Slashdot Mirror


Tech Buzzwords Added to Dictionaries

Mark Owen writes "With technology buzzwords becoming so commonly used in daily life, Webster and Oxford have both begun to include some new terms in their latest editions. Some of their newest additions include: adware, biodiesel, codec, digicam, google (as a verb), geocaching, hacktivism, mash-up, rewriteable, ringtone, spyware, and texting."

144 comments

  1. 'Texting' is a Noun? by eldavojohn · · Score: 3, Insightful
    texting, n.
    I thought 'texting' would be a verb. As in, "I just got an $1800 ticket for texting while driving" or "my teacher sent me to the principles office for texting during class."

    Maybe I'm wrong, I'm a better ones-and-zeros-smith than a wrodsmith.

    from the don't-forget-web20 dept.
    What the hell is web-twenty? Is that the time of day when all the pot heads get off their asses and sit at their iMacs and work on their crappy Phish tribute GeoCities site with flying toasters and images of Jerry Garcia?
    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by aymanh · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was going to post the same thing as well, Oxford dictionary added "text message" as a verb (as in "I just got an $1800 ticket for text messaging while driving"), but "text" itself wasn't added as verb from what I found in the article.

      --
      python>>> q="'";s='q="%c";s=%c%s%c;print s%%(q,q,s,q)';print s%(q,q,s,q)
    2. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by dereference · · Score: 4, Informative
      I thought 'texting' would be a verb

      Actually it's called a gerund, which is typically any noun made from appending "ing" to a verb. It's correctly a noun, as in, "Texting is fun."

    3. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should go back to grammar school. Neither of your two examples were using 'texting' as a verb.

      'texting' is no more a verb than 'running'. They're both adverbs of 'do'.

      I go running.
      I was running.
      I will go running.

      That is not to say that 'text' is not a verb. It is, just like 'run' is a verb.

      I run.
      I text.

      Thanks you, and good night.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    4. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by WedgeTalon · · Score: 1

      What the hell is web-twenty?

      I believe it's a side effect of slashcode's limitations. At least, I know with the beta tagging feature we can't enter "Web 2.0", it has to be "web20".

    5. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by mlk · · Score: 1

      Web 2.0, like the Web but cool (in the same way that being a member of the Linux Club at school is cool).

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    6. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by The+Fun+Guy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maybe I'm wrong, I'm a better ones-and-zeros-smith than a wrodsmith.

      Raelly? I never wuold have geussed.

      --
      The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. - Mark Twain
    7. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by robizzle · · Score: 1

      I would have thought it should be text'ing since it the combination text and messaging just like do and not create don't. The characters omitted are replaced with an apostrophe. Then again, writting and grammer is the last thing I should be writting about.

    8. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by kafka93 · · Score: 1

      Say what? "Adverbs of do"?

      Do they not teach you what an adverb is in "grammar school"?

    9. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by Mirlas · · Score: 1
      "I just got an $1800 ticket for texting while driving."

      'for texting' is a prepositional phrase with the preposition 'for' and the object 'texting'. It takes a noun to be an object. 'Texting' is the name of an activity. Names are nouns. Note that I am talking about usage. As another poster stated, the word 'texting' has the form of a gerund which is a form derived from a verb that can be used as a noun. It can also be a verb. I am texting him a message right now. Some day that form may be recognized by the dictionary. Dictionaries don't establish language; they describe it according to accepted usage.

      English is such a fun language. We can verbify nouns and subject verbs to nounification. Pretty soon, I predict there will one day be only one part of speech, the Interjection.

      Wow!

    10. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by Flimzy · · Score: 1
      "I just got an $1800 ticket for texting while driving"

      "Texting" isn't even a verb in your example. The only verb in that sentence is "got." "Text" would be a verb, as in "I text people." But "texting", as another poster mentioned, is a gerund.

      A simple (not fool proof) test to see whether a word is a verb, would be to try replacing it with another word. "I just got an $1800 ticket for paint" makes sense (gramatically, not necissarily logically). "Paint" is obviously not a verb.

    11. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the UK the new usage of text, by idiots at any rate, goes soemthing like this

      I just text chantelle and she has text me back.

      It's entirely possible that this is totally acceptable and correct, the problem is that it sounds ridiculous.

      I Just texted chantelle and she has texted me back.

      sounds, to me at least, somewhat better.

    12. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by steve426f · · Score: 1

      Web-twenty is referring to Web 2.0 which should also be included as a new term.

    13. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by plumby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Erm, no.

      Texting, as in "I am texting" is simply a continuous tense (in this case, present continuous) of the verb "to text".

      "I was running" and "I was texting" are both past continuous tense.

    14. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      it can also be an adjective (participle), as in "My texting citation caused me to lose my license."

    15. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by sirshannon · · Score: 1

      So a gerund is what you have when you finish verbing?

    16. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by DesireCampbell · · Score: 1
      Maybe I'm wrong, I'm a better ones-and-zeros-smith than a wrodsmith.
      Did anyone else find that really erotic? 'Rod'? No? I'm lonely...
      --
      Whoo, signature!
      DesireCampbell.com
    17. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by Penguin+Programmer · · Score: 1
      "my teacher sent me to the principles office for texting during class."


      Man, you got off light! She could have sent you to the principal's office and he wouldn't have been very happy with you at all. Proving some things from first principles at the principles office was probably kinda fun.
    18. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by rgravina · · Score: 1

      Yes, and with Web 2.0 being the load of hogwash that it is, I call this a feature, not a bug.

