NAMES
A description is not a name, though some names may also be descriptive.
The gate to our house was painted green. We called it ‘the green gate’. Later, we painted it red. We still called it, ‘the green gate’, because that was its name. Now it has been painted once more, this time green. We call it, ‘the green gate’. Is that a name, or a description?
We have lost our facility for naming things. Instead, we allocate initial letters (AIL), even if we never use those initial letters again in the article. Why do we do this? One reason is that many of the names that we do have, like telephone, television and telescope, actually come from Greek. In fact, they were never really names, but descriptions in another language.
Another we avoid names and replace them with descriptions, is that we want to deny the reality of what we referring to. Political riots were described as ‘unrest’, blackouts are described as ‘outages’, and a dwarf is a ‘person of limited growth potential’. Is that any better than the name itself? What we overlook is that we only use circumlocutions, (walking around the word), where we actually believe that there is something wrong with what we are referring to. Where there is no problem, we just use the name.
Some people dislike lawyers. When lawyers start referring to themselves as ‘members of the legal profession’, or ‘defenders of justice through argument’, we shall know that they, themselves, have doubts about their profession. As long as they describe themselves as lawyers, we know that they are comfortable with who they are.
Sometimes descriptions intended as insults are adopted with pride, as names. This has often happened in the history of Christian religions: Quakers, Methodists and Doppers. (The Doppers were so named because it was claimed they were ‘Snuffers’ snuffing out the light of religion).
In the wilderness of namelessness in which we have been languishing for a number of years now, we began with acronyms and quickly degenerated into jumbles of incoherent sequences of letters. (An acronym should properly make a pronounceable word. ‘AIDS’ is an example.) Could there be any connection between an absence of meaning in the name, and a corresponding lack of meaning in the named?
We are gradually returning from our bout of acronyms to the previous method of using descriptions in other languages as names. Thus Hans Strydom highway becomes ‘Malibongwe’ which means ‘we are thankful’. Toyota calls its taxis ‘Siayaya’ which is, in a word, ‘we are getting there’. Optimistic, but appropriate.
We forget that our life spans are short. New generations rise in our place, and learn language by direct connection between the name (no matter how obscure), and what it really refers to. We can hide the truth from ourselves, but our descendents will see us as we are.
Tolkien wrote an enlightening piece on the importance of naming things in ‘Lord of the Rings’, when he described the Ents and the importance they placed on naming things correctly. He was on to something. When we name something honestly and appropriately we are acknowledging its reality. We acknowledge the truth of what it is. This is particularly important in dealing with our feelings.
There is a lot of confusion about ‘being in your head’ or ‘head-stuff’ which tries to break the connection between our feeling, and our cognitive self. When we name what we are feeling, we create the connection between our thoughts and our feelings, and can then move to resolve the feeling and express it appropriately. Amazingly, people who refer to ‘head-stuff’ usually point to their heads at the same time, as though the word were not sufficient and they have to remind themselves physically what the word ‘head’ refers to. The truth is, you cannot engage your feelings without using your thoughts. Just not thinking does not make you more honest in your feelings.
And so to Sassenha. By an ironic twist of fate, this name is derived from the initial letters of a description, Sassenha comes from ‘Suid Afrikaanse Spoorwee en Hawens'. My first job was on the Cape Town docks where I went to discover ‘the real world’, (it was not there). On night duty, I had the steam locomotives parked and fuming quietly but restlessly, outside my office and I promised myself that, if I ever wrote anything, I would call it ‘Sassenha’.
And so I have.
A description is not a name, though some names may also be descriptive.
The gate to our house was painted green. We called it ‘the green gate’. Later, we painted it red. We still called it, ‘the green gate’, because that was its name. Now it has been painted once more, this time green. We call it, ‘the green gate’. Is that a name, or a description?
