Matthew W – Year 13 Student
Editor’s Note: Year 13 student Matthew W looks at language in the workplace and through intelligent wit and snappy sentences demonstrates how language, jargon and ‘phatic talk’ exist alongside one another. EB
Using language at work can be tough. Understanding all the nonsense and corporate jargon can be tricky, especially if English isn’t your first language. Balance sheets become risk assessments, which merge with net profit margins, which are essentially the same as operating profit margins but crucially different to gross profit margins and WOAH! Will somebody please tell me what is going on? I think that, in the workplace, the most important thing is clarity, as the purpose of workplace language is, ultimately, to execute business processes efficiently and increase performance as a result of that.
Got a boss that’s strict and loves Radiohead? Looks like your watercooler chats are going to consist of discussing whether “Creep” is really the band’s best song. (It isn’t, it’s “Weird Fishes/ Arpeggi” but that’s beside the point.)
This isn’t to say that we all need to speak like Orwellian robots, too afraid to speak freely or risk committing a Thoughtcrime. We need clarity and comfort to function in the workplace, not confusion and calamity. This is not just my opinion but that of modern linguist Almut Koester who, in 2014, conducted a study into workplace language and found that “phatic talk” (little chats by the watercooler or gossiping on a coffee break) is actually beneficial to a business rather than detrimental to it. Koester says that, because phatic talk performs a social function, it develops our interpersonal relationships with our colleagues more than an awkward team-building retreat ever could. By allowing colleagues to grow closer together organically, instead of forcing them to solve Chinese handcuffs in the rain, business owners can actually benefit from an increase in productivity, as colleagues understand each other to the point where collaborative work is enjoyable and productive.
However, like most things, the freedom of phatic talk exists on a spectrum, not in black and white. A group of linguists undertook the Language and Workplace Project over six years from 1998 to 2004. They found that it is those in positions of power (superiors) who dictate small talk. They initiate it, restrict it and even define appropriate subject matters. Got a boss that’s strict and loves Radiohead? Looks like your watercooler chats are going to consist of discussing whether “Creep” is really the band’s best song. (It isn’t, it’s “Weird Fishes/ Arpeggi” but that’s beside the point.) The point is, powerful people dictate office small talk, a fact that might end up throwing us in the opposite direction of Almut Koester’s chatty paradise as employees glumly listen to their boss’ opinion on early 2000s alt rock in what can only be described as being held verbally hostage. The worker can either participate or they do not – it’s unenjoyable regardless.
All this in mind, there are certain careers in which phatic talk has no place. Picture the scene: it’s 2011 and Seal Team 6 have just touched down in what is believed to be the final hiding place of the world’s most wanted terrorist, Osama Bin Laden. As the team prepare to breach the final door and put an end to this man’s reign of terror, one soldier pipes up with “Hey Ricky, d’you catch the game last night?” Not the time.
This issue of certain careers falling victim to unwanted catchphrases, idioms and inside jokes was well documented in 2009 where Kim and Elder, a linguist team from America, found that plain English was a lingua franca (linguistic common ground) for pilots and air traffic controllers. They found that most aviation near misses came as a result of American pilots failing to stick to pre-determined phrases.
A similar debate can be found in the UK, where some prison wardens have been referring to inmates as residents, supervised individuals and, absurdly, even clients. This is not just belittling and counter-intuitive, but flat-out wrong. A client chooses to go into business with you. Lawyers have clients. Estate agents have clients. Prisons have inmates or, better yet, prisoners. I think this brings an issue of condescension, as prisons are notorious for being unpleasant. This euphemistic nonsense helps nobody – especially not a prisoner whose new cellmate is constantly on edge and has access to a sharp object. “Residents.” Give me a break. Imagine trying to glorify such a terrifying situation. The word “prisoners” or “inmates” are far better, the former even has “prison” in it. Prison is a severe punishment for breaking the law. It is not a 4-star hotel. This is where we need to be specific, people.
The GSAL Journal 