• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Oxford English Dictionary adds "LOL", "FYI", "OMG" as entries

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Articalys

Member
http://www.oed.com/public/latest/latest-update/#new

For the March 2011 release of OED Online, we have selected for publication a number of noteworthy initialisms—abbreviations consisting of the initial letters of a name or expression. Some of these—such as OMG [OMG int. (and n.) and adj.]: ‘Oh my God’ (or sometimes ‘gosh’, ‘goodness’, etc.) and LOL [LOL int. and n./2]: ‘laughing out loud’—are strongly associated with the language of electronic communications (email, texting, social networks, blogs, and so on). They join other entries of this sort: IMHO (‘in my humble opinion’) [IMHO at I n./1], TMI (‘too much information’) [TMI at T n.], and BFF (‘best friends forever’) [BFF at B n.], among others.
Click to expand...

http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/24/omg-fyi-and-lol-enter-oxford-english-dictionary-foreshadow-th/

In an acknowledgement of the internet's overwhelming influence on the triviality we sometimes refer to as "real life," the Oxford English Dictionary doyens have decided to add a few of the web's favorite pronouncements to their lexicon. Among them are the standouts OMG, LOL and FYI, joining their compatriots IMHO and BFF among the proud number of officially sanctioned initialisms (abbreviations contracted to the initials of their words) used in the English language. Shockingly enough, the expression OMG has had its history tracked all the way back to 1917, while LOL used to mean "little old lady" back in the '60s, and FYI first showed up in corporate lingo in 1941. Not only that, but the heart symbol -- not the <3 emoticon, the actual &#9829; graphic -- has also made it in.
Click to expand...

http://digitallife.today.com/_news/2011/03/24/6335138-omg-and-lol-added-to-the-dictionary

Our favorite thing in this entire update though? A tweak to the definition of 'heart':

&#9829; to heart

The new sense added to heart v. in this update may be the first English usage to develop via the medium of T-shirts and bumper-stickers. It originated as a humorous reference to logos featuring a picture of a heart as a symbol for the verb love, like that of the famous ‘I &#9829; NY’ tourism campaign. Our earliest quote for this use, from 1984, uses the verb in ‘I heart my dog’s head’, a jokey play on bumper stickers featuring a heart and a picture of the face of a particular breed of dog (expressing a person’s enthusiasm for, say, shih-tzus) which itself became a popular bumper sticker. From these beginnings, heart v. has gone on to live an existence in more traditional genres of literature as a colloquial synonym for ‘to love’.
Click to expand...

The English language can be weird sometimes. Then again, there have been signs that the OED is no longer relevant anyway.
 
D

Drkirby

Corporate Apologist
Well, the OED is likely being designed to be a reference in the future, so when Historians 150 years from now are reading message board posts they can have a references for what our archaic phrases mean.
 
dream

dream

Member
I hate to refudiate you all but English is a living language so there's nothing wrong with this.
 
N

Nemo

Will Eat Your Children
Drkirby said:
Well, the OED is likely being designed to be a reference in the future, so when Historians 150 years from now are reading message board posts they can have a references for what our archaic phrases mean.
Click to expand...

urban dictionary > OED
 
E

Empty

Member
now people who say 'lol' in real life can be twice as obnoxious by saying 'hey, it's in the dictionary' when you call them on how terrible they are.
 
E

Earthstrike

Member
The purpose of a dictionary is to list and define those words and text that are used to express and convey meaning. OMG, FYI and LOL are all examples of commonly used text that conveys meaning, so why shouldn't it be contained in the dictionary?
 
E

e_i

Member
It's the end of civilization as we know it. I thought that the OED wouldn't stoop this low. That's why we have slang dictionaries for.
 
S

SolKane

Member
The OED will always be relevant, regardless of whether you think certain words merit entry. No better source for etymology in English.
 
K

Kusagari

Member
The phrases are used in real life all the time these days whether people like it or not. It makes sense to add them.
 
