Canada’s not for sale. Maclean’s is. Subscribe today

Ottawa

Of Cs, big and little, and how size sometimes matters.

By Kady O'Malley

This is something that came up more than once over the weekend, during my attempt at liveblogging a panel at the Manning Centre conference, but has cropped up before as a unintentional ambiguator:  When listening to those of a conservative – or nonconservative, for that matter – persuasion speak, how does one discern whether they are referring to capital-C, card-carrying Conservatives or the Conservative Party, or plain old small-c conservatives, who may or may not be affiliated with the party itself?

Sometimes, the context can help — at the conference, for instance, when the “conservative movement” was mentioned, it almost always seemed to be a reference to the  broader, small-c set of conservatives.  But what about this post from earlier today, where a big-C Conservative campus organization invited members of the big-C Conservative party to discuss political strategy, one of whom refers to becoming a “hero of the *onservative movement”? Is that a big C or a small one? Or, for that matter, this quote, where Pierre Poilievre refers to “*onservative-inclined voters”? Does he mean voters with a small-c leaning, or those who are already likely to vote for the Conservative Party?

The same difficulty arises occasionally on the other side of the political spectrum, where we have the Liberal/liberal conundrum. But because there are more federal parties with a small-l liberal leaning than just the big-L liberals, when someone uses the l-word, there is usually more of an effort made to distinguish between the two.

Anyway, are there any linguistically-minded readers out there who might be able to suggest a rule of thumb, particularly for journalists who are often called upon to report on written remarks, and wouldn’t want to accidentally misconstrue a big C as a little one, or vice versa?