w00t is 3rd Favorite Non-Dictionary Word

Jay writes "The word has been getting out apparently. No longer just a word for gamers, 'woot' now appears as #3 in Merriam-Webster's What's Your Favorite Word (That's Not in the Dictionary)? contest. It was beaten out by ginormous and confuzzled."

Confuzzled?

[TomHandy]

I've heard w00t of course, and ginormous, but where are people using the term "confuzzled"?

If w00t made the list then...

[bryan8m]

n00b should too!

Dictionary subject to trends?

[Sv-Manowar]

Obviously these words haven't been included in the mainline dictionary, but its an increasing trend for modern slang and shortened terms to enter the dictionary. Whether such words should be included in dictionaries, which are important reference works is subjective, but I feel there is a danger that as more words that are subject to current conditions are added, dictionaries will have to become more dynamic and possibly lead to faster evolution of the language.

Re:Confuzzled?

[TomHandy]

Exactly...:)

Whatever happened to

[idonthack]

"pwnt", "noob", "frood", and "haxor"?

Re:Dictionary subject to trends?

[forkazoo]

What do you mean "increasing?" Are you saying that dictionaries should only use Old English? You know, the dead language which used "thorn" as one of the letters. Ever try to read an original excerpt of Sir Gawain and The Green Knight, for example? Language references must always grow and adapt with the language. Otherwise, they couldn't include a definition for computer which talked about a machine, or include the word "television." All words were new at some point. Some will fall out of use and stop being put in mainstream dictionaries. It's the circle of life, dude.

Seriously, what is the official year after which new words can't be in dictionaries?

Re:The nature of dictionaries

[UserGoogol]

Well, although dictionaries are descriptive, there's always the question of how much they are supposed to describe. Are dictionaries supposed to describe ever niggly bit of the language, (which could be time consuming, because slang can evolve rather quickly) or should they only describe the parts of the language which are considered acceptable in formal writing?

Re:Dictionary subject to trends?

[poopdeville]

Uhhhh... dictionaries are historical records of words that have entered the lexicon. A word is added to the dictionary when it has shown its importance in the development of the lexicon. Of course slang should get into the dictionary -- at least once a slang word has shown its importance in culture. Slang is how the English language has developed through the centuries. Pick any English word you'd like -- it was slang at some point in history.

So yes -- the dictionary is subject to trends. Because it records them.

Re:A few favorites

[swb]

We used sexcapade in college in the mid-80s, it's been around for a while.

The only one missing from your list is automagic.

Re:The nature of dictionaries

[chromasia]

While "proscriptive" is a word, it doesn't mean what you think is means and propably isn't the word you were intending to use!

Re:Woohoo

[EvilFrog]

You're right, it isn't redundant.

Unfortunately it isn't funny either.

Re:Confuzzled?

[Anonymous Coward]

Disney's Winnie the Pooh ...

Disney? DISNEY?
A.A. Milne is rotating in his grave, and I feel like throwing up.

No, that mindless generic cartoon with a yellow bear you see on TV is not Winnie the Pooh. It's just yet another soulless Disney franchise, yawn. If you have kids, teach them what's what, and don't deny them the wonderful experience of having their mom/dad read Milne's remarkable books for them.

Re:We need a new word now.

[zkn]

Gamers, not geeks(Though most gamers assume they are geeks because they are fat and greesy) need new words. w00t was never a geek word, from day one it was "hey misunderstand me please"-slang. Geeks use words simpelminded people don't know of. And the people whining about Aim'girl stealing their slang should shape up and come to the conclusion that playing CounterStrike 24/5 doesn't make you good at computers. And ofcause stop trying to impress all the Aim'girlhotties(or fatties) with all their mighty geekslang.

Re:Dictionary subject to trends?

[lgw]

Dictionaries, however, make a point of trying to avoid recording slang which is only used in one area, or that is abandonded without becoming part of the language long term. While many words in English were once slang, for every word in English there are probably 20 slang words which didn't enter the language.

When slang becomes broadly adopted and looks like it will persist in the language, and not be merely a 1-generation fad, it makes sense to record it in a dictinary.

Re:On Language

[HalfFlat]

The point isn't just the success or failure to communicate an idea. Depending on the language chosen, outside from any 'factual content', there is also conveyed: the writer's opinion of the reader; the writer's opinion of themselves; ancillary flavour; and more besides.

Text that is ungrammatical reads as sloppy thinking, or causes the reader to expend undue effort to decode the content, which can be irritating. It can gives the impression that the writer doesn't care at all about the reader, making the writer look careless, conceited or arrogant.

Language use is also a social marker. Phrases such as 'could care less', and 'lol' in written text are shibboleths, just as much as using the word 'shibboleth' is.

So if you wish to appear uneducated and arrogant, and annoy your readers, feel free to be slack with grammar.

Why do people complain so about poor grammar use? I think mainly because they feel that these extra channels of communication, and the fine distinctions that precise grammar use can distinguish, are important parts of the language. People clamouring for the acceptance of sloppy writing are seen as barbarians massing at the gate, wanting to loot and sack the culture while blind to the things that make it worthwhile. It's not just the ignorance which is affronting, but the way that such ignorance is seen to be becoming acceptable, with the concomitant blurring of expressive power and subtlety. It's like being forced to use Windows 95, because it's "good enough for everyone else".