1
00:00:00,504 --> 00:00:02,566
I need to start by telling you a little bit

2
00:00:02,566 --> 00:00:04,555
about my social life,

3
00:00:04,555 --> 00:00:07,473
which I know may not seem relevant,

4
00:00:07,473 --> 00:00:09,220
but it is.

5
00:00:09,220 --> 00:00:11,150
When people meet me at parties

6
00:00:11,150 --> 00:00:13,342
and they find out that I'm an English professor

7
00:00:13,342 --> 00:00:15,739
who specializes in language,

8
00:00:15,739 --> 00:00:19,189
they generally have one of two reactions.

9
00:00:19,189 --> 00:00:24,378
One set of people look frightened. (Laughter)

10
00:00:24,378 --> 00:00:25,971
They often say something like,

11
00:00:25,971 --> 00:00:29,277
"Oh, I'd better be careful what I say.

12
00:00:29,277 --> 00:00:32,495
I'm sure you'll hear every mistake I make."

13
00:00:32,495 --> 00:00:36,553
And then they stop talking. (Laughter)

14
00:00:36,553 --> 00:00:38,950
And they wait for me to go away

15
00:00:38,950 --> 00:00:41,187
and talk to someone else.

16
00:00:41,187 --> 00:00:43,222
The other set of people,

17
00:00:43,222 --> 00:00:45,647
their eyes light up,

18
00:00:45,647 --> 00:00:46,878
and they say,

19
00:00:46,878 --> 00:00:51,187
"You are just the person I want to talk to."

20
00:00:51,187 --> 00:00:53,607
And then they tell me about whatever it is

21
00:00:53,607 --> 00:00:56,142
they think is going wrong with the English language.

22
00:00:56,142 --> 00:00:58,511
(Laughter)

23
00:00:58,511 --> 00:01:00,828
A couple of weeks ago, I was at a dinner party

24
00:01:00,828 --> 00:01:03,065
and the man to my right

25
00:01:03,065 --> 00:01:05,100
started telling me about all the ways

26
00:01:05,100 --> 00:01:08,381
that the internet is degrading the English language.

27
00:01:08,381 --> 00:01:11,620
He brought up Facebook, and he said,

28
00:01:11,620 --> 00:01:17,470
"To defriend? I mean, is that even a real word?"

29
00:01:17,470 --> 00:01:21,040
I want to pause on that question:

30
00:01:21,040 --> 00:01:24,826
what makes a word real?

31
00:01:24,826 --> 00:01:26,910
My dinner companion and I both know

32
00:01:26,910 --> 00:01:30,077
what the verb "defriend" means,

33
00:01:30,077 --> 00:01:32,777
so when does a new word like "defriend"

34
00:01:32,777 --> 00:01:34,858
become real?

35
00:01:34,858 --> 00:01:37,362
Who has the authority to make those kinds

36
00:01:37,362 --> 00:01:40,780
of official decisions about words anyway?

37
00:01:40,780 --> 00:01:45,075
Those are the questions I want to talk about today.

38
00:01:45,075 --> 00:01:48,375
I think most people, when they say a word isn't real,

39
00:01:48,375 --> 00:01:49,866
what they mean is, it doesn't appear

40
00:01:49,866 --> 00:01:51,864
in a standard dictionary.

41
00:01:51,864 --> 00:01:54,327
That, of course, raises a host of other questions,

42
00:01:54,327 --> 00:02:00,184
including, who writes dictionaries?

43
00:02:00,184 --> 00:02:01,048
Before I go any further,

44
00:02:01,048 --> 00:02:03,490
let me clarify my role in all of this.

45
00:02:03,490 --> 00:02:05,998
I do not write dictionaries.

46
00:02:05,998 --> 00:02:08,695
I do, however, collect new words

47
00:02:08,695 --> 00:02:11,750
much the way dictionary editors do,

48
00:02:11,750 --> 00:02:13,573
and the great thing about being a historian

49
00:02:13,573 --> 00:02:14,640
of the English language

50
00:02:14,640 --> 00:02:18,276
is that I get to call this "research."

