"... in 2007, the words “acorn” and “buttercup” were taken out of the Oxford Children’s Dictionary, in favor of words like “broadband” and “cut and paste” to reflect changing usage of the language. “Hamster,” “heron,” “herring,” “kingfisher,” “lark,” “leopard,” “lobster,” “magpie,” “minnow,” “mussel,” “newt,” “otter,” “ox,” “oyster” and “panther” were also deemed archaic and removed."
An excerpt from Losing Eden, a recently-published book that argues that today's children are losing touch with the natural world, as cited in a Harper's book review.
The deletions and new entries in Oxford's Children's Dictionary (which has over 30,000 words) have been roundly criticized and defended. TYWKIWDBI isn't taking a position on this matter - just noting it for the record.
Removing otter from the dictionary just crosses the line, man
ReplyDeleteI'll take a position: This sucks! Anyway, funny, I just read this article on our loss of contact with the natural world, before seeing what's new on the only blog I ever visit: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/01/machine-garden-natureless-world/621268/
ReplyDeleteMy seven year-old nephew tells me that "gullible" is no longer included in the Children's Dictionary.
ReplyDeleteA stunning book by an excellent writer, illustrated beautifully:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thelostwords.org/lostwordsbook/
Addresses this very subject. All of Macfarlane's books are well worth reading, especially "The Wild Places."
Requested from our library. Thanks for the suggestion :-)
DeleteThere's a difference. Cut (Ctrl+X) removes the original object, while copy (Ctrl+C) keeps it.
ReplyDeleteDictionaries don't lead, they follow. So if it is decided to remove these words, it's because fewer and fewer young people encounter them in daily life, hence no need to look them up. Which is something you can have all sorts of opinions about (I won't pretend I don't), but the trend is not the dictionaries' fault.
ReplyDelete"Yeah, let's hsve an argument on the internet about how the internet takes too much tine aqay from nature!" he typed with several typos, trying to get a feeling back into his fingers after a wonderful walk in the snow.
ReplyDeleteI’ve heard this one before: Hey, you primitivists are using modern technology to critique civilization! Or, what was the carbon footprint on the production of Don’t Look Up? Or… In other words, the rhetorical cousin of the ad hominem attack; if you don’t like the message, go after the medium. I’d rather have the discussion, by any means, than to have discourse suffocated. Perhaps, most of all, at moment when our species faces an existential struggle involving core values.
Delete