MikeyT Posted 25 March 2011 Posted 25 March 2011 http://techland.time.com/2011/03/25/the-oxford-english-dictionary-adds-3-and--as-words/ It is a decision likely to break the hearts of traditionalists. Once the sole preserve of tacky tourist T-shirts, the heart symbol – as in I ‘heart’ New York – has become the first graphical entry in the Oxford English Dictionary in its 127-year history. The entry is one of several controversial phrases among 45,436 new definitions in the latest online edition of the OED. Others include the text message abbreviation OMG, meaning ‘oh my God’, ‘Wags’, for footballers’ wives and girlfriends, and ‘singledom’, to reflect the growing number of single people. Record levels of obesity have led to the inclusion of ‘muffin top’, meaning ‘a roll of flesh which hangs visibly over a person’s tight-fitting waistband’. Graeme Diamond, of the OED, said: ‘While symbols do become spelt-out words relatively frequently, it is usually only with a mundane meaning as the name of the symbol – ‘star’ for *, ‘hash’ for #, and so on. It’s very unusual for it to happen in such an evocative and tangential way. ‘In English since the late 12th century, the heart has been thought of as the seat of love and affection.’ The OED, widely regarded as the accepted authority on the English language, contains the meaning, history, and pronunciation of 600,000 words – past and present – from across the English-speaking world. I can't bay-leaf it: Supermarket spice game peppering shelves with rude words The resource has been undergoing a painstaking updating process since 1989, when the Second Edition was published. Other new entries added today include 'tinfoil hat' – a reference to a type of headwear believed by some to protect the wearer from mind control or surveillance – and 'scrunchy', an adjective describing a wrinkled appearance. Most of the new entries are under the letter 'R' - and revising and adding words starting with this letter alone has taken three years. OTHER NEWLY ADDED WORDS AND PHRASES Dotbomb - An Internet company which has become bankrupt or ceased to operate; a failed or unsuccessful dotcom OMG - Expressing astonishment, excitement, embarrassment, etc.: ‘oh my God!’ Muffin top - A roll of flesh which hangs visibly over a person's (esp. a woman's) tight-fitting waistband Ego-surfing - The practice of searching on the Internet for mentions of one's own name or the name of one's business, website, etc. Banh mi - In Vietnamese cuisine: a sandwich comprising a baguette (traditionally baked using a combination of rice and wheat flour) split lengthwise and filled with a variety of ingredients, typically including pâté and/or grilled meat, pickled vegetables, sliced chilli or chilli sauce, and fresh coriander The origins of the OED began in 1857 when the Philological Society of London called for a new English dictionary. The project proceeded slowly after the Society's first grand statement of purpose. Eventually, in 1879, the Society made an agreement with the Oxford University Press and James A. H. Murray to begin work on a New English Dictionary (as the Oxford English Dictionary was then known). The reference work, comprising of 10 volumes, was then published in 1884. Today, the dictionary is still in the process of its first major revision, with existing entries being revised and new words being added every three months. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1369420/OED-grows-heart-graphic-symbol-love-added-latest-edition-dictionary.html#ixzz1HccnlnNv
MikeyT Posted 25 March 2011 Author Posted 25 March 2011 oh dear Exactly what i just said to a person that posted the link on Facebook.
DB11 Posted 25 March 2011 Posted 25 March 2011 I think it's a development of the English language. It shows that people are accepting the evolution and new technological era, so the dictionary should encompass the changing of how we use words.
Babylon Posted 25 March 2011 Posted 25 March 2011 I think it's a development of the English language. It shows that people are accepting the evolution and new technological era, so the dictionary should encompass the changing of how we use words. Nah, it just shows the Oxford English Dictionary is a media whore who wants attention.
MikeyT Posted 25 March 2011 Author Posted 25 March 2011 I think it's a development of the English language. It shows that people are accepting the evolution and new technological era, so the dictionary should encompass the changing of how we use words. Personally think it's a load of garbage.
Wymsey Posted 25 March 2011 Posted 25 March 2011 If this 'symbol' <3 is in the dictionary now, why isn't this? :L I don't have a clue what it means as i see it on friends comments and statuses on Facebook.
MikeyT Posted 25 March 2011 Author Posted 25 March 2011 If this 'symbol' <3 is in the dictionary now, why isn't this? :L I don't have a clue what it means as i see it on friends comments and statuses on Facebook. Why not every symbol? Let's go the full monty and get them all in while we're at it. :L 8-) Can't think of anymore.
