Oxford University Press has removed words like “aisle”, “bishop”, “chapel”, “empire” and “monarch” from its Junior Dictionary and replaced them with words like “blog”, “broadband” and “celebrity”. Dozens of words related to the countryside have also been culled.
Ah yes!!! The slippery slope of Relativism and Secularism continue. One more crack leading to the implosion of society.
And this will only continue the trend among young people who seem to think the world was created at the moment when they were born. :: Grumbles::
This is just silly!
I kept having to recheck that list to assure myself it was real. Acorn, nun, empire, decade, saint, and ivy getting thrown out? What kind of child’s school paper is going to be about broadband and voicemail?
But the one that seems silliest to throw out is “monarch.” Britain still has a queen, for crying out loud.
It almost sounds like whoever was put in charge of revising the dictionary just wants to sound all hip and “with it.”
I don’t think this will matter too much - I didn’t learn new words from the dictionary (most of them) - I learned them in the classroom or in discussion or background reading. Taking these words out of a dictionary just means nobody will buy it.
Kids don’t use dictionaries now-a-days. They use dictionary.reference.com/
**Words taken out: **
Carol, cracker, holly, ivy, mistletoe
Dwarf, elf, goblin
Abbey, aisle, altar, bishop, chapel, christen, disciple, minister, monastery, monk, nun, nunnery, parish, pew, psalm, pulpit, saint, sin, devil, vicar
Coronation, duchess, duke, emperor, empire, monarch, decade
adder, a**, beaver, boar, budgerigar, bullock, cheetah, colt, corgi, cygnet, doe, drake, ferret, gerbil, goldfish, guinea pig, hamster, heron, herring, kingfisher, lark, leopard, lobster, magpie, minnow, mussel, newt, otter, ox, oyster, panther, pelican, piglet, plaice, poodle, porcupine, porpoise, raven, spaniel, starling, stoat, stork, terrapin, thrush, weasel, wren.
Acorn, allotment, almond, apricot, ash, bacon, beech, beetroot, blackberry, blacksmith, bloom, bluebell, bramble, bran, bray, bridle, brook, buttercup, canary, canter, carnation, catkin, cauliflower, chestnut, clover, conker, county, cowslip, crocus, dandelion, diesel, fern, fungus, gooseberry, gorse, hazel, hazelnut, heather, holly, horse chestnut, ivy, lavender, leek, liquorice, manger, marzipan, melon, minnow, mint, nectar, nectarine, oats, pansy, parsnip, pasture, poppy, porridge, poultry, primrose, prune, radish, rhubarb, sheaf,
I bet if you look up the word “oxymoron” in this new & improved dictionary, it will show a picture of child using the new dictionary.
This just fails on the level of being a dictionary. If Britain is becoming more multi-cultural, the solution is clearly to add words, not to remove them.
Whoever wrote this dictionary should be fired, but not for reasons of oppressing religion. He should be fired because he thinks, for some bizarre reason, that children do not need to know what an acorn is.
‘Canter’ has nothing to do with religion.
So the British child who’s never seen a pig and wants to learn about it is out of luck if his/her only option is the Oxford Junior Dictionary. What idiot made this brilliant decision???
The article says that they do surveys of how often words show up in children’s literature, and base the dictionary on that.
This is more of a reflection of changing literature rather than a conspiracy by the dictionary-makers.
I guess that exonerates them somewhat, but its a bad way to write a dictionary, which should cover words that children will need to know in general, not words that appear in children’s books.
If that was the case, I’m curious to see how marzipan got in there to begin with; I’ve never seen a children’s book that word in there.
I’ve go to say that although I have seen ‘children’s dictionaries’ in lower elementary classrooms, most kids I know (mine included) never used a “children’s dictionary” for serious learning or studying. They all either used the standard adult version of Mirriam-Webster, or more recently, the online version.
It is ridiculous to remove words. Those words may not be in “modern” books, but many of them are certainly in classic literature. (But then again, students reading classic literature are not very likely to be using a “children’s dictionary”).
I can think of one: E.T.A. Hoffman’s “The Nutcracker Prince and the Mouse King” (which was one of the inspirations for the ballet “The Nutcracker”).
I know I just like horses LOL.
I found the webpage for this 'junior dictionary’
It appears to me that they limit it to about 10,000 words. So unless its going to keep growing and growing, it has to remove words. Presumably the top 10,000 most commonly use words in childrens literature make it into the dictionary.
Wow. How ridiculous.