OMG! Is the purity of English language getting diluted thanks to the seeping internet terminologies? Well, there certainly is a school of thought where purists view the inclusion of the slang internet interjections in the linguistic inventory as overwhelming the influence of internet on our lives and computer lingo.
In its 3rd edition, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) had inducted 2000 new words in the official lexicon such as tweet-up, de-friend, chillax and paywall amongst others, looking at the way the contemporary world of internet, short social media jargons and mobile text messaging has changed the way the lexical units have been used by the newer generation.
This time around a group of new additions in the OED are once again centered on noteworthy electronic communications and internet chat initialisms such as:
- LOL – laughing out loud
- TMI – too much information
- IMHO – in my humble opinion
- OMG – Oh my God
- FYI – for your information, and
- BFF – be friend forever
The OED defines LOL as an interjection used “originally and chiefly in the language of electronic communications: ‘ha ha!’; used to draw attention to a joke or humorous statement, or to express amusement.”
Initialisms like LOL and OMG are part of online lingo since a long time, with widespread popularity among the youngsters who are addicted to internet, especially online chatting.
On the flip side, the anti-LOL communities on the Facebook poses the argument against the official induction of internet slang in the ‘Bible of Lexicons,’ saying that though LOL means ‘laughing out loud’, it is not always that the slang resembles a person’s act of burst into laughter and, thus, conveying a wrong and deceptive feeling.
Lastly, the online edition of OED has also included the very first graphical entry in the history of the old fat dictionary – the ‘heart’ <3. Readers looking for the word ‘heart’ will find the symbol listed as a verb meaning ‘to love’.
Do you second the entry of internet lingo in the OED?
It just signifies how fast the time is changing..
Nice article.
But when I read that some purists are writhing in pain at the “dilution” of the language, I was surprised.
First of all, I would like to know what is pure English? Is it as these purists of 20th century know? English is the youngest of all teh European languages which got a recognition as a language only 600 years back. Before that it is a mix of French, Spanish and other languages. It is continuously evolving.
These purists will be surprised to know that if Shakesphere comes back to life now, he will writh in pain to know how these purists are talking.
So what I feel is that some organization like this Oxford should maintain English language of different periods.
They should research how ancient english is spoken and compile it as English 1.0.
Then they should compile an English of considerable variation and name it English 2.0. So on so forth. In this way the present English will be named English n.0.
Anyone interested in knowing a particular english will refer to that language only with out feeling pain at the dilution of English 100.0 from English 99.0.
However I too feel that “initialisms” are harmful to the very existence of the language. They are altogether another dimention.
Just my two paisa :)