Ghost

Ghost (pronounced gohst)

(1) The soul of a dead person, a disembodied spirit imagined, usually as a vague, shadowy or evanescent form, as wandering among or haunting living persons.

(2) A mere shadow or semblance; a trace; a remote possibility; a faint trace or possibility of something.

(3) A spiritual being; the principle of life; soul; spirit (sometimes initial capital letter).

(4) A secondary image, especially one appearing on a television screen as a white shadow, caused by poor or double reception or by a defect in the receiver (also called ghosting).

(5) In photography, a faint secondary or out-of-focus image in a photographic print or negative resulting from reflections within the camera lens (also called ghost image).

(6) In optics, a series of false spectral lines produced by a diffraction grating with unevenly spaced lines.

(7) In metalworking, a streak appearing on a freshly machined piece of steel containing impurities.

(8) In pathology, a red blood cell having no hemoglobin.

(9) In tax-avoidance and other frauds, a fictitious employee, business etc, fabricated especially for the purpose of manipulating funds.

(10) In literature (and especially quasi-literature), as ghost-write, to write a book, speech etc for another often without attribution.

(11) In engraving, to lighten the background of a photograph before engraving.

(12) In informal use (often associated with social media), suddenly to end all contact with a person without explanation, especially a romantic relationship; to leave a social event or gathering suddenly without saying goodbye.

(13) In digital technology, to remove comments, threads, or other digital content from a website or online forum without informing the poster, keeping them hidden from the public but still visible to the poster.

(14) In bibliography, as ghost edition, an entry recorded in a bibliography of which no actual proof exists.

Pre 900: From the Middle English gost, gast & goost (breath; good or bad spirit, angel, demon; person, man, human being", in Biblical use "soul, spirit, life”), from the Old English gāst (breath, soul, spirit, ghost, being), related to the Old High German gaist & geist (spirit) and the Sanskrit hēda (fury, anger).  The Proto-West Germanic gaist was derived from the Proto-Germanic gaistaz (ghost, spirit, (source also of the Old Saxon gest, the Old Frisian jest, the Middle Dutch gheest, the Dutch geest & the German Geist (spirit, ghost))), from the primitive Indo-European ǵhéysd-os, from ǵhéysd- (anger, agitation) and was cognate with the Scots ghaist (ghost), the Saterland Frisian Gäist (spirit), the West Frisian geast (spirit), the Dutch geest (spirit, mind, ghost), the German Geist (spirit, mind, intellect), the Swedish gast (ghost), the Sanskrit हेड (héḍa), (anger, hatred) and the Persian زشت‎ (zešt) (ugly, hateful, disgusting).  There’s no documentary evidence but the ultimate root is conjectured to be the primitive Indo-European gheis-, used in forming words involving the notions of excitement, amazement, or fear (source also of Sanskrit hedah (wrath), the Avestan zaesha- (horrible, frightful), the Gothic usgaisjan and the Old English gæstan (to frighten).  Ghost is a noun & verb (and used imaginatively as an adjective), ghoster is a noun, ghostly & ghosty are adjectives, ghosting is a noun & verb and ghosted is a verb & adjective; the noun plural is ghosts.

Ghost is the English representative of West Germanic words for "supernatural being" and in Christian writings in Old English it was used to render the Latin spiritus, a sense preserved by the early translators of the Bible in “Holy Ghost”.  The sense of a "disembodied spirit of a dead person", especially imagined as wandering among the living or haunting them, is attested from the late fourteenth century, a meaning-shift which returned the word to what was its probable prehistoric sense.  Most Indo-European words for "soul or spirit" also double with reference to supernatural spirits.  Many have also a base sense of "appearance" (the Greek phantasma; the French spectre; the Polish widmo, from Old Church Slavonic videti (to see), the Old English scin, the Old High German giskin (originally "appearance, apparition”), related to the Old English scinan & the Old High German skinan (to shine)).  Other concepts exist, including the French revenant (literally "returning" (from the other world)), the Old Norse aptr-ganga, (literally "back-comer") & the Breton bugelnoz (literally "night-child”).  The Latin manes (spirits of the dead) was probably a euphemism.

The gh- spelling appeared early in the fifteenth century in Caxton, influenced by Flemish and Middle Dutch gheest, but was rare in English before mid-1500s.  The sense of a "slight suggestion, mere shadow or semblance" (as in ghost image, ghost of a chance etc) is noted from the 1610s; the sense of "one who secretly does work for another" is from 1884 and ghost-write was a 1922 back-formation from the earlier (1919) ghost-writing.  The American Indian ghost dance was first noted in 1890, ghost town is from 1908, ghost story dates from 1811, the now extinct ghost-word (apparent word or false form in a manuscript due to a blunder) is from 1886.  The “ghost in the machine” was English philosopher Gilbert Ryle's (1900-1976) 1949 description of René Descartes' (1596-1650) mind-body dualism and the phrase "to give up the ghost" (to die or prepare to die) was well-known in Old English.  Synonyms include phantom, devil, demon, soul, shadow, spectre, vision, vampire, apparition, revenant, appearance, haunt, visitor, shade, spook, poltergeist, phantasm, wraith, daemon & manes.  There are a surprising number of uses of ghost, ghosted, ghosting etc said to be associated modern or internet slang covering fields as diverse as linguistic techniques and the art & science of smoking weed.  However, the most commonly used describes someone with whom one has been in contact suddenly stops responding, disappearing, as it were, like a ghost.  This can happen in conjunction with unfriending etc but can be an act in isolation.

