|
|
Re: More collateral damagePosted by ESC on November 23, 2001 In Reply to: Re: SALT & redundancy posted by ESC on November 22, 2001 : : : : I'm hoping someone out there in cyber space can fill me in on the origin of the euphemism, collateral damage. I writing an english paper on the development of this phrase, and I'm having trouble tracking down its beginnings. : : : : Thannks, Jewels : : :
Safire's New Political Dictionary has two mentions of collateral damage: : : : The term is also found in "20th Century Words: The Story of New Words in English Over the Last 100 Years" by John Ayto (Oxford University Press, New York, 1999). Page 466: "collateral damage n. destruction or injury beyond the intent or expectation of an aggressor, usually occurring in a civilian area surrounding a military target. Commonly used as a euphemism for 'accidentally killing civilians.' ." : : I had thought "SALT talks" stood for "Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty talks" and hence was not redundant. Wasn't this so? : I don't know. I was just quoting Safire. A couple more references: COLLATERAL DAMAGE - "The unintentional destruction of civilians in a nuclear attack. Since 1374 'collateral' has meant that which is aside from the main subject, line of action or purpose of something. In the nuclear era, 'collateral damage' means the destruction of people, cities and resources as a result of nuclear fallout, imprecise targeting or plain error. The 'megadeaths' (millions of deaths) that 'collateral damage' may entail are not represented in this term." From "Wordsworth Book of Euphemism" by Judith S. Neaman and Carole G. Silver (Wordsworth Editions, Hertfordshire, 1995). Page 353. COLLATERAL DAMAGE - "Civilian casualties, in euphemistic Pentagonese. This term, which had been in use for many years in discussion of nuclear war, came into its own during daily press briefings in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, to describe the overkill of conventional warfare. The term was a clear marker of the gulf between the military and the five hundred journalists who had been assigned to cover the war. Here is how R.W. Apple Jr. of the 'New York Times' treated the matter in a column of February 4, 1991: 'There are obvious cultural differences.between the highly disciplined military men, with their odd words and phrases like 'attrit' for 'wear down' and 'collateral damage' for 'civilian casualties,' and the reporters, who make their living by questioning authority and doubting official pronouncements. To them, Pentagonese is a laughable language.'" From "Slang: the authoritative topic-by-topic dictionary of American lingoes from all walks of life" by Paul Dickson (Pocket Books, 1990, 1998). "Pentagonese: Fort Fumble Speaks" chapter. Page 281-282 |