51
00:02:18,276 --> 00:02:20,620
When I teach the history of the English language,

52
00:02:20,620 --> 00:02:23,377
I require that students teach me

53
00:02:23,377 --> 00:02:26,903
two new slang words before I will begin class.

54
00:02:26,903 --> 00:02:29,220
Over the years, I have learned

55
00:02:29,220 --> 00:02:32,454
some great new slang this way,

56
00:02:32,454 --> 00:02:36,492
including "hangry," which

57
00:02:36,492 --> 00:02:40,188
—(Applause)—

58
00:02:40,188 --> 00:02:42,535
which is when you are cranky or angry

59
00:02:42,535 --> 00:02:46,774
because you are hungry,

60
00:02:46,774 --> 00:02:51,550
and "adorkable,"

61
00:02:51,550 --> 00:02:53,257
which is when you are adorable

62
00:02:53,257 --> 00:02:56,278
in kind of a dorky way,

63
00:02:56,278 --> 00:02:59,471
clearly, terrific words that fill

64
00:02:59,471 --> 00:03:02,176
important gaps in the English language.

65
00:03:02,176 --> 00:03:06,389
(Laughter)

66
00:03:06,389 --> 00:03:09,060
But how real are they

67
00:03:09,060 --> 00:03:11,279
if we use them primarily as slang

68
00:03:11,279 --> 00:03:15,396
and they don't yet appear in a dictionary?

69
00:03:15,396 --> 00:03:18,213
With that, let's turn to dictionaries.

70
00:03:18,213 --> 00:03:20,053
I'm going to do this as a show of hands:

71
00:03:20,053 --> 00:03:22,387
how many of you still regularly

72
00:03:22,387 --> 00:03:25,515
refer to a dictionary, either print or online?

73
00:03:27,338 --> 00:03:29,532
Okay, so that looks like most of you.

74
00:03:29,532 --> 00:03:32,697
Now, a second question. Again, a show of hands:

75
00:03:32,697 --> 00:03:35,902
how many of you have ever looked to see

76
00:03:35,902 --> 00:03:38,791
who edited the dictionary you are using?

77
00:03:42,048 --> 00:03:45,680
Okay, many fewer.

78
00:03:45,680 --> 00:03:49,360
At some level, we know that there are human hands

79
00:03:49,360 --> 00:03:50,936
behind dictionaries,

80
00:03:50,936 --> 00:03:55,207
but we're really not sure who those hands belong to.

81
00:03:55,207 --> 00:03:57,547
I'm actually fascinated by this.

82
00:03:57,547 --> 00:04:00,020
Even the most critical people out there

83
00:04:00,020 --> 00:04:02,614
tend not to be very critical about dictionaries,

84
00:04:02,614 --> 00:04:04,497
not distinguishing among them

85
00:04:04,497 --> 00:04:06,568
and not asking a whole lot of questions

86
00:04:06,568 --> 00:04:08,791
about who edited them.

87
00:04:08,791 --> 00:04:10,414
Just think about the phrase

88
00:04:10,414 --> 00:04:12,890
"look it up in the dictionary,"

89
00:04:12,890 --> 00:04:14,567
which suggests that all dictionaries

90
00:04:14,567 --> 00:04:16,273
are exactly the same.

91
00:04:16,273 --> 00:04:18,873
Consider the library here on campus,

92
00:04:18,873 --> 00:04:20,569
where you go into the reading room,

93
00:04:20,569 --> 00:04:23,442
and there is a large, unabridged dictionary

94
00:04:23,442 --> 00:04:27,320
up on a pedestal in this place of honor and respect

95
00:04:27,320 --> 00:04:29,667
lying open so we can go stand before it

96
00:04:29,667 --> 00:04:31,870
to get answers.

