Scrabble: Out to piss off grammar nazis

News article today says:

Scrabble, one of the last bastions of grammatical purism in a world overrun by cell phone text abbreviations, is capitulating to the times.

The board game plans to add 3,000 new words to its official dictionary, including several slang terms like "thang" (9 points) and "grrl" (5 points) as well as pop culture touchstones, like Facebook and MySpace.

Turning the most heads is the inclusion of "innit," a condensation of "isn't it" that will earn you 5 points - and the undying hatred of any English majors who are playing along.

Oh no they di'in't. 

God damnit! 'Grrl' really? Fucking really Scrabble?

Ain't no thang, grrl.

Wait... proper nouns in Scrabble? Wtf?

I'm holding out for the LOL version.

Grrl.

Who cares about the scrabble dictionary. The OED is where it's at. And I'm pretty sure all those words have been in the OED for years. Stuff like lol and omg are definitely in there. Language evolves, and whether we like it or not, they are words. Language is defined by its use. 100 years ago people would have cringed at half of the words we use today and think of as good spelling & grammar. 

No.

Why would you replace the I in 'girl' with another R? I really don't understand that.

Oh shiiiiiet son. Trippin'

" Why would you replace the I in 'girl' with another R? I really don't understand that. "

innit blad, am gunna murk you, yeh. fwagwan mandem.

I don't remember the manufacturers of Scrabble being in charge of the English language. Sure, it's their game but I'm going to follow the Oxford English Dictionary in every game I play of Scrabble.

at least people with a shitty vocabulary can play scrabble without getting frustrated.

The sound you are now hearing is my skull colliding with the wall in a repeated fashion until blood seeps out.

" Who cares about the scrabble dictionary. The OED is where it's at. And I'm pretty sure all those words have been in the OED for years. Stuff like lol and omg are definitely in there. Language evolves, and whether we like it or not, they are words. Language is defined by its use.  "

innit 2 winnit

" Why would you replace the I in 'girl' with another R? I really don't understand that. "

" @MattyFTM said:

" Who cares about the scrabble dictionary. The OED is where it's at. And I'm pretty sure all those words have been in the OED for years. Stuff like lol and omg are definitely in there. Language evolves, and whether we like it or not, they are words. Language is defined by its use.  "

I did consider the OED, and I know that they've been adding more e- and text-related words.  March of 2011 they added OMG, LOL and FYI.  But keep in mind that the OED normally gives compelling reasoning for including a word.  What could compel Scrabble to include INNIT? "

I assume the British version will reward bonus points for 'Queen'.

" The sound you are now hearing is my skull colliding with the wall in a repeated fashion until blood seeps out. "

WORDS WITH FRIENDS.

Fuck. That.

" Oh no they di'in't.  "

" WORDS WITH FRIENDS. "

" Fuck. That. "

Tell me, are you people even aware that the field of "linguistics" is the scientific study of language? Do you not consider at all the fact that smarter people than you are making decisions on things that they understand better than you do? Why do you trust an astronomer when he tells you what is or isn't a planet, but when a linguist tells you what is or isn't a word, you are incredulous? I think I'll follow advice on what is or isn't a word by people who can at least define the concepts involved.

Well, this is bullshit. I will continue to play with proper words and forbid slang and Ebonics.

@BeachThunder said:

@Hailinel said:

" The sound you are now hearing is my skull colliding with the wall in a repeated fashion until blood seeps out. "

Ah, yes, I believe that phenomenon is called "qyzjykx". That's 49 points, by the way.

You forgot the 50 bonus points for using all 7 of your letters. =)

What-the-fuck-ever, man.

@gakushya said:

Tell me, are you people even aware that the field of "linguistics" is the scientific study of language? Do you not consider at all the fact that smarter people than you are making decisions on things that they understand better than you do? Why do you trust an astronomer when he tells you what is or isn't a planet, but when a linguist tells you what is or isn't a word, you are incredulous? I think I'll follow advice on what is or isn't a word by people who can at least define the concepts involved.

