Skip to main content

sslct038

<?xml version="1.0"?>

<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "base.dtd">

<TEI.2><teiHeader>

<fileDesc>

<titleStmt>

<title>Dictionaries</title></titleStmt>

<publicationStmt><distributor>BASE and Oxford Text Archive</distributor>

<idno>sslct038</idno>

<availability><p>The British Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading, under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Centre for English Language Teacher Education, Warwick) and Paul Thompson

(Department of Applied Linguistics, Reading), with funding from BALEAP,

EURALEX, the British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. The

original recordings are held at the Universities of Warwick and Reading, and

at the Oxford Text Archive and may be consulted by bona fide researchers

upon written application to any of the holding bodies.

The BASE corpus is freely available to researchers who agree to the

following conditions:</p>

<p>1. The recordings and transcriptions should not be modified in any

way</p>

<p>2. The recordings and transcriptions should be used for research purposes

only; they should not be reproduced in teaching materials</p>

<p>3. The recordings and transcriptions should not be reproduced in full for

a wider audience/readership, although researchers are free to quote short

passages of text (up to 200 running words from any given speech event)</p>

<p>4. The corpus developers should be informed of all presentations or

publications arising from analysis of the corpus</p><p>

Researchers should acknowledge their use of the corpus using the following

form of words:

The recordings and transcriptions used in this study come from the British

Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus, which was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Warwick) and Paul Thompson (Reading). Corpus development was assisted by

funding from the Universities of Warwick and Reading, BALEAP, EURALEX, the

British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. </p></availability>

</publicationStmt>

<sourceDesc>

<recordingStmt>

<recording dur="00:55:34" n="7382">

<date>17/09/1998</date><equipment><p>video</p></equipment>

<respStmt><name>BASE team</name>

</respStmt></recording></recordingStmt></sourceDesc></fileDesc>

<profileDesc>

<langUsage><language id="en">English</language>

</langUsage>

<particDesc>

<person id="nf1271" role="main speaker" n="n" sex="f"><p>nf1271, main speaker, non-student, female</p></person>

<person id="sm1272" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1272, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sf1273" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1273, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sf1274" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1274, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sm1275" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1275, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sf1276" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1276, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sf1277" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1277, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sm1278" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1278, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sf1279" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1279, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sm1280" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1280, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sf1281" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1281, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sf1283" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1283, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sm1284" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1284, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sm1285" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1285, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sm1286" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1286, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sm1287" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1287, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sm1288" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1288, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sm1289" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1289, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="om1282" role="observer" n="o" sex="m"><p>om1282, observer, observer, male</p></person>

<person id="sf1290" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1290, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sm1291" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1291, participant, student, male</p></person>

<personGrp id="ss" role="audience" size="l"><p>ss, audience, large group </p></personGrp>

<personGrp id="sl" role="all" size="l"><p>sl, all, large group</p></personGrp>

<personGrp role="speakers" size="23"><p>number of speakers: 23</p></personGrp>

</particDesc>

<textClass>

<keywords>

<list>

<item n="speechevent">Lecture</item>

<item n="acaddept">CELTE (Centre for English Language Teacher Education)</item>

<item n="acaddiv">ss</item>

<item n="partlevel">Pre-sessional</item>

<item n="module">unknown</item>

</list></keywords>

</textClass>

</profileDesc></teiHeader><text><body>

<u who="nf1271"> i'll start off by <pause dur="0.5"/> telling you <pause dur="0.2"/> about a situation that i was in a few years ago <pause dur="0.9"/> where <pause dur="0.4"/> i <pause dur="1.1"/> was interviewed for local radio <pause dur="0.5"/> they <pause dur="0.6"/> they asked me to come along to the radio studios in <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> <pause dur="0.5"/> # to talk about words <pause dur="0.6"/> and <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="1.4"/> when the interviewer started asking me questions i realized that what he really wanted to know was <pause dur="0.5"/> # who decides which words go into a dictionary <pause dur="1.0"/> and <pause dur="0.3"/> he had an idea that there was such a thing as <pause dur="0.3"/> the <pause dur="0.3"/> dictionary <pause dur="1.1"/> and that this contained all the correct words in English <pause dur="0.8"/> and that <pause dur="0.3"/> if a word wasn't in the dictionary <pause dur="0.6"/> then it wasn't a proper English word and <pause dur="0.3"/> you couldn't use it <trunc>proper</trunc> you <pause dur="0.2"/> if you used it you were wrong <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> that's quite a common belief <pause dur="0.2"/> in Britain <pause dur="0.8"/> # we play <trunc>i</trunc> in Britain we play a lot of # <pause dur="0.5"/> games which involve <pause dur="1.1"/> checking words in dictionaries Scrabble <pause dur="0.3"/> do you do you know Scrabble </u><u who="ss" trans="overlap"> yeah </u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> yeah <pause dur="0.4"/> <trunc>i</trunc> it it's quite a common game and it <pause dur="1.1"/> to resolve arguments <pause dur="0.2"/> it's necessary to look <pause dur="0.2"/> in a dictionary <pause dur="0.3"/> and people always say look in <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.3"/> dictionary <pause dur="0.6"/> as if there was only one <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="1.5"/> people

seem to assume that there's <pause dur="0.2"/> someone <pause dur="0.2"/> or some group of people <pause dur="0.9"/> <trunc>h</trunc> who have the responsibility deciding which words are good enough <pause dur="0.3"/> to go in the dictionary <pause dur="0.3"/> and which words <pause dur="0.2"/> are not <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="1.2"/> well that's that's a completely wrong idea <pause dur="0.2"/> really isn't it you've only got to go <pause dur="0.2"/> to a bookshop <pause dur="0.4"/> to see <pause dur="0.4"/> that there's many more than <pause dur="0.2"/> one dictionary <pause dur="0.6"/> there isn't really any such thing as <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.2"/> dictionary <pause dur="0.7"/> is there <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> if you go along to the bookshop here for instance <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="5.4"/> <event desc="turns on overhead projector, bulb blows" iterated="n"/> huh </u><pause dur="0.7"/> <u who="sm1272" trans="pause"> <unclear>look at</unclear> the screen <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/></u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="sf1273" trans="pause"> now </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> oh yes suddenly the screen and the bulb's gone </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="overhead projector is on showing transparency" iterated="n"/> # this is just a a very <pause dur="0.4"/> rough <pause dur="0.7"/> summary of the kind of dictionaries that we have <pause dur="0.4"/> in English <pause dur="0.5"/> we have the <pause dur="0.5"/> the Oxford English Dictionary <pause dur="0.4"/> and that's the largest dictionary <pause dur="0.5"/> in <trunc>en</trunc> in the English language <pause dur="0.3"/> it's in twenty volumes <pause dur="0.2"/> with supplements <pause dur="0.5"/> # you'd think that that's what people would be referring to

when they say is it in the dictionary <pause dur="0.2"/> but of course they're not <pause dur="0.6"/> # very few people possess a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary <pause dur="0.2"/> it's really only for linguists and people who <pause dur="0.4"/> are <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> work <pause dur="0.4"/> people who work <pause dur="0.4"/> with the English language in some way <pause dur="0.8"/> # <trunc>y</trunc> <trunc>y</trunc> you can get it on C-D-ROM <pause dur="0.2"/> which is much easier but if you <pause dur="0.2"/> all twenty volumes take up a lot of <trunc>spa</trunc> # shelf space and they're very expensive <pause dur="0.5"/> so that's not usually the dictionary that people refer to when they when they play <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>Scrabble for instance <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> then we've got the Shorter Oxford Dictionary the New Oxford Dictionary of English <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="1.5"/> those are <pause dur="0.9"/> pretty big <pause dur="0.2"/> dictionaries i've got a C-D-ROM version of the New Oxford Dictionary in English here <pause dur="0.4"/> three-hundred-and-fifty-thousand words <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="holds up disk" iterated="n"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> by the way we have names for these we call # <pause dur="0.6"/> we call the Shorter Oxford Dictionary SOD <pause dur="0.7"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> and the New Oxford Dictionary of English NODDY <pause dur="0.2"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> that's your if you write about

dictionaries you use these # acronyms but # <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> then we've got dictionaries for learners of English <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> you'll be familiar with some of these Oxford Advanced Learners' Dictionary Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English Cambridge <sic corr="International">internitinational</sic> Dictionary of English Cobuild <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="1.9"/> i see people coming into the bookshop and not knowing which dictionary to buy <pause dur="0.4"/> because in fact the titles don't really tell you do they they <pause dur="0.5"/> those <pause dur="0.3"/> those four <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> that are listed there <pause dur="0.7"/> are <pause dur="0.7"/> not for native they're not intended for native speakers of English they're <trunc>in</trunc> intended for learners <pause dur="0.2"/> but there's nothing in the title to tell you that <pause dur="0.4"/> and so i see people who are not native speakers of English <pause dur="0.2"/> hovering around in the bookshop <pause dur="0.2"/> not knowing <pause dur="0.3"/> which dictionary to choose because <pause dur="0.4"/> there's no real indication on the cover <pause dur="0.7"/> who is <pause dur="0.7"/> who is it who they're intended for <pause dur="0.5"/> and then of course we've got <pause dur="0.3"/> hundreds of thousands of other kinds of dictionaries we've got <pause dur="0.2"/> shorter versions of those <kinesic desc="indicates point on board" iterated="n"/>