97
00:04:31,870 --> 00:04:34,176
Now don't get me wrong,

98
00:04:34,176 --> 00:04:37,381
dictionaries are fantastic resources,

99
00:04:37,381 --> 00:04:38,930
but they are human

100
00:04:38,930 --> 00:04:41,211
and they are not timeless.

101
00:04:41,211 --> 00:04:43,013
I'm struck as a teacher

102
00:04:43,013 --> 00:04:46,230
that we tell students to critically question

103
00:04:46,230 --> 00:04:49,964
every text they read, every website they visit,

104
00:04:49,964 --> 00:04:51,452
except dictionaries,

105
00:04:51,452 --> 00:04:54,617
which we tend to treat as un-authored,

106
00:04:54,617 --> 00:04:57,259
as if they came from nowhere to give us answers

107
00:04:57,259 --> 00:05:01,603
about what words really mean.

108
00:05:01,603 --> 00:05:05,200
Here's the thing: if you ask dictionary editors,

109
00:05:05,200 --> 00:05:06,358
what they'll tell you

110
00:05:06,358 --> 00:05:08,672
is they're just trying to keep up with us

111
00:05:08,672 --> 00:05:10,427
as we change the language.

112
00:05:10,427 --> 00:05:12,912
They're watching what we say and what we write

113
00:05:12,912 --> 00:05:15,070
and trying to figure out what's going to stick

114
00:05:15,070 --> 00:05:17,220
and what's not going to stick.

115
00:05:17,220 --> 00:05:18,537
They have to gamble,

116
00:05:18,537 --> 00:05:20,286
because they want to appear cutting edge

117
00:05:20,286 --> 00:05:22,942
and catch the words that are going to make it,

118
00:05:22,942 --> 00:05:25,381
such as LOL,

119
00:05:25,381 --> 00:05:27,585
but they don't want to appear faddish

120
00:05:27,585 --> 00:05:30,127
and include the words that aren't going to make it,

121
00:05:30,127 --> 00:05:31,940
and I think a word that they're watching right now

122
00:05:31,940 --> 00:05:35,359
is YOLO, you only live once.

123
00:05:37,317 --> 00:05:39,811
Now I get to hang out with dictionary editors,

124
00:05:39,811 --> 00:05:41,319
and you might be surprised

125
00:05:41,319 --> 00:05:43,535
by one of the places where we hang out.

126
00:05:43,535 --> 00:05:45,492
Every January, we go

127
00:05:45,492 --> 00:05:48,825
to the American Dialect Society annual meeting,

128
00:05:48,825 --> 00:05:50,172
where among other things,

129
00:05:50,172 --> 00:05:53,930
we vote on the word of the year.

130
00:05:53,930 --> 00:05:56,933
There are about two or three
hundred people who come,

131
00:05:56,933 --> 00:05:59,373
some of the best-known
linguists in the United States.

132
00:05:59,373 --> 00:06:01,121
To give you a sense of the flavor of the meeting,

133
00:06:01,121 --> 00:06:04,532
it occurs right before happy hour.

134
00:06:04,532 --> 00:06:06,608
Anyone who comes can vote.

135
00:06:06,608 --> 00:06:07,920
The most important rule is

136
00:06:07,920 --> 00:06:11,049
that you can vote with only one hand.

137
00:06:11,049 --> 00:06:14,513
In the past, some of the winners have been

138
00:06:14,513 --> 00:06:16,998
"tweet" in 2009

139
00:06:16,998 --> 00:06:20,403
and "hashtag" in 2012.

140
00:06:20,403 --> 00:06:23,462
"Chad" was the word of the year in the year 2000,

141
00:06:23,462 --> 00:06:27,282
because who knew what a chad was before 2000,

142
00:06:27,282 --> 00:06:31,696
and "WMD" in 2002.

