(no subject)
In other news...
The good people at Webster's have chosen their "Word Of The Year."
Reuters has an article about it, and, of course, you can see the official announcement over at m-w.com.
So what is the word?
W00t!
No, really. It's "w00t." Which they have correctly spelled with two zeroes.
What can I say?
Uhm... "W00t!"?
The good people at Webster's have chosen their "Word Of The Year."
Reuters has an article about it, and, of course, you can see the official announcement over at m-w.com.
So what is the word?
W00t!
No, really. It's "w00t." Which they have correctly spelled with two zeroes.
What can I say?
Uhm... "W00t!"?
no subject
Of course, now "squick", "squee" and "glomp" are feeling discriminated against. Especially since they comprise entirely of the alphabet.
*pets Webster*
no subject
no subject
no subject
*blink*
*clears throat* well then.
it is a useful word tho, so i guess i cant complain too much.
no subject
"People look for self-evident numeral-letter substitutions: 0 for O; 3 for E; 7 for T; and 4 for A," he said. "This is simply a different and more efficient way of representing the alphabetical character."
...I agree that using the numbers is a "different way" of representing the alphabetical characters. Sure. But I have to argue: It is not a "more efficient way" to represent the alphabetical characters. The MOST EFFICIENT WAY would be to use THE ACTUAL ALPHABET to represent alphabetical characters.
Am I right, here?
no subject
On the other hand, l8r is more efficient because the 8 substitutes for three whole letters.
no subject
Are there any OTHER words in the dictionary that are spelled with numbers in this fashion???
no subject
But w00t isn't actually in the dictionary. It's in the "open dictionary" which is kind of a wiki-ish thing. But it isn't an official word that you'd find in the regular dictionary. Though they say that having won the Word Of The Year poll (they narrowed it down to 20, and then had users vote), it's got a better chance for inclusion next year. We'll see.
So... no. No words in the dictionary spelled with numbers. Yet.
As for rediculousness... that's what you get when you leave the decision up to internet voters.
no subject
I did know its origin. What I didn't know is that it wasn't an actual, standard dictionary. The thought of a standard dictionary containing words spelled with numbers... THAT was the ridiculousness.
The fact that that "word" would win a poll, ESPECIALLY an online one, wasn't surprising at all. :)
Hey, depending on other entries, I might have voted for it myself. ;)
no subject
The word you've selected hasn't found its way into a regular Merriam-Webster dictionary yet—but its inclusion in our online Open Dictionary, along with the top honors it's now been awarded—might just improve its chances.
(No idea why they used dashes there, especially the second one. I guess they're concerned with individual words rather than full sentences and proper punctuation. ;) )
You can also see the rest of the top ten on that page. Coming in second was Facebook, as a verb.