LOL and OMG added to Oxford Dictionary

Good posts guys.

I've lost faith in humanity.
 
When you're LOL-ing in real life, apparently your e-shorthand helps you connote that you are using an "informal, gossipy mode of expression" or even going so far as to "parody the level of unreflective enthusiasm or overstatement that can sometimes appear in online discourse, while at the same time marking oneself as an 'insider' au fait with the forms of expression associated with the latest technology."
Click to expand...

Just the parody, thank you.
And the term is lolling or lawling. :P
 
Last edited:
I heard about this on the radio driving home today. It made me lol! (See what I did thur? *wiggles eyebrows*)

Anyways, on top of LOL and OMG, there's also ROFL, LMAO and several other abbreviations.

What has our stolen language of English become?

All I know is when my college professor asks me to write a paper, I'm using lol in it a LOT. And when he/she yells at me, I will be like, "IT'S IN THE DICTIONARY, LOOK IT UP!"
 
Incoming a bunch of kids in highschool using it in their papers. MLA going to have to release a new handbook to ban all of them :p
 
Cut Chem!st said:
Incoming a bunch of kids in highschool using it in their papers. MLA going to have to release a new handbook to ban all of them :p
Click to expand...

amen to that 2nd sentence. that kinda language is in no way appropriate for college. you might get away w/ it in high school due to your youth, but in college, they dont play round.
 
Does anyone remember Idiocrasy with Luke Wilson and Maya Rudolph? Yeaaaaaaaaah.

Personally, I think it's kind of neat because I've been using "lawl" in my everyday speech since 10th grade. But I used it more as a silly thing than I did seriously. Now, it just doesn't even matter. I even write "Lol" when I am writing in my journal. Loser ftw!
 
Listen now, languages change, and just because a word shortens or makes a phrase easier to say doesn't mean its a bad thing. If having vast and complicated ways of saying certain things is what you feel is "intelligent", by that logic china should have kept the 20+ dialects it had after the Waring States period rather than creating Cantonese.
 
Rukus. said:
Listen now, languages change, and just because a word shortens or makes a phrase easier to say doesn't mean its a bad thing. If having vast and complicated ways of saying certain things is what you feel is "intelligent", by that logic china should have kept the 20+ dialects it had after the Waring States period rather than creating Cantonese.
Click to expand...

I agree. The English language is a perpetual evolution of words, accents and dialects. I think as long as we don't start ONLY communicating in Text-speech, then we're fine.

Besides, I would be sad if Antidisestablishmentarianism went to waste anyway. Lololol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top