143
00:06:31,696 --> 00:06:34,497
Now, we have other categories in which we vote too,

144
00:06:34,497 --> 00:06:36,090
and my favorite category

145
00:06:36,090 --> 00:06:38,474
is Most Creative Word of the Year.

146
00:06:38,474 --> 00:06:41,224
Past winners in this category have included

147
00:06:41,224 --> 00:06:44,277
"recombobulation area,"

148
00:06:44,277 --> 00:06:48,080
which is at the Milwaukee Airport after security,

149
00:06:48,080 --> 00:06:50,640
where you can recombobulate.

150
00:06:50,640 --> 00:06:52,124
(Laughter)

151
00:06:52,124 --> 00:06:53,643
You can put your belt back on,

152
00:06:53,643 --> 00:06:56,104
put your computer back in your bag.

153
00:06:58,289 --> 00:07:01,621
And then my all-time favorite word at this vote,

154
00:07:01,621 --> 00:07:03,847
which is "multi-slacking."

155
00:07:03,847 --> 00:07:06,350
(Laughter)

156
00:07:06,350 --> 00:07:08,363
And multi-slacking is the act

157
00:07:08,363 --> 00:07:11,501
of having multiple windows up on your screen

158
00:07:11,501 --> 00:07:12,902
so it looks like you're working

159
00:07:12,902 --> 00:07:14,996
when you're actually goofing around on the web.

160
00:07:14,996 --> 00:07:19,825
(Laughter) (Applause)

161
00:07:21,381 --> 00:07:24,989
Will all of these words stick? Absolutely not.

162
00:07:24,989 --> 00:07:27,888
And we have made some questionable choices,

163
00:07:27,888 --> 00:07:29,565
for example in 2006

164
00:07:29,565 --> 00:07:31,604
when the word of the year was "pluto'd,"

165
00:07:31,604 --> 00:07:33,596
to mean demoted.

166
00:07:33,596 --> 00:07:37,351
(Laughter)

167
00:07:38,586 --> 00:07:40,955
But some of the past winners

168
00:07:40,955 --> 00:07:43,870
now seem completely unremarkable,

169
00:07:43,870 --> 00:07:45,388
such as "app"

170
00:07:45,388 --> 00:07:47,401
and "e" as a prefix,

171
00:07:47,401 --> 00:07:50,360
and "Google" as a verb.

172
00:07:50,360 --> 00:07:54,427
Now, a few weeks before our vote,

173
00:07:54,427 --> 00:07:56,208
Lake Superior State University

174
00:07:56,208 --> 00:08:00,987
issues its word of banished words for the year.

175
00:08:00,987 --> 00:08:02,920
What is striking about this

176
00:08:02,920 --> 00:08:05,691
is that there's actually often quite a lot of overlap

177
00:08:05,691 --> 00:08:08,528
between their list and the list that we are considering

178
00:08:08,528 --> 00:08:10,778
for words of the year,

179
00:08:10,778 --> 00:08:14,870
and this is because we're noticing the same thing.

180
00:08:14,870 --> 00:08:17,900
We're noticing the words that
are coming into prominence.

181
00:08:17,900 --> 00:08:20,053
It's really a question of attitude.

182
00:08:20,053 --> 00:08:23,720
Are you bothered by language
fads and language change,

183
00:08:23,720 --> 00:08:27,130
or do you find it fun, interesting,

184
00:08:27,130 --> 00:08:28,484
something worthy of study

185
00:08:28,484 --> 00:08:31,369
as part of a living language?

186
00:08:31,369 --> 00:08:33,525
The list by Lake Superior State University

187
00:08:33,525 --> 00:08:36,170
continues a fairly long tradition in English

188
00:08:36,170 --> 00:08:38,443
of complaints about new words.

189
00:08:38,443 --> 00:08:42,795
So here is Dean Henry Alford in 1875,

190
00:08:42,795 --> 00:08:45,041
who was very concerned that "desirability"

191
00:08:45,041 --> 00:08:47,490
is really a terrible word.

