CI_07_84

(our~t- cir~cuit
----.....------------------~~~
1
TheUpsand DourosofLanguage
by Geoffrey Vitale
1have for some time now been mulling
over what seem to me some
curious terminological contradictions
involving direction signais. For a number
of good reasons, including a permanent­
Iy charged timetable, 1doubt 1shall have
occasion to investigate the phenomenon
more thoroughly, but 1 feel it would be
churlish to hoard my accumulated gleanings.
Hopefully, the very tentative hypotheses
that follow will lead to an animated
correspondence in the columns of Circuit
and, who knows, some earnest young
translator in search of geographical glory
might make it the starting-off point for an
MA report.
The first point 1 should like to make
touches on the East-West phenomenon. In
London, Paris and Montreal, to take but
three examples, the "east end" has invariably
designated the poor area of town.
There is Iittle mystery here. Medieval
towns and, as is the case of Montreal and
many North-American cities, towns fou nded
in the medieval tradition were often
built on the sea or at the mouth of a tidal
river. These towns were very frequently
destined to grow into large cities. Starting
in the east, i.e. seaward, they gradually
expanded westwards and the rich
merchants and bankers living in St.
Paul's St., St. John's, St. Matthew's and
St. Luke's moved out to Primrose Gardens,
King Edward's Drive, Blenheim
Row or whatever, leaving their saints to
drift through genteel shabbiness to
outright decay. The phenomenon was of
course reversed when one reached the
west coast: the wealthy suburbs stretched
to the east, away from the sea.
Given the linear demography of Canada,
it is not surprising that this East-West syndrome
still prevails; though in inland
cities, East-West river lines are more
likely to generate a wealthy North-end or
South Shore. However, ports and river
mouths do not entirely explain attitudes
to direction signais, particularly those
associated with up and dawn. It may be
logical for someone living as far west as
Winnipeg, to say "down East", since
Canadians tend to designate directions
according to the flow of their rivers. But
why should a resident of Vancouver use
the same expression? ln 19 th century
America the pioneers "out West" used
"down East" almost with nostalgia to
denote a society of wealth, luxury and
culture. This gradually changed and, certainly
in Canada, overtones of distrust
rather than of envy crept into the term.
Twenty years ago there were still suggestions
of deep immorality when using
"down East" to stigmatise the follies of
Toronto and Montreal. The answer to the
persistence of the epithet is certainly not
river-associated.
The fluvial influence is very strong in
Québec. The Beauceron, whose river is
La Chaudière, will "monter en Floride"
and, thence, "descendre à Québec".
However, points of the compass do
supersede and he will "descendre dans
le sud" and "monter au nord." Notice,
though, that the francophone citizen of
Maine "descend en (sic) Canada." Not
only is the river important for the
Quebecer, but changes of river influence
his language. From Québec "on monte
à Montréal" and "on descend à Chicoutimi."
But from Chicoutimi the Saguenay
river takes over and "on monte à Chibougamau."
Using the same impeccable
logic, the citizen of Chicoutimi "monte
à Sherbrooke."
The direction of the current does not
affect the European in quite the same
fashion - perhaps heavily industrialised
countries are that much further from
nature. In France, the provincial, whether
he live on the Belgian frontier or at Carcassonne,
"monte à Paris." The Parisian,
for his part only leaves the capital to "descendre".
In ail fairness - it is sa difficult to
be objective about Parisians! - things
are changing and one does hear about
the occasional Parisian who "monte à
Lille."
ln Great Britain, the use of up is a trifle
more complicated and, when not
compass-associated, often carries a c1ear
suggestion of travelling away from one's
"locus in quo" towards uncivilised parts.
Thus, though both Londoners and Scotsmen
will travel "up North" and "down
South", the former will travel "up to Edinborough"
and the latter, when he cannot
avoid doing so, will travel "up to London".
Going to work, i.e. away from the
hub of his personal universe, the suburban
Londoner will go "up to town". However,
if shopping locally he will go "down
town" (and not "down to town").
"Down" is often associated with pleasure
activities, for example going "down to the
country" for the weekend. We may note,
however that the expression "down
home" is used much less frequently than
in the U.S.A., and the term "up home'
is rarely employed.
ln Britain there are, as in Canada, other
influences which complicate the use of
up/down. Thus, ''l'm yoing up to see my
brother" suggests a northern direction.
Dawn, in this context, while not necessarily
indicating the south, does normally
preclude the north. In London one also
finds a rather pretentious variant: "to go
up to the West End" (for theatre,
shopping, etc.) and to "go up to the City"
(to work). This particular usage is definitely
class-conscious and is used both by
the upper middle c1ass and by those who
wish to underline their white-collar status.
These are but a few examples of what
looks to be a rich lodestone of research,
particularly in a country Iike Canada,
where so many ethnie influences are at
work. Just to get his hand in, our hypothetical
MA student might wish to ask
some of the following questions: Does
everyone go "up the street" and "down
the street" because of the house numbers,
or because they live on a hill, or
because "down the street" means in the
direction of the shops? Are there communities
where "up" and "down" have
positive or negative moral connota
tions? Why does "to go west" mean to
show a pioneer spirit in the USA, and
to be ready for the scrap heap in Great
Britain? Il y a de quoi perdre le nord! ~
32 • CIRCUIT - DÉCEMBRE 1984