dictionaries for learners <pause dur="0.2"/> shorter versions of <kinesic desc="indicates point on board" iterated="n"/> the big dictionaries at the top <pause dur="0.5"/> and then we've got dictionaries for children and picture dictionaries and school dictionaries and visual dictionaries <pause dur="0.4"/> study dictionaries <pause dur="0.3"/> and something <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on board" iterated="n"/> right at the bottom of the transparency <pause dur="2.4"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> # <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> <pause dur="0.5"/> right at the bottom of the transparency # <pause dur="0.4"/> we've got something that we call they're called dictionaries you might have seen them you may have <pause dur="0.3"/> a dictionary like this <pause dur="0.3"/> dictionary of <pause dur="0.2"/> engineering terms <pause dur="0.3"/> something like that <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> they're called dictionaries but really they're not <pause dur="0.3"/> dictionaries <pause dur="0.2"/> they're more like encyclopedias because a dictionary is concerned with <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> the way <pause dur="1.7"/> the word is used in the language a dictionary is concerned with <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> <trunc>l</trunc> <pause dur="0.3"/> linguistic aspects of the word like its pronunciation its grammar which words it goes with <pause dur="0.6"/> and <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on board" iterated="n"/> these dictionaries of <pause dur="0.3"/> medicine and engineering and computing computer

science applied linguistics <pause dur="0.3"/> they don't tell you anything about the behaviour <pause dur="0.2"/> of that word <pause dur="0.2"/> or how it's pronounced or <pause dur="0.4"/> what the grammar is <pause dur="0.2"/> they just tell you about <pause dur="0.2"/> the concepts <pause dur="0.4"/> that the words expresses <pause dur="0.2"/> so they're really much more like <pause dur="0.4"/> encyclopedias or little textbooks they're not strictly speaking <pause dur="0.4"/> dictionaries <pause dur="1.2"/> so <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on board" iterated="n"/> that alone should show you should prove to you that <pause dur="0.3"/> the radio interviewer had completely the wrong idea <pause dur="0.6"/> # there isn't a single <pause dur="0.3"/> dictionary <pause dur="0.7"/> there isn't we can't say is it in <pause dur="0.3"/> the <pause dur="0.3"/> dictionary <pause dur="0.5"/> there is no such thing as <pause dur="0.4"/> the <pause dur="0.2"/> dictionary <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> you know i often hear it said people say is <pause dur="0.4"/> oh look in the dictionary i say which dictionary <pause dur="0.3"/> there are hundreds thousands <pause dur="0.5"/> of dictionaries to choose from and they're all different they all have different <pause dur="0.2"/> selections of words in <pause dur="0.2"/> and they all give <pause dur="0.2"/> different slightly different definitions for each of those words so there isn't a single authority on the other hand <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> the radio interviewer was right he had got sort of the right idea <pause dur="0.5"/>

because <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> there <pause dur="1.1"/> people who <pause dur="0.2"/> compile dictionaries <pause dur="0.2"/> do have to select <pause dur="0.9"/> there are <pause dur="0.2"/> there really is a group of people <pause dur="0.3"/> who select <pause dur="0.3"/> which words <pause dur="0.2"/> go into each dictionary <pause dur="0.4"/> and which words <pause dur="0.2"/> don't go in <pause dur="1.8"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> and the reason <pause dur="0.5"/> for this is that there are actually <pause dur="0.3"/> far far too many words <pause dur="0.3"/> in English <pause dur="0.3"/> to put into <pause dur="0.3"/> any dictionary <pause dur="0.2"/> even a really big one <pause dur="0.8"/> so <pause dur="0.4"/> they've got to make a selection they've got to decide <pause dur="0.2"/> which words go in <pause dur="0.3"/> and which words stay out <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> i think it was last year i was looking on an Internet mailing list <pause dur="0.4"/> # you know they have these <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> chats <pause dur="0.6"/> and somebody had written in and said i i'm having an argument with my German girlfriend <pause dur="0.6"/> think he was American <pause dur="0.2"/> he said <pause dur="0.4"/> # i say there are more words in the English language <pause dur="0.2"/> and my girlfriend says there are more words in the German language <pause dur="0.3"/> which of us is right <pause dur="0.6"/> right <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> well it's impossible question really isn't it but <pause dur="0.3"/> # somebody else wrote in to the mailing list and said <pause dur="0.3"/> i know how you can solve that problem <pause dur="0.4"/> just get an English

dictionary <pause dur="0.2"/> and get a <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>German dictionary <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> <pause dur="0.4"/> <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> look how many words are in each <vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.3"/> and you will know <pause dur="0.2"/> which language has more <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>words <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.5"/> # complete # i mean i i should have replied to that but <pause dur="0.4"/> it just <pause dur="0.5"/> i was <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>amazed because it just seemed such a silly idea <pause dur="0.3"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> because they could have <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> taken a a little dictionary and a big dictionary and <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> and anyway <pause dur="1.5"/> the the <pause dur="0.2"/> one of the main problems is that <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> which dictionary <pause dur="0.2"/> would you <pause dur="0.4"/> would you choose <pause dur="0.7"/> to <pause dur="0.3"/> to resolve that question <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on board" iterated="n"/> the Oxford English Dictionary up there <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> contains <pause dur="0.2"/> English words that have been in use since <pause dur="0.3"/> eleven-hundred <pause dur="1.4"/> and it's <pause dur="0.3"/> just under half-a-million <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on board" iterated="n"/> half-a-million words in the <pause dur="0.2"/> largest English dictionary the Oxford English Dictionary <pause dur="1.1"/> # another very big one American one Webster's Third <trunc>internation</trunc> New International <pause dur="0.5"/> that collects words <trunc>f</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> # since seventeen-fifty-five <pause dur="0.4"/> and that's got four-hundred-and-fifty-thousand <pause dur="0.3"/> words <pause dur="1.3"/> but <pause dur="1.2"/> there are far far more than half-a-million words <pause dur="0.5"/> in English <pause dur="1.1"/> anyone <pause dur="0.8"/> ever

heard any figure quoted for how many words there are in English <pause dur="3.3"/> it it <pause dur="0.2"/> it's frequently said four-million <pause dur="1.2"/> but <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> that can't be <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>true really <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.2"/> because there are six-million <pause dur="0.6"/> registered <pause dur="0.2"/> chemical compounds <pause dur="1.0"/> suppose that's true for every language <pause dur="0.6"/> all you know there'll be <pause dur="0.2"/> if there are six-million registered chemical compounds in English there will be <pause dur="0.3"/> for every language for everyone speaking here <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> and there are about two-hundred-thousand <pause dur="0.8"/> medical terms <pause dur="2.1"/> so <pause dur="0.2"/> you couldn't possibly fit all of those in a single dictionary <pause dur="0.3"/> could you <pause dur="0.6"/> and <pause dur="0.7"/> there's another point as well <pause dur="0.3"/> new words are coming into the language every day <pause dur="0.4"/> so you'd have to keep changing the dictionary every day <pause dur="0.2"/> you'd have to keep adding to it <pause dur="0.4"/> every day <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> so there must be someone who <trunc>dec</trunc> makes decisions about what goes in <pause dur="0.3"/> what goes out </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="overhead projector is on showing transparency" iterated="n"/> right so what i'm going to be talking about is <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> new words and old words <pause dur="0.8"/> new words coming into the language old words dying out <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="2.4"/> course <pause dur="0.6"/> the number of <pause dur="0.7"/> i can't use # have to shout because # <pause dur="0.8"/>

i'm waving the microphone can you hear me </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="ss" trans="pause"> yes </u><u who="ss" trans="overlap"> no </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> # <pause dur="0.5"/> the number of people speaking English has increased enormously in a <trunc>hu</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> last hundred years <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> there were <pause dur="0.2"/> apparently <pause dur="0.7"/> a hundred-and-forty-million native speakers of English at the beginning of <pause dur="0.3"/> last century <pause dur="0.7"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> and four-hundred-million <pause dur="0.2"/> native speakers at the end of last century i don't know how <pause dur="0.3"/> that happened <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> and there were also <pause dur="0.3"/> a <trunc>hun</trunc> an extra hundred-million who spoke English as a second language <pause dur="1.8"/> # <pause dur="2.2"/> there's such a thing as the <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> Oxford World Reading <pause dur="0.3"/> Programme <pause dur="3.5"/> that's used for Oxford English dictionaries <pause dur="1.0"/> and <pause dur="1.7"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> they have sixty <pause dur="0.6"/> readers around the world whose job it is to <pause dur="0.2"/> pick up instances of new words and phrases every time they see them <pause dur="0.8"/> and they claim <pause dur="0.7"/> that there's an average of eighteen-thousand examples of new words <pause dur="0.3"/> and turns of phrase each month <pause dur="2.0"/> terrific amounts <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> each year <pause dur="2.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> about nine-hundred of these are considered important enough <pause dur="0.2"/> to put in the Oxford English Dictionary <pause dur="0.3"/> neologisms are <pause dur="0.7"/> new words <pause dur="1.6"/> # <pause dur="5.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> and this century <pause dur="2.0"/> there've been

