南加州大學(xué)馬歇爾商學(xué)院管理與組織學(xué)副教授埃里克·阿尼奇表示:“共享行話(huà)能增強(qiáng)身份認(rèn)同和社群歸屬感。使用相同語(yǔ)言等同于宣告‘我屬于這里’?!?/div>
In this sense, office jargon doesn't just describe reality -- Anicich says that "it reprograms it, dividing those who are 'in' from those who'll never fully understand."
從這個(gè)意義上說(shuō),辦公室術(shù)語(yǔ)不僅是現(xiàn)實(shí)描述--阿尼奇指出,“它在重塑現(xiàn)實(shí),將‘圈內(nèi)人’與‘永遠(yuǎn)無(wú)法真正理解的人’區(qū)分開(kāi)來(lái)?!?/div>
Organizations often use jargon to hide sinister intentions or downplay the real effects of their actions.
企業(yè)常利用行話(huà)掩蓋不良意圖或淡化行為后果。
Anicich cites the 2008 financial crisis, where phrases like "synthetic CDOs" and "tranches of debt products" masked the true scale of the risks involved.
阿尼奇以2008年金融危機(jī)為例,當(dāng)時(shí)“合成CDO”、“債務(wù)產(chǎn)品分層”等術(shù)語(yǔ)掩蓋了實(shí)際風(fēng)險(xiǎn)規(guī)模。
In more recent times, mass layoffs are now shrouded in euphemisms like "downsizing," "restructuring," or "re-engineering."
近年來(lái),大規(guī)模裁員被“縮編”、“重組”、“流程再造”等委婉語(yǔ)包裝。
Jargon also serves a performative function.
行話(huà)還具有表演功能。
Together with Zachariah Brown and Adam Galinsky, Anicich conducted research that shows how office lingo is also used for impression management.
阿尼奇與扎卡賴(lài)亞·布朗、亞當(dāng)·加林斯基共同開(kāi)展的研究顯示,辦公室用語(yǔ)常被用于印象管理。
According to their findings, lower-status individuals are likelier to use jargon in evaluative situations -- not to clarify their message but to signal intelligence and competence.
研究發(fā)現(xiàn),地位較低者在評(píng)估場(chǎng)景中更傾向使用行話(huà)--并非為了澄清信息,而是彰顯自身才智與能力。

"In that sense, jargon is the linguistic equivalent of a luxury car: it may have legitimate functions, but it's also a status symbol," Anicich explains. "It's funny until you realize how often real organizations use language to draw invisible lines between insiders and outsiders."
“從這個(gè)角度看,行話(huà)就像語(yǔ)言層面的豪車(chē):既有實(shí)際功能,也是地位象征,”阿尼奇解釋道,“直到你意識(shí)到真實(shí)組織頻繁用語(yǔ)言在內(nèi)外部劃下無(wú)形界限時(shí),這種現(xiàn)象就不再可笑了?!?
So, where do we go from here? Should we strip work language down to the simplest possible terms? Not necessarily.
那么,我們?cè)摵稳ズ螐??是否?yīng)將工作語(yǔ)言簡(jiǎn)化到極致?未必如此。
"Jargon is used as a tool -- it's not inherently good nor bad, so it depends on how and when you use it," Anicich says.
“行話(huà)是工具本身--并無(wú)好壞之分,關(guān)鍵在于使用方式和時(shí)機(jī),”阿尼奇說(shuō)。
In fact, it's nearly impossible to avoid. Jargon seeps into everyday life in ways we barely notice.
事實(shí)上,行話(huà)幾乎無(wú)法避免。它正以潛移默化的方式滲透日常生活。
Bahtina mentions how fans of Grey's Anatomy who have never set foot in a hospital can still understand phrases like "code blue" or "intubate."
巴蒂娜舉例說(shuō),從未涉足醫(yī)院的《實(shí)習(xí)醫(yī)生格蕾》劇迷也能理解“藍(lán)色警報(bào)”、“插管”等術(shù)語(yǔ)。
"This doesn't mean that they can perform surgery, it shows how jargon can flow beyond its origin and become part of everyday speech," she says.
“這并不意味著他們能實(shí)施手術(shù),而是說(shuō)明行話(huà)可以超越原生環(huán)境,成為日常用語(yǔ)的一部分,”她說(shuō)。
Perhaps it can even help us articulate feelings or phenomena that we didn't know how to describe before.
行話(huà)甚至能幫助我們表達(dá)從前難以描述的情感或現(xiàn)象。
Instead of resorting to extremes, experts agree that it's best to interrogate whether jargon is being used constructively.
專(zhuān)家們一致認(rèn)為,與其采取極端做法,不如審視行話(huà)是否被建設(shè)性使用。
Is the shared language fostering understanding or obscuring important information?
這種共享語(yǔ)言是促進(jìn)理解還是掩蓋信息?
Is it inviting people to contribute to the discussion or barring them from true belonging?
是邀請(qǐng)參與討論還是阻礙真正融入?
Are employees more focused on reading between the lines than on the task at hand?
員工是否將更多精力用于解讀潛臺(tái)詞而非完成當(dāng)前任務(wù)?
If our vocabulary is building walls instead of bridges, it may be time to circle back -- and rethink how we speak at work.
如果我們的詞匯正在筑墻而非架橋,或許是時(shí)候回歸原點(diǎn)--重新思考職場(chǎng)表達(dá)方式了。