Baffle

Baffle (pronounced baf-uhl)

(1) To confuse, bewilder or perplex.

(2) To frustrate or confound; to thwart (a now archaic and probably obsolete seventeenth century use which didn’t of necessity involve the creation of confusion or bewilderment).

(3) To check or deflect the movement of (sound, light, fluids, etc.).

(4) To equip with a baffle or baffles.

(5) To cheat or trick; to hoodwink or deceive someone (used between the sixteenth & eighteenth centuries and now obsolete).

(6) To struggle ineffectually, as a ship in a gale (a nineteenth form rare except in Admiralty use).

(7) Publicly to disgrace, especially of a recreant knight (used between the sixteenth & seventeenth centuries and now obsolete).

(8) Something that balks, checks, or deflects (also called a baffle-board); an artificial obstruction for checking or deflecting the flow of gases (as in a boiler), sounds (as in the loudspeaker system of a radio or hi-fi set), light (as in a darkroom) or fluids (as in a tank).

(9) In audio engineering, any boxlike enclosure or flat panel for mounting a loudspeaker.

(10) In military camouflage, an architectural feature designed to confuse enemies or make them vulnerable.

(11) In coal mining, a lever for operating the throttle valve of a winding engine (US dialectal use).

1540-1550: Of uncertain origin but may have entered English from the Scots dialectal bauchle (to disgrace, treat with contempt, especially a perjured knight), from bauch or bachlen (publicly to condemn) and probably related to the early-modern French bafouer (to disgrace, to scorn, abuse or hoodwink) or the obsolete French befer (to mock) which was definitely picked up from the Scots bauchle.  The most likely root is the German natural sound of disgust, like bah which appears in the language as baff machen (to flabbergast) and the familiar modern meaning “to bewilder or confuse” is from 1640s while that of “to defeat someone's efforts” is from 1670s.  The use meaning “shielding device” dates from 1881 and “artificial obstruction” is from 1910.  The alternative spellings bafful & baffol are both obsolete.  Baffle is a noun & verb, bafflement & baffler are nouns and baffled & baffling are verbs & adjectives; the noun plural is baffles (or the rare bafflers).

As a noun, baffle emerged in the early 1880s, initially used mostly of the shielding device attached to stoves and ovens where it was short for “baffle-plate”, derived from the noun.  The earlier noun (from circa 1860) in the same sense was baffler, a word which can still be used to describe (1) something that causes one to be baffled, particularly a difficult puzzle or riddle & (1) in gaming, one of the projections inside a dice tower that serve to deflect the die unpredictably.  The noun bafflement (state of being baffled) dates from 1841 while the adjective baffling (bewildering, confusing, perplexing) was from 1733; it was the present-participle adjective from the verb baffle but also emerged in Admiralty slang (soon picked up in the merchant service) in the eighteenth century as a sailor's adjective for winds that blow variously and make headway difficult; although now rare, it survived into the age of steam.  The noun and verb bafflegab was first noted in 1952 and describes pretentious, incomprehensible, or overly technical language, especially legal or bureaucratic jargon; a synonym of gobbledygook (but not “hocus-pocus” or “mumbo-jumbo” which reference something nonsensical although use of those two is now probably proscribe because of their origin when speaking dismissively of the speech of African “witch doctors”.  The companion word is baffound (to perplex, bewilder by the use of bafflegab).

Although it had probably before been on the tips of not a few tongues, the words “baffle”, “baffling” & “baffled” in connection with Lindsay Lohan really spiked in 2016 when footage circulated of her speaking in distinctively different accent which used a conventional US English vocabulary but was delivered, with an occasionally halting delivery, the accent vaguely Russian or eastern European.  She later clarified thing by saying it was “…a mixture of most of the languages I can understand or am trying to learn”, adding that she’d been “…learning different languages since I was a child.  I'm fluent in English and French can understand Russian and am learning Turkish, Italian and Arabic”.  Taking advantage of the interest, she named the latest addition to the planet’s linguistic diversity “LiLohan” and a limited edition LiLohan clothing line was quickly made available as a philanthropic endeavour, part of the proceeds from each item sold going to Caudwell Children and the Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency of Turkey (AFAD).  Turkey is now properly called Türkiye Cumhuriyeti (Republic of Türkiye); the accepted short form Türkiye.

