Dictionary.com

These words may be removed from some dictionaries — find out why, and if you agree

No matter how clever, revolutionary, or poignant, the passage of time can render anything obsolete – even words.

Recently, researchers for the  Collins Dictionary released a list of words, such as charabanc and aerodrome, that are used so rarely that they are considered obsolete, and will no longer be included in smaller print dictionaries.

The following are among the words that the Collins lexicographers have identified. How many of these have you heard before, and do any of them deserve a second chance?

An online dictionary obviously doesn’t face the same  space dilemmas as its paper cousin, but an argument could be made that if a word is rarely used or searched for, it may not matter if it is in the dictionary or not. Are there any words that you think should be removed from the dictionary? Let us know what you think, below.

AIR FORCE, COAST GUARD TEAM UP IN GREEN SEA TURTLE RESCUE OPERATION.

States News Service January 18, 2012 CAPE CANAVERAL AFS, Fla. — The following information was released by the Air Force Space Command:

by Patrick Murphy 45th Space Wing Public Affairs The U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Coast Guard teamed up Jan. 6 to rescue 29 Green sea turtle hatchlings and give them a little help in their migration to the open ocean.

“We knew we would have to release the turtles further out at sea rather than from the shore,” said Biologist Don George of the 45th Civil Engineer Squadron Asset Management Flight at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. “We called the Coast Guard Station for assistance since they helped in rescuing sea turtles previously. They’re always willing to help.” The turtles, hatchlings from the last of 110 active Green sea turtle nests on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, may not have made it out of the nest without intervention by the Cape Canaveral AFS biologists who administer the installation’s sea turtle conservation project.

This program, which began at Cape Canaveral AFS in 1986, includes the protection, conservation and management of endangered and threatened sea turtles and their nests. Nesting occurs on more than 13 miles of Cape Canaveral AFS beach, with more than 2,000 nests deposited by Loggerhead sea turtles, 50-100 by Green sea turtles and this year, a record number 12 nests by Leatherback sea turtles, which are rare in the United States. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission issues a permit each year that allows the installation to conduct the program. site green sea turtle

Throughout sea turtle nesting season from May to October, members of the asset management flight count and mark the nests, determine nest productivity, deploy visual screens to prevent hatchling disorientation from artificial light, document and determine cause of disorientation incidents, live trap potential predators on sea turtle eggs and hatchlings, and conduct stranding or salvage activities. The flight produces reports annually that summarize nesting results which are provided to FWC and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to assist them in making management decisions for these threatened and endangered species. greenseaturtlenow.com green sea turtle

Upon hatching, sea turtles instinctively make their way to the water. These late bloomers, however, were excavated from the nest when the biologists noticed signs of hatching activity. The nest was created in September, and the eggs took 109 days to incubate – more than 50 days longer than usual.

According to Air Force Biologist Martha Carroll of the 45th Civil Engineer Squadron Asset Management Flight, the turtles began emerging from their eggs but some needed help in breaking through the shells. The 29 live hatchlings needed to get into the water to feed, but since they were so late in emerging the water temperature was too cold for them. Placing them directly into the water from the shore could have resulted in “wash back,” due to colder water temperatures that tend to inhibit their ability to swim.

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Committee recommended the turtles be released in warmer water further out to sea. With coordination complete and permission granted, the Coast Guard agreed to transport the sea turtles and their escort.

“It’s business as usual for us,” said Coast Guard Chief Boatswain’s Mate Nick Ingersoll. “This is just part of the job.” Aboard a search and rescue boat, Chief Ingersoll and the other members of the Coast Guard crew, Seaman Megan Bigelow and Fireman Dani Garcia, cruised 20 miles off shore with Ms. Carroll and the sea turtles. The water temperature at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration buoy there was around 70 degrees. Chief Ingersoll chased a flock of sea birds from the buoy with an air horn, then Ms. Carroll placed the turtles individually into the warm water.

The 29 Green sea turtles swam off to begin their search for food and the safety of the weed line, still about 30 miles further out. With the assistance of the Air Force and the Coast Guard, their chances of making it were greatly improved.

1,167 Comments

  1. Nazim Naqvi -  August 28, 2014 - 9:29 am

    is it true that in oxford dictionary indian means old fashioned and criminal people?

    Reply
  2. keisha -  April 20, 2014 - 9:23 am

    I think the word Negrophobia should be removed, its wrong in so many ways.. We as a human race have moved on from those dark times and words like this can only bring us back rather than help us move forward.

    Reply
    • Masche -  August 12, 2014 - 5:37 pm

      That word needs to removed right along with Stupid and Dumb.

      Reply
    • Verbatim -  August 28, 2014 - 3:33 pm

      Removing any word is a bad idea. It allows for revisionist history. Words have historical context and people need those words of their time to help understand the people and that era.

      Just because we don’t like a word, does not mean we should expunge it from human knowledge. We should understand the word, where it came from, how it ended up in the lexicon, etc…. so we can learn from history.

      Remember, those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

      Reply
  3. Judy -  April 1, 2014 - 5:01 pm

    No words should be removed. We already have experienced translation difficulties from ancient text because nobody knows what the word that was used in that time meant or what it’s equivalent is today.

    Reply
    • Val -  July 5, 2014 - 5:16 pm

      I agree. If it ever existed, it should be in the big book. I understand smaller dictionaries to not need as many words, but the main dictionaries should have every word. That is the point of a dictionary. Just because it isn’t used anymore, doesn’t mean it disappeared. It exists somewhere and if it is gone someone will be left with no clue what the word means. Luckily, we now have the internet, considering all of the space, there is no reason to omit anything, ever.

      Reply
      • Masche -  August 12, 2014 - 5:38 pm

        Stupid and Dumb needs to be removed because no one is Stupid or Dumb.

        Reply
  4. John -  March 23, 2014 - 6:09 pm

    For goodness’ sake! People are going on and on about how this is leading to a Newspeak situation like in 1984, but it’s NOT. First of all, these are a handful of words that are being taken away; do you know how many new English words we have last year? At least that many, if not more! Secondly, only in smaller dictionaries are these words being removed; does anyone still learn words as unused as these by pocket dictionary? They can learn them on an online dictionary or just by reading if they like! Thirdly, these words are already unused! These are virtually unused because of the fourth, and final, reason not to worry about this: each of these words has an identical or near-identical synonym that is used far more often in modern times, reducing the users of the original word to those who merely wish to impress people with their vocabulary.

    Here are the words people use today instead of these:

    Alienism = Psychopathology
    Bever = Snack
    Brabble = Squabble
    Charabanc = Tour bus (unless you’re talking about the early 19th-century vehicle, in which case you really ought to know what a charabanc is!)
    Deliciate = Indulge oneself
    Frigorific = Cold/Frigid (something that “causes cold or freezing” is just something that’s cold, for crying out loud!!)
    Supererogate = Overdo
    Younker = Lad

    Reply
    • Ora -  April 19, 2014 - 9:00 am

      Thank you, John, for saving me the trouble of looking those words up.

      Reply
  5. jerry -  March 20, 2014 - 4:48 pm

    keep delicate delete everything else on the list

    Reply
  6. Mark Baker -  March 20, 2014 - 9:58 am

    Referencing “Steve – March 17, 2014 – 5:10 am” — his is the best comment (admittedly I haven’t read them all) I’ve read in regards to dropping words from the dictionary. The word “dropping” is just another way of “banning”. I’ve commented on this in the discussion of eliminating the word “whom”. Suffice it to say, this practice is akin to book-burning, but on a much smaller scale. If the publishers of small-print dictionaries are concerned with size of volumes, then create a new category of the standard volume. Discarding words from publication is akin to discarding history from history books (which is being done). This society is being systematically attacked from all sides — controlling the use of the language is just one example. Anyone that doesn’t see this, is just part of the problem.

    Reply
  7. Winston -  March 19, 2014 - 12:57 am

    I reiterate the references to 1984 and Newspeak.

    Reply
  8. Samuel Huneycutt -  March 18, 2014 - 6:30 pm

    @Morgan It’s deliciate not delicate

    Reply
  9. YO MOM -  March 18, 2014 - 4:12 pm

    I think none of these words should be taken away I agree with everyone else.

    Reply
  10. Steve -  March 17, 2014 - 5:10 am

    I see a dictionary as a history book. A history book of words. As such things can only be added to it, not removed.
    Would you consider removing pieces of history from a history book. Just because some people consider it irrelevant should we removed every thing before 1700 from history books?

    Reply
    • Val -  July 5, 2014 - 5:18 pm

      Well said!

      Reply
  11. Morgan -  March 16, 2014 - 7:17 pm

    remove delicate? really??

    Reply
  12. Anonymous -  March 16, 2014 - 6:40 pm

    I don’t think any words should ever be removed from the dictionary. By dumbing down vocabulary, we’re dumbing down society.

    Besides, what are all those spelling bee kids and the people who sit at home and watch them on television going to do?

    Reply
  13. Prasad -  March 16, 2014 - 4:18 am

    Some people have a way with words, may be erasure is yours !

    Reply
  14. staligarde -  March 15, 2014 - 6:23 pm

    Why in the world are any of these words getting removed?!?!

    They all have their own usage, and just because something isn’t being used (much) now doesn’t mean that it won’t be used in the future, or that they weren’t used in the past. And if used in the past, then when you talk about that time period you will invariably use them.

    If you remove “aerodrome” you’re going to have to remove ALL aircraft, manned and unmanned, except for the commercial ones that land at airports. (Actually those might have to be removed as well, due to the emergency landings that take place every now and then.)

    “Alienism” may have a negative connotation, but it just a CONNOTATION. The word still has its own definition! (another example is “discriminate”; it’s not on this list, its original meaning is just to note a difference, like a square and a circle; a synonym is “evaluate”)

    If you remove “bever” it looks like you’re going to have to say the whole “take a light repast between meals”. Lunch has its own definition now.

    I use “brabble” for dialogue when I write stories.

    I’ve always wondered what those “large buses on sightseeing tours” are called. Thanks for letting me know that its “charabanc”.

    I’ve never heard of the word “deliciate”. I think I’ll start using it. Same goes for “frigorific”, “supererogate”, and Younker”

    Reply
  15. Ray Mattes -  March 15, 2014 - 9:48 am

    Here today, gone tomorrow BUT, mayb back again, sometimes with a different twist or meaning. For example, GAY. This word fell out of use but came back.
    Today, if a person is happy and joyful would you call him/her “gay?”

    Reply
  16. Saluton -  March 14, 2014 - 11:52 pm

    A mere supposition that a word should be removed from dictionaries is bloody silly and disgusting. Go eat your own penes you morons who wrote this article.

    Reply
  17. Scott Andrew Hutchins -  March 13, 2014 - 2:27 pm

    “A younker is a young man. Remember, a younker is a young man.” — CTB McGraw-Hill Test of Cognitive Skills. “Younker” is the origin of the name of Yonkers, New York, a popular test question, and a word used by Richard of Gloucester in both _Henry VI, Part III_ and _Richard III_, as well as Falstaff in _The Merry Wives of Windsor_.

    Reply
  18. Justin -  March 13, 2014 - 12:17 pm

    Aerodrome cannot be removed! As a pilot I know that it serves a very important purpose. Airport and aerodrome have two different meanings. An AIRPORT is what we use when we take a flight to Cuba for vacation (especially if you’re in Canada, burr), they have been inspected and hold a safety certificate. An AERODROME is any piece of land that is meant for an aircraft to land on, ranging from a paved runway to a cleared area on a frozen lake.

    Reply
  19. Santa Claus -  March 13, 2014 - 8:56 am

    Of course they should not remove any of these words! I enjoy reading the dictionary for the sole purpose of acquainting myself with these less commonly spoken words so that I do not have to use all the old words like nice and good and kind, etc. that are so overused and now have become dull and boring. I like to have a new and interesting flavor to my vocabulary, and if all these words that most people do not know about are removed, gradually all the interesting words will be gone from the dictionaries! Just because a lot of people don’t need these words doesn’t mean that you should remove them, because quite a few other people do like and use these words.
    Ditto everything that Phil Fasso said, and all those others in defense of these wonderful, remarkable, and unique words!

    Reply
    • Val -  July 5, 2014 - 5:25 pm

      I love reading the dictionary for fun. I have spent countless hours with an old Oxford Dictionary, unfortunately, it was destroyed by water. The online dictionary just isn’t the same. There was something more intimate with paper.

      Reply
  20. Lady Awesomely Awesome -  March 12, 2014 - 4:42 pm

    Even if they decide t remove words, they will live on forever in books on the internet. In fact, the words may come back into usage, simply because they were removed.

    Reply
  21. Anonymous -  March 12, 2014 - 4:07 pm

    Why remove them when you can mark them as obsolete?

    Reply
  22. anon -  March 12, 2014 - 12:26 pm

    Huh? why would you remove these words? My teacher is telling us to use ambitious vocabulary. How will we use those words if there not in the dictionary.The dictionary is for everyone to use so just so not many people are using them does that mean others are not? What will happen if we read a text and the words there? How will we understand their meanings? Anyway the text above said that it won’t be included in smaller dictionaries. Does that mean their less important? What about the next generation? Do they deserve not to learn meaning’s of words? They are innocent people. Also, no words deserve to be taken out of the dictionary.I’ts just like favouring one twin and not favouring the other when you gave birth to them. Speaking metaphorically, what will the words think if they are seperated? Please consider and DO NOT remove any words from the dictionary.

    Reply
  23. NO!!! -  November 20, 2013 - 3:53 pm

    They should remove all bad words from the dictionary. Kids look up words too you know!!!!!!!!!!!!! Some kids only use the dictionary to look up bad words to show their friends!! Why do those words exist?? WHY????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

    Reply
  24. Go redheads -  November 15, 2013 - 4:37 pm

    NO! They should not get rid of these words. I am only a middle school-er, and I have heard every single one of these before. If we’re going to be getting rid of words, why don’t we get rid of ones that people seriously haven’t heard of before. Also, what if we’re reading a book where one of these terms are in it and someone goes to look it up and WHERE IS IT! IT”S NOT IN HERE! That would be terrible. And anyways, is this what you’re teaching us kids, the future, that you can just go like, “Oh, I don’t like this word, oh no one uses it, they won’t care, let’s just get rid of it.” I just don’t think it’s smart.

    Reply
  25. Angalyssa -  October 25, 2013 - 9:35 am

    @gummi bearz
    I SUPPORT! :)

    Reply
  26. gummi bearz -  October 21, 2013 - 3:28 pm

    Hey its me again the best fiend of the son of Andrew Clements! i think a word should be included in the dictionary no matter how little used it is. its not fair. its like at school. when u r not popular enough to be included in anything.how would u feel? tell me what u think. ;)

    Reply
  27. cynikat -  October 14, 2013 - 3:47 pm

    How could they possibly delete “brabble” when it so accurately describes the current conversation in the US Congress?

    Reply
  28. www.levelonenetwork.com -  October 8, 2013 - 12:15 am

    Palmistry or chiromancy is the fine art of characterization and predicting the future with the research of the palm, additionally called palm reading, or chirology. The technique is found all over the world, with various cultural variants. Those who engage in chiromancy are usually called palmists, palm readers, hand viewers, hand experts, or chirologists.

    Reply
  29. Angalyssa -  October 2, 2013 - 9:28 am

    @Louise
    I Agree With You 100%(:

    Reply
  30. Louise -  October 1, 2013 - 4:13 am

    Your piece on the definition if happiness as it was meant in the American Costitution demonstrates how important it is to retain definitions that mey be considered obsolete.

    Reply
  31. Micah -  September 25, 2013 - 9:49 am

    I can see these words not being included in smaller, printed dictionaries. I hope the larger, more exhaustive dictionaries never take out words or meanings though. I love to be able to see all the different ways to use different words. It’s entertaining and helps to broaden my vocabulary and understanding of language. Keeping all the words and meaning in a dictionary is like protecting our history and our heritage. We would never take a presidents name off a list of our leaders just because he wasn’t as well known or accomplished as George Washington or Abraham Lincoln. We shouldn’t do that with the words that make up our language either.

    Reply
  32. en jay -  September 18, 2013 - 10:23 pm

    i think that you should take away all the words from the dictionary ,
    except for MONEY’

    Reply
  33. Samantha -  September 18, 2013 - 10:15 am

    Someonee (; <3

    Reply
  34. eshu -  September 17, 2013 - 4:48 am

    in other word of removed is ???

    Reply
  35. Jashy -  September 11, 2013 - 12:46 pm

    I don’t believe that any words should ever be removed from any dictionary. They are a part of history, linguistic evolution, cultural changes, etc…these things are not only fun at times to learn about, but as earlier mentioned, it’s a good idea to keep them available to learn from (while reading historical texts, for example), so we don’t lose the meanings.

    Reply
  36. Me(Tremble in Fear!!!XD) -  September 9, 2013 - 5:02 am

    I agree with Vicki. Just because words aren’t used as often doesn’t mean we should remove them from the dictionary!

    Also, could we please refrain from insulting each other? It gets a little annoying.

    Reply
  37. Eric S. Harris -  September 8, 2013 - 4:33 am

    Aerodrome and supererogate I’ve encountered.

    Aerodrome is almost obvious from the word itself. It could go away and be forgotten, and then come back decades later as a neologism with almost the same meaning.

    Let’s keep it. (FWIW, I like it better than its American English counterpart. Maybe it’s just the Anglophile in me, or because I think my favorite author used it.)

    The definitions of supererogate I’ve seen don’t give much help in how to use it. It looks like — and I believe I’ve encountered it where it was used like — a bit of professional jargon. In a legal context perhaps, or possibly a military one.

    If it’s in some occupation’s work-related vocabulary, it won’t go away even if all the general-purpose dictionaries remove it.

    Reply
  38. ms. doubtfire -  August 28, 2013 - 1:24 pm

    i have to say im a bit a word nerd rejecter

    Reply
  39. Sue -  August 27, 2013 - 12:06 pm

    I do wish that publishers of dictionaries would not leave out words, even
    not commonly used ones. I watched a TV program and needed to know what typhus was and my print dictionary didn’t have it, thankfully you did, even
    though that illness is no longer common it is no reason to eliminate it from
    print.

    Reply
  40. Graye Writer -  August 22, 2013 - 1:55 am

    I have to say, I’m a bit of a word-nerd, I literally read the dictionary three times between the ages of 6 and 8, before my mom bought me a new one and I realized that they were adding words and taking some away. I threw an absolute fit back then, because some of the words removed were my favorites, and I’m considering throwing one now. It’s absolute codswallop that we’re deleting beautiful words like these to make room for disgusting and insignificant new “words” that almost always amount to little more than slang terms. Unless the new words are functional and bred in a mind that surpassed the fourth grade, they shouldn’t be added in the first place. And if you are going to add truly obsolete slang terms, then don’t take away the words we still enjoy, if only for the simple fact that we get to look up their definition when we see it in word games. The dictionary has always been one of the largest and most important texts both in and out of the classroom, what does a quarter page matter? If we continue removing the “obsolete” words from our precious word-nerd bibles, then in the future, perhaps not too far off, we’ll be opening a dictionary of slang, with no other content. Don’t take away our words, just add the new BS terms that want to take their place to the slang dictionary that’s released every year.

    Reply
  41. Rachel -  August 12, 2013 - 3:51 am

    No obsolete words should not be removed from dictionaries. If you remove it where we find the meaning for these “obsolete” words?

    Reply
  42. Steve Dasey -  July 24, 2013 - 5:02 am

    If “aerodrome” is rarely used, it must be because other words are being misused. There are lots of aerodromes still around. Presumably these are being called, incorrectly, airfields or airports. “Aerodrome”, “airfield”, “airport” and “airstrip” all mean different things; they drummed this into us in the Air Cadets.

    It’s a concern because the same thing is happening with a lot of words. If people misuse words wholesale, as seems to be happening, meaning gets lost and then where is the language?

    Reply
  43. keotic -  July 16, 2013 - 8:06 pm

    i think the article says the words will be removed from the print but will stay online

    let’s say we’re in the 30th century. How will you ever know a very important link to the 21st century from a genius’ journal when the considered “ever-reliable” dictionary of the past chucked it out?

    if ever they have done this in the past, i’m confident that it’s one of the reasons why important documents, let’s say the Bible, were possibly lost in translation

    i just love the way this entry made people appreciate words :)

    Reply
  44. Dorothy -  July 9, 2013 - 3:44 pm

    Please delete the word “aint” from the dictionary for it displays poor communication skills

    Reply
    • Val -  July 5, 2014 - 5:32 pm

      I was traumatized over that word. I used it once, as a kid, and never used it again. It is a “word” that is still used. Slang, and mistakes are a part of every language. If you delete it, someone, likely a non English speaker or someone who uses the word, may wish to look it up. If you have omitted the word, how will the person know the meaning or understand that they should stop using the word?

      Reply
  45. Dillon Shelton -  July 7, 2013 - 6:46 pm

    I personally recall hearing “deliciate” on a few occasions. Is it considered ironic that my online dictionary doesn’t pick that up?

    “Eleemosynary” is a very fun way to call someone kind. As my favorite word, it’s very fun to perplex my friends with it.

    Reply
  46. Awesomeness -  July 1, 2013 - 12:28 am

    DUDE!!!!!!!! WHY DO PEOPLE EVEN REMOVE WORDS ANYWAY!? SOMEONE MIGHT JUST COME ALONG AND NEED IT!!!!!!!!! SERIOUSLY!

    Reply
  47. Melissa J Smiley -  June 24, 2013 - 6:08 am

    How do you get a new word in the dictionary.

    Reply
  48. michelle -  June 18, 2013 - 11:25 am

    definitely brabble

    Reply
  49. Clifton Palmer McLendon -  June 15, 2013 - 10:07 pm

    So long as the Catholic Church teaches the concept of indulgences, all of the forms of “supererogate” are here to stay.

    Reply
  50. KT5 -  May 25, 2013 - 11:13 am

    You can’t get rid of words!

    I’m currently reading “The Hippopotamus” by Stephen Fry and the number of words I’ve never seen before is voluminous. I have already learned so much new and beautiful vocabulary, and I’m only half way through the book.

    If you took words out of dictionaries, we would no longer be able to discover so many interesting words with such wonderful meanings.

    Reply
  51. -_- -  April 24, 2013 - 7:46 pm

    words should NEVER be removed from online dictionaries. who knows the meaning of the word “hauberk”? who has even heard of it? it is a type of chain- mail tunic. that would be pretty useful information if you were reading, say, a book about the 12th to 14th centuries. even if words are used infrequently, they have obviously been used sometime in the past, or else they wouldn’t be words. especially because there is no need to save room in online dictionaries.

    Reply
  52. Awesomepossumpants woot woot -  April 24, 2013 - 6:18 pm

    you should never ever remove a word seriously dude!!!!!!!!1

    Reply
  53. samsamosa -  April 16, 2013 - 6:48 am

    The word is deliciate, not delicate. Settle down, guys.

    Reply
  54. Janice -  April 1, 2013 - 5:47 am

    IExcept for words in Old or maybe even Middle English, I don’t think words should be removed from the dictionary. What would people do if they encounter any of these words in reading? People in favor of such a move might never read Shakespeare or even Austen or Dickens, but many of us do. Schools would have to publish their own special glossaries in order to assign any classic books in English class? I don’t *think* so. Regarding the word “aerodrome” specifically, I quote Snoopy in his Red Baron sketch in You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown (the stage-show, I don’t know about the movie): Here’s the World War I flying ace/back at the aerodrome in France…

    Reply
  55. Cupcake Queen -  March 25, 2013 - 12:42 pm

    Frigorific? WHY??? That is an amazing word! :(

    Reply
  56. J Keats -  March 22, 2013 - 8:04 pm

    Grammar check: it’s no matter how many times it is searched, not searched for.