about <pause dur="0.2"/> ninety-thousand new words <pause dur="0.2"/> recorded so in the last a hundred years <pause dur="0.5"/> ninety-thousand new words have been recorded for English <pause dur="0.4"/> that's apparently is about <pause dur="0.5"/> twenty-five <pause dur="0.9"/> per cent there's been an increase <pause dur="0.6"/> of twenty-five per cent <pause dur="0.3"/> in the vocabulary of <trunc>eng</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> of English <pause dur="0.3"/> since nineteen-hundred <pause dur="1.2"/> it's not very good news for any of us <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>is it <pause dur="0.3"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> if we're if we're learning English <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.2"/> it's a rather frightening thought that # <pause dur="0.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> even if you just learn the new words <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> there'd be ninety extra to learn <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="1.1"/> if you just look at <pause dur="0.3"/> any newspaper <pause dur="1.4"/> you'll see that this is true in fact you'll <pause dur="0.3"/> if you if you look at any newspaper <pause dur="0.2"/> any day of the week <pause dur="0.4"/> you will find <pause dur="0.3"/> words that aren't <pause dur="0.3"/> yet in a dictionary perhaps they'll never get into a dictionary <pause dur="0.2"/> i just tested this out yesterday i i had a look at Time magazine for this week <pause dur="0.5"/> and # the Independent <pause dur="0.8"/> and i i've got some some examples here <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> i i read <pause dur="0.3"/> the past year's <pause dur="0.3"/> tech-led <pause dur="0.3"/> decline <pause dur="0.4"/> tech <pause dur="0.3"/> T-E-C-H-<pause dur="0.3"/>hyphen-<pause dur="0.2"/>L-E-D tech-led <pause dur="0.2"/> decline <pause dur="0.2"/> now i'm prepared

to bet that tech-led <pause dur="0.3"/> isn't in any dictionary <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> and another one <pause dur="0.3"/> weblogs or blogs <pause dur="0.7"/> the daily personal diaries that many write on their web pages <pause dur="0.5"/> so a a diary on <pause dur="0.2"/> on your web page is <trunc>c</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> is now called a blog <pause dur="0.7"/><vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.3"/> whether that will ever make its way into a dictionary <pause dur="0.3"/> i don't know <pause dur="0.4"/> but it's <pause dur="0.6"/> maybe this is the first time it's ever appeared in print the word <pause dur="0.3"/> in Time magazine <unclear>as talking</unclear> <pause dur="0.8"/> and again i have from the Independent <pause dur="0.4"/> like-for-like sales were up <pause dur="0.2"/> seven per cent <pause dur="0.2"/> like-for-like with hyphens like <pause dur="0.2"/> hyphen for hyphen like <pause dur="0.8"/> new words <pause dur="0.8"/> # and # <pause dur="0.6"/> a lone package rated above junk status <pause dur="0.2"/> junk status <pause dur="1.0"/> these these are words <pause dur="0.4"/> that <pause dur="2.0"/> are not officially recognized <pause dur="0.8"/> in any dictionary yet <pause dur="0.4"/> but they're appearing all the time in every time you open a newspaper <pause dur="0.2"/> in conversation <pause dur="0.2"/> new words occurring all the time <pause dur="0.3"/> why <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> why do we keep on <pause dur="0.3"/> adding new words to English <pause dur="0.3"/> when we've got four-million or <pause dur="0.4"/> ten-million or however many already <pause dur="0.7"/> it it would <trunc>im</trunc> <pause dur="0.4"/> seems a bit odd doesn't it that <pause dur="0.4"/> the

language should be growing to such an extent <pause dur="0.9"/> but <pause dur="0.7"/> in fact <pause dur="0.8"/> we've got to <pause dur="0.2"/> add new words <pause dur="1.3"/> because new things are happening all the time </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="overhead projector is on showing transparency" iterated="n"/> this # <pause dur="0.2"/> this <pause dur="0.5"/> table <pause dur="0.3"/> shows how <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> new <pause dur="0.5"/> different types of new words <pause dur="0.3"/> came into the language in the last a hundred years <pause dur="0.3"/> so <pause dur="0.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> the first column is the most frequent <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.6"/> the greatest area of lexical growth <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> and this one is the <pause dur="0.7"/> smallest area of lexical growth <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> but they're all <pause dur="0.4"/> areas in which new words <pause dur="0.4"/> were came into the language <pause dur="0.2"/> so in the early nineteen-hundreds <pause dur="1.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> there weren't any words for cars things connected with cars <pause dur="0.2"/> so there was a massive rise in <pause dur="0.3"/> the number of words in English <pause dur="0.5"/> that were connected with cars <pause dur="0.8"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> and also aeroplanes of course because <pause dur="0.4"/> they were <pause dur="0.2"/> # they hadn't been in existence before <pause dur="0.5"/> you'll notice that in <pause dur="0.2"/> at this time <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> don't know if anyone's a French speaker here <pause dur="1.1"/> French speakers <pause dur="0.3"/> well <pause dur="0.2"/> a lot of <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> English words <pause dur="0.3"/> are about aeroplanes are of French origin <pause dur="0.5"/> and that's because the French

were very very good <pause dur="0.3"/> at # <pause dur="0.2"/> aviation and # the science of developing aeroplanes <pause dur="0.2"/> and so we borrowed <pause dur="0.3"/> our words <pause dur="0.3"/> for aviation from the French <pause dur="1.1"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> nineteen-twenties <pause dur="0.3"/> lots of # <pause dur="0.7"/> dance music and # <pause dur="0.4"/> the <pause dur="1.0"/> the <pause dur="0.3"/> what were they called the # roaring twenties they were known as when <pause dur="0.3"/> everyone went out and had a lot of fun between the wars <pause dur="0.8"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> nineteen-thirties and forties <pause dur="1.6"/> war <pause dur="0.3"/><vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.4"/> lots of words connected with war came in <pause dur="0.5"/> here <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> obviously the thirties and forties <pause dur="0.2"/> also for the first time <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> nuclear power <pause dur="0.2"/> and for the very first time <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> computers and space <pause dur="0.3"/> new words for computers and <pause dur="0.2"/> space travel started coming into the language <pause dur="1.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> # <pause dur="2.2"/> can you guess <pause dur="0.2"/> looking at this <pause dur="0.2"/> can you guess <pause dur="0.5"/> what about the sixties and the seventies <pause dur="0.8"/> what kind of words were coming into the language in the sixties and the seventies </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="sf1274" trans="pause"> computers </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="sm1275" trans="pause"> computers </u><pause dur="2.4"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> computers <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> yes absolutely right computers <pause dur="0.4"/> was the commonest <pause dur="0.2"/> any anything else </u><pause dur="0.5"/> <u who="sf1276" trans="pause"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> youth </u><u who="nf1271" trans="latching"> mm </u><pause dur="0.7"/> <u who="sf1277" trans="pause"> hippies </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> yes that kind of thing <pause dur="0.3"/> youth <pause dur="0.4"/> #

music <pause dur="0.7"/> we think of the sixties as being particularly a time of hippies and <vocal desc="cough" iterated="n" n="ss"/> <gap reason="inaudible due to audience noise" extent="1 sec"/><pause dur="0.6"/> pop music and things </u><u who="sm1278" trans="overlap"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> mm </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="sm1278" trans="pause"> drugs </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> drugs yeah <pause dur="0.2"/> actually <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="2"/> <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> yeah you're you're you're absolutely right <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> here we got <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> drugs started coming in then <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> don't know <unclear>actually</unclear> drugs in the end computers <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> were the main <pause dur="0.4"/> growth <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> sixties were youth culture and music <pause dur="1.0"/> and the first <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> for the first time <pause dur="0.2"/> we've got <pause dur="0.2"/> this which well i'll talk about <pause dur="0.2"/> in a few minutes <pause dur="0.6"/> the idea that you have to have special words for special groups of people so as not to offend them <pause dur="1.2"/> # <pause dur="1.3"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> and then the eighties eighties are characterized in Britain at least by a lot of concern with <pause dur="0.3"/> money <pause dur="0.8"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> people were very interested in money in the eighties and making a lot of it <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> # and also the environment for the first time we started <pause dur="0.4"/> words like # the greenhouse effect <pause dur="0.2"/> actually had <pause dur="0.3"/> had <pause dur="0.3"/> existed since about the nineteen-thirties <pause dur="0.3"/> but <pause dur="0.2"/> people <pause dur="0.2"/> hadn't <pause dur="0.2"/> <trunc>n</trunc> ordinary people <pause dur="0.3"/> who were not scientists <pause dur="0.3"/> they had never heard

these terms <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> until the eighties and then <pause dur="0.6"/> they became <pause dur="0.3"/> popular <pause dur="1.5"/> and <trunc>t</trunc> <pause dur="0.3"/> in the nineteen-nineties can you think of one area where there's been a huge growth in the nineteen-nineties </u><u who="sf1279" trans="overlap"> Internet </u><u who="sm1280" trans="overlap"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> </u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> absolutely <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> yes <pause dur="0.3"/> # </u><u who="sm1280" trans="overlap"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/></u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> it's actually third but <pause dur="0.4"/> to us it seems to be a very very <pause dur="0.2"/> important area of growth </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="overhead projector is on showing transparency" iterated="n"/> we need new words to <pause dur="5.9"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> to talk about new things that didn't exist before cars and <pause dur="0.3"/> planes and the Internet <pause dur="0.8"/> # we also need new words <pause dur="1.3"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> as <pause dur="0.4"/> a quicker <pause dur="0.3"/> and more convenient way of saying something <pause dur="1.6"/> we live in a world where <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="1.4"/> everything seems to be moving faster and faster <pause dur="0.6"/> and there are # things that we can do <pause dur="0.6"/> to <pause dur="0.5"/> make our <pause dur="0.7"/> speech <pause dur="1.6"/> more succinct <pause dur="0.6"/> # one <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> one thing that we've been doing a lot in the twentieth or we did in the twentieth century <pause dur="0.2"/> was to add <pause dur="0.2"/> <trunc>lie</trunc> # wise <pause dur="0.3"/> have you come across this <pause dur="0.4"/> where you say <pause dur="0.2"/> instead of <pause dur="0.5"/> with regard to or as far as something is concerned <pause dur="0.3"/> you <pause dur="0.4"/> make it the the