192
00:08:47,490 --> 00:08:50,224
In 1760, Benjamin Franklin

193
00:08:50,224 --> 00:08:51,680
wrote a letter to David Hume

194
00:08:51,680 --> 00:08:55,483
giving up the word "colonize" as bad.

195
00:08:55,483 --> 00:08:57,432
Over the years, we've also seen worries

196
00:08:57,432 --> 00:08:59,572
about new pronunciations.

197
00:08:59,572 --> 00:09:02,620
Here is Samuel Rogers in 1855

198
00:09:02,620 --> 00:09:05,219
who is concerned about some
fashionable pronunciations

199
00:09:05,219 --> 00:09:07,226
that he finds offensive,

200
00:09:07,226 --> 00:09:10,714
and he says "as if contemplate were not bad enough,

201
00:09:10,714 --> 00:09:13,132
balcony makes me sick."

202
00:09:13,132 --> 00:09:16,528
(Laughter)

203
00:09:16,528 --> 00:09:18,608
The word is borrowed in from Italian

204
00:09:18,608 --> 00:09:22,418
and it was pronounced bal-COE-nee.

205
00:09:22,418 --> 00:09:25,361
These complaints now strike us as quaint,

206
00:09:25,361 --> 00:09:30,306
if not downright adorkable,

207
00:09:30,306 --> 00:09:33,040
but here's the thing:

208
00:09:33,040 --> 00:09:37,413
we still get quite worked up about language change.

209
00:09:37,413 --> 00:09:39,475
I have an entire file in my office

210
00:09:39,475 --> 00:09:42,537
of newspaper articles

211
00:09:42,537 --> 00:09:45,040
which express concern about illegitimate words

212
00:09:45,040 --> 00:09:47,109
that should not have been included in the dictionary,

213
00:09:47,109 --> 00:09:48,557
including "LOL"

214
00:09:48,557 --> 00:09:50,627
when it got into the Oxford English Dictionary

215
00:09:50,627 --> 00:09:52,402
and "defriend"

216
00:09:52,402 --> 00:09:55,174
when it got into the Oxford American Dictionary.

217
00:09:55,174 --> 00:09:57,291
I also have articles expressing concern

218
00:09:57,291 --> 00:10:00,260
about "invite" as a noun,

219
00:10:00,260 --> 00:10:02,216
"impact" as a verb,

220
00:10:02,216 --> 00:10:05,187
because only teeth can be impacted,

221
00:10:05,187 --> 00:10:08,162
and "incentivize" is described

222
00:10:08,162 --> 00:10:12,673
as "boorish, bureaucratic misspeak."

223
00:10:12,673 --> 00:10:14,394
Now, it's not that dictionary editors

224
00:10:14,394 --> 00:10:17,325
ignore these kinds of attitudes about language.

225
00:10:17,325 --> 00:10:19,520
They try to provide us some guidance about words

226
00:10:19,520 --> 00:10:21,950
that are considered slang or informal

227
00:10:21,950 --> 00:10:25,293
or offensive, often through usage labels,

228
00:10:25,293 --> 00:10:26,983
but they're in something of a bind,

229
00:10:26,983 --> 00:10:30,635
because they're trying to describe what we do,

230
00:10:30,635 --> 00:10:32,594
and they know that we often go to dictionaries

231
00:10:32,594 --> 00:10:35,482
to get information about how we should use a word

232
00:10:35,482 --> 00:10:37,640
well or appropriately.

233
00:10:37,640 --> 00:10:40,664
In response, the American Heritage Dictionaries

234
00:10:40,664 --> 00:10:42,805
include usage notes.

235
00:10:42,805 --> 00:10:44,922
Usage notes tend to occur with words

236
00:10:44,922 --> 00:10:46,245
that are troublesome in one way,

237
00:10:46,245 --> 00:10:49,110
and one of the ways that they can be troublesome

238
00:10:49,110 --> 00:10:51,043
is that they're changing meaning.

