PC gone Mad! - Oxford University Press has removed words like "aisle", "bishop", "cha

[Catalpa]

This is crazy!

I know we harp on about the British Empire and all that but I'm sure this book will set a bad trend for future Children's Dictionaries that the PC Brigade over here will be all too willing to mimic.

Words associated with Christianity and British history taken out of children's dictionary - Telegraph

[cyberianpan]

I don't like political correctness - however this is nothing to do with PC

Lisa Saunders, a worried mother who has painstakingly compared entries from the junior dictionaries, aimed at children aged seven or over, dating from 1978, 1995, 2000, 2002, 2003 and 2007, said she was "horrified" by the vast number of words that have been removed, most since 2003.
"The Christian faith still has a strong following," she said. "To eradicate so many words associated with the Christianity will have a big effect on the numerous primary schools who use it

There's only 10,000 words in this dictionary and:

Oxford University Press, which produces the junior edition, selects words with the aid of the Children's Corpus, a list of about 50 million words made up of general language, words from children's books and terms related to the school curriculum. Lexicographers consider word frequency when making additions and deletions.

So it's as simple as that they've removed less frequent words: e.g. moss, fern , empire , chapel and replaced them with words that are now more common - e.g. blog, voicemail, attachment.

It's as simple as words got to do with Christianity & nature are less popular , the dictionary is not to blame for that.

cYp

[Cogadh]

Why do they have to take words out anyway? Why not just add the new more relevant words to the already existing dictionary? Or better yet why do they need a junior dictionary in the first place? If a child is going to actually use a junior dictionary then they could use a 'proper' one just as easy.

[CookieMonster]

Find me a child that doesn't know what mp3 player means.

[cyberianpan]

Why do they have to take words out anyway? Why not just add the new more relevant words to the already existing dictionary?

Children are small things and we wouldn't expect them to carry a 24 volume dictionary with them. About 10,00 words seems to be the limit they've chosen, I've seen the dictionary -a small , light paperback.

Or better yet why do they need a junior dictionary in the first place? If a child is going to actually use a junior dictionary then they could use a 'proper' one just as easy.

Indeed - thus also time to swap Noddy for 'War and Peace' or Harry Potter for 'À la recherche du temps perdu '.

cYp

[Cogadh]

Children are small things and we wouldn't expect them to carry a 24 volume dictionary with them. About 10,00 words seems to be the limit they've chosen, I've seen the dictionary -a small , light paperback.



Indeed - thus also time to swap Noddy for 'War and Peace' or Harry Potter for 'À la recherche du temps perdu '.

cYp

Nope I'd just expect them to have a pocket dictionary like I did when I was in primary school. I also hear that the current generation are supposed to be the most hi tech generation so they'd probably be able to fit those books you mentioned and more on their MP3 players or equivalent not to mention laptops, the internet etc.

[cyberianpan]

Nope I'd just expect them to have a pocket dictionary like I did when I was in primary school. I also hear that the current generation are supposed to be the most hi tech generation so they'd probably be able to fit those books you mentioned and more on their MP3 players or equivalent not to mention laptops, the internet etc.

If you keep adding entries to a "pocket" dictionary whilst not taking out some old entries you'll very quickly end up with a "desktop" dictionary.

Laptops , MP3 players & E-book readers are not yet a standard part of educational life. I'd agree that we should move towards this but that's a whole different issue.

CyP

[FutureTaoiseach]

It underlines how stupid Political-Correctness is and why it should be expunged from Irish politics. It silences democratic debate and invents non-existent hypotheses to justify clampdowns on freedom of speech such as claiming the term "non-national" is offensive to foreign-nationals when in fact it is not. The only people who regard it as offensive are the Far Left loons in politics, the media and academia who obsess about these things. It's from the same kinf of geniuses that demand cribs be moved because of 'multiculturalism' (as discussed in the Seanad last week).

[Cogadh]

If you keep adding entries to a "pocket" dictionary whilst not taking out some old entries you'll very quickly end up with a "desktop" dictionary.

Laptops , MP3 players & E-book readers are not yet a standard part of educational life. I'd agree that we should move towards this but that's a whole different issue.

CyP

Not really a pocket dictionary should be capable of accommodating words like bishop and blog. But a lot (although not enough) children will ahve access to a variety of these things already whether or not they are 'part of educational life.' Scrapping out of date needless things like 'junior dictionaries' is how you make technological advances part of educational life. It's called progress I believe.

[toxic avenger]

Political Correctness was fine to begin with, it was meant to target truly offensive or ignorant terminology and behaviour. It still is fine in so far as it does that. But it has been taken way too far by some of the dopier adherents, and more particularly by agenda-driven zealots using it as a means to their own partisan ends. The barmier examples are often used by the types of people who are nostalgic for times when Bernard Manning was considered mainstream. I think it's wise to consider the baby as well as the bathwater here. Nobody wants a world where black bin bags are considered racist, but neither should we return to an era where 'sambo' was considered a term of endearment...