The great Bush verb hoax
25 september 2003 | Ingen har kommenterat än
Geoffry Pullum – lingvisten som skrev ”The great Eskimo vocabulary hoax” (se notisen …men lulesamiska kanske?) – ger sig på talet där George Bush förde fram påståendet att Irak försökt köpa uranmalm från Nigeria (ett påstående som snabbt visade sig vara grundlöst).
Men ljög Bush, eller refererade han bara något engelsmännen trodde?
”Bush didn’t make a statement about what the British had said; he made a statement about what they had learned.
The difference is crucial, because learn is what is known as a factive verb. I can say that two plus two is five time I like, but I can’t learn that two plus two is five unless it really is. (…)
[T]he President really did personally vouch for the truth of the Niger yellowcake story in his State of the Union speech to Congress and the people.
That’s what happens when you say ’X has learned that P’: you commit yourself to the claim that P is true.”
Läs hela Verb semantics and justifying war på Language log – en blog med inte mindre än fyra lingvister som författare.
George Lakoff, en annan lingvist som dykt upp på Blind Höna flera gånger förut, skriver också om Bush ”and the L-word”:
”… lying, in itself, is not and should not be the issue. The real issue is a betrayal of trust.”
(Alternet 15/9: Betrayal of Trust).
Kategori: Språk
Kommentarer
Kommentera