Lesley Riddoch, an English Journalist, wrote the following in The Scotsman (4 June 2007):
Public discourse has been hijacked by people who treat language as a shield not a bridge. And as a nation of language lovers Scots should be up in arms - that's our patch they're cross-cutting. It's also our civic world that their jargon has diminished - because 'ordinary' Scots must learn fluent West Wing to participate.
While the context of this article was Scottish national identity (and few who read this are probably Scottish), what do you think of her overriding idea:
Public discourse has been hijacked by people who treat language as a shield not a bridge.
Has public debate been overrun by agenda-driven rhetoric?
Has the language of debate ceased to be dialogue, becoming platitude? Posturing? Pablum?
Has the parsing of statements become destructive to our public discourse?
If so, what forum best helps us bring this back to dialogue?
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 4