Thats not a word, its not in the dictionary

[Chance1234]

Overheard the phrase in the subject last night and have heard it many times before, which im sure we all have,

In this case, it was the word "init"

Thinking about it though, is the person saying "Thats not a word, its not in the dictionary" just as bad as the person who said init ?



Chance,

F, G + Its official, its even on a organisation chart et all

 

[p5wizard]

Chance, I'm wondering: where's y'r 'postrophe key gone to? ;-)

p5

 

[KenCunningham]

Do you mean init as in init 0 pr innit as in Staines Massive innit?

I want to be good, is that not enough?

 

[columb]

Back with Chance1234's point, we're into 'define a word' teritory. I'm sure all of the Staines Massive would define 'innit' as a word, well, they would if they could articulate that clearly, but the compilers of the OED might disagree. I've no access to the OED so I can't check.

The problem is that it's not binary. As a new word moves from isolated slang to common acceptance there's no clear point where it becomes a 'word' in the sense that the speaker meant. Maybe dictionary inclusion is as good a marker as any although it seems a trifle on the strict side for my liking.

Ceci n'est pas une signature
Columb Healy

 

[LizSara]

Isn't it not a word because it's a concatenation (sp?) of is not and it?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Whoever battles with monsters had better see that it does not turn him into a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. ~ Nietzsche"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[ESquared]

A dictionary is a history book.

It only prescribes how one must speak/spell if one subscribes to the idea that one is only allowed to use historically documented words. Or to put it another way, the idea that one should not use new words until some dictionary researcher guy has seen it in print enough times with a clear enough definition that he records it in his dictionary and has time to publish it.

With that understanding, it becomes hard to claim that something isn't a word just because it isn't in the dictionary. Someone had to use it for some period of time before it was in the dictionary at all. And use it in print. So was the word NOT a word until the day of publication and THEN it became a word?

And what is the punishment for using words that aren't in the dictionary? Is there some law?

The point is about one's listeners and whether they understand your meaning. It's a word IF the speaker and the people listening know the discrete meaning of it.

Even slang terms are in the dictionary. Just because something has been historically verified by going in doesn't mean it is considered proper.

"ain't" IS in the dictionary. I still don't use it unless specifically for comedy or some effect.

So better than "that's not a word because it's not in the dictionary" is "that is nonstandard and most commonly used by the uneducated."

There is also the matter of the domain to which the sentence applies. Something may be nonstandard or considered uneducated in one region but not in another.

So finally we have:

"That word, at least in <X or Y or Z> area is nonstandard and most commonly used by the uneducated."

Although nonstandard and uneducated don't necessarily have to go together.

 

[SantaMufasa]

That word...is nonstandard and most commonly used by the uneducated.

The gigantic exception to such a rule of thumb is the Lexicon of IT Intelligentsia.


Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]

 

[tcsbiz]

Is "blog" a word? And, when did it become a word? Blogs began circa 2001. The word is a morpheme of weblog which is a concatenation of web and log.

Individually, those words can have different meanings. Web can be a spider web or a web of deceit. Log can mean a written journal or fire fuel.

They mean only one thing when concatenated into weblog.

I think weblog and blog became words when they came into wide use regardless if they are in a dictionary.

If a dictionary is the standard, which one would we use?

 

[AnotherHiggins]

This American assumed that "innit" was just "Isn't it" pronounced poorly, quickly and/or with a strong accent.

And if "innit" is the phrase "isn't it", it isn't a word, but not because it isn't in the dictionary but because it is two words, each of which is in the dictionary, innit?

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ 181-2886 before posting.

 

[GwydionM]

I had trouble once with 'Traunch'. The standard dictionaries deny it exists, yet it is used widely in legal and financial circles.

------------------------------
An old man who lives in the UK

 

[SantaMufasa]

Perhaps Merriam-Webster and Oxford need a traunch to underwrite the cost of including that definition in their next editions. <grin>

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]

 

[ESquared]

The gigantic exception to such a rule of thumb is the Lexicon of IT Intelligentsia.

Would you explain, please?

 

[Austile]

If we assume that a word is NOT a word until it gets put into print into a dictionary, what happens when a word is no longer printed in a dictionary? Are we wrong when we use that word now?

I think ESquared hit the nail on the head with "The point is about one's listeners and whether they understand your meaning. It's a word IF the speaker and the people listening know the discrete meaning of it."



"Numbers aren't really my forty"
Be Well.

 

[drlex]

Chance,
Why describe them both as 'bad'? The speaker relies on responses (verbal/non-verbal) from his/her audience as to whether he/she is being understood. As to whether the words in the oration can be found in a a dictionary must surely be secondary considerations at best. As Esquared has already written, the reference books are reactive and require new words to have some degree of spread and permanence before their inclusion.
I'd consider the objector to be a pedant, unless the speaker was making his/her acceptance speech for his/her 'orator of the year' prize.

soi la, soi carré

 

[ESquared]

A good example is the word geas. I see it in fantasy books all the time. 15 years ago I was reading this word on a regular enough basis that I knew what it was and assumed it was a mainstream word. A few years back, to my surprise, I couldn't find it in ANY online dictionary. I even wrote to merriam-webster and was told they hadn't found enough sources of it in print and would appreciate to be informed of any.

There are still very few references to it online. But to anyone familiar with the fantasy genre, it is a known and useful word.

 

[strongm]

>hadn't found enough sources of it in print and would appreciate to be informed of any

Presumably because it is actually a Gaelic word (with fractionally different spellings in Scottich Gaelic from Irish Gaelic) rather than an English word.

 

[AnotherHiggins]

I agree about language being an ever-evolving thing. But I really think the discussion is purely academic as, in this particular case, you aren't searching for a word in a dictionary but a phrase, which you wouldn't expect to find in a dictionary.

Challenging someone that "innit" isn't a word is like saying that "wanna" isn't a word. Of course they aren't words, they're phrases. In the first case, it is someone poorly enunciating "isn't it" and in the second case it is someone poorly enunciating "want to".


drlex - does hearing "irregardless" bother you? The speaker's audience probably understands what he means, but it is still grating to many, many people who prefer "real" words like regardless and irrespective.

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ 181-2886 before posting.

 

[ESquared]

it is actually a Gaelic word ... rather than an English word

Yes it goes right well with deiseal/deosil and widdershins! But all the books I was reading were, I assure you, English.

 

[Welshbird]

Higgins - that REALLY greats on me.

I have to agree that language is primarily about being understood but it is also, or at least should be, pretty.

"irregardless" really greats on me, as does replied that make no sense.
Conversation I had with a colleague the other day:

[me] I saw a shirt at lunch time that would really suit you!
[him] Is it?

Eh? Is it me? Am I a TOG?



Fee

The question should be [red]Is it worth trying to do?[/red] not [blue] Can it be done?[/blue]

 

[columb]

Of course they aren't words, they're phrases

Strictly speaking, using that definition, then 'goodbye' isn't a word because, unless I've been missinformed, it's a contraction of 'God be with you'. I have a feeling you would have a hard time getting it accepted that goodbye isn't a word. We're back to the question of 'where does common (mis)usage become the accepted norm?'

Ceci n'est pas une signature
Columb Healy