The revision of Modern Chinese Dictionary has aroused people's controversy. Some people say that it is impure, some people say that it has become a reality, some people think that the dictionary of social development should be changed accordingly, and some people say that the modern Chinese dictionary no longer belongs to Chinese ... I don't want to judge which side is right, but as far as the name of Modern Chinese Dictionary is concerned, I think this revision is successful.

First, the word "modern" is the key. Since it is called "modern", we should keep pace with the times and expand the contents of the dictionary with the changes of the times and the development of Chinese itself. For example, some non-standard but commonly used terms have been given meaning, which is not unreasonable. Words that have been misunderstood and used for a long time are now taken for granted and their semantics are quite clear. Is it necessary for dictionaries to stubbornly stick to the city gate and refuse to accept them? The word "modernity" is a description of time, and the "modernity" of our life is constantly extending. Can't the words formed in this extended time be accepted by China families? Time is fluid and the meaning of modernity is constantly changing, so we should recognize new concepts.

Secondly, another equally important word is "Chinese". The introduction of NBA, MP3 and other words seems to violate the principle of "China people", but if you think about it carefully, it won't affect anything. There is nothing wrong with integrating these English abbreviations into the Chinese family. These English letter words are well known and used repeatedly in our daily life. Even when we use them, we don't realize that we are speaking a foreign language. In application, they have become a part of Chinese. If we change MP3 to "personal music player", I don't know what it means. These letters have formed a fixed and concrete thing in people's minds, and their ideographic function is irreplaceable. In this way, there is no difference between things, because like Chinese, they all serve people who use Chinese.

At present, there seems to be obvious contradiction between "modern" and "China people". "Modernity" means accepting words that do not belong to Chinese originally, and "Chinese" raises this threshold very high. Actually, the contradiction between them is not irreconcilable. It is unreasonable to attach importance to "modernity" and open the door to convenience, but it is difficult to meet the needs of practical application only by considering "China". However, the boundary between the two can be appropriately relaxed, some words that are not in line with Chinese can be appropriately deleted in "modern", and the qualification entry line can be lowered in "Chinese". In this way, the Modern Chinese Dictionary will do.