Newspeak was the official language of Oceania and had been devised to
meet the ideological needs of Ingsoc, or English Socialism. In the year
1984 there was not as yet anyone who used Newspeak as his sole means of
communication, either in speech or writing. The leading articles in the
Times were written in it, but this was a tour de force which could
only be carried out by a specialist. It was expected that Newspeak would
have finally superseded Oldspeak (or Standard English, as we should call
it) by about the year 2050. Meanwhile it gained ground steadily, all
Party members tending to use Newspeak words and grammatical
constructions more and more in their everyday speech. The version in use
in 1984, and embodied in the Ninth and Tenth Editions of the Newspeak
dictionary, was a provisional one, and contained many superfluous words
and archaic formations which were due to be suppressed later. It is with
the final, perfected version, as embodied in the Eleventh Edition of the
dictionary, that we are concerned here.
The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression
for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc,
but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that
when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten,
a heretical thought--that is, a thought diverging from the principles of
Ingsoc--should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is
dependent on words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact
and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member
could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meanings and
also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was
done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating
undesirable words and by stripping such words as remained of unorthodox
meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meanings whatever. To
give a single example. The word free still existed in Newspeak, but it
could only be used in such statements as "This dog is free from lice" or
"This field is free from weeds." It could not be used in its old sense
of "politically free" or "intellectually free," since political and
intellectual freedom no longer existed even as concepts, and were
therefore of necessity nameless. Quite apart from the suppression of
definitely heretical words, reduction of vocabulary was regarded as an
end in itself, and no word that could be dispensed with was allowed to
survive. Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range
of thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the
choice of words down to a minimum.
Newspeak was founded on the English language as we now know it, though
many Newspeak sentences, even when not containing newly created words,
would be barely intelligible to an English-speaker of our own day.
Newspeak words were divided into three distinct classes, known as the A
vocabulary, the B vocabulary (also called compound words), and the C
vocabulary. It will be simpler to discuss each class separately, but the
grammatical peculiarities of the language can be dealt with in the
section devoted to the A vocabulary, since the same rules held good for
all three categories.
* * * * *
The A vocabulary. The A vocabulary consisted of the words needed for
the business of everyday life--for such things as eating, drinking,
working, putting on one's clothes, going up and down stairs, riding in
vehicles, gardening, cooking, and the like. It was composed almost
entirely of words that we already possess--words like hit, run,
dog, tree, sugar, house, field--but in comparison with the
present-day English vocabulary, their number was extremely small, while
their meanings were far more rigidly defined. All ambiguities and shades
of meaning had been purged out of them. So far as it could be achieved,
a Newspeak word of this class was simply a staccato sound expressing
one clearly understood concept. It would have been quite impossible to
use the A vocabulary for literary purposes or for political or
philosophical discussion. It was intended only to express simple,
purposive thoughts, usually involving concrete objects or physical
actions.
The grammar of Newspeak had two outstanding peculiarities. The first of
these was an almost complete interchangeability between different parts
of speech. Any word in the language (in principle this applied even to
very abstract words such as if or when) could be used either as
verb, noun, adjective, or adverb. Between the verb and the noun form,
when they were of the same root, there was never any variation, this
rule of itself involving the destruction of many archaic forms. The word
thought, for example, did not exist in Newspeak. Its place was taken
by think, which did duty for both noun and verb. No etymological
principle was followed here; in some cases it was the original noun that
was chosen for retention, in other cases the verb. Even where a noun and
verb of kindred meaning were not etymologically connected, one or other
of them was frequently suppressed. There was, for example, no such word
as cut, its meaning being sufficiently covered by the noun-verb
knife. Adjectives were formed by adding the suffix -ful to the
noun-verb, and adverbs by adding -wise. Thus, for example, speedful
meant "rapid" and speedwise meant "quickly." Certain of our
present-day adjectives, such as good, strong, big, black,
soft, were retained, but their total number was very small. There was
little need for them, since almost any adjectival meaning could be
arrived at by adding -ful to a noun-verb. None of the now-existing
adverbs was retained, except for a very few already ending in -wise;
the -wise termination was invariable. The word well, for example,
was replaced by goodwise.