239
00:10:51,043 --> 00:10:54,279
Now usage notes involve very human decisions,

240
00:10:54,279 --> 00:10:56,528
and I think, as dictionary users,

241
00:10:56,528 --> 00:10:58,770
we're often not as aware of those human decisions

242
00:10:58,770 --> 00:10:59,869
as we should be.

243
00:10:59,869 --> 00:11:00,993
To show you what I mean,

244
00:11:00,993 --> 00:11:03,710
we'll look at an example, but before we do,

245
00:11:03,710 --> 00:11:05,352
I want to explain what the dictionary editors

246
00:11:05,352 --> 00:11:08,990
are trying to deal with in this usage note.

247
00:11:08,990 --> 00:11:11,664
Think about the word "peruse"

248
00:11:11,664 --> 00:11:15,302
and how you use that word.

249
00:11:15,302 --> 00:11:17,838
I would guess many of you are thinking

250
00:11:17,838 --> 00:11:22,375
of "skim, scan, reading quickly."

251
00:11:22,375 --> 00:11:25,210
Some of you may even have some walking involved,

252
00:11:25,210 --> 00:11:27,456
because you're perusing grocery store shelves,

253
00:11:27,456 --> 00:11:29,127
or something like that.

254
00:11:29,127 --> 00:11:31,611
You might be surprised to learn

255
00:11:31,611 --> 00:11:33,480
that if you look in most standard dictionaries,

256
00:11:33,480 --> 00:11:36,253
the first definition will be to read carefully,

257
00:11:36,253 --> 00:11:38,697
or pour over.

258
00:11:38,697 --> 00:11:41,556
American Heritage has that as the first definition.

259
00:11:41,556 --> 00:11:44,521
They then have, as the second definition, skim,

260
00:11:44,521 --> 00:11:48,316
and next to that, they say "usage problem."

261
00:11:48,316 --> 00:11:50,226
(Laughter)

262
00:11:50,226 --> 00:11:52,314
And then they include a usage note,

263
00:11:52,314 --> 00:11:54,191
which it's worth looking at.

264
00:11:54,191 --> 00:11:56,102
So here's the usage note:

265
00:11:56,102 --> 00:11:58,459
"Peruse has long meant 'to read thoroughly' ...

266
00:11:58,459 --> 00:12:00,096
But the word if often used more loosely,

267
00:12:00,096 --> 00:12:02,386
to mean simply 'to read.' ...

268
00:12:02,386 --> 00:12:05,315
Further extension of the word
to mean 'to glance over, skim,'

269
00:12:05,315 --> 00:12:07,771
has traditionally been considered an error,

270
00:12:07,771 --> 00:12:09,914
but our ballot results suggest that it is becoming

271
00:12:09,914 --> 00:12:11,870
somewhat more acceptable.

272
00:12:11,870 --> 00:12:13,269
When asked about the sentence

273
00:12:13,269 --> 00:12:16,000
I only had a moment to peruse the manual quickly,

274
00:12:16,000 --> 00:12:17,875
66 percent of the [Usage] Panel

275
00:12:17,875 --> 00:12:20,422
found it unacceptable in 1988,

276
00:12:20,422 --> 00:12:22,529
58 percent in 1999,

277
00:12:22,529 --> 00:12:26,397
and 48 percent in 2011."

278
00:12:26,397 --> 00:12:28,358
Ah, the Usage Panel,

279
00:12:28,358 --> 00:12:30,968
that trusted body of language authorities

280
00:12:30,968 --> 00:12:33,820
who is getting more lenient about this.

281
00:12:33,820 --> 00:12:35,890
Now, what I hope you're thinking right now is,

282
00:12:35,890 --> 00:12:39,885
"Wait, who's on the Usage Panel?

283
00:12:39,885 --> 00:12:42,997
And what should I do with their pronouncements?"

