Go back on
To “go back on” your word is to break a promise. You may know the expression, “to give your word.” To give your word is to make a promise. To keep your word is to keep a promise: to do what you said you would do. But to go back on your word is to break a promise: to not do what you said you would do.
It works the same way with the word “commitment.” If you make a commitment, you promise to do something. But if you go back on your commitment, you do not do that thing you promised to do.
Today, we talked about the frustrating case of the FSO Safer . It was a deteriorating oil tanker, sitting off the coast of Yemen. Left alone, it would have been an environmental disaster. The rebels who controlled Yemen’s coast wanted to use the oil on the tanker as leverage in their conflict. They’d also love to sell the oil and keep the money. They cared quite a bit less about the environment.
The U.N. cared about the environment and wanted to pump the oil off the Safer before it turned into a disaster. But they first needed permission to do so. So they struck a deal with the rebels in Yemen: The U.N. would be allowed to save the Safer from disaster, but they’d have to store the oil somewhere else. The rebels are not willing to give up their claim to the oil.
So now the oil has been saved from the Safer. The U.N. has control of the oil; it’s on a much newer, safer tanker. If I were the king of the world, I’d say the U.N., after having gone to so much trouble to save the world from environmental disaster, the U.N. should just sell the oil and use the proceeds for humanitarian aid in Yemen. But it is not up to me. And the U.N. made a commitment to the rebels. The commitment was, the U.N. would safely move the oil, but it would not take ownership of it. Now that it has moved the oil, safe and sound, it cannot go back on its commitment. Unfortunately, it has to keep its word to the rebels.
Why can’t the U.N. go back on its commitment to violent rebels? For one thing, it could cause the tentative truce in the region to fall apart, and fighting could resume. Second, the U.N. wants its credibility intact for the next time it has to negotiate with unsavory characters. So it cannot go back on its commitment; it cannot violate its commitment. It has to do what it said it would do, no matter how unpleasant that may be.
A lot of companies told employees they could permanently work from home; Twitter was one of those companies. But some companies have gone back on their commitments. Twitter has a new owner—you may have heard —and he told employees they have to come back to the office. Farmers Insurance is another company that went to “permanent” remote work structure. Permanent, in this case, meant just a year or two, because now that company also has gone back on its commitment to remote work.
With a company, country, or organization, you would typically say “commitment.” A company can’t “give its word,” so it can’t really go back on its word. It can only make a commitment. But with a person, you can say “go back on his word” or “go back on her word.”
For example, you could say, “My boss promised to install a nap room in the office, but went back on her word when she saw how much it would cost.”
In “The Morning Show ,” there’s a character who promises to go to rehab for his drug and alcohol use, but he goes back on his word. He doesn’t go to rehab after he promises to do so.
See you next time!
That brings us to the end of Plain English for today. Remember, we’re breathing some new life into the lesson e-mails we send on Mondays and Thursdays. Every time I think of something I want to tell you, I’m adding it to a list, and then I put all that stuff into our lesson e-mails. So you get some learning, but also so much more.
You can get those e-mails by going to PlainEnglish.com/mail .
That’s all for today; we’ll be back next week with two more Plain English lessons. See you then.
Learn more expressions like this
