We’ll have no wild words here

This post should not be read by 7-9 year olds in possession of a new Oxford Junior Dictionary. Their world doesn’t need natural words rampaging through it.

Heaven forbid they should come across an adder in the clover, or a boar eating acorns, when looking for blackberries outdoors.

 

They should be wary of drakes and cygnets if some adult takes them hunting for minnows near the willow tree. They should not countenance meeting talking beavers amongst the brambles.

 

beaver

Of course, they are safe from budgerigars, gerbils, goldfish and guinea pigs – schools don’t waste time on pets. Let cheetahs and bullocks be confined to TV documentaries. It is not necessary for anyone but minorities to know a colt from a foal, or a doe from a buck. Who else but their owners cares about ferrets or corgis?

 

A much more serious riposte can be found here in an Open Letter to OUP . I think it is truly important – but I couldn’t put better than the likes of Margaret Atwood and Michael Morpurgo. Please read their argument.

2 thoughts on “We’ll have no wild words here

  1. A creative response to a worrying trend. Growing up in the countryside, I have always been at home in nature, but since leaving for the big wide world I have been suprised by the number of people- particularly younger people, who seem to lack what I had always assumed to be basic knowledge; where meat comes from, the names of animals and their young. Thank you for adding your voice to the issue, and bringing to life the variety and colour of the world that OUP is denying to their young dictionary-goers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *