noun: verb. Labeling and reifying dynamic subjects as static objects. to form nouns.
I made this definition. As far as I know, the word “noun” is not used in the English-speaking world to describe action. A noun is a noun, and our language is a language with many nouns, and this tendency is becoming stronger and stronger as time passes. Social scientists refer to the cultural transformation of a verb into a noun as nominalization, which currently dominates law and academic writing (creatively speaking, the reverse is called nominalization, but it can happen as well). Google it. We’re not talking about that here.)
Last summer, linguist John McWhirter wrote a column lamenting how ubiquitous nouns have become in communication. They help package dynamic things and people into more meaningful static categories. But through them, McWhirter writes, “a rather feeble glimmer of humanity shines through.”
Nouns are related, but verbs are. If you want real action, if you want to build something by combining nouns, you need to bracket some verbs.
opinion
Readers may remember a report published in this paper in 2020. A political war broke out in the northern suburbs. First, neighbors bombarded each other with traditional campaign signs. However, these lacked the desired punch. So they resorted to a series of handmade signs filled with unpatriotic adjectives about their opponents. they called each other. I remember reading this and thinking, “This isn’t politics anymore.” This is psychology. ”
I’m a psychologist and I confess that the hammer is asking for the nail, but we each have to work with our unique skill sets to help the greater good. I would like your help in reducing the number of nouns.
I can see this in my clinical practice as well. Phrases like “He’s a narcissist and a gaslighter” and “She only said that because she’s a manic depressive” abound. They also take on the trappings of American politics. Frustrated peers become deplorables, pests, conservatives, Marxists, bullies, or betas. We name everyone, but it can get ugly.
Take Judge Holden, the violent antagonist of the late Cormac McCarthy’s novel Blood Meridian. He carried a ledger with him as he traipsed bloody along the 19th century Mexico-Texas border. In it, he records every person and natural object he encounters. A fellow traveler asked about the custom. Holden replies, “Anything that exists in creation without my knowledge exists without my consent.” Holden makes a name for himself by dominating his surroundings. Naming is an attempt at control.
In my opinion, that is the wrong way to foster democracy. It whitewashes things and soaks a system designed for dynamic, verbose permanence into syrupy noun trash.
Other psychologists think so, too. Mid-century social analyst Erich Fromm made a similar point in his book To Have Or To Be? An over-named culture makes people, politics, beliefs, and abilities seem like possessed objects rather than living processes. And because people turn their worldview into a commodity they hold onto, “each is afraid to change his opinion, precisely because it is one of his possessions,” Fromm writes. are.
Every time we try to reflect, the nameless among us take up arms to follow the labeled command, as if someone is trying to take something from them. We ignore the verbs that democracy needs to survive: to speak, to listen, to struggle, to compromise.
Another mid-century psychotherapist is better known in clinical circles as D.W. Winnicott. He wrote a political essay on the word “democracy”, defining it as “a society well adapted to its members of healthy individuals.” What is healthy living? He states that humans thrive when they play well with others and live with dynamic behavior rather than eliminating assumptions. In other words, healthy citizens speak with people who speak other languages. They revitalize democratic order.
“He’s one of the liberals,” one might say of her neighbor. She conjures up a set of prepackaged assumptions, such as the man whose whining about losing his job made that day’s New York Times headlines. Instead, she might say of him, “He reads the New York Times.” This redundant reference leaves room for consideration of many other possibilities. He might also read The American Conservative.
Let’s talk less about who our neighbors are and more about what they’re doing, thinking, and feeling. When we label our neighbors with nouns, we deny their complexity and capacity for change. We are undermining the culture necessary for the perpetuation of democracy. Try not to say too many nouns.
Nathaniel R. Strenger is a licensed psychologist and director of clinical advancement at the Center for Integrative Counseling and Psychology in Dallas. He is also the president of the Dallas Psychoanalytic Psychology Society.
This essay, part of our opinion series “The American Middle,” encourages more accurate and dynamic political discourse.
We welcome your feedback in a letter to the editor. Please see our guidelines and submit your letter here. If you have any problems with the form, please email letters@dallasnews.com.