In addition, any word--this again applied in principle to every word in
the language--could be negatived by adding the affix un-, or could be
strengthened by the affix plus-, or, for still greater emphasis,
doubleplus-. Thus, for example, uncold meant "warm," while
pluscold and doublepluscold meant, respectively, "very cold" and
"superlatively cold." It was also possible, as in present-day English,
to modify the meaning of almost any word by prepositional affixes such
as ante-, post-, up-, down-, etc. By such methods it was found
possible to bring about an enormous diminution of vocabulary. Given, for
instance, the word good, there was no need for such a word as bad,
since the required meaning was equally well--indeed, better--expressed
by ungood. All that was necessary, in any case where two words formed
a natural pair of opposites, was to decide which of them to suppress.
Dark, for example, could be replaced by unlight, or light by
undark, according to preference.
The second distinguishing mark of Newspeak grammar was its regularity.
Subject to a few exceptions which are mentioned below, all inflections
followed the same rules. Thus, in all verbs the preterite and the past
participle were the same and ended in -ed. The preterite of steal
was stealed, the preterite of think was thinked, and so on
throughout the language, all such forms as swam, gave, brought,
spoke, taken, etc., being abolished. All plurals were made by adding
-s or -es as the case might be. The plurals of man, ox, life
were mans, oxes, lifes. Comparison of adjectives was invariably
made by adding -er, -est (good, gooder, goodest), irregular
forms and the more, most formation being suppressed.
The only classes of words that were still allowed to inflect irregularly
were the pronouns, the relatives, the demonstrative adjectives, and the
auxiliary verbs. All of these followed their ancient usage, except that
whom had been scrapped as unnecessary, and the shall, should
tenses had been dropped, all their uses being covered by will and
would. There were also certain irregularities in word-formation
arising out of the need for rapid and easy speech. A word which was
difficult to utter, or was liable to be incorrectly heard, was held to
be ipso facto a bad word; occasionally therefore, for the sake of
euphony, extra letters were inserted into a word or an archaic formation
was retained. But this need made itself felt chiefly in connection with
the B vocabulary. Why so great an importance was attached to ease of
pronunciation will be made clear later in this essay.
* * * * *
The B vocabulary. The B vocabulary consisted of words which had been
deliberately constructed for political purposes: words, that is to say,
which not only had in every case a political implication, but were
intended to impose a desirable mental attitude upon the person using
them. Without a full understanding of the principles of Ingsoc it was
difficult to use these words correctly. In some cases they could be
translated into Oldspeak, or even into words taken from the A
vocabulary, but this usually demanded a long paraphrase and always
involved the loss of certain overtones. The B words were a sort of
verbal short-hand, often packing whole ranges of ideas into a few
syllables, and at the same time more accurate and forcible than ordinary
language.
The B words were in all cases compound words.[2] They consisted of two
or more words, or portions of words, welded together in an easily
pronounceable form. The resulting amalgam was always a noun-verb, and
inflected according to the ordinary rules. To take a single example: the
word goodthink, meaning, very roughly, "orthodoxy," or, if one chose
to regard it as a verb, "to think in an orthodox manner." This inflected
as follows: noun-verb, goodthink; past tense and past participle,
goodthinked; present participle, goodthinking; adjective,
goodthinkful; adverb, goodthinkwise; verbal noun, goodthinker.
[Footnote 2: Compound words, such as speakwrite, were of course to be
found in the A vocabulary, but these were merely convenient
abbreviations and had no special ideological color.]
The B words were not constructed on any etymological plan. The words of
which they were made up could be any parts of speech, and could be
placed in any order and mutilated in any way which made them easy to
pronounce while indicating their derivation. In the word crimethink
(thoughtcrime), for instance, the think came second, whereas in
thinkpol (Thought Police) it came first, and in the latter word
police had lost its second syllable. Because of the greater difficulty
in securing euphony, irregular formations were commoner in the B
vocabulary than in the A vocabulary. For example, the adjectival
forms of Minitrue, Minipax, and Miniluv were, respectively,
Minitruthful, Minipeaceful, and Minilovely, simply because
-trueful, -paxful, and -loveful were slightly awkward to
pronounce. In principle, however, all B words could inflect, and all
inflected in exactly the same way.
