BackThursday 3rd November, 2011
Should copywriters use words that aren’t in the dictionary?
Here’s an interesting thought for language buffs.
The other day I saw a tweet by the brilliant business copywriter Clare Lynch.
She said:
Both “under” and “way” are in the dictionary. “Underway”, however, is not. #BizwritingTip
Now, ‘underway’ is a word I’ve always used. I quite like it. I didn’t want to lose it.
So I looked it up in the dictionary we use at our copywriting agency – The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary.
It was in there. But for some reason it wasn’t in Clare’s Concise Oxford Dictionary.
We both have perfectly good reasons for choosing to use the word or not.
But what interested me was the idea behind our decisions.
Should copywriters use words that aren’t in the dictionary?
On reflection, I think we should – as long as they mean something to our readers.
And by the same measure, we certainly shouldn’t use words just because they are in the dictionary.
As David Ogilvy once pointed out:
“I once used the word OBSOLETE in a headline, only to discover that 43 per cent of housewives had no idea what it meant. In another headline, I used the word INEFFABLE, only to discover that I didn’t know what it meant myself.”
What do you think? Let’s get the commenting underway…
Simple really:
If it gets your point across, use it.
If it doesn’t, don’t.
Comment left by Andy Nattan on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 11:17 am
The key is your readers have to understand the word in the same way that you do.
For example, when I say ‘infamous’ I mean famous by virtue of being bad. Other people use it to mean ‘controversial’. (Ok, I’ve stolen this example from a Martin Amis Guardian article. http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/may/27/martin-amis-father-english-language-kingsley)
So whether it’s in the dictionary club or not, the word has to be understood in the way the writer intends.
Comment left by Sophie on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 11:46 am
And some nautical types might argue that you mean ‘under weigh’ but that opens a whole new can of worms. Just as long as you are consistent in your use, it doesn’t matter.
Comment left by Ali Turnbull on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 11:47 am
What I want to know is how old is Clare’s dictionary? Dictionaries are often updated to keep up with the pace of language change.
On that note, language change is inevitable. And fascinating, because it reflects society, groups in society and trends among groups and industries. . . .and loads more things. . . as the world moves on.
Using only words that are in the dictionary is a bit like only ever cooking from recipes. If writers had only ever used words that were also in dictionaries, we wouldn’t have ‘luggage’ as a noun (Shakespeare); to post (as in ‘to write a comment, update or article online); ‘hacker’ or ‘peng’ (good looking).
The final word should go to the Youf. Check out this article on using teenagers as language consultants in recent films like Kidulthood and Sket: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13445487
Comment left by Mel Poluck on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 11:48 am
@Andy – spot on.
@Sophie – I use infamous in the same way as you.
@Ali – and then I’d come right back and say that ‘underway’ comes from the Dutch nautical term ‘onderweg’… (pinched that out the dictionary too!)
@Mel – I’m surprised it wasn’t included too, but dictionaries do differ. I love using slang too, but most of it won’t be in the dictionary either. (I have lots of slang dictionaries for inspiration though).
Comment left by Ben Locker on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 11:54 am
Andy Nattan said it best. But that’s not going to stop me from commenting anyway.
One of the things I love about copywriting is that you can innovate judiciously and be free from the straitjacket of prescriptive grammar and the dictatorship of the dictionary. But you better know what you’re doing!
Yes, you can use words not in the dictionary. But does it add anything? Does it communicate clearly? Does it make you stand out more? Or does it confuse the audience, make you look like a fool, or make you look like you’re trying too hard (like some of the vomit-inducing new portmanteaux do). If you know how to skillfully use non-standard language, you can work wonders.
Comment left by B. Ligerent on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 12:02 pm
Perhaps I wasn’t clear: I wasn’t so much making a point about slang versus ‘everything else that also happens to be in the dictionary’, but creativity within language being part of ordinary linguistic evolution (since language began).
Comment left by Mel Poluck on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 12:32 pm
As has been said, it’s all about clarity and communication. I think made-up words can be effective in catching attention but language is a notoriously slippery thing.
I do get a little irritated by the pseudo-science neologisms you see all the time in the cosmetics and healthcare industries, but to a point I appreciate the need for it.
Would you rush to scoop a dollop of Bifidobacterium animalis in your cake hole? Probably not, so Danone renamed this probiotic bacteria Bifidus Digestivum for their yoghurts. It does exactly what it says on the bacterium.
Where I would find a problem if I had to do this myself for a client is deciding where exactly to draw the ‘stupid’ line. In other words, how frontal cortex-slappingly obvious does it have to be? That’s where I fear I would fail, because I feel my own intelligence being insulted by many of these names. It’s really only a matter of time before we have a new shampoo with the breakthrough Shinius Volumax formula developed by Switzerland’s top scientists.
A pretty cromulent post, Ben.
Comment left by David K on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 12:36 pm
Hi Ben, I like using the word ‘outwith’ in my copy, but according to this link it’s not used outside of Scotland! http://random-idea-english.blogspot.com/2011/03/q-is-outwith-word.html
Using words that aren’t in the dictionary is fine, as long as your target audience will have a ‘scooby’ what they mean.
Comment left by Jamie Graham on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 1:46 pm
Language exists in conversation, not in dictionarys; great post
Comment left by Oliver Radini on Thursday 3rd November, 2011 at 2:22 pm
A nice post, which I’ve just reluctantly Tweeted (reluctantly because of your very flattering description of me – thank you, even if you made me blush).
Other commenters have made some great points – not sure I can add anything more. Except perhaps to say that I’ll be sticking with my old fashioned two-word option simply so I can be sure I’m being consistent, which, as Ali points, out is the most important thing.
Comment left by Clare Lynch on Sunday 6th November, 2011 at 8:55 pm
Infamous means notorious, not controversial – even if you’re Martin Amis. More howlers here: http://wordcount-richmonde.blogspot.com/2011/07/howlers-latest.html
Comment left by Richmonde on Sunday 6th November, 2011 at 9:38 pm
I write for an event company – when I started in 2008 ‘theming’(as in ‘theming a venue with themed decorations’) wasn’t in the dictionary, now it is, I sent a letter proposing it should be included in 2009 and never heard back.
Whether or not it is or isn’t a word I still used it – and would of continued. But it’s a darn sight less distracting now the red squiggly line has gone from underneath it!
I blog and tweet geek-free copywriting advice – follow me
@becontent_
Comment left by Lisa on Friday 2nd December, 2011 at 12:07 am
P.S. I also like using the word ‘somewhen’ as in, a point in time, in the same way ‘somewhere’ is a point in space
Comment left by Lisa on Friday 2nd December, 2011 at 12:11 am
@Jamie Graham – With a name like that I’m sure you mean: ‘outwith Scotland’. I’m the author of that blog and I would say it’s used mainly, but not necessarily exclusively, by Scots. I get a lot of hits from England as well as Scotland. It’s a good word; use it proudly!
Comment left by Warsaw Will on Friday 9th December, 2011 at 6:37 pm