    19. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, gerunding a verb is nounage.

    20. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by Hatta · · Score: 1


      I thought 'texting' would be a verb

      Actually it's called a gerund, which is typically any noun made from appending "ing" to a verb. It's correctly a noun, as in, "Texting is fun."


      What about "I am texting my friend."? So it's either a noun or a verb depending on context.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    21. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about "I am texting my friend."?

      In that sentance, "am" is the verb, which is the present tense first singluar form of the verb "be".

      http://m-w.com/dictionary/am

    22. Re:'Texting' is a Noun? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And sentences can only have one verb? Right... Back to grammar school, kiddo.

  2. or in the new vernacular by yagu · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you're looking these up in the new spelling dicshunaire referenced in this previous slashdot article (over 1000 posts!):

    • adwear
    • biodesel
    • coedec
    • dijicam
    • googel
    • jeocashing
    • hactivisem
    • mash-up (unchanged)
    • reerietabel
    • ringtoen
    • spiewear
    • tecsting
    1. Re:or in the new vernacular by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or for our more streetwise friends:
      adwizzle, biodizzle, codizzle, digicizzle, googizzle, gizzlecaching, hacktivizzle, mizzle-up, rewriteabizzle, ringtizzle, spywizzle, and textizzle

    2. Re:or in the new vernacular by bark76 · · Score: 1

      ringtizzle

      Shouldn't that be "ring ring"?

    3. Re:or in the new vernacular by MetalPlates · · Score: 1

      textizzle

      And shouldn't it also be "tizzext"?

    4. Re:or in the new vernacular by Eythian · · Score: 1

      <asr> 'fo sheezy.
      <Sabboth> what the fuck does that mean in english? you should understand that having a day job precludes me from 'keeping it real' and as such, I lack a certain familiarity with the language of the 'streets' as it were.
      (bash.org)
  3. Potato mouse? by 9x320 · · Score: 1

    Never have I ever heard of that. I guess some people in the M-W offices got bored playing paddleball and decided to throw in whatever the office dullard had been spattering out. I guess they're saving "wiki" for 2007.

    1. Re:Potato mouse? by 9x320 · · Score: 1

      Speaking of which, the term "mouse potato" was apparently important enough to warrant an entry in Wiktionary... ...way back in 2002. The citations they gave are from 1994 and 2001. The word seems to have fallen into disusage since the '90s, signifying to me that it was slang belonging to the same class as the '80s era "boss," "tight," and "the bomb." Ah, well, the Dictionary Overlords that we have for so long welcomed have changed the rules yet again.

  4. Words in a dictionary? by Bobsledboy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wait, so you mean to tell me that they are going to add new words into the dictionary? I for one am astounded.

    1. Re:Words in a dictionary? by IAmTheDave · · Score: 1
      Wait, so you mean to tell me that they are going to add new words into the dictionary? I for one am astounded.

      And yet, another year goes by where "l33t" is once again overlooked. You keep your head up, "l33t". We're all pulling for you.

      --
      Excuse my speling.
      Making The Bar Project
    2. Re:Words in a dictionary? by mrxak · · Score: 1

      What about pwn?

    3. Re:Words in a dictionary? by JPribe · · Score: 0

      Hey pal, this isn't France, ok. We aren't so stuck up that we can't change a little bit....

      --

      Why go fast when you can go anywhere? O|||||||O
    4. Re:Words in a dictionary? by hachete · · Score: 1

      Umm, yes. In *very* *very* old days, just when Dikshunairies were invented, it was common practice for the mainstream Dikshunairies to *ignore* words used in commerce and trade. I'm not sure when the convention changed - possibly mid-late 19th century - but for a long time, this was so. Nowadays, massive computer-generated concordances and frequency tables are much in vogue.

      --
      Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
  5. Google? by Yvan256 · · Score: 0, Funny

    Didn't Google explicitely ask NOT to use Google as a verb? I expect chairs to be thr... oh wait, wrong company.

  6. Buzzwords. by adamlazz · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well, they're not buzzwords now.

  7. buzzwords by 56ker · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm still waiting for slashdot and trolling to be added

    1. Re:buzzwords by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1
      I'm still waiting for slashdot and trolling to be added

      I'm waiting for CowboyNeal to be added.

    2. Re:buzzwords by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      it'd be 'slashdotted' I think.

      Possibly, since the word is still tied to a single context, and not in general use, it wouldn't qualify.

    3. Re:buzzwords by aymanh · · Score: 1
      Troll (v) already has an entry Merriam-Webster, and one of the attached meanings is close enough:

      to fish by trailing a lure or baited hook from a moving boat
      --
      python>>> q="'";s='q="%c";s=%c%s%c;print s%%(q,q,s,q)';print s%(q,q,s,q)
    4. Re:buzzwords by viscount · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can't wait for the day 'slashdot' is added to the dictionary.

      And for the next day, when it will be added again...

    5. Re:buzzwords by owlnation · · Score: 1

      that would have to be a verb too I assume? "To cowboyneal ..."

    6. Re:buzzwords by zobier · · Score: 1

      You're going to have to wait at least a day before the dictionary becomes available again.

      --
      Me lost me cookie at the disco.
    7. Re:buzzwords by 56ker · · Score: 1

      Yep but the same argument could be made about google - but that's in the dictionary as a verb now.

  8. BREAKING NEWS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The english language hasn't stopped evolving.

    More at 11

  9. Implications of Google as a verb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm interested in seeing their definition of Google - whether it means "internet searching" in general.

