分裂世界中兩極化語言的危險

語言深刻影響我們對世界的知覺和解釋，塑造我們的思維和行為。雖然戰爭是一種獨立於我們的語言的現象，但將世界感知和描述為敵對的可能會導致戰爭的顯現。近幾十年來，包括委婉語和模糊溝通在內的語言濫用現象愈演愈烈，引發了人們對公共話語惡化的擔憂。操縱語言來控制思想一直是反烏托邦文學的主題，雖然這種國家產生的新話在民主國家並不普遍，但政治正確語言的出現源自於自由民主本身的機制。

Language, Thought, and the Perils of Polarity in a Fractured World

語言、思想和分裂世界中兩極化的危險

In an era marked by profound global challenges and escalating geopolitical tensions, it is imperative that we scrutinize the language we employ to describe our world. For language is not merely a passive observer of events; it actively shapes our perceptions, influences our actions, and can even precipitate the very outcomes it predicts.

在一個充滿深刻的全球挑戰和不斷升級的地緣政治緊張局勢的時代，我們必須仔細審查我們用來描述世界的語言。因為語言不僅是事件的被動觀察者，也是事件的被動觀察者。它積極塑造我們的看法，影響我們的行動，甚至促成它所預測的結果。

Consider the ubiquitous use of the term "war" to describe an ever-widening spectrum of conflicts. This linguistic habit, born out of a perceived need for urgency and decisive action, has the insidious potential to perpetuate the very hostilities it seeks to mitigate. By consistently framing the world through the lens of conflict, we may inadvertently escalate tensions and increase the likelihood of military confrontations.

考慮一下「戰爭」一詞的普遍使用來描述不斷擴大的衝突範圍。這種語言習慣源自於對緊迫性和果斷行動的感知需要，有可能使它試圖緩解的敵對行動永久化。如果我們始終從衝突的角度來看待世界，我們可能會無意中加劇緊張局勢並增加軍事對抗的可能性。

The cautionary tale of George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" echoes in our present-day discourse. Orwell decried the rise of doublespeak and euphemisms in the aftermath of World War II, recognizing their role as tools of obfuscation and justification for indefensible actions. The euphemistic language employed by totalitarian regimes to sanitize atrocities, such as "rectification of frontiers" to refer to forced population transfers, starkly illustrates the power of language to distort reality and suppress dissent.

喬治‧歐威爾的《政治與英語》的警世故事在我們今天的話語中迴響。奧威爾譴責二戰後雙語和委婉語的興起，認識到它們是混淆視聽和為無法辯護的行為辯護的工具。極權主義政權使用委婉的語言來淨化暴行，例如用「整頓邊境」來指稱強迫人口轉移，赤裸裸地說明了語言扭曲現實和壓制異議的力量。

In recent decades, a subtle yet pervasive shift has occurred in public discourse, characterized by an increasing vagueness and lack of precision. Consider the aspiration of the Royal Society of Arts to foster a "resilient, rebalanced, and regenerative" world, or the commitment of the UK government's AI Foundation Model Taskforce to forge a "nuanced" policy that "manages downside risks while protecting the upside of this technology." Such language raises questions about the role of public-communication professionals, who may find themselves adhering to prescribed formulas of buzzwords and stock phrases rather than engaging in genuine dialogue and debate.

近幾十年來，公共話語發生了微妙而普遍的轉變，其特徵是越來越模糊和缺乏精確性。考慮一下英國皇家藝術學會的願望，即培育一個「有彈性、重新平衡和再生」的世界，或者英國政府人工智慧基金會模型工作小組承諾制定一項「細緻入微」的政策，「管理下行風險，同時保護上行趨勢」。這項技術。”這種語言引發了人們對公共傳播專業人士角色的質疑，他們可能會發現自己遵守流行語和常用短語的規定公式，而不是參與真正的對話和辯論。

Orwell's dystopian novel "1984" stands as a prescient warning about the manipulative power of language to control thought and eliminate dissent. The novel's protagonist, Winston Smith, is tasked with rewriting history to conform to the latest political shifts, erasing inconvenient truths and ultimately rendering independent thought impossible.

奧威爾的反烏托邦小說《1984》對語言控制思想和消除異議的操縱力量提出了先見之明的警告。小說的主角溫斯頓史密斯的任務是重寫歷史以適應最新的政治變化，消除令人難以忽視的事實，並最終使獨立思考變得不可能。

While the overt censorship depicted in "1984" may seem like a relic of the past, the practice of "canceling" or shaming individuals for using "inappropriate" language has taken root even in democratic societies. Such practices, often cloaked in the guise of social engineering, suppress dissenting voices and stifle open dialogue, creating an environment where conformity and groupthink prevail.