Some of the B words had highly subtilized meanings, barely intelligible
to anyone who had not mastered the language as a whole. Consider, for
example, such a typical sentence from a Times leading article as
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Ingsoc. The shortest rendering that one could
make of this in Oldspeak would be: "Those whose ideas were formed before
the Revolution cannot have a full emotional understanding of the
principles of English Socialism." But this is not an adequate
translation. To begin with, in order to grasp the full meaning of the
Newspeak sentence quoted above, one would have to have a clear idea of
what is meant by Ingsoc. And, in addition, only a person thoroughly
grounded in Ingsoc could appreciate the full force of the word
bellyfeel, which implied a blind, enthusiastic acceptance difficult to
imagine today; or of the word oldthink, which was inextricably mixed
up with the idea of wickedness and decadence. But the special function
of certain Newspeak words, of which oldthink was one, was not so much
to express meanings as to destroy them. These words, necessarily few in
number, had had their meanings extended until they contained within
themselves whole batteries of words which, as they were sufficiently
covered by a single comprehensive term, could now be scrapped and
forgotten. The greatest difficulty facing the compilers of the Newspeak
dictionary was not to invent new words, but, having invented them, to
make sure what they meant: to make sure, that is to say, what ranges of
words they canceled by their existence.
As we have already seen in the case of the word free, words which had
once borne a heretical meaning were sometimes retained for the sake of
convenience, but only with the undesirable meanings purged out of them.
Countless other words such as honor, justice, morality,
internationalism, democracy, science, and religion had simply
ceased to exist. A few blanket words covered them, and, in covering
them, abolished them. All words groupings themselves round the concepts
of liberty and equality, for instance, were contained in the single word
crimethink, while all words grouping themselves round the concepts of
objectivity and rationalism were contained in the single word
oldthink. Greater precision would have been dangerous. What was
required in a Party member was an outlook similar to that of the ancient
Hebrew who knew, without knowing much else, that all nations other than
his own worshiped "false gods." He did not need to know that these gods
were called Baal, Osiris, Moloch, Ashtaroth, and the like; probably the
less he knew about them the better for his orthodoxy. He knew Jehovah
and the commandments of Jehovah; he knew, therefore, that all gods with
other names or other attributes were false gods. In somewhat the same
way, the Party member knew what constituted right conduct, and in
exceedingly vague, generalized terms he knew what kinds of departure
from it were possible. His sexual life, for example, was entirely
regulated by the two Newspeak words sexcrime (sexual immorality) and
goodsex (chastity). Sexcrime covered all sexual misdeeds whatever.
It covered fornication, adultery, homosexuality, and other perversions,
and, in addition, normal intercourse practiced for its own sake. There
was no need to enumerate them separately, since they were all equally
culpable, and, in principle, all punishable by death. In the C
vocabulary, which consisted of scientific and technical words, it might
be necessary to give specialized names to certain sexual aberrations,
but the ordinary citizen had no need of them. He knew what was meant by
goodsex--that is to say, normal intercourse between man and wife, for
the sole purpose of begetting children, and without physical pleasure on
the part of the woman; all else was sexcrime. In Newspeak it was
seldom possible to follow a heretical thought further than the
perception that it was heretical; beyond that point the necessary
words were nonexistent.
No word in the B vocabulary was ideologically neutral. A great many were
euphemisms. Such words, for instance, as joycamp (forced-labor camp)
or Minipax (Ministry of Peace, i.e., Ministry of War) meant almost the
exact opposite of what they appeared to mean. Some words, on the other
hand, displayed a frank and contemptuous understanding of the real
nature of Oceanic society. An example was prolefeed, meaning the
rubbishy entertainment and spurious news which the Party handed out to
the masses. Other words, again, were ambivalent, having the connotation
"good" when applied to the Party and "bad" when applied to its enemies.
But in addition there were great numbers of words which at first sight
appeared to be mere abbreviations and which derived their ideological
color not from their meaning but from their structure.
