Sarah Palin is back in the news for matters linguistic. I’ll only briefly summarize the issue here; given the strange belief by media and Internet folks that Sarah Palin’s doings are somehow significant*, I assume that by the time you’re reading this post, you’ve already been inundated with information about this latest event.
In short, there’s a proposal for an Islamic community center and mosque, the Cordoba House, at 45 Park Place in lower Manhattan. This is two blocks from the edge of the former World Trade Center site. The Community Board for that part of New York unanimously approved the proposal, but now Real Americans like Sarah Palin are instigating a Crescent Scare against the center, essentially claiming that having a good Muslim thing so close to a bad Muslim thing in a city many of them haven’t ever been to will cause them substantial emotional duress. Or as Palin herself put it, it would be a stab through the heart.
Personally, I find her position silly; there’s no reason that New Yorkers should care what Sarah Palin thinks they should do in their city, and there’s no reason she should care what they do. In fact, the only reason I find her position at all interesting is the way she chose to express it. In a tweet, she called on “Peaceful Muslims” to “refudiate” something:
That tweet was quickly taken down (thanks to Little Green Footballs for getting the screenshot) and replaced with a similar tweet that took out not only the heart-stabbing imagery, but also the curious word refudiate, which was replaced with the more standard refute**:
But the damage was done. The blogosphere, primed by her usage of refudiate in a Fox News appearance a few days earlier, had already caught wind of Palin’s refudiated tweet. So Palin was left with little choice but to defend herself:
Yes, people create words a lot. Shakespeare is especially known for this. English, like all extant languages, is ever-changing, and there’s a lot of good to be had in allowing people to create words or mess with syntax when it’s called for. However, refudiate was an error (just like misunderestimate). That’s fine; we all make mistakes. But there is a world of difference between passing off a mistake as a word and the premeditated release of a new word.
The fact that Palin took down her original tweet, and then added not only the “refute” tweet but also another tweet that re-instated the heart-stabbing point of the original, shows that she lacks confidence in her new coinage. Those two tweets contain pretty much everything that was in the original, except for refudiate, so it seems pretty clear that Palin is trying to repudiate refudiate.
So what of refudiate? As Mark Liberman showed, Sarah Palin is not the first to use the word; the science-fiction author John Sladek used it in a short story, Answers, back in 1984. It’s popped up from time to time since then, but in all of the instances I’ve listed here (as well as most of the others I found), it’s explicitly labelled as erroneous, just as Palin has implicitly labelled it.
Personally, I find this surprising and a little bit sad, as refudiate could be a useful word for me. Sometimes someone will say something both profoundly mistaken and offensive, and I’ll want to simultaneously repudiate it (i.e., separate myself from it unequivocally) and refute it (i.e., disprove it). In fact, I’ve been noticing this feeling a lot more when I read about political news lately. Sarah Palin herself is someone whose opinions I’d often like to refudiate.
Unfortunately, Palin has miscreated refudiate, rendering it unusable. In her original tweet, it seems likely to me that the word she wants is repudiate; it’s a little unclear because the character limit forced her to omit the object of transitive refudiate, so we’re left to infer that the intended object is the mosque. The only other possible object would be Palin’s own argument-in-question-form, and presumably she’s not requesting people to disprove her claim.
Assuming that the mosque is the object, we can then be pretty sure that repudiate is the intended meaning, as you can’t refute a thing***; refuting is the act of disproving or rebutting or showing to be erroneous, which must be done to an argument, claim, belief, or something of the like. To refute a mosque would be, I suppose, to prove that it does not exist, in which case the whole tweet would become quite unnecessary. It isn’t a blend; it’s just a variant form of repudiate. Because she introduced the word in a domain already solidly ruled by another word, refudiate has no reason to catch on.
And so, sadly, the meaning that people will think of for refudiate will not be the reasonable meaning that blends refutation and repudiation into a rebuttal-and-disavowal. Worse, because of Palin’s awkward attempt to justify it away, the word will be a laughingstock for the near future. This has poisoned what could have been a good word.
But at least it gives us a cautionary tale. Refudiate coulda had class. It coulda been a contender. Instead, it’s the butt of a joke. If you have a pet word that you’ve been nurturing, and you want to see it find its way into the language, don’t introduce it as an identical replacement for an existing word. Don’t omit its context. And don’t ever treat it like a typo. Be proud of your word, thrust it into the light of day, make clear what exactly it means, and you’ll be the proud parent of a word.
—
*: Of course, the fact that I’m writing about Sarah Palin again means that I am part of the problem. Crumbs.
**: I say “more standard” here even though her usage of refute is still non-standard. The OED notes that pre-18th century Scotland is the only place and time when refute has been used consistently to mean “to refuse or reject (a thing or person)”. In general, refuting something is about disproving it, and it doesn’t really make sense to disprove a plan.
***: Unless you are in Scotland in the 17th century, which I remain confident Palin is not.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 20, 2010 at 8:42 am
Trish
Hi, Gabe! I enjoy your blog, and think you are generally right on in your assessment of language as it is being used. This is my first time commenting. First, let me say that I am no fan of Ms Palin, and agree with you that folks spend waaaay too much time/energy/ink/electrons on her.
That being said, I’m pretty sure the second tweet was just her attempt to make a joke at her own expense, which she did with her usual tin-ear approach to English, but revealed more self awareness than I had assumed she possessed. That’s it; just a joke, as illustrated by the other examples she gives. People in the public eye who use twitter had better have excellent language and communication skills, particularly editing skills, if they are not to expose themselves to potential worlds of hurt!
July 20, 2010 at 9:17 am
Janet
Palin has mastered the art of converting her malapropisms, solecisms, and other blunders (social and linguistic) into badges of patriotism and into testimony of her carefully contrived image as someone who represents the working people of America. They see her as the foe of secular, liberal “elitists” who don’t understand their world, and who don’t even speak their language. Palin’s mistakes endear her to these people, and –make no mistake about it–Palin knows this! But she’s the darling of corporations that have charbroiled these same workers. The pity is that they don’t sense they’re being played, suckered. Palin is raking in a lot of money (and living “real good” now) as a result of having learned to play two different games with two different audiences. Viewers and readers who are disgusted with Palin, and yet equally disgusted with their disgust of a person who doesn’t seem worth their attention, should stop feeling guilty. Palin is worrisome, and she should worry a lot of people — but not because of what she represents, but rather because of the cynical way she uses image to delude masses of vulnerable and scared Americans.
July 25, 2010 at 1:23 pm
Days 14 & 15: « ltbnl
[…] the morning), I propose that this day be declared Make Up Your Own Word Day in honor of yet another Palin blunder. In the name of “refudiate,” I pronounce polyautorhagia* a word which can, […]