    IAMANAL, but I seem to have heard that if a trademark becomes a popularized verb/noun to refer to a general category of items (i.e. internet searches) it can be used by other companies as well. In this case, there could be a "Microsoft Google" coming along.

    Would this be correct?

    1. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by jeblucas · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Would this be correct?
      No. A trademark used as a verb is not considered an infringement and does not (nor can it be) defended by the trademark holder. Google, the company, should defend against the use of its rademark as a noun, as in, "The Google of Porn" or something like that.
      --
      blarg.
    2. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They lose the trademark when the word becomes so ubiquitous that it no longer has as a referrant anything by the brand name.

    3. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by sprudel · · Score: 1

      So "Honey, did you see my car keys? I've been googling for them for ten minutes and I really have to go!" will not get me in a law suit?

    4. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 1
      No. A trademark used as a verb is not considered an infringement and does not (nor can it be) defended by the trademark holder.

      I dunno...

      You mean we can use "We won't Microsoft You to the Poorhouse!", or "Buy From Us, and You won't be Microsofted" as our slogans and get away with it?

      --
      Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
    5. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by aymanh · · Score: 1
      Here is the definition:

      to use the Google search engine to obtain information about (as a person) on the World Wide Web.

      Taken from the WP coverage of this news item.

      So no, the definition seems specific to Google.
      --
      python>>> q="'";s='q="%c";s=%c%s%c;print s%%(q,q,s,q)';print s%(q,q,s,q)
    6. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Just because people call photocopying "xeroxing", doesn't make it ok for Canon to call their photocopier a "xerox machine"

    7. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/google

      Main Entry: google
      Pronunciation: 'gü-g&l
      Function: transitive verb
      Inflected Form(s): googled; googling /-g(&-) li[ng]/
      Usage: often capitalized
      Etymology: Google, trademark for a search engine
      : to use the Google search engine to obtain information about (as a person) on the World Wide Web

      Specifically refers to the Google engine, and not searching in a generic sense. Even less a gray area.

    8. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by bitt3n · · Score: 1
      "IAMANAL"?

      I think that's more of a confession than you meant to provide.

    9. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by jeblucas · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's what I mean. Sadly, no one will know what the hell you are talking about. Here's another tidbit--you can lose your trademark if it's too generic. "Mountain Bike" was once a trademark of Trek, I believe--but they lost it in court. That's why you don't see trademarks on things like "Folding Chair".

      --
      blarg.
    10. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by jeblucas · · Score: 1

      What you say is true--if used as a noun. That's how Xerox (as a noun meaning photocopy), Kleenex, Frisbee, Tin Foil, Yo-yo, and other words lost trademark status. They were being used as nouns and they were not sufficiently defended. I don't make up the rules, man. Verbs = okay, nouns = infringement.

      --
      blarg.
    11. Re:Implications of Google as a verb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about "hoover"? Hoover is used as a verb (at least in the UK) and has lost trademark status as a consequence (again, in the UK at least).

  10. Webster by Otter · · Score: 1
    ...Webster and Oxford have both begun to include some new terms in their latest editions...

    Nitpick: This is Merriam-Webster, not "Webster". The various American dictionaries with "Webster" in the title are mostly unrelated to each other.

    (By the way -- "cybrary"? "mouse potato"? Did they get these words out of a 1995 issue of Wired?)

    1. Re:Webster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were invented by uber-author Cory Doctorow.

  11. Paper Dictionaries by neonprimetime · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who uses Paper Dictionaries anymore? I mean seriously, you have all the online resources you need in wikipedia and google. You have PDA's and cell phones that will hook you up to the internet, so that's not an excuse anymore.

    1. Re:Paper Dictionaries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Lots of people.

      I for one don't pause in the middle of a game of scrabble, open google and type in the decidedly dodgy word put down on a triple word score. I pick up my trusty OED and look it up!

    2. Re:Paper Dictionaries by vertinox · · Score: 1

      I for one don't pause in the middle of a game of scrabble, open google and type in the decidedly dodgy word put down on a triple word score. I pick up my trusty OED and look it up!

      That is what a web enabled cell phone or PDA is for. And if you don't have one on your body at all times (including sleeping) then you can just hand in your geek card on the way out the door.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    3. Re:Paper Dictionaries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wikipedia is not a dictionary (Wiktionary is, but I don't know anyone who uses it). And the results you get from dictionary.com are taken from Merriam-Webster.

    4. Re:Paper Dictionaries by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      Who uses Paper Dictionaries anymore?

      I recently ordered a nice hefty leather-bound dictionary. And I use it all the time when writing papers on my computer. I've personally found that it's far easier for me to move my hands a few inches and flip through the dictionary to check on a word than it is to switch from my text editor of choice to a browser, punch in my word at m-w.com (or google define:word). It's certainly a lot less distracting, too. Honestly, I never would've guessed how much easier it is to deal with before I got it.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    5. Re:Paper Dictionaries by jeremymiles · · Score: 1

      Isn't that cheating?
      The people playing with you might pick up the dictionary after you've placed your dodgy word, but you can't do it before (at least, not in my house!)

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  12. MORE BREAKING NEWS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The english language hasn't stopped evolving.
    Maybe it's news because the French language has (electronique currier, anyone)?
  13. What is this world coming to by sprudel · · Score: 5, Funny

    I spit on these so-called "buzz" words. Ringtone? My audiotelegraph gives me a notification signal, dagnabbit!

