exp(x) Posted August 31, 2009 "Twittering"? I have no respect for that dictionary. 0 Share this post Link to post
printz Posted August 31, 2009 And heh sounds like a regular exclamation, so why only now? Same about hmm, really. 0 Share this post Link to post
Breadrobber Posted August 31, 2009 I hope the people who chose to add "Twittering" to the dictionary get raped by stalkers who are following them on Twitter. 0 Share this post Link to post
Nomad Posted August 31, 2009 I sure hope that dictionary has twittering in it. If it's in the context of the website, though, I'll have to express disrespect. 0 Share this post Link to post
Steeveeo Posted September 1, 2009 Nomad said:I sure hope that dictionary has twittering in it. If it's in the context of the website, though, I'll have to express disrespect. It probably means it added another definition of the same word. Collins Dictionary is teh fail. (I wonder if "teh" would ever make it in, considering how much it's used...) 0 Share this post Link to post
Maes Posted September 1, 2009 Perhaps "Your", "you're" and "fail" will also make it in the dictionary. As in "you're dictionary is teh fail, and your a moron". Also "sight" as in "I urge you to remove this web page from your sight" 0 Share this post Link to post
Ninjalah Posted September 1, 2009 BLAME TEH TEENAGORZ! Damnit I hate being 15. Everything is our fault... But who cares about this dictionary? Now if Webster Dictionary adopted the words... then... I think I may have to kill someone. By the way, what's the definition of 'word'? I wouldn't think 'hmm' would be a goddamn word. 0 Share this post Link to post
Visplane Overflow Posted September 1, 2009 Ninjalah said:BLAME TEH TEENAGORZ! Damnit I hate being 15. Everything is our fault... Uhh, yeah actually. 100% correct. Though plenty of adults have sought to ruin the internet as well, so don't feel too bad. 0 Share this post Link to post
David_Dweedle Posted September 1, 2009 Alright!!! Young People 1! Old Farts 0! Now we need to get " Sup , Lol , Leet and Zomg " in the Dictionary.. gonna sign up for one of those free Online pettition sites now.. Democracy will prevail!! 0 Share this post Link to post
pavera Posted September 1, 2009 I thought the world was coming to an end when "noob" was in the running for the 1,000,000th word in the English dictionary. iHatetheinternet 0 Share this post Link to post
Creaphis Posted September 1, 2009 I'm unsure of the purpose that dictionaries should ideally serve. They certainly shouldn't attempt to be the definitive rule book for communication, because to do so goes against their very nature. Dictionaries are necessarily more descriptive than injunctive: the concrete definitions of words in a dictionary are just snapshots of words' evolving meanings, as they are used organically in everyday society, and what might be an imprecise usage of a word one day could be the correct usage the next. Because of this, treating a centuries-old dictionary definition of a word as sacrosanct, as the Truth, is utter folly. It is better for the makers of dictionaries to allow their definitions to evolve with the words themselves, and also to include newly-appearing words within their auspicious tomes. I appreciate that "cromulent" appears to be receiving some degree of mainstream respect, a word which Danarchy used in a post the other day, perhaps without realizing that it has a guttersnipe's origin: a Simpsons gag. Yet, when a dictionary's editors embrace the vocabulary of contemporary culture, and within its pages include definitions for volatile corruptions, onomatopoeic grunts and brand-name verbs, I find this reprehensible. I wonder where one could draw the line - but then I wonder if any line whatsoever could be justified as anything but a double standard. The only rational positions that avoid said double standard would be to fully embrace every new meaning of every new word that appears in the public lexicon and demand that they be preserved in print - but only for as long as each meaning continues to be used - or to insist that dictionaries should exist merely as history books, genealogies, museums of original meanings that plumb the deepest depths of time, but are hopelessly inapplicable to contemporary communication. There you go, Myk, something to respond to. 0 Share this post Link to post
DuckReconMajor Posted September 1, 2009 How about so people can understand these big words you use. 0 Share this post Link to post
