Language on parade

AS the Government tries to sort Boko Haram out by prosecuting its emergency rule in the three northern states, a.k.a. BAY states, and as the governors try to sort themselves out after their bizarre chairmanship election in Abuja, what can any perplexed aficionado of language find more exhilarating and edifying than trying to sort out the sundry questions which these two emergent matters have unleashed upon our public space and our collective psyche? That is to say, our business on the language train today is to separate or arrange the various questions being asked about the emergency rule and the imbroglio emerging from the Nigeria Governors’ Forum election according to their class, kind or type.

To be sure, the business was actually kicked off at the end of the last excursion on the language train, when fellow travellers were asked whether they could see the point in describing a given question about emergency rule, to wit, QAER1, as unfair, opinionative, benign, or substantive.  And the question was: “Do you think imposition of emergency rule would address insecurity situation in affected states?”

Before we deal with those four categorisations, though, let me quickly state that questions may be sorted out by using numerous factors, which in the main pertain to the asker, acceptable or appropriate response, substance, and language, specifically, the type of words and sentences involved in framing them.  And to reiterate a point made in the last ride on the language train, questions, like language, generally, do tell us something about the learning, disposition, and social state of the person asking them, all factors that may also be used as a basis for sorting them out.

Now, unless the person who was asked QAER1 is a military strategist or high ranking intelligence officer, how could he possess the knowledge or information to adequately or properly answer the question, “Do you think imposition of emergency rule would address insecurity situation in affected states?”  Not even GEJ himself can confidently answer the question.  Because the interviewee does not have the requisite training and does not occupy a relevant position, that question may be deemed unfair.  Specifically, questions may be classified as fair or unfair based on the criterion of appropriateness.

It is true, of course, that based on substance questions may be categorised as factual or opinionative.  Certainly, QAER1 is opinionative and there is nothing wrong with that.  And the question is benign as well.  Suppose the interviewer had framed his question thus: “Do you think imposition of emergency rule would worsen the insecurity?”  This would be a malignant question, for the choice of the word, “worsen,” rather than “address,” implies having some effect, in this case, a harmful effect.

Finally, does QAER1 deal with a serious or light matter?  Based on weight of a matter, that is, weightiness, questions may be classified as substantive or trivial.  Well, I don’t know about you, but I would say that the aforementioned question is a very substantive one, especially, when we consider how the Government goes about managing the various aspects and fallouts of the emergency rule.

Talking about weightiness, and simultaneously moving on to the other emergent matter, how would you sort out some of the questions about the gubernatorial imbroglio that have trailed the Abuja NGF chairmanship election?  For purposes of distinction, we crave your indulgence to label the questions, QAGI, short for Questions About Gubernatorial Imbroglio.  The label QAGI may be expediently pronounced “kwaghe,” because it serves to remind me of something that I am enormously enamoured of: that special music and dance ensemble that belongs to the part of the country one of the chief combatants in the saga comes from, I mean, the Governor of Plateau State, Jonah Jang.

Here are a few of the questions that many Nigerians have been asking, the first four paraphrased, the fifth one presented verbatim.

QAGI1: “If 36 leaders cannot hold a free, fair, and credible election among themselves, how can they be part of those who would conduct elections for 160 million people?”

QAGI2: “Is it true that some of the governors almost turned from voters to boxers during their chairmanship election?”

QAGI3: “What lessons are the governors teaching our children and generations yet unborn about how to conduct elections?”

QAGI4: “Since when did our governors become members of the Reformed Alawada Theatre?”

QAGI5: “Shouldn’t comedy have its limits and limitations even in a country that has been a long running theatre of the bizarre, where reality is often blurred by the inanities of its leaders?”

QAGI5 comes from an opinion piece in The Nation of Thursday, May 30, 2013.  Written by Gbenga Omotoso, the article is titled, “When Governors Go Gaga.”  If you ask me to sort out this question on the basis of weightiness, instead of categorising it as substantial or trivial, I would just say: Tragicomic.