    1. Re:What is this world coming to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "Spit"? Is that what you kids are calling salivacation these days? I can't keep up with you younguns!

    2. Re:What is this world coming to by sprudel · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe if you'd went to the talkies more often, you'd be up to date.

  14. Snake-oil-ng: standards compliant but worthless... by StreamCipher · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Snake-oil-ng: Standards compliant but worthless encryption. Used by founder of Innersafe Corporation to warn others about the new generation of snake-oil encryption products using AES-256 in a way that make their security practically worthless. Snake-oil-ng can truthfully claim to be standards-compliant with AES-256, while providing less security than "snake-oil" using junk proprietary encryption. In one of many examples, allowing millions of passwords to be guessed per second while limiting the range of potential passwords--the generated key is still 256 bits so it can provide the illusion of security. Other examples include repeatedly generating the same IV and key when given the same password. Snake-oil-ng is replacing snake-oil because of easy-to-use crypto libraries that provide AES. And possibly making it easier for governments to give out export licenses to create the illusion that export/import controls have been relaxed. For example, most people have no clue that in the U.S. certain cryptographic software sold to people outside U.S. and Canada require the names and addresses of every customer to be filed semi-annually with the U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security--making most retail products use less effective security.

  15. I for one welcome... by Pasquina · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...the new words officially added to the English language.

  16. Gerund. by hey! · · Score: 1

    Gesundheit.

    Suspecting words that like to cross dress as other parts of speech is within understanding. But seeing is believing.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  17. google is my dictionary by rucs_hack · · Score: 4, Informative

    in 99% of cases where I need to know how to spell a word, I type it into google.

    The 'did you mean' feature has yet to let me down.

    I don't know if they intended this, but it's so reliable that my dictionary stays on the shelf these days, and I barely ever have to use online dictionaries, except when I'm trying to locate a precise definition of a word.

    1. Re:google is my dictionary by shish · · Score: 2, Informative
      except when I'm trying to locate a precise definition of a word.

      define:word

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    2. Re:google is my dictionary by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      Awesome, thanks :-)

    3. Re:google is my dictionary by Hyram+Graff · · Score: 1
      The 'did you mean' feature has yet to let me down.

      I acutally had the did you mean feature let me down yesterday. In the fortunes there's one that reads, "sillema sillema nika su" and I suggset Googling it and checking the results you get with the did you mean feature. It's a big credit to Google that things like that are so rare.

      --
      0*0
      00*
      ***
    4. Re:google is my dictionary by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      I don't get a 'did you mean' response for that, just the web pages.

      I've no idea how the underlying algorithm works though.

    5. Re:google is my dictionary by Hyram+Graff · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. For me when I search http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=sillema+sille ma+nika+su&btnG=Google+Search/ it suggests changing the 'a' at the end of the first two words to an 's'. Maybe they've fixed it and I've got a stale page in my cache.

      --
      0*0
      00*
      ***
    6. Re:google is my dictionary by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      Perhaps. Clicking on your link still produces no 'did you mean' entry.

      Odd that.

    7. Re:google is my dictionary by dasheiff · · Score: 1

      In the google search bar,

      define: [word]

      Google is the Oracle.

    8. Re:google is my dictionary by vistic · · Score: 1

      If you use it like that, then Google is your spellchecker, not your dictionary.

  18. OED first by sane? · · Score: 2, Insightful
    But as the article mentions, the OED was updated to include many of these terms earlier - and inclusion in the OED is much more the definition of if a word has arrived than Merriam-Webster.

    Why both reporting the also ran?

  19. Hey, grammar nazi by Jaxoreth · · Score: 1
    "my teacher sent me to the principles office for texting during class."
    It's "principal's office". :-)

    Maybe I'm wrong, I'm a better ones-and-zeros-smith than a wrodsmith.
    *smirk*

    --
    In general, it is safe and legal to kill your children. -- POSIX Programmer's Guide
  20. Company name in dictionnary? by Spez · · Score: 1

    "With technology buzzwords becoming so commonly used in daily life, Webster and Oxford have both begun to include some new terms in their latest editions. Some of their newest additions include: adware, biodiesel, codec, digicam, google (as a verb), geocaching, hacktivism, mash-up, rewriteable, ringtone, spyware, and texting."

    Do you know many company name that became an official word in the dictionnary? Is Kleenex even one? I'm pretty impressed with what Google has accomplished

    --
    I wouldn't mind you in my head, if you weren't so clearly mad -Lews Therin Telamon
    1. Re:Company name in dictionnary? by Admiral+Justin · · Score: 1

      Company... yes... software product... yes... excessive use of ellipses... yes...

      Lots of people photoshop things when they edit them, regardless of if they are using adobe products.

      Also, if you read the article *gasp* you'll see the title: "Google joins Xerox as a verb."

      --
      You will be baked, and there will be cake.
    2. Re:Company name in dictionnary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geocaching is also a website. Albeit a far less known website than Google.

  21. OMG!!!!1111eleven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I can grok teh dictionary

  22. From the please-not-web2.0 dept by Frightening · · Score: 1

    I will boycott, hate, and spend the rest of my life lobbying against any dictionary that incorporates that horrifically stupid phrase into its vocab. This is slashdot, dammit. We have to do something.

  23. Mash-up by ScottyH · · Score: 2, Informative

    Everytime I read this word I feel pissed off. I can't explain it...except for saying that it just seems so stupid.

    1. Re:Mash-up by dbcad7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have similary unexplainable feelings about the phrase "my bad".

