Where Is English Going?

[Nosebleed]

This is nothing new, new words are added to the dictionary all the time, but doesn't anyone ever look back at the stuff we add in the dicitonary and think "this is probably a really stupid idea"?

 

Well, whatever you think of it, Oxford Dictionaries have officially added yet a bunch of new words to English, including:

• Butthurt (Personally I think they should also expand the definition of "salty" )
• Subreddit (Good job Reddit, you're now part of the English language)
• Grexit (We totally needed this one singular hypothetical event to have a dictionary entry)
• Mkay (Drugs are bad mmmkay)
• Awesomesauce (Do people still say this?)
• Bruh (So cool brah)
• Pwnage (Get with the times Oxford, where's a definition for REKT?)

Full list here: http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/press-releases/oxforddictionaries-com-quarterly-update-new-words-added-today-include-hangry-grexit-and-wine-oclock/

 

I know language is constantly evolving and it makes sense we'd add new words to the dicitonary when they become so prevalent (?) in real life, but are these kinds of words really something one would want to officially preserve in a language? I know it ultimately doesn't affect anything and people will say what they want regardless, but sometimes it saddens me that such silly words like pwnage end up being considered part of culture (yes, a language is a part of culture). Or when some people misuse a word so much that they have to add an extra definition on a dictionary to acomodate people's misuage of the word (I'm looking at you, literally).

 

More to the point, if popularity is all it takes, why isn't "Rare pepe" a word yet? I feel like these additions are so pointless and biased that it tarnishes a language more than it makes them evolve, and as someone who likes language quite a bit, I can't help but feel disappointed, even though I know it doesn't impact me in real life.

 

What are your thoughts on Oxford adding these silly words all the time?

 

PS: I will totally sign a petition to add Rare Pepe in dictionaries.

[Flutterz]

From the little I've read on the topic, the Oxford Dictionary is more descriptive than prescriptive. So once a term becomes widespread enough they want people to be able to look it up.

[greenshadow622]

This is nothing new, new words are added to the dictionary all the time, but doesn't anyone ever look back at the stuff we add in the dicitonary and think "this is probably a really stupid idea"?

 

Well, whatever you think of it, Oxford Dictionaries have officially added yet a bunch of new words to English, including:

• Butthurt (Personally I think they should also expand the definition of "salty" )
• Subreddit (Good job Reddit, you're now part of the English language)
• Grexit (We totally needed this one singular hypothetical event to have a dictionary entry)
• Mkay (Drugs are bad mmmkay)
• Awesomesauce (Do people still say this?)
• Bruh (So cool brah)
• Pwnage (Get with the times Oxford, where's a definition for REKT?)

Full list here: http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/press-releases/oxforddictionaries-com-quarterly-update-new-words-added-today-include-hangry-grexit-and-wine-oclock/

 

I know language is constantly evolving and it makes sense we'd add new words to the dicitonary when they become so prevalent (?) in real life, but are these kinds of words really something one would want to officially preserve in a language? I know it ultimately doesn't affect anything and people will say what they want regardless, but sometimes it saddens me that such silly words like pwnage end up being considered part of culture (yes, a language is a part of culture). Or when some people misuse a word so much that they have to add an extra definition on a dictionary to acomodate people's misuage of the word (I'm looking at you, literally).

 

More to the point, if popularity is all it takes, why isn't "Rare pepe" a word yet? I feel like these additions are so pointless and biased that it tarnishes a language more than it makes them evolve, and as someone who likes language quite a bit, I can't help but feel disappointed, even though I know it doesn't impact me in real life.

 

What are your thoughts on Oxford adding these silly words all the time?

 

PS: I will totally sign a petition to add Rare Pepe in dictionaries.

I'm just waiting on tsundere becoming a word.

[Nosebleed]

From the little I've read on the topic, the Oxford Dictionary is more descriptive than prescriptive. So once a term becomes widespread enough they want people to be able to look it up.

Don't we have this for that already? 

 

On a more serious note, pretty sure that's what Google's for, I don't particularly see the need of a supposedly respected dictionary to add these often silly entries that are completely cherry picked, because if "widespread" is all it took, Oxford would become meme central.

[Narcosis]

They're just doing their job and going with the spirit of time. Doesn't really mean they're doing the right thing, but it's obvious that majority of languages around the world have been in constant demise since the end of previous century. It's really reassuring to know, the ones who should be defending languages from cultural impoverishment are adding the fuel instead

 

No matter what, though... stay classy, gentlemen.

[Down]

I actually think they don't do it enough. Maybe because they don't have enough resources at their disposal, I don't know.

