Noughty language

Now that 2009 is well and truly behind us and the so-called Noughties are nought (pun intended) but a distant memory, what could be more heart-warmingly nostalgic than to have a look back at some of the most popular linguistic innovations of the past decade? That's precisely what this Guardian blog does.

You say tomato...

Here's an interesting article that ties in nicely with some of the work we've been doing recently on regional variation on the A2 course. In it the writer, Richard Morrison, discusses the 'state' of regional accents and dialects in modern Britain. It is a widely-held (if not necessarily always empirically based) view that 'accents and dialects are dying out', but Morrison seeks to debunk this perspective. He observes that "the British are reasserting their regional distinctions, at least in the one area over which ordinary folk have total control — the way we speak". Morrison continues:

Academics at Lancaster University have found that, rather than disappearing or merging, British dialects and accents are stronger than ever. Indeed, it seems that the great urban argots — Geordie, Scouse, Glaswegian, Brummie and the like — are actually extending their reach into the surrounding towns and countryside, as more and more people assert with their mode of speech their pride in belonging to a particular region.

The writer goes on to observe:

What’s really important is that, despite all the predictions made half a century ago, regional accents clearly haven’t been steamrollered into oblivion by mass communication and social mobility. Yes, all of us listen to the same TV and radio presenters, and many of us live hundreds of miles from where we learnt to speak our mother tongue. Yet we appear not merely to be clinging to the distinctive figures of speech and vowel sounds of our native soil, but actively nurturing them.

We're about to start looking at a phenomenon known as dialect levelling, and related theories that suggest that varieties associated with particular regions are becoming less distinct and are instead adopting non-standard forms that are shared by speakers across the country. The spread of so-called 'Estuary English' over the last couple of decades is often cited as evidence of this phenomenon, whereby speakers from areas as far north as Hull have been recorded using non-standard linguistic features not associated with the traditional varieties of their area but with varieties linked to the South-East of England. Whilst on one level Morrison's observations would appear to run counter to this, he does comment that "[t]he academics say that there are fewer and fewer differences between the way that people speak in neighbouring villages or urban districts. These micro-distinctions are being subsumed into regional “super-dialects”...". So to some extent this is like a localised version of dialect levelling. This gives us another angle to consider when looking at the issue of change in regional varieties, and should encourage us not to make blanket assumptions about the extent or nature of dialect levelling, but instead to consider each regioan and their related varieties on their own merits.

When does a word become a word?

In case you didn't hear the triumphant fanfares or spot the vibrantly-coloured processions of jubilant lexicographers dancing in the street, yesterday was Million Word Day. Except it wasn't... and that's why the aformentioned festivities didn't actually happen. You may remember that in a previous post on this blog I talked about the Global Language Monitor's prediction that the English language would reach its one millionth word on 29th April 2009. Well, the day has come and the day has gone, and according to the GLM we still haven't quite got to 1 million. In fact, they've now moved the projected date for Million Word Day to around 8th June 2009... and this is not the first time they've changed their minds (they originally said we were going to become linguistic millionaires three years ago!).

All of this speculation and uncertainy has prompted discussion in the media of what actually constitutes a word. Can, for example, short-lived slang terms be classed as words in their own right. Are we going to let 'text speak' words into the dictionaries if they show signs of having crept into our spoken vocabulary? These are some of the questions addressed in this video report from the BBC. Members of the general public are asked to give their views on words such as chav ("It's a term that's been coined... it's slang... I don't think it's a real word.") and LOL ("Everyone's using it.. it's fun."), while a lexicographer from the Collins Dictionary points out that "a word needs to be used in a wide variety of [contexts] for it to be included in the dictionary". The report also looks at some of the new words that are helping the language to clock up its one million - words such as Obamamania and to defriend (the process of dumping someone from your list of firneds on Facebook).