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    2. Re:Mash-up by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

      I'm inclined to agree.. even though I really enjoy mashups (as in music) and make my own (OMG PLUG!) I really wish a different name for them had caught on. In the UK they tend to call them "bootlegs," but I find that too general a term. The real, Wikipedia-approved (*snicker*) term for the genre is "Bastard Pop," which, although quite descriptive, is even more cringeworthy.

  24. Why? by the+phantom · · Score: 1

    Why, oh why, is this a big deal? Dictionaries are not, by and large, prescriptive. They are not holy tomes to be referenced for authoritative knowledge on how language should be. Rather, they are collections of words, as they are used by people. When the use of a word changes, the dictionary will change to reflect that (rather than insist that people continue to use the old usage). When people start using new words, or stop using old words, the dictionary will change. Why is it that there is such a fuss over words being included in the dictionary? Why do people assume that inclusion gives these words some kind of holy stamp of approval? Some kind of validity? By the time a word makes it into the dictionary, it is already in the lexicon, and has been for a while. Why is it that dictionary inclusion gives these words some kind of super-validity? Why do we care?

    1. Re:Why? by EggyToast · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Now the word is officially "archived." Without some historical archive on words and the uses of words, the idea of language changing over time could be easily overlooked by some in the future. Think about young kids whose only use for "gay" is for homosexuality and "bad." Without some archive that actually defines the word, the idea that at one point it meant "happy" could be forgotten. Looking back at historical text from the 30s and 40s, without that understanding one would end up quite confused.

      Besides that, dictionaries do have some authority that people put trust in. As you mention, it's already colloquially used, but that only helps for people in those circles. Now that there's a trusted resource, people outside of those lexical circles can peer inside and figure out what those words mean, without getting a run around online. A parent hearing their kid use these words may feel stupid asking the kid what those words meant (and wouldn't likely get a straight answer), but now, rather than trying to do searches online (since their lack of understanding means they likely don't get a lot of internet exposure), they have a trusted resource they can refer to.

      You may not care since you see these words all the time, but it's like any archiving; it's there for people who need it.

    2. Re:Why? by mcguiver · · Score: 1

      The why really is a big deal. There are so many 'buzzwords' that people use in normal conversation that are just annoying to have to listen too. Now that they are in the dictionary those so inclined to use them can do so without reservation. I will admit that some of the words did need to be added, especially the new words that develop to describe new technologies. But there are some words that are used frequently that just shouldn't be added to the dictionary. I have a brother-in-law who loves to say aint and we would always correct him because "aint aint a word". But then they just had to go and add it to the dictionary...

    3. Re:Why? by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

      When you're playing scrabble, and you're holding B,I,O, and someone else just played DIESEL, and the B could go down on a triple word score, you won't be asking why it's a big deal.

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    4. Re:Why? by the+phantom · · Score: 1

      1) Ain't (with an apostrophe) has been in the dictionary longer than you have been alive. I have seen it in some very early editions of the OED. "They" didn't "just add it."

      2) The arguements that everyone is making seem to make it clear that they don't really understand how dictionaries are created. Being in the dictionary only gives it status because a small group of people insists that there is a right way to conduct English conversation, and a wrong way. These people insist that the dictionary is some kind of holy book of language, that defines the way in which people [i]should[/i] speak and write. In fact, dictionaries are compilations of language as it is spoken and written. The inclusion of a word in a dictionary is not a holy blessing that allows people to use the word, and that gives the word legitimacy. It is an indication that a word is widely used. Thus, again, I ask: why is this a big deal? New words are created in the English language every year. Other words are abandoned. This is how language changes. [i]Of course[/i] dictionaries are going to change. Why is it a big deal? Why is it news?

      A parallel example: every year or two (or three or four, or whatever), any given publisher that produces an introductory chemistry text will put out a new edition. This new edition will contain some new information. Is it a big deal that the information is included? Is it news worthy? Does it give that information legitimacy that it did not have before? In short, no. New information in a chem text will already have been peer reviewed in the journals, and have existed in the field for quite a while. The same is true of words that are added to the dictionary -- by the time they are added, they are already part of the language. The dictionary is just there to help you learn how they are used, and how you should spell them in formal writing.

    5. Re:Why? by the+phantom · · Score: 1

      That, sir, is the first good argument that I have seen.

    6. Re:Why? by the+phantom · · Score: 1

      Reread what I wrote, then read my responses to other replies in this thread. I am not arguing that dictionaries should not change, or that the archival of the language is not important. I am arguing that the changes to the dictionary are more or less trivial, and that the specific changes are not news. Words go in, words go out. That is how dictionaries have functioned since their creation. Yet, every year, when the new editions are published, people single out a few words that are important to them, and comment on how dictionaries are losing their authority because "yadda-yadda-yadda" has been included; or how they are being caught up in tech fads because "buzzwords" are included (buzzword, by the way, is a buzzword that was first included in many dictionaries rather recently). As to words now being available for people outside of the particular cliques that use them, that is the point of a dictionary. That dictionaries are updated, and kept current, [i]is[/i] important. Not news, really, as that is what dictionaries are designed to do, but important, none the less. What specific words are included and are not included is, in general, not that important.

  25. A missing verb by DaveInAustin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Slashdotted: our site crashed after we were slashdotted. Come on, "Mouse Potato" made it, but not slashdotted? Who has ever used the words "mouse potato"?