284
00:12:42,997 --> 00:12:44,960
If you look in the front matter

285
00:12:44,960 --> 00:12:46,068
of American Heritage Dictionaries,

286
00:12:46,068 --> 00:12:47,493
you can actually find the names

287
00:12:47,493 --> 00:12:49,212
of the people on the Usage Panel.

288
00:12:49,212 --> 00:12:51,244
But who looks at the front matter of dictionaries?

289
00:12:51,244 --> 00:12:54,291
There are about 200 people on the Usage Panel.

290
00:12:54,291 --> 00:12:56,668
They include academicians,

291
00:12:56,668 --> 00:12:58,345
journalists, creative writers.

292
00:12:58,345 --> 00:13:00,437
There's a Supreme Court justice on it

293
00:13:00,437 --> 00:13:02,336
and a few linguists.

294
00:13:02,336 --> 00:13:07,168
As of 2005, the list includes me.

295
00:13:07,168 --> 00:13:10,980
(Applause)

296
00:13:11,342 --> 00:13:14,710
Here's what we can do for you.

297
00:13:14,710 --> 00:13:17,070
We can give you a sense

298
00:13:17,070 --> 00:13:20,122
of the range of opinions about contested usage.

299
00:13:20,122 --> 00:13:23,479
That is and should be the extent of our authority.

300
00:13:23,479 --> 00:13:26,890
We are not a language academy.

301
00:13:26,890 --> 00:13:29,837
About once a year, I get a ballot

302
00:13:29,837 --> 00:13:32,869
that asks me about whether new uses,

303
00:13:32,869 --> 00:13:36,207
new pronunciations, new meanings, are acceptable.

304
00:13:36,207 --> 00:13:39,099
Now here's what I do to fill out the ballot.

305
00:13:39,099 --> 00:13:42,607
I listen to what other people are saying and writing.

306
00:13:42,607 --> 00:13:44,851
I do not listen to my own likes

307
00:13:44,851 --> 00:13:48,060
and dislikes about the English language.

308
00:13:48,060 --> 00:13:49,529
I will be honest with you:

309
00:13:49,529 --> 00:13:52,478
I do not like the word "impactful,"

310
00:13:52,478 --> 00:13:54,480
but that is neither here nor there

311
00:13:54,480 --> 00:13:57,609
in terms of whether "impactful"
is becoming common usage

312
00:13:57,609 --> 00:14:00,970
and becoming more acceptable in written prose.

313
00:14:00,970 --> 00:14:02,018
So to be responsible,

314
00:14:02,018 --> 00:14:04,546
what I do is go look at usage,

315
00:14:04,546 --> 00:14:06,382
which often involves going to look

316
00:14:06,382 --> 00:14:09,077
at online databases such as Google Books.

317
00:14:09,077 --> 00:14:11,897
Well, if you look for "impactful" in Google Books,

318
00:14:11,897 --> 00:14:15,103
here is what you find.

319
00:14:15,103 --> 00:14:17,344
Well, it sure looks like "impactful"

320
00:14:17,344 --> 00:14:19,074
is proving useful

321
00:14:19,074 --> 00:14:20,703
for a certain number of writers,

322
00:14:20,703 --> 00:14:22,303
and has become more and more useful

323
00:14:22,303 --> 00:14:24,262
over the last 20 years.

324
00:14:24,262 --> 00:14:26,415
Now, there are going to be changes

325
00:14:26,415 --> 00:14:29,049
that all of us don't like in the language.

326
00:14:29,049 --> 00:14:31,233
There are going to be changes where you think,

327
00:14:31,233 --> 00:14:32,220
"Really?

328
00:14:32,220 --> 00:14:35,905
Does the language have to change that way?"