sentence much shorter by saying # <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> oh i'm all prepared lessonwise <pause dur="0.3"/> or <pause dur="0.3"/> # i know what to do exam<pause dur="0.2"/>wise <pause dur="0.3"/> it's it's informal it's not considered correct English <pause dur="0.2"/> but it's much quicker than saying <pause dur="0.2"/> as far as exams are concerned <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> another <pause dur="0.2"/> similar one is like <pause dur="0.4"/> any German speakers <pause dur="1.6"/> no German speakers it's supposed to be <pause dur="0.2"/> the influence of the German language on American English because of a lot of German speakers <pause dur="0.2"/> in America and in <pause dur="0.5"/> <trunc>germ</trunc> in <pause dur="0.3"/> the German language has got </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="sm1280" trans="pause"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/></u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> there is a German speaker <pause dur="0.4"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" dur="1"/><pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="2"/><pause dur="1.0"/> good are you a German speaker <pause dur="0.6"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> like to comment on that </u><pause dur="0.7"/> <u who="sm1280" trans="pause"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="2 secs"/></u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> is <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> do you <pause dur="0.3"/> concur <pause dur="0.2"/> yes what i'm saying is correct <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="2"/><pause dur="1.0"/> you can ask him for more details afterwards <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="1.8"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> another <pause dur="0.9"/> another reason we new <pause dur="0.2"/> we need new words <pause dur="0.2"/> is because the old words have become offensive this happens all the time <pause dur="0.5"/> you have a word <pause dur="0.4"/> it <pause dur="0.3"/> seems a bit rude so you have another one <pause dur="0.2"/> and then that seems a bit rude so you have another one <pause dur="0.2"/> a a typical <pause dur="0.3"/> # example of this is <pause dur="0.2"/> the word for

toilet or lavatory we keep changing it all the time because each time we think of a new word <pause dur="0.2"/> then everyone's offended by that as well so <pause dur="0.3"/> so in America they've got to this ridiculous situation <pause dur="0.2"/> what do they call it in America </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="ss" trans="pause"> restroom <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> </u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> restroom we think that seems a bit silly because <pause dur="0.3"/> it's nothing <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> to do <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="3"/> <pause dur="0.4"/> with any rest at all <pause dur="0.4"/> but # <pause dur="0.5"/><vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/> <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> but they're trying very hard i'm sure they'll have to think of another term soon because people will be embarrassed to say <trunc>res</trunc> restroom <pause dur="0.8"/> and # <pause dur="0.7"/> # going <pause dur="0.9"/> we'll talk about political correctness again in a moment but <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> at one time <pause dur="0.7"/> people could be described as fat <pause dur="0.9"/> but that is considered offensive <pause dur="0.3"/> now so <pause dur="0.5"/> <trunc>peop</trunc> <pause dur="0.5"/> you use words like # <pause dur="0.6"/> well chunky <pause dur="0.4"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" dur="1"/><pause dur="0.3"/> and # <pause dur="0.5"/> have you heard of <pause dur="0.4"/> # it's a bit of a joke but things like horizontally challenged <pause dur="1.2"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> or circumferentially <pause dur="0.2"/> challenged <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> ways to get round saying that somebody is fat <pause dur="1.4"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> and we also <pause dur="0.9"/> use <pause dur="0.6"/> new add new words <pause dur="1.4"/> to create little groups of people <pause dur="0.5"/> and reinforce their membership so they feel

they belong <pause dur="1.1"/> have have any of you heard of Cockney rhyming slang <pause dur="1.0"/> have you come across that <pause dur="1.6"/> it's a slang <pause dur="0.5"/> it's slang that's used <pause dur="0.2"/> have you heard Cockney you know the word Cockney it means people living in London <pause dur="0.3"/> well in a <trunc>cert</trunc> in a <pause dur="0.2"/> right in the centre of London <pause dur="0.6"/> and <pause dur="0.3"/> there's a kind of slang that is used <pause dur="0.2"/> by Londoners <pause dur="0.4"/> where instead of saying <pause dur="1.1"/> the word they say another word with <pause dur="0.2"/> which rhymes <pause dur="0.8"/> with it <pause dur="0.8"/> so a telephone <pause dur="0.4"/> is a dog and bone <pause dur="2.0"/> # <pause dur="1.2"/> there's lots and lots of examples of this <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> and <pause dur="1.0"/> some of them <pause dur="0.4"/> are used by lots of people all around # <pause dur="0.2"/> Britain <pause dur="0.2"/> and some of them <pause dur="0.2"/> really are only used in London <pause dur="0.3"/> but the original idea apparently was to keep <pause dur="0.2"/> outsiders out apparently <trunc>or</trunc> it originated with thieves <pause dur="0.2"/> who wanted to talk about all their plans for stealing things <pause dur="0.3"/> without other people understanding what they were saying <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> but also teenagers have slang words <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> don't they teenage slang words like sad <pause dur="0.5"/> and wicked <pause dur="0.4"/> don't know if you <pause dur="0.2"/> come across <pause dur="0.8"/> words like that <pause dur="0.5"/>

# </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/><u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="overhead projector is on showing transparency" iterated="n"/> do you know do you know have you come across # <pause dur="2.2"/> the word sad <pause dur="1.1"/> in slang <pause dur="0.2"/> meaning <pause dur="1.8"/> no <pause dur="0.5"/> # it used we all know what the <trunc>pr</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="1.1"/> dictionary meaning is <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> which is <pause dur="0.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> not this <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> not this <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> these are <pause dur="0.5"/> this keeps changing <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> for this one <pause dur="1.0"/> mournful not not happy <pause dur="0.4"/> basically <pause dur="0.3"/> yeah <pause dur="0.3"/> but <pause dur="0.3"/> <trunc>i</trunc> it's used a great deal now in <pause dur="0.4"/> by teenagers at least <pause dur="0.4"/> to mean <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> to refer to someone who's a social failure <pause dur="1.0"/> so or <pause dur="1.3"/> <trunc>someth</trunc> somebody who's not <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> a great social success basically <pause dur="1.2"/> so he's really sad <pause dur="0.2"/> just # <pause dur="0.5"/> just stays at home and listens to classical music or something <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="2"/> <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> and <pause dur="0.5"/> that <pause dur="0.3"/> that meaning has evolved <pause dur="0.4"/> amongst teenagers <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> because it makes them feel that they all understand each other and they're all part of the same group and <pause dur="0.2"/> other people are excluded from that group <pause dur="3.0"/> so you'll notice from this <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> that # <pause dur="1.6"/> when we say new words <pause dur="0.6"/> we are not usually talking about completely <pause dur="0.5"/> new words <pause dur="0.3"/> we're talking about new meanings <pause dur="0.3"/> for old words </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/><u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="overhead projector is on showing transparency" iterated="n"/> so <pause dur="0.9"/> when we talk about new words how do we form them <pause dur="0.7"/> we can <pause dur="0.2"/> put <pause dur="0.4"/> words like

sad <pause dur="0.4"/> to a new <pause dur="0.3"/> to a new use so it used to mean <pause dur="0.3"/> unhappy <pause dur="0.3"/> now it means <pause dur="0.3"/> not very socially <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> well integrated <pause dur="0.8"/> it's very difficult to measure this <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> isn't it because <pause dur="0.2"/> how can you tell when a word is changing its meaning <pause dur="0.4"/> they change perhaps their meanings just slightly is it a new word or is it just <pause dur="0.2"/> a slightly different interpretation of an old word so <pause dur="0.3"/> that's the most difficult one <pause dur="0.3"/> to measure <pause dur="2.3"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> the most <pause dur="0.9"/> common <pause dur="0.3"/> way <pause dur="0.2"/> of creating new words in English <pause dur="0.3"/> is to combine <pause dur="0.2"/> existing words <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> or word parts <pause dur="0.5"/> right <pause dur="0.8"/> this they say that <pause dur="0.4"/> three-quarters of all the new vocabulary in English <pause dur="0.4"/> certainly a <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> big majority all the new <pause dur="0.3"/> words in English <pause dur="0.3"/> are <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> constructed <pause dur="0.2"/> in this way they're combinations <pause dur="0.5"/> so <pause dur="0.3"/> some of the examples that i <pause dur="0.4"/> gave out # <pause dur="2.6"/> a few minutes ago like like-for-like <pause dur="0.8"/> and tech-led <pause dur="0.5"/> right <pause dur="0.3"/> are <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> combinations of <pause dur="0.4"/> word part <pause dur="0.3"/> the World Wide Web <pause dur="1.7"/> # <pause dur="1.2"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> you can <pause dur="0.4"/> there's also such a thing <pause dur="0.5"/> as a blend <pause dur="1.0"/> where <pause dur="0.2"/> you take <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="1.5"/> you take <pause dur="1.9"/> parts of words and <pause dur="0.3"/> concertina them together <pause dur="0.3"/> so that they're not <pause dur="0.2"/> just two bits of <pause dur="0.3"/> like tech-<pause dur="0.2"/>led or World Wide Web <pause dur="0.3"/> but