One day, there may be Lindsay Lohan: The autobiography.

Ghostwriters (also as ghost-writer) are professional writers hired to create content (books, columns, posts or any other text-focused item), the authorship of which will ultimately will be credited to another.  Ghostwriters are used for a number of reasons including constraints of time, a lack of interest in the project (though not the profits) or, typically, a lack of the necessary skill with the written word.  Ghostwriting contracts can vary but focus on including terms of payment, non-disclosure of involvement, the notional author’s exercise of veto over all or some of the content and the rights to the finished work.  Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021) is known to have used ghostwriters on several occasions and the arrangements are not always concealed, Paris Hilton (b 1981) in her 2023 memoir's acknowledgments thanking the ghostwriter who “helped me find my voice”.  Mr Trump made no mention of his ghostwriters.    

Holy Ghost vs Holy Spirit in Blblical Translation

Pentecostés (Descent of the Holy Spirit) (circa 1545), oil on canvas by Tiziano Vecelli (or Vecellio), (circa 1489-1576; known in English as Titian), basalica of Santa Maria della Salute, Venice.

The Trinity is one of Christianity’s central doctrines, the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in the one Godhead.  One of the most important Christian affirmations about God, it’s rooted in the idea God came to meet Christians in a threefold figure: (1) as Creator, Lord of the history of salvation, Father, and Judge, as revealed in the Old Testament; (2) as the Lord who, in the incarnated figure of Jesus Christ, lived among human beings and was present in their midst as the “Resurrected One”; and (3) as the Holy Spirit, whom they experienced as the helper or intercessor in the power of the new life.  In the Roman Catholic Church, the Sign of the Cross is made in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

It’s a myth that prior to the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II; 1962-1965), the Third Person of the Trinity was always referred to in English as the Holy Ghost and one of the council’s decisions was to replace this with Holy Spirit.  Although it’s true Pope Pius XII (1876–1958, pope 1939-1958) authorized several bilingual rites which included Holy Spirit, this was merely procedural and a formalization of processes for the publishing of new editions of existing works. Well before the twentieth century, the shift to Holy Spirit had become almost universal in translation although use of the older form persisted because of the reverence for tradition among some congregations (if not always the clergy) and a fondness, particularly in the Anglican community, for earlier translations, especially the Book of Common Prayer (1549-1622) and the King James version of the Bible (KJV: 1611).

The change reflects the evolution of words. In the theological context, Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit mean exactly the same thing.  The early translators were influenced by ghost being of Germanic origin and, as the Old English gast inherited the original meaning “soul, life, breath, good or bad spirit, angel or demon”, they used gast to translate the Latin Spiritus, thus Holy Ghost.  Although the more modern sense of a disembodied dead person dates from the late fourteenth century, it long remained rare and when translating the Bible into English the scholars behind the KJV opted mostly to use Holy Ghost which enjoys ninety entries compared with seven for Holy Spirit.  Either as literature or theology, there’s nothing in the texts to suggest any difference of meaning between the two, the conclusion of biblical scholars being the choices were wholly arbitrary and probably an unintentional consequence of the KJV being translated from the Greek into English by different committees.  One committee translated hagion pneuma as Holy Spirit while the other preferred Holy Ghost and when the work of the two bodies was combined, the differences remained.  In English, the meaning shift of ghost was induced essentially by its adoption in literature and popular culture, the sense long universally understood to be that of the spectre of a deceased person or a demonic apparition, hardly an association the church found helpful.  It hasn’t wholly been replaced however, some editions of the Book of Common Prayer still are printed with the phrase “He may receive the benefits of absolution, together with ghostly counsel and advice, to the quieting of his conscience.”

Unrelated to etymological matters however, there is one fine theological point about the Trinity.  It took some time for the Patristic Fathers (the early Christian writers of the period generally considered to run from the end of New Testament times or end of the Apostolic Age (circa 100 AD) to either the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD) or the Second Council of Nicaea (787 AD)) to work out the Trinity was three persons, but one God.  The Old Testament foretold the visit to earthly life of the Messiah, but did not name him explicitly as Jesus, seeing the Holy Spirit as a manifestation of God, but did not see Him as a separate person of the one Godhead.  Despite the implications of that, at least since Augustine (354–430), it’s never been an orthodox view the Old Testament should be thought incomplete.  Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022), always one to find a fine theological point, noted “Christians do not read the Old Testament for its own sake but always with Christ and through Christ, as a voyage to Truth through continuing Revelation.”

A century apart: Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost (left) and Paris Hilton's Rolls-Royce Ghost (Right).

The Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost (1906-1926) was the car which cemented the company's reputation and sometime during its production, it may well have deserved to be regarded "the best car in the world", at term which long ago ceased to be useful but Rolls-Royce have probably always deserved to be thought "the best-made cars in the world".  Some might have matched the quality of the fit and finish but it's doubtful any have ever done it better.  Such was the reputation the Silver Ghost quickly gained that the name overtook the line.  Originally, the Silver Ghost had been but one model in a range available on their standard (40/50 hp) chassis but the name so captured the public imagination that eventually, the factory relented and when the first of the Phantom line was release in 1926, Silver Ghost for all the 40/50 cars it became.  Perhaps surprisingly, although in the subsequent century there were many uses of the "silver" adjective (Silver Wraith, Silver Dawn, Silver Cloud, Silver Shadow, Silver Spirit, Silver Spur & Silver Seraph), it wasn't until 2009 the "Ghost" name was revived and it remains in production still, the line augmented in 2011 by the Ghost Extended Wheelbase (EWB).

