Language

Mind The Gap(s)

/ Jeff Hora / 1 Comment

The longer I live and the more avenues we all have to “converse” with each other or to the broad public arena, the more I feel like language ties us up. It can feel like going out into the woods and going “Boo-ge-da, Boo-ge-da!” to the trees.

Language is so part and parcel of our experience, each of which is singular and unique, that crafting communication to clarity seems harder and harder. Here’s an example I like to use:

Let’s say that I sit down with a new acquaintance and she tells me that she has two dogs. Here are the two dogs that I visualize:

Credit: https://pixnio.com/fauna-animals/dogs/two-puppies-dogs

However, here are the two dogs she loves and cares for:

Credit: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Great_dane.jpg

…and…

Credit: https://www.pickpik.com/chihuahua-dog-puppy-baby-play-young-108669

Now, as we continue to get to know each other, and as often as the subject of her dogs comes up in our chatting, I may gain a better idea of what her dogs are really like. However, my first internal impression is still there, even if it starts to evolve to a closer view of the truth.

If this is any indication of how something as basic as “dog” can get misinterpreted, here are a few words that have even greater latitude in interpretation and personal/cultural definitions:

  • Work
  • Freedom
  • Family
  • Father
  • Mother
  • Boss
  • Dangerous
  • Sickness
  • Rich
  • Poor
  • God
  • Socialist
  • Fascist
  • Vote
  • Neighbor
  • Home
  • City/Town
  • Country (meaning either Nation or Rural)

….and so on. Needless to say, any one of these words and concepts can drive a terrific conversation. A number of years ago, well before I received my Master of Communication from the University of Washington, I grew fascinated by how humans communicate, manipulate, and shape discussion. Since then I’ve nurtured my deepening fascination for quantum science, philosophy, and theology.

These all inform each other. I keep uncovering what I feel are really cool cross-meanings and enlightening points of view that help me to further my journey. I will never understand it all (especially the quantum science, but a deep bow is due to Brian Greene and his books….they lead me through the quantum briar patch better than most….).

The “Gaps” I refer to in the title to this post are the gaps in clarity and understanding that we, as humans, ignore at our peril. I deeply believe that part of the course we need to navigate in this world, and especially here in the United States, is one of “Minding the Gap(s)” in the understanding and empathy with all the members of our community.

“Holy Crap!” you might rightly exclaim. “That’s not a cognitive stance I can take with everyone!!!”

Well, no, probably not. It’s hard work and tends to take more time in an interchange than our rushed and breathless lives will allow. So, start small…start with someone close to you, that you interact with most every day.

In many ways, this will be a harder task, because, if you really are with them a lot every day, you’re used to a lot of conversational assumptions, which is pretty normal. There are, so to say, more gaps to mind. So, if you need to, choose another person. Listen in an open way, not busy composing what you will say or reply in return while you “listen”. Again, not easy, as it isn’t part of what we do naturally as humans, and certainly not part of your normal discourse, but give it a shot. Listen openly……ask clarifying questions (“HOW BIG is your first dog? WOW!!!”). Listen to the tone of her voice. Pay attention to facial expressions and body language (tough to do online, for sure, hence our challenges communicating there…more on that at a later time).

Each gap you mind will uncover additional gaps, for sure. Just going deeper with one person is a lifetime process. Broadening the effort to others will clear and uncover immeasurable other gaps. It’s all good. You’re deepening your relationships with those around you and gaining an understanding and empathy you can’t get any other way.

So, if you’re always trying figure out what’s going on, this can be an important part of the journey for you. It has been for me, so far….

Weasel Words

/ Jeff Hora / 2 Comments

I have been using a term, “weasel word”, in a way that has garnered a bit of attention and enough misunderstanding that I think I need to clarify my particular meaning.


First of all, in my most common usage, a weasel word is not a bad word. (A further definition, if you wish to read more about this term, can be found here…) Weasels have an occasional cultural and semantic reputation of being an animal to avoid. That is not the attribute I want to emphasize when I use this term in the context of clarity and further understanding in a conversation. I am more focused on the slipperiness and cunning of the animal. When I say or write “weasel word”, I imply that the word is hyper-subjective…. Slippery, if you will. There are any number of words that are NOT weasel words, if only because they are slightly better established in the commonality in our experience.


For example, if you say the word “cow”, I may not visualize the exact same animal you do, but somewhere in our experiences, whether Real Life experiences or exposure via the media in some way, initially we both know, at a basic level, the kind of animal we’re talking about (certainly, if the conversation is about cows and not just a passing reference, further definition may be desired….). This is more of a problem when words that are indicative of a concept or a belief, especially when utilized to persuade or convince, but can easily show up in daily conversation. Here are a few examples:

  • liberty
  • justice
  • law
  • love
  • illegal
  • constitution
  • evil
  • good
  • diversity
  • strong
  • weak

…and so on. In the context of a real conversation between people who wish to understand each other, if and when words like these come up (or any other words that make a person “jump up” internally and make them either uncomfortable or immovably established in their “solid” idea of what it means…), time needs to be taken to ask about what each other means and feels about the word or words, and listen. Even if the person doesn’t agree with the other’s definition, at the very least you can know what the other means when using that word or those words, and will make the conversation more productive. The chances of a slight re-think of your own definition may occur.


This whole ongoing process of noting and dealing with weasel words in our discourse, whether at home or in public in some way, can make you less likely to be easily manipulated by any person or organization trying to force you to react in some way. Work well worth doing.