 

It's not a matter of being respectable or not, if people use those words then they are de facto units of language bearing meaning and deserve being recorded both for description purposes and cultural preservation purposes. What is absolutely necessary is also to record when and where were those words used. Those words are precious testimonies of a certain period of time in a certain circle of people. There's nothing worth being forgotten or trashed here.

[Darklord Rooke]

In the old days, the English language was expanded and developed by creative and learned thinkers… generally speaking. This was why English was both beautiful and subtle.

 

Fast forward to today and the English language is expanded and developed by communities like 4chan, which is why it’s becoming crass and retarded. 

[Nosebleed]

Those words are precious testimonies of a certain period of time in a certain circle of people. There's nothing worth being forgotten or trashed here.

Can't wait for people 5000 years from now to remember us as the "dank memes" generation.

[Flutterz]

Can't wait for people 5000 years from now to remember us as the "dank memes" generation.

I'm sure that's when "le wrong generation" will make a comeback

[Kaguya]

Can't wait for people 5000 years from now to remember us as the "dank memes" generation.

 

[Down]

In the old days, the English language was expanded and developed by creative and learned thinkers… generally speaking. This was why English was both beautiful and subtle.

??

Sure, Shakespeare might have coined some words and so did a few other creative writers, but for the most part, a language evolves without giving the damnedest about official standardizations and written culture. Evolution occurs mainly through the spoken language, and especially the language spoken by the masses. It has pretty much always been so in every languages. French, for example, derived from the vulgar latin spoken by the common people, not from the latin of traditional texts. 

[Darklord Rooke]

Evolution occurs mainly through the spoken language, and especially the language spoken by the masses. 

 

Also stealing the best parts from other languages, like French, Latin, and so on. Codifying rules where before there were none... although the guy who broiught Latin grammar rules onto English because Latin gave him a hard on was a dick.

[firecat]

I'm sure that's when "le wrong generation" will make a comeback

 

"le wrong generation": 2000 - whenever there is a rule to kill it.

 

"Millennials": 1980-2000, our generation name is better than anyones 

[Deep Blue]

In the old days, the English language was expanded and developed by creative and learned thinkers… generally speaking. This was why English was both beautiful and subtle.

 

Fast forward to today and the English language is expanded and developed by communities like 4chan, which is why it’s becoming crass and retarded. 

There is a perfect new word to describe what you just said

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/es/definicion/ingles_americano/butthurt?q=Butthurt+

See? It's not that bad after all

[Eclipsed]

I was called a froob once

 

apparently F#$^& retarded noob is the meaning.

[Deep Blue]

I was called a froob once

 

apparently F#$^& retarded noob is the meaning.

It is used a lot in online games, specially when you are bad and get killed a lot (giving free EKs)

[Darklord Rooke]

It is used a lot in online games, specially when you are bad and get killed a lot (giving free EKs)

 

Figures that online gaming would spawn such a stupid, crass, uncreative, and lazy word. It's 3 words, if you can't type them out go hammer yourself in the balls.

[Down]

Also stealing the best parts from other languages, like French, Latin, and so on. Codifying rules where before there were none... although the guy who broiught Latin grammar rules onto English because Latin gave him a hard on was a dick.

I feel like you're trolling me now

Be a good internet denizen and put smileys in your posts if you're being playful.

[Darklord Rooke]

Be a good internet denizen and put smileys in your posts if you're being playful.

 

I don’t think so. It's funnier when nobody can tell if, and when, I'm being serious. The world is a tedious place, you got to get your amusements from somewhere...

[ExtraMana]

This is nothing new, new words are added to the dictionary all the time, but doesn't anyone ever look back at the stuff we add in the dicitonary and think "this is probably a really stupid idea"?

 

Well, whatever you think of it, Oxford Dictionaries have officially added yet a bunch of new words to English, including:

• Butthurt (Personally I think they should also expand the definition of "salty"

Butthurt' is now part of the Oxford Dictionary. Future generations will look back on this day and weep knowing they could of stopped it.

[Deep Blue]

Figures that online gaming would spawn such a stupid, crass, uncreative, and lazy word. It's 3 words, if you can't type them out go hammer yourself in the balls.

But you need all the energy you can get, not typing 3 words can mean the difference between being a froob or a really awesomesauce player, this is a serious matter bruh.