RAF Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost armored car, Iraq, circa 1936.

The Silver Ghost also had what may seem an improbable career as a military vehicle, the factory eventually building 120 armored cars on the chassis which was famously robust because of the need to survive on the often rough roads throughout the British Empire.  Although the period of intended service on the Western Front was shortened when the war of movement anticipated upon the outbreak of hostilities soon gave way to the effectively static trench warfare, the machines proved ideally suited to operations in the Middle East, the most famous the squadron used by TE Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia; 1888–1935) in battles against the Ottoman forces during World War I (1914-1918).  Lawrence remarked the Rolls-Royces were “more valuable than rubies” in desert combat and that he’d be content with one for the rest of his life were it to be supplied with tyres and petrol, the big, heavy Ghosts chewing rapidly through both.  In many parts of the empire, numbers of the armoured cars remained in service well into the 1930s, valued especially by the Raj in India.  The last one was retired from service with the Irish Free State in 1944, new tyres being unobtainable.

Vexillology

Vexillology (pronounced vek-suh-lol-uh-jee)

The study of and the collection of information about flags.

1957 (and in print since 1959): The construct was vexill(um) + -ology.  Vexillum (the plural vexilla) was from the Latin vēxillum (flag, banner), from the Proto-Italic wekslolom (and synchronically a diminutive form of vēlum), from the Proto-Italic wekslom, from the primitive Indo-European wegslom, from weg- (to weave, bind) and cognate with the English wick.  The Latin vexillum translated literally as “flag; banner” but in English was used to mean (1) a flag, banner, or standard, (2) in military use a formation company of troops serving under one standard, (3) the sign of the cross, (4) in botany, the upper petal of a papilionaceous flower and (5) in ornithology, the rhachis and web of a feather taken together.  The suffix -ology was formed from -o- (as an interconsonantal vowel) +‎ -logy.  The origin in English of the -logy suffix lies with loanwords from the Ancient Greek, usually via Latin and French, where the suffix (-λογία) is an integral part of the word loaned (eg astrology from astrologia) since the sixteenth century.  French picked up -logie from the Latin -logia, from the Ancient Greek -λογία (-logía).  Within Greek, the suffix is an -ία (-ía) abstract from λόγος (lógos) (account, explanation, narrative), and that a verbal noun from λέγω (légō) (I say, speak, converse, tell a story).  In English the suffix became extraordinarily productive, used notably to form names of sciences or disciplines of study, analogous to the names traditionally borrowed from the Latin (eg astrology from astrologia; geology from geologia) and by the late eighteenth century, the practice (despite the disapproval of the pedants) extended to terms with no connection to Greek or Latin such as those building on French or German bases (eg insectology (1766) after the French insectologie; terminology (1801) after the German Terminologie).  Within a few decades of the intrusion of modern languages, combinations emerged using English terms (eg undergroundology (1820); hatology (1837)).  In this evolution, the development may be though similar to the latter-day proliferation of “-isms” (fascism; feminism et al).  Vexillology, vexillologist vexillographer, vexillophilia, vexillophile & vexillolatry are nouns, vexillological & vexillologic are adjectives; the most common noun plural is vexillologists.

A vexillographer is one who designs flags, standards & banners, a vexillophile is (1) someone who collects and displays flags and (2) one who studies flags, their history and meaning.  Although there are vexillophiles, there is in medicine no recognized condition known as vexillophilia (which would be a paraphilia describing the sexualized objectification of flags (ie flag) although following the convention established in recent revisions to the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) (DSM-5 (2013) & DSM-5-TR (2022)), the correct clinical description would now be "foot partialism"; vexillophiles anyway prefer to describe themselves as "flag nerds".  Nor is there any record of there being instances of vexillophobia (a morbid fear of flags); there are those opposed to what flags represent  but that's not the same as being a vexillophobe which would be something specific about this type of bunting in general.  In political science, there is the word flagophobe (also as flagphobe), a derogatory term used usually by those on the right (and other nationalists) as a slur suggesting a want of patriotism in an opponent they’ve usually already labelled as “liberal”.  It's based on a metaphorical connection between a national flag and pride in one's country and is thus not a reference to a fear of flags in general.  To vexillize (or vexillate) can mean (1) to gather or to lead an army under a flag, (2) to organize or to lead people under a common cause or goal, (3) to make a flag (sewing, printing, digitally distributing etc), (4) to design a flag or (5) to introduce a specific depiction on a flag.

Wrapped: Vexillologist Lindsay Lohan and the stars & stripes.  The phrase “wrapping themselves self in the flag” is used of politicians who attempt to disguise their self-serving motives by presenting something as being in the national interest or being done for patriotic reasons.  The companion term is “patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel”, a observation made in 1775 by Samuel Johnson (1709-1784) of the hypocrisy of William Pitt (1708-1778 (Pitt the Elder); First Earl of Chatham & UK prime-minister 1766-1768).

