Job Discussion Forums

[earl]

A thought crossed my mind the other day during class when trying to decide if a word that one student got from their electronic translator was a real English word or not.

Who decides (finally) whether a word is included into the language or not?

If it is in a dictionary, does that necessarily mean that it is an official "English" word? For example I recently saw on the BBC that the Oxford (I think...) dictionary had included the word "muppet". It�s definition was basically "an idiot". I understand that this is modern English English. Does this mean that words like this are now officially included in English? Who regulates this?

any ideas or theories?

[andyscott84]

I don't think the dictionaries support these words persay. But, with many people using them they have to at least acknowledge the words. I'm sure if you looked in the Oxford dictionary next to the word 'muppet' it would say it was slang. Maybe I'm not up to date on the meaning of the word slang, but I'm pretty sure that it's not official English no matter how often anyone uses it.

The dictionaries list these words though for the sole purpose of people who have no idea what the slang means. Maybe worried parents who aren't too sure about the gibberish that is escaping their childs mouth, or for the uncool amongst us and being the only way they can keep up to date with the latest trends.

I would accept the words as a valid form of communication amongst people, but would not refer to it as formal English.

[brsmith15]

In the subterranean crypt of Oxford University there are a group of trolls who are reincarnated public school dons.

They decide. Period.

[mondrian]

[JDYoung]

To the best of my knowledge, there is no "final say" in all circumstances in English. Unlike French, there is no official body that has any kind of recognized status as the official arbiters of English vocabulary. Things like the "Official Scrabble Dictionary" are designed for the purpose stated by the authors subject to a variety of conditions.

[bearcanada]

It's interesting to watch what happens to a language over time as new usages and colloquial expressions enter the mainstream. Maybe it would be a good thing to have a central language office. I don't know.

I have some familiarity with Italian and was surprised to discover the odd developments that have occurred over time. Maybe it would have been better if they hadn't. Again, I don't know.

For one thing, the gerund has disappeared in Italian usage. You can say, "I eat", but you will almost never hear anyone say, "I am eating". I don't know why, but this form of expression has just disappeared. It's too bad too, because Italian even has a special form of the verb 'to be', just for use with the gerund ('stare' instead of 'essere').

In Italian, you don't say that you like something; instead you say, "mi piace", which means 'it pleases me'. That's not bad, maybe, but now they have used up the words and there is no way to say that something pleases you.

But if you don't like something, you must say, "non mi piace" - 'it does not please me'. You cannot say, "mi dispiace" - 'it displeases me', because they have taken this expression to mean, "I'm sorry".

So now there is no way to say that you are not pleased, nor a way to say that you are displeased, because they've used up the words. The language is full of things like this, and it's become less precise and more convoluted over time.

English is not likely to follow the same pattern, but we don't always know where changes will lead. Maybe language changes shouldn't always be left to the general population without some oversight. I don't know.


Disclaimer:
"Do not eat. Not for use by children under 3. Do not leave in direct sunlight. May cause headache if worn instead of hat. Colors may vary. Batteries not included." (Courtesy of DOS)

[joe_doufu]

I'm pretty sure most dictionaries require that a word appear more than once, in different works of literature by different authors published by different publishers, before they recognize it as a word. So if you coin a new term in your book, and it is later used by the New York Times, it could be considered for inclusion.

[Roger]

I have just asked my lazy so-called university students to do homework in situ, i.e. in class, and was fairly surprised by the results they produced checking their dictionaries - all electronic, of course! - for words with 'A' initials pronounced in 5 different ways ('A' as in "alien" to 'A' as in 'alternate').
The purpose of this was to make them aware of the pronunciation variability and the fact that they can find out how to pronounce the words by themselves (you know those silly ones that always accost you with "teacher, how to say 'gourd'?...curt? ...Thank you, teacher, good-bye!").

Many came up with the most abstruse lexical units I had ever seen. They could find the obvious, easy-to-retrieve-from-their-own-memory but some contrived, useless, esoteric item - arbalete, alstom (for the record: I think this was the name of a French nuclear power equipment manufacturer!).
I guess that's what their Chinese English teachers love about them - drumming words into them that no native speaker ever needs to know!

[vikdk]

if I was set homework like that I'd also write words like arbalete and alstom - hoping they where genuine oxford dictionary swear words

[Roger]

I am not in the habit of giving Danish Vikings any homework because, well, you can see what kind of topics they are interested in if you follow the daily Haggar the Terrible cartoons.
From my students I can normally expect something more intelligent, really! IT's just that they are damn lazy.