An old boss and mentor of mine (and, by old, I mean "former" even though he is on the other side of 50...) used to constantly remind us that "language is behavior." At the time, I would roll my eyes, chalk this up to pontification and chucklingly go back to the work that was really "important."
Several years have passed since I worked for this person, however, and (hopefully) I've grown a little wiser, coming to realize that there may have been some worth to a lot of the stuff he said (actually, I'm sure he's still saying it!) So, that "language is behavior" mantra was playing through my mind as I read this post from Dick Cavett's New York Times blog.
There is a large part of me that believes we all just need to relax...about everything. So, my knee-jerk reaction was "OK, so President Bush looks like a fool when is pronounces nuclear 'nuke-you-lur' - who cares? You know what he means."
But when I stop to think about it - and apply it to my every day work - I'm forced to admit that this stuff is important, even if it can seem like nitpicking.
For example, you could draft the most relevant, jargon-free, compelling and powerful press release ever, but if you're touting software that is meant to complement, but instead you've it complimenting, you've lost the battle before it's begun. Further, the improper use of language implies laziness, sloppiness and disrespect. Certainly, this is not a perception one would want to cultivate in the minds of managers and colleagues.
But as Mr. Cavett points out, there are more dire consequences here than lost sales or career damage:
"Getting a little thing like words right, is it so important?
The right answer is: Yes. As when poorly worded road signs cause fatalities. Sloppy language leads to sloppy thought, and sloppy thought to sloppy legislation. And why not a sloppy war? What if someone big, issuing an order of earth-shaking potential, made the (tiny) error of confusing the last letters of Iraq and Iran?"
While there may have been political motivation in Mr. Cavett's use of this particular scenario, that is not my intent in highlighting it. Regardless of your politics, this example illustrates that just maybe the line between language and behavior is a lot less clear than I originally thought.