    Reply
  57. Finn -  March 12, 2013 - 10:49 pm

    Take out all the words!!
    No I think you shouldnt plus at my house there are 2 dictionarys and they have some different words if they are words they should be there and what is the problem here beaver is an animal?????

    Reply
  58. Webranger -  March 1, 2013 - 8:11 am

    Only someone so myopic and ignorant that they never read old literature could ask this question. Is any one worth talking to really suggesting that there can never be a reason to look up the meaning of words found in Chaucer, Shakespeare, Sheridan, Dickens, and so forth?
    Keep them all, along with derivations and ancient usage.

    Reply
  59. Liz -  February 28, 2013 - 6:06 pm

    I think the folks at Collins are in too big a hurry. Many of us have heard “aerodrome” in period dramas. And I heard “charabanc” quite recently, I think in an episode of the new (c. 2012) version of _Upstairs, Downstairs_, which aired last year on PBS. Both these words offer nuances of meaning different from any single-word synonyms that might be suggested as replacements. No quibble with omitting some less frequently used words from smaller dictionaries. But are “charabanc” and “aerodrome” really considered obsolete? I hope not.

    Reply
  60. RANDOM PERSON -  February 24, 2013 - 9:58 pm

    Alienism should be given a second chance.

    Reply
  61. R. -  February 19, 2013 - 12:13 pm

    Please leave in as many words as possible. When I’m reading old novels or books of history, these are just the sorts of words I need to look up. Particularly if space is not an issue online, leave every single word in the dictionary!

    Reply
  62. btwwrh -  February 12, 2013 - 1:26 am

    why do you leave out such innocent words? Myah!

    Reply
  63. zomon skrillex -  February 7, 2013 - 5:29 pm

    will everyone stop hounding shelby for misspelling one stainkin word we aal make mistakes! like those of you who still spell mistakes with an extra ‘s’ and those of you who have nothing better to do than promote memes or ask us to find all the zeros in the group of o’s when really we should be working on a report about sharecropping assigned to us by our ninth grade english teacher!…..i should probably get back to work now,shouldnt i?

    oh and uh no words should be removed except those that used to have a proper meaning but are now used as fowl language by filthy teenagers and hobos with nothing better to do with their time than look at porno mags and drink diet coke on a park bench.

    Reply
  64. Justin -  February 5, 2013 - 11:27 pm

    I’m not sure we should be removing words from a dictionary, however if it must be done, I think the list is appropriate, apart from Aerodrome, which is still used locally in South Australia…although I suspect it will decline in the near future. I completely agree with preverbal reality’s comment.

    Reply
  65. Jose Chavez -  February 5, 2013 - 2:27 pm

    I agree on keeping on words that have been added since the existence of words. Is there any real reason as to why they want to remove these words, other than, to make space for future new words? eh…

    Reply
  66. john -  February 5, 2013 - 6:55 am

    Just as we have no fellowfeeling boonfellows now, no one talks of aerodromes instead of airports. Words have limited lifespans, and new words take their place. It’s how languages evolve. Obsolete words are not needed in dictionaries of current language. Comprehensive, unabridged dictionaries should retain the words, as should on-line dictionaries.

    Reply
  67. preverbal reality -  January 28, 2013 - 2:19 pm

    The very fact that a word is rarely used is exactly why it should be in a dictionary! When I hear a rare word, I need to look it up.

    Reply
  68. Gonzo -  January 28, 2013 - 12:25 pm

    @ Shelby the word deliciate should definitely change. Simply because it delves too far into the fact that a word carries a connotation and deliciate sounds too close to delicious, which will leave an impression within the word of the action that it speaks of would be fairly close to something delicious. Instead, the word means the over-indulge
    ov|er ind|u|lge.
    ovinderge while using the fold together method of creating a slang to combine two words would explain Over-indulgence while keeping its primary meaning, and removing the temptation to find over-indulgence delicious.
    Or maybe I’m reading it wrong and Deliciate has more to do with the sound in the ominous fashion that it is presented.

    A delicious over-indulgent action…. sounds kind of decadent to me.

    Reply
  69. apb -  January 22, 2013 - 4:13 pm

    alienism was in MLK speech therefore should not be removed.Agree with Phil Fasso because someday we all might need the meaning of one of these words and to not find it anywhere would be saddening.No word is ever obsolete because they all have their own specific meanings and some may not have shorter, more often used synonyms(as Adam Wood says about aerodrome).If we begin to do this the whole meaning and understanding of the english language may be lost in the ages as like what happened to heiroglyphics.

    Reply
  70. Adam Wood -  January 15, 2013 - 2:07 pm

    Aerodrome is in active use on UK roadsigns, so cannot be considered obsolete. Furthermore, it has no synonyms so cannot be removed or replaced.

    Reply
  71. Crazy person -  January 9, 2013 - 3:34 pm

    @Sarah: Nobody looks up names used in name-calling in the dictionary, even if it’s there. Hey…the spelling bee quizzes these rare words…

    Reply
  72. Crazy person -  January 9, 2013 - 3:30 pm

    @Shelby: NOTICE THE EXTRA “I” IN THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Great way to fool people that don’t look closely. Keep “deliciate”. Nice way to fool people.

    Reply
  73. Daniel -  January 8, 2013 - 6:04 pm

    What will happen when someone decides to make a giant dictionary with every word in it? They should stay. Even though modern people don’t use them, (I use most of these words regularly)they originally had a purpose, and old books still have them. I have already noticed that some words aren’t in dictionary.com, including many from The Cheshire Cheese Cat (a novel). If you are a child reading this (as am I, albeit a child with a larger vocabulary than many adults)imagine how scornful aliens would be if they saw how we chose to forget information. Also, why throw them down the drain? What’s wrong with them? They can stay there. My computer certainly isn’t getting slow because there’s too much information on this website, so why delete them? Dictionary.com is the biggest dictionary on Earth, so this knowledge should be preserved. Who knows, maybe one day someone might need it? Anyways, I urge dictionary.com to stop throwing away words, keep updating the website, (new words are always being made)and possibly recover the lost ones that this website so carelessly deleted!

    Reply
  74. Miguel -  January 8, 2013 - 8:58 am

    Both Aerodrome and Frigorific deserve to stay, they are not that obsolete yet, give them at least 5 more years of life

    Reply
  75. antsut -  January 8, 2013 - 1:05 am

    I need “like” button for BORA (above)! Thumb up!

    Reply
  76. Mark -  January 7, 2013 - 7:51 pm

    They all deserve to stay! Even if nobody is using them any more, is nobody reading early 20th century documents anymore? What about the poor sap who in ten years time reads a mention of an aerodrome in a novel and doesn’t know what it is?

    Reply
  77. Sherri -  January 7, 2013 - 7:31 am

    It’s freakin’ frigorific in L.A. I like this word. Let’s keep it. Can we get rid of “awesome?”

    Reply
  78. Mattski -  January 7, 2013 - 6:33 am

    Aerodrome, too? I guess the folks at the Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome will have to change their name…

    Reply
  79. Anneliese -  January 1, 2013 - 6:48 pm

    Let them stay. Some people may not use them very often, but they are indeed useful words that could definitely come in handy when in need of better diction.

    Reply
  80. rai-lynn -  December 29, 2012 - 4:20 pm

    I think that they should not be deleting words just because know one uses
    the word

    Reply
  81. Bora -  December 26, 2012 - 5:32 am

    If there is one word I’d consider removing it would be the words ‘perfect’ and ‘perfection’… There is no such thing as perfect, because everything/everyone has at least one flaw, and that defies the notion of perfection.

    I don’t like the obsession – people trying like mad to be ‘perfect’, driving others away because they are far from ‘perfect’, quitting important life processes because they never turn out to be as ‘perfect’ as they hoped, pushing their kids to death in order to achieve ‘perfection’… basically never happy with what they have achieved! That is just sad, and the existence of the word ‘perfect’ only makes it worse (!)

    Half-jokes aside, I think online dictionaries should include EVERY word known.

    Reply
  82. Danny -  November 30, 2012 - 5:36 am

    I am a poet of sorts and have just used the word deliciate in one of them, it really is a wonderful word , if anyone else has any other words they want including that we don’t use anymore let me know and I will try and include them in my future book of poems, which I am compiling at the moment .

    Reply
  83. Meh -  November 27, 2012 - 3:08 pm

    I have heard every single one of these words, which could be surprising I suppose, as I am only 15, but these words definitely should not be removed from a dictionary (online or paper) because of lack of use or any other reason. Alienism is a word I use often myself, as well as aerodrome. It is sad to me that these words will possibly be removed. Although I suppose they will live on in our memories (and hopefully our diction:).

    Reply
  84. cat -  November 25, 2012 - 12:58 pm

    i think all swear words should be removed from the dictionary, online and paper. you’d be surprised at how many kids look to the dictionary for cursing knowledge. i know because me and many of my friends have done it ourselves

    Reply
  85. Mhawk10 -  November 18, 2012 - 4:45 pm

    Captious should be taken out of the dictionary; it’s incredibly obsolete at this point in time.

    Reply
  86. ldb -  November 17, 2012 - 7:40 pm

    We must keep “aerodrome”. It’s an old and venerable word.

    Reply
  87. Cupcake Queen -  November 16, 2012 - 5:28 pm

    You know, I love finding and using rarely used or unique words (not only for the benefit of my skills, but also to stump my friends :D) and I will use these! ;)

    Reply
  88. Victoria -  November 16, 2012 - 6:22 am

    In cadets, we say aerodrome all the time…now it won’t be a word..

    Reply
  89. SHayes -  November 13, 2012 - 9:58 am

    Why sister?

    Reply
  90. Derp -  October 31, 2012 - 6:15 pm

    can u take out the word sister

    Reply
  91. robbie -  October 30, 2012 - 4:39 pm

    Just because a word isn’t used now doesn’t mean it should be put to death. that may have been the hot word of the encyclpodedia in the 19 hundreds.

    Reply
  92. Baillie -  October 29, 2012 - 10:10 am

    Every word is amazing. You know that feeling you get when you just can’t find the right word. Well, maybe that word you are looking for exists, but some people just voted to take it out of the dictionary. Think about it.

    Reply
  93. brinazarski -  October 29, 2012 - 8:01 am

    I’ve heard of alienism many times, don’t see why it’d be removed…

    I don’t think the others should be removed either, even if they are seldom used.

    Reply
  94. Euan -  October 29, 2012 - 4:58 am

    I used the word aerodrome the other day, and my friends needed to look it up. It can’t be deleted!

    Reply
  95. Brianna -  October 28, 2012 - 2:18 pm

    man at least delicate should stay and all of those othere words are fun to say like alienism. Fun. ALE-EEE-IN-IS-SUM!!!

    Reply
  96. Darren -  October 27, 2012 - 9:24 pm

    Just because of this article, these words everyone knows these words, will use them, and they don’t have to worry about dying now! CLEVER!

    Reply
  97. Nathanathanatha -  October 27, 2012 - 1:24 pm

    You people, the word is deliciate, not delicate!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  98. Nathanathanatha -  October 27, 2012 - 1:06 pm

    Shelby-

    The word is deliciate. Notice the i after the c.

    Reply
  99. SA -  October 27, 2012 - 9:19 am

    Keep bever, brabble, delciate, frigorific, supererogate, younker

    Do away with aerodrome, alienism, charabanc

    Reply
  100. John -  October 27, 2012 - 5:55 am

    There is a dictionary that removed words simply because they were considered offensive – The Official Scrabble Dictionary, Third Edition. It’s a move that I resent, ’cause the f-word is worth 13 points.

    Reply
  101. anon. -  October 26, 2012 - 12:36 pm

    Have you ever noticed in the old cartoons that when an angry crowd is standing around yelling, everyone’s saying, “Brabble, brabble, brabble, brabble, brabble….!”?

    Words that are not used often add color to the language.

    Reply
  102. anon. -  October 26, 2012 - 12:26 pm

    If words are removed from the dictionary, what happens when someone is reading older books and doesn’t know the meaning of a word? This happens a great deal especially with English literature! Even if the words aren’t used and the rules no longer followed, they have to remain in an accessible place so that classic literature isn’t one day completely lost because the next generation is left without the understanding to enjoy it and without resources needed gain that understanding.

    Reply
  103. Lilian -  October 25, 2012 - 8:55 pm

    The dictionary cannot include every word in the English language! The English language must be expanded, not to just the extent of a book!

    If words kept leaving the English language, what do you think would happen? You wouldn’t HAVE a language!!! And Michael, I want to think: Will new words ACTUALLY be added to the language??? Our language is one of a kind and it deserves to be kept.

    Reply
  104. Alexandria -  October 25, 2012 - 5:01 pm

    I just learned Frigoric this week ! I cannot spell it properly though. It was on my vocabulary list.

    Reply
  105. Lilac Lavender -  October 25, 2012 - 5:46 am

    It’s sad these words are dying. We should really start a revival…

    Reply
  106. Michael Nolan -  October 14, 2012 - 2:16 pm

    Language changes all the time, and English has been changing and growing more rapidly than ever in the last few years. Unabridged dictionaries can and should attempt to include every word in the language, but smaller dictionaries must be edited. Except for aerodrome, I had never heard of any of these words before, and I think we can afford to take them out so as to include new words in new dictionaries.

    Reply
  107. mu -  October 1, 2012 - 1:23 am

    I love how theses are primarily British. I actually have heard of Younker before…it was in a song, I think. Deliciate is a pretty word…

    Reply
  108. 7kud -  September 24, 2012 - 10:10 am

    Believe it or not I use Alienism all of the time. it’s one of my favorite words to use…as often as I talk about the subject I use the word as a standing example of such. Why bother removing words??? You don’t know how often they are used by people who appreciate them.

    Reply
  109. John Howe -  September 17, 2012 - 6:25 pm

    Oops sorry the word is Deliciate – but I frequently partake of deliciative experiences.

    Reply
  110. John Howe -  September 17, 2012 - 6:23 pm

    Delicate is considered obsolete – never, never surely. It is in frequent use in many contexts well in the UK anyway.

    Reply
  111. John Howe -  September 17, 2012 - 6:22 pm

    I may be wrong but I undersand the the International Civial Aviation Authority and IATA still use the word Aerodrome as the official term for any airport or landing strip big or small.

    Reply
  112. cutieisevil -  September 14, 2012 - 2:12 am

    I don’t think Delicate should go off…

    Reply
  113. goodwin -  September 9, 2012 - 8:27 am

    Wow, these words ARE never used.

    Reply
  114. Patrick -  September 7, 2012 - 10:01 am

    Removing a word seems like a good idea until you’re reading an older book that uses that word. Try looking up an obscure 17th century word in a dictionary that’s been purged of all the “old” words.

    Reply
  115. Silver Fang -  September 6, 2012 - 11:04 am

    Not delicate, deliciate. It means to enjoy something in a hedonistic manner.

    Reply
  116. anonymous -  September 3, 2012 - 10:45 am

    Aerodrome shouldn’t be removed from the dictionary, I know a very popular game that uses the word “Aerodrome” in it. Actually, it uses “Aerodome”, but I think the two words are synonyms.

    Reply
  117. samarri -  August 27, 2012 - 4:32 am

    no i don’t think these words have to be removed from the dictionary!!
    i think it because to form a single word or letter ,it takes thousands of decades. the word charabanc and aerodrome may be of someone effort.
    i believe if we bring those words in era of todays youngsters , i am sure they will love to use it .

    Reply
  118. Jeremy -  August 14, 2012 - 2:36 pm

    No, we should never removie words from the dictionary. How else would we know the bad language to use?

    Reply
  119. ed -  August 10, 2012 - 1:04 am

    Words are a form of sophisticated communication setting us apart from the more base animals. The more we are able to communicate with words the more ideas we are able to express for that is the purpose of words. Hence, the more words you know the more ideas you may convey to others. Words also equate to the more ideas you yourself may construct in your own mind as well.

    However, it is possible that a verbose speaker/writer may not convey their ideas to one with a limited vocabulary. This must contradict the core purpose of words as communication if the delivery of the word is not understood. Should the speaker/writer dumb down the vocabulary to express their thoughts and ideas and thus lose added meaning in order to be understood? This would seem the argument for the deletion of words from any dictionary.

    Is it too much to expect that the listener should increase their own vocabulary in order to understand and communicate? If elucidation is required for a majority to comprehend then perhaps it is easier and more effective to start deleting and thus ‘be keepin it real cause it is what it is.’ And pray for our future.

    Reply
  120. Goldenia Boy -  July 22, 2012 - 12:50 am

    How many words that are removed from some dictionaries?

    Reply
  121. Hank -  July 18, 2012 - 10:18 pm

    I completely disagree with removing AERODROME from dictionaries. Almost every landing field in Australia (where I come from) and New Zealand (where I now live) is called an aerodrome. Why remove it??

    Reply
  122. Nicolas Smith -  July 3, 2012 - 6:54 pm

    MY OPINION is that people should not remove any kinds of words from dictionaries

    Reply
  123. Aruba -  June 25, 2012 - 4:56 am

    Greetings! Very helpful advice in this particular post!
    It is the little changes that produce the biggest changes.
    Thanks a lot for sharing!

    Reply
  124. Grace -  June 24, 2012 - 12:21 pm

    Weeelll, I think aerodome actually sounds pretty cool. Like, on the most beautiful word. It kind flows… AND… deliciate! Not delicate! 2 different words people!

    Reply
  125. anonomous -  June 23, 2012 - 11:42 am

    i think berborgymous should get BACK in the dictionarys! its HILARIOUS! LOOK IT UP!!!

    Reply
  126. Amber -  June 7, 2012 - 2:09 am

    I like bever, brabble, deliciate, frigorific, and supererogate!! i couldn’t find younker though so i have no opinion on that particular word.

    Reply
  127. Sweetchill -  May 28, 2012 - 6:11 pm

    Shelby, the article didnt say ‘delicate’, it said ‘deliciate’

    Reply
  128. peter murphy -  May 27, 2012 - 6:31 pm

    MISSION STATEMENT FOR A DICTIONARY PUBLISHER –
    Produce a book of words and meanings available for all to consult, especially rare, unusual and easily confused words, so that the reader will be educated and enabled to create better communication.

    Isn’t that the reason Dictionaries exist – to explain the meaning and spelling of obscure, rare or infrequently-used words???

    Perhaps Collins could go further… ignore all the words they feel are not needed (redundant, non sine-qua-non, non-essential, unnecessary, superfluous, supernumerary) words.

    That way we could all employ (use) the standardised (? … or is it ‘standardized’…?) language (tongue?) comprising less than the 20,000 words that fit in the reduced-size (little, tiny, insignificant, unimportant, minute, reduced, precied, ) Collins Dictionary. for the masses of uneducated gits.

    The advantage for Collins of course – and for the world of literatury pursuit (writers, authors, essayists) is one would no longer need to buy (acquire, purchase) a thesaurus (a treasury of like-meaning words, from the Greek, ‘thesauro’ = treasure.)

    Or is this evidence of a modern-day Pict miopia (oh, sorry, I mean xenophobic short-sightedness by a company who’s publishing house is founded in those lands on the northern side of the once-important (and now deleted, removed, excised, de-constructed, dismantled, re-located, re-fashioned) Hadrian’s wall.

    I concede, unlike myself, some may not boast memories of ‘planes taking off and landing at the local aerodrome’ (where unlike today, there was no serviced passenger lounge, no duty-free commercial precinct, no luggage carosels),. No… they must console themselves in their vacuous memory banks, awaiting touchdown or departure at the airport.

    So… Collins would change the language to suit their own commercial needs to ‘tighten the belt.’ Good One! Bonzer, mate.

    Reply
  129. random -  May 27, 2012 - 5:12 am

    EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT AERODROME MEANS!!!!! ☺☻♥

    Reply
  130. random -  May 27, 2012 - 5:11 am

    SERIOUSLY, THESE PEOPLE ARE CRAZY!!!
    IM JUST A YOUNKER AND I KNOW NOT TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT!
    THIS PREPOSITION IS FRIGORIFIC IN MY STOMACH!!!
    IM GOING TO BRABBLE WITH THESE PEOPLE UNTIL THEY GIVE IN!!

    LOL ☺☻♥♦♣♠•◘○µËü

    Reply
  131. random -  May 27, 2012 - 5:01 am

    THAT IS THE WORST THING THEY COULD EVER DO!!!!

    WORDS IN DICTIONARYS SHOULD STAY IN DICTIONARYS!!!!!

    Reply
  132. Debbie K -  May 18, 2012 - 7:37 am

    I’ve heard of two of them, aerodrome and charabanc, and maybe frigorific. All of them should stay! Aerodrome has been used within my living memory, and as for charabanc, what if someone reading an Agatha Christie or Dorothy Sayers novel meets it and can’t find out what it means?

    Reply
  133. Ren -  May 17, 2012 - 11:46 am

    Aerodrome shouldn’t be dropped, we still use this word quite a lot in England…

    Reply
  134. Brittany -  May 16, 2012 - 11:36 am

    I don’t think a word should ever be removed from a dictionary because, although they aren’t commonly used doesn’t mean they have been forgotten.

    Reply
  135. Brian Krecik -  May 15, 2012 - 12:50 pm

    “I don’t think any words should be removed from the dictionary. i’m 14 and when I have to read novels from the 1800’s for english, it’s nice to be able to look up words that no one uses anymore.”

    Good point… perhaps move them to a section of the dictionary that places them by their age, such as historical reference. My hat off to Renira for seeing well into the future.

    Brian

    Reply
  136. William OConnell -  May 13, 2012 - 7:50 pm

    Crayola replaced the “Flesh” crayola in 1962 to “Peach”.What a smooth
    transition That was.
    Just think what might happen if you took the word “Hate” out of your
    dictionary.

    Reply
  137. bye -  May 11, 2012 - 1:07 am

    bye

    Reply
  138. hello -  May 11, 2012 - 1:06 am

    hello

    Reply
  139. yawn -  May 11, 2012 - 1:06 am

    yawn

    Reply
  140. this is getting boring -  May 11, 2012 - 1:06 am

    this is getting boring

    Reply
  141. ha ha -  May 11, 2012 - 1:05 am

    ha ha

    Reply
  142. wassup -  May 11, 2012 - 1:05 am

    wassup

    Reply
  143. Shareena -  May 6, 2012 - 12:56 pm

    I think that silent letters should be illegal. Ugh I just hate them so much.

    Reply
  144. Renira -  May 3, 2012 - 6:49 am

    I don’t think any words should be removed from the dictionary. i’m 14 and when I have to read novels from the 1800′s for english, it’s nice to be able to look up words that no one uses anymore.

    Reply
  145. evurts -  April 29, 2012 - 6:34 pm

    If you take these words out of the dictnary they will just become more and more obslite I think that we should take it upon ourselves to birng these words back and keep them in the dictionary

    Reply
  146. Sam Stuart -  April 26, 2012 - 5:20 pm

    A word should never deserves to die. Every word has a history that should be preserved in at least one dictionary.

    Reply
  147. Annie -  April 26, 2012 - 4:38 pm

    Never remove a word from the dictionary. This is a vexation to the gods of verbiage! :)

    Reply
  148. nunyabiz -  April 26, 2012 - 3:02 pm

    Cacaphonactious should be a word meaning awsome

    Reply
  149. jon -  April 25, 2012 - 3:22 am

    no word should be removed from the dictionary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  150. jon -  April 25, 2012 - 3:20 am

    what?