Quite when the first flag was flown is not known but so simple is the concept and so minimal the technology required for fabrication that as forms of identification or communication they may have been among the earliest examples of symbolic representation.  Although the nation-state as its now understood is a relatively new creation (barely a thousand years old), prior to that there had for millennia been organized settlements with distinct identities and there is evidence from surviving works of art and drawings that something like a flag existed in the Mediterranean region as long ago as the fourth century BC and it’s possible such things were in use in China even earlier.  The familiar concept of the national flag evolved as the modern nation state emerged in Europe in the late Middle Ages and early modern period and traditionally, Denmark's Dannebrog is cited as the oldest national flag extant, having being in continuous use (though not always as the symbol of state) since the thirteenth century.

Denmark's Dannebrog (usually translated as "the cloth of the Danes").

The legend is that during a battle on 15 June 1219 in what is modern-day Estonia, the Danish army was on the defensive and defeat seemed imminent when suddenly, a red banner with a white cross fell from the sky.  As a result, the fortunes of war shifted, the Danish army won the battle and Denmark gained a flag.

Inherently, a small piece of colored glass three metres in the air can have no effect on a passing car yet the use of red, amber & green traffic lights is what makes modern road systems function as efficiently as they do.  They work because people (usually) respond as they should through the lens of semiotics, the signifier being the color of the light, the signified the instructions conveyed (green=”go”; amber=”prepare to stop or proceed with caution” & red=”stop”) and the referent the physical need to go, proceed only with caution or stop.  The power of the glass lies wholly in its symbolism and the implied consequences of ignoring its message.  Flags, mere pieces of fabric, have no inherent political or military force yet have for millennia been among the most valued and contested of symbols; men have died defending pieces of bunting which could have been replaced with a tick of a supply sergeant’s pen, simply because of the symbolism.  Symbolism has always been integral to the appeal of Nazism (and fascism in general) and by the early summer of 1942, on a map, the military position of Nazi Germany looked impressive, its forces still maintaining a presence in North Africa, most of Western Europe occupied from Norway to the south of France and the territorial gains from Operation Barbarossa reaching well into the Soviet Union.  However, the map substantially reflected the gains which had been made in 1941 and by mid-1942 it was clear to the German military they had under-estimated the ability of the Soviet armies to absorb losses and recover.  It was clear Germany no longer had the strength successfully to advance along the massive front created in 1941 and even Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) realized that, at least temporarily, more modest strategic aims would have to be pursued.

What Hitler set in train was a multi-pronged operation which would have been strategically sound had (1) the resources been available to sustain it and (2) there had not been such a gross under-estimation of the available Soviet military capacity.  Originally, the plan had been to advance on the Caucasus after the encirclement and destruction of the defending forces in the Stalingrad region and the occupation of the city itself.  This was changed, splitting the attacking force to allow the city and the Caucasus simultaneously to be conquered and the area envisaged was vast, including the eastern coast of the Black Sea, the forbidding Caucasian mountain passes and the oil fields of Grozny & Baku, far to the south.  The German generals didn’t need much more than the back of an envelope to work out it simply couldn’t be done and that rather than undertaking sound planning based on reliable intelligence, the Führer was indulging in little more than wishing & guessing.  “Wishing & guessing” was General George Marshall’s (1880–1959; US Army chief of staff 1939-1945) critique of Winston Churchill’s (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) dabblings in military matters and the comment wasn’t unjustified but the difference was that while the Allied high command was able to restrain (and if need be, veto) the prime-minister’s romantic (essentially Napoleonic) adventurism, the Wehrmacht’s generals and admirals had by 1942 long been dominated by Hitler.  The German army was however generally the most effective ground force of the war and remarkably, achieved some early tactical gains but such were the distances involved and the disparity of forces available that the offensive was not only doomed but culminated in the loss of some 230,000 troops at Stalingrad, a calamity from which the army never quite recovered and among the German people damaged the prestige of the regime to an extent no previous setback had done.

Third Reich War Flag, Mount Elbrus, August 1942.

Hitler, at least in 1942, wasn’t delusional and understood he was running a risk but his gambler’s instincts had for twenty years served him well and he still clung to the belief a strength of will could overcome many disadvantages, even on the battlefield.  Early in the war, that had worked when he was facing divided, unimaginative or week opponents but those days were over and he was well-aware he was playing for high stakes from a position of weakness.  That he was under great pressure and wracked by uncertainty (whatever might have been his outward displays of confidence) was probably the cause of a celebrated over-reaction to what was one of the war’s more trivial incidents: the planting of the Nazi war flag on the peak of Mount Elbrus, at 5,642 m (18,510 feet) the highest point in Europe.  Hitler thought pursuits like mountain climbing and skiing absurd but, like any practical politician, he liked a good photo-opportunity and had in peacetime been pleased to be photographed with those who had raised the swastika on some mountain or other (something which dedicated Nazis had been doing since the 1920s, long before the party gained power in 1933.  On 21 August 1942, the Third’s Reich’s war flag, along with the divisional flags of the 1st and 4th Divisions fluttered in the wind on the roof of Europe and news of the triumph was transmitted to FHQ (Führer Headquarters).

