My occasional diatribes about the appalling Americanisation (or "Americanization") of our language usually produce emotional responses from sensitive souls for whom this sullying of our language is a disaster equalled only by nuclear war or lack of parking space in George St.
A Palmerston correspondent has sent a photo of a KiwiRail sign with a "z" (or perhaps a "zee") in "apologizes" where she would prefer an "s".
"So what?" some would say. "We know what they mean."
Well, yes, we know immediately that KiwiRail are deeply sorry about doing something that doesn’t involve ship-grounding but it doesn’t stop us wondering if there shouldn’t be a law to protect New Zealand English, perhaps something like the Wildlife Act (1953) which protects more than 900 native species including three types of frog.
Is not our language as valuable as frogs? A New Zealand Language Act might also include a clause making it mandatory for all public signs (not "signage") to be written by someone who actually speaks English and cares about its use.
KiwiRail has about 4000 employees and if just one of them had any feeling for language and was appointed signs officer, how pleasant that ugly Palmerston sign could be.
Of course, "apologise" would feature and the random sprinkling of capital letters and apostrophes would disappear, as would the almost always unnecessary "currently".
But, in these days of staff reductions and a prime minister enamoured of all things American there will be no signs officer nor a New Zealand Language Act.
I never listen to politicians but for this column I took a deep breath and read one of Christopher Luxon’s speeches. It was at Waitangi Day this year.
The obligatory (and very long) introduction in Maori made me wonder if his pronunciation had met the required standard but the English part was pretty straightforward — a severe thrashing of the previous government and an assurance that by 2040 (safely five elections away) New Zealand, under his party’s guidance, would be an earthly paradise. In fact, it was more of an election speech than a commemoration of our national day.
What I was looking for was evidence of an American taint in our leader. Just when I’d decided he was clean, in a speech suitably peppered with "iwi" and "whanau" came a strange word in the "paradise on Earth" pitch — "I am leading a government that is determined to achieve this 2040 vision. I want to see us get our mojo back — a much more confident, positive and ambitious New Zealand."
Maybe the crowd cheered and tears of gratitude bedewed their cheeks, but for me "mojo" ruined the big moment. It’s from African American and Afro-Caribbean English and used in some circles to mean "magic spell".
Perhaps Mr Luxon is a sorcerer and that’s how he’ll save the nation. Then again, perhaps "mojo" was a legacy of his eight years in North America or just an attempt to project a with-it image.
"Mana" might have been a better choice but I guess most of his listeners had at least a vague idea of what he was on about, and therein lies the problem for the New Zealand Language Act, a problem not faced by the Wildlife Act. A dead frog is a dead frog but "apologize" and even "mojo" manage to still do the job.
Even if we admit that American English works well enough, there are still many who are turned off by what they hear and see as its ugliness — an ugliness often based simply on its being different. The pronunciation "skedule" is an exception. Not only is it different, it’s physically painful to listen to.
The growing list of Americanisms will rile pedants and purists for years to come even as others accept them.
Do you cringe when you read that Swim Dunedin supports "swim coaches" and that Moana Pool has a "swim shop"? There’s brief relief in finding that the national body stick to good old-fashioned "Swimming New Zealand" but then spoils it all with news of "swim meets".
Mercifully, "Dunedin Railway Station" becomes "Dunedin Train Station" only in that world of illiteracy represented by travel brochures.
I guess we need to relax. No less an authority than Ian Jolly, who writes the BBC News house style guide, has this to say: "I was taught years ago that railway station was the correct term. But why hamper our language when suitable alternatives are available? And I can’t agree with the idea that any term used outside the UK is not acceptable within it."
Perhaps, then, we must be more tolerant towards language changes. Even so, I will still grimace whenever I hear "skedule" and whenever I use the railway crossing in Palmerston.
— Jim Sullivan is a Patearoa writer.