they're squashed together so that you can't really work out what they <pause dur="0.4"/> what the parts were <pause dur="0.5"/> a famous example of this that's often used is <pause dur="0.2"/> motel what's motel </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/><u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <event desc="overhead projector is on showing blank transparency" iterated="n"/> it's a very <pause dur="0.7"/> it's a very very common <kinesic desc="writes on transparency" iterated="y" dur="4"/><pause dur="0.3"/> way of creating <pause dur="0.8"/> new words <pause dur="1.2"/> nowadays motel is </u><pause dur="0.6"/> <u who="ss" trans="pause"> motor hotel </u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> motor hotel <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> i'll try some more on you <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="writes on transparency" iterated="y" dur="3"/> this one <pause dur="0.5"/> was very common a few years back but it doesn't seem to be used so much now <pause dur="0.3"/> do you know what it is </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="sf1281" trans="pause"> channel tunnel </u><pause dur="1.1"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> yes the channel tunnel </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="ss" trans="pause"> oh </u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" dur="1"/><pause dur="2.0"/> these ones <kinesic desc="writes on transparency" iterated="y" dur="8"/> are very common at the moment you'll <trunc>he</trunc> you'll you'll certainly come across these <pause dur="1.6"/> do you know this one <pause dur="2.7"/> it's a new idea <pause dur="2.2"/> it's a sort of combination of information <pause dur="0.2"/> and entertainment a lot of <pause dur="0.2"/> a lot of the stuff on the Internet <pause dur="0.2"/> is what you call <pause dur="0.2"/> infotainment <pause dur="0.3"/> you learn a bit but you're enjoying yourself at the same time <pause dur="0.9"/> a new concept <pause dur="0.9"/> and # <pause dur="1.6"/><kinesic desc="writes on transparency" iterated="y" dur="4"/> how about this one <pause dur="1.6"/> again <pause dur="1.2"/> a new idea really <pause dur="2.8"/> you know

that one <pause dur="3.8"/> it's a mixture between a documentary and a soap opera <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="2"/> # i don't know if this relates in some ways to what <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="indicates observer" iterated="n"/> <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/>'s talking about on his talk # </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="om1282" trans="pause"> <unclear>no</unclear> </u><pause dur="0.7"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> no not at all <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> the the idea that you can <pause dur="0.2"/> is a documentary is supposed to be telling <pause dur="0.4"/> a true <pause dur="0.3"/> account of # <pause dur="0.9"/> you know some information <pause dur="0.2"/> and a soap opera is a dramatization <pause dur="0.3"/> but sometimes nowadays on television you can't really tell <pause dur="0.7"/> you know it's a sort of mixture between the two because they're slightly <pause dur="0.8"/> setting up situations so that they're more entertaining and they're more emotional <pause dur="0.3"/> than maybe everyday life <pause dur="0.3"/> would be <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/> any anyone know any more blends <pause dur="1.3"/> it's a very very common way of forming words in English at the moment <pause dur="2.0"/> a famous one that dates to the nineteenth century is <pause dur="0.2"/> brunch you all know brunch <pause dur="0.7"/> brunch breakfast and lunch <pause dur="0.9"/> but i'm sure if you look out you'll see <pause dur="0.4"/> you'll see plenty more </u><pause dur="1.8"/><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/><u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="overhead projector is on showing transparency" iterated="n"/> so <pause dur="1.0"/> that's a <pause dur="0.2"/> that's a <pause dur="0.2"/> a method of combining <pause dur="3.0"/> # <pause dur="1.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> another way of forming new words is to shorten them <pause dur="1.2"/> you can knock

off the end <pause dur="0.2"/> so we <pause dur="0.2"/> we talk about porn <pause dur="0.2"/> rather than pornography <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> these days <pause dur="1.1"/> you can do something called <pause dur="0.2"/> <trunc>in</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> an initialism <pause dur="1.3"/> and that is <pause dur="0.8"/> when you take the letters <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> and pronounce <pause dur="0.2"/> the initial letters of each of the word # each of the words separately <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> common examples today you'll <trunc>th</trunc> come across a lot are <pause dur="0.3"/> B-S-E <pause dur="1.0"/> yeah you've all heard of B-S-E </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="sf1283" trans="pause"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/></u><pause dur="0.9"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> it's mad cow disease <pause dur="0.2"/> you've all heard of mad cow disease </u><u who="ss" trans="latching"> oh </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> yeah <pause dur="0.2"/> it's <pause dur="0.4"/> it's i i forgot it's <pause dur="0.3"/> bovine spongiform <pause dur="0.2"/> encephalitis <pause dur="0.4"/> is the correct <pause dur="0.4"/> full name <pause dur="0.2"/> but we call it B-S-E <pause dur="0.5"/> # one that's very topical <pause dur="0.3"/> F-M-D <pause dur="0.7"/> do you know what F-M-D is <pause dur="0.7"/> you'll see it in the newspapers <pause dur="0.8"/> foot and mouth disease that's right <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> i'm never sure <pause dur="1.7"/><kinesic desc="changes transparency" iterated="y" dur="3"/> i'm never sure whether <pause dur="0.4"/> how to pronounce <pause dur="0.2"/> this one <pause dur="5.2"/><kinesic desc="writes on transparency" iterated="y" dur="3"/> have you come across this </u><u who="ss" trans="latching"> <gap reason="inaudible, multiple speakers" extent="3 secs"/> </u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> yes how do you pronounce it <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>though <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.9"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="2"/> do you say it's A F-A-Qs </u><pause dur="0.5"/> <u who="sm1284" trans="pause"> i think you do </u><u who="nf1271" trans="latching"> you say it's A F-O-A-Qs yeah <pause dur="0.2"/> frequently asked questions <pause dur="0.4"/> we say <pause dur="0.2"/> <trunc>F-A</trunc> <pause dur="0.3"/> have you come across F-A-Qs <pause dur="0.9"/> no <pause dur="0.4"/><vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> you you probably will <pause dur="0.6"/>

during the next year you'll probably come across F-A-Qs <pause dur="0.4"/> # frequently asked questions <pause dur="0.4"/> a list of questions and answers that people often ask <pause dur="0.3"/> <trunc>sa</trunc> to save people the trouble of <trunc>as</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> answering <pause dur="0.9"/> questions over and over again <pause dur="0.2"/> they put them the put the # # answers to the frequently asked questions down all at once <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> it's an initialism <pause dur="1.8"/> the other way to do it would be <pause dur="0.2"/> to make it into an acronym <pause dur="0.5"/> and call it a FAQ <pause dur="0.9"/> i don't know if anyone's done that yet <pause dur="0.5"/> in English we have initialisms <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> like <pause dur="0.2"/> F-A-Q F-M-D B-S-E <pause dur="0.4"/> and we have <pause dur="0.3"/> acronyms <pause dur="0.4"/> like <pause dur="0.4"/> # AIDS <pause dur="0.7"/> yeah <pause dur="0.8"/> and NATO <pause dur="1.4"/> yeah <pause dur="0.4"/> i don't <pause dur="0.2"/> really know why <pause dur="0.2"/> some words in English are pronounced as initialisms <pause dur="0.4"/> and some are pronounced as acronyms <pause dur="1.3"/> perhaps it's just how easy it is to pronounce the word <pause dur="0.6"/> i know in some languages <pause dur="0.4"/> they always pronounce the <pause dur="0.2"/> new words as acronyms they don't pronounce them as initialisms am i right <pause dur="0.6"/> some languages tend to use more acronyms <pause dur="0.6"/> but English uses quite a lot of initialisms <pause dur="0.9"/> so sometimes if you're thinking of a

translation for a word <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> in your language <pause dur="0.6"/> you'll find that in English you have to pronounce each letter <pause dur="0.6"/> individually have you come across that <pause dur="0.7"/> has anyone come across that <pause dur="1.4"/> not sure <pause dur="0.2"/> think think about it <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="4.2"/> the interesting this is that there were <kinesic desc="changes transparency" iterated="y" dur="4"/> virtually no acronyms <pause dur="0.3"/> a hundred years ago <pause dur="1.9"/> there <trunc>w</trunc> there weren't any <pause dur="0.9"/> if you look at the language <pause dur="0.6"/> as it was written in nineteen-hundred <pause dur="1.0"/> there were no acronyms <pause dur="1.1"/> and the reason for this of course is all the <pause dur="0.3"/> medical developments and all the organizations and entities that have <pause dur="0.4"/> grown up <pause dur="0.2"/> in the last a hundred years <pause dur="0.5"/> and <pause dur="1.5"/> with such long names <pause dur="0.3"/> that people couldn't keep on <pause dur="0.2"/> saying the long name <pause dur="0.2"/> and therefore they had to find a way of shortening it <pause dur="1.3"/> and i expect that's true <pause dur="0.2"/> in everyone's languages here everyone's <pause dur="0.3"/> everyone's had the same experience </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/><u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> another way <pause dur="0.2"/> of forming new words <pause dur="0.3"/> is to borrow them <pause dur="1.0"/> from other languages <pause dur="1.3"/> and we do that <pause dur="1.4"/> quite a lot <pause dur="0.2"/> about five per cent of all the new words <pause dur="0.5"/> in English that have <pause dur="0.2"/> come into English

