Meaning Beyond Lexicon

Text is not always meaningful if it is not supported by context. Context gives clues and background to derive meaning. It is therefore a prerequisite to take stock of the context to get the real meaning of the text/word. As a person dealing with numerous common and uncommon words in the daily workplace, I sometimes find myself in a dilemma and difficulty choosing the right words. I think it may sound similar to those working as desk editors in media houses. It indeed is a plight of straddling two different languages and contexts.

Undoubtedly, accuracy and precision count much in journalism. Imaginative and figurative, like poetry, is not entertained here. The right words in the right place are essential. It is crucial to be straight but not offensive, and objective but not emotional in such writing. However, don't you doubt whether some words carry a clear, adequate meaning?  For example, 'bichauliya' is often a repeated term in recent political and administrative parlance. So is the case in the media, as it is largely a reporting business. And, which English word did most media use for it? Is bichauliya a positive or negative word? Is it derogatory, too? 

This word in Nepali is fully a negative one and may be derogatory to some as well. It is so because the Nepali perception has been developed in a similar vein. It therefore essentially bears a negative connotation. However, while going through English words for it, it even goes to the extent of a person working for facilitation. Most of us are using the 'middleman' to convey the same meaning. Here, isn't facilitating two parties/sides giving a positive sense ? 

Does it inherently carry the Nepali context of pejorative comment when we use middleman for bichauliya? One of the meanings of middleman in the Cambridge Dictionary is "someone who communicates or makes arrangements between two people or groups who are unwilling or unable to meet or deal directly with each other". The Oxford Dictionary also has a similar meaning. 

There are several other words bearing pejorative meaning in Nepal, such as setting, broker and politics. It is worrying to have a negative connotation of politics, while actors are largely culpable in it. Politics itself is not a dirty game, but it has been made dirty by the actors. In Nepali, 'rajniti' is used for politics. 

See, how august the meaning of rajniti (raj + niti) is in Nepali: 'Raj' is major/prominent/vital, while 'niti' is policy, principle. Why and how did such a prominent policy (rajniti) begin giving a negative impression to the public? It is the context- the political context - that is hugely polluted. 

It is said that 'propaganda' used to mean publicity in a positive sense before World War I. But it got huge disrepute after Goebbels adopted it. Propaganda lost its positive meaning of publicity after World War II. These days, propaganda is associated with bad intentions.

The words, languages and contexts are such sensitive issues that go through transformation over time - see new dimension, deviation, oblivion and obsolescence too. Importantly, politics and perception are equally mighty determinants of contexts (time and space), irrespective of lexical meaning.