M-W vs. Grant Barrett on "ginormous"

[Grant Barrett]

On May 19, 2005, at 09:11, Barnhart wrote:
> Why then, Ben, is the NEW Oxford crowing?

I don't know about "crowing," since I don't and didn't work on the
New Oxford American Dictionary, but maybe "teasing" would be more
accurate.

I told David at Boing Boing about NOAD 2e's inclusion of the term
because--unlike the other dictionaries that include the word--the
average consumer has a greater chance of actually finding and buying
a copy of NOAD 2e or Mac OS X 10.4. Plus, it was a little dig at his
mention of "the" dictionary in his post.

The news articles also wrote up the MW press release as if there's
just one DICTIONARY OF THE UNIVERSE (say that loudly with an echo for
the full effect), which is, I guess, what dictionary publisher's
marketing people love to see. It's no fun if marketroids have to put
"top ten words that consumers want added to a mainstream dictionary
in order to validate their secret belief that they live on the
cutting edge of spoken English or to feel like they've left a legacy
since they've blown all their income on Escalades and trips to the
casino, after the editorial staff have eliminated all the wacky
blends, nonce words, and terms that are, in fact, already in most
dictionaries."

Bouncebackability, my foot.

(With all due teasing and respect to Mr. Barnhart, the fine folks at
Merriam-Webster, and the good chaps at Collins.)

Grant Barrett
gbarrett at worldnewyork.org