Political correctness

The society is beset by the language of politics which surrounds it, people meet it every day in diverse forms and sources, in radio and television broadcasts, in newspapers,etc. So, Ronald Carter mentions, politics is a substantial part of life, and peoples involvements in life are interpretable as political processes[;130]. The term of political correctness comes from the United States of America. The earliest mention of the term comes from the Supreme court decision in the case of Chisholm v.Georgia in 1793. It had a different meaning from nowadays one. It suggested that using the term The United States instead of the People of the United States did not correlate with the way the ideals and goals of politics of the United States were generally seen and defined by then. In other words , it said that the former term was not politically correct as the state was there for the people rather than the other round.Also Allan Keith comments that in 1990 political correctness was being described as responsible for corruption of English language on a truly Orwellian scale, and it was criticized for trivializing important issues precisely because it focused on insignificant language matters, and not on importants political ones. Some years later, as Keith states the label political correctness had turned into a powerful rhetorical stick to beat your political opponents with; a way of bringing contumely on someone you didnt like;an effective strategy of short-circuit serious debate [;9394]. Nowadays , political correctness refers to behavior, especially verbal behavior, rather than to a political position. According to Keith, the emphasis of political correctness has now moved to civil gentility. He considers political correctness as a brainwashing programme and as simple as good manners. Keith assumes that political correct language reflects and also seeks to enforce social change. He mentions a definition of political correctness from the Macquarie Dictionary: political correctness is a conformity to current beliefs about correctness in language and behavior with regard to politics on sexism, racism, ageism, etc. In other words as V Fromkina observes referring to political correctness : you know how to use your language appropriately, even if you sometimes choose not to[;438]. Political correctness is usually criticized by some polititians and linguists because it limits the language choice and speech freedom. It certainly cannot be denied that political correctness bears a certain degree of resemblance to censorship. Keith also considers that political correctness creates a kind of tacit censorship. He added that one reason for hostility towards political correctness is that a breach of political correct protocol can quickly become an inquiry into a miscreants character.

The well-known journalist George Orwell criticized very harsh the political language claiming that it is the defence of the indefensible. He maintained that the great enemy of clear language is insincerity represented by the corrupting euphemisms, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness form political language. Orwell believed that all issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, nad schizophrenia. In response to Orwells view, Robert Hughes, a critic of political correctness, describes political correct language as a linguistic Laerdes, where evil and misfortune are dispelled by a dip in the waters of euphemism. Actually as A.Keith points out, political correctness gets the peple to focus on the claims of different goups, it prescribes and proscribes public language for ethnicity, race, gender, sexual preference, apperaence, religion, (dis)ability, etc. he adds that it ensures a fair go for all, but mixed in with it is a twist of fear and anxiety[;105]. In general Allan Keith studiing the taboos and forbidden words of English language, analyzes very carefully and profoundly the subject concerning the language of political correctness. He concludes that verbal taboos are imposed by social conventions, they strengthen social cohesion and serve human interests by censoring out bald mention of things which threaten danger, distress and offence. He considers the language of political correctness is no more a threat to freedom of speech than other types of verbal taboos. In fact the political correct restrictions on speech are mostly selfimposed with speakers unwilling to run the risk of being judged to violate the accepted code for their context of utterance. Moreover Keith pays attention to the problem regarding the relations between political correctness and eupmesms terms. Mentioning the fact that modern dictionaries of euphemisms like Neaman and Silver, Ayto include political correct expressions among their entries, he maintains that they put forward the view that political correct usage call for a more precise and accurate use of language. Apart from this, there is the emphasis on the role of political correct language as a form af public action. Keith agrees that political correct language is euphemistic, but in this emotive discourse, words get politicized and used as ideological bludgeons. Whereas people generally use euphemisms for the sake of social etiquette, in the political arena it becomes a political gesture - an euphemism with an attitude.