B

border

Member
I hate these stories, mainly because you get a bunch of people whining about the new additions when they fail to understand what the Oxford English Dictionary is. They track the use of language (slang or otherwise) over centuries of change and progress. This isn't an attempt to legitimize these terms, so much as it is creating a record so that centuries from now someone reading a 21st century book/novel/play can look up the defunct term and understand it. Just like you can go to the OED now and look up some bizarre archaic slang from Elizabethan England and understand it.
 
A

Articalys

Member
I don't have a problem with languages adapting; in this same revision they added the term "muffin top" and I don't have any issues there. I have an issue with adding three-letter initialisms to a dictionary. They were developed merely as shorthand; if they had formally added them as full phrases "oh my god" and "laugh out loud" and then noted the initialisms in those entries I wouldn't be nearly as irritated.

In full disclosure I haven't opened a hardcover dictionary in years though and don't know how many initialisms have entries, so if you wish you can take this as merely a news article about the internet age further merging with linguistics and brush off my ignorance.

Edit again: Maybe this is only abrasive to people like me since it's the very start of the merge and there isn't much precedent; also internet slang develops at an incredible rate, so how do we fit it all in a dictionary?
 
H

heliosRAzi

Banned
e_i said:
It's the end of civilization as we know it. I thought that the OED wouldn't stoop this low. That's why we have slang dictionaries for.
Click to expand...
Language is a fluid construct. It changes over time. Should we speak like the American Forefathers did? Or perhaps we should speak like those in Jim Crow South. Or maybe we should speak Middle English.

You can't stop language from changing and if it does change, it won't be the end of civilization.
 
G

gerg

Member
Articalys said:
I don't have a problem with languages adapting; in this same revision they added the term "muffin top" and I don't have any issues there. I have an issue with adding three-letter initialisms to a dictionary. They were developed merely as shorthand; if they had formally added them as full phrases "oh my god" and "laugh out loud" and then noted the initialisms in those entries I wouldn't be nearly as irritated.

In full disclosure I haven't opened a hardcover dictionary in years though and don't know how many initialisms have entries, so if you wish you can take this as merely a news article about the internet age further merging with linguistics and brush off my ignorance.
Click to expand...

A dictionary is not a Bible of "proper" words. It's not that a word isn't a word unless it's in the dictionary.

No, a dictionary is essentially a toolbox, meant to help you understand common words. Initialisms and slang terms (once they reach a certainly vague level of use) are therefore crucial to a dictionary.

Qwomo said:
Every single one you whiners and complainers should watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY

and then stop bitching.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, I prefer my video! ;P
 
G

gerg

Member
Articalys said:
Surprisingly, I would actually be more accepting of OMG if it were formally listed as lower case like those are.
Click to expand...

How is the term more commonly written?

IMO, that's how we should decide how we formally list the term.
 
P

PumpkinPie

Banned
Earthstrike said:
The purpose of a dictionary is to list and define those words and text that are used to express and convey meaning. OMG, FYI and LOL are all examples of commonly used text that conveys meaning, so why shouldn't it be contained in the dictionary?
Click to expand...

Because they are just abbreviations of words that already feature in the dictionary?
 
H

heliosRAzi

Banned
gerg said:
How is the term more commonly written?

IMO, that's how we should decide how we formally list the term.
Click to expand...
Also, at one point, scuba, laser, and radar were all capitalized when written. Now that they have become words instead of just abbreviations, they have been put in lowercase.
 
K

kehs

Banned
What a waste of a title:


FYI, Oxford English add three(OMG) internet speak entries to dictionary, LOL!
 
Q

Qwomo

Junior Member
PumpkinPie said:
Because they are just abbreviations of words that already feature in the dictionary?
Click to expand...
So are scuba and laser and radar.

edit: beaten like a cheap whore
 
G

gerg

Member
AShep said:
Both of those videos were fantastic. Thanks guys.
Click to expand...

You're welcome.

It is because of the Erin McKean video that I now know the word "erinaceous". It is an awesome word.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
[BBC News Magazine] Britishisms and the Britishisation of American English
2 3 4
169
14K
radioheadrule83 replied
  • Locked
Oxford Dictionary adds Sarah Palin's "Refudiate" to its dictionary
2
54
3K
blame space replied
Top Bottom