this century <pause dur="0.5"/> are borrowed <pause dur="0.3"/> from other languages <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> is there any particular area where you think that English <pause dur="0.3"/> borrows a lot </u><pause dur="0.7"/> <u who="sm1285" trans="pause"> food </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> food <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>yes that's right <pause dur="0.9"/> <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/>food's the main one isn't it every time you go to a menu # <pause dur="0.2"/> look at a menu in a restaurant in Britain <pause dur="0.5"/> all the words are foreign <pause dur="0.6"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> i wonder why that is <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> we've <pause dur="0.4"/> especially <pause dur="0.2"/> in the last hundred years we've <pause dur="0.5"/> # discovered that other countries have better food than we have <pause dur="0.8"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> <pause dur="0.2"/> and we've borrowed <pause dur="0.4"/> tried to borrow the food we've certainly borrowed the words i don't know how successfully we've managed <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>to borrow the food but <pause dur="0.3"/> we've we've <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> we got the words all right <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="1.7"/> other areas <pause dur="0.2"/> # </u><pause dur="1.0"/> <u who="sm1286" trans="pause"> animals </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> animals yes i suppose that's so but i don't know <pause dur="0.7"/> have there been many new <pause dur="0.3"/> new animals discovered recently <pause dur="0.2"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> in the last hundred years or so <pause dur="0.4"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> <pause dur="0.4"/> maybe <pause dur="0.4"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" dur="1"/></u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="sm1286" trans="pause"> for example orang-utan </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> yes orang-utan is <pause dur="0.2"/>

# from </u><u who="sm1286" trans="overlap"> from Indonesia </u><u who="nf1271" trans="latching"> from Indonesia yes yeah so that's certainly i don't know when orang-utan was borrowed into English <pause dur="0.3"/> but that's certainly <pause dur="0.2"/> certainly in the last hundred years i'd say yeah <pause dur="0.7"/> yeah <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> political <pause dur="1.4"/> things connected with politics <pause dur="0.2"/> borrowed from other <pause dur="0.2"/> languages <pause dur="0.4"/> in the <pause dur="0.3"/> Cold War <pause dur="0.7"/> <trunc>s</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> immediately after the Cold War a lot of Russian <pause dur="0.7"/> words like glasnost and so on <pause dur="0.2"/> and nowadays i suppose things like # <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="1.1"/> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> <pause dur="0.4"/> fatwa <pause dur="1.1"/> have been borrowed <pause dur="0.2"/> into English <pause dur="1.3"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> and the last one <pause dur="1.2"/> is <pause dur="0.8"/> the last way and <pause dur="0.3"/> really a very uncommon way <pause dur="0.4"/> of <pause dur="0.2"/> forming new words in English <pause dur="0.4"/> is <pause dur="0.6"/> to <trunc>c</trunc> coin them out of nothing <pause dur="0.2"/> to make them out of nothing <pause dur="0.6"/> that's really pretty rare <pause dur="0.2"/> in English i don't know about in other <pause dur="0.5"/> # languages <pause dur="0.4"/> but <pause dur="0.2"/> we <pause dur="0.3"/> that's a last resort <pause dur="0.6"/> in English <pause dur="0.4"/> we only do it if we really can't think of a way of <pause dur="0.6"/> using bits of old words or borrowing somebody else's words <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/><kinesic desc="changes transparency" iterated="y" dur="5"/> one very famous example <pause dur="1.5"/> is this <pause dur="1.5"/> cover it up like that then you won't be able <pause dur="0.2"/> does anyone know what that word means </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="ss" trans="pause"> <gap reason="inaudible, multiple speakers" extent="4 secs"/></u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause">

you search the Internet a search of the Internet <pause dur="0.5"/> oh <pause dur="0.5"/> well maybe it's got another meaning as well </u><pause dur="0.5"/> <u who="sm1287" trans="pause"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> </u><pause dur="0.9"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> it it is a mathematical term <pause dur="0.3"/> yeah it's a mathematical term <pause dur="1.0"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> that's what it means i personally have never had cause to use it but # <pause dur="0.5"/> if you're a mathematician <pause dur="0.2"/> you may do <pause dur="0.7"/> <trunc>a</trunc> <trunc>a</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> apparently the story of this word is that <pause dur="0.2"/> a a famous mathematician <pause dur="1.1"/> can't remember his name <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> <trunc>im</trunc> <pause dur="0.9"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> wanted a term <pause dur="1.0"/> to <pause dur="0.5"/> describe this number <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> there isn't a word in English <pause dur="0.9"/> he asked his grandson <pause dur="1.3"/> and his grandson only happened to be about a year old <pause dur="0.2"/> at the <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>time <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> <pause dur="0.3"/> <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> and his grandson said googol <pause dur="0.3"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="1"/> and so that was the word that he used that's the story <pause dur="0.5"/> i understand is anyone here a Tamil <pause dur="0.2"/> speaker <pause dur="0.4"/> does anyone speak Tamil <pause dur="1.6"/> no <pause dur="0.6"/> because in some languages <pause dur="0.2"/> some languages are much richer <pause dur="0.5"/> in number words than English is <pause dur="0.2"/> and i understand in some <pause dur="0.2"/> Indian <pause dur="0.2"/> languages they've got many more words for numbers than we have in English <pause dur="0.6"/> but # and i don't know <pause dur="0.2"/> what they <pause dur="0.2"/> call

googol <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> but <pause dur="0.5"/> that's the English word <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="3.4"/> another one was <pause dur="0.2"/> is quark <pause dur="0.8"/> do you <pause dur="0.2"/> you know quark </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="sm1288" trans="pause"> no </u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> it's # <pause dur="0.4"/> it's a a group of subatomic particles is what it means <pause dur="0.3"/> and it was originally used as a nonsense word in <pause dur="0.3"/> the novels of <pause dur="0.2"/> do you know the novelist James Joyce an Irish novelist James Joyce <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> and he invented this word it didn't mean anything <pause dur="0.5"/> but it was taken by <pause dur="0.2"/> # physicists <pause dur="0.3"/> just <pause dur="0.2"/> they've just used it <pause dur="0.8"/> to <pause dur="0.6"/> for their science </u><pause dur="0.2"/><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/><u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> <kinesic desc="changes transparency" iterated="y" dur="3"/> okay so lots and lots of new words coming in <pause dur="0.2"/> to the language all the time <pause dur="1.2"/> but how many of them will actually last this is the problem for people making dictionaries <pause dur="0.7"/> even if they did record all the new words <pause dur="0.4"/> then they'd discover that <pause dur="0.2"/> a great many of them <pause dur="0.6"/> didn't remain in the language anyway <pause dur="0.3"/> they came <pause dur="0.2"/> they lasted a a year <pause dur="0.7"/> maybe less than that <pause dur="0.2"/> then they disappeared again <pause dur="0.7"/> and so <pause dur="0.2"/> would hardly be worth recording them in a dictionary <pause dur="0.7"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> # <pause dur="1.3"/> so in this period i'm afraid i haven't got any more recent figures <pause dur="0.2"/> there were three-thousand-five-hundred-and-sixty-five new words

recorded <pause dur="0.3"/> in <pause dur="0.2"/> the Oxford English Dictionary <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> fifty-eight per cent of them had fallen out of use again <pause dur="1.1"/> by nineteen-ninety-three <pause dur="1.9"/> # so why what happens why do these words <pause dur="0.2"/> fall out of use <pause dur="1.5"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> some of them <pause dur="0.9"/> because <pause dur="0.2"/> they refer to things that never happened <pause dur="0.7"/> there was at one time for example proposed <pause dur="0.4"/> a a union between Scandinavia <pause dur="0.2"/> and the U-K <pause dur="0.6"/> and it was called Uniscan <pause dur="0.9"/> but it never happened so we never talk about it any more <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="2.9"/> more commonly perhaps <pause dur="0.4"/> you get <pause dur="1.7"/> new <pause dur="0.2"/> a <pause dur="0.2"/> a new thing <pause dur="0.2"/> a new <pause dur="0.3"/> idea or <pause dur="0.3"/> something <pause dur="0.2"/> arising <pause dur="0.6"/> and <pause dur="0.3"/> people in different <pause dur="0.5"/> parts of the English speaking world <pause dur="0.6"/> think <pause dur="0.2"/> of different names for it <pause dur="0.3"/> so you've got several names <pause dur="0.2"/> for the same <pause dur="0.8"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> thing <pause dur="1.0"/> and <pause dur="0.4"/> they're in competition <pause dur="0.8"/> and eventually <pause dur="0.3"/> one word becomes the common word for that thing <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> can you guess <pause dur="1.5"/> what these are for instance <pause dur="0.4"/> these are <pause dur="0.2"/> words that <pause dur="0.2"/> were originally used for <pause dur="1.4"/> yeah <pause dur="1.7"/> can anyone guess <pause dur="0.8"/> either of them </u><pause dur="3.6"/> <u who="sm1289" trans="pause"> breathalyser </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> yeah that's right yes intoximeter was another name for a breathalyser you know <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="demonstrates pretend breathalyser" iterated="n"/><vocal desc="blow" iterated="n"/> when you have to blow if

