Google becomes a verb

[ElyseC]

Seems the dictionaries are officially adding Google as a verb. The latest TidBits has this article (http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=08598) about it.

[Michael Rowley]

Elyse:

Seems the dictionaries are officially adding Google as a verb.

It is used as a verb in this country, moreover as a generic term for seeking information on the Web using any search engine. 'Google' has the advantage of being easy to say and write, unlike AstaVista, MSN, or Yahoo!

[ElyseC]

t is used as a verb in this country, moreover as a generic term for seeking information on the Web using any search engine. 'Google' has the advantage of being easy to say and write, unlike AstaVista, MSN, or Yahoo!Definitely in common use as a verb here in the States, too. It does roll off the tongue and fingers easier than, "today I yahooed for..."

It's interesting that the author purposely lowercases such verbs just to irritate corporate lawyers. On one hand I smile at the thought of a pompous young lawyer getting their panties in a twist, but on the other hand, as someone who designs brand and corporate identities, I always sigh and wrinkle my brow a bit when brand names become generic terms. It doesn't affect the price of tea in China, but I'm rather a stickler about my own speech, saying "tissue" instead of Kleenex and "photocopy" instead of "Xerox." Of course I seem to have no trouble at all using Google as a verb, but I do like to capitalize it when I write. Oh heck, I guess I'm breaking my own rule.

[BobRoosth]

saying "tissue" instead of Kleenex and "photocopy" instead of "Xerox."
I doubt the lawyers for Google have any objection to the generic use, unlike Kleenex and Xerox. I suspect they, or at least the company execs, rather like the idea.

[ElyseC]

I doubt the lawyers for Google have any objection to the generic use, unlike Kleenex and Xerox. I suspect they, or at least the company execs, rather like the idea.Yes, that's my hunch, too. That's probably why I don't much mind using it as a verb. The context of the virtual world is different from that of the tangible.

[annc]

Seems the dictionaries are officially adding Google as a verb. The latest TidBits has this article (http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=08598) about it.It's been officially recognised as a verb here for at least three years.

[donmcc]

They will be if the term gets accepted as a generic word. If it does, and they can not prove attempts to prevent it, then you will be able to create a site called The DTPforum google page with no links to them.

Coca-cola has spent millions over the years to prevent the common phrase 'having a coke,' meaning having a soda, from becoming generic, which would allow others from calling their soft drink a 'coke.' Use the word coke in print and you will get a lovely little letter from Coca Cola lawyers some months later.

[ElyseC]

It's been officially recognised as a verb here for at least three years.You forward thinkers, you! http://desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/images/smilies/smile.gif

[ElyseC]

Coca-cola has spent millions over the years to prevent the common phrase 'having a coke,' meaning having a soda, from becoming generic, which would allow others from calling their soft drink a 'coke.' Use the word coke in print and you will get a lovely little letter from Coca Cola lawyers some months later.Yep. And when they goofed up way back when and put the circle-R in the wrong spot when registering the Coca-Cola logomark, it allowed other companies to use the "cola" part. Oopsie.

[ktinkel]

You forward thinkers, you! http://desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/images/smilies/smile.gifWe don’t have official agencies that monitor words in the U.S., but google has been used here as a verb for at least that long.

William Safire wrote about it in his New York Times “On Words” column quite a while ago (would have to do some research to figure out exactly, but I would guess about 18 months ago).


.

[ElyseC]

Yes, I, too, have seen it in use at least that long, but I haven't known of it being officially added to dictionaries until now.

[Michael Rowley]

Elyse:

I haven't known of it being officially added to dictionaries until now

That's probably because there's generally no such thing as an 'official' English dictionary, all English dictionaries are records of usage in print. In a few years (or perhaps months), we'll be looking up the word 'google', to find out what it meant. Or perhaps not.

[ElyseC]

there's generally no such thing as an 'official' English dictionary, all English dictionaries are records of usage in print. Indeed, but I'm saying I've not seen it officially accepted into recognized dictionaries -- well known names of the kind that get printed -- before. I know well that there cannot possibly be one official dictionary for any language, because humans are constantly changing and so must their languages. http://desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/images/smilies/smile.gif

[ktinkel]

Yes, I, too, have seen it in use at least that long, but I haven't known of it being officially added to dictionaries until now.But dictionaries aren’t “official” — nor are they unamimous.

A dictionary is one publisher’s snapshot of the language at a particular time. The publisher’s judgments (and prejudices) determine what is included, but it is never official.

[ElyseC]

But dictionaries aren’t “official” — nor are they unamimous.

A dictionary is one publisher’s snapshot of the language at a particular time. The publisher’s judgments (and prejudices) determine what is included, but it is never official.Oy. I know that, but people do look to them as authorities on their language and words can exist for eons without someone working for some dictionary company deciding to add them to the collection. Oh well. I'm not making myself clear, but it's not a life threatening point. http://desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/images/smilies/smile.gif

[ktinkel]

I think the problem is your repeated use of the term “official” — otherwise, no real differences. :)

[Michael Rowley]

Elyse:

there cannot possibly be one official dictionary for any language

Well, France has its French Academy, which examines every word to see if it should be allowed into French; but I understand Frenchmen don't take too much notice of its pronouncements, which are official.

[Michael Rowley]

KT:

I think the problem is your repeated use of the term “official”

Perhaps 'authoritative' might be better: the OED & Websters 3rd are certainly that.

[ElyseC]

I think the problem is your repeated use of the term “official” — otherwise, no real differences. :)Yeah, that seems to be the point of misunderstanding. I meant that someone somewhere in the bowels of the dictionary company, someone "official" enough to decide what goes on their pages and what doesn't, decided it was time to put the word in.

There. Better? http://desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/images/smilies/smile.gif

[ElyseC]

but I understand Frenchmen don't take too much notice of its pronouncements, which are official.I've heard that, too. Good for the regular everyday Frenchmen! http://desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/images/smilies/smile.gif Heck, I'd rebel, too, at some of the unwieldy ways they contrive to make a true blue French term and keep foreign words at bay.

[dthomsen8]

They will be if the term gets accepted as a generic word. If it does, and they can not prove attempts to prevent it, then you will be able to create a site called The DTPforum google page with no links to them.

Coca-cola has spent millions over the years to prevent the common phrase 'having a coke,' meaning having a soda, from becoming generic, which would allow others from calling their soft drink a 'coke.' Use the word coke in print and you will get a lovely little letter from Coca Cola lawyers some months later.

Bayer lost the trademark status for aspirin many years ago, and even Coca-Cola can't stop the sale of "cola" products.

[PeterArnel]

well at least its not another four letter word - you can "google off" sounds much better
Peter :-)

[Michael Rowley]

Dave:

Bayer lost the trademark status for aspirin many years ago

They lost it in America and Britain after WW1 as part of the German reparations, but Aspirin is still a trademark in Germany; the thrifty have to ask there for 'ASS', which can be sold of course, since the Bayer patent expired long ago.