Slashdot Mirror
Tracking The (English) Words We Use
Zugok writes "Wordcount.org has an interactive presentation of the 86,800 most frequently used English words. In addition they have Query Count which is a dynamic database of what are the most queried words on Wword Count. Then there is the conspiracy corner where certain words seems to end up in some sort of eerie order. Cowboy comes 14834 and Neal comes 18928. Bebop comes 70673."
fuck is number 5598
Actually, I expected this to be higher since I watched Goodfellas last night.
Hm...I would have thought things like "the", "and" or "or" would have beat out "dog" "pussy" "sex".
Hi there
At least love @384 ranks above hate @3107
I think the world isn't so bad...
All the worlds indeed a
I mean, I guess I should've known, but I didn't expect the font size to be so damned *large*!
(Not, of course that anyone would waste work time by reading
when the word "money" makes place 227 while "love" is at 384. Or maybe I am just turning into some sort of postmodern hippie. ;-)
Fuck = 5598
Cunt = 18636
HTH.
Well, if people could write fuck, cunt, bitch, motherfucker, ect in the web without being censored by "lets be nice" moderatores, irc-bots, php-bbses,ect, their rank would be quite a bit higher.
I guess fuck should be at least in the top 1000.
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
Bloody hell, I wonder what other words are _not_ so frequently used then.
but Windows ranks at a disturbing 1169. ;-)
It would be nice if the list were available in plaintext form, instead of this slow and miserable Flash presentation.
This is a prime example of Flash being misused. It's not needed at all, and only serves to slow things down. It also makes it impossible to use the data for anything useful.
This space intentionally left blank.
"WordCount was designed with a minimalist aesthetic, to let the information speak for itself."
Which explains their logical use of Flash.
Except it is one of the most annoying interfaces I've used. There's no way to know what you're suppose to click on, and there's limited space that displays like 3 words at a time in a giant font. I would prefer to see even the most rudimentary HTML so I could scroll through a list of 100's or 1000's of words at a time.
1) que
2) centre
3) colour
4) dialogue
5) program
6) pyjamas
Why yes, I am american
"If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
Pretty,
but possibly the most useless UI for list-format data ever; I can only read the first (counts) 19 entries, (can't read the numbers after 10). After that you have to do random sampling.
Browsable Lists - the past and future of basic data presentation!
"Grok is not currently in the archive"
Funny that you mention this, because they'll definitely be adding the verb "slashdotted" after today.
Hoist Number One and Number Six.
"Slashdot" and "effect" are located at?
I really am sick of sites that require flash to get actual information. It should be part of the usability guidelines of the web that information be required to be in at least format.
Take these two sites for example. I work in the healthcare profession and we don't run our machines as administrators, and flash isn't installed default on Win2k. When you go to Ochsner's Health Plan website, you can't do anything unless we, as administrators, log in and install flash for them from the activex control, just to log in as a provider.
Also, Houston RoadRunner is the exact same.
I hate flash, a lot, and It annoys me because you can't manipulate fonts, you can't use scroll wheel most of the time, all the control is taken AWAY from the user. I love flash when used for hilarious web cartoons, but using it for content is ridiculous.
Chris
Perhaps sites like this will encourage the creation of word flashmobs. A group of people would conspire to overuse some obscure word to boost its rating. Bombing the word within blogs, web pages, and postings might help the word spread into wider use and rise in the rankings. It could even be a competitive sport -- two teams pick two words of adjacent rank and the team whose word rises the most wins.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Words 29350-29352.
Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
1941-1945:
faith establish facts requires membership
Tom Cruise hacked their website!
I'll do it for cheesy poofs.
Book comes in at 357, Television comes in at 1022 and TV comes in at 1577.
Ah, now I know what's wrong with it... It's "Artistic" so it doesn't have to mean anything. I mean, nobody would find it useful if the number of occurrences of a word was given.
Here's the bit that would make you choke on your cornflakes... Tell me, what was the award trophy? A chocolate tea pot?
Where's the Kaboom?
There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
That has to be the coolest use of Flash
It is a cool idea and it has been implemented with Flash.
I'd like to see it implemented without Flash. What is cool would then be more accessible and available faster. That would be more compelling.
.. 'Microsoft' is at a disturbing 4304 which puts this word ahead of 'Fuck' at 5589!
/. readers as a basis for working out their word collection.
This means that either:
1) That people at large think more about Microsoft than copulating. (Unlikely)
2) They used a bunch of
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
Apparently, the 'word' NaN is used a lot! :-)
NaNNaNNaNNaNNaN
Slashdotted?
Sig Nature
To fight keyword stuffing, I believe keeping track of the word use distribution in an email would help us judge the spam potential.
Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
Also, it's not as if you are "correct" and the American "incorrect." Languages are fluid. Languages evolve, including English. Brits (I include Canadians here, having severed ties only quite recently) have really screwed up the proper German you were taught ~1500 years ago too. And the Norwegian you were taught ~1200 years ago. And the French you were taught 968 years ago. As such, would you consider the entire English language "incorrect?" Many words had various spellings in the 1600s when English was brought to America. As such, it's not accurate to claim that the American spelling is incorrect, when we simply chose one of the accepted spellings at the time and the Brits chose the other. It might be different if the English language had an established spelling for a certain word by 1500 and Americans changed, but this is not the case. For all the pedantic spelling and grammar correction, many Brits (and Canadians) seem to be ignorant of the history of their own language.
One might also suggest that you not engage in such displays of self-superiority - "When in Rome..." one might say. You seem to share the attitude of tourists in foreign lands who expect to have waiters (for example) speak their own native language and become irate when the waiter can't or won't. Admittedly, Americans are one of the major contributors to the image of the self-righteous tourist, and I find that disgusting too. Ultimately, one can adapt to your host nation - even if it's simply over the phone - or one can maintain self-righteousness and deal with the inevitable inaccuracies. What does one gain from this exchange, anyway?
As for the Americans in Canada you cite, their mistakes are borne of ignorance rather than self-righteousness. The difference borne of ignorance is correctable. I would politely, without condescencion, inform them that the letter they refer to as "zee" is called "zed" by the rest of the English speaking world. If they insist on maintaining their behavior, then your ire would be well-placed - if you didn't insist on doing the same, that is.
All in all, there's really no need for this "whose language is correct" debate. Language is a tool. If you can effectively with the other party, you have no problem. Your problem is you intentionally choose not to simply due to ego, which I find baffling.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat