Reader question:

Please explain this headline: Politicians huff and puff – markets call their bluff (Reuters, August 12, 2011).

My comments:

Good question – we will try to kill two or three birds with one stone by mastering three words and two idioms at one go.

The three words are “huff”, “puff” and “bluff”, the two idioms being “huff and puff”, “call their bluff”.

First the three “ff” words.

To huff is to catch in short and quick breaths. The puff is to let the air out in an equally short and hurried manner. To bluff on the other hand is to brag, exaggerate one’s good qualities.

Now, when do people huff and puff?

Yes, when they’re exerting themselves and are getting tired and exhausted. Hence to huff and puff suggests great physical and mental effort.

To call someone’s bluff, on the other hand, is to point flat out that they’re bragging, i.e. telling better stories about themselves in order to make them look better. Hence, to call someone’s bluff suggests that they’ve been lying, deceiving, not telling the truth – in other words, they’re not as good, competent or effective as they say they are.

In the top example, politicians, whenever they are described as huffing and puffing as a matter of fact, are working hard at talking empty talks, promising many measures they say they are taking or are about to take in order to improve the economy.

However, markets, the stock markets that is, keep calling their bluff, i.e. the stock markets never respond in a positive manner. In fact, from New York to Shanghai, London to Tokyo, share prices continue to fall.

To wit, sluggish markets make an unequivocal statement – that world leaders are not effective, even though they go on bragging and whimpering about how capable they are.

To call someone’s bluff, by the way, is an expression developed originally from the game of poker. To bluff in poker is to subtly give your opponents the impression that you have a much stronger hand than you actually possess. This exaggeration of the truth is meant to intimidate the opponents, forcing them to quit or at least waver in their attempt to mount effective counter-attacks.

This is perfectly in compliance, of course, with the principles of Sun Tzu’s Art of War, which stipulates that the best war-winning strategy is to win without battle, by creating an impression, for example, that you outnumber the enemy by 10 to one, thus convincing the enemy that they cannot possibly win. Hence the enemy surrenders without putting up a fight. Hence and therefore bloodshed is avoided.

To call your bluff, on the other hand, is for the opponent to tell you straight in the face that you’re fooling. In other words, they have seen through your tricks. They realize that you’re a paper tiger, all show and no substance.

That means trouble for you, of course.

Alright, here’s a media example of “calling someone’s bluff” to hammer the point home:

In President Barack Obama’s most recent State of the Union address, he vowed to “win the future” by jumpstarting innovation through ambitious government investment in education, research, technology and infrastructure. In the wake of the recent debt ceiling debacle, this rarefied promise has dwindled miserably into its unfortunate acronymic husk: WTF.

While there is plenty of blame to spread around the Beltway for these manufactured debt-ceiling shenanigans, the role of the US media deserves our keen attention. The media – and, in particular, their treatment of the Tea Party movement – have been a key ingredient in this recipe for political dysfunction.

But let’s start with the most obvious culprit. To say President Obama fell prey to Republican brinkmanship is to give the GOP too much credit. Obama entered negotiations braying about a balanced approach that included tax increases for the super-rich, but once hunkered at the negotiating table, he got worked over like a Grand Canyon pack mule. Lowlights include a mid July meeting when the president reportedly told Virginia Republican Eric Cantor, “Eric, don’t call my bluff.” This slip of the tongue could be the laugh track for an amateur hour poker tournament. At the high-stakes negotiations with “real deal” government funds on the congressional chopping block, Obama’s remark foretold disaster.

Then, there’s the Tea Party movement. In a way, you’ve got to hand it to them. They’ve managed to hijack the national conversation from job creation and overall economic health to one of deficit and default. This despite the fact that a recent CBS News/New York Times poll found that when asked to identify the most important problem currently facing the United States, more than half (53%) responded jobs or the economy while a mere 7% mentioned the budget deficit or national debt.

- How the Tea Party turned the media’s ‘liberal bias’, Guardian.co.uk, August 5, 2011.

本文僅代表作者本人觀點，與本網(wǎng)立場無關(guān)。歡迎大家討論學(xué)術(shù)問題，尊重他人，禁止人身攻擊和發(fā)布一切違反國家現(xiàn)行法律法規(guī)的內(nèi)容。

我要看更多專欄文章

About the author:

Zhang Xin is Trainer at chinadaily.com.cn. He has been with China Daily since 1988, when he graduated from Beijing Foreign Studies University. Write him at: zhangxin@chinadaily.com.cn, or raise a question for potential use in a future column.

相關(guān)閱讀：

Find your feet?

Goodness knows?

Another false start?

Make the cut?

（作者張欣 中國日報網(wǎng)英語點津 編輯陳丹妮）