So far as it could be contrived, everything that had or might have
political significance of any kind was fitted into the B vocabulary. The
name of every organization, or body of people, or doctrine, or country,
or institution, or public building, was invariably cut down into the
familiar shape; that is, a single easily pronounced word with the
smallest number of syllables that would preserve the original
derivation. In the Ministry of Truth, for example, the Records
Department, in which Winston Smith worked, was called Recdep, the
Fiction Department was called Ficdep, the Teleprograms Department was
called Teledep, and so on. This was not done solely with the object of
saving time. Even in the early decades of the twentieth century,
telescoped words and phrases had been one of the characteristic features
of political language; and it had been noticed that the tendency to use
abbreviations of this kind was most marked in totalitarian countries and
totalitarian organizations. Examples were such words as Nazi,
Gestapo, Comintern, Inprecorr, Agitprop. In the beginning the
practice had been adopted as it were instinctively, but in Newspeak it
was used with a conscious purpose. It was perceived that in thus
abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by
cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it.
The words Communist International, for instance, call up a composite
picture of universal human brotherhood, red flags, barricades, Karl
Marx, and the Paris Commune. The word Comintern, on the other hand,
suggests merely a tightly knit organization and a well-defined body of
doctrine. It refers to something almost as easily recognized, and as
limited in purpose, as a chair or a table. Comintern is a word that
can be uttered almost without taking thought, whereas _Communist
International_ is a phrase over which one is obliged to linger at least
momentarily. In the same way, the associations called up by a word like
Minitrue are fewer and more controllable than those called up by
Ministry of Truth. This accounted not only for the habit of
abbreviating whenever possible, but also for the almost exaggerated care
that was taken to make every word easily pronounceable.
In Newspeak, euphony outweighed every consideration other than
exactitude of meaning. Regularity of grammar was always sacrificed to it
when it seemed necessary. And rightly so, since what was required, above
all for political purposes, were short clipped words of unmistakable
meaning which could be uttered rapidly and which roused the minimum of
echoes in the speaker's mind. The words of the B vocabulary even gained
in force from the fact that nearly all of them were very much alike.
Almost invariably these words--goodthink, Minipax, prolefeed,
sexcrime, joycamp, Ingsoc, bellyfeel, thinkpol, and countless
others--were words of two or three syllables, with the stress
distributed equally between the first syllable and the last. The use of
them encouraged a gabbling style of speech, at once staccato and
monotonous. And this was exactly what was aimed at. The intention was to
make speech, and especially speech on any subject not ideologically
neutral, as nearly as possible independent of consciousness. For the
purposes of everyday life it was no doubt necessary, or sometimes
necessary, to reflect before speaking, but a Party member called upon to
make a political or ethical judgment should be able to spray forth the
correct opinions as automatically as a machine gun spraying forth
bullets. His training fitted him to do this, the language gave him an
almost foolproof instrument, and the texture of the words, with their
harsh sound and a certain willful ugliness which was in accord with the
spirit of Ingsoc, assisted the process still further.
So did the fact of having very few words to choose from. Relative to our
own, the Newspeak vocabulary was tiny, and new ways of reducing it were
constantly being devised. Newspeak, indeed, differed from almost all
other languages in that its vocabulary grew smaller instead of larger
every year. Each reduction was a gain, since the smaller the area of
choice, the smaller the temptation to take thought. Ultimately it was
hoped to make articulate speech issue from the larynx without involving
the higher brain centers at all. This aim was frankly admitted in the
Newspeak word duckspeak, meaning "to quack like a duck." Like various
other words in the B vocabulary, duckspeak was ambivalent in meaning.
Provided that the opinions which were quacked out were orthodox ones, it
implied nothing but praise, and when the Times referred to one of the
orators of the Party as a doubleplusgood duckspeaker it was paying a
warm and valued compliment.
* * * * *
The C vocabulary. The C vocabulary was supplementary to the others and
consisted entirely of scientific and technical terms. These resembled
the scientific terms in use today, and were constructed from the same
roots, but the usual care was taken to define them rigidly and strip
them of undesirable meanings. They followed the same grammatical rules
as the words in the other two vocabularies. Very few of the C words had
any currency either in everyday speech or in political speech. Any
scientific worker or technician could find all the words he needed in
the list devoted to his own speciality, but he seldom had more than a
smattering of the words occurring in the other lists. Only a very few
words were common to all lists, and there was no vocabulary expressing
the function of Science as a habit of mind, or a method of thought,
irrespective of its particular branches. There was, indeed, no word for
"Science," any meaning that it could possibly bear being already
sufficiently covered by the word Ingsoc.