The Line

/ Jeff Hora / 3 Comments

I pretty much get the moves that the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church of America) makes to recognize the marginalized and the discriminated-against in our community and culture. Author and Shaman Lenny Duncan made that really clear in his Dear Church book, and certainly in his posted experiences in the past several years.


So when it was announced from the pulpit this past Sunday that our church was going to eliminate and/or limit the use of the words “Lord” and “Master” from service as they are reportedly offensive to (especially) Black members of our community, it jumped out at me. They (the words) hearken back to the deferential words and attitudes that slaves had to display to their owners. I can really see the tie-in.


But this bugged me for some reason. The study I have done on language and the history of certain words used a lot in the Bible presents me with a bit of a dilemma. As I understand the etymology of the word Lord, the Hebrew Bible uses this word in place of the Name of God, as it was not allowed to pronounce it (or even to write it, depending on how strict you wanted to be in the interpretation). A number of Christian writers, thinkers, theologians and teachers have chosen to use Lord instead of the Name of God in respect for the Hebrew traditions and their Jewish colleagues beliefs.

This is where the cultural context of language gets sticky. In the process of abstracting or obfuscating the word Lord from community liturgical use, what might this signal to our Jewish community, especially given the rise in anti-Semitic language and attitudes throughout the West of late? There is also another cultural challenge: Lord is a key word, and more importantly concept, for many Christians in their own spiritual lives. While the abstraction and excising of the Lord from the liturgy may address the discomfort of a segment of the community and acknowledge a past that is despicable, it denies the depth of integration of a particular, somewhat different meaning of the word into the devotional lives of others.


Where is the line? At what point is love, understanding and compassion flowing both directions? And there are So Many discriminated groups within our culture…..in a discussion I had about these questions, it was pointed out to me that, among many others, women are a discriminated class. Despite much having been done over the past number of years in opening up ministry, authority, and inclusive language, is it “enough”? What does “enough” even mean? Positive steps have and are being taken, but is our culture putting those efforts on pause, slowing them down, backing up, or what?

Other groups of community members with “invisible disabilities”, such as neuro-divergent people or those suffering from chronic pain, present different and difficult challenges to the caring people around them. How are the church and community seeing, prioritizing or addressing them in the context of the liturgy, their spiritual lives and day-to-day well-being?


Where is the line? That’s a really good question. Should there be a line? Ideally, no. Inclusiveness, by definition, means including everyone. Partitioning people into different groups, while helpful in ministering to needs, contains the danger of walling people from each other, and unconsciously prioritizing one group over against another. This is not the way that Jesus ministered, that I can read. He said that he came first to the flock of Israel, and then would turn around and heal and/or minister to Gentiles. For example, the demoniac of Gerasene was quite obviously in the Gentile world (why else would there be keepers of an enormous herd of pigs right there?!). Yet He cast the Legion of demons from this guy and sent him to witness to what God had done for him. No apparent line in His ministry that I can see there.


What can this mean for our actions within today’s world? I don’t think I can give any kind of definitive answer, other than to draw attention to The Line and encourage us to consider its meaning both in a liturgical and day-to-day apprehension.


The Line is there. Do we do anything with it?

Smack into the Wall

/ Jeff Hora / Leave a comment

By Jorge Láscar from Australia – West walls of the medieval city of Rhodes, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31948199

“You are the light of the world. A city built on a hill cannot be hid. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven.” – Matthew 5:14, 16 (NRSV)

“You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored?…” – Matthew 5:13 (NRSV)

“By you I can crush a troop, and by my God I can leap over a wall.” – Psalms 18:29 (NRSV)

The more I study and learn about communication, language, and witness, the more frustrated and concerned I become. In the midst of reading some of the thoughts of the French philosopher/psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan (not an easy read, for sure…), I discovered a concept he named the “wall of language.” While not totally lined up with his definition of this idea, I have appropriated it to describe what, to me, is the biggest challenge to clear communication on the planet, and, as a result, a serious concern to all y’all living to express God’s grace and love into this broken old world.

Here’s the problem: Not only is there no real universal definition for every word (although Webster’s gives it a shot for English…), but even between just two people, the best agreed-upon definition of something that these two people can see or experience (say, “spoon”, for example…) will likely conjure up slightly different, or wildly different, pictures in each of their memories and experiences of spoons. While some of the time that might not make that much of a difference, it can accumulate a number of minor misapprehensions in a conversation that add up to a greater and greater chance of misunderstanding. Now, if “spoon” has the potential to do that, you can well imagine what the thoughts, ideas and experiences of God, Father, Son, Spirit, grace, love, faith, trust, salvation, (and to add a few more words that can go a lot of different ways in today’s American society…), acceptance, justice, evangelical, poor, forgiveness, sin, compassion, “woke”, and so on. It can get really messy…

We only really have language to speak and write with, so we’re kind of stuck. The old marketing saying of “know your audience” only goes so far, especially since language has so many strong and ill-defined words by which we communicate and can be manipulated.

So, what can we do, as God’s people, to communicate who God is into this world? Well, using language the clearest way I can, I recall the scriptures posted at the top of this post. The old saying that “actions speak louder than words” doesn’t preclude speaking or writing, of course. However, the verses in Matthew emphasize BEING (” You ARE the light…” and “You ARE the salt…”) and the verse from Psalms points out that action directed by God gives us the strength and direction to “leap over a wall”! The wall of language isn’t going to go away and will likely not get any easier to leap over, but God guides and strengthens us to live who He is into the world. Words can be valuable, but the life of God lived and expressed into the world can make some of these words make sense to others.