Linguistic Precision as Political Act

Sor Juana's writings demonstrate meticulous attention to language, using precision to expose contradictions in official doctrine. This becomes a corruption-fighting tool: corrupt systems depend partly on linguistic fog. Officials use vague terms, passive voice, and euphemisms to obscure wrongdoing—'misspent funds,' 'irregularities,' 'misunderstandings,' 'strategic partnerships.' Sor Juana's example suggests that clarity becomes resistance. Anti-corruption work requires rigorous naming: call bribery bribery, not 'facilitation payments'; call nepotism nepotism, not 'family involvement'; call embezzlement embezzlement. This linguistic precision serves multiple functions: it clarifies what actually occurred, it penetrates the rhetoric that protects corrupt actors, and it creates accountability by making actions undeniable. When language becomes exact, corruption becomes visible. This concept also recognizes that controlling language is itself a form of power—institutional language often silences reality. By insisting on precision, anti-corruption movements reclaim linguistic authority and make corruption harder to hide behind bureaucratic abstraction.