Baffled sump (left) and fuel tank (right).In cars, baffles are used in sumps and fuel tanks to prevent fluids sloshing around when subjected to the high lateral forces encountered in high-speed cornering.  With fuel tanks this ensures weight transfers are minimized while the purpose in a sump is to (1) avoid the oil surge or starvation which can happen if movement means the oil becomes removed from the oil-pump’s pickup & (2) assist in reducing the oil’s tendency to foam.  In Australia Ford included a baffled sump on the Falcon GTHO Phase III (1970-1971) and this was to be carried over to the abortive Phase IV (1972), the novelty with the latter being the race cars gaining tear-drop shaped “ears” welded to each side of the sump, adjacent to the oil pump.  The ears not only increased oil capacity but also, sitting as they did in the air-flow passing under the body, enhanced cooling.

Speak no evil: Alan Tudge.

Given the number of times the Australian Liberal Party has in recent years sought to celebrate the virtue of “personality responsibility” the evidence given by Alan Tudge (b 1971) to the royal commission investigating the “robodebt” scheme (a system which sought to “recover” what were alleged to be debts incurred by citizens who had failed to inform the government about their earnings) must to some have seemed baffling; not necessarily surprising, just baffling.  The scheme had been found to be unlawful but Mr Tudge, who served as (Liberal) minister for human services in 2017-2018 and was (under the Westminster system) “responsible” for the administration of “robodebt”, refused during questioning to accept ministerial responsibility for the unlawfulness of the scheme.  Despite being the minister in charge, Mr Tudge said it was not his responsibility check whether or not the robodebt scheme was lawful although he did seem to concede he was responsible for the scheme’s “lawful implementation”, adding that he assumed it was lawful, and had never been shown legal advice regarding its legality.  His position appeared to be based on what sounds a reasonable assumption: that the departmental secretary (the public servant in charge of the department) would not be implementing a program which he or she would know to be unlawful, something he described as “unfathomable”, adding that the scheme had gone through a rigorous cabinet process “which always has a legal overlay”.

Justice Jackson prosecuting, Albert Speer in the dock, Nuremberg, 1946. 

There are many books by academics, historians and former politicians which discuss the doctrine of ministerial responsibility but it's not known if the transcript of 20 June 1946 of the International Military Tribunal (the Nuremberg Trial) was in Mr Tudge's mind: Mr Justice Robert Jackson (1892–1954; US Supreme Court Justice 1941-1954; Chief US Prosecutor at the Nuremberg (IMT) trials of Nazi war criminals 1945-1946) cross-examining Albert Speer (1905–1981; Nazi court architect 1934-1942; Nazi minister of armaments and war production 1942-1945):

MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Your statement some time ago that you had a certain responsibility as a Minister of the Government.  I should like to have you explain what responsibility you referred to when you say you assume a responsibility as a member of the Government; your common responsibility, what do you mean by your common responsibility along with others?

DEFENDANT SPEER: In my opinion, a state functionary has two types of responsibility.  One is the responsibility for his own sector and for that, of course, he is fully responsible.  But above that I think that in decisive matters there is, and must be, among the leaders a common responsibility, for who is to bear responsibility for developments, if not the close associates of the head of State?

This common responsibility, however, can only be applied to fundamental matters, it cannot be applied to details connected with other ministries or other responsible departments, for otherwise the entire discipline in the life of the state would be quite confused, and no one would ever know who is individually responsible in a particular sphere. This individual responsibility in one's own sphere must, at all events, be kept clear and distinct.

MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, your point is, I take it, that you as a member of the Government and a leader in this period of time acknowledge a responsibility for its large policies, but not for all the details that occurred in their execution. Is that a fair statement of your position?

DEFENDANT SPEER: Yes, indeed.

MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I think that concludes the cross-examination.

Alan Tudge at the 2017 Midwinter Ball with Liberal staffer Rachelle Miller.

Ms Millar also provided some interesting evidence to the “robodebt” royal commission and (pursuant to an unrelated matter) received from the Commonwealth a taxpayer-funded Aus$650,000 settlement for damages while working in two ministerial offices.  Ms Millar had accused Mr Tudge of being physically abusive towards her while in a consensual relationship and part of the settlement related to these matters, including compensation for loss of earning, hurt, distress, humiliation & medical and legal costs.  The Commonwealth did not admit liability but in paying Aus$650,000 seems to have assumed responsibility.  In a Clintonesque touch, Mr Tudge admitted he was at times sexually intimate with Ms Miller but insists he did not have “sexual intercourse” with that woman.