    --
    --- http://davidnehme.blogspot.com
    1. Re:A missing verb by ems2004 · · Score: 1

      Let us slashdot webster and oxford sites so that they know what slashdotting means.

      --
      ..... best things in life are not so free..........
  26. Merriam-Webster is stuck in the 19th century by 3dWarlord · · Score: 2, Informative

    They are the only dictionary that refuses to recognize "gullible" as a word.

    1. Re:Merriam-Webster is stuck in the 19th century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't have thought this joke could work online; but there you are, modded as informative....

      Kudos!

  27. Is that what the kids are calling it these days? by netsavior · · Score: 4, Funny

    We were Texting it up all night, first I googled her codec, then I showed her my biosteel... just be sure to uninstall before you pixelate otherwise you will have a little nanobot to worry about. This method is sooo much better than mere self-storage. Just give her the ole chip and PIN that's what I always say. I look forward to our next mash-up


    I think I just accidentally cybered slashdot. crap. it all happened so fast. I just hope whatever I got is screenable

  28. Web 20 by lys1123 · · Score: 1

           
    from the don't-forget-web20 dept.

    What the hell is web-twenty? Is that the time of day when all the pot heads get off their asses and sit at their iMacs and work on their crappy Phish tribute GeoCities site with flying toasters and images of Jerry Garcia


    Don't you remember? O'Reilly owns the trademark for Web 2.0. So from now on we refer to it as Web 20, GOT IT? Web 20.

    Willie: "Shinning, Lad. You want to be sued!"
    Bart: "Right, the Shinning"
    1. Re:Web 20 by geoffspear · · Score: 2, Funny

      I still prefer the good old days of Web 19.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  29. slashdotted? by digitaldc · · Score: 1

    http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie =UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-09,GGLD:en&q=define%3A+S lashdotted

    At least google and wikipedia has a definition for it, Webster's does not.
    Time for Webster's to join the 21st century.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  30. Who thanks you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Number 1 rule of grammar nazism - don't screw up your closing sentence.

  31. Oooops! by conlaw · · Score: 1

    From the article: "Defining google as a verb and as using the Google search engine is appropriate," a representative for Google told CNET News.com in an e-mail." That representative should check with Google's legal department - encouraging the use of a trademarked name is a really good way to lose the trademark. That's why Xerox spent megabucks on a campaign to make sure that people used "photocopying" as the verb for making a copy on a Xerox photocopier.

    1. Re:Oooops! by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      I don't think Xerox would be in any trouble, trademarkwise, if they accepted the usage of "xerox" as a verb to mean "to copy on a Xerox photocopier." The issue arises if they don't defend against the use of "xerox" as a noun to describe any photocopier and the use of "xerox" as a verb meaning to photocopy on a photocopier, including one not produced by Xerox.

      Google's representative specifically says that the use of "to google" meaning "to use the Google search engine" is appropriate. You can bet that they'd have a problem if people started saying they were going to "google that on MSN."

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  32. Not the first time by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 3, Informative

    Other technical words have become common in English.

    Lightbulb
    Radio
    Radar
    Sonar
    Sonic
    Radiation
    Electromagnetic
    Radiator
    Dishwasher
    Dryer
    Microwave
    Television
    Telephone
    Software
    Spreadsheet
    Photoshop (as verb)
    Internet
    Modem

    Because brand names that describe a unique concept tend to become generic words, that is why we see Google used as a verb. Common trademarks used as generic words: Aspirin, Kleenex, BandAid, etc. Therefore, you can expect to see new words like...

    TiVo

    --
    The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
    1. Re:Not the first time by Penguin+Programmer · · Score: 1
      Common trademarks used as generic words: Aspirin ...


      If I'm not mistaken, Aspirin is no longer a trademark in the US. Bayer failed to protect it properly and it fell into the public domain. Hence all the new Bayer ads that don't use the word Aspirin, referring to the product as "Bayer" in hopes that it will become the new name for Aspirin.

      Here in Canada, however, it's still a trademark and the ads still say Aspirin.
  33. Why by AlpineR · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1) It's not really that big of a deal. This is a summertime Friday on Slashdot. There is a small possibility that there will be an article posted here with less than Earth-shattering consequences.

    2) When a word appears in the dictionary, it's usage and spelling are defensible. You should no longer be considered illiterate if you write "adware" in a school report or magazine article. And the next edition of your word processor should stop trying to correct "adware" to "aware".

    3) As you say, the dictionary is a record of how people use words. It has sociological value. I didn't realize that anyone was actually using the terms "cybrarian" or "mouse potato". Apparently somebody is.

    1. Re:Why by the+phantom · · Score: 1
      1) It's not really that big of a deal. This is a summertime Friday on Slashdot. There is a small possibility that there will be an article posted here with less than Earth-shattering consequences.
      Indeed, slow news day. The fact remains that slashdot is not the only orgainzation that makes a big deal out of words being added to various dictionaries.

