Should dictionaries change the definition of the word "McJob"?

Question

Are the English majors and English Professors of the world providing feedback on this to the OED, Merriam Websters Dictionary, other dictionaries?

In the future should corporations and even governments be empowered to change the definitions of words in dictionaries?

I hope that this topic receives a thorough discussion far and wide...

Or is this topic really not a big deal?

http://www.oed.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/mcjob...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/showbiz/boo...

http://www.time.com/time/business/a...

Answer 1

From almost the beginning of comprehensive English dictionary compilation with James Murray and the OED, English has not been defined by what we would like it to be but rather, as others have suggested, as it is. Language is a dynamic force that defies boundaries. McDonald's protesting this word makes sense from a brand standpoint but not from a philological standpoint. A good dictionary simply records how the word is used without any commentary on its fairness or anything else so subjective. In that practice, our dictionaries reflect English's strength as an adaptable and constantly growing and changing language. On a final note, I agree that government interference with language, while plausible in this day and age, would be entirely inappropriate. Leave it to the scholars.

Answer 2

The definition of words in Dictionaries is decided on by publishers, or by the writers of the dictionaries working for them.
I know that in the case of the main Dutch dictionary they count how often a word has been used in books, newspapers and internet, as well as keeping check on spoken language. If a word is coming up, it will be included if it has been used more than a certain number of times.
If a word is going out of use, it will be left out of the new editions if it has not been used for a set amount of years.

I am sure that all dictionary publishers have a system like that, which depends on the size of the book, the way the publisher works and how quick the language changes.

Countries should have no influence on dictionaries, as languages are not restricted by country borders.
English is spoken in many countries, as are French, Spanish and many more, smaller languages often excist in two countries that do not always agree on anything.

Companies can launch a word, but unless the people take it up, it will not be included in dictionaries, as can individual people.
Some of the best words of today have been thought up by news people or people in the entertaining industry. Some even by comercial institutes, and often they are not even pleased by the popularity of the word. Google is an example of that last.

Seeing the lack of answers so far, not many people have an opinion, or they are still asleep or at work.

PS, non of your links seem to work.

Answer 3

Yes - your topic is a big deal. In England, the OED prides itself not only in defining what is gramatically or factually correct but in recording modern usage. So - if a word comes into the vocabulary and is accepted and understood by many people, there is a fair chance that it will appear in the OED.

The French try hard to limit the adoption of words into their language, but only the Académie Francaise refuses to accept these neologisms. The result is a dictionary that lists "official" French words but neglects to include those that are used by a great majority of people.

All langauages change throughout time: the language of Beowulf is different from that of Chaucer, which is different from that of Shakespeare, which is different from that which I speak, which is different from that which my children speak. You can't change the way languages develop - the best thing to do is record the changes and, perhaps, give an explanation for them in the dictionary.