you're driving and you've had something to drink and the police stop you and <pause dur="0.2"/> ask you to blow <pause dur="0.2"/> so they can tell how much alcohol <pause dur="0.2"/> you've drunk <pause dur="0.9"/> nowadays it's called a breathalyser <pause dur="0.3"/> when it was first invented <pause dur="0.2"/> some people called it an intoximeter <pause dur="0.3"/> some people called it a breathalyser <pause dur="0.3"/> breathalyser <pause dur="0.2"/> won <pause dur="0.6"/> what about this one <pause dur="3.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> any ideas <pause dur="1.7"/> it's genetic engineering <pause dur="1.2"/> don't know why genetic engineering <pause dur="0.3"/> won <pause dur="0.2"/> and algeny <pause dur="0.2"/> lost <pause dur="0.2"/> but <pause dur="0.9"/> # i <pause dur="0.3"/> i had <pause dur="0.2"/> a colleague who's now retired <pause dur="0.3"/> worked here at this university <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> with a group of biologists <pause dur="0.3"/> who were working on <pause dur="0.3"/> some <pause dur="0.4"/> trying to identify <pause dur="0.3"/> some <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> microscopic organisms <pause dur="0.4"/> some bacteria <pause dur="0.7"/> and they were working with a group in California <pause dur="1.1"/> and <pause dur="1.4"/> each time they discovered a new bacteria <pause dur="0.5"/> the group in Britain <pause dur="1.3"/> gave a name <pause dur="0.2"/> to the new bacteria <pause dur="0.7"/> and the group in California <pause dur="0.8"/> gave a name <pause dur="0.4"/> to the bacteria <pause dur="0.5"/> so there were two different names <pause dur="0.2"/> for the same <pause dur="0.2"/> bacteria <pause dur="0.8"/> and <pause dur="0.3"/> the <trunc>w</trunc> the group at <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> <pause dur="0.2"/> called their bacteria with long <pause dur="0.2"/> Greek and Latin names <pause dur="0.5"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> the group in California called their

bacteria <pause dur="0.3"/> with names like <pause dur="0.3"/> Big Black Bug <pause dur="0.2"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="2"/> and the end of the story is <pause dur="0.2"/> that the two groups met up <pause dur="0.8"/> and all the biologists who were working on the project in <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> <pause dur="0.3"/> moved to California <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="2"/> <pause dur="0.2"/> <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> so <vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.3"/> that's what happens <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> <pause dur="0.5"/> <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/> <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> and just <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> a last point <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> this goes back to this notion of political <pause dur="0.2"/> correctness <pause dur="0.2"/> there've been a lot of changes <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> in <pause dur="0.8"/> the way that we call people as a result of not wishing to offend <pause dur="0.2"/> minority groups <pause dur="0.6"/> what do you call <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> the lady who serves you on the aeroplane </u><pause dur="1.2"/> <u who="ss" trans="pause"> <gap reason="inaudible, multiple speakers" extent="3 secs"/> </u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> hostess stewardess flight attendant <pause dur="0.5"/> which is more <pause dur="0.5"/> politically correct </u><u who="ss" trans="overlap"> <gap reason="inaudible, multiple speakers" extent="3 secs"/> </u><u who="nf1271" trans="overlap"> yeah <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> it started off <pause dur="0.2"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="6"/> as sky girls <gap reason="inaudible" extent="3 secs"/><pause dur="2.1"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> then we've got air stewardess air hostess <pause dur="0.2"/> but nowadays that's not considered politically correct <pause dur="0.3"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" dur="1"/><pause dur="0.2"/> so <pause dur="0.3"/> # it's <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> flight attendant is the correct <pause dur="0.2"/> name <pause dur="0.2"/> and just to finish off <pause dur="0.3"/> here's some more <pause dur="0.9"/><kinesic desc="changes transparency" iterated="y" dur="5"/> politically correct words <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> you don't have a chairman <pause dur="0.8"/> any longer <pause dur="0.7"/>

what is it now we don't talk about chairperson <pause dur="0.9"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> # i got told off by <pause dur="0.9"/> the <pause dur="0.2"/> the head of the school where my daughter went because <pause dur="0.5"/> i called her a headmistress <pause dur="0.7"/> she told me off it's not that now is it it's <pause dur="1.2"/> headteacher <pause dur="0.6"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> you're not supposed to call a <trunc>w</trunc> a woman <pause dur="0.9"/> head <pause dur="0.3"/> a headmistress <pause dur="1.4"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> blind people or people who have difficulty seeing <pause dur="1.1"/> don't call them blind any more that's too politically incorrect <pause dur="1.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> visually challenged <pause dur="1.7"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> people who are short <pause dur="0.3"/> this is a bit of a joke really but <pause dur="0.3"/> <trunc>y</trunc> <pause dur="0.4"/> short people now <pause dur="0.4"/> don't call them short <pause dur="1.4"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> they're vertically <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="4"/> challenged <pause dur="3.8"/> and there have been some <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> words that <unclear>are suggested</unclear> but i don't know whether they will ever <pause dur="0.3"/> catch on <pause dur="1.0"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> have you heard of this <pause dur="0.2"/> i don't know if these <pause dur="0.3"/> they're not in common use <pause dur="8.2"/><kinesic desc="reveals covered part of transparency" iterated="n"/> see if they catch on <pause dur="0.2"/> maybe they'll be the new words <pause dur="0.4"/> of the future <pause dur="3.8"/> <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>very clumsy <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/>aren't they <vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="1.6"/> okay <pause dur="8.5"/><event desc="takes off transparency, turns off overhead projector" iterated="n"/> thanks <kinesic desc="applause" iterated="y" dur="unknown"/></u> <gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause">

<kinesic desc="overhead projector is on showing transparency" iterated="n"/> i think everybody ought to have one of those <pause dur="0.2"/> myself <pause dur="0.5"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> have a look at them and decide which one you like best <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> this one looks the nicest Longman the Longman looks the nicest needs if i mean they're all good <pause dur="0.7"/> the Longman's <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> perhaps got the most <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="1.4"/> attractive layout <pause dur="0.9"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> the <trunc>ca</trunc> # the Cambridge International Dictionary of English's got smaller print <pause dur="0.6"/> but it it # does contain a lot of information but it's <pause dur="0.7"/> perhaps not so attractive to look at <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> you can <pause dur="1.0"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> some of these have got <pause dur="0.2"/> versions online as well <pause dur="0.9"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> the Cambridge is a very useful one for online <pause dur="0.4"/> free <pause dur="0.4"/> online <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> you go to the Cambridge Dictionary <pause dur="0.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> the Cambridge Dictionary website <pause dur="0.4"/> you can <pause dur="0.3"/> <trunc>a</trunc> have access to this dictionary <pause dur="0.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> and the <pause dur="0.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> equivalent American dictionary <pause dur="0.4"/> online for free <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> and i think at the moment at the Longman web if you <pause dur="0.5"/> i think at the Longman web page at the moment you can access the Longman dictionary online as well <pause dur="1.7"/> but really <pause dur="0.4"/> you should be thinking in terms of also <pause dur="0.2"/> as a very advanced learners as you are <pause dur="0.9"/> where did i put it <pause dur="0.6"/> # you should be thinking in terms of

getting <pause dur="0.4"/> # a native speaker dictionary as well because <pause dur="0.3"/> the difference between the learner dictionaries and the <pause dur="0.4"/> # native speaker dictionaries is the learners' dictionaries <pause dur="0.3"/> give lots of <pause dur="0.2"/> good information <pause dur="0.4"/> about <pause dur="0.6"/> the grammar <pause dur="0.3"/> pronunciation <pause dur="0.2"/> and the use of words they tell you <pause dur="0.6"/> i mean sometimes i use a learner's dictionary # <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> sometimes really for my own <pause dur="0.5"/> purposes when i'm writing <pause dur="0.4"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> i don't want to use a native speaker dictionary because i want to know <pause dur="0.7"/> what the collocation <trunc>i</trunc> you know i want to know can you say <pause dur="0.4"/> for example to <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="2.0"/><vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> i'm trying to think of an example <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.2"/> to # <pause dur="0.5"/> to arouse interest <pause dur="0.3"/> you know i don't i'm i'm not sure i can give you do you say arouse interest <pause dur="0.2"/> and i'd look <pause dur="0.3"/> in <pause dur="0.9"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> one of these dictionaries <pause dur="0.3"/> rather than <pause dur="0.2"/> a native speaker dictionary because the native speaker dictionaries don't give many examples <pause dur="0.2"/> of how <pause dur="0.2"/> you use they presume that you know all about the language except for the particular word that you're looking up <pause dur="0.6"/> whereas these ones <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> give you lots of examples and they <pause dur="0.3"/> they show you the kind