    Reply
  151. ben -  April 25, 2012 - 3:19 am

    dude

    Reply
  152. jon -  April 25, 2012 - 3:18 am

    chicken!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  153. Rexas -  April 24, 2012 - 9:21 pm

    @RichardH

    Wow I was just about to post that.

    Reply
  154. Marian -  April 24, 2012 - 6:37 pm

    Please don’t delete any words. They are still words. People may still use them! XD

    Reply
  155. LOL -  April 24, 2012 - 5:07 pm

    @RichardH OMG, DONT REMOVE DELICATE, I HEAR IT ALL THE TIME. That is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
    FREAKINGGGGGGGGGGGGGG funny. Delicate, deliciate. HA HA! LOL

    Reply
  156. Dan Anderson -  April 24, 2012 - 4:03 pm

    Although old and rarely used, such “obsolete words” should never be removed from the online dictionary. It is possible someone may come across a 17th or 18th literary work and need to find the meaning of a word he/she never saw.

    Please keep all outdated words for this very purpose. It is fine to note that it is obsolete, but they should NEVER be deleted as old novels and newspapers, etc., are encountered everyday on the Internet, in historical socieities, libraries, etc.

    Thank you!
    Dan

    Reply
  157. RichardH -  April 24, 2012 - 5:24 am

    To all of you posting ‘OMG DON’T REMOVE DELICATE, I HEAR IT ALL THE TIME’ you are all complete retards who can’t read. – The word is deliciate. ‘delic-i-ate’ With an extra ‘i’ in it. Read before you post ffs.

    Reply
  158. Future_Author -  April 19, 2012 - 7:48 pm

    I personally think that no word should be removed from the dictionary. You never know if a word that is considered obsolete now could be one of the most common words used in the future. I truly love writing (hence my name) and I honestly believe that uncommon words are stupendous when I try to make my stories and essays sound less dull by replacing overused words.

    Simply put, I think we should keep every single word found in the dictionary and thesaurus. Revoking words is not the best idea in the world. Before thinking of removing words, we should try to use them more often so the nearly obsolete words have a chance to catch on.

    Reply
  159. briekellyo -  April 17, 2012 - 7:19 am

    Brabble seems to have been replaced by Babble, even though Babble can mean something different – like rambling. I’ve heard the use of Babble be the same as Brabble. “All that annoying babble!” Just like the word “ironic”.

    Frigorific seems like a useful word! “That room is frigorific! The heater’s broken!” It’s also quite fun to say.

    ALIENISM?!?! I’ve used that word numerous times! Wasn’t expecting that one!

    Charabanc is actual a really pretty word…though not so common or useful. Still a pretty word. Could even be a name! Charabanc Marie. Yes.

    Definitely never hear “younker.” I’m guessing it was used just as “Youngins” is. Though, from my experience, “youngins” is only used in a joking manner these days. Like “whippersnapper.”

    Anyways, I personally don’t think ANY words should be removed from the dictionary. I don’t think a word will ever undergo complete “alienism.”

    Yes. I just used one.

    Reply
  160. OnceInABlueMoon -  April 15, 2012 - 11:23 am

    Dude is a really annoying word. Everybody uses it so much you think they forgot your name.

    “Hey dude!”

    “I’m not Dude, don’t call me that.”

    “OK, dude.”

    “I said don’t call me that.”

    “Yeah, dude.”

    “DON”T CALL ME DUDE!!!! I DON”T WANT TO HEAR ANOTHER ‘DUDE’ COME OUT OF YOUR MOUTH! DO YOU UNDERSTAND!”

    (long pause)

    “Hey dudette”

    Gets me every time….. D:<

    Reply
  161. Talyn -  April 14, 2012 - 10:21 am

    I have never heard of these words.. good riddance.. you look like a wise ass adding those words in and it’s a pain to explain what they mean.. you don’t look smart saying those in front of other 16 year olds, you look stupid and pretentious.. ooh big word!! Let’s hope people don’t think it means ‘having leaves’ or ‘shy’ … people are stupid -_-

    Reply
  162. Shini -  April 10, 2012 - 2:16 pm

    I don’t think any of these words should be removed.

    Deliciate is a confusing word, though. I almost mistakened it for “delicate”.

    Reply
  163. Miama -  April 9, 2012 - 7:47 am

    Instead of removing them, how about adding a new section to the website labeled ‘erased words’ and leave them there so that the public may know. It may become a historical place! Or maybe, some people will decide to start using them.

    Reply
  164. keyboardsmash -  April 7, 2012 - 7:58 pm

    I think they should all be given a second chance. I mean isn’t it a dictionary’s job to teach us the meaning of words? Retain the unknowns!…or make an “Obsolete Words” dictionary. People who want to sound intelligent might revive the use of these words.

    Reply
  165. arch -  March 31, 2012 - 6:18 am

    shouldnt be taken off… these words might have been used in a poem, in a book or a letter, which future generation might read, and they might wanna look up these words in the dictionary

    Reply
  166. Jenny -  March 28, 2012 - 6:03 pm

    I think they should keep all words and perhaps adjust their definitions to say something more considerate such as “was once used to refer to.. ” Such and so on.

    Reply
  167. SaintPiran -  March 25, 2012 - 6:35 am

    Removing words from dictionaries deliberately is intellectual vandalism of the basest kind.

    Cease and desist forthwith!

    Frankly though, I CAN understand that various commercial pressures exist, requiring published works to be abridged for common usage.
    Nevertheless, there MUST in perpetuity be preserved a ‘master-volume’ containing the complete lexicon ever used by each individual language.
    Personally, I see that provision being equivalent to the (Sciences’) Systeme International practice whereby there is (e.g.) preserved a ‘master’ metal-block with the mass of 1 kilogram, against which every mass registering device is tared, etc.

    I would go so far as to say that previously discarded words should be reintroduced to this grand opus, including words spelled properly with now redundant letters also fallen by the wayside!

    Reply
  168. Herschel -  March 22, 2012 - 10:58 pm

    The English language is composed of hundreds of thousands of words and omitting some of them might not be a big deal. However, words are crucial to express ideas, feelings and such. Even if only a few of those words are eliminated, it would seem like expressing is shorten. It might not be alarming that only 10 or 20 words are removed. That’s where everything starts, folks! As of now, they will only take off 10 but sooner they will add some more. What will happen to English?!

    Reply
  169. Aymeezus -  March 21, 2012 - 7:03 pm

    THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE!! WORDS ARE WHAT MAKE THE WORLD GO ROUND. WORDS ALLOW US HUMAN KIND TO SURVIVE, THE DELICATE FORM OF COMMUNICATION. IF WE LOSE EVEN ONE WORD, IT’LL BE LIKE THE EXTINCTION OF AN ANIMAL! THESE WORDS ARE ENDANGERED, ONE MIGHT SAY. WORDS ARE ALL WE NEED TO SURVIVE! ( Okay maybe we still need rations. Maybe water, too. And oxygen. Sleep will do, too.)

    Reply
  170. Patricia Smith -  March 21, 2012 - 12:27 pm

    Aerodrome – despite the fact it is very commonly used among weathermen, and aviators. It should not be removed.
    Alienism – I myself believe in aliens and find the word useless. Just being called a believer of aliens is enough. So it can be removed without too much criticism.
    Bever – Not really used to often and not many people know what it means. I don’t think anyone would miss this word if it was removed.
    Brabble – is pretty much the same as argue. Therefore it is not needed.
    Charabanc – Is actually a tour bus which is easier to say so again this word is not needed.
    Deliciate – Though the meaning is well known it would be stupid to remove it from the dictionary.
    Frigorific – Is the same as a cold so there is really no need for the word
    Supererogate – going above and beyond basicly thus it is just a large word used by super geeks and is not needed.
    Younker – same as a youngster it would not matter if this word is removed.

    I find that no word should be removed from the dictionary online or otherwise. If it is however someone should start a site dedicated to lost words removed from the dictionary. It would solve the issue of people not wanting the words removed and provide a little bit of word history for future generations.

    Reply
  171. philip -  March 19, 2012 - 10:38 pm

    Removing some words from print dictionaries might be justified, but removing words online is disgusting. Bound to happen, but disgusting. That’s how words die.

    Reply
  172. Tropical Coconut-AJB -  March 19, 2012 - 9:09 pm

    Oh! Hey avg! Look who’s Jewish! I’m Jewish too! OMG! How’s Israel? I’ve been dying to go there. I still can’t believe that they’re going to take away all these words from the dictionary. Vanessa isn’t my real name, just to let you know. I’m still kind of sad about these words disappearing. We need those words! They are the requirement for this language! Gosh! How dictionaries can be so careless. I just hate what anoymous said about having all the words erased. He’s such a blockhead. He’s a complete immature retard. Anyways, glad I posted this.

    Reply
  173. Kayla -  March 19, 2012 - 7:14 pm

    I’ve heard “charabanc” before, but it’s definitely becoming obsolete, since I read it in a classic that came out in the 1800s or something.

    Reply
  174. Kaitlynn -  March 19, 2012 - 5:16 pm

    WHAT ARE YOU CRAZY PEOPLE THINKING? WHO ARE YOU TO KILLWORDS?? CRAZY CRAZY CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i bet youre either a hobo, a bozo, a person who is jealous that the words have a more complex meaning than you do, or a CRAZY FREAKING WORD HATER!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  175. Sam Stuart -  March 19, 2012 - 5:07 pm

    I don’t believe in eliminating words, even if we don’t use them that often. They were used, and hey, someone might be able to use it for Scrabble.

    Reply
  176. MC -  March 19, 2012 - 3:43 pm

    I always have to find the right word for what I’m thinking and my friends are always joking with me because I like to use “big words”. But I like to feel smart by using them :). You can’t just take words out of the dictionary! The reason people look words up is because they don’t know what it means. If only the common words were in the dictionary there would be no use for it because everyone would know all of the words!

    Reply
  177. XfildChild -  March 19, 2012 - 8:15 am

    I have never heard of any of these words. I think I will memorize their definitions and start using them every day…purely out of spite! Take that!

    Reply
  178. Jared -  March 19, 2012 - 7:35 am

    Frigorific sounds like a terrific refrigerator.

    Reply
  179. Laurie -  March 18, 2012 - 10:26 pm

    I can’t imagine ANY words disappearing from the dictionary. I am also very grateful for the online dictionaries, though I prefer the paper versions. I love books and to be able to touch and hold them.
    But as a writer, I need my online versions every day. They can include all words, accommodating even archaic words, and the new (sometimes disturbing) words such as chillaxin’, which are necessary, considering I sometimes write contemporary fiction, sometimes not.
    Words, words words! We need em all in the dictionary! :D

    Reply
  180. Nathan -  March 18, 2012 - 7:59 pm

    Actually the word Aerodrome is used often generally referring to a type of NOTAM.

    Reply
  181. no one -  March 18, 2012 - 7:48 pm

    whoever shelby is, it says deliciate not delicate. ps my computer said that deliciate isnt a word :)

    Reply
  182. Brad -  March 18, 2012 - 6:42 pm

    Words may not be used but think about a scenario like this: if we get rid of lots of important and infrequintly used words than one day our grandchildren or their grandchildren may want to read a historic document, like the Declaration of Independence, and they dont understand the words and they cant find the words in any dictionaries (paper or online) and then because they dont understand it so the valuable message that it bestows is lost on the reader. If the people who are assisting the termination of infrequently used words, im a 13 year old student who has more insight than any of you. Think about that!!!

    Reply
  183. Brad -  March 18, 2012 - 6:41 pm

    Words may not be used but think about a scenario like this: if we get rid of lots of important and infrequintly used words than one day our grandchildren or their grandchildren may want to read a historic document, like the Declaration of Independence, and they dont understand the words and they cant find the words in any dictionaries (paper or online) and then because they dont understand it so the valuable message that it bestows is lost on the reader. If the people who are assisting the termination of infrequently used words, im a 13 year old student who has more insight than any of you. Think about that.

    Reply
  184. DictionFan -  March 18, 2012 - 3:00 pm

    midget words being deleted because of improper or insignificant use? NO FREAKING WAY!!!! all words have the right to become something, and not be deleted from a dictionary. word heritage ppl. Removing areodome? really? that is the most ultimate fail i’ve heard.
    #wordheritageandpresevation

    Reply
  185. NinjaTurtle -  March 18, 2012 - 1:21 pm

    I use the word “Delicate” all the time!!! “Alienism” is a great one too, i use it to mean “violation of privacy”. Why take these words away?!?!?!?

    Reply
  186. Bridges Stevenson -  March 18, 2012 - 12:59 pm

    Personally, I feel that a word should only be erased from the dictionary, or memory for that matter, if a newer more commonly used and known word replaces it. Also there are many words which are used in writing that are never or rarely used in everyday conversation, I feel that, as a writer, these words should be left right where they are.

    Reply
  187. Jan... -  March 18, 2012 - 12:06 pm

    Just because certain words are not being searched for excessively does not mean the words are not being used by individuals in actuality.

    The case might be, that words not being excessively searched for are words that are being used by individuals who know its exact meaning. If someone learns of these individuals’ choice of words, then, new words are introduced to them and, of course, a dictionary must be used to identify the meanings.

    That person is then given the opportunity to ‘adopt’ new significant words.

    Reply
  188. Marc -  March 17, 2012 - 4:09 pm

    I don;t know the words, but why remove them? There’s no point in “refining” and “shedding” our language of unused words.

    Reply
  189. Maisha -  March 17, 2012 - 8:50 am

    I doubt five words make much of a spatial difference in a dictionary, though.

    Reply
  190. gail -  March 17, 2012 - 8:03 am

    In my opinion, such arcane words should still remain as part of the dictionaries… in the very least, they should be retained in “unabridged” editions. We need to have reliable resources in which to look up even so-called rare or obsolete words. By the way, “arcane” is probably just such a word! It is from this word that the word “arcana” (more commonly seen in discussions of Tarot cards) derives. How would we know that, if they made all such words simply “go away” because they are no longer “commonly used” ??? Language is a fascinating thing, it is almost an organic thing– of course it evolves as society evolves! However, don’t we still research and study society’s past (think archeology) and species’ past (think biology)??? So, why not retain the resources that allow us to research language’s past??? The history of language dates back to cave paintings, should we simply throw away anything not in common use then??? I believe even these dated and archaic and so-called obsolete words are worth keeping, because often in those words lie the roots of many other words and expressions that we DO still use. :-)
    I believe these words STILL HAVE VALUE!!!
    Thanks for listening.

    Reply
  191. Bookworm -  March 16, 2012 - 5:30 pm

    Every single word ever used should stay. Just because words are rarely used doesn’t mean they are useless. What if we find an old book full of these words. We will never understand it. Maybe they can be removed from paper dictionaries but they should stay online.

    Reply
  192. Bookworm -  March 16, 2012 - 5:25 pm

    Every single word ever used should stay. Just because words are rarely used doesn’t mean they are useless

    Reply
  193. Gina, book dragon -  March 16, 2012 - 8:20 am

    I can see why these may be removed from print editions, Alienism doesn’t even make sense!

    Reply
  194. Will Lugar -  March 11, 2012 - 3:10 pm

    Although it sounds like a couple of these words are still used enough to justify their retention in the dictionaries, I disagree with the notion that words should NEVER be removed. Yes, people may want to know what an archaic word means–but there’s always the internet. Databases of words can grow to practically infinite size on the internet.

    But imagine how long dictionaries will be in 1,000 years if we never, ever remove any words! We’ve got to think loooooong-term, people!

    Reply
  195. Hello -  March 10, 2012 - 5:28 pm

    I don’t think any words should be deleted from the dictionary, its words which make up our language, no matter how little people use them. To erase such words would be like taking away parts of our language little at a time.

    Reply
  196. mh -  March 10, 2012 - 4:13 am

    supererogate should stay

    Reply
  197. Doc -  March 9, 2012 - 2:09 pm

    I could watch the likes of “frigorific” or “charabanc” cross the bar without a qualm, but “younker” is much too satisfying and fun to consign to such a fate.

    Reply
  198. logosxxx -  March 8, 2012 - 1:33 am

    alienism is the anagram of milesian

    Reply
  199. Bleeding Ugly » Word of the day: Gallimaufry -  March 1, 2012 - 9:18 pm

    [...] published a list of words that will be expurgated from the smaller editions of their dictionary. Mostly these are just antiquated words. Things like aerodrome and charabanc. Words like wittol and drysalter. I understand their reasoning [...]

    Reply
  200. MissRedhead -  February 29, 2012 - 4:24 pm

    dont know how many people would agree but regardless, i say take no words away…whats the point -it doesnt matter if it is considered a word or not. people always make up words- all that matters is that we continue our efforts in communicating what me mean to say! <3

    Reply
  201. Hi -  February 29, 2012 - 1:58 pm

    I have never heard even 1 of these words b4

    Reply
  202. smite -  February 25, 2012 - 2:31 pm

    the internet help you do thing that you need to word(;

    Reply
  203. Australia translation -  February 25, 2012 - 5:28 am

    [...]Here are some of the internet sites we advocate for our visitors[...]

    Reply
  204. mary torres so loved -  February 23, 2012 - 11:35 am

    i know thats right :D

    Reply
  205. mary torres so loved -  February 23, 2012 - 7:11 am

    :D

    Reply
  206. maddie -  February 22, 2012 - 3:53 pm

    this is absurd!! u dont just remove words from a dictionary!! this is ridiculous!!!

    Reply
  207. mary torres -  February 18, 2012 - 12:17 pm

    cell phone are sll mostly touch sceens cool:) !

    Reply
  208. website security australia -  February 18, 2012 - 5:30 am

    [...]although internet websites we backlink to beneath are considerably not associated to ours, we really feel they may be essentially really worth a go by means of, so possess a look[...]

    Reply
  209. mary torres -  February 17, 2012 - 11:30 am

    hey hey hey lol :)

    Reply
  210. cheap refurbished computers -  February 17, 2012 - 5:49 am

    [...]the time to read or stop by the material or web pages we have linked to below the[...]

    Reply
  211. Yawnie -  February 13, 2012 - 11:20 pm

    Aerodrome, really?! That word is used a lot around here on maps and signage since there is a lot of airstrips that dot this land. I’m actually scared if they remove this word as I fear of what confusion it could cause…

    Reply
  212. Zombie Spy -  February 13, 2012 - 7:01 pm

    look again, shelby. it’s “deliciate”, not “delicate”

    Reply
  213. Fr. Jim -  February 11, 2012 - 3:57 pm

    Why this headlong rush toward ignorance? First, the professional incompetents at the National “Education” Association gave us “whole word reading.” They were finally convinced to stop, so now they don’t want us to be able to communicate in handwriting. Now there’s an online dictionary that’s considering dropping words.

    You Tube has dozens of “stupid American” videos. I think we should all watch them, and realize the time has come to wake up.

    Reply
  214. 7×7 Final Outcomes | Lolarama @ Parsons -  February 8, 2012 - 10:32 pm

    [...] Doc: the only one of the dwarfs to wear glasses (so presumably the most intellectual) Keyword: Intellectual Solution:  A memorial of  distinct words Inspiration: English Dictionaries, “Obsolete Words” [...]

    Reply
  215. fast acting diet pills -  February 6, 2012 - 12:41 am

    [...]here are some links to web pages that we link to because we assume they are worth visiting[...]

    Reply
  216. sarth -  February 2, 2012 - 2:12 pm

    Bring these words back! As our vocabulary shinks, so does our capacity to enjoy intelligent discourse. I am not looking forward to a future in which people say, “Lol, that totally roxxors.” as if that were a valid statement.

    Reply
  217. Wesobi123 -  January 24, 2012 - 8:25 am

    get rid of biebar….its in my new dictionary

    Reply
  218. someone -  January 22, 2012 - 5:41 pm

    yes

    Reply
  219. unknown -  January 15, 2012 - 8:59 pm

    Isnt finding rare words the POINT of using dictionaries?…..

    Reply
  220. Jackie Dack -  January 14, 2012 - 7:58 am

    What does it say about the modern human race that the word Supererogate is to be taken out of the dictionary? No one ever goes the extra mile anymore? Everyone is on a train to Jobsworthville? Imagine what a little supererogation could do to light up the darkness, give people a sense of self esteem and swagger and help those who just need a little boost in their lives now and again.

    Reply
  221. Stewart -  January 14, 2012 - 4:52 am

    I think the spoken and written language is actually a pretty superficial tool we use to articulate deeper things namely our thoughts and ideas. This could possibly explain the “malleability” of language and why it must adhere somewhat slavishly to our cultures and ideas.

    Reply
  222. Sara -  January 12, 2012 - 7:02 pm

    I am a writer trying to get a book published, and I disagree with deleting words from the dictionary/thesaurus. I use interesting words that hardly anyone knows as place names, character names, titles, etc., and I love using a thesaurus. These words are so great because they actually have meaning and no one really knows it, so if they look up the word you can be like, “hey, this actually has a meaning relevant to the story.”

    Some words are underused, yes, but I still love finding them and digging them up, and the next step after obscurity is removal from the language altogether.

    Reply
  223. hellow -  January 12, 2012 - 3:43 pm

    words are big deal. infact i think ALL WORDS should be keept in an online dictionary. i needed one of these words for a creative wrighting essay we got in class, now that i know it since i looked at all of them, i can use it. and in reply to Phil Fasso if a dictionary was unabridged then it would be at least 5 inches thick, i know cause i have one, and its from 1970. so their is NO WAY that it can be less than 5 in. thick

    Reply
  224. uberhaxanova -  January 11, 2012 - 2:49 pm

    why would there be so much argumaent about words!!!!! its not a big deal!!!!!!

    Reply
  225. uberhaxanova -  January 11, 2012 - 2:42 pm

    EVERYBODY JUST STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  226. Tammy -  January 11, 2012 - 9:38 am

    One of my favorite book ideas I think Julie Andrews wrote; it’s inspired by and deals with a word and definition she found in an old dictionary somewhere. :) It’s a fun little children’s novel.

    Reply
  227. Austin -  January 9, 2012 - 8:05 pm

    What about Buk mow?

    Reply
  228. Mike -  January 8, 2012 - 7:02 pm

    People need to actually read this article thoroughly before commenting. Most of these comments are obviously based on the title. They are thinking about removing these words from SMALL dictionaries, like pocket dictionaries, because they aren’t used very frequently. This doesn’t mean that it’s going to stop existing all together. It will still be in online dictionaries, and larger dictionaries. So stop complaining. Most of you just use google anyway

    Reply
  229. arjay -  January 8, 2012 - 8:59 am

    “alula” and “telegony” are great words for exclusionary definition lists.

    Reply
  230. Peter McLean -  January 1, 2012 - 7:45 pm

    I don’t know how any dictionary can think of leaving out any words. By all means label a word as archaic or obsolete, but that is no reason not to include it. Or even publish a dictionary containing only words which the compilers consider archaic or obsolete. But they shouldn’t be consigned to the lexicographical dustbin. If dictionaries are to be merely a record of the words that ordinary people speak today, they would be a lot smaller than they are. But that’s not their purpose, or at least it shouldn’t be. They should be a historical record of the words that people use now, and have used in the past. How on earth are people supposed to understand literature of the past if they don’t have a dictionary to explain those words which have since become obsolete? Do they expect us to stop reading Shakespeare, Chaucer, Milton and all the other great writers of the past? It’s a ridiculous notion.

    Reply
  231. i cant tell -  December 29, 2011 - 8:59 am

    THEY STILL MEAN SOMETHING!
    THEY ARE STILL WORDS AREN’T THEY????

    ANSWER: YES STILL WORDS

    Reply
  232. Omar E -  December 28, 2011 - 5:35 pm

    In my opinion: no words should ever be removed from the dictionary.

    Reply
  233. Tim Kramar -  December 26, 2011 - 7:08 am

    I know I’ve encountered aerodrome, not quite sure about younker or supererogate.