In another part of the same report the issue of 'word death' is also discussed. Professor Mark Pagel from the University of Reading observes that words like to stab and to throw have a relatively limited life span of about 800-1000 years, while words such as I, to, five and who can be around for as long as 20,000 years. This in itself ios not surprising, given that the words in the latter category are either function words or fundamental basic content words, while those for which he predicts a shorter life belong to the content or open class word group, where, as we know, new words come along and de-throne old words all the time!

A special edition of the Forbes Magazine has recently looked at this issue of language growth. You can read the full article here, but I've picked out a few key points form it below.

On the issue of the one-millionth word:

An outfit called the Global Language Monitor claims that English is about to add
its millionth word, boldly (and absurdly) projecting the event to transpire some
time around June 8, 2009. But that gives the patina of precision to the
ultimately subjective task of determining what counts as "English" nowadays--and
what counts as a "word." Even if we content ourselves with the paltry number of
neologisms that get included in dictionary updates, it's instructive to see
which words make the cut. Recent additions to the Concise Oxford English
Dictionary, for instance, include biosignature, botnet, locavore, mocktail,
plus-one and vanity sizing. In some cases we know exactly where these words are
coming from. Locavore, meaning "a person whose diet consists only or principally
of locally grown or produced food," was coined in 2005 by a group of four San
Francisco women who challenged local residents to eat only food grown within a
100-mile radius. It was then picked up by like-minded activists around the
country.

On the issue of new prefixes and suffixes:

Suffixes and prefixes are the Legos of word-making, handy attachments we slap
onto words as needed. Most don't make us blink: like the "pre" and "s" in
"prefixes" itself.
Others are a little more creative, gaudy and
eye-catching. It's no longer unusual to spot "-y" suffixed words like "women's
magazine-y" and "false-prophet-y" or words with " 'tude" such as
"braindead-itude," "poor-human-being-itude" and "warlorditude." There's nothing
new about "nano" in conjunction with a very small iPod or scientific words like
"nanotubes," but slangy, informal words like "nano-brained" are adding fancy new
features to the insulter's toolbox. The celebutante-inspired prefix "celebu-"
has spawned many recent coinages such as "celebu-tats," "celebu-chefs,"
"celebu-ooops," and "celebu-scent."

On the issue of words that have come into the language from the world of gaming:

Sometimes new words are not invented, but are crafted from old words. In
gaming, a "griefer" is a player who intentionally disrupts the gameplay of other
players--a griefer gives other players grief. Gamers took a word that already
existed and added the highly productive suffix "-er" to make a word that fit
their language needs. On the history of new words:
Shakespeare popped off
hundreds of neologisms, such as "excellent," "lonely" and "leapfrog," that have
long been accepted as words, but which, if dictionaries were being written in
Elizabethan times, would have been flagged as suspiciously colloquial. Given
that it is nearly impossible to create a word for something out of thin air and
see it adopted by the rest of the English-speaking world--i.e., if you randomly
decided to call the cover for your memory stick a "verch," no one else would
join in--most of the words that have accreted in the vast English vocabulary
over the 2000-plus years of the language's existence have been created in
various ways.

Crotchdogs, mousemobs and piersonalities

If you got a chance to have a look at Monday's Guardian while drying off and getting warm in between bouts of snowball fighting, sledging and snowman building (or snow whatever building - Nathan knows what I mean), then you will have come across Charlie Brooker's column, in which he lists a number of entries from his New Media Dictionary. These are all spoof word formations, but they're worth looking at because (a) they demonstrate a number of the word formation processes that those of you on the A2 course need to know by heart for Language Change, and (b) some of them are very funny. Take, for example:

chudge (chudj) n. An underqualified judge on an underwhelming TV talent contest.

craptitude test (krap-ti-chewed tessed) n. A televised talent contest with a panel of chudges (qv).

zerotoleriddance (zero-toller-riddantz) n. The moment the public mood finally and irrevocably turns against a hitherto-just-about-tolerable minor celebrity; eg, "We put Danielle Lloyd on the cover and sales nosedived; looks like she's hit zerotoleriddance."

