When Language Masks Meaning: Lessons for Researchers
We like to think words are little containers for meaning. Simple vessels that deliver ideas from one mind to another. But in reality, language is not simple. And words’ meaning can shift depending on the context, the circumstances, and the perspective of the person interpreting them.
Sometimes, this shape-shifting nature of language is deliberate. Politicians speak of “revenue enhancement” instead of “tax increases.” Businesses announce “rightsizing” instead of “layoffs.” Military briefings refer to “collateral damage” rather than “civilian deaths.” These euphemisms work like soft-focus filters, blurring the edges of unpleasant truths. The listener hears the words, but the emotional sting is dulled - meaning has been obscured without technically being removed.
At other times, language hides meaning through it’s complexity. Think of corporate jargon, “leveraging cross-platform synergies to achieve scalable outcomes” might mean something very simple, but buried under layers of abstraction, only insiders can decode it. Not necessary malicious, sometimes it’s just habit. But it has the same effect: outsiders are left on the wrong side of a fence.
Language also shifts unintentionally, evolving with time and cultural change. Words that seemed neutral can accumulate new weight. A phrase like “stay woke” was originally rooted in African American Vernacular English as a call for awareness of racial injustice. Over time, its meaning broadened, then morphed, and now in some contexts it’s used ironically or as a political insult. The word didn’t change, but our collective understanding of it did.
Even within a single moment, meaning can vary wildly depending on the audience. A joke that lands in one group can fall flat or cause offence in another. A sentence delivered in a dry tone might be read as sarcasm, sincerity, or subtle threat depending on who’s listening. Literature and journalism often exploit this elasticity, allowing words to resonate differently for different readers. George Orwell’s Animal Farm works simultaneously as a fable for children and a biting political allegory. The layers of meaning exist together, but not everyone sees all of them.
For qualitative researchers, these nuances are a daily reality. When analysing interview transcripts, open-ended survey responses, or archival documents, it’s easy to assume that words point directly to fixed ideas. But meaning is rarely static. A participant might choose softer terms to avoid confrontation. A slang phrase might be perfectly clear to their peer group yet invisible in a formal coding scheme. Historical texts may carry connotations that have shifted over decades, making a modern reader’s interpretation subtly (or wildly) different from the original audience’s.
The challenge, then, is to look beyond the words themselves. This means paying attention to patterns, context, and relationships between concepts, not just counting word frequency. It means recognising when two very different phrases are expressing the same underlying idea, and when the same phrase might mean something entirely different depending on who is saying it and when.
In everyday life, our shifting, layered language can be playful, strategic, or confusing. In research, it can make the difference between shallow description and genuine insight. Words are slippery. Meaning moves. And our job is not just to catch it but to understand why it’s moving in the first place.