AveryMaurice Posted September 1, 2009 I remember seeing a thread similar to this one in the losers forum, not even kidding. It was 3 pages, I'm pretty sure, of people saying "heh" though. 0 Share this post Link to post
Super Jamie Posted September 1, 2009 Creaphis said:There you go, Myk, something to respond to. Paragraphs are obviously not in your dictionary either ;) 0 Share this post Link to post
DuckReconMajor Posted September 1, 2009 █░█░███░█░█ █░█░█░░░█░█ ███░███░███ █░█░█░░░█░█ █░█░███░█░█ 0 Share this post Link to post
lupinx-Kassman Posted September 1, 2009 avery1555 said:It was 3 pages. HeH Three pages? Laughable compared to the one that used to be in Blogs. 0 Share this post Link to post
Sharessa Posted September 1, 2009 Dictionaries have been full of crap since they were invented. Seriously, read Samuel Johnson's dictionary some time. It's hilarious. Unlike most modern lexicographers, Johnson introduced humour or prejudice into quite a number of his definitions. Among the best known are: * "Excise: a hateful tax levied upon commodities and adjudged not by the common judges of property but wretches hired by those to whom excise is paid" * "Lexicographer: a writer of dictionaries; a harmless drudge that busies himself in tracing the original and detailing the signification of words" * "Oats: a grain which in England is generally given to horses, but in Scotland supports the people" A much less well-known example is: * "Monsieur: a term of reproach for a Frenchman" 0 Share this post Link to post
The Ultimate DooMer Posted September 1, 2009 lupinx-Kassman said:Laughable compared to the one that used to be in Blogs. memories....*sniff* 0 Share this post Link to post
Jello Posted September 1, 2009 On the one hand I have strong reservations about these words being included in any official dictionary since they are simply slang words, onomatopoeia, or copyrights turned into verbs. On the other hand, words such as fuck and cunt are slang used to describe various actions, organs, or acts. However the versatility and the evolution of those words far exceeds words such as "twitter" and "google". Still there is a certain credibility to words such as "meh" "heh" and "hmm". They are used to express a specific mental or emotional response, and since "sigh", which is basic onomatopoeia, is in the dictionary and means tiredness, disappointment, and boredom, then I must concede that they belong. I will still stand by the opinion that copyrighted names turned into verbs should be in the dictionary though. I've never heard someone saying they "Webstered" something. You have used a source to research something, you say you researched the topic, then you site sources. If you send a message via twitter, you say you sent a message on twitter. You did not 'tweet', you are not a bird. 0 Share this post Link to post
Maes Posted September 1, 2009 Danarchy said:Dictionaries have been full of crap since they were invented. Seriously, read Samuel Johnson's dictionary some time. It's hilarious. Even "esteemed" academics can sometime include controversial terms: e.g. the famous George Babiniotis, whose opera omnia is easiest the largest and more comprehensive modern Greek dictionary, made the "mistake" of including the term "bulgarian" and giving it the alternate definition of "violent footbal fan, hooligan, especially one supporting a particular northern greece FC". In the same manner we could use "Albanian" as "poor, hungry and dirty" etc. (and most of our dictionaries give the above meaning to the word "Gypsy"). 0 Share this post Link to post
Ichor Posted September 1, 2009 avery1555 said:I remember seeing a thread similar to this one in the losers forum, not even kidding. It was 3 pages, I'm pretty sure, of people saying "heh" though. 3? It's actually close to 40 pages, but yeah, it's still no match for that old blogs thread. 0 Share this post Link to post
khartael Posted September 8, 2009 "Twittering" isn't as cringe-worthy as some other words added to that dictionary -- read the article! wtf, noob, woot, soz and omg have all been included. 0 Share this post Link to post
Reisal Posted September 8, 2009 Ebonics should NOT be recognized as a language, as all it is a gibberish and fucked up version of American English. 0 Share this post Link to post
Enjay Posted September 8, 2009 Heh, I "say" heh, and I'm no teenager. :P Anyway, Collins dictionary gets an article like this every year. I'm pretty sure that they do it as a bit of publicity as much as anything else. 0 Share this post Link to post