      2) When a word appears in the dictionary, it's usage and spelling are defensible. You should no longer be considered illiterate if you write "adware" in a school report or magazine article. And the next edition of your word processor should stop trying to correct "adware" to "aware".
      How do you mean "defensible?" Why would someone be considered illiterate for using a word that is not in a dictionary? A word does not make it into any dictionary on a whim -- it is included because it is widely used. In the case of most dictionaries, this means that it is used in writing. By the time a word is considered for inclusion, it has already appeared in many school reports and magazine articles. As for autocorrection, or spell checking, or whatever, that is what custom dictionaries are for. Even without those, there are a lot of words that my word processor recognizes that are not in an "official" English dictionary (such as surnames, Christian names, places names, certain kinds of slang (much slang is ultimately included in the most dictionaries), certain foreign words that are commonly used in English, &c.). I am not claiming that the inclusion of words in dictionaries is not important; only that it is silly to make a big deal out of which words are included, and to have a slashdot story [i]every single year[/i] when the new editions come out with some new words.
      3) As you say, the dictionary is a record of how people use words. It has sociological value. I didn't realize that anyone was actually using the terms "cybrarian" or "mouse potato". Apparently somebody is.
      Again, the fact that dictionaries stay current is a "Good Thing(TM)" I am not arguing that. That dictionaries are updated is important. However, the content of those updates is hardly newsworthy. In response to another reply below, I used the example of a chemistry book being updated -- by the time the updates are made, the content of those updates is already old news, and not that important. If you are really interested in changes in chemestry, you don't read an intro level text -- you read the academic journals. In much the same way, if you are interested in the language vis a vis sociology, you don't read the dictionary -- you read the anthropological, linguistic, and sociological journals that discuss language. That is where the discoveries and innovations are described.
  34. Euro English by krowland · · Score: 1

    European variation on the Mark Twain text:
    he Conversion to Euro English...

    With the implementation of the Eurodollar underway in Europe these last few years, the European Union is trying to find new ways to standardize practices in Europe.

    The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the EU rather than German which was the other possibility.

    Conversion to European English
    As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a five year phase-in plan that would be known as "Euro-English".

    In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of the "k". This should klear up konfusion and keyboards kan have 1 less letter.

    Conversion to European English
    There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f". This will make words like "fotograf" 20% shorter.

    In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be ekspekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkorage the removal of double letters, which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of the silent "e"s in the language is disgraseful, and they should go away.

    Conversion to European English
    By the fourth year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v". During ze fifz year, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters.

    After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi to understand ech ozer. Ze drem vil finali kum tru! And zen world!

    1. Re:Euro English by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      It's more likely that English and German will converge into some kind of übersprache by the steady infusion of Anglicisms into German. For example

      Autos / Möbel / usw. clever kaufen - 'clever' apparently being the new German word for wise or canny, but applied only to shopping.

      It's your Heimspiel. - McDonald's promotional slogan for the World Cup.

      Handy - a 'handy' is a mobile phone. Of course.

      A Beamer is a projector. I suppose it's equally strange that a Beemer is a BWM in some places.

      According to Wikipedia a Smoking is a dinner suit or tuxedo. They have a list of other Scheinanglizismen, or words which supposedly come from English but in fact are German inventions.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  35. slashdot by Jaxoreth · · Score: 2, Funny

    slashdot, v. [Error loading definition: No response from server]

    --
    In general, it is safe and legal to kill your children. -- POSIX Programmer's Guide
  36. "Appropriate" by Zephyros · · Score: 1
    FTFA, emphasis mine:
    "Defining google as a verb and as using the Google search engine is appropriate," a representative for Google told CNET News.com in an e-mail.

    Makes perfect sense to me. I'm no trademark lawyer (or a lawyer of any kind, for that matter, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night...), but as long as the new verb refers solely to using Google, does it dilute their trademark? I guess the concern is going to be whether or not the word use starts creeping and begins to mean using any search engine. Personally, I prefer the way Oxford handled it, retaining the capitalization. Still, Google faces an uphill battle from here on out to retain their trademark...

    1. Re:"Appropriate" by TheCoders · · Score: 1

      Fine, you go Google. I'm gonna go Ask Jeeves.
      Oh, wait, can we use "Ask" as a verb?

    2. Re:"Appropriate" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but you didn't "Holiday Inn Express" your girlfriend last night.
      This noun turning into verb stuff is nonsense.

  37. since google is now an 'official' verb by MECC · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since google is now declared a verb, will that weaken the value of the word 'google' as a trademark? If I register 'googlearound.com' as a domain (not that I would do something so stupid, since godaddy, the Internet's official domain slut, already has), would it be harder for google to sue me?

    just wondering

    --
    "We are all geniuses when we dream"
    - E.M. Cioran
  38. Codec? It's about time! by jomegat · · Score: 1
    They're just now adding the word "codec" to the dictionary? I don't know when it was introduced into the vernacular, but I first heard it in the early 80's. I'm sure it goes back a lot farther than that.

    Maybe they'll add "modem" next.

    --

    In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they're not.

  39. FAQ by jefu · · Score: 1

    How about FAQ?

    Scrabble needs "faq".

    1. Re:FAQ by shish · · Score: 1
      Scrabble needs "faq".

      And jozxyqk. You'd be surprised how often that combination of letters comes up...

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    2. Re:FAQ by MarkByers · · Score: 1

      Nah, but faqir works.

      There are others too: http://www.hasbro.com/scrabble/pl/page.QwithoutU/d n/home.cfm

      --
      I'll probably be modded down for this...
  40. Umm... by kripkenstein · · Score: 1

    This is all good and well, but what about the poor words that had to be cut to make room for the newbies?

    The humanity.

  41. It's web two point oh by hellfire · · Score: 1

    As in, don't forget to add Web 2.0 as a new dictionary term.

    Lame joke, but that's what it is.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  42. so if to google... by owlnation · · Score: 1

    ..is a verb. Then, just for fun, and not intending to troll particularly, would anyone care to offer definitions for similar verbs for "to eBay" and "to MySpace"?

