Jump to content

Junior OED: Nature isn't worth defining anymore...?


Gord Barentsen
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 3 months later...

Since I'm revisiting this for my CPRG talk I thought I'd include a Guardian article that goes into more details about the changes, which were in fact made way back in 2007 but have only recently attracted scrutiny:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jan/13/oxford-junior-dictionary-replacement-natural-words

as well as the Snopes article which researches and verifies this as true:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/oxford-junior-dictionary-words/

The Snopes article has some more lengthy quotes from some of the authors who protested the decision, as well as the "justification" (laughable if you ask me) for the changes.

When a book and a head collide and a hollow sound is heard, must it always have come from the book? -- Lichtenberg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

well i'll never have any use for "lark" or "kingfisher" or the like but i do think its a shame that they are no longer included.  just because im a city bloke with no knowledge of nature doesn't mean the children of the future should be..

'That's why they call it the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it.'  - George Carlin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Hello guest! In using this site you agree to LiquidFractal's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy