“Horriblarious” additions to the Merriam-Webster

The English language is constantly evolving. The way we speak today would have baffled people 400 years ago. I fear that with the recent inclusion of Web speak and slang to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, that evolution is happening faster than even Darwin could have predicted.

Dictionaries have always been the source of the correct spelling, definition and even the correct usage of words. If we add abbreviations and words like TUL (text you later), “iPodally,” “textmate” and “twex” to the dictionary, then what’s next, college-level writing using only acronyms?

I understand that times are changing, especially technologically, and that with such changes come a completely different language, but should it affect the way we speak and write to such an obtuse degree?

Yes, the English language is composed of French, German and other words, but to add Web speak only dilutes and diminishes it. Words like “wordrobe” are unnecessary additions. It means vocabulary. So, why go out of your way to use such a silly word that is uglier?

Don’t get me wrong, I am not against the addition of words to the language. It is understandable that some of these words, like “cyberchondriac” — someone who thinks he/she has a disease after reading about it online — have been added because the Internet has brought the need for words that relate specifically to what is done online, but some of these are simply ridiculous. “Fantalicious,” really? Just say fantastic.

It’s the addition of words like this that make me think people don’t know how to speak English, so they must make up words like “fantalicious” to express how incredible the latest Justin Beiber song was.

But there is hope in the future: the language has gotten so bad; it cannot possibly get worse, right? Hey, I didn’t say I was an optimist.

Leave a Reply