Thanks for bumping a 15 month old topic to be a condescending jerk buddy.

@gakushya said:

Tell me, are you people even aware that the field of "linguistics" is the scientific study of language? Do you not consider at all the fact that smarter people than you are making decisions on things that they understand better than you do? Why do you trust an astronomer when he tells you what is or isn't a planet, but when a linguist tells you what is or isn't a word, you are incredulous? I think I'll follow advice on what is or isn't a word by people who can at least define the concepts involved.

I think we are aware "people" (read: morons) use words like innit and grrl, but are they really used commonly enough to be included in this?

Also, who the fuck is blindly trusting astronomers with information without doing a little further research if it sounds fishy? Same thing applies here, please don't throw out stupid analogies like that. I mean, are you busy using these "words" when you're not trying to school us, and trying to enforce it? I thought not.

daaaamn grrl what a necro

Isn't this really about spelling and not grammar though?

So basically, humanities future for correct speech is established from SMS language?

Lulz

@Ulain said:

@gakushya said:

Tell me, are you people even aware that the field of "linguistics" is the scientific study of language? Do you not consider at all the fact that smarter people than you are making decisions on things that they understand better than you do? Why do you trust an astronomer when he tells you what is or isn't a planet, but when a linguist tells you what is or isn't a word, you are incredulous? I think I'll follow advice on what is or isn't a word by people who can at least define the concepts involved.

I think we are aware "people" (read: morons) use words like innit and grrl, but are they really used commonly enough to be included in this?

Also, who the fuck is blindly trusting astronomers with information without doing a little further research if it sounds fishy? Same thing applies here, please don't throw out stupid analogies like that. I mean, are you busy using these "words" when you're not trying to school us, and trying to enforce it? I thought not.

It's not an analogy. If a professional journalist needs to say something about something which falls under the domain of science, they will always consult an expert (in theory anwyays). If its about medicine, they will ask a doctor, if its about phsyics, they will ask a physicist, if it has something to do with animals a biologist or zoologist will be quoted. When it comes to language, a linguist is not consulted. Seriously professional journalists just make shit up about language, and its often wrong.

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=833

Check out this article from the Language Log (the blogger is a computational linguist). The point being made here is that

The principle we see at work here is that writers think fact-checking is never needed on any point that is broadly about language.

And there are countless examples.

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3479

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=199

Politics will accuse each other of short sentences and incomplete grammar, when they do the exact same things.

@Ulain said:

I think we are aware "people" (read: morons) use words like innit and grrl, but are they really used commonly enough to be included in this?

I never said people who use the word "innit" are morons. That's harsh. No I don't think that. I've studied the history of two languages, Japanese and English, and also historical linguistics, and the pattern always repeats; some group of pedants protesting and bitching against some emergent word or colloquialism demanding that we use something this way or that. ALWAYS. Seriously. Since the emergence of language, there has always been some person bitching about how others speak. I'm not kidding. Every point in time in the history of the English language, someone has identified a specific trend that somehow represents the downfall of the language. If these morons took some time to study how language works in a technical and social sense, they will realize that language will never devolve and loose the beauty or sophistication they identify. Barring the fact that these claims always evaporate the moment you ask the accuser to form their proclamations in a technical way that can be verified, language just doesn't work that way. It's not a system that becomes simpler or less expressive over time. No. How can you possibly claim that English has declined and devolved since the Shakespeare days when you don't even know the basic methodology for analysing languages to begin with?

Most of the time Grammar Nazi's do not have a linguistic rational for their accusations, its just norm enforcement. You are grossly offended by someone doing something that appears to be breaking the conventions and customs that you have internalized. You think someone gets angry over "youre" because there is an inherent linguistic mistake? No. They get angry because you are violating what they take to be a cultural law (manifested in language in this case), and humans always instinctively react to these sorts of transgressions with indignation and aggression.

I'm so gonna play "grrrrrl" as every word possible and get the hell out of that Scrabble bonus.

Grrl really? Sweet lord.

@Video_Game_King said:

I'm so gonna play "grrrrrl" as every word possible and get the hell out of that Scrabble bonus.