    Reply
  234. LA Weight Loss -  December 6, 2011 - 3:38 am

    I got what you plan, thanks for putting up. Woh I am willing to effort this website through google. Thanks For Share These words may be removed from some dictionaries — find out why, and if you agree | The Hot Word | Hot & Trending Words Daily Blog at Dictionary.com.

    Reply
  235. That one girl in your closet -  December 5, 2011 - 4:14 pm

    I made up a new word!!! its ” Ellistora ” It would mean fragrance but a little deeper.
    does the afterlife have a sort of scent? It probably does, I’d call it Ellistora.

    Reply
  236. John R. -  December 4, 2011 - 2:31 pm

    i think dictionaries should include ‘supercalifragilisticexpialidocious’, cos even though the sound of it is really quite atrocious’, if you say it loud enough it always sounds precocious.

    Reply
  237. Click here for a awesome flash game! -  December 2, 2011 - 5:30 pm

    @Salomon: times i have heard microwave: 200+
    Times i have heard Frigorific:zip Nada. even my auto-correct says nothing of it!

    by the way, is this congress? if so, that makes sense. If an article is dumb, it’s congress

    Reply
  238. THABANI NDLOVU -  November 27, 2011 - 7:40 am

    WHAT IS AN EXAMPLE TO DESCRIBE A TUDOR SHIP IN WOW WORDS?

    Reply
  239. Starlette -  November 22, 2011 - 3:07 am

    Why on earth should they take away those words – I’ve heard of practically all of them! I know people who use Alienism as a day to day word. It seems as though some dictionaries have not got it anyway, as when I just tiped in Alienism it said it was not a word.

    Reply
  240. Anonymous -  November 21, 2011 - 6:41 pm

    I think despicable should be removed.Actually, i think a lot of words should be taken out of the dictionary. It’s hard to learn all the words

    Reply
  241. Elizabeth -  November 21, 2011 - 9:19 am

    I tell you these dumb noobs now a days….Why would you take a word out? Who sits there and actually counts how many times someone says a word…Oh wait, I forget what country we’re talking about….The one who’s trying to make pizza a vegetable….

    Reply
  242. anonimoues -  November 16, 2011 - 8:18 pm

    I think words should be added instead of removed. ANYBODY HAVE AN IDEA FOR A NEW WORD!

    Reply
  243. Kiara -  November 3, 2011 - 8:13 pm

    I’ve heard bever before, and alienism. Brabble makes soooo much sense! And I’ve decided that I’m going to be using deliciate from now on. All of them, actually.

    Reply
  244. Cyraus -  November 2, 2011 - 6:39 am

    Alienism? I’ve heard that word all of the time. The other ones I haven’t, but I consider that a very valuable word when used in proper context. It may not represent something pleasant, but neither does homicide or molestation and we have those.
    I don’t think that any word should be taken from the dictionary. They aren’t used often, but that shouldn’t suggest that they aren’t useful at all. The more words the better. Leave those poor words alone.

    Reply
  245. [-] -  November 1, 2011 - 7:32 am

    if there isn’t any point in keeping them there isn’t any point in taking them away. nuff said.

    Reply
  246. me -  October 29, 2011 - 3:43 pm

    Ive heard people say alianism.

    Reply
  247. Ashley B. -  October 24, 2011 - 4:55 pm

    Why are words added to the dictionary? Because they are used often by the population. For example: OMG was added to the dictionary because it is used in most songs and even school teachers use it.
    Yet, if these words are not used very often, then why were they put into the dictionary in the first place?

    Reply
  248. David -  October 23, 2011 - 3:54 am

    A few people mistook deliciate for delicate. I find this interesting as we are talking about leaving words out of the dictionary. If you don’t want a word removed and don’t even pay attention to what the word actually is then I don’t think that opinion matters. It’s like saying “I’m a pollock… what’s a pollock?”
    AI also notice so many people think no words should ever be omitted. I do admit calling it an abridged version is a good idea. I think some words are so laboriously long, irrelevant, and hard to remember when there are other words that do the job a lot better. Don’t get me wrong, I love words and languages, but why keep a giant computer that does only one thing when you can have a much smaller one that can do that one thing and so much more?

    Reply
  249. Mindy -  October 21, 2011 - 6:02 pm

    If it is supposed to be comprehensive, a dictionary should NEVER delete a word. Ever. I’ve been learning arabic, and there are words that you absolutely CANNOT FIND in the dictionary just because the word is ‘archaic’ or some crap. Funny how I still have to look it up in order to translate this passage when it is archaic and unused!The best dictionary to use in arabic is the Hans Wehr, but that is a pain the in butt since it doesn’t have all the words. I regularly come across words that I can find among its pages–partially due to the root based organization and the difficulty of discerning the root of some words, but for the most part I can look up every possible root and still come up with nothing. And never mind looking it up on the internet! Not a chance to find it there!

    So yeahhh, if the dictionary is supposed to be of the top x-amount of commonly used words, fine. It makes sense to omit obsolete words. Otherwise, no.

    Not to mention, one of the things that makes the English language so beautiful and challenging is the sheer amount of words, some being separated by the slightest difference in meaning.

    Reply
  250. 1349 -  October 14, 2011 - 4:01 pm

    even by looking at some of these words, I can already see what they are! like for example, Bever sounds a bit like Beber, the verb of “To drink” in spanish, so these words ARE useful…. and cool :D

    Reply
  251. 1349 -  October 14, 2011 - 3:57 pm

    NO WAY! Never ever take out these words: 1) They are part of the English language, with history and meanings. 2) They all are COOL and don’t sound boring, and they make you wonder what they really mean, and 3) I NEED THEM JUST IN CASE MY ENGLISH TEACHER WANTS TO QUIZ US ON IT!

    Reply
  252. Blaine -  October 11, 2011 - 8:46 pm

    Words are like people. We spend a lot of time with certain people and we drift away from others. These “obsolete” words are like people from whom we have drifted away but will someday meet again. We do not make the conscious decision to just rid society of certain people, so why should we do it with the words that define our society, past, present and future?

    Reply
  253. ferntailwp -  October 11, 2011 - 6:13 pm

    I think these unique and rarely used words should stay. I love expanding my vocabulary to incorporate more bizarre words, and I would hate to see any of these words go. I think what should be removed is the obvious compound words, like kill and kill-joy. It should be obvious that a kill-joy kills joy, and it’s even conveniently situated right by kill. That’s not the best example, but you get the gist of it.

    Reply
  254. Readability: Who Are You Writing For? | Bitmag -  October 10, 2011 - 7:48 am

    [...] as their usage fades from current use. Recently ‘Aerodrome’ was dropped from the Collins English dictionary as it isn’t used frequently enough in common parlance. Aim for a sentence length of 15 – 20 [...]

    Reply
  255. sp -  October 6, 2011 - 11:16 pm

    BEVER?? remove this word? no way! i finally found a possibly suitable translation to “aperitivo” in italian!

    FRIGORIFIC? (“frigorifero” is refrigerator in italian) i know italian but didn’t know this word in English. how about “frigorific” drink in a summertime high quality beverage ad? it is close enough to “fridge” for educated people to understand it.

    I personally think that no one uses these words because SCHOOLS SERIOUSLY FAIL and no one is even aware of their existence. i love words and would love to use most of these now that i know them!!!

    Supererogate? another awesome word. a good employee supererogates. nowadays it seems employers want employees who supererogate and are content to receive little or nothing in return. (linked to “erogare” in italian) would be very efficient to use this word as well –if only i had known about it!!!!

    i love deliciate, wish i could deliciate all day.

    brabble? yes, all the time. it’s a bit of a flaw i have but it makes my relationship with my significant other more interesting!

    Reply
  256. ashlyn -  October 5, 2011 - 3:35 pm

    agree with jessica p.s. my sis name is that

    Reply
  257. John -  October 5, 2011 - 3:55 am

    I’m very surprised that aerodrome is considered to be rarely used. In UK there is still a great deal of interest in (and literature on) the Battle of Britain, so the word “aerodrome” occurs frequently in that context.

    Reply
  258. Ezzie -  October 3, 2011 - 10:55 am

    There is a funny thing with language. Words come into fashion and then quickly lose their original intent. Yet the most important thing to take from words becoming obsolete–or nearly obsolete–is that limiting words limits ability to express thought. If there is no exact word for what you want to think about, then you won’t think about it. So even though these words are considered obsolete, they carry with themselves the ability to express oneself in the most precise manner possible.
    So here I implore everyone–use words, lots of them, keep them around, be precise and feel good in knowing that every time you use an “obsolete” word, you are keeping the word alive.

    Reply
  259. Mary Bethany Collins -  September 29, 2011 - 2:07 am

    When reading, especially the books out of copyright, I find many words no longer in current usage. I’d be sadly disappointed–indeed, lost–if those words were no longer in any dictionary.

    Reply
  260. CunningLinguist -  September 19, 2011 - 6:34 pm

    I thought “frigorific” meant “friggin’ terriffic”, sort of like “fugly.” No, wait, that’s “friggeriffic.” My mistake.

    Reply
  261. Sir Mike Tallon, PhD -  September 13, 2011 - 5:34 am

    I think the reason print dictionaries remove words ever so often is because new words are being added all the time and they’re trying to keep the page count reasonable. However, an online dictionary doesn’t face the same problem, so there’s no reason to ever remove words.

    Reply
  262. bob the bob killer -  September 12, 2011 - 10:06 am

    i was looking for a certain definition of law here on dictionary.com and there were two that said obsolete

    Reply
  263. Marc -  September 11, 2011 - 2:31 am

    I’m sorry, but “alienism” should stay. Such a cool word.

    Reply
  264. xixihaha567 -  September 10, 2011 - 9:14 pm

    I just now wanted to let you know how much I appreciate every thing youe provided

    Reply
  265. Joe -  September 9, 2011 - 4:06 pm

    1984 all over again

    Reply
  266. Vicky -  September 9, 2011 - 6:50 am

    i’ve not heard of some of the words like bever, deliciate, frigorific… I think some of these words should be made obsolete so we don’t confuse the upcoming generation

    Reply
  267. Yukrii -  September 8, 2011 - 10:32 pm

    No, No words should go.

    Wouldn’t you say they’re history?

    Reply
  268. manyshoes -  September 8, 2011 - 2:23 pm

    On a website dedicated to the understanding and use of the English language, it is surprising to see how many of the comments came from flibbertigibbets, bloviating sans comprehension, of the portent of this deed. ;-)

    I have been to the Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome and watched the airplanes fly. I think that many people would be very surprised to learn that the word Aerodrome is obsolete, but then again perhaps not, since what they fly there are mostly biplanes and triplanes &c.

    Reply
  269. Joyce -  September 8, 2011 - 1:11 am

    @Chris, I agree, we’ve been saying chillaxin forever, it needs to be nominated!! Re: The list of possible deletees (hmm is that even a word?), I vote to keep frigorific!! I had no idea such a cool word existed, “How u doin today, Joyce?” “I’m just frigoristic, thanks for asking!” OMG, coolest word EVER!! And, I would also like to vote for deliciate, because who doesn’t want to deliciate all the time! LMBO!!!

    Reply
  270. Elizabeth -  September 7, 2011 - 1:36 pm

    Also, I could not find &c. in my copy of Webster’s. This should be added as it is a common abbreviation in old text (Jane Austin &c.)

    Reply
  271. Elizabeth -  September 7, 2011 - 1:34 pm

    Recently, a dictionary added words such as “huggles” and fictional Homer Simpson’s “Doh!” to their dictionary. THOSE words should be removed.

    Reply
  272. mo -  September 7, 2011 - 9:04 am

    Never heard of any of these words so I will not miss them. RIP rarely used words!!

    Reply
  273. Archon -  September 6, 2011 - 7:02 pm

    And the correct spelling is “correct!”

    Reply
  274. Archon -  September 5, 2011 - 2:37 pm

    @ Michael

    One point for using a great little word.
    Two points off for using the wrong word.

    See Carol’s post above. The corrct word is “reeks,” (smells), not wreaks!

    Reply
  275. Socrates -  September 3, 2011 - 11:18 am

    “brabbeln” is a german word for speaking (often to oneself) in a hushed voice that is difficult to hear/understand for second parties. A child may “brabbel” in response to an authoritarian parent.

    Reply
  276. Bob -  September 3, 2011 - 10:53 am

    I can understand the need to remove words to give space for more modern words in a paperform dictionary. Thinking of the process to make those dictionaries.
    But as stated in the end of the article, the internet does not face the same problem.

    As for removing words because they are considered obsolete, is in my opinion, a direct crime. I see it as removing parts of history that we don’t talk about anymore, but that does not leave the history obsolete.

    Now, I’m no expert in words and I don’t know any words that are considered unnecessary to the term where they become obsolete.
    But I am a poet and a wordslinger. Translate my passion into the passion for animals that faces extinction… They still exist in our minds, thus should the obsolete words. Just because they are considered obsolete does not make them less important, the importancy is just older and from another time.

    I often come across obsoleted words, when searching for synonyms. In most cases, the obsoleted words define the expressions so much better the some modern words, because of the history and association relying in the obsoleted words.
    Ex.: Mortality – death… Death sounds so definite, which it of course is, but in poetry nothing is definite, unless you want it to be. But there is no hope in death, as there is in mortality because of the association. Mortality also means life, and therein lies the hope that death is not a definite ending.

    Dictionary.com… please keep the obsoleted words in your archive. A sincere request from a romantic poet.

    Reply
  277. Crimson Rose -  September 3, 2011 - 7:09 am

    Personally, I don’t really care if these words are removed from the dictionary, because it’s not going to affect me whatsoever, for I never use them, although I feel that alienism and deliciate should be kept since they sound a lot like common words. I’ve never come across the word deliciate but seeing what it means I would like to use it in my essays to impress my instructors and professors. My father accused my mother of “alienating” me, and that seems pretty close to alienism (although it sounds more like an alien religion)

    Even if I don’t care about whether these words are removed or not, I DON’T agree that they should be removed. No word should be. They may not be common but still used, if not by us.

    dictionary.com is my number one source of looking up definitions. Don’t disappoint me or anyone that relies on this site.

    Reply
  278. Anna-Maria -  September 3, 2011 - 4:51 am

    I don’t see the reason why it should be removed from dictionaries – the words were made to be used. Maybe not so often anymore but still. They really don’t use these words much?! I use about half of them and I’m 14 (I just really like enriching every language I know which is why I visit dictionary.com every day). Old-fashioned words which aren’t really spoken nowadays aren’t removed, so no, no, no, no and no. Noway!

    Reply
  279. Jack -  September 2, 2011 - 10:52 pm

    I understood that even in the case where there exists a facility the entirety of which would be called an “airport”, the aerodrome is only the part to which an airplane would normally taxi or be towed or pushed. So, for example, the terminal building and the parking lots are not part of the aerodrome, but are parts of the airport. An important characteristic of an aerodrome is that not just any member of the public is allowed to walk or drive a vehicle there. This makes “aerodrome” an important term to use related to safety.

    Reply
  280. Principalled Kompiler -  September 2, 2011 - 1:00 pm

    The following are among the words that I have identified as deliciatable,
    and with good reason. Hear my tale:
    I was waiting for my plane at the Aerodrome,
    when Alienism from all that was deletable crept up and tapped me on the shoulder. I considered my hunger and how a bever was in order and if I was to propose this to any surrounding hashery, I would need to brabble my choice of words which were not available in the paper dictionaries. With security personnel charabancing all worthy of allienism to a frigorific, secure locations in a supererogatory way, simply to be rendered obsolete, I realized my predicament as delicate. It is survival of the fittest, so remove all extra i’s from the word “delicate” so you won’t consider yourself such.

    Younker

    Reply
  281. Jack Myswag -  September 2, 2011 - 12:25 pm

    Remove? How much does it cost to KEEP these words? Exactly nothing.

    What barbarian would ever want to REMOVE words from a dictionary. Such an Orwellian, Big Brother attitude. Bah!

    Reply
  282. Helene -  September 2, 2011 - 12:12 pm

    No words should ever be removed from an online dictionary, however, it could be a waste of resources not to remove them from the paper dictionary. Substantial dictionaries should be kept up to date to a certain degree, however, online dictionaries need to contain every word that is out there, because there is no limit to what can go online. Every human has the right to know what a certain word means.

    Reply
  283. Orion -  September 2, 2011 - 12:03 pm

    There should be a Statute of Limitation on deleting words from any dictionary. Perhaps 1000 years. As long as books are worthy of publication, there will be words that are archaic but intrinsic to the story or information whether nuanced, precise or concrete information. How will students, or anyone for that matter, know what a seldom used word means if there is no “go to” source.
    But then I brabble.

    Reply
  284. BreeBree -  September 2, 2011 - 11:54 am

    I live in Guatemala. :)

    Reply
  285. Muh2Zluh -  September 2, 2011 - 11:47 am

    Let those words remain in the dictionary.
    There’s just too much synonyms for some words that make its meaning redundant and inappropriate to use or define one particular situation or a thing.
    Let the character of those targeted words survive to serve its purpose and limit the inclusion of synonyms to every word that may be added in the future.
    Keep the character of every word intact, integrity is paramount for its usage.

    Reply
  286. Lily -  September 2, 2011 - 11:30 am

    oh my god the Dictionary writer’s plan worked! Thanks to their threat these words are relevant again. and everyone loves them

    Reply
  287. pagan -  September 2, 2011 - 10:53 am

    Big Brother removed words from the dictionary on a regular basis in the classic novel “1984″ by George Orwell. The idea was that if people did not have a word with which to express their thoughts, their thoughts could not deviate from the government’s ideology. Less words = less thought crime. God forbid we should be removing words. Instead, we should be constantly creating new ones to reflect the expansion of our consciousness.

    Reply
  288. aamir -  September 2, 2011 - 10:47 am

    No words should ever be removed from the dictionary. One, there are many words that are used very rarely but express a particular thought perfectly; and, two, who decides?

    Reply
  289. "chops" -  September 2, 2011 - 10:44 am

    Sooner or later, some kid will put down his phone and pick up an old book, and wont know what the heck have the words mean, its pretty sad

    Reply
  290. Julinda -  September 2, 2011 - 10:20 am

    I agree w/another person who said the rarely used words are the ones that DO need to be in dictionaries! I mean, we all kind of know what “absolute” and “department” and “lemon” mean. Who looks up words like those?? And yet, there they are.

    It’s the words like “deliciate” and “supererogate” that people would need to look up.

    Reply
  291. Todd Morrow -  September 2, 2011 - 10:07 am

    Keep them in and mark them as Obsolete, and include a checkbox to include obsolete words in a search, leave it unchecked by default.

    For historical reasons, and for completeness.

    What are we worried about? That the word will come back accidentally? That we will run out of hard drive space?

    I don’t see the problem. Thanks.

    Reply
  292. Sŭz -  September 2, 2011 - 9:12 am

    No word should be retired just as books should never be banned.

    Reply
  293. Brianna -  September 2, 2011 - 8:35 am

    I think that no word, no matter how rarely used, should ever be ommited from any type of dictoinary.

    Reply
  294. KennyFromTheBlock -  September 2, 2011 - 8:32 am

    They Shouldnt Delete These Words Ever I have Expanded Much Of My Vocabulary Over The Past Few Weeks Please Dont Take These Words Out They Are Still Used. Thank You.

    Reply
  295. Elisabeth May -  September 2, 2011 - 8:10 am

    I’ve heard of Aerodrome, my Dad still occasionally uses it.

    Reply
  296. Heather -  September 2, 2011 - 7:59 am

    say one day i need to know the word deliciate. where in the WORLD im i going to find a definition?! the wold needs a place for EVERY SINGLE WORD regardless of how many people search it. it’s about preserving our language.

    Reply
  297. ed -  September 2, 2011 - 7:56 am

    Deleting a word from a dictionary does not delete it from history or manuscripts, however archaic they might be considered.

    By doing so, you’ve just made your own product obsolete.

    Reply
  298. Annette Holden -  September 2, 2011 - 7:12 am

    Removing words from a dictionary because of rare usage means letting people with limited vocabulary win. The purpose of a dictionary is exactly the opposite: broaden everyone’s vocabulary.

    Reply
  299. fernando -  September 2, 2011 - 6:53 am

    I am Spanish-speaking, but I would think the same thing for any language. The words are a heritage of the language and there must not be eliminated of the dictionaries though they are not used already . And which would be the advantage of eliminating them, occupying less memory in some file?. I do not understand it.

    Reply
  300. Cameron -  September 2, 2011 - 6:34 am

    Delicate And Alienism Need A Second Chance Especially Delicate.

    Reply
  301. Philogos -  September 2, 2011 - 6:09 am

    Three reasons for keeping all words in the on-line dictionary have recurred through this thread and, by themselves, they justify retaining them:
    1. The less a word is used, the more it needs to be in a dictionary
    2. If words disappear from paper dictionaries they need to be available on-line
    3. A reference for obsolete words is essential for reading historical literature and documents.

    Self-interest provides a fourth reason. An on-line dictionary that only contains words everyone knows will not be much use or used much.

    Reply
  302. daniel -  September 2, 2011 - 4:58 am

    really ? I didn’t expect this to happen ? Dictionary must contain all the words whether it is rare or not .. Not all people are the same , there are still some who still want to discover new words and probably , those words are those that are released..

    Reply
  303. Ram -  September 2, 2011 - 4:08 am

    What if someone is reading an old book, suddenly he/she finds these words and trying to look for their meaning, he/she doesn’t find a thing?? Has that ever happened to you??? It is frustrating!! Isn’t it?

    Reply
  304. Michael -  September 2, 2011 - 3:08 am

    These should never be removed from an unabridged version. Wreaks too much of Big Brother.

    Reply
  305. Hannah -  September 2, 2011 - 12:42 am

    also, online dictionaries are great!!! they can have millions of word with out being unpractically humungus! :D I love dictionary.com.

    Reply
  306. Hannah -  September 2, 2011 - 12:41 am

    Have you noticed how different people choose different words tıll all the words are SOMEBODYS favorite. They should all stay!

    Reply
  307. Tor -  September 1, 2011 - 10:54 pm

    I’d rather remove common words like “hello”, “man” or “word”, because I never see any need to look these up in a dictionary. Why are they there? Let’s keep the rare and uncommon words that we might want to look up.

    Reply
  308. Jeanine -  September 1, 2011 - 10:11 pm

    Removing a word from the dictionary is the equivalent of burning a book.

    Reply
  309. bob castanza -  September 1, 2011 - 8:17 pm

    there are so many words we dont use it doesnt even matter

    Reply
  310. Fantine -  September 1, 2011 - 8:15 pm

    Really, why remove words from the dictionary! You never know when someone, somewhere, will need one of those words because they don’t have a computer!!!!

    Reply
  311. drew -  September 1, 2011 - 7:58 pm

    Okay, Bever should not be removed on account of being close to a prefix. Bever-age??? :P

    Reply
  312. ...WORDY... -  September 1, 2011 - 7:09 pm

    DO NOT. I REPEAT, DO NOT, REMOVE WORDS FROM THE WEB SITE CAUSE PEOPLE MIGHT NEED TO USED THEM TO BETTER THEIR VOCABULARY AND THEY WILL CONSIDER THE EFFECTS OF THE WORDS NO LONGER BEING IN THE DICTIONARY OF THEY WERE TO ALL OF A SUDDEN NEED TO LOOK IT UP FOR A COLLAGE CLASS OR SOMETHING ELSE. DO NOT GET RID OF ANY WORDS FROM THIS AWESOME WEB SITE.