In the throes of the offensive driving towards Stalingrad and the Caucases, the alpine troops who climbed the peak to plant the flag doubtless though they were “working towards the Führer” and providing him a priceless propaganda piece.  They probably expected medals or at least thanks but Hitler was focused on his military objectives and knew he needed every available man to be devoted to his job and upon hearing two-dozen soldiers had decided to ignore their orders and instead climb up a hill of no strategic value, just to climb down again, his reaction was visceral, recalled in his memoirs by Albert Speer (1905–1981; Nazi court architect 1934-1942; Nazi minister of armaments and war production 1942-1945), then at FHQ:

“I often saw Hitler furious but seldom did his anger erupt from him as it did when this report came in. For hours he raged as if his entire plan of the campaign had been ruined by this bit of sport. Days later he went on railing to all and sundry about “those crazy mountain climbers” who “belong before a court-martial.” They were pursuing their idiotic hobbies in the midst of a war, he exclaimed indignantly, occupying an idiotic peak even though he had commanded that all efforts must be concentrated upon Sukhumi.”

The famous (and subtlety edited) photograph of the Soviet flag being raised over the Reichstag on 30 April 1945 during the Battle of Berlin (actually a staged-shot  taken on 2 May).

The Germans never made it to Sukhumi and the high-altitude sideshow by a handful of troops of course in no way affected the campaign but the reaction at FHQ was an indication of the pressure felt by Hitler.  The planting of a symbolic flag was also though symptomatic of the arrogance which had permeated the German military under the Nazis and it anyway proved a pyrrhic act of conquest, the standard torn down and replaced by the Soviet flag within six months; that the Russian army took the trouble to do that amid the clatter of war illustrates potency of national flags as propaganda devices.  One of the most famous photographs of the conflict was that of the Soviet flag in May 1945 being placed over the Reichstag in Berlin, a symbol of defeat of Nazism.  Interestingly, so important to the Kremlin was the image that the act was actually re-staged the next day, this time with a photographer in place to shoot a roll of film so the perfect shot could be selected and the Russians are not the only ones to have re-staged famous flag raisings.

Quash

Quash (pronounced kwosh)

(1) To put down or suppress completely; quell; subdue; used usually in a military or paramilitary context.

(2) To make void, annul, or set aside (a law, indictment, decision etc); to reject (an indictment, writ, etc) as invalid.

(3) To crush or dash to pieces (obsolete and thought possibly an imperfect echoic of squash).

(4) In the civil procedure rules of US courts (as motion to quash), a specific request that asks the court to render the decision of a previous lower court ruling invalid.  It is similar to a motion to dismiss, except it asks the court to nullify a previous ruling rather than the current filing.

Circa 1275: From the Middle English quaschen, quasshen, cwessen, & quassen (to smash, break, overcome, suppress) from the Old French quasser, in part from the Latin quassāre (to shake), present active infinitive of quassō, frequentative of quatere (to shake) and in part from the Late Latin cassāre (to annul), a derivative of the Latin cassus (empty, void) under the influence of the Alatin cassō (I annul), from the Latin quatiō (I shake).  Ultimate root was the primitive Indo-European kweht- (to shake), the source also of the words pasta, paste, pastiche, pastry; cognate with Spanish quejar (to complain).  Similar to some degree are suppress, squash, repress, crush, quell, invalidate, annul, revoke, reverse, veto, void, undo, vacate, squelch, repeal, overrule, rescind, scrunch, annihilate and subdue.  Regarding quash and squash, the verb quash is now used to describe the crushing of something in a nonphysical sense whereas squash is applied when an object is physically crushed but both were for hundreds of years used in both senses, quash losing its physical sense only in the twentieth century.  Urban Dictionary also lists a number of non-standard meanings.  Quash & quashed are verbs, quasher is a noun, quashing is a noun & verb and quashable is an adjective; the most common noun plural is quashings.

In the matter of Cardinal Pell

Cardinal George Pell (1941-2023): On appeal, the prosecution not having proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the conviction was quashed.

Quash means to nullify, void or declare invalid and is a procedure used in both criminal and civil cases when irregularities or procedural defects are found.  In a unanimous (7-0) judgment (Pell v The Queen [2020] HCA 12)) quashing Cardinal Pell’s conviction (Pell v The Queen [2019] VSCA 186), the High Court set aside the verdict and substituted an acquittal; in a legal sense it is now as if the original verdict never happened.  What the court did was declare existing law and provide what are not exactly parameters but are more than guidelines.  If nothing else, it’s likely the judgment will cause trial judges more precisely to instruct juries about reasonable doubt:

(1) The accused on trial in a serious criminal matter is presumed to be innocent.

(2) The accused may but is not obliged to offer a defense; it is incumbent upon the prosecution (almost always the state) to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, the guilt of the accused.

There’s nothing controversial about those positions, they’ve well known and have for centuries been accepted orthodoxies for the administration of criminal law in common law jurisdictions.  What the Pell judgment did was draw attention to other orthodoxies not as widely known:

(3) A jury is presumed to be comprised of reasonable people who impartially will assess the evidence (contested facts) presented; matters of contested facts are subjective and for the jury.

(4) It is the responsibility of the judge accurately and lucidly to instruct the jury on such matters of law which may be relevant to their consideration of matters of fact; matters of law are objective and for the judge.