We have lost our facility for naming things. Instead, we allocate initial letters (AIL), even if we never use those initial letters again in the article. Why do we do this? One reason is that many of the names that we do have, like telephone, television and telescope, actually come from Greek. In fact, they were never really names, but descriptions in another language.
Another we avoid names and replace them with descriptions, is that we want to deny the reality of what we referring to. Political riots were described as ‘unrest’, blackouts are described as ‘outages’, and a dwarf is a ‘person of limited growth potential’. Is that any better than the name itself? What we overlook is that we only use circumlocutions, (walking around the word), where we actually believe that there is something wrong with what we are referring to. Where there is no problem, we just use the name.
Some people dislike lawyers. When lawyers start referring to themselves as ‘members of the legal profession’, or ‘defenders of justice through argument’, we shall know that they, themselves, have doubts about their profession. As long as they describe themselves as lawyers, we know that they are comfortable with who they are.
Sometimes descriptions intended as insults are adopted with pride, as names. This has often happened in the history of Christian religions: Quakers, Methodists and Doppers. (The Doppers were so named because it was claimed they were ‘Snuffers’ snuffing out the light of religion).
In the wilderness of namelessness in which we have been languishing for a number of years now, we began with acronyms and quickly degenerated into jumbles of incoherent sequences of letters. (An acronym should properly make a pronounceable word. ‘AIDS’ is an example.) Could there be any connection between an absence of meaning in the name, and a corresponding lack of meaning in the named?
We are gradually returning from our bout of acronyms to the previous method of using descriptions in other languages as names. Thus Hans Strydom highway becomes ‘Malibongwe’ which means ‘we are thankful’. Toyota calls its taxis ‘Siayaya’ which is, in a word, ‘we are getting there’. Optimistic, but appropriate.
We forget that our life spans are short. New generations rise in our place, and learn language by direct connection between the name (no matter how obscure), and what it really refers to. We can hide the truth from ourselves, but our descendents will see us as we are.
Tolkien wrote an enlightening piece on the importance of naming things in ‘Lord of the Rings’, when he described the Ents and the importance they placed on naming things correctly. He was on to something. When we name something honestly and appropriately we are acknowledging its reality. We acknowledge the truth of what it is. This is particularly important in dealing with our feelings.
There is a lot of confusion about ‘being in your head’ or ‘head-stuff’ which tries to break the connection between our feeling, and our cognitive self. When we name what we are feeling, we create the connection between our thoughts and our feelings, and can then move to resolve the feeling and express it appropriately. Amazingly, people who refer to ‘head-stuff’ usually point to their heads at the same time, as though the word were not sufficient and they have to remind themselves physically what the word ‘head’ refers to. The truth is, you cannot engage your feelings without using your thoughts. Just not thinking does not make you more honest in your feelings.
And so to Sassenha. By an ironic twist of fate, this name is derived from the initial letters of a description, Sassenha comes from ‘Suid Afrikaanse Spoorwee en Hawens'. My first job was on the Cape Town docks where I went to discover ‘the real world’, (it was not there). On night duty, I had the steam locomotives parked and fuming quietly but restlessly, outside my office and I promised myself that, if I ever wrote anything, I would call it ‘Sassenha’.
And so I have.
2 comments:
Ek is ook 'n ou Spoorwegman - looking forward to your future - shall I name them "Insights".
For my pleasure you may want to look at the concept "liberal" and see how its meaning originated, evolved, how it (the term) was hijacket to mean the opposite of the classical users thereof intended and what it means today.
Perhaps some other time.
Have fun, let off some steam, and looking forward to following you on your track.
Charl
realestategoingson.blogspot.com
Hi John,
Very interesting writings. Glad you got the blog and the feedback working. Looking forward to your future writings.
What I would like to read about in future, if you are also interested in it is: The merging of spirituality and materialism. The eastern (mostly spritual) and the western (mostly material) way of living. How to find a balance between the two and the Buddist teachings of non-attachment.
Johann
Post a Comment