WWTBAM Bored

The clamor to change Scrabble rules:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1237312 ... =yhoofront

I think they should get rid of those Scrabble dictionaries that have foreign words in them. If you play in English, the words you use should be English.

While I know that English is very adaptable in taking in foreign words, the standard that they use in the Official Scrabble Dictionary is way too low.

A good example: qat. This is not an English word but it is in the Scrabble dictionary. It is a transliteration of an Arabic word and should be included. It isn't even the standard transliteration, that would be khat.

IMO.

andrewjackson wrote:I think they should get rid of those Scrabble dictionaries that have foreign words in them. If you play in English, the words you use should be English.

While I know that English is very adaptable in taking in foreign words, the standard that they use in the Official Scrabble Dictionary is way too low.

A good example: qat. This is not an English word but it is in the Scrabble dictionary. It is a transliteration of an Arabic word and should be included. It isn't even the standard transliteration, that would be khat.

IMO.

I agree with AJ.

And I hate words like rif. It's not a word now and shouldn't be a Scrabble word until it's been around 50 years like sonar and radar.

SportsFan68 wrote:

andrewjackson wrote:I think they should get rid of those Scrabble dictionaries that have foreign words in them. If you play in English, the words you use should be English.

While I know that English is very adaptable in taking in foreign words, the standard that they use in the Official Scrabble Dictionary is way too low.

A good example: qat. This is not an English word but it is in the Scrabble dictionary. It is a transliteration of an Arabic word and should be included. It isn't even the standard transliteration, that would be khat.

IMO.

I agree with AJ.

And I hate words like rif. It's not a word now and shouldn't be a Scrabble word until it's been around 50 years like sonar and radar.

Dictionary debates get very heated over in the Scrabble world. Believe me, this is minor. [The big ongoing debate in the Scrabble world is whether to switch from the American/Canadian dictionary to the international English dictionary, which contains a lot more words used in other English-speaking parts of the world. People get violent on the subject, and I am not exaggerating!] And a lot of words are borderline.

Regarding foreign words: the judgment of whether something is a foreign word often depends on whether there is an equivalent English word to describe that particular object. (It's usually nouns that are involved.) The most obvious examples are Greek/Hebrew letters and foreign currency. The only word available to us in English to describe the symbol for zeta is zeta. The only word available to us in English to describe a particular unit of Vietnamese currency is xu. So those words are legit.

Other foreign words have English equivalents, but have become so frequently used in English that we may consider them to have entered the English language. Amigo is in this category. So is tzuris.

As for words needing to be 50 years old, the dictionary has to reflect the way we actually speak. Blog is now in the Scrabble dictionary. Bling is not yet, but it will be the next time there's a revision. Do you think those words shouldn't be? A lot of people think we need to revise the dictionary more often, not less, because the language changes so fast.

The biggest problem is that English has no single source of what is and isn't acceptable. There's no French Academy to be the arbiter of our language. But, in general, I consider that a good thing. So our hard-working Dictionary Committee labors on.

Whether actual words should/shouldn't be included is a point I'll let the experts debate.

What I do NOT like is the inclusion of letter combinations that are NOT words.

"aa" is not a word. I don't know if "Za", "qi" and "zzz" are words (I'm not aware that they are).

They should be out.

I am lobbying to have "teh" declared a word so I don't have as many typos in my posts.....

lb13

Jeemie wrote:Whether actual words should/shouldn't be included is a point I'll let the experts debate.

What I do NOT like is the inclusion of letter combinations that are NOT words.

"aa" is not a word. I don't know if "Za", "qi" and "zzz" are words (I'm not aware that they are).

They should be out.

"aa" is definitely a word, and it isn't a new addition. It's a type of lava. Even the Britannica has an entry for it.

franktangredi wrote:

Jeemie wrote:Whether actual words should/shouldn't be included is a point I'll let the experts debate.

What I do NOT like is the inclusion of letter combinations that are NOT words.

