Isabelle Kerr’s article is pointless. It undermines itself. she is against modern slang, yet she uses idioms. The English she is using is derived from slang itself. It’s hard not to find a line where she doesn’t undermine herself, like a hide and seek game where there objects are transparent. At the bottom of the article it says this “Isabelle Kerr is an undergraduate student at Bristol University” I find it surprising that she is at university considering the article she wrote is just terrible. On top of that Kerr tries to say that her generation (20 years old) is responsible for slang, when we know that they aren’t. Kerr doesn’t accept her age, and doesn’t show it either.

Many of the words that we and Kerr use were made or at least used by Shakespeare. The person she said “will be turning in his grave”, this makes that point highly ironic as her example was a pioneer of the modern English language and is responsible for making it what it is today. Without the slang that he made (and used) the language and the world would not be the same, on the bright side the article wouldn’t exist.

“If the only words we can create are unimaginative hybrids of pre-existing words, or worse, shortening of already perfectly good words, then what hope is there?”. Kerr undermines herself again, and be warned it is not the last time you’ll see this sort of idiocy in this text, many more quotes (and face-palms) are to come. The words now are called “unimaginative hybrids”. We have to remember that many of the words Shakespeare used in his plays were taken from what people spoke in London and England at the time, meaning that some of the words were in fact hybrids of common words at the time. So what was used then isn’t much different to what’s used now. The rich and educated at this time probably looked down upon the “commoners” slang or language, and it clearly hasn’t changed much. We can see this from Kerr’s attitude towards any slang included the text. Slang is described as being “unimaginative”, but I’m pretty sure that if Kerr tried to make a word or piece of slang, it would be atrocious. Probably being based on a defunct word from the Elizabethan era.

“Among some of the greatest and most eloquent words in the English language, an invasion of bizarre, nonsensical and downright pointless words appear to have taken over.” This line is just stupid. Slang is described as being nonsensical, but fits the quote itself better. If slang was indeed nonsensical there would be no point in making it, but there obviously is, so the whole point and sentence is undermines itself therefore making the quote itself nonsensical and pointless. This quote is utterly useless and shows how Kerr has superior English to everybody else who can speak, read and write English, even Shakespeare. Who is obviously her idol of “correct” English that ironically used slang and invented words.

“These are in fact the pitiful emblems of the current young generation’s contribution to language. My generation. I am 20.” Kerr tries to take responsibility for the inclusion of some slang words that were included in the Oxford Dictionary Online, these are : Twerking, selfie, vom, unlike and srsly. She says her age at the time of writing the article, which was 20 years old. Just by this I can tell you that she is not responsible for these words, it would in fact be somebody of my generation (15,16 years old) or even younger. What supports this further is the fact that Kerr had to search what twerking meant, showing not only that her knowledge of slang is inadequate, but clear proof that her generation didn’t invent these word otherwise she would have known what twerking meant. On top of all of this Kerr is ranting and disliking the fact that the Oxford Dictionary Online has slang in it when it is said in the 2013 update on their blog that the ODO was created in order to focus on current English and includes modern meaning and uses of those words. so she doesn’t need to worry about this because she can use the Oxford English Dictionary, which does not contain these words and will not attack her as it is a historical dictionary documenting all of the core words and their meanings. She can admire Shakespeare’s brilliant words in this dictionary and not have to look at the unimaginative modern slang that she so hates. What’s even worse is the fact that Kerr says “while I scroll through the new listings of the online dictionary, I see the unfortunate positioning of twerk. It sits embarrassingly next to ‘twere’, an archaic word reminiscent of an era of great language and literary triumph.” This quote comments on the fact that ’twere is near to twerk in the online dictionary and how ’twere came from a time where there was great language and literary triumph, but doesn’t realise the word ’twere is a contraction or shortening of it were. This is not much different from vom or srsly as those are both the simplification of pre-existing words that are used in everyday language. The reason behind all of these being made shorter is pretty much the same, it’s simpler to say and write (more efficient), shortening a piece of text or speaking. In Shakespeare’s case it was useful because it helped to keep the Iambic pentameter that was used in many, if not all of his plays.

I’m going to get up from my chair and walk off to talk to people in the foreign language that has taken over, and enjoy speaking to people rather than sneering at the fact that they do not talk Queen’s English.

Here’s a quote from the update in 2013 explaining the differences between the Oxford Dictionary Online and Oxford English Dictionary :

“It is important to note that the new words mentioned above have been added to Oxford Dictionaries Online, not the Oxford English Dictionary. Why is this?

The dictionary content in ODO focuses on current English and includes modern meanings and uses of words

The OED, on the other hand, is a historical dictionary and it forms a record of all the core words and meanings in English over more than 1,000 years, from Old English to the present day, including many obsolete and historical terms. Words are never removed from the OED.”