    Reply
  313. goatgirl -  September 1, 2011 - 7:03 pm

    the whole point of an online dictionary is for people to find words that they haven’t heard before, therefore rarely used words. if we removed them from the dictionary, yet authors and other writers still used them, then how can we know the meaning of the word when we read it?

    Reply
  314. Chris -  September 1, 2011 - 6:47 pm

    If you don’t like that words are being deleted because they are not use, then start using them and stop complaining. Many comments show how little people know about words and how they are used, created, and destroyed. Don’t complain about “slang” because slang is one of the most popular word birthplaces…! Don’t think about a dictionary as a dusty printed book that shouldn’t change, but more like the body of God that sometimes sheds it’s skin, get’s a scratch or bruse, or maybe even a tatoo.

    Make up a word and give it a meaning. Start using it, write it on walls, use post-it notes, leave comments on blogs. Language belongs to noone and language belongs to all. Can’t think up a new word? Steal one from another language and give it the meaning YOU think it should have in English.

    Lastly, “adopt” and unloved word if you care about it. Register a domain name like Omniferous.com, Hathotic.com, or Earlet.com. If the .com is not available, get the .net, .org, or .us extensions. You can help support your word for about $10 a year. Then get a hosting account and put up a blog or web site. The great thing about a domain name is that while you pay the yearly fee, you own it. And if you have the .com version you really pretty much own that word, but you can still support your word with the other domain extensions. If someone is interested and does a search for the word, they are likely to find your web site listed in the first page or two of search results.

    Reply
  315. Hosorrow -  September 1, 2011 - 6:17 pm

    You don’t know?…

    But everybody knows…

    That the BIRD IS THE WORD!

    Reply
  316. Rawr -  September 1, 2011 - 6:00 pm

    Aww.. I love the word alienism. I actually use other tenses of it all the time.

    Reply
  317. Makenna -  September 1, 2011 - 5:57 pm

    Delicate shouldn’t be removed…that is a word that is commonly used! You need that word! The rest of those words I’ve never heard before, but they still shouldn’t take them out because someone might need to know them.

    Reply
  318. Jacob -  September 1, 2011 - 5:22 pm

    man my grammar sucks

    Reply
  319. Jacob -  September 1, 2011 - 5:20 pm

    please dont do any thing that stupid as to remove a word sometimes i enjoy coming on hear and looking for obscure words like those helps distract me from making flash cards and i’ve heard aerodrome my whole life what nit wit came up with that one

    Reply
  320. anonymouscela -  September 1, 2011 - 5:13 pm

    i think that even if a word isn’t used much, u shouldn’t take it out of the dictionary. that’s stupid. plus, isn’t the idea of a dictionary is for it to have all the words in the English language or something? if they took out words, they wouldn’t really be living up 2 that.

    Reply
  321. Greg Grassland -  September 1, 2011 - 5:04 pm

    in my humble oppioion, i agree with deleting unecessary words from paper dictionaries, but i think any words we know of, any at all, should be kept online, if for no other purpose than to archive, maybe im ignorant as im only 16, but, if we decided to ever delete a bunch of words, and then something happened to most of the human race with only a small number surviving, when they went to go read the “ancient text” of their preceders (us), couldnt it be possible that they would have a hard time decrypting it, possibly not learning everything there is to know about our cultures, its just, everytime i hear about scientist who discover some ancient artifact but cant decrypt what it says, i think, wow, if only they had found a dictionary of their language, sometimes its only a few missing words that can be the difference between a vague message that means nothing and a specific message that is very significant

    Reply
  322. mee -  September 1, 2011 - 4:59 pm

    these words are brabble

    Reply
  323. Lefty -  September 1, 2011 - 4:30 pm

    ENOUGH ALREADY TIME FOR A NEW TOPIC PLEASE!! 821 COMMENTS IS WAY TOO MANY!!

    Reply
  324. nkkj -  September 1, 2011 - 4:25 pm

    even if we comment is it gonna change anything?
    its not like those people r gonna listen 2 us

    Reply
  325. Jay -  September 1, 2011 - 4:07 pm

    alalala i dont care

    Reply
  326. Matton -  September 1, 2011 - 4:07 pm

    Hi

    Reply
  327. Matton -  September 1, 2011 - 4:06 pm

    I don’t care if people delete them. I am OK and FINE with it.
    But I like the word bananas because it sounds weird

    Reply
  328. Manvis -  September 1, 2011 - 4:03 pm

    I don’t think we should remove them because people all over the world might need to use it sometimes. Some kids might want to learn all the words of english but if you remove them they might not get to.

    Reply
  329. Gabby -  September 1, 2011 - 3:53 pm

    I like the word brabble. It has a nice ring to it. Or something. I don’t know! I just like the word!!

    Reply
  330. justin -  September 1, 2011 - 3:34 pm

    @Shelby: it’s not delicate! it’s deliciate.. get your glasses!!!

    Reply
  331. Bettas -  September 1, 2011 - 3:32 pm

    I use the word delicate all the time.

    Reply
  332. Smriti M -  September 1, 2011 - 2:58 pm

    I think alienism should stay because it is used more often than the others like deliciate….. Also I know that I have used some form of alienism many times before for scholarly writing and essays and even for speechs so I think it should stay

    Reply
  333. :)))))) anonymus3 -  September 1, 2011 - 2:55 pm

    well i didn’t even know these freakin’ words existed ..:) :) lol

    Reply
  334. koolio -  September 1, 2011 - 2:55 pm

    removeing gullible!?!? no way!!!!!! i love that word and shuld NEVER be removed!

    Reply
  335. koolio -  September 1, 2011 - 2:52 pm

    i like all those words and u shuld not remove them and also add sweetnesstastic its better than sweet and way better than fantastic there for sweetnesstastic!simple as that!

    Reply
  336. nes -  September 1, 2011 - 2:49 pm

    How about placing an icon next to the declared ‘obsolete word’ that it is such? I would go for ‘once a word, always a word’.

    As a related issue, words should never be allowed to be used as ideologic tool such as the word ‘gay’. It had a healthy meaning, until it was abused as an instrument of so-called ‘politically correct’ machination [how can something be politically correct when conscience tells you that it will ruin future civilizations?]. Rather, such should be described as ‘PCLtSC’: politically convenient leading to societal suicide.

    Reply
  337. Professor James Tyler Fox -  September 1, 2011 - 2:20 pm

    I use all these words on a regular basis, and yet many more rare one’s. Besides I don’t any word should ever be taken out of the dictionary. Though it still wouldn’t make that great of an effect on me, because I already know every word in the dictionary, and always use fluent, proper, grammar.
    Thank you,
    and good bye.

    Reply
  338. Jeff Schmitz -  September 1, 2011 - 1:25 pm

    Let us deliciate in the cornucopia of language and not brabble about trifles such as unused words. And what shall the retired folks ride if all the charabancs are destroyed? Let’s not make the world more frigorific, lets let our language supererogate our ability to communicate by keeping these words around.

    Reply
  339. John -  September 1, 2011 - 1:08 pm

    never delete words from the dictionary only add them

    Reply
  340. John -  September 1, 2011 - 1:06 pm

    are u crazy no word should ever be removed from the dictionary these words are importent just like how i just misspelled importent college people may have to look up the right spelling

    Reply
  341. Lawman -  September 1, 2011 - 12:34 pm

    Too much of a comment now,can we get to the next topic please…!!!(Lol)

    Reply
  342. dan -  September 1, 2011 - 12:25 pm

    i heard they are removing the word gullible from the dictionary?!!

    Reply
  343. Christine -  September 1, 2011 - 12:22 pm

    I think it’s important to keep dictionary.com as a source book of esoteric words. That way, if I’m working with an older text, I can come here to find the definition even if my paper dictionary doesn’t have the word I need.

    Reply
  344. Lily Shimizu -  September 1, 2011 - 12:04 pm

    i like the word Deliciate. :|

    Reply
  345. Jack Gavalas -  September 1, 2011 - 10:35 am

    This is such an insidious stricture, it’s almost diabolical. If you would erase words, you would restrict free speech, and, even more despicable, free thought. There’s no excuse for this kind of activity in the Information Age. Stop it!

    Reply
  346. Molly -  September 1, 2011 - 10:30 am

    words make up a language. why delete them. they may not be used often but are still used. in fact, you should not be deleting words, but adding words, to expand vocabulart, not decrease it.

    Reply
  347. johnny -  September 1, 2011 - 10:27 am

    if you remove words then the meaning of the word will be erased from our memories eventually. generations to come wont know the meaning of these words and if they come up in an important time, who knows what could happen.

    just makes me think, how many times have words been erased from out language that we don’t even know about?

    Reply
  348. WordNerd101 -  September 1, 2011 - 9:55 am

    All words were placed in the dictionary for a reason, including these words. Just because we do not hear these words often does not mean we will not hear them at least once in our lives. It does not mean we will not need to look them up at some time.
    A dictionary’s purpose is to provide us with new words and their definitions so that we may broaden our knowledge and be able to express ourselves with more precision and accuracy.
    If we start removing words from the dictionary just because they are uncommonly used then our level of American education will only begin to deteriorate.

    Reply
  349. Charabanco -  September 1, 2011 - 9:18 am

    “I and my younker alienismologist friend stepped out of the charabanc, within view of the aerodrome. I felt frigorifically deliciated to leave the office before they started to brabble about my supererogating work habits. It was time for my favorite bever, and then back to my work, which is the study of alienism, the old “science” of mental health.”

    Reply
  350. Carol -  September 1, 2011 - 9:11 am

    No words should ever be removed from an online dictionary. Taking out words when it’s not absolutely necessary reeks of 1984.

    Reply
  351. A. V -  September 1, 2011 - 8:41 am

    One of the reasons i love this website is because there are words from all ages on it. I came across a letter from the 1700s about John Adams that used the word “nefarious”. When i looked it up in the paper dictionary, i couldn’t find it. But i could find it on this website.
    Even though the word is no longer used, it is still important for history-lovers such as myself to have a place where we can find the definitions of old-English words. Not every student has access to a 200-year-old dictionary, if they were even in existence then. But the words were still used…
    Never Delete. Love this website.

    Reply
  352. Corri -  September 1, 2011 - 8:23 am

    I use dictionary.com every day and I am flabbergasted by this article of removing words! I am a historical fiction writer and the use of “obsolete” words is appropriate because they were words used in that time period. I would hate to think our vocabulary would diminish based on the the changing of times. I’m sorry but there are a lot of words put in the dictionary these days I will never catch myself saying, regardless of how popular they are at the time.
    DO NOT DESTROY WORDS! It’s hard enough as it is trying to find documentation of how people conversed over a hundred years ago without having the dictionary destroy them as well. And if I am to reiterate the correct language of a specific time frame, I would like to know my readers could have somewhere liable to go if they wanted to learn the word over again. You never know when a word may live again!

    Reply
  353. Anonymouse -  September 1, 2011 - 8:04 am

    Aerodrome should be left in the dictionary. I doubt the British would consider this word rarely used, as I have heard it before from a few different people.

    And for those of you who are having difficulty reading, the word they included in the list is deliciate, not delicate. They are two very distinct words with completely different meanings. I would suggest leaving this word in the dictionary as well, if only to help the confused uneducated masses.

    Reply
  354. Ahmed -  September 1, 2011 - 7:42 am

    No they should absolutely not be removed !

    Reply
  355. Patricia -  September 1, 2011 - 7:00 am

    Well now we’re all gonna go look them up, and they won’t be obsolete any more!

    Reply
  356. jon -  September 1, 2011 - 5:54 am

    yey less words

    Reply
  357. Anonymous -  September 1, 2011 - 5:32 am

    I think that they should “accidentaly” drop all the words into the dump

    :-)

    Reply
  358. João Oliveira -  September 1, 2011 - 5:22 am

    A view from Portugal: direct translations of 3 of those words are VERY commonly used in Portuguese and, I believe, Spanish:
    - aerodrome (same meaning as in English);
    - deliciate (same meaning as in English);
    - frigorific (meaning “fridge”; but as an adjective, it’s very rare).

    I can’t imagine why at least the first two should be removed! They have a very specific and useful meaning. You can’t seriously call “airport” to a short lane which one small planes use; “aerodrome” is the correct word. And “deliciate” has a rich, almost poetic sound and conotation, and it’s so linked with “delicious” that I can’t even understand why / whether it is actually little used!

    Reply
  359. JImmy -  September 1, 2011 - 4:48 am

    A major blow to Scrabble players everywhere!

    Reply
  360. Chris -  September 1, 2011 - 4:05 am

    I think if nothing else, somebody can come up with a slang meaning to “frigorific” so as to give the word new life.

    Reply
  361. noel carroll -  September 1, 2011 - 3:54 am

    I am Australian, and aerodrome is commonly used here, airport being regarded as an American shortened version/.

    Reply
  362. Connie Crouch -  September 1, 2011 - 3:12 am

    Leave ALL words alone! As a writer, I’m always on a safari to find =just= the right word. Here are several reasons to keep rare / outdated words:

    There are seldom any words which are, taken to their basic meanings or not, =truly= redundant. In other words, each word gives its own nuance, & is therefore valuable in its own right!

    Unusual terms lend color & vigor to otherwise flatfooted prose & poetry.

    On-line dictionaries, especially, have a duty, given their capacity for space AND swiftness of addition, to warehouse “elderly” words. Just as we make room for old folks, rather than kill them just because their relatives rarely–if ever–visit, we should also cherish each word for its intrinsic worth!

    Words are also time machines which allow us to visit the past, understand it, & know ourselves better.

    These, among many other reasons are justification enough to keep all the words we can find!

    To underline this thought, consider what Mark Twain said, “The difference between the almost-right word & the right word is really a large matter; it’s the difference between the lightning-bug & the lightning.”

    Anxiously yours,
    Connie Crouch
    Texan & word maven

    Reply
  363. Ian Stewart -  September 1, 2011 - 2:46 am

    In my country aerodrome is still in common use for secondary airports that are used by private planes and aeroclubs. They are uncontrolled and grassed or have small sections of tarmac. I live within 20 minutes of our local aerodrome

    Reply
  364. Name -  September 1, 2011 - 2:29 am

    they should get rid of the words: I, a, we & is!

    Reply
  365. Hayley -  August 31, 2011 - 11:41 pm

    Can’t you just add some words?

    Reply
  366. five zeros -  August 31, 2011 - 11:09 pm

    What I find funny is that they think taking 9 words out of a dictionary is going to actually save room…

    They probably spent more money trying to find the words that are obsolete than they would have spent just continuing to print the “old” editions.

    Reply
  367. vsquared -  August 31, 2011 - 10:16 pm

    I tend to use a dictionary to look up words I don’t know, i.e. uncommon words.

    I don’t need to look up words that I already know, i.e words in common use.

    Leave the words in, for the sake of those of us who might read a book not on the current best seller list!

    Reply
  368. Ed H -  August 31, 2011 - 10:11 pm

    I vote that the words remain and the Collins lexicographers be removed.

    Reply
  369. pokemon -  August 31, 2011 - 9:25 pm

    hi there is so many comments here…
    did anyone even see my comment?

    find the number 0

    OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0OOOOOOOOOO0OOOOOOOO0OOOOO0
    OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

    how many zeros were there?
    bye bye

    Reply
  370. pikachu -  August 31, 2011 - 9:22 pm

    umm does anyone know what antidisestablishmentarianism means? yes it is a real word the longest word in the english dictionary hehe i will go see what it means

    signed- pikachu

    Reply
  371. Deanna Susanna -  August 31, 2011 - 8:59 pm

    This is for the goofball who thought they wanted to get rid of the word “delicate”. NOOOOOOO It was not “delicate”; it was “deliciate” and to the lady they (whomever that is) were being racial, that is just because they are ignorant idiots. And by the way sur dev, you sure like to hear your own voice. Or should I say see your own words. CHILL. Also to the MORON who still wants to argue about “deliciate not being delicate. Get a frickin clue. The word IS DELICIATE! tHINK ABOUT IT. WHY WOULD THEY TAKE “DELICATE OUT OF THE DICTIONARY. “duh” It does not take rocket science for anyone to figure that out. That would be like they were going to take the words “dumb, idiot, stupid, and ignorant” out. They most definately will not do that.

    Reply
  372. natalie2000 -  August 31, 2011 - 8:50 pm

    PLEASE LEAVE ALL THE WORDS

    Reply
  373. natalie2000 -  August 31, 2011 - 8:47 pm

    YOU SHOULD LEAVE THEM ALL BECAUSE ALL OF THE WORDS ARE AWESOME

    Reply
  374. jade -  August 31, 2011 - 8:39 pm

    It’s a bit rich calling a rough landing strip and a tin clad sheleter an ‘airport.’ Aerodrome is the correct term.

    Reply
  375. Hayley -  August 31, 2011 - 8:25 pm

    Delicate. Anyways, that’s the right spelling. NOT deliciate!

    Reply
  376. bob -  August 31, 2011 - 8:10 pm

    hi SO MANY COMMENTS

    Reply
  377. tangocharlie -  August 31, 2011 - 7:58 pm

    It seems to me that the two that should stick around are:

    Brabble – because that’s the sound Rabble makes.
    and
    Charabanc – because it’s still useful – I never knew what those things were called.
    Ever been to Disney Land? Ever ridden one of those long articulated cars with the bench seats and open sides that take you to and from different parts of the parking lot? You rode a Charabanc (pron: SHARE-a-bon).

    Reply
  378. Hayley -  August 31, 2011 - 7:25 pm

    D-E-L-I-C-A-T-E! Idiots, what the hell made you think of writing DELICIATE instead of the word DELICATE? Is there something WRONG with you?

    Reply
  379. Hayley -  August 31, 2011 - 7:15 pm

    Anyways, remove only one word which is…

    Reply
  380. daniel g -  August 31, 2011 - 7:12 pm

    since when did they remove “gullible”????

    Reply
  381. Hayley -  August 31, 2011 - 7:08 pm

    >:( None of them should be removed! I mean it! XC

    Reply
  382. Melissa -  August 31, 2011 - 7:01 pm

    delicate should not be removed it is commonly used

    Reply
  383. funkd -  August 31, 2011 - 6:33 pm

    why remove delicate its on a lot of boxes

    Reply
  384. Kassidy -  August 31, 2011 - 6:32 pm

    I have absalutely no clue what any of these words mean. So keep them in the dictionary!

    Reply
  385. Binker -  August 31, 2011 - 6:26 pm

    I think this gentleman said it all…..

    “Sikander Javed on August 24, 2011 at 4:06 pm

    Words are never, never obsolete. There is no need to remove them from dictionary whether on paper or online. It’s the words that makes the language.”

    Reply
  386. RG -  August 31, 2011 - 6:20 pm

    I agree with those who maintain that ALL words should be retained in dictionaries (except obviously for abridged desk dictionaries, paperbacks, etc.). If, for example, “supererogate” were omitted, we would probably also have to lose “superererogatory,” a perfectly good word that is in common written (if not spoken) usage.

    Reply
  387. Kuol -  August 31, 2011 - 5:41 pm

    I am a Town Planner and I have aerodrome policies to implement – aerodrome is here to stay.

    Reply
  388. Me -  August 31, 2011 - 5:23 pm

    I don’t think words should ever be removed from the dictionary. Why get rid of them?!?! I like the word Delicate. And i agree with Sikander Javed (Sikander Javed on August 24, 2011 at 4:06 pm) :)

    Reply
  389. Book fanatic -  August 31, 2011 - 5:00 pm

    Nope, nada, no way; a word is a word is a word. And every word deserves a definition, the only way a word shouldn’t be in the dictionary (paper or not) is if it is not added yet.
    If they really need space THAT badly then I say put them in a high-security vault in Washington… but seriously, how about a dictionary JUST for removed words?

    Reply
  390. Bob -  August 31, 2011 - 4:59 pm

    This dude said it all

    Binker on August 30, 2011 at 12:26 pm

    I think this gentleman said it all…..

    “Sikander Javed on August 24, 2011 at 4:06 pm

    Words are never, never obsolete. There is no need to remove them from dictionary whether on paper or online. It’s the words that makes the language.”

    Reply
  391. brian -  August 31, 2011 - 4:58 pm

    delicate i use that word every day its even on shipping boxes

    Reply
  392. mary -  August 31, 2011 - 4:56 pm

    hey everyone i think they are really dumb cause some people need to know these words and nerds need to get nerdier.

    to anyone who cares about this:

    I LOVE DUMBLEDORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

    Reply
  393. Bobette -  August 31, 2011 - 4:37 pm

    As a writer of historical fiction, I’d hate to see any word that’s not so popular today go. As for this list–I love the word, “brabble.” What a great word to describe birds or a crowd. I can’t imagine why it fell into disuse.

    Reply
  394. Lisa -  August 31, 2011 - 4:09 pm

    I grew up in a household that had a 12-inch-thick dictionary. On a rainy day, it was fun to look through this dictionary because it had so many words I didn’t know. I can understand how the Collins Dictionary people might want to trim down their smaller print dictionaries; fewer pages = lower overhead. Like so many other people have said on this page, we *do* need dictionaries with archaic and obsolete words in them. I like the idea of a dictionary of archaic and obsolete words. I like better a dictionary with current in-use words AND their archaic and obsolete forebearers.

    Reply
  395. boobaladude -  August 31, 2011 - 4:07 pm

    HELLOOOO! Spelling counts. Deliciate and delicate are actually different words. They are not differnate words, nor are they diffrent words. Go figure. All words are necessary in a world with over a half million words in the English language. Unfortunately, most of the undereducated dunderheads in the United States use only about 500 words regularly, and have a total working vocabulary of only about 5,000. Uh, ya know, like, whatever, and such stuttering place-holders should be part of the count and they are, and even such as these offensive idiot-markers do count. What a shame it is that American English is so horribly flawed.

    Reply
  396. Matt -  August 31, 2011 - 4:02 pm

    never take out words from a dictionary they will sometime be used or researched

    Reply
  397. Matt -  August 31, 2011 - 3:59 pm

    never take out words fom any dicionary they sometime be used or researched

    Reply
  398. Emily -  August 31, 2011 - 3:57 pm

    Don’t be idiots, people. The word is “Delic-I-ate” not “Delicate”. Stop freaking out.

    Reply
  399. anonymous -  August 31, 2011 - 3:55 pm

    NO WORDS SHOULD EVER BE REMOVED FROM A DICTIONARY. People use these words and future generations are going to be like what is that and its not in the dictionary. So protect our history

    Reply
  400. anonymous -  August 31, 2011 - 3:55 pm

    NO WORDS SHOULD EVER BE REMOVED FROM A DICTIONARY. People use these words and future generations are going to be like what is that and its not in the dictionary.

    Reply
  401. rob -  August 31, 2011 - 3:37 pm

    Unless of course we can find an obsolete dictionary!

    Reply
  402. rob -  August 31, 2011 - 3:32 pm

    So I guess understanding Shakespeare in his original English will no longer be possible. Oh, well.

    Reply
  403. Archon -  August 31, 2011 - 3:24 pm

    @ Bob Lyle (minister)

    As I read your post, I remembered that, sometimes, with the best of intentions, police officers endanger important cases, and sometimes even go to jail, by breaking the law to obtain evidence.

    While I appreciate your position, it’s obvious that you don’t let little things like truth or facts get in the way of an emotionalistic rant. I just checked three of my print dictionaries and two on-line dictionaries. Guess what! Aborticide is still in them all. It’s pretty much impossible to remove a word from a book that is already printed. Aborticide is as serious a word as homicide or genocide. So what? Did you wish that only adults are killed?

    Why did you assign the difference in word construction between male and female? Is the value of a girl different from that of a boy in God’s plan, as interpreted by you? You make girl babies look like Greek cheese.