329
00:14:35,905 --> 00:14:37,588
What I'm saying is,

330
00:14:37,588 --> 00:14:39,310
we should be less quick

331
00:14:39,310 --> 00:14:43,101
to decide that that change is terrible,

332
00:14:43,101 --> 00:14:44,815
we should be less quick to impose

333
00:14:44,815 --> 00:14:48,116
our likes and dislikes about words on other people,

334
00:14:48,116 --> 00:14:51,030
and we should be entirely reluctant

335
00:14:51,030 --> 00:14:53,774
to think that the English language is in trouble.

336
00:14:53,774 --> 00:14:57,970
It's not. It is rich and vibrant and filled

337
00:14:57,970 --> 00:15:00,980
with the creativity of the speakers who speak it.

338
00:15:00,980 --> 00:15:03,598
In retrospect, we think it's fascinating

339
00:15:03,598 --> 00:15:06,976
that the word "nice" used to mean silly,

340
00:15:06,976 --> 00:15:08,320
and that the word "decimate"

341
00:15:08,320 --> 00:15:12,165
used to mean to kill one in every 10.

342
00:15:12,165 --> 00:15:16,358
(Laughter)

343
00:15:17,162 --> 00:15:22,255
We think that Ben Franklin was being silly

344
00:15:22,255 --> 00:15:24,904
to worry about "notice" as a verb.

345
00:15:24,904 --> 00:15:26,367
Well, you know what?

346
00:15:26,367 --> 00:15:29,067
We're going to look pretty silly in a hundred years

347
00:15:29,067 --> 00:15:31,364
for worrying about "impact" as a verb

348
00:15:31,364 --> 00:15:34,176
and "invite" as a noun.

349
00:15:34,176 --> 00:15:36,416
The language is not going to change so fast

350
00:15:36,416 --> 00:15:38,313
that we can't keep up.

351
00:15:38,313 --> 00:15:40,596
Language just doesn't work that way.

352
00:15:40,596 --> 00:15:42,209
I hope that what you can do

353
00:15:42,209 --> 00:15:45,038
is find language change not worrisome

354
00:15:45,038 --> 00:15:47,076
but fun and fascinating,

355
00:15:47,076 --> 00:15:50,085
just the way dictionary editors do.

356
00:15:50,085 --> 00:15:52,047
I hope you can enjoy being part

357
00:15:52,047 --> 00:15:57,051
of the creativity that is continuously remaking

358
00:15:57,051 --> 00:16:00,327
our language and keep it robust.

359
00:16:00,327 --> 00:16:03,247
So how does a word get into a dictionary?

360
00:16:03,247 --> 00:16:05,716
It gets in because we use it

361
00:16:05,716 --> 00:16:07,340
and we keep using it,

362
00:16:07,340 --> 00:16:11,575
and dictionary editors are paying attention to us.

363
00:16:11,575 --> 00:16:14,695
If you're thinking, "But that lets all of us decide

364
00:16:14,695 --> 00:16:16,444
what words mean,"

365
00:16:16,444 --> 00:16:20,495
I would say, "Yes it does,

366
00:16:20,495 --> 00:16:22,847
and it always has."

367
00:16:22,847 --> 00:16:26,774
Dictionaries are a wonderful guide and resource,

368
00:16:26,774 --> 00:16:30,270
but there is no objective
dictionary authority out there

369
00:16:30,270 --> 00:16:34,043
that is the final arbiter about what words mean.

370
00:16:34,043 --> 00:16:36,556
If a community of speakers is using a word

371
00:16:36,556 --> 00:16:40,152
and knows what it means, it's real.

372
00:16:40,152 --> 00:16:41,520
That word might be slangy,

373
00:16:41,520 --> 00:16:43,162
that word might be informal,

374
00:16:43,162 --> 00:16:45,067
that word might be a word that you think

375
00:16:45,067 --> 00:16:47,524
is illogical or unnecessary,

376
00:16:47,524 --> 00:16:50,075
but that word that we're using,

377
00:16:50,075 --> 00:16:52,433
that word is real.

378
00:16:52,433 --> 00:16:54,774
Thank you.

379
00:16:54,774 --> 00:16:56,453
(Applause)