We've looked at this sort of thing many times before, so if you've got five minutes and you want to have a go at coming up with your own spoof neologisms I'd love to see them. Post them as a comment below (together with your analysis of the word formation process) and I might even find it in my heart to give a prize for the best one (and the most accurate analysis). Here's my effort:

bincentive (bin-sent-iv) n. A motivational 'prize' offered by one such as an English Language teacher, which, while purporting to be of high value (e.g. a Mars Bar, a Cafe Nero voucher) is, in fact, worth nothing (e.g. said teacher's 'applause' and 'respect'). Blend of 'bin' and 'incentive'.

Your turn...

Apostrophes about to meet it's maker.

It seems that the death sentence has finally been passed on that most problematic of punctuation marks, the apostrophe - in Birmingham, at least. This week Birmingham City Council announced that they would be abolishing the apostrophe - the proper use of which has been the source of much confusion since its first appearance in our langauge 300 years ago - from all newly-produced street signs. You can read more about the reasons for this decision here.

This move has inevitably sparked something of a debate. There are those who welcome the termination of the apostrophe's 'rights of residency', arguing that it was never really necessary anyway. Perhaps the strongest supporters of this side of the argument are those behind the Kill the Apostrophe website. On the other hand, more prescriptivist views are expressed by the likes of the Apostrophe Protection Society, whose campaign does exactly what it says on the tin. There's a very handy summary of both sides of the argument here.

So what do you think? Is the apostrophe worth saving or is it better off dead and buried?

Out with the old...

Welcome back to the blog - and a somewhat belated Happy New Year to you all! And what better way to celebrate the arrival of 2009 than by having a look at some of the most annoying words of the year just gone? (OK, you can probably think of lots of better ways of celebrating the arrival of 2009, but just work with me on this one, will you??). Lexicographer and all-round word boffin Susie Dent has compiled a list of the worst words of 2008 as voted for by the general public. You'll find some old 'favourites' in here, as well as a few that you might not have heard before. Always useful for ENA5 Language Change and other language debates.

Ch-Ch-Changes

No, this is not a post about the linguistic qualities of David Bowie's lyrics (although that would in itself be an interesting analysis - I offer you "It's on America's tortured brow; Mickey Mouse has grown up a cow" - Life on Mars?. Weird.). But no: instead this is a link to a series of articles that have appeared over the last couple of years focusing on language change and people's attitudes towards such ch-ch-changes. I'm putting this up now because those of you in my A2 class are about to write your first essay on contemporary language change, and these links will be immensely helpful.

First off, there are some excellent articles on general views about language change here, here , here and here. Then there are some items which look more specifically at attitudes to new words and/or phrases here, here and here.

The next two links focus on attitudes towards the use of jargon - here and here. Then there's a whole heap of articles about people's attitudes towards changes caused by the electronic media (texting, email etc.) - here, here, here, here and here. Then there are some stand-alone items on attitudes to language reclamation, people's views on the use of the title Ms, some observations about Political Correctness, and finally some words from broadcaster John Humphrys, who is well known for his views on language use and langauge change.

All very interesting... or, as Mr Bowie would have put it, "strange fascination, fascinating me".

Going... Going... Gone!

In the last couple of months we've had quite a few posts focusing on new words that are finding their way into various 21st century dictionaries and other lexicographical collections, so in the interests of providing a balanced view of the whole process of language change, here is an article from Time Magazine that looks at what happens at the 'other end' of the language change production line, so to speak. The article begins:

The lexicographers behind Britain's Collins English Dictionary have decided to
exuviate (shed) rarely used and archaic words as part of an abstergent
(cleansing) process to make room for up to 2,000 new entries. "We want the
dictionary to be a reflection of English as it is currently spoken," says Ian
Brookes, managing editor of Collins, "rather than a fossilized version of the
language."

