New Words Thread: Enrich English & Generate Traffic

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andre
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Thread
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This forum discussion focuses on the creation of new words to enrich the English language and the implications for generating web traffic. Participants propose various neologisms, such as "Decaninetion" (the act of making an area free of dogs) and "Googlexclusion" (the phenomenon of new words not being indexed by Google). The conversation also touches on the impact of Google's algorithms, particularly the Panda update, on website rankings and content originality. The thread serves as a creative outlet for linguistic innovation while exploring the intersection of language and search engine optimization.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of neologisms and their role in language evolution
  • Familiarity with Google algorithms, particularly the Panda update
  • Basic knowledge of SEO principles and web traffic generation
  • Awareness of linguistic creativity and word formation processes
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the impact of Google Panda on website content and SEO strategies
  • Explore the concept of neologisms and their acceptance in modern English
  • Learn about effective techniques for generating original content that attracts web traffic
  • Investigate the relationship between language and search engine indexing
USEFUL FOR

Writers, linguists, SEO specialists, and anyone interested in the dynamics of language development and online visibility.

  • #31
Andre said:
It appears that google panda continuously crawls around the sites

Google bots crawl the web since Google started as a search engine. Panda is a codename for a new algorithm (or perhaps an upgrade to the old algorithm) used to analyze data collected by bots. Stating "google panda crawls the web" doesn't make much sense.

Panda was one of zillions algo updates done by Google in the last few years (see for example http://www.sistrix.co.uk/google-updates/). The "new, fresh, original content" mantra is repeated by Google since at least 2005 (that's when I read it for the first time). Plenty of examples that it is only part of the reality, and following the idea is not a guarantee of anything. At the same time PF as a forum is a source of a lot of new content every day, one thread is not going to change anything.
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #32
I knew we got slammed by Panda Update #23 and have not recovered since.
 
  • #33
Andre said:
It appears that google panda continuously crawls around the sites to monitor contents and analyse it on orginality, readability and news value. It downgrades sites that contains mostly copied material, a lot of ads or incomprehenseable non appealing jargon. It favors sites with original contents and things that appeal to the general public.
Where is the difference between original contents (here: words not appearing anywhere else) and incomprehenseable jargon?
 
  • #34
mfb said:
Where is the difference between original contents (here: words not appearing anywhere else) and incomprehenseable jargon?

No orginal contents means sentences not found anywhere else, be it directly copied or reworked. This sentence is an original content New words appear interesting but it was only a supposition, appealing to the public except Turbo :wink: . Here is an idea what Panda looks for: More guidance on building high quality sites

Incomprehensible jargon is obviously still about existing words that are not appealing for the general public. Or maybe it does:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35
lyool : A person who is either a liar or a fool.
 
  • #36
Johnny Carson, in his role as Karnak, came up with one that I love. I only heard it, as opposed to seeing it in print, and that was probably 30-35 years ago, so I have no idea whether or not I'm spelling it correctly: Glotchophobia—the fear of, while naked, running full speed backwards into a doorknob.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 137 ·
5
Replies
137
Views
5K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 212 ·
8
Replies
212
Views
15K