OMG, LOL enter Oxford English Dictionary


Too orsm for you.
Jul 5, 2006
OMG, LOL and FYI are among the latest additions made to the Oxford English Dictionary in a new update.

The online edition revealed that it had selected a "number of noteworthy initialisms" for publication. The latest three, used widely in online and text speech, join previous entries IMHO, TMI and BFF.

"Of course in such a context initialisms are quicker to type than the full forms, and (in the case of text messages, or Twitter, for example) they help to say more in media where there is a limit to a number of characters one may use in a single message," the OED said in a statement. "OMG and LOL are found outside of electronic contexts, however - in print, and even in spoken use where there often seems to be a bit more than simple abbreviation going on."

However the OED insisted that the abbreviations are not just associated with a younger generation and revealed that research has unearthed former uses.

"OMG is from a personal letter from 1917; the letters LOL had a previous life, starting in 1960, denoting an elderly woman [as 'little old lady'] and the entry for FYI, for example, shows it originated in the language of memoranda in 1941," they revealed.

A surprise new entry also came from the heart symbol '♥'. Referenced "as a symbol for the verb love", the heart has become widely associated with the 'I ♥ NY' tourism campaign.

Meanwhile, the term WAG - used to collectively describe the wives and girlfriends of footballers - will also enter the collection, following its first cited use by the Sunday Telegraph in 2002.

"It is remarkable to see how much the environment has changed over the ten years since the OED first went online," OED's chief editor John Simpson said.

Other new entries include: muffin top, dotbomb, non-dom, tragic [when used to define someone said to be boring or socially inept] and yuck factor.

Source: Digital Spy

I find it quite funny that this kind of slang has even made it into the dictionary. It's probably unnecessary at the same time, but still funny. xD
It's terrible. :hmph: The English we once knew, the proper English, is heading for a terrible track. People are already saying in commercials "more gooder"

First of all, "gooder" isn't a word. And if you happen to say gooder you won't need the "more" part. More does what the "er" at the end of the word is doing. Why say it twice? :ffs:

We are heading for a Wall-E reality.
I wonder if tl;dr is in there yet, or whether it will be eventually? :hmmm: As in, "This dictionary is tl;dr" :andry: /badjoke

I'm not surprised though, tbh. It is a bit odd though if they're talking about the actual paper dictionaries, since OMG, LOL, and FYI are primarily online colloquialisms, and most people who use them I would think would use online dictionaries as well :hmmm:
I don't know how I feel about this. It seems a little... silly? I've already hear people (tweens and teens) talk outloud in text speech and it's quite annoying. I hope in the future we are not all completely speaking this way.
This does seem a bit odd. But it's just another part of getting with the times. This speak is really common nowadays, especially on the Internet and via texting. But you will get those few that come along and have no idea what they mean. Now they just have to check the dictionary and presto! Knowledge gained.
I dont see a problem with it. Its just the dictionary, i dont care what words are in it. People type it and we know what it means so does does it really matter?

I can imagine all these English grammar freaks getting worked up about it though. Which is kinda sad but kinda funny at the same time.
I'm kinda worried about this sort of thing, because one day our dictionary's won't have one real word left in it. :sad3:

It's just like that movie Idiocracy where they can't even form sentence without making grammatical errors verbally. >.<

Glad I won't be around to see that day! At least I hope not. >.<
I thought LOL originally meant "Lots of love". That's stupid. Little old lady.

And Laughing Out Loud? That's more stupider.

I'm sticking with webster from now on.
...WTF :ffs:

Honestly, if they tried to pick up every single slang term or variable meaning of a word, the Oxford English Dictionary would be at least five times the length it currently is. This is, bluntly put, rather stupid. They might be fairly common terms these days, but still...what next?
Acronyms such as "LOL" I can more or less tolerate because at least it is composed of letters, but who the heck thought throwing in ♥ would be a good idea? Shall we throw in symbols such as > and < as well? Of course, I don't religiously revere the Oxford English Dictionary or anything, so I'm not too bothered what they want to throw in. My vocabulary consists of words I want to use and if 'words' like ♥ are thrown in, then fine. I won't be using it - at least offline anyway. However, please for the love of all that is holy, do not start saying "LOL" in public. It's daft and pointless. I'll perhaps only begin to be troubled by "LOL" and "ROFL" if I become an English teacher or something and schoolwork and essays are littered with shorthands.

Still, I am a bit amused nonetheless. Poor Samuel Johnson and the like. They must be starting to roll in their graves after seeing this. :britt:
Yeah this is seriously retarded.... Why would LOL be in the dictionary? I mean it is just an internet slang term and I would be really ashamed to see someone read this in the dictionary. ♥ in the dictionary is interesting. We already have the word love... but now a heart symbol. I ♥ (insert city or country here) made this get in the dictionary? I am more concerned however about LOL and OMG, ROFL etc. These are just slang terms on the internet and they do not need to be in the Oxford dictionary.. Basically all these internet terms exist online. No need for them to be in a dictionary. This is pretty stupid if I do say so myself.
Well, languages are subject to evolution and evolution has to be recorded in dictionaries and the like in order to keep up with the language and inform people who want to know what a term means. However, I'm not too sure this kind of evolution could be labeled a good evolution.

So, I think it'd be better to ask ourselves what have we done to degrade language like this instead of blaming dictionaries for doing what they are meant to do.
It isn't stupid at all. This is how modern people communicate and so the modern dictionary should reflect that. All languages evolve and change as much as the society that uses it so the point at which someone might say proper English stops and improper English begins is completely arbitrary in relation to it's evolution.

But as usual, there is a mindless knee jerk reaction to these sorts of things.
To be honest, I'm kind of annoyed by this. I'm something of an elitist when it comes to spelling and grammar - and whilst I certainly know that both myself and others will make mistakes, I utterly despise internet slang.

It seems like the vast majority of people are growing up 'typin liek dis lol' instead of being coherant and improving their English skills.
I can deal with this, but don't add "u" or "ur" to the dictionary or "w/e" or "ikr" or any of those other childish female teenager facebook texting slang words. It's bad enough the IQ has dropped over the years, I think this is directly related.