But this is a controversial mission statement, as the article goes on to point out:

Here in Old Blighty, the birthplace of English, the dictionary's compilers
face passionate resistance from language lovers who believe that any cull
reduces the richness and variety that make language powerful — and leaves us
all a bit dumber... Collins' editors know that old words die hard — and that
some people will vilipend (regard with contempt) any execution without a
fair trial. So they've offered the chance of a reprieve. They have made
public 24 words that face deletion because editors could find no example of
their use in their database of English-language books, newspapers,
broadcasts and other media. If, by February 2009, a word reappears in that
database with at least six "high quality" citations, it could be spared from
the semantic dustbin.

You can read the full list of 24 words currently residing on Dictionary Death Row here. If you ask me (you didn't, but I'll say it anyway), the thought of such wanton lexicide (wonder whether that one will ever make it into the CED) is abhorrent, and must be stopped! But it's not just these 24 words that face the chop - there are loads of unfortunate lexemes that need rescuing from the clutches of the language axeman. Where, for example, would we be without the word napiform meaning 'shaped like a turnip'? And what about typtology, 'the theory that the dead communicate with the living by tapping on tables'. And, should the day come when the word hylomania bites the dust, how on earth will we ever be able to talk about 'the abnormal love of wood'? A language cull would indeed reduce the richness, the variety and - at times - the downright weirdness of the English language... and that can only be a bad thing.

So let's hear from you - which obscure words are on your top three list of vocab worth reviving?

Wordsmiths strike again

Another list of the hottest new words of 2008 was published in today's Daily Mail. So if you suffer from nomophobia, get depressed by stagflation or simply can't tell your funt from your framily, then take a look at the article. It lists a number of very inventive new uses of language, each demonstrating one or other of the word formation processes that we're about to start looking at in A2 (Language Change).

Language is booming when it comes to the crunch

There's a really good article here about the new terms that have come into the language as a result of the current global financial crisis. As the article says, "tumultuous times change language" and this has certainly been the case with the world banking meltdown. Credit crunch is the most obvious example of linguistic innovation in this area, and the article gives a detailed account of the development of this term. The article as a whole presents an excellent overview of the ways in which language is used by the media to represent this particular issue, including a very useful glossary of 'meltdown lingo'. As such this is a great resource for your AS coursework on Representation and Language.

Room for a small one?

Sticking with what seems to have become a bit of a theme in recent postings, this article on language innovation asks us to consider whether the English language is 'full'? The writer of the article, Alex Beam, claims to "love neologisms, coinages, new words, whatever you want to call them", citing staycation, manecdote and brocabulary as personal favourites. In the interest of presenting a balanced argument, however, Beam raises the following question:

Are new words as great as we think they are? Paul MacInnes, writing for The
Guardian newspaper, says no. "The common line is that any new word is a good
word," he says. "It shows a vibrant, playful language shaped by those who
practice it." He continues: "Not often, however, does anyone stop to ask whether
this is a good thing, whether... the English language is full."

It's an interesting point, whether or not you agree with it - and this kind of debate is right up our street as far as the A2 English Language course content is concerned.

txt speak - luv it or h8 it?

There's been a lot of media interest in the language of text messaging recently, not least because of the latest book to be published by David Crystal, one of the UK's leading linguists. In Txting: the gr8 db8 Crystal explores the impact that the language of texting has had on the spelling system of English. This article features a detailed account of some of Crystal's thoughts on the subject. Whether you're an AS student thinking about the language of so-called 'blended', mixed mode electronic texts, or an A2 student focusing on language change and attitudes towards it, this article is a very useful one to read.

Lend us a word, mate

With the history of the English language at the forefront of our minds on the A2 course at the moment, this article was a timely find. The article reviews a new book, The Secret Life of Words: How English Became English by Henry Hitchings, and focuses in particular on the wide variety of foreign loanwards that have worked their way into the English language for one reason or another over the centuries. As well as citing some of the usual suspects (Latin, Old Norse, French), the reviewer highlights some of the other languages that have so generously donated their lexemes to our beloved tongue - among them Turkish, Arabic and Dutch. As the reviewer points out, this rich linguistic history reflects and indeed emphasises the multifaceted nature of Britain's social, political and economic history.

