A recent article on Telegrpah.co.uk by Dean Nelson describes that an engineer has found a way to build glaciers in spite of global warming. The headline states ‘Indian engineer 'builds' new glaciers to stop global warming’. This headline, however, can easily be misunderstood by the reader due to ambiguity. Using conceptual analysis, these possible misunderstandings can be clarified.
First of all, there is a possible misunderstanding of what it is meant by ‘building a glacier’. In the article, the author means that building a glacier is done by building a dam and then letting the water freeze, in turn creating a glacier of sorts (Nelson, 2009). Taken literally, however, one might think that the engineer is building a glacier like they would with a building. Although it is explained later on in the article what glacier building is, the headline still offers the room for the possibility that a reader could misunderstand the meaning.
Next, there is the ambiguity associated with the phrase ‘stop global warming’. There is more than one possible meaning to this phrase. I believe that when saying this, the author implies that by ‘building’ the new glaciers, this is reversing the melting process on the pre-existing glaciers. While global warming is melting the glaciers, the engineer is adding glaciers so the process cancels itself out and, in a sense, the engineer is stopping global warming. The ambiguity and possible misunderstanding of this statement is that some readers may believe that the creation of these new glaciers will completely stop global warming and all of its current and future effects. This is, however, a highly unlikely result of the new glaciers, but there is the possibility that some readers may understand it this way.
Finally, there is the issue of misunderstanding the difference between global warming and climate change because there is, in fact, a difference between these two terms. Global warming means that the entire planet is being influenced by a heating trend and all areas are, in turn, increasing in temperature. On the other hand, climate change means that the climates of the earth are under a change. This change could be: heating, cooling, increasing rainfall, decreasing rainfall, change in wind patterns, etc. The article states that the new glaciers will ‘halt’ global warming, but it is likely meant that the glaciers will ‘halt’ climate change. The result of climate change in the area could be a heating trend, which, in turn, melts the glaciers. The terms global warming and climate change are not the same although many people think that they are, so there is plenty of misunderstanding possibilities when it comes to this part of the headline.
Although headlines are used to grab the attention of a prospective reader, the authors must be cautious when it comes to ambiguity and possible misunderstanding of what is being said. By clarifying ambiguous statements, an author can avoid being quoted out of context and having words put into their mouths, so to speak.
Reference
Nelson, D. (2009, October 28). Indian engineer 'builds' new glaciers to stop global warming. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/6449982/Indian-engineer-builds-new-glaciers-to-stop-global-warming.html
I personally do not believe the phrase ‘building a glacier’ is misleading to readers. ‘To build’ can mean be to construct, to assemble, to create or form something, physically or figuratively. Wherever the term is used, it is understood, whether it is ‘to build a building’, ‘to build trust’ or even in this case, ‘to build a glacier’. The reader would understand from the title that some sort of process has been developed to physically create a glacier from materials. I do agree that the other phrase, ‘stop global warming’, can easily be misinterpreted. The phrase is so common, people use it without thinking about it. Of course the single process of building glaciers would not ‘stop global warming’, but instead, might contribute in reversing the effects of global warming.
ReplyDelete