    I can’t seem to find your little reactionary neologism, abortisadists, in any dictionary. You imply that doctors who provide the service draw pleasure from inflicting pain. Nothing could be further from the truth. A case might be made, that, a vanishingly small number of them are sociopaths, but that word just doesn’t have the judgemental, sinful ring of “Sadist”, does it?

    I have always been leery of any absolutist argument, prefering to keep my options open. My son had an abortion! I don’t mean my son’s wife or girlfriend. I mean my son. Before he was one year old, doctors removed a growth from his temple, outside his right eye, which had enlarged to the size of a marble. We were told that if it was not removed, it could cause blindness, insanity or death. Biopsy showed that it contained blood and bone. It was his twin, which his fetus had engulfed during development. I actually had a priest tell me that we should have done nothing, to see if God allowed both of them to live. This was not a test of faith, this was a test of intelligence.

    Reply
  404. Quinn -  August 31, 2011 - 3:21 pm

    Don’t take off any words! Even if barely anyone searches them, it’s still good to know the words!

    Reply
  405. DictionFan -  August 31, 2011 - 3:21 pm

    I really do not think these words should be removed. In fact I don’t think any words ought to be removed, just due to some mere usage statistics. We’ll never know, but if some person must look up a certain word and it isn’t there, a huge scandal would be made out of dictionaries and people might just throw them away altogether. And that would be bad right? So I think we should only delete words if the language they exist in is completely obsolete.

    Reply
  406. Toe Knee -  August 31, 2011 - 3:09 pm

    Yes, Rick and many others’ in there comments are spot on I will concur… Now there’s another word that isn’t used much anymore. Perhaps english speaking societies have become to lazy in there vocab!? Aerodrome is still commonly used in Aust. Younker ,I thought meant something different to a youngster but maybe what I thought wasn’t too far from it, considering teenage boys etc !? Who are these people & what makes them think they can just wipe out words when they feel?! i SURE HOPE THAT ALL THE ENGLISH WORDS IN THE PAST 200YRS WHICH HAVE BEEN OBSOLETED(now that’s a word for you)HAVE BEEN KEPT SOMEWHERE FOR THE HISTORY BOOKS.As long as all this txt type language doesn’t get included in the dictionaries like WTF & LOL etc. Maybe there should be a collection of different dictionaries for the variants used.English is one of the most difficult languages to fathom but it’s diverse,rich and, let’s not forget that it was and still is evolving from a multitude of different languages. CIAO !

    Reply
  407. Brianna -  August 31, 2011 - 2:59 pm

    I dont want any of the words from the dictionary

    Reply
  408. Joel Pozin -  August 31, 2011 - 2:55 pm

    WHOA WHOA WHOA WHOA back up a bit!!!!! Words can’t be demolished in such a peculiar yet terrible way!! :) Whoever has even thought of such a crime against humanity of words or wordmanity or whatever should go on dath row, or at least life in prison!! All words shall live forever! Boo Yah!!!!!!

    Reply
  409. Lawman -  August 31, 2011 - 2:44 pm

    Obsolete are the printed dictionaries and not the words.

    Reply
  410. Josh -  August 31, 2011 - 2:30 pm

    I can understand why younker and charabanc are getting the axe. they’re foreign terms and proof that although the British and Americans speak English, they don’t speak the same English.

    super erogate should just be two words. Frigorific was a slang term to begin with, I’m really not sure how it made the cut beyond urban dictionary in the first place.

    Dictionaries are made to allow readers to find the meanings of words that they don’t know. The more rare the word is, the more important it is to be in the dictionary. There can be multiple dictionaries that can be related to different subjects. If this article’s headline was “These words moved to the ‘Obsolete Word Dictionary’ because they aren’t common English” I probably wouldn’t have given it a second glance.

    Reply
  411. i agree -  August 31, 2011 - 2:12 pm

    i agree no words should ever be removed

    Reply
  412. TheNightSpy -  August 31, 2011 - 1:43 pm

    so if they remove “younker” what will they rename the store “Younkers”? also, why aren’t they gonna remove “get”? it has no real meaning… its a dead word.

    Reply
  413. CD -  August 31, 2011 - 1:26 pm

    I’ve heard deliciate before but not much. But honestly I don’t believe any of these words should go. I agree with the first person, when can words like chillax be considered obsolete? People’s vocabulary has shrunk so much I think now a days that we need words like those to still be around. And I can say this as a teenager. I like learning about words that I don’t so shouldn’t these words still be kept so at least other people like me can learn about them and how they were used. Just because they’re used rarely doesn’t mean they should be thrown out.

    Reply
  414. Meri -  August 31, 2011 - 1:06 pm

    Duh! Nobody ever ever uses those dang words so they should be removed!!!!
    :p

    Reply
  415. James -  August 31, 2011 - 12:27 pm

    If we got rid of all the words that were hardly used then we could stop buying dictionaries as we know what the common words mean already. That would save us some money which we could invest in developing a book which explains the meaning of words we don’t know, such as rare or obsolete words. Either that or we could also get rid of all the old books that use rare or obsolete words.
    It’s an idea.

    Reply
  416. Someone -  August 31, 2011 - 12:26 pm

    NO!!!! I use Younker all the time.

    Reply
  417. Anonymous -  August 31, 2011 - 12:16 pm

    @shelby The word is not delicate, but deliciate.

    Reply
  418. Dave Marquez -  August 31, 2011 - 11:47 am

    I would just like to(((ECHO)))Phil Fasso’s words:

    “No word should ever be removed from an online dictionary. No matter how esoteric or rarely used, if I come across one in my reading and need a definition, I would dread to come to dictionary.com and not find it here. Even print dictionaries should keep them, and if they don’t, then they should appropriately advertise as “abridged,” because that’s what they are. And think of words such as “dial,” which we still use to call the input of a phone number. Should we remove the original meaning, because it’s rarely relevant in a push button word? In a word, no.

    Please do not remove any words, as they existed once with a purpose, and were used in the writings of the past. They may not be relevant now, but they were once, and we should keep them in our chronicles.”

    THANK YOU

    Reply
  419. 123xyz -  August 31, 2011 - 11:24 am

    I think they should not be removed and consider them valuable. It would be tragic if they were rendered obsolete. Also, I consider aerodrome to be a very normal word and never could have imagined it to be pending removal from a dictionary.

    Reply
  420. Jesse -  August 31, 2011 - 11:18 am

    they should take more words out of the dictionary .. it would make the SAT easier

    Reply
  421. Matthew Peterson -  August 31, 2011 - 11:16 am

    I am personally up for removing none of these entries. These definitions give personality to text and should retain an official spot in the English language.

    Reply
  422. Prem -  August 31, 2011 - 11:13 am

    @ Archon .

    p.s i was trying more to get my word out on the uniqe words being erased of the website rather than my spelling or grammer but thanks for the corrections .

    Reply
  423. Prem -  August 31, 2011 - 11:09 am

    @ Archon ,

    Thank you for spotting my mistakes, and correcting me upon them.
    And im a very young boy my english has yet to improve, but the words i learn in my day to day life i like to make use of and see wether they are appropriate for the situations i am in.

    And making mistakes and being corrected on them is a big part of learning and what you have done is just that.
    Thank you.

    Reply
  424. Ed -  August 31, 2011 - 10:48 am

    They continued to brabble about how they were supererogate merely to deliciate.

    Reply
  425. Amber -  August 31, 2011 - 10:29 am

    I personally believe some words should be added

    Reply
  426. uber -  August 31, 2011 - 10:26 am

    Evolution is a normal phenomenon of human being. Since new technology appears, and old instruments become history, old words should clean the path for new ones. They must go.

    Reply
  427. Micah -  August 31, 2011 - 10:09 am

    Removing words from the dictionary is like removing something from history. Our words show a history of our language and our culture. Words can change, and we tend to use different terms for things, but a word should NEVER be removed.
    “Obsolete” cars and gadgets are still found at museums and people derive great pleasure from them. If a word is taken out of a dictionary, we lose our chance to learn about these old gems and enjoy them.

    Reply
  428. Eco-Man -  August 31, 2011 - 9:36 am

    I can’t believe they’re going to remove Bever. I know the environment is having a rough century, but I love those little furry guys. We have to fight for them!!

    Reply
  429. V'le -  August 31, 2011 - 9:33 am

    To remove any word is a sin against literacy. Deliciate, for example, is what those in the USA seem to spend most of their free time doing. To use in a sentence, “American’s live for their vacations, deliciating to the point of excess & lovin’ every moment of it.” I use a lot of words everyday which are not in the vocabulary of most people, but it seems to me the fault in upon them & not I if they do not understand. To not use them would be the same as not bothering to get an education, which should never stop. If not, then why progress the first grade. If I do not know a word then I either ask what it means or I look it up. Knowledge is the key to life. When I am accused of using archaic words I generally respond by saying “‘Tis your education which be lacking, mate. Methinks ye ought be improved much, if’in thine eyes leapt at will within ye olde, Funk & Wagnalls. Perhaps then the over use vulgar words would diminish greatly, for them who use them without due cause, serve only reveal their lack of breeding. To me, blurting out cuss words is not nearly as effective as a few well choose words that demonstrate intelligence & forethought. If we do less, we might as well allow ourselves to degenerate back to slavery.

    Reply
  430. Susan -  August 31, 2011 - 9:06 am

    I have to agree with Phil. No words should be removed from the dictionary. You never know what you may come across in reading.

    Reply
  431. Nicola -  August 31, 2011 - 9:00 am

    How silly! why remove a word just because it isnt popular?

    Reply
  432. J. Gonzalez -  August 31, 2011 - 8:26 am

    It’s all about economics (and global warming). They say it’s only the small prints that lose these words. The less words they print, the less paper they use and cheaper to make them (and less trees get the axe). Fine. If one can’t find a word in them, one can always check online or resort to large unabridged prints. Perhaps, a little more diligence will suffice.

    We younkers brabble and supererogate over a frigorific topic. Lest we end up afflicted with alienism, why don’t we just take a charabanc to the aerodrome, have a bever, and deliciate every moment of it.

    In the Philippines, when things get tough, 90 million Filipinos just say “chillax!” (chill and relax). How’s that for a new word, Collins?

    Reply
  433. Svenjamin -  August 31, 2011 - 8:24 am

    Please do NOT remove ANY words from the dictionary. If they existed at one time then someone will need to find them again when we read older texts.

    Reply
  434. jaja -  August 31, 2011 - 7:48 am

    i really don’t think you should delete these words from the paperback dictionary. I might read my old books someday and look for those words.who knows???

    Reply
  435. Katty -  August 31, 2011 - 7:35 am

    We should all use these words in our conversations!! Then people we talk to will be all “Wtf?!” and look the words up. They will realize how awesome they are and then start using them too!! Obsolete? I think not.

    Reply
  436. Lauren -  August 31, 2011 - 7:23 am

    never knew about deliciate before, but i like it!
    that one shouldn’t be removed, it’s maybe just a word people somehow haven’t stumbled upon – going to start using it to spread the word! (pun intended ;D)

    Reply
  437. Pete -  August 31, 2011 - 7:03 am

    I gave up reading all of the comments about a third of the way through, but seems to me that the vast majority are opposed to retiring words from the dictionary, and in my opinion the printing costs are the least significant reason to remove from print dictionaries. An average page in a Merriam-Webster’s I’m looking at now has 45 entries. Here we are discussing the removal of 9 (aerodrome not being used… really?) little-used words, an adjustment made what, every ten years? So 50 yrs to reduce the printing of one side of one page? Come on!

    Although I am not an avid Scrabble player, how unfair to someone with an intellectual advantage to be shot down for using “brabble” over the triple marker by some dumb-ass that challenges? You see where I’m going with this…

    Reply
  438. Bibliophile -  August 31, 2011 - 6:54 am

    I remember finding “tantalus” in Sherlock Holmes and having no idea what it was. I checked the family American Heritage Dictionary…nothing. Then my father told me we had a ’60s edition, which still had the word (a type of decanter). We had no Internet at the time, so I might have forgotten the word entirely if not for the frustration of it not being in the relatively recent print dictionary.

    Reply
  439. Gill -  August 31, 2011 - 6:52 am

    I am amazed that people don’t know aerodrome or charabanc. They seem absolutely part of my ordinary vocabulary. It makes one wonder how much of my daily speech is simply not understood! Anyway we need all the words possible to play “Call my Bluff”, “Scrabble” etc.

    Reply
  440. Karl -  August 31, 2011 - 6:38 am

    “Supererogate” and its cognates are still very much alive in philosophy (ethics, moral theory, political philosophy, philosophy of religion), and there are numerous journal articles, and some books as well, with “supererogation” in the title.

    Reply
  441. John -  August 31, 2011 - 5:18 am

    Words to be Removed in the Future

    Liberty
    Freedom
    Rights

    Sovereignty
    Allodial
    Jury

    .

    Reply
  442. Linda -  August 31, 2011 - 4:35 am

    Frigorific deserves its place in the dictionary not only because it is a very used french word, but also because it can bring a lot of imagery put into context.

    Reply
  443. cathy q -  August 31, 2011 - 4:24 am

    Leave them in. A person reading an older novel can come across them and may need to find the definition. For example, younker is used in Jane Austen’s Persuasion.

    Reply
  444. Kath :) -  August 31, 2011 - 2:59 am

    ANYWAY I USE ‘delicate’ ALL THE TIME!

    Reply
  445. Kath :) -  August 31, 2011 - 2:56 am

    AND to speak pig latin all you need to do is:
    with any english word move the first letter of the word to the end,
    and add ‘ay’ to the end of it!

    For example: Hello = Ellohay

    Reply
  446. Kath :) -  August 31, 2011 - 2:53 am

    Even though I’ve never heard of these words before..I think they should stay because they were created for a reason and we shouldn’t just throw them away just because they are the least used. Some unknown scientist or historian is probably using these words for an important reason.

    English is one of the newest languages in the world, so it uses alot of other languages word spelling and phrasing to create it. For example in french ‘grands parents’ is ‘grandparents’ in English and ‘week-end’ in french is ‘weekend’ in English. (F.Y.I. I do study french at school!).

    Did you know that there is a mobile phone texting dictionary!
    This is made for all those people that suck at short hand fast texting.

    Reply
  447. Bogyum -  August 31, 2011 - 1:46 am

    people it is not delicate it is deliciate! and as I spell these they are already underlined in red,.. :(

    Reply
  448. Pratibha -  August 31, 2011 - 1:37 am

    How about ‘basically’ and ‘actually’? They are so used and abused that deserve to b e removed.

    Reply
  449. Ben -  August 31, 2011 - 1:27 am

    Aerodrome and delicate need to stay but otherwise I think those words are ridiculously pointless remove

    Reply
  450. J. Gonzalez -  August 31, 2011 - 12:49 am

    It’s all about economics (and perhaps global warming). The less words they print, the less paper they use. The less paper they use, the cheaper the dictionary (and less trees are killed). They said they’ll only delete them words from the smaller print dictionaries. Fine. If a word isn’t in them, one can always check online or the larger unabridged prints. Perhaps a little more diligence may suffice.

    All we younkers brabble too much and supererogate over a frigorific topic. Lest we all get afflicted with Alienism, let’s go take a charabanc to the aerodrome, have a bever, and deliciate every moment of it.

    Now, who says those words are hardly used…..

    Reply
  451. who am I? -  August 31, 2011 - 12:37 am

    i dont think any words should be obsolete.
    the “obsolete” ones i just learned about sound quite funny when i say them out loud! ☺

    Reply
  452. Mercado -  August 30, 2011 - 11:54 pm

    YA RIGHT SHE/HE’S CORRECT!!
    >:(

    Reply
  453. Mercado -  August 30, 2011 - 11:53 pm

    HOLY COW BATMAN NO FREAKING WAY!!! THEY SHOULD NEVER REMOVE THE WORD! YOU NEVER KNOW IF SOMEONE MIGHT NEED TO KNOW THE WORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    …..
    ….
    AND SO MANY COMMENTS ARE HERE!!
    THERE’S ONLY REMOVE A WORD IN DICTIONARY YOU REACT LIKE THAT!!!!
    >:(

    Reply
  454. john -  August 30, 2011 - 11:44 pm

    Shelby, you need spectacles. :)

    Reply
  455. trol lol lol -  August 30, 2011 - 11:32 pm

    Words are words, letters in an order that sound a specific way. Some may spell them wrong or make up new ones, but does it really matter? I say if they have a meaning and people use them then keep them, the more the merrier, or have we forgot how to live and take risks?? Also if ‘lol’ isn’t already in the dictonary then it should be. It is an acronim and there are many other ones also in the dictonary. GO TROLFACE! :D

    Reply
  456. Bob -  August 30, 2011 - 11:31 pm

    Well… I had to find the dictionary definition for aerodrome school. If it was removed I wouldn’t be able to do my homework!!

    Reply
  457. Olivia -  August 30, 2011 - 11:29 pm

    Well… Whoever wants to get rid of aerodrome has obviously not talked to any pilots.

    Reply
  458. Jane -  August 30, 2011 - 11:23 pm

    Absolutely, never, ever, and no way at all, remove a word.

    Reply
  459. Disy -  August 30, 2011 - 11:13 pm

    I don’t think any of those words should be removed and personally I have heard and read at least four of those words. If you remove them from the dictionary they become dinosaurs and hence extinct and a word is always a word!

    Reply
  460. Julia -  August 30, 2011 - 9:59 pm

    NOOO!!!! DON’T REMOVE THEM!!! They’re such great words and people may want to use these words in essays – heck I’ll add em to my vocabulary right now!!!

    Reply
  461. random -  August 30, 2011 - 9:47 pm

    what about peop, it isn’t fair.
    peops had anough and it wants its rights

    Peop isn’t in the dictionary. its the hole in letters. qeopadgbQROPADB all have peops in them.Spred the word and be part of history. Help get peop in the dictionary.

    Peop said pee-op

    Reply
  462. Cindia Gonzalez -  August 30, 2011 - 9:15 pm

    In my opinion, words shouldn’t be taken away from the dictionary online or on book. No matter how rarely used or known, they deserve to stay. You never know when you might need the word itself or find it and not know what it means. Then you go looking for the word in a dictionary and discover that the word itself isn’t there. I mean, what are you going to do when you read an old novel. Be serous. Words old, unused, or forgotten should stay written. That way their never really forgotten and anyone can look for them whenever needed.

    Reply
  463. (gasp) -  August 30, 2011 - 8:36 pm

    Urban dictionary is on the lead,
    because paper-dictionary gave them less choice of words…

    People make new word, because they are not able to find words that
    these people removed.

    Reply
  464. Jan H -  August 30, 2011 - 8:32 pm

    I may not use the word Aerodrome very often, but I do use it. Maybe it is more particular to some countries, e.g. Australia. I don’t believe any word should be removed from a full dictionary, but they can come out of the concise dictionaries. Aerodrome however, is not one of those words!

    Reply
  465. hey -  August 30, 2011 - 8:32 pm

    I use delicate frequently.

    It’s like one of those 1st words I learned in English…
    seriously do not remove Delicate.

    Alienism will soon come back, because people use -ism or other suffix
    and attach it to every word they know.

    Reply
  466. Emily -  August 30, 2011 - 8:32 pm

    Why would you leave words out of the dictionary? Are people TRYING to eliminate our vocabulary altogether? In the Shakespearean era people had a vocabulary of hundreds of thousand words where as in the modern era humans only have about 3-4,00 words.

    Reply
  467. harmamae -  August 30, 2011 - 8:14 pm

    I’ve definitely heard the word “aerodrome” before. Didn’t realize it was so uncommon. And “younker” sounds familiar, though I didn’t know what it meant.

    As a side note, I really like the word “bever”! I wish it wasn’t obsolete, or I’d probably use it!

    Reply
  468. Never -  August 30, 2011 - 8:14 pm

    I wouldn’t mind it if “bling” fell out of common and marketing use, but I think there should always be some record of the shifting of language. If there is a concept, something we wish to express, and there is a word for it, then that word has a purpose and is part of the language. The more words we remove from our collective lexicon, the less nuanced our conversations and our minds.

    Reply
  469. Lilie -  August 30, 2011 - 7:59 pm

    I believe that all words serve a purpose, and should all have their chance of being said. So I’m challenging myself to use at least one esoteric word a day. Also, brabble is a great word and I shall be using it more.

    Reply
  470. Sarbina -  August 30, 2011 - 7:38 pm

    If your going to take words out, then why make so many words up? I mean really, at least half of the words in a dictionary people never have and probably never will hear of. So why even bother making them up?

    Reply
  471. Janae -  August 30, 2011 - 7:36 pm

    I think you shouldn’t take words away from the dictionary because the dictionary is how you learn new interesting words like i learned that alienism means the study of mental illnesses. You know how people say you should learn something new everyday well taking away words from the dictionary wont help that especially with people that love to learn new words. But of course that’s just my opinion.

    Reply
  472. Ginny Arthur Weasley -  August 30, 2011 - 7:23 pm

    Hi again, I just figured out how to make an emoticon.
    I have never heard of any of those words, but maybe, probably “brabble”. AHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    “Brabble” is UNDERLINED RED in this “leave a comment” box. Let’s see the others….:-)
    Deliciate. Underlined red.
    Frigorific. Underlined red.
    Charabanc. Not. Whew.
    Younker. Yes underlined.

    Reply
  473. Hermione Granger -  August 30, 2011 - 7:22 pm

    Hi again, I just figured out how to make an emoticon.
    I have never heard of any of those words, but maybe, probably “brabble”. AHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    “Brabble” is UNDERLINED RED in this “leave a comment” box. Let’s see the others….:-)
    Deliciate. Underlined red.
    Frigorific. Underlined red.
    Charabanc. Not. Whew.
    Younker. Yes underlined.

    Reply
  474. Hermione Granger -  August 30, 2011 - 7:17 pm

    You know, those words should never be deleted, what if someone needs to know the definitions? Sure, they could go on dictionary.com, but if the online dictionary is deleting words, then I’m a bowtruckle.

    P.S. Seeing as I’m Hermione Granger, I like all words and books.
    P.P.S. The word bowtruckle is underlined red in the “leave a comment” box. They should add that word. :-)

    Reply
  475. Juan -  August 30, 2011 - 7:09 pm

    Never remove a word… NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  476. Magre -  August 30, 2011 - 7:07 pm

    All words should have a chance and they should never be kicked out! The only thing that should be kicked out is kicking out words!!!

    Reply
  477. Morgan McCartor -  August 30, 2011 - 6:57 pm

    We don’t need to remove these words, we need to start using them. Deliciate is delicious, and brabble seems positively vital in today’s political climate…

    Reply
  478. Mark -  August 30, 2011 - 6:50 pm

    There is an Ardmore aerodrome just down the road. I’m pretty sure Dairy Flat is an aerodrome too. What are we supposed to call them ?
    They are not airports….

    Reply
  479. jackso -  August 30, 2011 - 6:41 pm

    none should be removed:)

    Reply
  480. L J Ferguson -  August 30, 2011 - 6:18 pm

    While it is reasonable to leave the words out of smaller print dictionaries I oppose deleting them from larger/online dictionaries.
    Partly to keep a record of our language changing over time. And especially because it may be necessary to understand something written in an earlier time. Are we saying that our own history is irrelevent? If so the barbarians are not at our gates. They are running things!

    Reply
  481. Janet -  August 30, 2011 - 6:13 pm

    No word should be removed. If we removed it, then we would be removing its history and culture behind it. Besides, gramophones and records aren’t used these days, yet people have them because they are SPECIAL. it should be the same way with words, since the oral language is beautiful.

