Sunday, December 19, 2010

Reading the Dictionary

During university I had a political philosophy professor who stood before the class one day and asked, "Have you ever read the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) from cover to cover?"

It was a strange question because, as I thought anyway, aren't dictionaries something to be looked at when we forget how to spell something? Yeah, how do spell...look it up. The same with a Thesaurus. What's another word for....look it up. But then you put down the OED and never look at it again.

The professor's recommendation to us that day was simply that, "You should, it's remarkably interesting and entertaining!"

The interesting, I could see. Dictionaries, in a way, are the diary of languages, the way we track its past, present and ever-changing future. When somebody does something great (greatly evil, as you will find Hitler, Stalin and Pinochet's names; or just plain great like Tolstoy, Diana, Princess of Wales, et-cetera), their names are added to the OED.

In recent years this has been extended to consumer culture. Canadians will be pleased to know that if they are confused about what a "double-double" is, they can look it up in the Canadian OED. I'm sure in some American addition, one can find the hallmark of the original fast-food meal, the Big Mac.

When film and books began to be popularized by mass market PR strategies, making them available to global audiences, the word "blockbuster" was inserted and is defined informally as "a film or book with great commercial success." This was also extended to describe a person behind such great success, by calling them "superstars", and defining the term as "an extremely famous and successful performer or sports star." (Even animal noises are given a name and defined. Take for example, the "bleat" which is first defined as "a sheep or goat's weak or wavering cry.")

There are any number of examples where the changing nature of the English language has added to the content of the OED.

The entertaining, I can also understand, for the simple reason that some words or names are hilarious and given even funnier definitions. Take for example the "walrus moustache", a noun that describes a "long, thick, drooping moustache." (Along the lines of facial hair, maybe the term "Movember" might find its way in some day.)

How about "yippee", describing an "expression of wild excitement or delight." Canadians always love to point out the British influences on their lives, so in that spirit, consider the "yob" which is a British informal word describing a "rude or aggressive young man", or a "yobbo", which refers to a "yob".

The list goes on and on.

While the professor characterized the OED as an interesting and fascinating read, perhaps it is also a necessary read. How many times have you seen the wrong "your" or "you're", or "its" and "it's" or "they're", "their", and "there" used incorrectly? If you must, their definitions rather simply spell out their appropriate use, and they're found in the OED.

How many times have you had a conversation over Twitter or Facebook, and employed the letters "LMAO" or "LOL" to describe that you're "laughing your ass off" or that you just "laughed out loud"? How many times have you seen the aforementioned "your" simply written as "ur"?

Whether you view the OED as simply a reference tool, a vital reminder of the roots of the English language, as a source of entertaining and amusing words and definitions, or as a log meant to track the evolution of words and phrases, I would say that it is all of these things.

And definitely worth a read!





No comments: