Perhaps the steep decline in the ‘quality’ of written and spoken lan­guage has never been as rapid as it has been in the past two to three de­cades. Like the Titanic, anything of substance takes a very long time to sink. In the context of the development and decline of language and societies, thir­ty to forty years is a drop in the ocean of time. This affliction of the downturn in language is not restricted to any particular geograph­ic area; neither is it confined to any one segment of society or industry. It is a mal­aise without borders and is, hence, wide­spread. No language today is safe from this onslaught that reduces it to base hu­man instincts freely expressed, with inhi­bitions thrown out of the window.

In the not-too-distant past, the words chosen for communication were con­sidered to reflect upbringing, school­ing, and family. The consistent vulgari­sation of language, locally and globally, is a rude reality.

Corporate communication is as much a victim of this crass, obnoxious, and in­decent slide. The niceties are becoming a rarity, almost heading towards extinc­tion, and are no longer a part of commu­nication. The sacrifice in quality is done under the guise and pretext of lack of time and the need for speed. It is argued that it is corporate culture that drives the content and quality of communication.

Language is critical to good commu­nication. Possibly, for initiating, main­taining, and strengthening any type or format of relationship, the nature and quality of communication are extreme­ly important. We keep hearing that chil­dren do not understand what their par­ents mean; parents do not understand their children; husbands and wives don’t understand each other. In the same vein, managers and supervisors don’t understand each other. It is not that they cease to talk to each other, but they are simply not ‘communicating’. In very simple terms, conversation is per­fect only when the message ‘intended’ is the message ‘received’ by the recipient. Any dichotomy would deprive commu­nication of its true meaning.

We are surrounded by insensitive com­municators. Some people are so insen­sitive that they cannot talk to a cripple without mentioning feet. “It is the prov­ince of knowledge to speak and the privi­lege of wisdom to listen.” ‘He talked forev­er; and you wished him to talk on forever’ (William Hazlitt). Queen Victoria, in jest, once said about William Gladstone, the famous Prime Minister, ‘he speaks to me as if I were a public meeting’. Communi­cation shouldn’t be an eruption of a dis­ease called ‘talking incessantly’.

In many cultures and geographies, in­cluding some parts of our country, the use of expletives in everyday conver­sation is considered normal. It is not looked down upon. In fact, many users of obscene language remain unaware that they actually use swear words. They are oblivious to the profanity they utter. I had a senior colleague who would in­variably use the worst adjectives. Upon being called out for these lapses, he would express ignorance. On one occa­sion, I pointed out to him his use of an expletive during the meeting. He didn’t believe he could have said anything in­appropriate. He claimed it was not in his habit. The use of four-letter words or ab­breviated expletives is so common with many that there is no realisation on their part. I asked, what did you have in mind? Did you abuse the individual or the issue at hand? He kept insisting he does not use expletives. It was a habit.

The multinationals, which were once in plenty in Pakistan, produced more ‘Brown Sahibs’ than the East India Com­pany could have imagined in its almost 200-year history. These Brown Sahibs, in aping their foreign supervisors, par­ticularly from across the Atlantic, made liberal use of words unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman… including, ‘O, Christ…’ (deliberately not quoting in full, holy this, holy that, etc.).

Language has become vulgar. All seg­ments of society have contributed to­wards the decline in the quality of con­versations. The politicians take the cake; of course, there are bankers, journalists, doctors, lawyers, film writers, lyricists. Some do not fall under the watchful, in­trusive, and unholy cameras and the le­thal social media. Hence, their unique fund of filthy words remains obscured.

Unfortunately, it is now quite com­monly believed that the use of profane words releases stress and tension. Be­tween ‘what the hell’ and ‘what the heck’, it is difficult to say which is worse be­cause both mean the same.

There is an opinion that language pre­vents violence. The theory is that the use of swear words in communication is a good alternative to becoming physi­cal. John Cohen, writing in The Observ­er, stated, “The man who first abused his fellows with swear words instead of bashing their brains out with a club should be counted among those who laid the foundations of civilisation.” Ver­bal warfare has a preference over physi­cal warfare because it doesn’t leave be­hind death, only wounded souls and decimated egos.

Many words of decent import and meaning over the years have acquired entirely new meanings by way of usage. Everyday ordinary words have become words of abuse. Regrettably, human anat­omy is the basis for the growth and de­velopment of explicitly crass and ugly ad­jectives. Many are gender-specific. It is also not imagination, but fact, that both males and females use expletives. To pro­tect myself and the readers from blush­ing with embarrassment, I refrain from mentioning the conversion of decent words into expletives in this piece. Intel­ligent readers have the licence to develop their own scrolls of such words, whose meanings are now housed in duplicity.

George Bernard Shaw (GBS) said the best English is one that the receiver, the listen­er, understands. On a different occasion, he highlighted what the language of commu­nication should capture and deliver to the audience. Speaking about the Hungarian language, he remarked, “After studying the Hungarian language for years, I can confi­dently conclude that had Hungarian been my mother tongue, it would have been more precious. Simply because through this extraordinary, ancient and power­ful language, it is possible to precisely de­scribe the tiniest differences and the most secretive tremors of emotions.”

The sweetness of language, like, say, French, Persian, or Bengali, doesn’t in any manner take away the sting of their respective words of vulgarity and abuse. It is also worth noting that both Urdu and Punjabi, which are spoken in offices, can give stiff competition to the named languages, including Hungarian, when it comes to detailed and explicit words. The art of imagination and creativity has to be at its best for developing a new vo­cabulary of profane words.

Only an artificial language such as Esperanto has no swear or expletive words. On Wikipedia’s search engine, it is said that the language that has the most swear words is Croatian, with over one hundred expletives for five mil­lion native speakers. Norway, shock­ingly to this scribe, comes in at second place with 94 swear words for 5.6 mil­lion speakers, while their neighbours in Sweden have a variety exceeding 120 variants of abusive words. I luck­ily never worked in Scandinavia, so I can, alongside the readers, imagine and wonder about the beauty of corporate language in vogue there.

In the corporate sector, vulgar lan­guage, though considered bad and unac­ceptable, is rampant. It is neither a sign of power nor of weakness to use profan­ity. It, however, significantly showcases the education and upbringing of an in­dividual. The sad breach of social norms and etiquette while communicating be­fore any audience, of any type, is con­duct unbecoming. It is best to choose the right and acceptable word while in com­munication, both verbal and written.

Sirajuddin Aziz
The writer is a senior banker and freelance contributor.