Toss Z's on all them thangzzzzz

@AlexW00d said:

@gakushya said:

Tell me, are you people even aware that the field of "linguistics" is the scientific study of language? Do you not consider at all the fact that smarter people than you are making decisions on things that they understand better than you do? Why do you trust an astronomer when he tells you what is or isn't a planet, but when a linguist tells you what is or isn't a word, you are incredulous? I think I'll follow advice on what is or isn't a word by people who can at least define the concepts involved.

Thanks for bumping a 15 month old topic to be a condescending jerk buddy.

You know what, you broadcast your uneducated oversimplified views on language, you promulgate myth and miseducation, and so, yeah, you deserve to be scolded. If this were a discussion about numbers, we would be using the methodology of mathematics, if this were about javascript we would be asking the programmers, if we were discussing diets we might ask a nutritionist. But when it comes to language, things are suddenly right or wrong, and suddenly everybody knows why. Don't see why this is a social problem worth addressing? Well, fine. It's not like anything I do is going to convince you.

@gakushya: I think you deserve to be scolded for getting on a high horse. You could address your points without pulling it out of the stable.

@gakushya said:

@AlexW00d said:

@gakushya said:

Tell me, are you people even aware that the field of "linguistics" is the scientific study of language? Do you not consider at all the fact that smarter people than you are making decisions on things that they understand better than you do? Why do you trust an astronomer when he tells you what is or isn't a planet, but when a linguist tells you what is or isn't a word, you are incredulous? I think I'll follow advice on what is or isn't a word by people who can at least define the concepts involved.

Thanks for bumping a 15 month old topic to be a condescending jerk buddy.

You know what, you broadcast your uneducated oversimplified views on language, you promulgate myth and miseducation, and so, yeah, you deserve to be scolded. If this were a discussion about numbers, we would be using the methodology of mathematics, if this were about javascript we would be asking the programmers, if we were discussing diets we might ask a nutritionist. But when it comes to language, things are suddenly right or wrong, and suddenly everybody knows why. Don't see why this is a social problem worth addressing? Well, fine. It's not like anything I do is going to convince you.

grrl?!

is that growling and then having a heart attack?

@gakushya said:

@Ulain said:

I think we are aware "people" (read: morons) use words like innit and grrl, but are they really used commonly enough to be included in this?

I never said people who use the word "innit" are morons. That's harsh. No I don't think that. I've studied the history of two languages, Japanese and English, and also historical linguistics, and the pattern always repeats; some group of pedants protesting and bitching against some emergent word or colloquialism demanding that we use something this way or that. ALWAYS. Seriously. Since the emergence of language, there has always been some person bitching about how others speak. I'm not kidding. Every point in time in the history of the English language, someone has identified a specific trend that somehow represents the downfall of the language. If these morons took some time to study how language works in a technical and social sense, they will realize that language will never devolve and loose the beauty or sophistication they identify. Barring the fact that these claims always evaporate the moment you ask the accuser to form their proclamations in a technical way that can be verified, language just doesn't work that way. It's not a system that becomes simpler or less expressive over time. No. How can you possibly claim that English has declined and devolved since the Shakespeare days when you don't even know the basic methodology for analysing languages to begin with?

Most of the time Grammar Nazi's do not have a linguistic rational for their accusations, its just norm enforcement. You are grossly offended by someone doing something that appears to be breaking the conventions and customs that you have internalized. You think someone gets angry over "youre" because there is an inherent linguistic mistake? No. They get angry because you are violating what they take to be a cultural law (manifested in language in this case), and humans always instinctively react to these sorts of transgressions with indignation and aggression.

Tl;DR. No, seriously.

How's that for proper linguistic skill, bud?

19 Posts and you're using it to undermine and insult your fellow forum-goers. You're off to a good start :)

@PeasantAbuse: My thoughts exactly.

Just because something is in the OED doesnt mean its ok to use in scrabble. Just like they have rules against using abbreviations and slang, they should have a rule against using bullshit internet words.

Did they add "1337"?