Fosse Boy Posted 25 March 2011 Posted 25 March 2011 I think it's a development of the English language. It shows that people are accepting the evolution and new technological era, so the dictionary should encompass the changing of how we use words. Well fucking said Danny Boy. Language is a fluid thing people, get over it. Do we speak and write the same way Shakespeare or Chaucer did nowadays? No. Dictionaries are there to observe and record language change, not to dictate it.
MikeyT Posted 25 March 2011 Author Posted 25 March 2011 Well fucking said Danny Boy. Language is a fluid thing people, get over it. Do we speak and write the same way Shakespeare or Chaucer did nowadays? No. Dictionaries are there to observe and record language change, not to dictate it. I agree with you for the most part, but L-O-L and OMG aren't words and neither is <3.
BoneDog Posted 25 March 2011 Posted 25 March 2011 I still can't believe that shitting, shitted, shat, shit oneself, be shitting bricks and when the shit hits the fan are in there. Oh, and shitkicker and shit-faced are in there too and mines the 2001 edition so who knows what filth is in there now. Yep, just checked, and piss off and piss-up are in there. Thankfully piss-flaps is not. That would have been a step too far.
MikeyT Posted 25 March 2011 Author Posted 25 March 2011 I still can't believe that shitting, shitted, shat, shit oneself, be shitting bricks and when the shit hits the fan are in there. Oh, and shitkicker and shit-faced are in there too and mines the 2001 edition so who knows what filth is in there now. Yep, just checked, and piss off and piss-up are in there. Thankfully piss-flaps is not. That would have been a step too far. Hahaha
Sly Posted 25 March 2011 Posted 25 March 2011 Piss flaps is in the Profanisaurus (Sp?) which is a great read.
MikeyT Posted 25 March 2011 Author Posted 25 March 2011 Piss flaps is in the Profanisaurus (Sp?) which is a great read. What, what??
Starkwell Posted 25 March 2011 Posted 25 March 2011 Well fucking said Danny Boy. Language is a fluid thing people, get over it. Do we speak and write the same way Shakespeare or Chaucer did nowadays? No. Dictionaries are there to observe and record language change, not to dictate it. The sad thing is though, that these new words ARE a direct reference to the complete lack of sophistication in society nowadays: I mean, if our contribution to the development of the English language is scrunchy, muffin top and , it's nothing really to be proud of - not compared to such fabulous English words like 'verisimilitude', 'lambent' or 'animadversions'... And why on earth do we need to include the Vietnamese word for sandwich?
Trav Le Bleu Posted 25 March 2011 Posted 25 March 2011 The dictionary was originally contrived so that all people would understand the words that were being in common usage up and down the country. THe OED is still doing that, language evolves. I used to be shocked by this kind of thing, but think - the dictionary you grew up with would have been strange, maybe even shocking to people a genration or two before.
DB11 Posted 26 March 2011 Posted 26 March 2011 The dictionary was originally contrived so that all people would understand the words that were being in common usage up and down the country. THe OED is still doing that, language evolves. I used to be shocked by this kind of thing, but think - the dictionary you grew up with would have been strange, maybe even shocking to people a genration or two before. Just like the word 'bird' used to - correctly - be spelt 'brid'. It was a typo in a book that was well read that led to the new word / spelling that we use today
Fosse Boy Posted 26 March 2011 Posted 26 March 2011 The sad thing is though, that these new words ARE a direct reference to the complete lack of sophistication in society nowadays: I mean, if our contribution to the development of the English language is scrunchy, muffin top and , it's nothing really to be proud of - not compared to such fabulous English words like 'verisimilitude', 'lambent' or 'animadversions'... And why on earth do we need to include the Vietnamese word for sandwich? Why should sophistication be what we aspire to though? Language is about effective communication. Whilst I agree there's nothing better than having a wide vocabulary at your disposal to increase the accuracy of your message, unnecessary verbosity is something we should try to avoid. N.B. Well aware of how unnecessarily verbose that post was.
The Doctor Posted 26 March 2011 Posted 26 March 2011 Not really that concerned and fair enough, language does evolve and we have to try and keep up, but it is disappointing to see text-speak in the dictionary.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 26 March 2011 Posted 26 March 2011 Why should sophistication be what we aspire to though? Language is about effective communication. Whilst I agree there's nothing better than having a wide vocabulary at your disposal to increase the accuracy of your message, unnecessary verbosity is something we should try to avoid. N.B. Well aware of how unnecessarily verbose that post was. It was infinitestimally magniloquent!
MikeyT Posted 26 March 2011 Author Posted 26 March 2011 Not really that concerned and fair enough, language does evolve and we have to try and keep up, but it is disappointing to see text-speak in the dictionary.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.