Aug. 29, 2001

What an interesting article.(Doh! A Dictionary Update) Thank you!

Is there a site on the Net that lists the new entries for the year. Your article included what you called a few of the new listings. Where can I find the complete list?

Thank you.

Nancy Oulton

Editor's Note: The Oxford English Dictionary has posted the complete list on its Web site: Oxford English Dictionary News

July 17, 2001

I don't think you can call "snail mail" a noun. Surely mail is the noun and snail an adjective?

Very interesting article though.

I think the reason they keep a lot of the old words is that anyone reading the classics needs them. "Dot" for instance. And many more. Young people find classics hard going, and I think it is partly because they don't read the bible, and are not familiar with the English prayer book. Thus they simply miss the references.

It is very interesting, and sometimes frustrating, to observe the language in the process of change. I particularly observe the words that are being lost. For instance, "amount" has almost replaced "number" (on the CBC anyway). It sounds very strange to hear "A large amount of people". One thinks of them as heaped up.

I am refraining from complaining about grammar on the CBC!

Thanks for the interesting article.

E. Haydock

Editor's Note: Like home movie and thousands of other terms, snail mail is indeed a new noun made up of two old ones (mail and snail.) It's identified as a "noun" on page 1373 of the 1998 Canadian Oxford Dictionary.

top | main index | archived letters | contact us