Reasonable people on juries are thus required to decide if there is a reasonable doubt the prosecution’s case has proven guilt.  Reasonable doubt went back a long way but the phrase “reasonable person” was defined by English courts in negligence cases, an attempt to provide an example of the “the average man” or “the man in the street”.  Descriptions by judges vary but usually mean something like a “…reasonably intelligent and impartial person unversed in legal esoteric” (Jones v US, DC Court of Appeals), sketched rather more poetically by an English judge as “the man on the Clapham omnibus” (“a bloke on the Hornsby train” in Australian parlance).

(5) In exercising their subjective judgment to determine if the prosecution has proven their case beyond reasonable doubt, the jury is required to decide this on the objective basis of reasonable doubt detailed in the judge’s direction or summing up.

(6) If a court of appeal found a jury, acting reasonably, on the basis of the evidence presented, should have found reasonable doubt of guilt, the judge(s) can order the conviction quashed and verdicts of acquittal entered instead.

Not only verdicts can be quashed.  If within their jurisdiction, a judge can quash a warrant or order.

Voice

Voice (pronounced vois)

(1) The sound made by the vibration of the vocal cords, especially when modified by the resonant effect of the tongue and mouth; the sound or sounds uttered through the mouth of living creatures, especially of human beings in speaking, shouting, singing etc.

(2) The faculty or power of uttering sounds through the mouth by the controlled expulsion of air; speech.

(3) A range of such sounds to some extent distinctive to one person, or to a type of person or animal.

(4) The condition or effectiveness of the voice for speaking or singing (usually expressed in the phrases “in good voice” or “in poor voice” (although “in good voice” is also used sarcastically to refer to someone merely talkative or voluble).

(5) A sound likened to or resembling vocal utterance.

(6) Something likened to speech as conveying impressions to the mind (voice of the forest etc).

(7) Expression in spoken or written words, or by other means (to give voice); that which is communicated; message; meaning.

(8) The right to present and receive consideration of one's desires or opinions (usually in a political context, “the voice of the people” said to be expressed by voting in elections).

(9) An expressed opinion or choice (literally, electorally or behaviorally); an expressed will or desire, wish or injunction (“with one voice” meaning unanimous).

(10) The person or other agency through which something is expressed or revealed such as the notion of the Roman Catholic Pope being the “Vicar of Christ on Earth” and thus “The voice of God”.

(11) A warning that proved to be the voice of prophecy.

(12) In music, a substitute word which can apply to a singer, a voice part or that part of musical score which involves singing and (in harmony) an independent melodic line or parta fugue in five voices.

(13) In phonetics, the audible result of phonation and resonance; to pronounce with glottal vibration (and distinguished from the mere breath sounds heard in whispering and voiceless consonants).

(14) In grammar, a set of categories for which the verb is inflected in some languages (notably Latin) and which is typically used to indicate the relation of the verbal action to the subject as performer, under-goer, or beneficiary of its action; a particular way of inflecting or conjugating verbs, or a particular form of a verb, by means of which is indicated the relation of the subject of the verb to the action which the verb expresses.

(15) In grammar, a set of syntactic devices in some languages, as English, that is similar to this set in function; any of the categories of these sets (eg the English passive voice; the Greek middle voice).

(16) In the tuning of musical instruments, the finer regulation (expressed usually as intensity, color or shades of light), used especially of the piano and organ.

(17) To give utterance or expression to; declare; proclaim (“to voice one’s approval”, “to voice one’s discontent” etc).

(18) In sign languages, the interpretation into spoken language.

(19) In computers. of or relating to the use of human or synthesized speech (as voice to text, text to voice, voice-data entry; voice output, voice command etc).

(20) In telecommunications, of or relating to the transmission of speech or data over media designed for the transmission of speech (in classifications such as voice-grade channel, voice-data network, voice-activated, voice over internet protocol (VoIP) etc); in internet use, a flag associated with a user on a channel, determining whether or not they can send messages to the channel.

(21) A rumor; fame, renown; command precept; to vote; to elect; to appoint; to clamor; to cry out (all obsolete).

(22) In entertainment, to provide the voice for a character (as voice-over for purposes such as foreign translations).

(23) In literary theory (1) the role of the narrator, (2) as viewpoint, the position of the narrator in relation to their story & (3) the content of what is delivered behind a persona (mask), the most basic form of aesthetic distance.

1250–1300: From the Middle English noun voice, voys & vois (sound made by the human mouth), from the Anglo-French voiz, voys & voice or directly from the Old French voiz & vois (voice, speech; word, saying, rumor, report (which survives in Modern French as voix)), from the Latin vōcem (voice, sound, utterance, cry, call, speech, sentence, language, word (and accusative of vōx (voice)), from the primitive Indo-European wṓkws, root noun from wekw- (to utter, speak).  It was cognate with the Latin vocāre (to call), the Sanskrit वाच् (vāc) & vakti ((he) speaks), the Ancient Greek ὄψ (óps) (voice) & épos (word (and related to the later “epic”)) and the Persian آواز‎ (âvâz).  The Latin was the source also of the Italian voce and the Spanish voz. The Anglo-French borrowing displaced the native Middle English steven (voice), from the Old English stefn, from the Proto-Germanic stemno, from the primitive Indo-European stomen-.  The extension of use to mean "ability in a singer" dates from the early seventeenth century while the idea of "expression of feeling etc." (in reference to groups of people etc) was known as early as the late fourteenth century (and persists in uses such as the broadcaster “Voice of America”) The meaning "invisible spirit or force that directs or suggests, (used especially in the mental health community in the context of “voices in one's head” dates from 1911.  The verb was from the Middle English voysen & voicen, from the noun and emerged in the mid fifteenth century, initially in the sense of "to be commonly said" (familiar still in terms like “the Arab voice”) and from circa 1600s it was understood to mean "to express, give utterance to a feeling, opinion etc”.  From 1867 there was also the technical meaning "utter (a letter-sound) with the vocal cords", used often as voiced or voicing.  The spelling voyce is long obsolete.  Voice & voicer are nouns; voiced is a verb & adjective and voicing is a noun & verb; the noun plural is voices.