    Reply
  482. emi99 -  August 30, 2011 - 5:19 pm

    fregues, jamas las quiten ( are u kiding, dont remove them) im honduran

    Reply
  483. Anonymous -  August 30, 2011 - 4:49 pm

    No word should ever be removed from an online dictionary. No matter how esoteric or rarely used, if I come across one in my reading and need a definition, I would dread to come to dictionary.com and not find it here. Even print dictionaries should keep them, and if they don’t, then they should appropriately advertise as “abridged,” because that’s what they are. And think of words such as “dial,” which we still use to call the input of a phone number. Should we remove the original meaning, because it’s rarely relevant in a push button word? In a word, no.

    Please do not remove any words, as they existed once with a purpose, and were used in the writings of the past. They may not be relevant now, but they were once, and we should keep them in our chronicles.

    Reply
  484. Teresa Fosdyck -  August 30, 2011 - 4:37 pm

    The removal of words is not only sad, but also how are people going to learn what these words mean or how to pronuouce them. Correctly spell them and many more children are going to need them in life. History is also lanuage!!!!! I am in college and still use a dictonary.

    Reply
  485. kelsey s -  August 30, 2011 - 4:35 pm

    EVEN IF THEY ARE UNCOMMON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHO CARES???????????????????????????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :( :(

    Reply
  486. kelsey s -  August 30, 2011 - 4:33 pm

    do u know how many words i have needed to find desparatly and out of 10 different kinds of dictionaries i didnt find them?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DONT TAKE WORDS AND REMOVE THEM FROM THE DICTIONARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  487. Maddi -  August 30, 2011 - 4:31 pm

    We should NEVER remove words from the dictionary!!! I personally think ALL these words are quite interesting and unique, and should never be removed. They are part of our heritage as Americans, as someone else said, as people used to use them quite regularly, so we should keep them, if only to preserve our heritage.

    Reply
  488. ashley -  August 30, 2011 - 4:30 pm

    sry bad grammar im 10 hey :D just bacause we barely use them i for got to put one more thing >
    they will probaly take it off cause they want to save money and when it comes to money uno >but thet should record the words some way and be avalable some how to public

    Reply
  489. Daniel -  August 30, 2011 - 4:29 pm

    leave them in because if you are having a test and you have to look them up they wont be there and FAIL. And also the words will be important because they are original. Never delete original words. I use Delicate every day basically. So please don’t delete them.

    Reply
  490. ashley -  August 30, 2011 - 4:26 pm

    none of thease words should be gone just because we used them same as no history should be removed they should stay as a marking of humanity

    Reply
  491. Xavier -  August 30, 2011 - 4:12 pm

    All of the realy long words should be removed

    Reply
  492. Julia -  August 30, 2011 - 3:46 pm

    Un-add surplus words from dictionary plus-good.

    Reply
  493. Bob -  August 30, 2011 - 3:43 pm

    We should leave them in the dictionary because if we do we’ll use them more.

    Reply
  494. Andy -  August 30, 2011 - 3:41 pm

    most printed dictionary’s aren’t even bought by the public mostly by schools otherwise people just look it up online like this website.

    Reply
  495. Michael -  August 30, 2011 - 3:37 pm

    I think many of you are missing the point. They are taking them out of smaller print (read pocket size) dictionaries, they are not being taken out of the English language in general.

    Reply
  496. FourMoreYears -  August 30, 2011 - 3:08 pm

    “Frigorific” sounds like a word George Bush made up.

    Reply
  497. Basil N. -  August 30, 2011 - 3:07 pm

    I agree with keeping them in the online dictionaries. If you read some of the short stories by O.Henry and Kate Chopin, you might find yourself needing a dictionary.

    Reply
  498. bella barthalow -  August 30, 2011 - 3:06 pm

    they should remove dictionary and definition from the dictionary

    Reply
  499. kimw -  August 30, 2011 - 2:55 pm

    looking at these words, i can tell you I’m about to start using them A.S.A.P

    Reply
  500. Jibran -  August 30, 2011 - 2:48 pm

    I think “Aerodrome” definitely deserves a second chance!

    Reply
  501. fergie sharon -  August 30, 2011 - 2:47 pm

    all you people are just lame nerds who really gives a care ? there will always be internet to look up stuff?i mean really!who even uses a dumb dictionary anymore!omg big whoop? o m g om g i cant belive their taking one word that i would never use out the dictiionary! please yall geeky nerds???/

    Reply
  502. nate -  August 30, 2011 - 2:14 pm

    agreed

    Reply
  503. Teresa -  August 30, 2011 - 2:00 pm

    I’v recently heard of Alienism and Aerodrome. *shrugs*

    Reply
  504. E.B. -  August 30, 2011 - 1:57 pm

    What is this Orwell’s 1984? Don’t take out words.

    Reply
  505. Constant -  August 30, 2011 - 1:44 pm

    Aerodrome, frigorific, are great words.
    Who said they are not used? All depends on your field of interest and education!
    Not used by some but very used by others… Just let time remove them and not an association of people who do not represent all fields of interest or profession

    Reply
  506. Ryan -  August 30, 2011 - 1:26 pm

    To all the people who kept saying delicate shouldn’t be removed from the dictionary, the word is deliciate, not delicate.

    Reply
  507. na -  August 30, 2011 - 1:18 pm

    No word should be removed from the dictionary! There was a reason for it to be made so why should it not be used today? And even if not a lot of people search for those words, some people might! What if someone wonders what one of those words mean and try to look it up in the dictionary and its not there! So no I don’t not think the words should be removed from the dictionary.

    Reply
  508. Andy -  August 30, 2011 - 1:18 pm

    Speaking to those who have expressed distress at these words’ removal: If you value retaining these words for the sake of their potential for greater exactitude of speech, consider three words in light of that value: “smaller print dictionaries.” The above does not imply all dictionaries produced in the future will omit these words, but only some dictionaries intended for practical use. You will also readily observe that “dictionaries” are already a diverse class of books, of widely varying degrees of inclusiveness.

    Reply
  509. Mary -  August 30, 2011 - 1:09 pm

    I think the words need to stay even if they are no longer used. Where else will you look up words you don’t know when reading older books and works from ages ago? Are they going to delete the words from books they may have been written in as well? Just because we don’t use them, doesn’t mean we don’t need to know what they mean.

    Reply
  510. Young Moula Grant -  August 30, 2011 - 1:05 pm

    I think all words should stay, u never know when u could use one of them

    Reply
  511. Carlitos -  August 30, 2011 - 12:56 pm

    @Archon on August 29, 2011 at 10:19 pm
    @ Jimmy

    Don’t “misunderestimate” me. I didn’t bring politics into the discussion; (Semicolon for Cassandra) I was still on the topic of linguistics. It was plain who the real captain of the ship of state was, during the Bush era. Cheney was at the helm and W. was just the figurehead, with about as much intellect and ability to steer the craft as a real pine figurehead. The talking-head hand-puppet should have been chosen to look and sound good to the American public. I could begin to appreciate Carlitos’ distaste for hillbillies, but, this man was born and raised in Connecticut. He somehow managed to graduate from both Yale and Harvard and still couldn’t manage to string two words together without tripping over his mouth. Bush-isms were endemic. Comedians still get gigs by referring to them.

    Not that I’m thrilled with Obama and cohorts either. I didn’t vote for him. I could damn the new administration with faint praise by saying that it seems that we’re losing ground a little less quickly than we were. It’s ironic that you mentioned Franks’ slurred “sh” in shibboleth. That’s exactly why the Israelites chose the word in the first place, to root out the infiltrators.

    @ Prem

    I usually only correct for errors of fact, rather than usage. Having read your post I can only hope that English was not your first language. Don’t worry about the 9 candidates for exclusion, or words like perplexed. Focus on the more mainstream words. Anyword should be any word. Obserred should be absurd. Rearly should be spelled rarely. Apon should be upon. There, should have been their, in that usage. Rare should have been rarer. Sayed should have been said. Perviously is spelled previously. Peoples’ has an apostrophe to indicate possessive. Don’t has an apostrophe to indicate abbreviation and, to say something like, “on which people come upon”, is rendundant. The “on” and “upon” mean essentially the same thing. Construct your work to eliminate one or the other. If you spoke Farsi or Hindi first, your English shows promise. If you were born in Alabama, don’t let Carlitos know.

    Hi Archon, old friend. It appears that they have not been posting my comments anymore. The last one was agreeing with you about your politics; Jimmy, it seems, may be one of those reasons we suffered 8 years of W. There are many people on this blog that make me afraid for 4, heaven forbid 8, years of Bachmann or Perry. Maybe we’ll get 12 or 16 because whereas they claim to have some intimate knowledge of the US Constitution, they exhibit very little of it. As you may not be, I am also not an “Obama-supporter” in any other sense than that of him being President and me being an American citizen. Much like the troops- I don’t care for the phony wars and needless destruction, but I support the poor men and women tasked with making it so.

    Anyway… I love to see you mention my name in so many of your posts, it makes me feel like a celebrity to have the most smug sonofa on this blog letting everyone know how I feel about Alabama, which coincidentally, is not where hillbillies are from as far as I’m concerned. You get the good old-fashioned southern man from those good old-fashioned southern states. In my opinion, I would consider proper Appalachia as the home range of the hillbilly.

    Reply
  512. Binker -  August 30, 2011 - 12:26 pm

    I think this gentleman said it all…..

    “Sikander Javed on August 24, 2011 at 4:06 pm

    Words are never, never obsolete. There is no need to remove them from dictionary whether on paper or online. It’s the words that makes the language.”

    Reply
  513. Rick -  August 30, 2011 - 12:18 pm

    Most of the words in the list to be removed are Latin derived words and they are very common in Latin based languages like Portuguese, French or Spanish. Since English is the global language, these words should exist to ease the communication with foreign speakers.

    Reply
  514. (^U^) -  August 30, 2011 - 11:37 am

    I’ve never heard of these words before..but I think they should stay because they were created for a reason and we shouldn’t just throw them away :/

    Reply
  515. Amie -  August 30, 2011 - 10:17 am

    Is there a dictionary for words taken out of the dictionary?
    Because they should put those in there, then.
    Just saying. I might need the definition of those words someday, but if they are taken out of printed dictionaries, we still have our old friend dictionary.com, right?;D

    Reply
  516. Ricardo Santos -  August 30, 2011 - 10:15 am

    Removing words is a dangerous and unnecessary proposition.

    Dangerous : because each word is not only a word, but a representation of an idea. Thus by eliminating the word (and its definition) you eliminate a way to communicate an idea. Specially, but not limited, when the word represents an abstract concept. Not to mention that ideas on old books that use the word would be lost for all but the few that still know the meaning.

    Unnecessary : because there is no danger of running out of words.

    The only valid reason would be to conserve space in a death tree form dictionary.

    Reply
  517. Randall John -  August 30, 2011 - 10:11 am

    Aerodrome is a great word. I grew up in Rural Indiana and there were many Aerodrome around. But I didn’t know the word for them; now I do.

    Reply
  518. John -  August 30, 2011 - 10:05 am

    Great, so when you read an old novel that contains archaic words you can’t look them up because they are archaic. But you can find the meaning of the word ‘is’ even though most of us learned that one before we started kindergarden.

    Reply
  519. Beth -  August 30, 2011 - 9:46 am

    Since when has no-one used alienism? i use it all the time!

    Reply
  520. Jesse -  August 30, 2011 - 9:00 am

    Supererogate should absolutely stay I have read that many times in books the last year, and should at least stay in there another 5 years or so until the are ultimately added to an online site quite like this one as an out of date term. No word should be forgotten or able to find online in a dictionary source. They should always be provided but as for common dictionaries found in a desktop setting only words used within the last 75-100 years should be in them.

    Reply
  521. wondering -  August 30, 2011 - 8:34 am

    why dont they stop whining about space in the dictionary and just come out with a part 2

    Reply
  522. Kimber -  August 30, 2011 - 8:33 am

    They take away our plantets, now our words. What’s next……

    Reply
  523. The Watcher -  August 30, 2011 - 8:18 am

    Well… The last time I saw a list of dictionaries, Collins wasn’t on it. So there.

    Reply
  524. Liquor Connoisseur -  August 30, 2011 - 7:54 am

    Before we zoom over the vast fields of our dictionaries, let’s land on an aerodrome so we can deliciate in the last bever of this list of words. I would much rather take a tour of our beautiful language on a charabanc than feel like a younker wondering through the endless field we call the English lexicon. Ever since this article was posted, there has been a brabble going on in the comments section over whether or not these words should be subject to alienism from our dictionaries. In my opinion, to oust these words from our iridescent language would be very frigorific, and personally, I think doing so is a perfect example of what it is to supererogate.

    Reply
  525. Mike -  August 30, 2011 - 7:23 am

    All the words can stay as long as the expression ” on a go forward basis” is outlawed .

    Reply
  526. L. A. DuBois -  August 30, 2011 - 6:51 am

    Several of those do have replacements (aerodrome, airdome; alienism, alienage; etc.) so I guess that’s okay, but bever, char-à-banc, deliciate, supererogate – English has already lost plenty of useful words that have no real modern equivalent. It doesn’t need to loose any more.
    Regardless of use, words should only be categorized as obsolete if they have suitable alternatives.

    Reply
  527. Sean Reeves -  August 30, 2011 - 6:50 am

    A lot of you aren’t even reading the article–correctly, or perhaps, not at all. The word is “deliciate” not “delicate”. Furthermore, the words “will no longer be included in smaller print dictionaries”; not removed from all dictionaries. Additionally, no one ever said that they would be removed from online dictionaries, the article read, “an argument could be made that if a word is rarely used or searched for, it may not matter if it is in the dictionary or not.”

    Get it together, people. This article was short, and the vast majority of you couldn’t even comprehend its content. If you can’t make intelligent, relevant comments, then please don’t comment at all.

    Reply
  528. Irfan H -  August 30, 2011 - 6:49 am

    You can’t remove a word from a dictionary! Then it’s not even a complete dictionary!

    Reply
  529. Michael -  August 30, 2011 - 6:37 am

    ALL words should be in the dictionary. If I look a word up and it is not in the dictionary I am using, I will throw it in the trash.

    Reply
  530. Lucy Mauterer -  August 30, 2011 - 6:34 am

    I agree with Phil Fasso. There are those of us who occasionally read esoteric or archaic texts for either research or personal interest. Having a full unabridged dictionary available to locate the meanings of archaic words is very useful. I personally keep all my old print dictionaries just in case a word I need has been ‘retired’ from use. I also keep dictionaries in 7 different languages in case I need to translate something.Consider this; Latin may be considered a ‘dead’ language but tell that to the botanists and biologists. Language is a living thing but in order to study the living things in this world, having fossils from another age to examine are extremely helpful. Let’s keep the old as a foundation and keep building and creating new words as the need arises!

    Reply
  531. Jose -  August 30, 2011 - 6:32 am

    Does anyone ever pay any attention? They said the words would be removed from small print dictionaries not all dictionaries. Why would they especially remove it from online dictionaries when they have a vast space to store knowledge. Also, some people were confused between the words deliciate and delicate…people….>.>

    Reply
  532. zach -  August 30, 2011 - 6:06 am

    but you told me that when one is truly saved they will want to grow, glorify God and not sin. but doenst a false convert do that too?

    Reply
  533. Allison -  August 30, 2011 - 6:03 am

    No matter how little used a word may be, it should still be in the dictionary, maybe not a compact dictionary for space reasons, but definitely in any full dictionary. Just because the word is rarely used doesn’t mean that someone wouldn’t look the word up if he or she stumbled across a reference to it, or that someone wouldn’t want the option at least of using the word. So many of the words in the dictionary aren’t known or widely used, except by a select few, but that doesn’t mean they’re not words worth of defining.

    Reply
  534. Bob Lyle (minister) -  August 30, 2011 - 5:53 am

    Why has the word “aborticide” been removed from dictionaries, on paper and online? Too politically incorrect no doubt. Too much like homicide and genocide, which it is. Aborticide is the act of destroying a fetus in the womb. Killing little master Fetus and little Miss Feta is committed by aborticidal abortisadists.

    Reply
  535. Josh -  August 30, 2011 - 5:51 am

    Okay, idiots, the word that is going to be removed is deliciate… not delicate. You are stupid.

    Reply
  536. Marc -  August 30, 2011 - 5:25 am

    Words become obsolete when they aren’t used. And how can they ever be used, if they get removed from existence? All that is takes is for one person to discover any one of these words, like it, find it interesting and start using the word for it to live.

    I say keep them all! I can only imagine that in our lexicon, there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of words that aren’t used daily. However, isn’t discovering new words, that which makes learning fun?

    Reply
  537. ajones -  August 30, 2011 - 5:19 am

    They are crazy if they take words from any dictionary. You might not use the words but that does not mean someone else doesn’t so why take it out the dictionay.

    Reply
  538. CaitlinXD -  August 30, 2011 - 1:03 am

    Just because there words aren’t used doesn’t mean that they should be left out of the dictionary! Although those words aren’t that commonly used they should be kept because I know I’ve had a few of these words in my spelling lists at school and I would have been hopelessly lost if it weren’t for my trusty pocket dictionary :)

    Reply
  539. Ed -  August 30, 2011 - 12:34 am

    Ooh ooh! Now that I know what “bever” and “deliciate” mean, I’m going to use them in my Dungeons & Dragons campaigns everytime the adventuring party stops at a tavern! And as everyone knows, a D&D game without taverns is like a circus without clowns.

    “And so, deserving of respite, our heroes spend a handful of what was once Bragnor the ogre chieftain’s gold to settle over a hearty bever of twice-seared quail and brown lager. While the band so deliciates, Balleog the cleric continues to ponder the riddle spilt from Bragnor’s dying lips as the barmaid returns offering cracked pepper…”

    Also on the slate: using “younker” instead of “young nobleman,” and using “frigorific” to describe spells such as Ray of Frost, Cone of Cold and Ice Storm. “The frigorific blast from the dwarven wizard’s white rod bites through your chainmail….”

    Yeah, I think that might work. Thanks, Dictionary.com! :)

    Reply
  540. Tabitha -  August 29, 2011 - 11:24 pm

    remove words?! that would be removing the purpose of a dictionary!
    how else will we find the meanings of words that you have never heard/read before??
    a dictionary would be useless if it didnt include every word.
    you would destroy the fun of a dictionary aswell; where else will we find odd/weird/cool/unusual/unused/unknown words to slip into coversation or assignments to baffle people?

    Reply
  541. zachismail -  August 29, 2011 - 10:59 pm

    blah… do we all need to mundify our memories with such subservient, imperious interrogation; some inept attempt to justify milquetoast rationalizations?
    -all aliteration aside, adjectives should be obsolete in gerenal… everything is relative, be it succinctly said with more laconic indignation than i could care to ‘conjure’: when you participate in such consumption of the aforementioned, and more often than not transmogrified cacophony, you truly only hear what you care to listen for… i would happily return monosyllabic grunts and ubiquitous underlinings of the underlying quaquaversal. though, i’m sure i selfishly have too much to say!
    have a good day.

    Reply
  542. Archon -  August 29, 2011 - 10:19 pm

    @ Jimmy

    Don’t “misunderestimate” me. I didn’t bring politics into the discussion; (Semicolon for Cassandra) I was still on the topic of linguistics. It was plain who the real captain of the ship of state was, during the Bush era. Cheney was at the helm and W. was just the figurehead, with about as much intellect and ability to steer the craft as a real pine figurehead. The talking-head hand-puppet should have been chosen to look and sound good to the American public. I could begin to appreciate Carlitos’ distaste for hillbillies, but, this man was born and raised in Connecticut. He somehow managed to graduate from both Yale and Harvard and still couldn’t manage to string two words together without tripping over his mouth. Bush-isms were endemic. Comedians still get gigs by referring to them.

    Not that I’m thrilled with Obama and cohorts either. I didn’t vote for him. I could damn the new administration with faint praise by saying that it seems that we’re losing ground a little less quickly than we were. It’s ironic that you mentioned Franks’ slurred “sh” in shibboleth. That’s exactly why the Israelites chose the word in the first place, to root out the infiltrators.

    @ Prem

    I usually only correct for errors of fact, rather than usage. Having read your post I can only hope that English was not your first language. Don’t worry about the 9 candidates for exclusion, or words like perplexed. Focus on the more mainstream words. Anyword should be any word. Obserred should be absurd. Rearly should be spelled rarely. Apon should be upon. There, should have been their, in that usage. Rare should have been rarer. Sayed should have been said. Perviously is spelled previously. Peoples’ has an apostrophe to indicate possessive. Don’t has an apostrophe to indicate abbreviation and, to say something like, “on which people come upon”, is rendundant. The “on” and “upon” mean essentially the same thing. Construct your work to eliminate one or the other. If you spoke Farsi or Hindi first, your English shows promise. If you were born in Alabama, don’t let Carlitos know.

    Reply
  543. henry tobias -  August 29, 2011 - 10:16 pm

    Brabble is still a great word. Sounds like a Lewis Caroll ‘nonsense’ word. I think I’ll keep it in my vocabulary, even if Collins won’t.

    Reply
  544. Kimmy -  August 29, 2011 - 9:15 pm

    I think that you should keep all the words. Why? Well, like you said before, the online dictionary has more space, or rather “unlimited space” then the regular paper ones. Just because we hardly use those words, it doesn’t mean you should throw them away. For example, what if a word from that list came up in our book that is very old. We would want to search it up and find out, however we can’t find the definition in the paper dictionary. Therefore, they should keep all the words!

    Reply
  545. Eric Bragg -  August 29, 2011 - 9:11 pm

    “Alienism” almost sounds useful. Other than that, my vote is that there’s no need for those words. Never heard of them, and would probably never use them.

    Reply
  546. Jayden -  August 29, 2011 - 9:08 pm

    THEY SHOULD KEEP ALL THE WORDS IN THE DICTIONARY BECAUSE IF SOMEONE NEEDS TO KNOW ONE OF THE WORDS THEY WON’T FIND IT!!!!

    Reply
  547. Colin -  August 29, 2011 - 9:07 pm

    like 9 words will make a difference in a dictionary, just keep them

    Reply
  548. Brad -  August 29, 2011 - 8:35 pm

    Half the people commenting here are either not very bright, or completely misunderstood the article. It’s entirely reasonable for smaller dictionaries to remove obsolete words from their pages.

    Some people were complaining about words being removed from dictionary.com, when it was quite clearly stated that that would not be necessary. Also, they are not being removed from larger more comprehensive dictionaries. Other people misread the words, for example “deliciate” (which, funnily enough is not recognized by my computer’s dictionary) is not the same as “delicate”.

    Reply
  549. Dave -  August 29, 2011 - 8:32 pm

    Interesting collection of comments here: some enlightening and insightful, some just “off.” I especially liked the poster who questioned deleting the word “delicate,” not realizing she’d misread the actual word: “deliciate.” Oh well, not everyone’s at the high end of the bell curve!

    I’m voting for “frigorific.” I think Kanye West or Jay-Z should put it in a rap song, then wait to see if MTV over-reacts and bleeps it!

    I’ll also side with those who feel that an online dictionary should hang onto as many words as they can. As a professional corporate writer, I value finding just the right word to express a shade of meaning that another word doesn’t quite hit, so I like to have my options open to me.

    Also, another poster pointed out that new words come into our vocabulary (and thus, into our dictionaries) because they build on older terms. Having the older words around—even if they’re noted as archaic—helps us find the path from where we are to where those words came from.

    One more thing: until everyone learns how to spell, I think every site’s “Comments” app should have a built-in spell checker. To me, nothing works faster to knock points off of peoples’ perceived IQ faster than misspelling or misusing words. That’s why there ARE dictionaries: so no one has to look like an idiot for not spelling things correctly.

