Weasel word

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the term "weasel word" in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words.

Weasel words are deliberately misleading or ambiguous elements of language used to avoid making a straightforward statement while simultaneously generating the illusion that a direct, clear form communication is being utilized. This type of language is used to deceive, distract, or manipulate an audience.

Tactics that are used include vague generalizations; the use of the passive voice; non-sequitur statements; extrapolating through the use of grammatical devices such as qualifiers and the subjunctive; using euphemisms (e.g., replacing "firing staff" with "headcount reduction").

Contents

[edit] History

In the political sphere, this type of language is used to "spin" or alter the public perception of an issue. In 1916, Theodore Roosevelt argued that "...One of our defects as a nation is a tendency to use ...'weasel words'"; when one 'weasel word' is used "...after another there is nothing left.[1]

The expression first appeared in Stewart Chaplin's short story Stained Glass Political Platform, published in 1900 in The Century Magazine[2] which refers to them as "...words that suck the life out of the words next to them, just as a weasel sucks the egg and leaves the shell.

[edit] Generalizations and non-sequitur statements

 This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (April 2008)

The vagueness of a statement may disguise the validity or the aim of that statement. Generalizing by means of quantifiers, such as "many" or "better", as well as the passive voice ("it has been decided") conceal the full picture. In this way, one may evade responsibility for what may be inferred.

Non sequitur statements are often used in advertising to make it appear that the statement is a sales point:

  • "Our product is so good, it was even given away in celebrity gift bags." (True, perhaps, but not relevant.)
  • "See why more of our trucks are sold in southern California than in any other part of the country." (Southern California is a big vehicle market.)
  • "Nobody else's product is better than ours." (They're all about the same.)
  • "Becoming involved with this problem would be beneficial to us." (In what way would it be beneficial?)
  • "People say…" (Which people?)
  • "I heard that..." (Who told you? Is the source reliable?)
  • "There is evidence that..." (What evidence? Is the source reliable?)
  • "Experience shows that..." (Whose experience? What was the experience? How does it demonstrate this?)
  • "It has been decided that..." (Who decided this?)
  • "It has been mentioned that..." (Who mentioned it?)
  • "Popular wisdom has it that..." (Is it actually popular wisdom?)
  • "It is known that..." (By whom is it known?)

There are some generalizations which are considered unacceptable in writing. This category embraces what is termed a "semantic cop-out", represented by the term allegedly.[3] This phrase, which became something of a catch-phrase on the weekly satirical BBC television series Have I Got News For You, implies an absence of ownership of opinion which casts a limited doubt on the opinion being articulated.

[edit] Extrapolating

Extrapolating through the use of grammatical devices such as qualifiers and the subjunctive can be used to introduce facts which are beyond the proof of the cited work. This is a legitimate function of language, which resembles weaseling. When it is impractical to enumerate and cite many individual works, then the use of these grammatical devices conforms to the standards established by tradition. For example: "For scientists as for so many others, evolution served as an example of a fundamental challenge to long-held convictions".

Also rhetorically valid is the use of the neuter pronoun it and the adverb there as impersonal dummy subjects, as when an author intends to distance himself/herself from the work, or to separate one part of the text from another:

  • "At the beginning, it was the train that was late."
  • "It was a matter of total indifference that..."
  • "After the end of the Californian gold rush, there were many ghost towns."
  • "There are people who wash very infrequently."

The personal pronoun one, as a subject or an object in formal speech, that refers either to oneself or as a generalization to anyone in a similar situation, may also be used justifiably to distance a speaker from a subject.

  • "One wonders what else was being discussed that evening".
  • "What can one do in circumstances such as these?"

[edit] Passive voice

The passive voice can be used in English to weasel away from blame. A passive construction occurs when the object of an action is made into the subject of a sentence, or the object (usually indicated by "by the") is missing altogether, as the sentence "mistakes were made by the politicians", for example, has been curtailed deliberately to "mistakes were made".

  • "Mistakes were made."
  • "Over 120 different contaminants have been dumped into the river."
  • "Becoming involved with this problem would be beneficial to us."

In the example: "Mistakes were made," it is clear that the names of the persons who made mistakes is being withheld and the intention of weaseling is obvious.
In the "over 120 different contaminants..." sentence, a more precise number of "contaminants" might have avoided the impression of weaseling, even though we might never know who the "dumpers" were.
"Becoming involved with this problem would be beneficial to us", has more to do with style than weaseling, as it would be much better to use the active voice: "It would be beneficial to us to become involved with this problem". This is a particular issue which engages the attention of many linguists and teachers who discourage the passive voice being used too frequently.[4][5]

However, in the sentence

  • "100 votes are required to pass the bill",

the usage of the passive voice is not necessarily connected with weaseling. The phrase, "100 votes are required to pass the bill", is probably a statement of fact, that it is exactly 100 votes which are needed for the passing of the bill, and it might be impossible to predict where these votes are to come from. For a statement to be a weasel expression, it needs other indications of disingenuousness than the mere fact that it is expressed in the passive voice.

[edit] In business

Weasel words may be used to detract from an uncomfortable fact, such as the act of firing staff. By replacing "firing staff" with "headcount reduction", one may soften meaning.[6] Jargon of this kind is used to describe things euphemistically.

In certain kinds of advertisements, words are missing or withheld deliberately to influence the buyer. Words such as more or better are misleading due to the absence of a comparison:

  • "...up to 50% off." (How many items were actually decreased in price by half? The statement holds true even if the price of only one item is reduced by half, and the rest by very little.)
  • "... is now 20% cheaper!" (Is it really 20% cheaper than the last product?)
  • "Four out of five people would agree..." (How many subjects were included in the study?)
  • "... is among the (top, leading, best, few, worst, etc.)" (Top 100? Best in customer service/quality/management?)
  • "...for a fraction of the original price!" (This wording suggests a much lower price even though the fraction could easily be 99/100)
  • "More people are using..." (What does that mean in numbers?)

[edit] Articles and books

In Report on Unidentified Flying Objects (1956), U.S. Air Force Captain Edward J. Ruppelt described astronomer Dr. J. Allen Hynek's report on the death of Air Force Pilot Thomas Mantell in pursuit of a UFO as "a masterpiece in the art of 'weasel wording'."[7]

Carl Wrighter discussed weasel words in his book I Can Sell You Anything (1972).

Australian author Don Watson collected two volumes (Death Sentence and Watson's Dictionary of Weasel Words) documenting the increasing use of weasel words in government and corporate language. He maintains a website[8] encouraging people to identify and nominate examples of weasel words.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ Crystal, Hilary; David Crystal (2000). Words on Words: Quotations about Language and Languages. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0226122018.  p. 199
  2. ^ According to The Macmillan Dictionary of Contemporary Phrase and Fable
  3. ^ Garber, Marjorie B.. Academic Instincts. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691115710.  p. 140 "it is alleged"
  4. ^ Passive Voice
  5. ^ Passive Voice
  6. ^ Has Downsizing Gone too Far?. University of North Florida, Jacksonville, Florida, USA, December, 1995.. Retrieved on 2007-10-05.
  7. ^ Report on Unidentified Flying Objects
  8. ^ Examples and discussion of weasel words

[edit] External links


v • d • e
Propaganda techniques