TW
0

by MONITOR
IT'S encouraging evidence of the enduring literacy of the British nation that there should be three long-established dictionaries still in competition with each other. Chambers, Collins and the Oxford English dictionaries each have their adherents whose loyalties are won by the comprehensiveness of the words listed and the clarity of their definition. Each year one of them appears with a new edition claiming to reflect the latest fashions of the English language and this week the Oxford University Press has set out to show how its new edition captures the words that are in current common usage on the street, in the pubs and clubs, and in the privacy of one's home. For instance, a “chugger” is revealed to be a person who approaches passers-by in the street asking for donations to charity. A “handy” is a mobile phone and a “pelmet” is slang for a very short skirt. “Undercrackers” are, apparently, men's underpants. “Phishing” is a noun for the “fraudulent practice of sending e mails purporting to be from reputable companies to induce individuals to reveal personal information online.” No doubt estate agents preparing powerful copy for their advertisements already know that an “infinity pool” is one of those swimming pools whose positioning gives the impression that it merges into the surrounding landscape, especially the sea. And beach dwellers must surely know that a “chillybin” is what used to be called, and is still called by the older among us, a coolbox. But when we get to “cockapoo” and “labradoodle” to identify crossbred dogs it is perhaps time to ask whether the Oxford English Dictionary is doing its job properly. Most words like these have very short lives indeed and would be better excluded from a serious publication until they have shown their staying power. But that wouldn't sell dictionaries, would it?