Is the needful really necessary?

"I have sent you an email. Read it and do the needful."

It's a usage that anyone who has ever worked in an office in India is probably aware of. "The needful" is one of the more notorious relics that haunt Indian English today. Taken literally, it means "that which is needed". But there's more to it than that. It has the property of making you feel both helpless and annoyed at the same time - helpless because you can't figure out what it is you're meant to do, and annoyed at the condescending tone of the speaker.

In its defence, "do the needful" is a victim of its own good intentions. Used as early as the 18th century in England, it implies respect and trust towards the listener by expecting him¹ to understand what the speaker has in mind without actually spelling it out. The problem with this is that it leaves the listener free to decide what the speaker intended, which can, as time has proven, lead to bad things.

While most native speakers have outgrown the phrase, India hasn't, which results in its being labelled an 'Indian-ism' and often ridiculed. To be honest, "do the needful" sounds like something out of a bad martial arts movie where the aging master lies bleeding and (between gasps) says to the favoured apprentice, "You must not let the enemy destroy what we have been fighting for. You must be strong, and avenge my death. You must... do the needful" before finally collapsing to the ground.

Now that's an occasion that calls for the phrase. Contrast this with the more mundane uses it is usually put to:

"The printer tray has been refilled with paper. Please do the needful" (i.e. "Switch the printer on")

"The government should listen to the common man's plea and do the needful" ("Reduce taxes", maybe)

or this post from an actual forum: "Attached below is the set of questions. Kindly do the needful." ("Answer the questions")

As you can see, it's not always easy to guess what "the needful" might mean. Besides sounding rather awkward and pretentious, this seemingly harmless phrase can create a lot of confusion when used for something important.

Okay, we get it. Just tell us what to use instead!

I understand that there may be a legitimate need for the phrase. For example, when you don't know exactly what needs to be done but you have to instruct someone to do it, "the needful" could be a simple solution:

"My computer's broken. Please do the needful."

Even so, being a little less formal is a good idea. You could use one of these instead:

"My computer's broken. Please look into this."

"Please take care of it."

"Please do what needs to be done." (this still sounds a little pretentious)

or maybe just "Fix it".

But as far as possible, if you know what you want the listener to do, just spell it out. Save yourself the embarrassment of having to explain what you really meant by stating it explicitly the first time. Quit hiding behind "the needful". The next time you want a sandwich, say "Make me a sandwich".

1: Him or her. I prefer to say 'him' because using 'her' to denote both genders sounds weird. Call me sexist.

When English grammar comes to India

"Please reply back as soon as possible."

Can you spot the error in the above sentence? How about the one below?

"The Prime Minister would be making a speech in the city today."

Languages can be intimidating. You might not realise it, but the first language you learn has a powerful impact on your life. It can shape the way you think, and affect seemingly unrelated aspects of it - even your sense of direction and how you perceive colour¹. That's why learning a new language can be an arduous task; it can go against the very way you think, forcing you to accept things that contradict what you've always taken for granted.

India has something of a disadvantage when it comes to language. You see, Indians have to speak at least two languages to go about normal life²; more specifically, we have to speak English - a language that's alien to our various first languages. The result is a mixture (christened 'Hinglish', 'Minglish', or even 'Tinglish' depending on what regional language is added) that is delightful to a casual listener, but tiresome to a regular one.

Through decades of use and abuse, Indian English is almost a different language from that spoken in England. It doesn't help that it's fashionable to misspell words and ignore grammar and punctuation while posting to most forums and social networks. That's where this web site comes in.

So why should you care about grammar and spelling?

Good question. Language, after all, was invented for communication. As long as you get the message across, what does it matter if you misspell a word or two? A few reasons follow.

1) It doesn't always get the whole message across.

"Rajiv injured a fellow student today. The boys parents were summoned immediately."

Whose parents where summoned? Just Rajiv's? Or did both sets of parents have to share an awkward silence in the waiting room outside the principal's office? The humble apostrophe can solve this dilemma once and for all, depending on where it's placed. "The boy's parents" would imply that the injured student's parents were not called, whereas "The boys' parents" would inevitably lead to the embarrassing silence in the waiting room.

2) It makes what you write harder to read.

"i still remmbr last year exam ...dint prepare at all...threw the paper in the dustbin aftr takin the exam...the kind of paper"

What's wrong with this, you ask? Sure, there isn't a whole lot of emphasis on full stops, but the meaning's plain as day. But imagine trying to read an entire book written like this - or even a whole page. Punctuation helps you pace your reading by telling you where to pause. An ellipsis (that's what you call three dots in a row) implies a longer pause than a full stop, and gives the impression that something dramatic is about to follow.

To make it easier to read, you would replace the above sentence with this:

"I still remember last year's exam. I didn't prepare at all. I threw the paper in the dustbin after taking the exam - that's how tough it was!"

3) It's bad for your career.

Every time you misspell a word or use incorrect grammar in an official email, an article, or your resume, you stand the risk of not being taken seriously.

The logic behind this is a little flawed, but it's also very common: 'X has misspelt a word on his resume. Therefore, he did not put in the effort to proofread it (which implies this job does not mean much to him), or he simply has not learnt to spell the word correctly. If he has not even mastered the basics of language, how could he possibly handle this position? X is clearly unsuitable for this job.' And just like that, you've lost a job you might have been otherwise qualified for.

But the Americans do it too!

When confronted with the idea that Indians should change the way they speak, some contend that we're going about this the wrong way. Maybe we should be proud of Indian English. It's part of our culture, part of what makes us Indian. Besides, the Americans did it too! The Americans spell 'colour' without the 'u', and no one has a problem with that. How is it any different when it comes to India?

American English is a language (set of dialects, rather) widely accepted and spoken in the U.S. It's taught in schools there. There's no dearth of dictionaries that use American English. Indian English, on the other hand, is not considered a separate language even in India. Schools here teach British English. No reputable English textbook used in India would condone the use of such gems as 'time-pass' and 'reply back'. That's why when an American writes 'color', he's writing it as 'taught in his country' but when an Indian says 'reply back', he's saying it wrong.

I now return to the questions I posed at the beginning of this article. The use of 'reply back' is wrong because it contains a redundancy. The word 'reply' means 'to say something back'. The meaning of the word 'back' is already contained in 'reply', so there's no need to use them together. The corrected sentence is:

"Please reply as soon as possible."

The second sentence (about the Prime Minister making a speech) is not necessarily wrong; it uses bad style. You see, the intended meaning is that the Prime Minister is scheduled to make a speech today. Using the word 'would' reduces the certainty of something happening, and introduces a certain conditional or 'if' element. I have no problem with the following sentence:

"The Prime Minister would be making a speech in the city today if the budget proposal hadn't been rejected".

As it stands, however, this would be a better replacement:

"The Prime Minister will be making a speech in the city today."

I'll cover these topics in greater detail in a later post. Meanwhile, feel free to contradict me, argue, or voice your opinion in the 'Comments' section.

1: This article from the Wall Street Journal suggests that the language you speak can shape how you think

2: This is probably a sweeping generalisation. What I mean is that it's difficult to get very far in your career if you do not speak English.