Response: Bare Vexed

Dear Ms Kerr

I agree with your article ‘Twerking, selfie and unlike?’ to a certain extent. Although you state that slang words are ‘just like any fashion trend’, I believe that there is reason for people to use them. The way in which a person speaks is not in correlation with his intelligence. Instead they just find it easier to communicate in that fashion, rather than using over-elaborate vocabulary. Slang words are constantly changing to fit the modern world’s society. While they are just a ‘fashion trend’, I do agree that they should not be put in the Oxford dictionary. An example of this would be ‘groovy’. I personally have not heard anyone say this in a number of years, and so no longer merits its place in the Oxford English dictionary.

Ms Kerr, I also believe that you are underestimating young people’s intelligence. I do not believe slang would be used in job interviews. Young people are fully aware that this would come across as unprofessional. Instead they legitimately use it to communicate on the ‘streets’ to one another. While you might use “Hi” to greet someone, they might use “Wagwan”. They may even use no spoken language at all and simply fist bump. In some ways, this is their use of jargon. Nonetheless I do agree that these words should not be put into the Oxford dictionary. However if a person is applying for a job, has a fantastic work ethic and would be a great asset to the company, would it be fair to not give them the job because they cannot express themselves to the standards required? Surely, Ms Kerr, you would not think this fair? If these slang words were introduced into the Oxford dictionary, then their spoken expression would be satisfactory and would be able to get the job.

Also not everyone uses slang to communicate with one another. Some use slang to talk to their friends and not to people who are a figure of importance to them, as they respect these people and strive to learn from them. In fact some don’t use slang outside of the ‘texting’ world. They could be using slang for its easy typing ability. This can confuse people who are not familiar with slang as some of the abbreviations can be very confusing. This means that the people who are not familiar with slang or the abbreviations to think it is stupid or daft.

Here is the example of modern day slang that you used in your article; “I’m so gonna unlike that selfie of her twerking. Srsly though, these words make me wanna vom”. The people of this young, modern society do not speak in this manner. This bundle of words doesn’t even make sense. The fact that you created this sentence, which also made no sense, gives a one sided view on the matter of slang. I’m sure if you put random English words into a sentence, it will end up making no sense and make you look stupid; much like the sentence you put into your article.

Though you mentioned that Shakespeare would be ‘turning in his grave’, Shakespeare invented different types of slang words. He is seen as one of the greatest writers in history, yet he still used the slang that was relevant at his time. Does this make him no better than the people who use slang to this day? The words that he had created are now seen as words of the English language which are also within the Oxford dictionary. But when Shakespeare was alive these words were not known. This meant people did not understand what he was stating in his plays and caused people to dismiss these words that he had created. It took many years for these words to then become accepted into the English language and acceptable to use them. Although much of the slang used in our modern age is just a shortened form of exciting words, Shakespeare’s words gave new meanings. I still believe that in the future some of the slang we use now will become acceptable in the English language and Oxford dictionary. This will lead this language to become acceptable in a future society.

I feel as though you should consider slang as an alternative form of expression. I’m not saying slang is good or bad, the fact that they choose to communicate like this makes it acceptable. I believe it is acceptable as it is creative, meaning they are creating new words with different meanings. Yes, it may sound stupid but if you understand them then that shouldn’t be an issue. Though in interviews they can judge you on your speech, is it fair if they are brought up in a certain area or neighbourhood, which is not educated enough and they cannot afford to become better suited? This means that they should be tutored rather than left in the dirt. No one should be blamed for the way they express themselves. However with no help they will just keep speaking in slang or context that is misunderstood by others. Instead of saying how bad it is and how much of a disappointment it is, why not address these facts to the government or the council of a certain estate so that they can help them with their speech?

Words are added into the Oxford dictionary as to allow future generations to use them with true meaning. By implementing these slang words into the Oxford dictionary we are able to use new words within the English language for everyday use. By doing this we are allowing those who do not have the best communication skills or English skills, to become more equal in the modern or future society.. Though these words may seem stupid, they represent modern English culture. This means it is reasonable to use them in a way that they see fit. However there is no need to shorten words that are already within the English language. Instead we must create new words so we can expand our collective vocabulary. A language is defined by the people who speak it. Therefore people should not be seen as illiterate if they speak it, slang included…

Your sincerely,

Alex Draper