True English, the COD and Scrabble
I have been addicted to playing Scrabble for about 30 years. Playing online is a waste of time unless you really trust that your opponent won’t cheat by using dictionaries, online checkers and score maximising engines. So I like to play the old-fashioned way across a board head-to-head.
The simplest way to play is to pick a dictionary that you and your opponent have and agree on and stick to only the words that are acceptable in that dictionary. The beauty of language, though, is that it is ever-changing. Some useful Scrabble words that I learned 30 years ago have now been dropped – presumably deemed not used frequently enough in modern language – and, of course, new words are being officially accepted into the English language each year.
The governing bodies of official tournament Scrabble, however, have been buggering about for decades. What is officially acceptable to put as a word has been distorted over the years to a point that has become utterly ridiculous. I heard that proper nouns are to become acceptable and, frankly, I don’t want to play to those rules. It’s just not cricket.
There was a point, way back, when only the Chambers dictionary was accepted, perhaps because Chambers paid a great deal of money to the makers of the game to be the officially recognised dictionary? Then, a few years ago, Collins must have put in a higher bid. These days, officially acceptable words come from an amalgamation of at least three dictionaries. Some self-proclaimed high-and-mighty idiots somewhere decide on an ongoing and ever-changing basis what words can and can’t be used; possibly dependent on what tiles they happen to have sitting on their own racks at any given moment.
So, as a writer as well as a Scrabble-player, I have rejected all official Scrabble claptrap and have begun to apply logic and thought to what would be a sensible way of judging what is acceptable. As wordy experts, I would like to invite you to join in this process. I will begin by putting forward my thoughts, which you are most welcome to challenge and/or support. And I have a few questions which a couple of you might know the answers to.
1. THE OED
My overall personal preference is for the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) and for Scrabble, specifically, the Concise Oxford Dictionary (COD). This is for several reasons. Firstly, I believe the OED to be the most complete and comprehensive dictionary on the planet. I also feel that it is produced with the most care and diligence by the most experienced linguistic experts. Even people who went to Cambridge recognise the Oxford University Press, grudgingly or otherwise.
1 a) The OED now stretches on into several shelf-bowing volumes – if anyone can provide the number of volumes and the current number of words defined within, that would be interesting-to-know stuff.
1 b) I would also like to establish whether the OED only adds words and never drops any? Is the OED a complete record of all English words ever, even if they have fallen out of use?
2. THE COD
For the purposes of Scrabble, the OED is simply too much. That’s where the COD comes into play. Another reason I pass a respectful nod to the Oxford publication is that that is what they recognise on the TV programme Countdown. Sure, maybe Oxford University Press pay Channel 4 to be the official one they use, maybe they don’t. Any which way, I like that the Countdown format has remained constant, the dictionary they refer to on the programme has stayed the same, and they apply sensible, realistic and thorough rulings to acceptable words.
The COD is revised every year. New words are added and existing words are removed. That’s fair enough; that’s the nature of a language so rich and diverse as English. It’s possibly true of all languages. My questions to you word gurus regarding the COD are:
2 c) Exactly how the diligent folk who analyse language decide what should be added and what should be taken away?
2 d) Roughly how many words are added each year, and how many are dropped?
I used to picture some bushy-faced bespectacled chaps sitting around in a dusty office pointing out that they heard three people say the word chav down the pub in the week. Last night, however, after an unrecorded number of sups forced upon me by the alcohol gods, my pickled brain reached the more respectful notion that an army of people possibly monitor an extensive range of published materials and count the appearances of borderline words. Maybe it’s national daily newspapers plus a list of respectable scientific journals; maybe it’s more complicated than that? Do any of you know?
3. SCRABBLE
I started doing a little testing using obscure words which have been on the fringes of Scrabble acceptance for a while. I put my well-used COD from about 10 years ago up against Oxford Dictionaries Online (ODO).
Qiblah is an old favourite. Only now the paper COD says it’s spelled qibla or kiblah. At first OD Online said qibla wasn’t a recognised word. But, when pushed on the subject, it changed its mind and decided qibla was OK and in a list somewhere else. And should really be spelled qiblah after all. Arse. Anomalies with the very first thing I checked. I threw my hands up in the air and turned to Mecca.
3 e) So, when you check a word online, are you getting the whole of the OED, or just what’s been deemed OK to be in the COD?
In the appendices of the decade-old, dog-eared COD, is a handy page with a comprehensive list of two-letter words – perhaps the most useful words to learn on the road to becoming a respectable Scrabble player. The word io has been defined as a cry of joy, although this dictionary only defines it as a small furry mammal. The OD Online, however, says it’s only a proper noun – a priestess from Greek mythology or a moon of Jupiter – and therefore I wouldn’t allow myself to use it. Arse. Again. That was the second thing I checked.
Not in the two-letter appendix list of this COD are the words yd and yr. Yet, there in the main body of that very dictionary are both words. Listed as abbreviations, but without a full stop after them, technically that means they’d be acceptable in a game of Scrabble. Strangely, there is a separate entry for yrs; but not one for yds. And each of these is again supported in the ODO. How long is it going to take me to reach a definitive conclusion on what is acceptable and how will I measure it?
Anyway, having been foolish enough to think I could pick a respectable dictionary like the COD to give me definitive answers, I’m now nowhere nearer to a logical foundation from which to progress. I therefore open the door to all suggestions and even invite you to make the case against the Concise Oxford Dictionary, be it in terms of Scrabble playing, writing or the application of correct English in any capacity.
Comments
Subscribe
Visitor counter
Blog Roll Centre
Blog Hints
23 Comments
There's no way I could hate you for playing Scrabble in any capacity, Charlie. In fact, I feel a little closer to you now that I know you're an appreciator too.
As for sticking to a dictionary of choice, I have Collins' Scrabble Dictionary and some of the words! I believe professionals memorise it for matches.
Last weekend:
The Setting: Living area, The Time: sometime after the kids went to sleep, The Cast: Hubby and me
Sitting across each other, laptops open, him writing a project report, me reading up on POV, both of us making informed comments on the hapless contestants of this year's X-Factor and the likely voting behaviour of the public (no protest vote this year, changed the dynamics completely)
The whole night playing scrabble against each other over the internet (but at least it was old style, no cheating) - best fun I have had for ages!
And "I believe professionals memorise [Collins' Scrabble Dictionary] for matches." If I was going to memorise a dictionary I'd want more than matches for my efforts!
I love the idea of interacting across the sofa via the internet, Charlie. Who said married couples have lost the art of communicating?
Tony - Mouser is in the Scrabble Dictionary, but we were using the Oxford one, and it wasn't in there. I turned it into a game of Poker and looked, and then played my bluff... I know it was wrong, but I didn't have any vowels.
So if you're an Oxford lexicographer, Minxie, your cat can't be a good mouser? I suppose it's an accomplished preditor of small rodents.
I'd like to see a Chinese version of scrabble. It would be all like ¬ >` ~ | / ^ bits that you could stick together.
Good luck in your wordy quest, Steve.
Click here to sign up now.