    1. Re:so if to google... by Zephyros · · Score: 1

      MySpace: (1) (v) To possess, maintain, or update a personal information website on MySpace. (2) (v) To browse personal information websites on MySpace. (3) (n) A personal information website hosted on MySpace which contains embedded multimedia, clashing colors, blinking lights, broken layouts, poor grammar, and photographs of users in compromising or illegal situations. Syn. Geocities (n), defunct.

  43. So begins the official decline... by crossmr · · Score: 1

    Educators were already complaining that students couldn't even write properly in class as they were often falling back on internet short hand in reports. It used to take an extremely long time for buzz words to get into dictionaries, they had to have a long history of usage. Now, it seems a couple of years of sketchy usage and you're good enough for Websters. I remember that when there was a story about them adding Bootylicious to the dictionary, which people get beaten for using now good choice on that, they were also adding a couple of slang words from like the 50s or something. Took them 50 years to earn a spot in websters, and bootylicious was getting in after a year or so.
    Yeah..

  44. Don't agree.. by helfom · · Score: 1

    I don't think some should be in there...

    Google as a verb (or noun for that matter) is too specific. Its more of a fad than anything. What happens in ten years when another great search engine, say "klink", shows up and we all start saying "did you klink it?"

    And "mouse potato"? "Computer/Internet junkie" maybe, but mouse potato is pretty lame...

    It also seems to me that a "wave pool" should be something in the encyclopedia and not the dictionary. Same with "avian influenza".

    "cybrary" and "cybrarian"? Did they gleen that from a sci-fi novel?

  45. Nice trademark defending, Google by E++99 · · Score: 1
    google (as a verb)
    This means that Google, Inc. has officially lost any claim to restrict the use of its "google" trademark. Which means that I could legally create my own search engine called SuperGoogle.com if I wanted. I guess they figured it would have undermined their corporate image to send out cease and desist letters to publications using their trademark as a verb.
  46. They passed over 'prepend' *again* by Krokus · · Score: 1

    One day, this convenient little word will get the promotion from 'jargon' to the big time. You just wait!

    1. Re:They passed over 'prepend' *again* by jZnat · · Score: 1

      Wait, you mean that prepend isn't a word?

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
  47. Biodiesel by hlh_nospam · · Score: 1

    I'm glad to see this one. I hope that it is a sign of increasing popularity of this alternative fuel. Biodiesel has actually been around for some time now. For about $4K, you can buy a home biodiesel plant that is capable of producing 40 gallons a week of the stuff, with about 2 hours of effort, 50 cents/gallon worth of chemicals, plus whatever you have to pay for vegetable oil (waste vegetable oil can still be obtained for free, but I expect that will change as it gets more popular). And unlike ethanol, electric, or hydrogen, biodiesel can be used right now without the need for inventing entirely new technologies.

  48. hacktivism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hacktivism: See criminal

    1. Re:hacktivism by AlgorithMan · · Score: 1

      wrong

      hacktivism: See Cyber-Terrorist

      ;)

      --
      The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
  49. Hooray for Scrabble Players!! by Goblez · · Score: 1
    Now I can use all the words I know in Scrabble!!!

    (and trust me, I've been losing turns for a while finding out that half of what I say doesn't count)

    --
    - Kal`Goblez
  50. OMG ROFL LOLLERCAUST!!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that joke was so horrible and overplayed that it just killed millions of Europeans jews. Please, think of the children before you post.

  51. Just doesn't seem practical. by Worthless_Comments · · Score: 1

    This concept, when looked from an actual practical standpoint, seems a bit useless to me. Chances are if you're going to talk about Googling(Now there's a question; when used as a verb, are you supposed to capatalize it?) something, chances are you're not going to be getting out your Webster paper dictionary to look up one of these new words. Of course, I suppose it'll be nice for any elemetary school student doing a report on 'technology'.

  52. Those aren't buzzwords by Bastian · · Score: 1

    Those are words that are used in a particular field (computers, in this case) that are created to deal with new concepts that are introduced in that field. In other words, they're just jargon.

    A buzzword is a word that generates 'buzz', i.e., it's getting a lot of attention and seems to pop up everywhere, even in places where it doesn't make sense. Sometimes even the word doesn't make sense, or becomes so popular that its meaning becomes fuzzy as people who never solidly grasped its original meaning begin to use it regularly. Multi-threaded was a buzzword in the late 90s, multimedia is starting to wane but it's been a buzzword for a long time. Lessee, some others I can think of are framework, leverage, cyberspace, online, legacy, foo-killer, and collaborative.

  53. X vs. Y by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    I always liked that kinda construction, and it goes back to days of oldskool hip hop.

    So you take that components of your mash-ups and title it, you know:
    Mario vs. London Philharmonic or whatever you've got going on in your track.
    Unfortunately saying: "I like to compose Vs. (versus)" sounds kinda like verses or "I like to write lyrics".

    I think if you avoid certain verbs before "versus" (drop, write, compose), and stick to more descriptive ones (track, mix, splice).

    Shit, I like that last one.
    "I really enjoy splicin' versus."

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  54. Already in MacOS X's disctionary by Smurf · · Score: 1

    Interesting... all those words are included in the dictionary that has been included with Tiger since it was launched almost a year ago (New Oxford American Dictionary, 2nd Edition). The only one missing is rewriteable, which is spelled rewritable in that dictionary. And, unlike the Oxford English Dictionary mentioned in the article, the verb google appears both capitalized and not capitalized.

    Frankly this looks like rather old news...