The noun voicemail (originally voice mail) dates from 1982 and was one of the bolt-ons to fixed-line telephony which was among the most popular features of the early cellular (mobile) phones but, interestingly, by the late 1990s users had come much to prefer SMS (short message service or text).  The adjective voiceless began in the 1530s as a doctor’s description of one who had “lost their voice” but within a century was used to refer to those who had no say in affairs of Church and state: The voiceless masses”.  It was first used in the sense of "unspoken, unuttered" to refer to non-verbal communication in 1816 and in phonology "unvoiced" dates from 1867.  In idiomatic use, the phrases include “at the top of one's voice”, chest voice, chipmunk voice. liking the sound of one's own voice, outdoor voice, raising one's voice, voice changer, voice coil, voiceprint & voice quality.  In formal grammar, there’s active voice, anti-passive voice, middle voice, neuter voice & passive voice.

The Australian Labor Party, the “Voice to Parliament” and the referendum process.

With great enthusiasm from one faction and a feeling of impending dread from the other, Australia’s brand new Labor Party (ALP) government has confirmed the election promise to submit to the people a referendum to append to the Constitution of Australia a “Voice to Parliament” for the indigenous peoples will be honored, the vote scheduled for the second half of 2023.  In Australia, even to submit a referendum is ambitious given that of the 44 submitted since 1901, only eight have been approved and the bar to success is high, demanding (1) an absolute majority of voters nationally and (2) a majority in at least four of the six states.

The “Voice to Parliament” does seem to be wholly symbolic given the consensus view among legal academics that it neither “confers upon Indigenous Australians any special rights” nor “takes away any right, power or privilege from anyone who is not indigenous”.  In other words, it will have the same constitutional effect as the words “…humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God” have had since being enacted as part of the constitution in 1901: Nothing.  The view seems to be that the voice will provide “a strong basis on which to conduct further consultation”, the implication being the creation of a mechanism whereby there’s a standing institution of communication between the political elite and an indigenous elite.  So logical and efficient does that appear, it looks like one of the classic colonial fixes at which the British were so adept under the Raj.  In India they were the key to minimizing troubles while in Fiji they worked so well even the British administrators were astonished.  There, the Great Council of Chiefs, an institution entirely of the Raj’s imagination became so culturally entrenched that within a generation, the chiefs themselves were speaking of the council as if it had existed a thousand years.

2023 Toyota Land Cruiser Sahara ZX.

The ALP government has been at pains to ensure there’s nothing to frighten the horses, repeatedly confirming the voice will have “no veto power over the functions or powers of the parliament or the executive” and is limited to a purely advisory role in “making representations to the parliament and the executive government about matters, including existing or proposed laws, policies or decisions that have a connection to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.”  It also maintains the opportunity to make these representations will be “…available to any individual or organisation”.  That of course is unlikely to mean that all voices will be created equal and the government, like the Raj, will find the system most agreeable once it decides which are the Indigenous Australians whose representations prove most helpful and thus worthy of a salaried position, an expense account and a new Toyota Land Cruiser every year.  This will give the voice a coherent form and in a nice piece of political window-dressing, will likely include mostly (reasonably) tame “Brezhnev approved dissident” types there to protest just enough to seem edgy but not enough to forsake a salaried position, expense account and a new Toyota Land Cruiser every year.  Those who get ideas above their station will be offered a trip to New York to address the United Nations General Assembly or a six month "study tour" taking in Rome, Venice and Paris in the late spring; it will be a job for those "hard faced men and women who have done very well out of colonization".

The government has said “the ultimate model was still being debated by internal groups, and would be subject to negotiation” but given the need to create something which gives the appearance of being much yet has absolutely no constitutional effect, it difficult to see what the basis for discussion might be other than details about Toyota Land Cruisers.  Despite that, there is opposition, one source of which comes from within the ALP, certain figures convinced (and the history of referendums in Australia is not encouraging) it’s impossible to get a vote to pass unless both side of politics advocate a “yes” vote.  So sensitive has become the issue of race they fear a no vote would be damaging internationally so are lobbying to find some excuse to “delay” the vote, even arguing it would be better first to pursue a treaty, the theory being if the can is kicked far enough down the road, by the time the matter re-surfaces, they’ll be retired and it’s someone else’s problem.

