By Dickson Tenga
Do you know the meaning of the word, “nice”? Of course you do. It’s probably one of the most overused words in the English language. “That’s a nice car.” “He’s a nice guy.” Or simply, “Niiiiiiiice!!” So even if you can’t formulate a concise and exhaustive definition of the word for me, you know what someone means when they say, “nice”. But the funny thing is that 400 years ago, that word meant something completely different. And 800 years ago, it meant something else than it did 400 years ago. So now you’re wondering what “nice” meant, and here it is: Stupid.
According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, “nice” entered the English language in the 13th century from the French, like practically half of all English words. It came with its original French meaning: “foolish.” But by the late 14th century, it’s meaning had already changed. It actually now meant “fussy” and didn’t stop evolving there. 15th century folks decided nice meant “dainty” or “delicate,” and in the 16th century it meant “exact” or “precise.” It was only by the 19th century that it came to mean what we know it to mean today, “agreeable and delightful” or “kind and thoughtful.” Interesting huh?
It becomes even more interesting to find out that “nice” is by no means an exceptional case. “Awful” use to mean “awesome.” “Quick” meant “alive.”
“Girl” and “gay”, at one point had nothing to do with sexuality and everything to do with age and mood, respectively.
Being a visual thinker, when I look at this phenomenon, I begin to see words as little boxes, meant to carry a concept or a feeling or an idea. And we as individuals, or as a community, can choose what idea we are going to put inside these “boxes.” Of course we refer to dictionaries and people to tell us what idea to put in a certain box, but in the end we decide what combination of concepts, feelings and ideas we put into word-box based on our experiences with how we came across that particular word-box. And so a word-box like “nigger” which originally only carried the completely harmless idea of color black, started carrying the feelings of racism and discrimination, because of the way it was used. Innocent words end up malicious.
I then asked myself, what happens benevolent words are used with not-so-benevolent attitudes? You know, the “Christian” words? Something horrific happens. They begin to lose their meanings and “church” ceases to mean a group of happy, accepting, warm, friendly people who have this amazing story and this infectiously optimistic goal to change the world for the better. Instead it means a stone-cold, expensive structure, where pessimistic people meet on a weekly basis to try and convince each other that they are still better than the rest of the world.
“Doctrine” no longer means a better way of viewing the world that gives us hope and the will to live a better and more fulfilling life, but a list of declarations to which we must swear by—or else!
“Faith” isn’t the belief that no matter how bad things look right now, there is still a bigger and better plan that is already taking place in our hearts, but that fanatical, religious, quality that some people have and others don’t.
“Judgment” is no longer about how the oppressed and the persecuted finally get a fair trial, but about how you need to watch out, ‘cause God is watching you kinda like Santa Claus used to when you were a kid.
When we say these words to people, and their first reactions are anger, or indifference, who is to blame? Is it them, for choosing the “wrong” combination of feelings and ideas and concepts to put into that word-box? Is it us for assuming what those words mean for us is what they mean to everybody else?
We could play the blame game for a while here, and I could probably present a very strong case for “us.” But the point would be lost, because its not about winning arguments, it’s about communicating effectively.
The writers of the Bible were so in tune with their cultures. They knew how their audiences thought and felt, what they had put in their word-boxes. And they weren’t afraid to be ingeniously creative in the language they chose to express the beautiful things of God.
I have this crazy proposition to make. Perhaps we should learn from the Bible-writers. We should learn to speak the language of the people who need to hear the beautiful things of God. Be in tune with the cultures we live in. Eat with sinners a bit. Get to know a prostitute or two. If we find that word-boxes like “church” and “doctrine” and “judgment” are not working, perhaps we should throw them out. They are only boxes anyway.
I love the way one Bible-writer puts it. He says: “A word fitly spoken, is like apples of gold in pictures of silver.” (Proverbs 25:11 KJV)
Honestly, I couldn’t have said it better.
Thank you for this post on the challenges of modern language. I agree, the original Bible writers must have been very much in tune with their culture. But this also begs the question: Who writes the rules of morality in a world where almost anyone can “write” anything? Back in the day, publishing was scarce so words echoed through time. Today publishing is easy so words will… I’m not sure. Perhaps you can help me finish that sentance.
Honestly, I think we have an unprecedented opportunity in our age to all be able to participate in an exercise that in the past was only reserved for the few influential in society. Back then, when a state or a religion endorsed a moral code, it was not allowed to be questioned. Instead we have today, so many people “endorsing” and voicing their views. Instead of one person or group getting to redefine moral standards, we have the world taking part. It encourages discussion. And discussion leads to understanding. And who knows what we can accomplish if we understood each other.
My project (photo) is “fitting” with your post.
I, too, couldn’t have said it better.