Retweet this: Oxford’s new addition of words are outlandish

In a world where the Internet is a vital part of our lives, many readily recognize online slang such as “woot,” “sexting,” “retweet,” “mankini” and “cyberbullying.” These words have become so standard that according to The Telegraph, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) added them into its recently released 12th edition.

The OED has been acknowledged as the definitive authority on the English language. However, the OED has breached the fine line between colloquial slang and standard words that should be included in the English dictionary.

Despite the fact that languages are bound to change based on the cultural influence of the media and trends, it is shameful to have Internet slang such as “sexting” and “retweet” be a part of a prestigious dictionary. The job of a dictionary is to document a language that is relevant to a specific group of people are using.

If scientific words are separated from the general English dictionary, then slang should be excluded as well. This is because Internet slang is used by the young generation, not the entire population including the elderly. Since the OED is a general English dictionary, it should contain standard English that is applicable to all ages and groups.

Angus Stevenson, the dictionary’s editor, argued otherwise, saying the dictionary should document all permanent and popular words. He contended in an interview with The Telegraph, “It’s how the dictionary has always worked—we get as much evidence as we can so we know it’s not just a small number of people using the word and it’s not going to disappear.”

If that was the case, then how permanent is the new word “retweet,” which is a term from the social networking company Twitter? Twitter is popular, but it is not as widespread as Facebook. Instead, “retweet” should be defined in informal English dictionaries such as the website Urban Dictionary. Urban Dictionary’s word entries are strictly related to vernacular slang or slurs from a wide variety of sub-cultures which can be submitted by anyone. These words covered by Urban Dictionary are not part of the official English language because they may be relevant only for a small group of people or a short time span.

The addition of technology-originated words to the OED has been done before. In the past, the OED has also added and defined “OMG” and “<3.” It seems ridiculous that the “<3” symbol has to be defined as an actual word.

Standard and colloquial dictionaries need to separate proper English and shorthanded English apart to preserve the eloquent standard of the official language. Slang should only be added into the formal dictionaries if those words are shown in newspapers, essays or any writings that display proper English. Otherwise, there are strictly vernacular dictionaries that are at the public’s disposal.
So if you do not understand “wage withholding,” look it up in a law dictionary. If you do not understand “Brownian motion,” look it up in a scientific dictionary. If you do not understand “mankini,” the OED can help you with that, but the OED should have left the conversational words to a vernacular dictionary.