The leader of the opposition has announced the Liberal Party will be advocating a “no” vote, something which has doomed every referendum submitted without bipartisan support.  The leader of the opposition didn’t articulate any coherent reason to oppose the voice but history suggests saying “no” when the government says “yes” can be a successful approach and Lord Randolph Churchill’s (1849-1895) dictum that “the duty of the opposition is to oppose” remains good politics.  Of interest too among those opposing the voice is their language: Eschewing the popular (if contested) phrase “first nations” to describe Indigenous Australians for “first peoples”, they are anxious to ensure that any notion of sovereignty can’t be part of the discussion although, given the indivisibility of the doctrine (as opposed to land title) under law, it’s hard to see how this could be part of the debate about the voice.  Perhaps they are fretting about negotiating treaties and perhaps they should.

Finally, there are the “black-letter lawyers” who, noting that judicial activism seemed to be fashionable on the bench of the High Court of Australia not that long ago, worry some judges might find in the words of “the voice” things which on the basis of the usual techniques of linguistic or judicial construction would seem not to exist.  The High Court is the final arbiter on constitutional matters; what a majority there says the words of the constitution mean is what they mean and while parliaments can by legislative change impose their will upon laws, the only way the wording of a passage in the constitution can be changed is to have substitute words approved by referendum; a probably improbable prospect.

Still, it’s difficult to advocate anything but a yes vote.  Since white settlement, Indigenous Australians have at times endured dispossession, discrimination, conditions which can be described only as slavery and not a few instances of mass murder and it’s absurd to suggest the level of disadvantage so many continue to suffer is not a consequence of this history.  What’s remarkable is not that among them there are expressions of discontent but that so many manage to maintain such generosity of spirit and willingness to engage.  The Voice may appear, as the Holy Alliance seemed to Lord Castlereagh (1769–1822; UK foreign secretary 1812-1822) “a piece of sublime mysticism and nonsense” but it’s worth remembering he anyway recommended Britain signed the thing on the basis that although too vague to achieve anything substantive, it was unlikely to make things worse.  Something good may come from the Voice while little good can come from rejecting it.

Lindsay Lohan in promotional interview for debut album Speak (2004, Casablanca Records-UMG).

Lindsay Lohan’s sometimes hoarse voice has attracted comment, some finding the gravelly tone sexy, others expressing concern the change might be lifestyle induced. The voices of actors and singers are after all their stock-in-trade so something so distinctive can limit the one’s range of characters or repertoire although notable artists such as Marlene Dietrich (1901–1992) and Marianne Faithfull (b 1946) made a signature of what used to called a “gin-soaked voice”.  Still, Lindsay Lohan’s vocal dynamics piqued the interest of Dr Reena Gupta, Director of the Division of Voice and Laryngology at the Osborne Head & Neck Institute (OHNI) and she provided some explanatory notes, noting that while inherent for some, hoarseness can be a serious matter for those whose living depends on their voice, the condition sometimes reversible, sometimes not.  According to Dr Gupta, a clear voice requires (1) straight edges of the vocal cords, (2) regular and symmetric vibration of the vocal cords, (3) no space between the vocal cords, (4) no mucous on the vocal cords, healthy lungs and (5) a healthy vocal tract (and that includes the mouth, nose, sinuses etc).  Hoarseness occurs when there is damage to the vocal cords that either disrupts the straight edge of the vocal cords or disrupts their vibration, the other factors more important for ease of voice use and vocal tone.

Many injuries can cause the vocal edge to be irregular, thereby inducing hoarseness including polyps, cysts & nodules but even when the edges are straight, scarring can also dampen vibrations and make them irregular, scarred vocal cords having lost their ability to vibrate due to a loss of the vibrating layer and there is currently no cure for the loss of vibration due to scarring.  The scarring can happen for many reasons but is almost always caused by vocal trauma which can be induced by (1) talking loudly or frequent yelling, (2) singing with a flawed technique, (3) smoking (any substance) or (4) a chronic cough or habitual throat clearing.  Any behavior that causes inflammation of the vocal cords will result in a higher likelihood of scarring and a videostroboscopy is the only non-surgical procedure which can confirm the presence of scarring.  There’s nothing unusual or concerning about a hoarseness which lasts only a day or so but if it persists beyond that, a professional evaluation should be sought and many of the causes of are treatable, almost all able to be at least to some extent ameliorated.

Celebrity site ETOnLine.com in 2016 noted the “darkening” in Lindsay Lohan’s voice and posted examples of the variations.

However, prevention being better than cure, Dr Gupta provided the following guidelines for caring for one’s voice and there’s probably no other aspect of our physiology which, despite being so important, is so taken for granted:

(1) No smoking (that’s anything, including vaping).

(2) No heavy use of alcohol, though in moderation it’s OK.

(3) When in a loud environment (restaurants, clubs, parties, sporting events et al), restrict the use of the voice use to a minimum and resist the temptation to shout except in cases of life or death.

(4) Hydration is especially important when in a loud environment (always carry water).

(5) If the voice has been subject to loud or prolonged use, rest the vocal cords the next day.  Under extreme conditions (towards the end of epic-length Wagnerian opera, the voices of even the most skilled will sound a little ragged) there will always be some damage, just as many athletes will tear a few things in competition which is why the recovery protocols must be observed.

(6) If scheduled to need one’s voice in perfect shape, do not the previous evening go somewhere one may be required to shout.

(7) Avoid recreational drugs; their effects are always uncertain.

(8) Learn correct voice use.  Although actors & singers often undertake professional voice training for reasons of articulation and projection, they also learn techniques to ensure damage is minimized and a clinical vocal exam prior to these lessons is advisable to ensure that physically, all is well.