* * * * *
From the foregoing account it will be seen that in Newspeak the
expression of unorthodox opinions, above a very low level, was well-nigh
impossible. It was of course possible to utter heresies of a very crude
kind, a species of blasphemy. It would have been possible, for example,
to say Big Brother is ungood. But this statement, which to an orthodox
ear merely conveyed a self-evident absurdity, could not have been
sustained by reasoned argument, because the necessary words were not
available. Ideas inimical to Ingsoc could only be entertained in a vague
wordless form, and could only be named in very broad terms which lumped
together and condemned whole groups of heresies without defining them in
doing so. One could, in fact, only use Newspeak for unorthodox purposes
by illegitimately translating some of the words back into Oldspeak. For
example, All mans are equal was a possible Newspeak sentence, but only
in the same sense in which All men are redhaired is a possible
Oldspeak sentence. It did not contain a grammatical error, but it
expressed a palpable untruth, i.e., that all men are of equal size,
weight, or strength. The concept of political equality no longer
existed, and this secondary meaning had accordingly been purged out of
the word equal. In 1984, when Oldspeak was still the normal means of
communication, the danger theoretically existed that in using Newspeak
words one might remember their original meanings. In practice it was not
difficult for any person well grounded in doublethink to avoid doing
this, but within a couple of generations even the possibility of such a
lapse would have vanished. A person growing up with Newspeak as his sole
language would no more know that equal had once had the secondary
meaning of "politically equal," or that free had once meant
"intellectually free," than, for instance, a person who had never heard
of chess would be aware of the secondary meanings attaching to queen
and rook. There would be many crimes and errors which it would be
beyond his power to commit, simply because they were nameless and
therefore unimaginable. And it was to be foreseen that with the passage
of time the distinguishing characteristics of Newspeak would become more
and more pronounced--its words growing fewer and fewer, their meanings
more and more rigid, and the chance of putting them to improper uses
always diminishing.
When Oldspeak had been once and for all superseded, the last link with
the past would have been severed. History had already been rewritten,
but fragments of the literature of the past survived here and there,
imperfectly censored, and so long as one retained one's knowledge of
Oldspeak it was possible to read them. In the future such fragments,
even if they chanced to survive, would be unintelligible and
untranslatable. It was impossible to translate any passage of Oldspeak
into Newspeak unless it either referred to some technical process or
some very simple everyday action, or was already orthodox
(goodthinkful would be the Newspeak expression) in tendency. In
practice this meant that no book written before approximately 1960 could
be translated as a whole. Prerevolutionary literature could only be
subjected to ideological translation--that is, alteration in sense as
well as language. Take for example the well-known passage from the
Declaration of Independence:
_We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are
instituted among men, deriving their powers from the consent of the
governed. That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive
of those ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish
it, and to institute new Government ..._
It would have been quite impossible to render this into Newspeak while
keeping to the sense of the original. The nearest one could come to
doing so would be to swallow the whole passage up in the single word
crimethink. A full translation could only be an ideological
translation, whereby Jefferson's words would be changed into a panegyric
on absolute government.
A good deal of the literature of the past was, indeed, already being
transformed in this way. Considerations of prestige made it desirable to
preserve the memory of certain historical figures, while at the same
time bringing their achievements into line with the philosophy of
Ingsoc. Various writers, such as Shakespeare, Milton, Swift, Byron,
Dickens, and some others were therefore in process of translation; when
the task had been completed, their original writings, with all else that
survived of the literature of the past, would be destroyed. These
translations were a slow and difficult business, and it was not expected
that they would be finished before the first or second decade of the
twenty-first century. There were also large quantities of merely
utilitarian literature--indispensable technical manuals and the
like--that had to be treated in the same way. It was chiefly in order to
allow time for the preliminary work of translation that the final
adoption of Newspeak had been fixed for so late a date as 2050.
Public domain in Canada and Hong Kong, where copyright ends fifty years after the author’s death. It may still be under copyright elsewhere: not for use or redistribution outside Canada or Hong Kong.