"aa" is not a word. I don't know if "Za", "qi" and "zzz" are words (I'm not aware that they are).

They should be out.

"aa" is definitely a word, and it isn't a new addition. It's a type of lava. Even the Britannica has an entry for it.

I seem to recall its being the answer (or, at minimum, one of the choices) for a WWTBAM question about lava.

franktangredi wrote: Dictionary debates get very heated over in the Scrabble world. Believe me, this is minor. [The big ongoing debate in the Scrabble world is whether to switch from the American/Canadian dictionary to the international English dictionary, which contains a lot more words used in other English-speaking parts of the world. People get violent on the subject, and I am not exaggerating!] And a lot of words are borderline.

Regarding foreign words: the judgment of whether something is a foreign word often depends on whether there is an equivalent English word to describe that particular object. (It's usually nouns that are involved.) The most obvious examples are Greek/Hebrew letters and foreign currency. The only word available to us in English to describe the symbol for zeta is zeta. The only word available to us in English to describe a particular unit of Vietnamese currency is xu. So those words are legit.

Other foreign words have English equivalents, but have become so frequently used in English that we may consider them to have entered the English language. Amigo is in this category. So is tzuris.

As for words needing to be 50 years old, the dictionary has to reflect the way we actually speak. Blog is now in the Scrabble dictionary. Bling is not yet, but it will be the next time there's a revision. Do you think those words shouldn't be? A lot of people think we need to revise the dictionary more often, not less, because the language changes so fast.

The biggest problem is that English has no single source of what is and isn't acceptable. There's no French Academy to be the arbiter of our language. But, in general, I consider that a good thing. So our hard-working Dictionary Committee labors on.

If they're borderline, leave them out. I don't see a problem here.

I accept xi, xu, and zeta based on the rationale you describe.

There is no such rationale for blog and bling. Remember posslq? That's why I want a 50-year rule. OK, 40. All right, all right, let's be realistic. 20. I would think that the minimum y'all would impose would be 10.

Yes, I think blog and bling should not be in the Scrabble dictionary because the language changes so fast. If it has 20-year staying power like radar and sonar, fine. If not, out. Don't let it in.

JMHO. And no, don't let IMHO in either.

A posslq is a person of the opposite sex sharing living quarters.

Then domestic partner came along, much better.

silvercamaro wrote:

franktangredi wrote:

Jeemie wrote:Whether actual words should/shouldn't be included is a point I'll let the experts debate.

What I do NOT like is the inclusion of letter combinations that are NOT words.

"aa" is not a word. I don't know if "Za", "qi" and "zzz" are words (I'm not aware that they are).

They should be out.

"aa" is definitely a word, and it isn't a new addition. It's a type of lava. Even the Britannica has an entry for it.

I seem to recall its being the answer (or, at minimum, one of the choices) for a WWTBAM question about lava.

But IIRC, there are two-letter combos that Scrabble allows that aren't actually words, correct?

If not, then never mind my complaints.

Jeemie wrote:

silvercamaro wrote:

franktangredi wrote: "aa" is definitely a word, and it isn't a new addition. It's a type of lava. Even the Britannica has an entry for it.

I seem to recall its being the answer (or, at minimum, one of the choices) for a WWTBAM question about lava.

But IIRC, there are two-letter combos that Scrabble allows that aren't actually words, correct?

If not, then never mind my complaints.

There are two letter combos that many people don't consider to be words. I think the rule of thumb is, if they appear in a dictionary with a pronunciation that is not simply a pronunciation of the letters themselves, they are consider a word rather than an acronym. For example, an attempt to include tv in the OSPD was put down a decade or so ago, and rightly so. Okay is in the dictionary, ok is not.

Za was widely debated several years back. The argument was that it was very common regional slang -- I have actually heard people use it to as short for pizza. And slang is not against Mr. Butz's rules of inclusion.

A lot of tourney players don't really care if something is a word or not. They just want their acceptable letter strings. But they are not in a majority.