I'm tired

[mjriedstra]

I know language is constantly evolving and it makes sense we'd add new words to the dicitonary when they become so prevalent (?) in real life, but are these kinds of words really something one would want to officially preserve in a language? I know it ultimately doesn't affect anything and people will say what they want regardless, but sometimes it saddens me that such silly words like pwnage end up being considered part of culture (yes, a language is a part of culture)

 

I don't know if I agree that a word like "pwnage" is sillier than other words. It's redundant, in the sense that "ownage" already means the same thing and is the same number of letters, but "ownage" itself is useful and concise: a single word to express "domination of an opponent to an embarrassing extent."

 

Because modes of communication are so broad and instantaneous now, we're seeing a much faster evolution of language. I think that has unsettled a lot of people — Including myself. But I've come to realize that, for example, leet speak is no more different from modern textbook English than modern textbook English is from Shakespearean English. I don't think modern English is inferior to old forms of English; I also don't think internet short forms are inferior. If anything, the need for brevity and clarity in typed language is improving language as a whole.

 

Computer age language may leave older forms of language behind and create a short generational gap where communication suffers, but future generations may actually benefit. Studies have shown that people can read an English paragraph with all of the vowels removed and still understand it. That's a lot of letters which aren't contributing a whole lot, implying a language in need of serious pruning.

 

Even the way I'm formally typing all of this out in proper English is more out of habit than because I think this way is superior.

 

u dig?

[Mr Poltroon]

I don't know if I agree that a word like "pwnage" is sillier than other words. It's redundant, in the sense that "ownage" already means the same thing and is the same number of letters, but "ownage" itself is useful and concise: a single word to express "domination of an opponent to an embarrassing extent."

 

Because modes of communication are so broad and instantaneous now, we're seeing a much faster evolution of language. I think that has unsettled a lot of people — Including myself. But I've come to realize that, for example, leet speak is no more different from modern textbook English than modern textbook English is from Shakespearean English. I don't think modern English is inferior to old forms of English; I also don't think internet short forms are inferior. If anything, the need for brevity and clarity in typed language is improving language as a whole.

 

Computer age language may leave older forms of language behind and create a short generational gap where communication suffers, but future generations may actually benefit. Studies have shown that people can read an English paragraph with all of the vowels removed and still understand it. That's a lot of letters which aren't contributing a whole lot, implying a language in need of serious pruning.

 

Even the way I'm formally typing all of this out in proper English is more out of habit than because I think this way is superior.

 

u dig?

I can see where you're coming from... but there is no way I will ever abandon adopting superfluous and, wherever possible, longer terms than necessary into my everyday speech.

I like this evolution of the language. As long as the old terms don't stop being accepted by society at large (and even if they are, I'm an insurgent), I'm using and I will continue to us my preferred terms and expressions, because they are still English, no matter how old.

Who knows?

Maybe in fifty years I'll be using archaic English all the time for including vowels.

[Darklord Rooke]

I don't know if I agree that a word like "pwnage" is sillier than other words. It's redundant, in the sense that "ownage" already means the same thing and is the same number of letters, but "ownage" itself is useful and concise: a single word to express "domination of an opponent to an embarrassing extent."

 

Because modes of communication are so broad and instantaneous now, we're seeing a much faster evolution of language. I think that has unsettled a lot of people — Including myself. But I've come to realize that, for example, leet speak is no more different from modern textbook English than modern textbook English is from Shakespearean English. I don't think modern English is inferior to old forms of English; I also don't think internet short forms are inferior. If anything, the need for brevity and clarity in typed language is improving language as a whole.

 

Leet speak is a basic form of cipher invented in the late 80s so people looking for ‘warez’ and ‘pr0n’ could get around bots. Because it is a cipher it is by nature difficult to parse for no other reason than to make things difficult to parse. Because of this, people who use it in everyday conversations should be strung up by their testes and have their nostrils sewn to their arses.

 

Furthermore, if brevity was all that was important we'd all be speaking in acronyms and emoji by now... *looks at Skype* oh GOOD JOB PEOPLE  >:C

[Down]

 

Studies have shown that people can read an English paragraph with all of the vowels removed and still understand it. That's a lot of letters which aren't contributing a whole lot, implying a language in need of serious pruning.

Written forms that only used consonants have existed a long long time ago and naturally evolved towards forms including vowels.

I'm not a linguist but I don't think there's any need for pruning or anything, although some languages will probably evolve so that the written form reflects more accurately the spoken form, since words tend to retain archaic features that are no longer pronounced for a while.

 

Much the same way it is possible to read a text where all the letters but the first and the last ones are permuted, or to read a text where only the bottom half of the letter are written. All of this is rather gimmicky in my opinion, it informs about the process through which the brain parses language but it is vain to think it'll be useful or possible to force a language to change. Although it is interesting data for constructed languages, but I'm not a person very convinced by or interested in constructed languages.