Isabelle Kerr’s article is so rife with hypocrisy that one may guess that it was written by politicians. All jokes aside, what is up with this article? This “journalist” has forgotten how much language and life has changed in this decade itself. Ask people in 2004, what an Iphone is or who Obama is? Very few people would even understand your language.
The internet is not written in ink, you can delete, and censor and just overall remove what you don’t want (provided it’s not on Facebook or something). Especially if you have a team working to manage the website (like OED) there isn’t a problem to remove words from the website, therefore they won’t be immortalized. Also, you mention that these are just fads however you forget that in the middle of the article. Words we use every day, that we consider eloquent and powerful are just really evolved slang words. All words are slang; some are just older than others. Maybe if you wait 20 years you may make your peace with “selfie”. If thou really want to be puritan about it, wherefore not speak like this. Thou cit’d Shakespeare as one of the masters of language (which he is,nay denying that). Thou would think I was non compos mentis if I was talking like this to thou anon, that is the reason that the evolution of language is behoveful. This is an extreme example,
In response to your remark about our generation being responsible for these “linguistic calamities”, our parents were responsible for the “linguistic calamities” of “crunk” and “groovy”. Their parents “boogie” and “cool cat”. Our generation will also be responsible for the full execution of drone mail, the first fully functional bionic limbs and improving VR technology. This is simply a shortlist of what we can achieve and you are worried about dropping all the vowels from seriously. I do however; credit your direct approach and your hyperbole.
Authority is important. Authority can allow someone to judge their field of expertise. You have little authority to judge the English language. You have your right to express your opinion that is something paramount that everyone deserves. However that is all they are: opinions. This brings up an interesting point. Do the OED people have the authority to judge the English language? Who are these people that determine what goes in our dictionary and what we speak? Nevertheless, you cite them as the warden of the English language yet you do not say who they are. I think it is important to cite reference when criticizing on such a large scale, of course, as a journalist, you know this.
In conclusion, I think that your passion about the English language is very inspiring but the way you go about is very concerning. When the generation who are supposed to be responsible for the forward thinking and advancement of the language are the ones thinking back to times of old then we have a problem but it’s not the problem that you think.
React!