Sunday 10 April 2016

English is not a trap

Michael Hofmann is one of the most interesting figures in the U.K. literary scene. As a consequence, I'm always on the look-out for features about him. They tend to provoke numerous thoughts on my part, so it was no surprise when I was deeply struck by his interview in The Guardian this week in which he states the following:

"English is basically a trap: class trap, dialect trap, feeling trap. It’s almost a language for spies, for people to find out what people are really thinking." 

As someone who speaks three languages and has lived in a non-English-speaking country for over twenty years, I couldn't disagree more. English itself isn't the trap. Instead, it's Hofmann's upbringing in a certain social environment that traps him. The interviewer mentions his RP tones, while also describing his boarding school and Oxbridge education.

In other words, Hofmann feels hemmed in by the English he associates with the society that he knows. Of course, this linguistic world view is hugely limited, as if the English language were restricted to how it is used at Winchester College and Cambridge University. In the interview, Hofmann also states the following when comparing German with English:

“I have come to be very fond of German again. There are reaches of simplicity that English cannot do without sounding ignorant and stupid. In English you always have to sound as if you are making an effort."

When attempting to generalise, he's actually comparing his specific experience of the two languages. For example, the English that is spoken in the playgrounds and pubs of my home town bears no resemblance to the language he describes. Nor does the English that's used in numerous other parts of the British Isles. And this is before invoking the English of other countries.

Language doesn't trap us. The burden of its social connotations form the real trap, and this is true of English, German, Spanish, French, etc, etc. Of course, the personal knowledge of an extra language is another trap: bilingualism enriches you in terms of the layers and texturing that you can encounter in both languages, yet it also means you are never quite at home in either. This is no fault of the languages themselves. It's down to the societies where we've experienced them.

11 comments:

  1. Thank you Matthew, I too read that and absolutely disagreed with it and totally agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Roy,

      Thanks for commenting. Glad we share opinions once again!

      Delete
  2. Dear Matthew

    I speak Spanish, French, Russian and German and I have to say that English still seems to me to be by far the most efficient and effective language in the world.

    Best wishes from Simon R. Gladdish

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes well said. The Hoffman piece was vastly irritating.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Edwin,

      Thanks for commenting. It certainly got my juices going too!

      Best wishes,

      Matthew

      Delete
    2. Just returnig to say been reading my way through Joseph Roth lately (woderful) & it strikes me that Mr Hoffman shoudl maybe turn his gaze upon that period - the different languages, registers, how German was used.

      Delete
    3. So many textures in so many languages! We limit ourselves when we ignore them.

      Delete
  4. Hi Matthew. It seems to me that what Hofmann is saying is that, in the UK, people make assumptions about a person's social class based on accent, dialect, vocabulary and syntax in their spoken English. ("In English you always have to sound as if you are making an effort") It is the interviewer who makes reference to Hofmann's own social class. And this "English is a trap" quote is only one small element of an interview which in other places makes, I think, brilliant points about, for instance, Hofmann's boldness in valuing interpretive translation above literal translation. I find it hard to disagree with Hofmann's viewpoint about spoken English (if I've understood it correctly). Anyway, thank you for providing much food for thought! - Josephine

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Josephine,

      Thanks for commenting.

      I've inhabited both sides of the fence, as a comprehensive schoolboy with an M.A. in Modern Languages from Oxford, and my peers in my home town ceertainly didn't sound as if they were making an effort. Now the guys from Winchester College that I encountered at St Peter's College were a different kettle of fish!

      As for his view of translating, I also disagree with it in many respects, as would anyone who's studied under Eric Southworth and John Rutherford, but that's another post!

      Delete
  5. Couldn't agree more Matthew.

    Hofmann is unfortunately blinded by the socio-cultural circles he has experienced and moved inside in both languages, and this leads him to a generalisation that excludes the experiences of a great many English speakers.

    I say all that as someone who admires his critical nous and writing style as both reviewer and poet a very great deal, I should add.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I also admire Hofmann's skill and intellect hugely. I do struggle to be moved by his verse, but maybe that's down to me...

      Delete