The next big debate -- it's already started -- will be about online words that have no relation to spoken language at all. (All that acronym shit I refuse to use myself.)

franktangredi wrote:The next big debate -- it's already started -- will be about online words that have no relation to spoken language at all. (All that acronym shit I refuse to use myself.)

LOL!

WTF are you talking about?

lb13

franktangredi wrote:
A lot of tourney players don't really care if something is a word or not. They just want their acceptable letter strings. But they are not in a majority.

Stand firm against these forces of evil!

SportsFan68 wrote:

franktangredi wrote:
A lot of tourney players don't really care if something is a word or not. They just want their acceptable letter strings. But they are not in a majority.

Stand firm against these forces of evil!

Like gratuitous posting?

franktangredi wrote:There are two letter combos that many people don't consider to be words. I think the rule of thumb is, if they appear in a dictionary with a pronunciation that is not simply a pronunciation of the letters themselves, they are consider a word rather than an acronym. For example, an attempt to include tv in the OSPD was put down a decade or so ago, and rightly so. Okay is in the dictionary, ok is not.

Oooh! Since the correct pronounciation of UFO is "YOO-fo", does that mean you can use it in tourney play?

franktangredi wrote:A lot of tourney players don't really care if something is a word or not. They just want their acceptable letter strings. But they are not in a majority.

I know they don't care. I care. Scrabble is supposed to be about WORDS, not cheap two-letter combos that score you points towards the end when you're down to few tiles and usable spaces on the board.

ulysses5019 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

franktangredi wrote:
A lot of tourney players don't really care if something is a word or not. They just want their acceptable letter strings. But they are not in a majority.

Stand firm against these forces of evil!

Like gratuitous posting?

Gratuitous posting is not evil.

SportsFan68 wrote:

ulysses5019 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:
Stand firm against these forces of evil!

Like gratuitous posting?

Gratuitous posting is not evil.

Not in the slightest.

SportsFan68 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

ulysses5019 wrote:
Like gratuitous posting?

Gratuitous posting is not evil.

Not in the slightest.

Never has been.

SportsFan68 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote: Gratuitous posting is not evil.

Not in the slightest.

Never has been.

Never will be.

Jeemie wrote:Oooh! Since the correct pronounciation of UFO is "YOO-fo", does that mean you can use it in tourney play?

I know they don't care. I care. Scrabble is supposed to be about WORDS, not cheap two-letter combos that score you points towards the end when you're down to few tiles and usable spaces on the board.

As a matter of fact, UFO does appear on the list used internationally, presumably because it is sometimes written in lower-case letters and pronounced just that way, but it's not on the the North American list.

Jeemie wrote:I know they don't care. I care. Scrabble is supposed to be about WORDS, not cheap two-letter combos that score you points towards the end when you're down to few tiles and usable spaces on the board.

But every one of those two-letter combos IS a word, with a meaning, "Scrabble" didn't make up them up. Each is found in at least one of three or four designated collegiate dictionaries. If you truly do care about the game, I encourage you to get a copy of Joe Edley's "Everything Scrabble". I have no doubt it will increase your enjoyment of the game, especially if you're currently mainly using two-letter words to shed tiles at the end.

SportsFan68 wrote:There is no such rationale for blog and bling. Remember posslq? That's why I want a 50-year rule. OK, 40. All right, all right, let's be realistic. 20. I would think that the minimum y'all would impose would be 10.

But posslq is an acronym! Isn't there already a rule about acronyms?

SportsFan68 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote: Not in the slightest.

Never has been.

Never will be.

Sounds just like your replies to ES.

I'm beginning to think the lady doth protest too much!

MarleysGh0st wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote: Never has been.

Never will be.

Sounds just like your replies to ES.

I'm beginning to think the lady doth protest too much!

I think she needs a few gratuitous scritches.

MarleysGh0st wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote: Never has been.

Never will be.

Sounds just like your replies to ES.

I'm beginning to think the lady doth protest too much!

Nope.