As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Dictionary Slang: Where to draw the line?
VThornheart
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I noticed today that w00t has apparently has received some acclaim from Merriam-Webster.
It got me thinking... and then I realized that there's probably an entertaining activity that can be had from this. So here goes! If you were to publish a dictionary, where would you "draw the line" at what was included and what wasn't?
You can give long explanations of the types of words you wouldn't include if you want, but it may be amusing/interesting if you gave one word that provided a "best example" of the kind of words you wouldn't include in the dictionary.
To begin the volley, I'll put my "I draw the line here" word:
"bling"
Discuss!
It got me thinking... and then I realized that there's probably an entertaining activity that can be had from this. So here goes! If you were to publish a dictionary, where would you "draw the line" at what was included and what wasn't?
You can give long explanations of the types of words you wouldn't include if you want, but it may be amusing/interesting if you gave one word that provided a "best example" of the kind of words you wouldn't include in the dictionary.
To begin the volley, I'll put my "I draw the line here" word:
"bling"
Discuss!
3DS Friend Code: 1950-8938-9095
VThornheart on
0
Posts
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Obviously in your dictionary you can't include every slang term in existence. So you'd need to have a measurement of some kind for which slang words haven't been adopted by enough people yet to qualify.
The specific word part of the discussion was merely for entertainment value, but also provides a (highly speculative) measuring stick for the "line".
EDIT: I should be more clear about what I'm interested in as far as this discussion goes I suppose.
For instance... in my case, I'd put the word in if it can be used without giggles from the crowd in a public speech (a subjective definition, as pretty much any would be). This would rule out seldom used/generally unaccepted slang, as well as antiquated words (such as the "Middle English" referred to by The Cat).
Of course, my subjective line has many flaws with it. What if the word is commonly used, but just plain funny? It's a flaw, but one I can live with.
Good point too. A lot of dictionaries have tons of words used even less than the most infrequently used modern slang.
Suppose I would draw the line at technical words that aren't going to be used outside of their specialist field and slang that is only found in one fairly small area.
For example, a dictionary can be used as a quick reference for the language itself. A person still learning the given language, for example, might use a dictionary (often a pocket one) as a reference when trying to speak to another person who knows the language. With slang thrown in (especially regional slang, or offensive slang), the sentence may end up being incomprehensible (or even offensive) to the person targeted. Though I suppose a thesaurus would be more useful in this kind of a situation, you could reason that what is included in a dictionary should be included in a thesaurus.
Seriously.
Things like "bling" and "crunk" seem like legitimate slang to me. Bet when you start getting into the kind of garbage common in IM/text messages? That shit's not slang. It's just laziness because people don't want to type. Or stupidity involving numbers because some 13-year-old thought it would be cool.
So yeah, I draw the line at leet-speak or whatever the fuck the kids are calling it these days.
Anything that is popular nearly solely on the internet should stay out of the dictionary. It's incredibly unlikely that anyone has both heard that word without being able to figure out what it meant, and not heard it from the internet. And if someone reads something on the internet, and then chooses to look it up in a book as opposed to an internet search, they deserve not to know what it means anyway.
Pretty damn interesting.
Yeah, part of me is just getting crotchety and old. On the other hand, internet/text-message slang seems to be a lot more transient and see much less common usage than "traditional" slang. Look at "w00t" vs. "crunk. " When was the last time you even saw somebody use "w00t" even halfway seriously? Heard it on TV or the radio? Heard it spoken at all?
Compared to "crunk," which while not exactly a "serious" word sees actual usage in popular culture...both written and verbal. And which has been around, at least according to wikipedia, for like 14 years now.
So yeah, leet-speak is definitely over the line. Internet slang in general is pretty iffy.
See, and even if you don't listen to rap (particularly of the southern variety), that word in particular is starting to bleed into mainstream culture. Not serious usage, of course...often in parody. But for instance I heard it last night when I was watching Superbad (one of the kids uses it). I've heard it used jokingly in other contexts in movies/TV. Same for words like "bling." They may only see "real" usage in a limited community (rap/hip-hop for these two), but they're referenced in mainstream popular culture and a large portion of people at least know what they mean even if they'd never actually use them.
w00t, on the other hand? l337? pwn? n00b? For most of these, not so much.
EDIT: That's besides the fact that the whole "clever use of numbers in place of letters" thing is pretty retarded.
Words never drop off. They keep the origin, first mention (as best they can discern) intact and provide concise pronunciation as well as shifting definitions through time. They add words like "bling" and the lot because... they're words!
I agree with you on principle, but I am curious what's going to happen in another 20 years. Most of my friends, which fall squarely into the "25-30 tech-savvy" bracket, already text far more than they call. When their kids grow up in an environment where portable IM devices (smart phones, etc.) are even more ubiquitous, is this distinction between "real words" and "internet memes" going to make any sense?
Seriously, it happens multiple times every time I see him, which usually isn't for very long.
"That guy got pwned."
"I'm gonna go dee ell some pr0n."
"Hey guys, I gotta gee tee eff outta here."
At that point, you're just being a douchebag. Even if the words had any legitimacy or humor attached to them in an online setting, they fail miserably when used in another medium.
In 20 years Merriam-Webster will consider "irregardless" a word and "loosing" will be considered a correct spelling for "losing."
"Me and John went for a drive, and John drove good" will be considered proper grammar.
powned.
As in the end of postponed?
Thanks.
Hi5!
Personally, I think a slang term should wait on the sidelines for a long time before being included in a "real" dictionary. Everyone knows what getting a Lewinsky means, but I don't think we need a picture of a stained dress in the OED. Personally I quite enjoy slang, but it really belongs alongside the dictionary, not in it. In the same way list of every organism ever discovered is quite useful, but belongs in a separate volume. After much time and with common acceptable usage, then a word can migrate from slang or a technical tome into the dictionary.
If you ever need to talk to someone, feel free to message me. Yes, that includes you.
Man, I occasionally say "pwned" or "pron" in an ironic fashion, and I have a habit of saying "woot!" but that guy needs to be punched.
Yeah, but is it worth it if by catering to those minute few that don't accept our current language set and feel like changing it, we totally destroy the word and translation structure of our language by including numbers with letters to form a word? I mean how the fuck are translaters supposed to explain that in five years.. and don't say "very carefully..."
"Cannibal" will mean something that eats humans, as opposed to something that eats its own species. It's will refer to both the possessive and the contraction (Which I really don't have much of a problem with. The context is usually enough to tell you which it is, so why not have it follow the same conventions for apostrophe use as everything else?) and "should OF", "could OF", "would OF" will all be legitimate ways to write "should've", "could've", "would've".
History is written in the eyes of the victor, as they say, and in any cultural war, idiots are usually the dominating force, or close to it.
It's not destroying the word structure from a phonetical perspective as w00t still works out to be [wut] through IPA symbols. It's just a matter of orthography.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
I have no problem with woot.
You're: contraction for "you are."
Also spelled: ur
In 20 years: Me fail English? That's unpossible!
Edit: I also think it's important to note that woot is an entirely original word that isn't just an alternate spelling of another word.
I think its a dance?, but I've never heard anybody say "crunk" before.
That's why places like OED require that they be demonstrated to have been used in print, preferably a notable print source that one might actually be referencing centuries from now, so when some random hip author in the New Yorker makes two references to "bling" in an article about Hilary Clinton's campaign or something like that, the person in the future won't be scratching their head.
Man, woot isn't a word because it's just a meaningless exclamation like 'whoo'.