<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: BusinessWeek on new words</title>
	<link>http://www.thenameinspector.com/businessweek-on-new-words/</link>
	<description>Tells you what makes names tick.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:25:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mostly Technical</title>
		<link>http://www.thenameinspector.com/businessweek-on-new-words/#comment-774</link>
		<dc:creator>Mostly Technical</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2007 05:44:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.thenameinspector.com/businessweek-on-new-words/#comment-774</guid>
		<description>The web must cause lexicographers a lot of frustration ... but in the end, perhaps dictionaries will lag only slightly behind common usage of language, rather than waiting for words to show up in print.  What you read in newspapers and magazines probably does not reflect how people actually use words in the real world nearly so much as how people write on the web.

But then will lexicographers be able to sort out what words and word usages endure and what are merely fads?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The web must cause lexicographers a lot of frustration &#8230; but in the end, perhaps dictionaries will lag only slightly behind common usage of language, rather than waiting for words to show up in print.  What you read in newspapers and magazines probably does not reflect how people actually use words in the real world nearly so much as how people write on the web.</p>
<p>But then will lexicographers be able to sort out what words and word usages endure and what are merely fads?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