雖然《1984》中所描述的公開審查制度似乎已經成為過去，但「取消」或羞辱使用「不當」語言的個人的做法甚至在民主社會中也已紮根。這種做法往往打著社會工程的幌子，壓制不同的聲音並扼殺公開對話，創造了一種從眾和群體思維盛行的環境。

The linguistic excesses of our time are not solely driven by state-mandated Newspeak but also by the proliferation of a politically correct vocabulary that has emerged from the mechanisms of liberal democracy itself. As Alexis de Tocqueville astutely observed, democratic societies are prone to a linguistic inflation, where grandiose titles are bestowed upon modest occupations, technical jargon is applied to everyday items, and words are imbued with ambiguous meanings.

我們這個時代的語言過剩不僅是由國家強制的新話所推動的，也是由自由民主本身機制中出現的政治正確詞彙的擴散所驅動的。正如亞歷克西斯·德·托克維爾敏銳地觀察到的那樣，民主社會很容易出現語言膨脹，平凡的職業被賦予宏大的頭銜，技術術語被應用於日常用品，詞語被賦予模糊的含義。

This linguistic inflation is not solely a reflection of the tyranny of the majority, as Tocqueville suggested, but is also driven by the demands of minorities seeking recognition and representation. The moral imperative to avoid causing distress to members of these groups has led democratic governments to regulate language in an attempt to prevent social unrest.

正如托克維爾所說，這種語言膨脹不僅反映了多數人的暴政，而且也是少數人尋求承認和代表的要求所驅動的。避免對這些群體的成員造成困擾的道德責任促使民主政府對語言進行監管，以防止社會動盪。

However, the most insidious danger posed by today's democratic rhetoric lies in its tendency to frame international relations in stark moral terms, dividing the world into "good" and "bad" countries. This simplistic dichotomy, while perhaps providing a sense of moral clarity, undermines the prospects for peaceful coexistence and global cooperation.

然而，當今民主言論所帶來的最陰險的危險在於其傾向於用赤裸裸的道德術語來建構國際關係，將世界分為「好」國家和「壞」國家。這種簡化的二分法雖然可能提供了道德明確感，但卻破壞了和平共處和全球合作的前景。

As the historian A.J.P. Taylor famously observed, wars fought in the name of ideals, such as the "just" wars of the 20th century, have often resulted in far greater bloodshed than wars fought for pragmatic reasons. By framing conflicts in moralistic terms, we risk escalating tensions, hardening positions, and making compromise and diplomacy more difficult.

正如歷史學家 A.J.P.泰勒有一句名言：以理想之名進行的戰爭，例如 20 世紀的「正義」戰爭，往往會比出於務實原因而進行的戰爭造成更多的流血。透過用道德術語來描述衝突，我們可能會面臨緊張局勢升級、立場強硬、妥協和外交變得更加困難的風險。

In an interconnected and interdependent world, the consequences of our linguistic choices extend far beyond the narrow confines of domestic politics. The language we use to describe global challenges, from climate change to nuclear proliferation, can either foster cooperation and collective action or sow division and mistrust.

在一個相互連結和相互依賴的世界中，我們語言選擇的後果遠遠超出了國內政治的狹隘範圍。我們用來描述從氣候變遷到核擴散等全球挑戰的語言，要么可以促進合作和集體行動，也可以播下分裂和不信任的種子。

It is therefore imperative that we approach the use of language with mindfulness, recognizing its profound impact on our perceptions, actions, and the course of human history. By employing precise and nuanced language, avoiding the pitfalls of doublespeak and euphemisms, and resisting the temptation to retreat into polarized moral frameworks, we can create a discourse that promotes understanding, empathy, and the peaceful resolution of conflicts.

因此，我們必須以正念對待語言的使用，並認識到它對我們的感知、行動和人類歷史進程的深遠影響。透過使用精確而細緻的語言，避免雙關語和委婉語的陷阱，並抵制退回到兩極分化的道德框架的誘惑，我們可以創造一種促進理解、同理心以及和平解決衝突的話語。

The words we choose have the power to shape our world. Let us choose them wisely.

我們選擇的字詞有能力塑造我們的世界。讓我們明智地選擇它們。