Twerking, a provocative dance, and selfie, a self-portrait photograph usually taken on a mobile phone, now appear in the dictionary’s online edition.
FOMO, an acronym that stands for fear of missing out, and refers to anxiety caused by seeing social media posts that imply something more exciting is happening elsewhere, also made the grade.
There was widespread criticism of their inclusion.
Michael Dirda, a journalist writing in the Washington Post, summed up the general mood by saying: “Like so much digital terminology, many of these new words are ugly.
“Most of these new words and acronyms are probably never meant to be spoken by actual human beings. They live and breathe only on the tiny screen.”
He added: “No doubt they have their place, but let them stay there.”
 |
| A classic selfie |
So is it snobbish to agree with Dirda or should we be fighting against the use of these new words?
In theory, English teachers should be teaching a clean and correct version of the language, with no place for fly-by-night slang.
Having said that, the main reason that native English speakers are in such high demand in non-English speaking countries is that they use a ‘genuine’ version of the language. This is preferable to the stilted and unrealistic English found in many textbooks.
If native English speakers use these words enough, then why not include them in the dictionary? And why not teach them to your students (provided they are relevant to the topic at hand)?
Words appear and develop in a way that we cannot control.
The poet Samuel Coleridge denounced ‘talented’ as a barbarous word in 1832 and a letter-writer to the Times, in 1857, described ‘reliable’ as vile. The reason – they were considered too ‘American’. I think we would all agree that speakers of British English would now use these words without hesitation.
They became a part of our language, whether we liked it or not.
In theory, English teachers should be teaching a clean and correct version of the language, with no place for fly-by-night slang.
Having said that, the main reason that native English speakers are in such high demand in non-English speaking countries is that they use a ‘genuine’ version of the language. This is preferable to the stilted and unrealistic English found in many textbooks.
If native English speakers use these words enough, then why not include them in the dictionary? And why not teach them to your students (provided they are relevant to the topic at hand)?
Words appear and develop in a way that we cannot control.
The poet Samuel Coleridge denounced ‘talented’ as a barbarous word in 1832 and a letter-writer to the Times, in 1857, described ‘reliable’ as vile. The reason – they were considered too ‘American’. I think we would all agree that speakers of British English would now use these words without hesitation.
They became a part of our language, whether we liked it or not.
 |
| A man enjoys a spot of lunting |
Similarly, words fall out of fashion and become obsolete. ‘Twattle’, meaning to gossip, was popular in the 1600s. Had you been around in the 1800s you may have heard the word ‘lunting’, meaning to walk while smoking a pipe.
But both words don't appear in most modern dictionaries. Why? Simply because nobody uses them anymore.
So, despite all the grumbling - twerking, selfie and FOMO are now officially a part of the English language. Whether they will stand the test of time remains to be seen...
But both words don't appear in most modern dictionaries. Why? Simply because nobody uses them anymore.
So, despite all the grumbling - twerking, selfie and FOMO are now officially a part of the English language. Whether they will stand the test of time remains to be seen...
