My blog is popular among professors of English (because they are very smart) and enthusiasts of the language. So I’m asking them to help out a non-native speaker.
Here is my question: does the word “vociferous” have negative connotations for you? For example, in the sentence “Barcelona was vociferous in demanding the return of these papers”, is the speaker trying to express a veiled dislike of Barcelona’s demands or am I imagining a whiff of negativity here?
Clarissa's Blog 
To me, vociferous is not negative on it’s own. It’s an intensifier. But I wouldn’t use “vociferous” in regards to delight. But I would say “vociferous” in regards to need. So, to me, it doesn’t fit in regards to something positive. But it’s not quite negative either if that makes sense. It sort of signifies rapaciousness. I am curious what others think……..
LikeLike
From a UK perspective, I would classify “vociferous” (especially in the context given) as emphatic and possibly somewhat aggressive, but not necessarily negative.
LikeLike
Seconding that, as a native UK speaker. It implies a sort of passion and emphasis in the demanding, but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
LikeLike
The UK perspective is very valuable here because the author of the quote is British.
LikeLike
Like raddledoldtart, I would classify it as something that comes off as “aggressive.” Whether you see aggression as a negative trait or not, or the listener views aggression as a negative thing, is subjective.
LikeLike
This is a very interesting insight. For this particular author (Jeremy Treglown), aggression is anathema, so this makes the whole thing even more interesting.
LikeLike
BTW, not an English prof. Just a reader.
LikeLike
I’m with Kathleen; I think it depends how you feel about people expressing themselves passionately and/or loudly. From the perspective of my WASP upbringing, it would definitely carry a somewhat negative connotation. I could even make an argument for there being a whiff of ethnic stereotyping (those passionate Mediterranean types!) implied, but that might be taking it a step too far. Let’s just say that someone who is “vociferous” is not also dignified; or calm, cool, and collected, or several other things one might expect a diplomat and/or government to be (for instance, if you switch from the personified city to a person, I’m having trouble imagining any much-admired Secretary of State being described as being “vociferous”).
LikeLike
” I could even make an argument for there being a whiff of ethnic stereotyping (those passionate Mediterranean types!) implied, but that might be taking it a step too far. ”
– No, I also think this is what is going on, The author of the quote is a Brit who is writing about Spain and he is, indeed, very much into ethnic stereotyping.
LikeLike
What everyone else said. One may think that vociferousness in a particular case is unnecessary or excessive, but there’s nothing inherently negative about the term.
LikeLike
For me, it’s not inherently negative but the sentence quoted does have a negative feel to it,
B : So do you have those papers yet?
M : We’re working on it, but you know how the bureaucra-
B : Cause I need them now!
M : We’ll get them to as soon as possible. Call back in an hour.
(five minutes later)
B : So where are they?
etc etc etc until you manage to get them their precious papers
My guess is the author is either not that skilled or very skilled in using a word that’s not inherently negative (so they can deny negative intentions if called out) but which in context definitely seems a little hostile.
LikeLike
This is a trick many authors use and this one is particularly good at it: he says he doesn’t want to take sides (on the subject of the Spanish Civil War) but then uses his very good grasp of vocabulary to manipulate the image of each group. He never says who the good guys are in his opinion, he just colors their image with words.
LikeLike
I’m not an English professor, but the examples I find often use it to suggest a self-serving demand. Seek for example, http://www.reference.com/example-sentences/vociferously
LikeLike
Also, even though the dictionary definition isn’t especially negative, the synonyms clearly are negative. http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/vociferous
LikeLike
Following on from the other comments, vociferous certainly means being very
loudly determined to get a point of view across – not in itself a negative action it but can be seen as aggressive by timid persons and by those opposed to the point of view.
Also what about the definition of ‘professor’? For example, in the UK it’s a specifically appointed title and reserved for the most senior academics, so that excludes everybody I know. In France I believe it’s the title of all schoolteachers and in the US it’s for all higher graduates. I’m ruled out everywhere, so probably shouldn’t be answering your question! Damn..!
LikeLike
And this is where MY command of vocabulary failed me. 🙂 🙂
LikeLike
“Barcelona was vociferous in demanding …”
Unless “Barcelona” is shorthand for a seat of government, this starts out wrong-headed anyway — I cannot imagine an entire city of disparate voices joining forces to whinge somewhat pompously about “papers”.
For instance: “Berlin was vociferous in demanding …” may be shorthand for the Merkel government and its coven of loudly baying bureaucrats — innocents in their injuries, devils being offended, and such like. I could imagine the seat of a global or national government being so loud and so bold, but not so much a regional government.
Washington DC qualifies: “Washington was vociferous in demanding the return of the stolen Eddie Snowden 2013-2014 Cloak-and-Dagger Pin-Up Calendars”. Insert your favourite overblown locale for comedic effect — Biloxi, Mississippi or Omaha, Nebraska, for example. (I can’t decide whether Jimmy Buffett or Warren Buffett delivering the news would be more comedic — I suspect Jimmy Buffett would do it with a margarita, which makes the imagery already look just a bit silly, but Warren Buffett might say he can save you 10% on your insurance while delivering the news, which makes him a formidable rival for silliness.)
Perhaps Lord Vader has a spare Death Star to keep those regional governments in line — the Galactic Empire’s power has been slipping, however, perhaps as a result of all of those “vociferous” protestations against Imperial rule, some of which have involved small groups of rogue fighter pilots attacking Imperial outposts without so much as a single piece of evidence that shows they’re licensed for those spacecraft. Shocking — I’m sure the bureaucrats are “vociferous” about removing those unlicensed fighter pilots from the Empire’s free and open space.
Insofar as “vociferous” itself goes, imagine a chorus of voices all singing the same song, a bureaucratic hymnal in this case … without being suddenly silenced, since that of course is only possible if you deploy the Death Star against them.
Molest us not with these “papers” anyway …
Don’t government agents in your part of the world have proper burn barrels?
BTW, I want my calendar back — May 2014 was going to be a fine month for Valerie Plame, who in that particular pin-up shot had not the slightest bit of blame, especially in that frame …
LikeLike
OK, you have got to be a professor because here is an entire very well-crafted essay that made me forget what my question even was. 🙂
LikeLike
Thank you, everybody! I think the consensus we reached is that the author isn’t trying to offend people in Barcelona but that he is not praising them for their demands either.
LikeLike