    The sad reality is that most people (and I’m talking about college educated people, too) don’t know how to spell, so society needs the spell checker as a crutch for all those who were goofing off during grammar lessons, or didn’t do their spelling homework, or maybe they’re simply dyslexic.

    The spell checker should be enshrined in the Bill of RIghts, and made available to all people regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, creed, sex, marital status, familial status, age, disability, veteran status or sexual orientation.

    Is anybody with me?

    Reply
  550. XXX -  August 29, 2011 - 8:05 pm

    NEVER!!!!

    Reply
  551. Josiah -  August 29, 2011 - 7:48 pm

    I agree with so many; If all you have in a dictionary is a collection of words that people use commonly, who would use it? We’d all know the definitions already. Printing Costs? If I were to go to a bookstore looking to buy a dictionary, I would pay at least two dollars more for a dictionary that has even just ten more words than the $2 less dictionary. It is the right of the company to publish however many words in their dictionary they like, but please, Dictionary.com, NO WORD REMOVAL! When I have free time I often look through a dictionary to expand my vocabulary, I then use those words in my everyday conversation. I hope that the old, obsolete, archaic(yes I realize that was slightly redundant) words remain in more than a minority of dictionaries. Pocket dictionaries are one thing, but this? Also, I might add in regards to ‘Eric’, no one directly picked any words to remove from the English language or it’s dictionaries in order to make it the way we see it today; that was a slow, slow process. I think that if we actually remove words from the English language as they become ‘less used’, our future archaeologists will have more of a challenge reading ancient literature discovered from digs and elsewhere. There would also be no reason for the word “Vernacular” to exist if everything spoken were part of the vernacular. This a dumb idea; removing words from a dictionary? How will words be remembered if not through the Dictionary?

    Reply
  552. DSHF -  August 29, 2011 - 7:46 pm

    the point of a dictionary, especially an online one is to find the definition of a word which we do not know, that incluses, and maybe specifies, ones that are old

    Reply
  553. HPFan -  August 29, 2011 - 7:11 pm

    How about making a dictionary of rarely used words? That way the words will still be around for everyone to see and use.

    Reply
  554. mochi -  August 29, 2011 - 7:09 pm

    Yeah, I think all words should be kept in the dictionary. And if there is such a hurry to take a word out of a reference, why not a really bad, disgusting word that people shouldn’t use?

    Reply
  555. Matthew Reynolds -  August 29, 2011 - 6:57 pm

    For what my 2 cents is worth, here are my thoughts –

    REMOVE:

    • aerodrome
    • alienism
    • bever
    • younker

    KEEP:

    • brabble
    • charabanc
    • deliciate

    NOT SURE/DON’T CARE:

    • frigorific
    • supererogate

    Reply
  556. Kdawg -  August 29, 2011 - 6:55 pm

    They need to keep alienism and aerodome! BOTH HIGHLY USEFUL!

    Reply
  557. Zoë -  August 29, 2011 - 6:47 pm

    Alienisum… Is that a derogatory term?

    Reply
  558. InsaneG -  August 29, 2011 - 6:46 pm

    All words should be kept if only for reference.

    Reply
  559. Josephine -  August 29, 2011 - 6:40 pm

    When I was a younker I use to supererogate my time as I deliciate in a frigorific bever while riding away in a charabanc from the aerodrome; alienism would not brabble the insanity of illiminating a single word in this sentence!

    Reply
  560. isaac -  August 29, 2011 - 6:28 pm

    i think that its really stupid to remove WORDS, from a DICTIONARY, they are meant for people to look up words and find them, not to look up a word and find out that it has been removed!

    Reply
  561. kamran -  August 29, 2011 - 6:28 pm

    almost all the words are often used by me, even if they remove all the words people are still going to use these words in conversations, not many would be affected, except the ones using Microsoft Word, coz its gonna underline it with red…………..just ignore………….not my comment

    Reply
  562. isaac -  August 29, 2011 - 6:26 pm

    i think that its really stupid to remove WORDS from a DICTIONARY

    Reply
  563. AA -  August 29, 2011 - 6:20 pm

    Leave all the words in the dictionary. It’s a historical piece. Better than a history book. The older the dictionary, the better.

    Reply
  564. derp -  August 29, 2011 - 6:15 pm

    I actually came across the word supererogate in my summer reading assignment today. heh. derpie derp. :D

    Reply
  565. Rannie -  August 29, 2011 - 5:57 pm

    I think that NO words should be removed at all. Who knows–someday someone will need those words. If they removed it, I’d be pissed off and it’s SO WRONG to remove an rarely used words. Someone unique might want to use them to show their uniqueness.

    Lots of looooove, Rannie

    Reply
  566. Maxie -  August 29, 2011 - 5:54 pm

    No word should ever be removed from an online dictionary. No matter how esoteric or rarely used, if I come across one in my reading and need a definition, I would dread to come to dictionary.com and not find it here. Even print dictionaries should keep them, and if they don’t, then they should appropriately advertise as “abridged,” because that’s what they are. And think of words such as “dial,” which we still use to call the input of a phone number. Should we remove the original meaning, because it’s rarely relevant in a push button word? In a word, no.

    Please do not remove any words, as they existed once with a purpose, and were used in the writings of the past. They may not be relevant now, but they were once, and we should keep them in our chronicles.

    P.S.Phil Fasso YOU ARE AWESOME YOU SOUND SOOOOO MUCH LIKS PETA OFF OF THE HUNGER GAME SERIES BY SUZAIN COLLINS

    Reply
  567. Hippie3 -  August 29, 2011 - 5:37 pm

    My Dad’s a pilot, so I’m used to hearing the word “aerodrome.”

    Personally, I think no word should ever be deleted from a dictionary…ever.

    Reply
  568. Jessica -  August 29, 2011 - 5:20 pm

    I’ve denifitely used brabble – like what would call most of this discussion. Oh well, now that I know all these words, I might as well start using them. I think I’ll go deliciate a bever.

    Reply
  569. Alondra -  August 29, 2011 - 5:19 pm

    I personally never herd these words, so if you guys remove them I probably wouldn’t have noticed, but what about the people who have. Are they going to announce it in the news so that everybody could know not to use them no more?
    Its just like I don’t know ALL the songs, movies or books and just because some of us don’t know them doesn’t mean they are going to be removed. Same with words we don’t and we won’t know all the words or even use them, but who knows some people might know them or even use them. And they shouldn’t be removed!

    Reply
  570. Scarlett -  August 29, 2011 - 5:15 pm

    I think it’s wrong to ever even consider the cutting of words from dictionaries. Who knows? Maybe there is that one random old guy who uses a word us younglings wouldn’t understand, and we decide to look it up. I know that I do that all the time. Words are important, and if you’ve ever seen 1984, you would know that taking words that are “unnecessary” out of the language is a form of discouraging free thought, atleast in my opinion.

    Reply
  571. anonymous brabble -  August 29, 2011 - 5:14 pm

    :|]

    Reply
  572. anonymous brabble -  August 29, 2011 - 5:13 pm

    remove them all :) ;)

    Reply
  573. mimi -  August 29, 2011 - 5:06 pm

    i have never heard of anyof those words, except delicate. people use that word all the time, i think i used it yesterday! you cant make a word obsulete just cause you think people arnet using it. that is a very delicate topic

    Reply
  574. Jenna -  August 29, 2011 - 5:05 pm

    its
    D-E-L-I-C-I-A-T-E
    not delicate, you dumb, illiterate people

    Reply
  575. jesus cabrera -  August 29, 2011 - 4:55 pm

    I agree with many of the comments about not removing any word or expression from the dictionaries, especially the ones online, because even though they are not in aural use anymore, they will always be found in some kind of printed material, such as the classics. Besides, we might always bring it back with a new concept. For example, the word budget entered the language from French meaning a small bag to carry coins [as was the usual thing to do during the Middle Ages]; later, the meaning of the monies allotted for project came up and the word was not only revived, but it was borrowed back to French with that meaning!

    Reply
  576. Heman -  August 29, 2011 - 4:54 pm

    What rubbish ! how can you even think of removing words………… has the world (or some in the world) gone mad. Why not remove books, music, movies, photos, art work etc just because they have not been looked at, heard, read etc. Why not just live in a cave with a wooden club and a wooden plate and dress in animal fur. We are supposed to be a civilised intelligent race – treasure what our ancestors and we have created and take delight in them. If words are no longer used perhaps encourage their usage rather than delete them. Are we such a use and dispose society with no values whatsoever!

    Reply
  577. Marcos -  August 29, 2011 - 4:51 pm

    I know you would probably say I don’t have any authority to say that, but some words really fall on disuse. English is one of the languages with the largest vocabulary in the world, with more than 1 million words. I wonder why there are so many words if only a few are going to be used. I’m learning english as a second language (my first one is portuguese) and this website helps me so much when I have to read something in the web I can’t understand. Yes, I have a very strict vocabulary yet, but it becomes much harder when I have to learn words and expressions that either have lots of siynonyms or have lots of meanings. It would be much better if there were more specific words or expressions instead of this crazy mix.

    But I agree these words should be kept in dictionary for historical purposes.

    Sorry for the grammar mistakes i have probably commited.

    Reply
  578. Ryan -  August 29, 2011 - 4:51 pm

    Removing words other than exotic proper nouns from dictionaries is a crime in my opinion. So what if they get one hit every four years? They’re words. Be a nerd one day and trawl through a paper dictionary for a few minutes. I’ll bet you my house, my bank account, AND my lakeside summerhouse that there will be words you’ve never used or never heard of.

    Ryan

    Reply
  579. Alberto -  August 29, 2011 - 4:50 pm

    Remember 1984? In Newspeak, George Orwell argues that reducing words in the language we reduce the possibilities of expressing “illegal” thoughts. If you don’t have a way of saying it, you’ll stop thinking it in the end. Talk about alienism!

    Reply
  580. Winston Smith -  August 29, 2011 - 4:42 pm

    Only The Party from George Orwell’s 1984 eliminates words from the dictionary! DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER!

    Reply
  581. dylan -  August 29, 2011 - 4:37 pm

    supererogate/supererogatory are common in the language of international morality and justice (a 30-40 year old field of inquiry)

    Reply
  582. Alex -  August 29, 2011 - 4:34 pm

    Honestly it really doesn’t matter if unused words get taken out of the dictionary or not. As long as there is a recorded record record of all known English words (such as on dictionary.com), there is no real use to keep them in the dictionary and it will lower printing costs. If words no matter what they are, were taken out of the dictionary, it would exponentially get larger and larger as new words are created and printing costs would go up etc. So is there really a need to have EVERY word in the dictionary???

    Reply
  583. Sean E -  August 29, 2011 - 4:31 pm

    Whoops, typo. I think that Alienism should go as well, becuase it is derogatory to people with mental illnesses.

    Reply
  584. Sean E -  August 29, 2011 - 4:29 pm

    I say, definitely keep Aerodrome, Alienism, Bever, Brabble, Charabanc, and Deliciate, but that Frigorific, Supererogate and Younker have to go. Frigorific doesn’t even sound like a technical term, but rather a made up word, like ginormous

    Reply
  585. lilly -  August 29, 2011 - 4:06 pm

    wow that is so cool who knows what Slewed means please answer

    Reply
  586. Jen -  August 29, 2011 - 3:53 pm

    @ brushfire… I must humbly disagree with the first paragraph in your comment.

    “I cautiously disagree with the person quoting Beowulf. Unlike the proposition in this article, I don’t believe that a conscious decision was ever made to discard those words wholesale from the language. They evolved on their own over time”

    The decision to discard the original Old English WAS in fact a conscious decision. It was not however made by the speakers of that language. The decision was made by Norman the conqueror, a French man who, after conquering the Old English territories forced all inhabitants to speak French for 300 years instead of Old English. The Old English speakers did not decide to get rid of their language; the decision was made for them. The only 2 surviving literary works in Old English are Beowulf, and Caedmon’s Hymn.
    Just sayin…. :-)

    Reply
  587. Juan Woodstock -  August 29, 2011 - 3:49 pm

    I don’t often go to the dictionary for words I know the meaning of, hear and use all the time. It would make more sense to remove words like Bird and Cat…Just Say’n.

    Reply
  588. anonymous -  August 29, 2011 - 3:36 pm

    I think that they should not remove these words from online dictionaries because some people (like me) don’t know the meaning of these words and if people who do not know these words come upon them they should be able to find their definitions somewhere..

    Reply
  589. anonymous -  August 29, 2011 - 3:35 pm

    I think that they should not remove these words from online dictionaries because some people (like me) don’t know the meaning of these words and if people who do not know these words come upon them they should be able to find their definitions somewhere.

    Reply
  590. Anonymous -  August 29, 2011 - 3:05 pm

    I just so happen to LOVE words that are older and more vintage. Charabanc is one of the really good ones still left! Old-fashioned words are still very much alive and can be used intelligently if one wishes to use them. It is sort of like Latin — not hardly dead, but most definitely immortal! Keep the words in the dictionary!

    Reply
  591. DReeves -  August 29, 2011 - 2:56 pm

    Having once been a teacher I would hate to see any words removed from the dictionary. They all have meaning.

    The more rare the more need for them in a dictionary.

    If someone wants to print an abridged dictionary because they don’t want to pay for the paper, then it should be labeled as ‘abridged’. But these words need to be recorded in an accessible place for the readers of today. If that falls to the online dictionaries, so be it.

    The classics still use the words and many of today’s readers need somewhere to look up the meanings. Many of today’s writers should look up the meanings of words before committing them to paper (or type).

    Reply
  592. Donna OKeefe -  August 29, 2011 - 2:47 pm

    Words should never be deleted from the dictionary. You never know when it may come up again and besides in a way words in the dictionary are another version of our history. Besides that how can researchers for the Collins Dictionary possibly know if I am sitting in my home looking up a word in my dictionary. I just think it is wrong.

    Reply
  593. Elephant -  August 29, 2011 - 2:41 pm

    Deliciate (delic*i*ate) not delicate.

    Reply
  594. paulina -  August 29, 2011 - 2:37 pm

    if it’s a word, it should be in the dictionary =|

    Reply
  595. Mr. Smith -  August 29, 2011 - 2:36 pm

    I took the radical step of reading the actual article to which this half-formed piece linked. It makes perfect sense to remove words from smaller print dictionaries as new editions are published. Preserving these words and their definitions in larger print editions or digitally is also great.

    You may now continue your hysterics.

    Reply
  596. Why do u wanna know? -  August 29, 2011 - 1:42 pm

    Keep it, someone might need to know it.

    Reply
  597. Ophe -  August 29, 2011 - 1:25 pm

    They really should keep them all. So many comments on here already say what I firmly think, so there is no need to repeat what I believe importance. Not just that, personally, I love expanding my vocabulary. Always do I have the thesaurus open in a tab when I am online. It comes in quite handy. I do a large bit of writing stories with other people, so descriptiveness is quite essential. As well as when writing, you tend to use certain words frequently. Then when doing so, it becomes repetitive und even boring.

    Example: “Eyes” To describe such, I personally use “orbs,” “oculi,” “lenses,” “hues,” etc.

    I find it quite important to have a variety of words for the same intention. When looking up words online, a large handful of my common words are noted as archaic for the meaning I choose to use them for. Which is a shame, really. Most of which are quite beautiful.

    Reply
  598. John Moldy -  August 29, 2011 - 1:19 pm

    the vernacular and the lexicon collide again. dictionaries “of limited space” are dictionaries of dubious consideration, unless the literature is relegated to an abecedarian account of Sesame Street vocabulary in a pre-school setting. we are all doomed. *sigh*

    Reply
  599. lia -  August 29, 2011 - 1:12 pm

    no word should be earsed because what if a teacheror parent ask do you know what this word means. And she or he doesnt know if they dont have dictionary they go online and cant find it and he or she had to do it for a assingment.and they cant find one dictionary at a store.teacher going to get mad.soooo please dont earse not one word from the dictionary.all words matter we use them everday!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  600. Mila -  August 29, 2011 - 1:04 pm

    I don’t think any words should be removed from the dictionary, although I do see the reason in it. Speaking of which words should get a second chance, I vote Alienism and Younker. I’m only 11, and I know what they mean. Also, the text said they would only be removed from the smaller print dictionaries, so the large dusty copies you see in the libraries will be kept. Good discussion topic, though.

    Reply
  601. Vijay -  August 29, 2011 - 1:03 pm

    They are there for a reason. DO NOT REMOVE. I tell you who we should remove, the politicians. Keep everything else.

    Reply
  602. Kygon -  August 29, 2011 - 12:30 pm

    Aerodrome should stay, It’s used often enough. I think chillaxin’ should have never been added in the first place, or any other slang for that matter, it’s just annoying.

    Reply
  603. Simone -  August 29, 2011 - 11:51 am

    Actually I think you should KEEP THEM ALL!

    Reply
  604. Simone -  August 29, 2011 - 11:49 am

    I think deliciate should not I repeat SHOULD NOT BE REMOVED! I like that word.

    Reply
  605. brenna -  August 29, 2011 - 11:23 am

    POPPYCOCK!!! keep them all

    Reply
  606. Noah Tirrel -  August 29, 2011 - 10:48 am

    If we were to remove words from the dictionary, online or not, wouldnt that basically be like removing them from the english language? i dont think it would be good to remove them completely… or at all for that matter…

    Reply
  607. Ryan Murphy -  August 29, 2011 - 10:26 am

    The word “supereroge” (and related words: supererogative & supererogatory) CHANGED MY LIFE! I think this is a case where a distinction should be made between a word that is unknown and used rarely because it is simply neglected by educators, and a word that has become irrelevant. Supererogation remains a very important concept in moral and ethical philosophy — for reasons that would probably interest most people, if they’ve ever held (or lost) a job, wanted help with something, or tried to help someone. It’s an elegant term that provides a useful conceptual distinction between the categories of acts that are morally obligatory and acts that, while not strictly imperative (deontologically), are nevertheless morally praiseworthy.
    Indeed, it may be an example: for Collins to retain this term even in small dictionaries, if it is uncertain that such an inclusion is necessary, should be considered as a supererogatory service to readers…

    Reply
  608. Hollie -  August 29, 2011 - 10:25 am

    When I was a younker, my grandfather, who studied Alienism, used to take me on a charabanc. We would brabble sometimes because I would deliciate in sitting on the top of the charabanc, so I could see the aerodrome when we passed it, but my grandfather would moan that the open roof meant it was frigorific. When the charabanc reached its destination, we would have a Bever at a local pub. The staff were always really nice and would supererogate so we always left a decent tip.

    You can’t say words are obsolete!

    Reply
  609. Joe -  August 29, 2011 - 10:22 am

    Throwing words away is like deleting history. It’s narrow minded.

    Reply
  610. St. -  August 29, 2011 - 10:11 am

    Aerodrome is still used, and is so much better than it’s American equivalent, airdrome, which, in my opinion, sounds stupid and is unecessary. Get rid of airplane and airdrome – that makes more sense to me.

    Reply
  611. Heather Walters -  August 29, 2011 - 9:51 am

    I think you need to keep aerodrome. I grew up with this word, though I agree it’s not in vogue at present.

    Reply
  612. Redford -  August 29, 2011 - 9:40 am

    Dangerous for a dictionary to stop describing and start prescribing.

    Reply
  613. Blair -  August 29, 2011 - 9:30 am

    I happen to think frigorific is a fantastic word and shouldn’t be removed!

    That said, I think a lot of folks didn’t read the post clearly and missed the part where it said these words ” will no longer be included in smaller print dictionaries.” Economy of space, people! Like it or not, we have to make way for “blog” and a sixth definition of “twitter.”

    I have faith Dictionary.com and those glorious eighteen-pound dictionaries will keep these words for some time to come.

    Reply
  614. Stephanie -  August 29, 2011 - 9:14 am

    I feel that they should stay in the dictionary SPECIFICALLY because they are never used. One day, people will see those words and they might just start using them again…I think it’s dumb to take out words…

    Reply
  615. Jocelyn -  August 29, 2011 - 8:49 am

    Why remove actual words to make room for word fad definitions (i.e. LOL)?

    Reply
  616. Shareen -  August 29, 2011 - 8:48 am

    THESE WORDS MAKES ME WANT TO BARF!!!

    Reply
  617. Wilbur -  August 29, 2011 - 8:17 am

    I think people are misunderstood. They are merely saying these words are being removed from SMALL PAPER DICTIONARIES:

    “Recently, researchers for the Collins Dictionary released a list of words, such as charabanc and aerodrome, that are used so rarely that they are considered obsolete, and will no longer be included in smaller print dictionaries.”

    I’m sure they understand to keep the words in online dictionaries because online dictionaries have “infinite” space (I use the word infinite loosely because it costs money and space to maintain bigger and bigger servers of course)

    Reply
  618. Anynoumus -  August 29, 2011 - 8:10 am

    What’s the question?

    Reply
  619. Edward -  August 29, 2011 - 8:07 am

    I don’t think words can ever become ‘obsolete.’ People have become obsolete in their creative abilities to use them.

    Reply
  620. Aaron -  August 29, 2011 - 7:53 am

    Please note, it is not delicate that’s being removed, but deliciate. See the additional I?

    Reply
  621. ravenmoon -  August 29, 2011 - 7:35 am

    “Who controls the past, controls the future.”

    Orwell understood that language and thought are closely linked. When we limit language (a la Newspeak) we limit thought, and thereby freedom. No word should be removed from the dictionary.

    Reply
  622. David -  August 29, 2011 - 7:20 am

    In smaller a dictionary removing the archaeic words isn’t a bad thing. They have limits to what space they have and if it comes to a battle of which words stays, go with the old words that are unknown. Removing a word from a dictionary doesn’t make it not a word. There is no way to make a word not a word unless its meaning is completely forgotten. As long as the larger dictionaries still carry the word, the word will still exist. Online dictionaries should never have words taken out. There is no issue with space, and even if a word isn’t searched for anymore – if just one person looks for it once, the definition is still needed somewhere.

    Reply
  623. Pink Tiger at Work -  August 29, 2011 - 7:17 am

    I completely agree with Phil Fasso (August 24, 2011, 3:19 pm).
    If there’s EVER been an accurately-used appearance of a word in print (hardcopy, online … whatever), it should NEVER be removed from ANY dictionary. From my view, that’s the primary purpose for a dictionary – to help readers determine the meaning of a word that otherwise would leave them befuddled. And words like deliciate and frigorific are terrific examples of such words. I don’t look up words like ‘work’ in a dictionary because I already know what they mean. It’s the obscure words that carry weight in a dictionary. And I’m 100% certain that a reference can be found to all of the words in your list in literature somewhere in time. If words are to be deleted from a dictionary, burning the books in which those words appeared is the next step. Brrrrrrrrrr, that’s a scary thought.

    Reply
  624. The Observer -  August 29, 2011 - 7:14 am

    The should never remove a word, only add new ones. You may need them for Scrabble someday.

    Reply
  625. Bryce R -  August 29, 2011 - 6:48 am

    These words should not be erased, even how obsolite they are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  626. Levy G -  August 29, 2011 - 6:47 am

    I have no comment

    Reply
  627. Bryce R -  August 29, 2011 - 6:45 am

    none of these words should be taken off, even when obsolite!!!!!

    Reply
  628. Morgan -  August 29, 2011 - 6:39 am

    These all need to stay because I have no idea what any of these mean :D

    Reply
  629. Riley -  August 29, 2011 - 6:37 am

    People, read the word carefully. DELICIATE, not DELICATE. Notice there’s an extra I after the C in DELICIATE.

    Reply
  630. Bjimmer Bell -  August 29, 2011 - 6:35 am

    ~
    Removin