Okay, everyone, buckle up. As promised, this week we’re taking a little break from the heavy stuff and going down a different rabbit hole.
No political finger-pointing, no government surveillance, no arguments about who is doing what to whom. Well, not exactly. We’re going to talk about something that manages to get involved in all those things anyway: words.
Words are fascinating little creatures. We use them to explain ourselves, describe other people, win arguments, lose arguments, make friends, end relationships, and occasionally put our foot so far into our mouths that we need a crowbar to get it out.
But have you ever stopped to consider how much a single word can change the way you see a situation? Or how the words you use to describe yourself might influence what you believe you’re capable of doing?
Welcome to the world of language, where things are not always what they seem, and even the word nice has a questionable past.
First, a little history lesson.
Etymology is the study of where words come from, how they develop and how their meanings change over time.
Take “nice.” Today, we use it to describe something pleasant or kind. It came into English through Old French, from the Latin nescius, meaning ignorant or unaware. Over the centuries, its meaning evolved through associations with foolishness, delicacy, and precision before arriving at the meaning we know today.
If the meaning of a word can change over centuries, how much influence does the word itself have over the way we interpret the world around us?
Quite a bit, as it turns out.
Research published in Psychological Science in the Public Interest in 2024 examined how language framing influences our thinking, feelings, and behavior. The way information is presented can affect how we interpret everything from politics and health to business and personal relationships.
Consider how the media uses words and labels as shortcuts that can prevent people from examining what happened.
Once someone has been labeled a troublemaker, their next disagreement may be interpreted as more evidence of troublemaking and their objections dismissed even if they have a point.
Language deserves scrutiny. A label can become a verdict before the facts have had their day in court.
Look at the language used in news reports, political speeches, advertising, and social media.
A government policy might be described as reform by its supporters and a rollback by its opponents. A person attending a demonstration might be called a protester, while someone else calls that person an agitator. A company can describe job cuts as restructuring, much tidier than telling employees their jobs are disappearing.
Are these descriptions necessarily false? Not always.
But each directs our attention toward a different interpretation. Words can emphasize benefits, minimize costs, suggest threats, or invite sympathy before we’ve examined the evidence.
One 2024 study involving more than 3,000 participants found that euphemistic language could reduce how seriously people judged certain kinds of wrongdoing.
Think about that. The action hasn’t necessarily changed. The facts haven’t magically rearranged themselves. Yet the words used to describe an action can influence how people judge it.
And yes, that includes journalists, politicians, corporations, activists, and advertisers.
Now let’s look at some of the words we use every day.
Take “mortgage.” This one really does have an interesting history. It comes from Old French mort gage, literally meaning “dead pledge.”
The term referred to an arrangement in which the pledge ended when the debt was paid, or the property was lost if the borrower failed to pay.
Considering that a 30-year mortgage can feel like a lifetime commitment, the expression has a certain dark humor.
Television becomes “tell-lie-vision.” Not its actual linguistic origin, of course, but an interesting prompt for thinking about the images and messages we allow into our homes. And what about a television program? The word program is genuine, but the question is worth asking: What are we repeatedly watching, hearing, and absorbing, and how might it influence our thinking?
Information can become “in-for-mation” so what information are we receiving, who is supplying it and what might they want us to believe?
These are not etymological definitions. They are reminders to look beyond the word and examine the message.
Wordplay invites an interesting question: Are we understanding something for ourselves, or simply accepting someone else’s interpretation?
Words are spells. Or at least, they can feel like it in spelling.
Think about “history.” The playful expression “his story” invites us to ask whose perspective has shaped the version we learned. It isn’t the actual etymology of history, which comes through Latin from Greek historia, meaning inquiry or knowledge acquired through investigation. But the question of whose stories get told, and whose are left out, is entirely legitimate.
Here’s another fascinating connection. The French word “grimoire” refers to a book of magic or magical instruction. It developed from an older form of the word grammar, which historically had associations with learning and, in some medieval contexts, occult knowledge.
So, no, grammar isn’t simply derived from a magical book of spells. But language has long been associated with the power of knowledge, and knowledge has never been equally distributed.
And while we’re playing with words, consider “sub-mission”: the idea of yielding or submitting to authority. Or “dis-ease,” which visually invites us to think about a lack of ease, even though its linguistic history comes through Old French and ultimately Latin roots.
Words do not prove hidden agendas. But they can prompt us to examine how we understand authority, health, obedience, and the descriptions attached to our experiences.
Let’s talk about contracts.
When purchasing property, you sign documents filled with conditions, obligations, and legal terminology. Much of that language has precise meanings, and the documents are intended to establish enforceable rights and responsibilities.
But anyone who has stared at a stack of closing papers knows how difficult it can be to understand every provision without professional guidance.
Consider the wordplay “con-tract,” “con-ditions” and “con-fuse.” The word con can mean a trick or deception and the underlying concern is real: If you don’t understand what you’re signing, you may agree to something you never intended.
Words can build bridges or burn them. They can clarify a situation or obscure it. They can encourage us to think independently or persuade us to accept someone else’s version of reality without asking questions.
I’m not suggesting that changing a few words will transform the world overnight. Nor am I proposing we slap a cheerful label on every miserable experience and pretend everything is wonderful.
But when someone describes a person or situation in a particular way, ask yourself what that description emphasizes and what it leaves out.
Ask yourself what the person telling the story stands to gain by making you feel or behave a certain way.
When you hear a persuasive speech, read a headline or scroll through social media, look beyond the emotional reaction. Examine the facts. Question the framing.
Words are tools. They can explain, illuminate, comfort, deceive, manipulate, inspire, and wound.
So, the next time you find yourself caught up in an argument, repeating a negative thought or accepting someone else’s version of events, stop for a moment.
Look at the words.
Question the meaning.
Do these words deserve the power you’re giving them?
Remember, sometimes, the most powerful spell of all is the one we never stop to question.
Rita Cook is a freelance writer for The Ellis County Press. She can be reached at rcook13@earthlink.net.