Dictionary analysis turns political
“Toxic” could describe different aspects of the year just ended, and in fact one influential institution in Britain has decided to do just that. The learned, and obviously biased, lexicographers at the Oxford English Dictionary have selected this word as official Word of the Year 2018.
The organization solemnly intones this laden, perhaps leaden, word as not only of significance but also representative. The word is described as not only heavily in demand, meaning entered by many people in the search portal of the Oxford English Dictionary, but also important in describing events and attitudes of the current time.
Having opened the door to toxicity for their own purposes, the editors at Oxford English Dictionary turn advocates and activists. They veer from lexicography into opinion.
“Toxic masculinity” is a frequent use of the term, they tell us. In other words, in Oxford English Dictionary editors’ hands, the shield of dictionary objectivity combines with the sword of editorial aggression — make that assertiveness.
A similar exercise in opinion advocacy disguised in dispassionate analysis is in the Oxford English Dictionary word for 2017: “Youthquake.” This word is what those who study and analyze language term a “portmanteau,” meaning a word formed from the combination of two other words.
Other examples include “motel” combined from motor and hotel, “smog” combined from smoke and fog, and “brunch” derived from breakfast and lunch. The word portmanteau also traditionally refers to a large suitcase divided into equal sections.
Young people in Britain registered and voted in exceptionally large numbers in the general election held in June 2017. Their powerful support for the Labour Party challenged the plans of the ruling Conservative Party for Brexit, a portmanteau for leaving the European Union.
Ashley May wrote about “Youthquake” in “USA Today”: “No, we haven’t heard of it either.” She quoted President Casper Grathwohl of Oxford Dictionaries that “the word was not an obvious choice,” but researchers determined usage has increased “fivefold.” That is a lot, but their methodology remains undisclosed.
The website www.inews.co.uk further quotes Grathwohl to the effect that the word has positive connotations: “At a time when our language is reflecting our deepening unrest and exhausted nerves, it is a rare political word that sounds a hopeful note.”
That is his opinion, his editorial, reflecting current vogue in much media and political commentary, not established dispassionate fact. He is using his professional position as a pulpit to broadcast personal political views, also a practice currently much in vogue.
May was in good company. For example, the headline of a column in The Washington Post by Jennifer Hassan declared, “The Oxford Dictionaries’ Word of the Year is a word nobody actually uses.”
Regarding the word “vogue,” Hassan did due diligence and reported that “Youthquake” was coined in 1965 by Diana Vreeland, editor of “Vogue” magazine. She was using the word to underscore the important, increasingly turbulent social and political events of that extremely violent decade.
Britain’s politics remain uncertain but nonviolent. Youthquake describes voting trends, not blood literally in the streets.
Likewise, “toxic” is debatable. People have used the word prominently for some time. In 2008, columnist William Safire applied “toxic” to modify reference to “bailouts” of failing giant banks. In 2003, Britney Spears recorded a Grammy-winning song titled “Toxic.”
Oxford English Dictionary language analysis has turned political. Oxford English Dictionary staff should answer skepticism by disclosing data entered in their portal.
Until then, do not fall for this toxic declaration.