I HAVE a weird habit of reading the newspaper at least five times a day or more. It's not a bad habit to have because I do update myself with the latest news and opinions. A couple of days ago, on latimes.com, I was excited to come across an article called, 'La La Land,' now the dictionary definition of Los Angeles" by Carolyn Kellogg. According to Kellogg, the Oxford English Dictionary redefined Los Angeles. The Oxford English Dictionary, as of March 24th's updates, Los Angeles became:
"la-la land n. can refer either to Los Angeles (in which case its etymology is influenced by the common initialism for that city), or to a state of being out of touch with reality- and sometimes to both simultaneously".
Professor, I remember you saying that it was your pet peeve for Los Angeles to be referred to as "La La Land". I couldn't fully understand why that was, but I think I do now. "La La Land" shouldn't even be in the dictionary, especially the Oxford English Dictionary. When I first read this article, I wondered why people dubbed Los Angeles as "La La Land", making it almost seem like the myths of Los Angeles are true. As an Angeleno, I can say that Los Angeles is one of the best places to live; however, it's not a place that is out of this world or a place that is not in touch with reality... I think the term, "La La Land", belongs in the urban dictionary website and completely out of the Oxford English Dictionary.
Here's the link for you to read:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/jacketcopy/2011/03/la-la-land-now-the-dictionary-definition-of-los-angeles.html
caption: night shot of colorful downtown, los angeles
credit: astig, flickr creative commons