Having worked through some examples of words that have come into English from other languages, the reviewer touches on some of the attitudes that are often expressed about the proliferation of foreign loanwords in English. He comments that English has never been short of its "furious defenders against foreign corruption", an observation about 'linguistic gatekeeping' that links very nicely with a couple of other articles that I found recently - this time not about words but about spelling.

This one talks about "the utter irrationality of British spelling", commenting on the somewhat controversial views of John Wells, a professor of phonetics and president of the Spelling Society, before going on to discuss in detail the arguments for and against spelling reform. Professor Wells argues:

"Let's allow people greater freedom to spell logically," adding, "Have we really
nothing better to do with our lives than fret about the apostrophe?"

You can read more about Professor Wells' (Wells's?) views in another recent article, which focuses on - among other issues - the use, misuse and abuse of the apostrophe. This third article adds further detail to the same story.

To round off this posting on language change and people's attitudes towards it, you might like to have a look at this article, which reports on some of the new slang words that have earnt their place in the pages of the latest Oxford English Dictionary of Modern Slang. The only thing I'll say is that I cannot be held responsible for the image that they've chosen to accompany their story, nor for the feelings of revulsion that are certain to ensue. Enjoy.

Rents think Teenglish website is bare nang, blats

...or something. If you thought that 'malt' was something used in making beer, 'rare' was a way of cooking steak and 'flossing' was that thing the dentist is always nagging you to do, then you need the Teenglish Jargon Buster. Okay, maybe you don't actually need it, but your parents might, as this story in the Daily Mail tells us.

The jargon buster is a feature of the gotateenager website hosted by Parentlineplus, the purpose of which is to "help break down the language barrier" between parents and teenagers. What is interesting about this website is that it aims to keep on updating the dictionary of 'Teenglish', inviting contributions from parents in order to do so. This is particularly important given the extreme transience of this particular type of slang - it changes more rapidly, probably, than any other type of non-standard or colloquial usage, so websites like this are useful for linguists like us if we want to keep track of this high-speed language change as it occurs. After all, some of the words that appear in slang dictionaries like this one are out of date almost as soon as they are published ("phat", anyone...?).

You say tomato...

In her editorial column in today's Guardian Siobhan Butterworth brings a well-worn language debate out for another airing. The debate focuses on the use (or rather misuse) of the phrases "bored of" and "disinterested in", among others. Butterworth gives a clear explanation of the 'correct' (as prescriptivists would have it) uses of these phrases and of the debates surrounding their misuse, but ultimately makes her own - more descriptivist - views plain by observing that "at some point we have to let go and accept modern usage or risk sounding clumsy, or worse, pompous".

Arguments like these about changes in what is considered to be 'standard' usage are the stuff of which Language Debates (ENA6) and the Language Change element of ENA5 are made, so it's worth considering your own views on these issues.

Shows potential but lacks the necessary application...

I found this article rather amusing - it's about the language of school reports and how it has changed over the course of the last few hundred years. Charlotte Moore, the writer of the article published in yesterday's Guardian, clearly has her tongue planted firmly in her cheek when she discusses the differences between the language of her 10-year-old son's 21st century report and that of the school reports of the likes of Sir Winston Churchill, Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Stephen Fry (actually Stephen Fry hasn't been given a knighthood, but surely it can only be a matter of time...?).

Putting the article's humorous approach to one side for a moment, though, it does make some important points about language and representation, and about changes in language that can probably be attributed to the PC movement. For 'relaxed', suggests Moore, read 'bone idle', while if your teacher describes your behaviour as 'challenging' it is highly likely that you are considered to be something of a pain in the proverbial. Moore argues that these kinds of linguistic changes have arisen out of schools' fears of litigation, but it's debatable whether such changes in language really change the way people interpret the message. Determinists would, of course, say that they do, while their reflectionist friends would argue that the changes in language are symptomatic of changes in the way in which educationalists think.

Have a look at the article and decide for yourself. You might also want to have a look at some of your own recent school or college reports and have a go at interpreting the language along the lines suggested in the article!

Is 'fashion' undergoing new trends or going down the maxi?

Maybe it's because the fashions are going around a time loop and keep coming back (-and I should know because I was wearing maxi dresses back in....ah no, that would be giving it away!) that fashion writers are finding new fashions in language instead. Lisa Armstrong clearly had a good time writing her article for the Times today - check it out here. Spot the uses of the word 'fashion' and the 'on trend' use of fashion terms - what do you think? Is she being creative and genuinely using 'fashion' in new ways or is she recycling? Mind you is the latter a good thing too? After all green is the new black!

Who wants to be a Millionaire?

Apparently the English language does... and according to the Global Language Monitor it will achieve its ambition on 29th April 2009, for that is when this group of "linguistic experts" predict that the one-millionth word will be coined in our language.

This article in today's edition of the Scotsman tells us that at the last count there were 995,844 words in the English language and that the GLM have calculated that "a new word is created every 98 minutes". Now, leaving aside for the moment the obvious question 'How exactly have they calculated this?' (and, if you want to be cynical, 'Why?'), the GLM's observations do raise some interesting points if we think back to the subject of last week's Custard Creams and Muffin Tops post. You'll remember that this post looked at the list of new words that had been added to the latest edition of the Concise OED, noting that "it's always interesting to see which words the dictionary makers deem worthy of an entry in their latest edition". Bearing in mind that this new edition of the Concise OED updates the edition published two years previously, using the GLM's figure of one new word every 98 minutes, a grand total of 10,726 (and a half) new words will have entered our language in the time between the publication of these two editions (and yes, I really did spend my time working that out...). Surely this begs the question why only a handful of these new words have made it into the dictionary?

Perhaps this points to the transience of many of the new words and phrases that enter our language, and/or to the fact that the use of many coinages is restricted to relatively small groups and specific contexts. Some of the comments that have been posted in response to the Scotsman article have some interesting things to say about this.

Custard Creams and Muffin Tops

Where can you see slebs, neets and non doms all in the same place? The new edition of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, that's where.

It's always interesting to see which words the dictionary makers deem worthy of an entry in their latest edition. Of the vast array of slang terms and coinages that burst onto the English language scene in any given year, those that are chosen for a place in print offer a fascinating insight into the issues, fads and fashions that are currently of the greatest significance in society. Whether the accolade of appearing in the dictionary points to - or even encourages - the longevity of a given term is another matter though; while I feel safe predicting that custard creams are here to stay, I can't imagine that muffin tops as a linguistic term will last much beyond the fashion that gives rise to this physical attribute.

Yesterday's Daily Telegraph published the full list of new words added to the 11th ediiton of the Concise OED. Have a look and let us know which other current words and phrases you think should be added to the dictionary.

Yoof slang sucks. End of.

This week's copy of the Huddersfield Daily Examiner (everyone's No.1 local paper) features a letter from a rather disgruntled Mr Dennis R Fisher, who makes some heart-felt observations on the 'state' of modern youth slang.

On the one hand Mr Fisher acknowledges that "language naturally changes and evolves over time", but at the same time he observes that "we are now beginning to sound like a nation of infantile losers and potato heads". At the heart of Mr Fisher's argument, it seems, is his view that the English language is being 'eroded' by a generation of speakers whose desire to be just like their favourite celebreties extends to mimicking their linguistic behaviour.

Have a look at the letter and let us know your views - is the English language being damaged beyond repair, or is this just another stage in its natural evolution? If you have something you'd like to say about this topic, why not post a thread on the VLE discussion forum?