of context in which it would be suitable <pause dur="0.2"/> to use the word <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> so you need this <pause dur="0.4"/> but <pause dur="0.5"/> of course because they provide all that information about context and <pause dur="0.5"/> pragmatics that means <pause dur="0.8"/> you know whether it's polite or whether it's <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> only used in technical <pause dur="0.2"/> texts and they give lots of information like that <pause dur="0.2"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> so there isn't enough room left to put in a lot of words so typically <pause dur="0.3"/> these dictionaries will have about fifty-thousand words <pause dur="0.5"/> whereas the New Oxford Dictionary of English and i've got it on C-D-ROM here <pause dur="0.2"/> is three-hundred-and-fifty-thousand words <pause dur="1.2"/> so you've got quantity <pause dur="0.4"/> and <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>quality <kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.3"/><shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> but not quality quality <pause dur="0.2"/> in in the sense of more information about each word <pause dur="0.6"/> so really you need both # <pause dur="0.2"/> i was going to buy the New Oxford Dictionary of English because it's very good <pause dur="0.4"/> but <pause dur="0.2"/> # it costs about thirty pounds <pause dur="0.4"/> and so i bought the C-D instead and that cost twenty <trunc>pou</trunc> nineteen-pounds-ninety-nine <pause dur="1.4"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/><kinesic desc="indicates point on transparency" iterated="n"/> these cost about what <pause dur="0.2"/> what about <pause dur="0.2"/> <trunc>fifte</trunc> <pause dur="0.9"/> fifteen pounds something like that </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="om1282" trans="pause">

yeah another question </u><pause dur="0.9"/> <u who="sf1290" trans="pause"> <vocal desc="clears throat" iterated="n"/> <pause dur="0.4"/> English is considered to be one <pause dur="0.2"/> to be the world's most <pause dur="0.4"/> richest <pause dur="0.4"/> and consummate language <pause dur="0.8"/> but </u><u who="nf1271" trans="latching"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/><pause dur="0.2"/> can't see who's speaking <pause dur="0.8"/> can you put your hand up <pause dur="0.5"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" dur="1"/> <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> right okay<vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="sl" dur="2"/> </u><pause dur="0.6"/> <u who="sf1290" trans="pause"> English is considered to be one # to be the world's <pause dur="0.4"/> most famous <pause dur="0.2"/><event desc="turns on lights" iterated="n" n="nf1271"/> richest and consummate language <pause dur="0.4"/> and the borrowing of word from the different languages in perspective of the food names and animals' name <pause dur="0.4"/> don't you think this would affect the singularity <pause dur="0.3"/> uniqueness and richness of the English language </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> no it's the opposite really <pause dur="0.3"/> it is the opposite isn't it i mean it wouldn't have grown <pause dur="0.4"/> if it's very flexible <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> most European countries have got some kind of academy <pause dur="0.5"/> which tries to control the language <pause dur="0.3"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> tells people <pause dur="0.8"/> correct and incorrect use <pause dur="0.9"/> i think <pause dur="0.5"/> almost all European countries apart from Britain <pause dur="0.7"/> has <pause dur="0.2"/> some sort of <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> established group of people who <pause dur="0.3"/> say <pause dur="0.3"/> this is not <pause dur="0.3"/> a French word for example <pause dur="0.2"/> and in France this is

particularly <pause dur="0.2"/> active <pause dur="0.4"/> in France <pause dur="0.2"/> there are actually laws saying you can't put English words on your shopfronts <pause dur="0.6"/> you can't use <pause dur="0.3"/> this English word in French <pause dur="0.3"/> because it's not a French word you have to use a French equivalent <pause dur="0.5"/> but Britain has never had that <pause dur="0.5"/> <trunc>br</trunc> # <pause dur="0.2"/> when the other academies were being developed in the eighteenth century <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> they decided not to have one <pause dur="0.3"/> in Britain <pause dur="0.5"/> and they just <pause dur="0.3"/> let it grow <pause dur="0.4"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> and that's one of the reasons why there's so many words of course i don't think <pause dur="0.4"/> no i think <pause dur="0.3"/> i <trunc>thi</trunc> well i think it's great don't you <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" dur="1"/><pause dur="0.2"/> it's great to <pause dur="0.2"/> to add new words <pause dur="1.5"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> it would be very silly to try and translate # <pause dur="0.2"/> Indian restaurant curry menu <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> into English i think <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="1.2"/> so no i <trunc>d</trunc> haven't got any <pause dur="0.2"/> objections at all i don't think <pause dur="0.5"/> i think <pause dur="0.3"/> it's in the spirit of the English language that it's very flexible always changing <pause dur="0.2"/> the grammar is always changing too </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> initialism is when you <pause dur="0.2"/> say the <pause dur="0.2"/> each <pause dur="0.2"/> letter in turn so <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> B-S-E <pause dur="1.2"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> F-M-D <pause dur="0.4"/> foot and mouth

disease <pause dur="0.5"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> an acronym is where you <pause dur="0.5"/> pronounce it as if it was a word so if you said bse <pause dur="0.2"/><vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.3"/> instead of B-S-E <pause dur="0.3"/> it would be an acronym <pause dur="0.5"/> that's obviously the reason why we don't do it because you <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>can't say it <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/>but <pause dur="0.3"/> NATO <pause dur="0.2"/> is an acronym <pause dur="0.6"/> AIDS is an acronym <pause dur="0.8"/> yeah you see the difference <pause dur="1.2"/> in some languages they turn all their initialisms into acronyms they don't they don't use initialisms very much <pause dur="0.8"/> but in English we have a mixture of the two <pause dur="0.3"/> depending on whether we can pronounce it or not <pause dur="0.5"/> foot the FTSE index <pause dur="1.0"/> is a is an acronym although you wouldn't think you'd be able to pronounce it as <pause dur="0.5"/> they changed they've changed its # </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="sm1291" trans="pause"> <unclear>it will be</unclear> one of the common classes in the presessional <pause dur="0.7"/> we <pause dur="0.7"/> consult a little about <pause dur="0.8"/> # the use of <pause dur="0.4"/> hes and hers </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> ah yes </u><u who="sm1291" trans="overlap"> and when when you </u><pause dur="0.5"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> yes </u><pause dur="0.5"/> <u who="sm1291" trans="pause"> when when you are <pause dur="0.3"/> actually <pause dur="0.6"/> talking in general terms <pause dur="0.8"/> and # there is high concern <pause dur="0.4"/> about <pause dur="1.1"/> which is the <pause dur="0.6"/> the correct way <pause dur="0.4"/> what's your opinion about </u><pause dur="0.8"/> <u who="nf1271" trans="pause"> well there's a there's a <trunc>n</trunc> a desperate need <pause dur="0.3"/> for <pause dur="0.6"/> a word <pause dur="0.4"/> that's not he and not she and

not his we've got two words <pause dur="0.3"/> a word that's not he and she and a word that's not his and her a neutral pronoun <pause dur="0.4"/> but <pause dur="0.2"/> although <pause dur="1.2"/> the lexical words in English are growing all the time and we can change them and add to them <pause dur="0.4"/> there are there's a subclass of words in English which are called grammatical words <pause dur="0.8"/> and they <pause dur="0.2"/> can't change <pause dur="0.7"/> they're those very short words pronouns <pause dur="0.5"/> <trunc>prep</trunc> prepositions <pause dur="0.9"/> articles <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> that's about it really <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="1.8"/> and <trunc>ix</trunc> auxiliary verbs <pause dur="0.9"/> verbs like the verb to be <pause dur="0.3"/> you can't change them <pause dur="0.7"/> the last change we had in the pronoun system in English was in Anglo-Saxon times <pause dur="0.5"/> when we borrowed <pause dur="0.4"/> two <pause dur="1.0"/> pronouns from <pause dur="0.4"/> Scandinavian languages and that was they and them <pause dur="0.7"/> that was the last time that's about <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> over a thousand years ago <pause dur="0.4"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> we still haven't got used to it <pause dur="0.3"/><shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> because <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.3"/> <trunc>af</trunc> after a thousand years we still haven't adjusted <pause dur="0.4"/> because you'll hear English people say <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> instead of them <pause dur="1.1"/> what do they say <pause dur="0.5"/> in <trunc>spee</trunc>

in fast speech <pause dur="1.4"/> have you noticed this <pause dur="0.4"/> almost all of us <pause dur="0.3"/> we don't actually say <pause dur="0.2"/> them <pause dur="0.4"/> in fast speech we say 'em <pause dur="1.2"/> give 'em to me <pause dur="0.6"/> so after a thousand years we still haven't adjusted to that borrowing <pause dur="0.7"/><vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.4"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> so <pause dur="0.7"/> # in America particularly i mean there are web sites devoted to suggestions for change <pause dur="0.3"/> to a neutral pronoun but they won't catch on <pause dur="0.7"/> we just can't <pause dur="0.9"/> you know we can borrow any number of lexical words <pause dur="0.2"/> but we don't seem to be able to borrow or to invent <pause dur="0.3"/> any new <pause dur="0.3"/> grammatical words in English <pause dur="0.2"/> it's it's awful because we really need them <pause dur="0.4"/> they just don't catch on <pause dur="0.5"/> you know <pause dur="0.6"/> keep suggesting them <pause dur="0.8"/> nobody <pause dur="0.6"/> nobody will agree no one <pause dur="0.2"/> took takes it up because it's part of the grammatical system <pause dur="0.2"/> of the language and the grammar <pause dur="0.5"/> the basic grammatical system of the language can't change </u><pause dur="2.4"/> <u who="om1282" trans="pause"> okay thanks very much <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> <kinesic desc="applause" iterated="y" dur="unknown"/></u></body>

</text></TEI.2>