• Basic Writing questions is not a crit forum. All crits belong in Share Your Work

Is the word 'luv' a legitimate word?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chris Graham

Banned
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
45
Reaction score
3
Location
England's 'West Country'
So 'luvvies', a word coined in the C20th, is fine because it's in common use, but 'luv', a word coined in the C19th and also in common use, is an affectation.

Right.

Both words are fine in the right context, and the right context is chosen by the writer ultimately.... he or she has the last word. Any slang word has to be used with forethought, especially if it's not being used in dialogue. It depends if the narrative is being given in the 'voice' of a character that would use the word in question.
Your comment about which period the words were coined in says it all. My usage was in a dialogue taking place in the recent past, so the word 'luvvie' was current and was appropriate to the speaker. 'Luv' is also currently still used and is therefore fine, if the writer chooses to use it. There are lots of words, particularly slang words, that are obsolete, or have changed their meanings, but are still valid in the right places. But they need care in their usage if the reader is expected to understand them.
Today, if a person says "I'll do it presently". It means he'll do it later, but in the past it meant that he'd do it immediately, or at the present time. My late grandmother would have the family in fits of laughter, (which she never understood the reason for), when she'd ask if a pub, that we were all going out to, was a gay one or a posh one. A gay friend tried to explain the modern meaning to her, but she still used the word in its earlier meaning till the day she died, despite being perfectly accepting of him and his partner, and their situation. She put them up in her home for a week, in a double bed, while work was being carried out on their home.
 

Honest Bill

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
377
Reaction score
43
I'd say that 'luv' is fine to use as long as you understand the connotations. It can mean different things when said by and to different people. It can be use affectionately or it can be condescending. It is used a lot in certain walks of life and not in others.

Also, if someone said to me 'I'll do it presently' i'd think that they were deliberately trying to sound old fashioned, it would sound unnatural where i come from. (East Anglia) and also i'd assume they meant they would do it right now, and i'd be thinking '...Well go on then.' i've never hear that used to say 'i'll do it later'

It's quite interesting how people use language so differently.
 

mirandashell

Banned
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
16,197
Reaction score
1,889
Location
England
Now that's odd because I would hear 'I'll do it presently' to mean 'I'll do it in a few minutes'.
 

Honest Bill

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
377
Reaction score
43
Now that's odd because I would hear 'I'll do it presently' to mean 'I'll do it in a few minutes'.

Haha. There you go. It just goes to show that language usage can vary wildly between people of all kinds.

But as i said, i really can't remember the last time anyone ever said that to me. It's not something i ever hear beyond watching old films or TV programmes where maybe a butler might say it or someone like that.
 

HapiSofi

Hagiographically Advantaged
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
2,093
Reaction score
676
Curious -- why is that time period OK, but others aren't? It's still very current as slang, and it was used back in Victorian times too. So how come only one short period is acceptable?
The spoken version has a longer history of idiomatic usage. The approximate period I mentioned was the time when spelling it "luv" got some some real traction. Fortunately, it was temporary.
 

Honest Bill

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
377
Reaction score
43
In my opinon it wouldn't seem unnatural to see it in a story set in current day England. Providing it's said by the right person and in an appropriate manner. But i would only consider using it in dialogue. I can't see a place where it would even fit in narrative.
 

HapiSofi

Hagiographically Advantaged
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
2,093
Reaction score
676
The only place for it in published writing is in dialogue, and only where it fits the character, for example when the character is a 'sloppy' speaker and drops the end letters of words.
I have to disagree. The difference in pronunciation between "love" and "luv" is slight in the U.K., and nonexistent or practically nonexistent in the U.S. Over here, "luv" is just an affected spelling.
I did a word search on my 150,000 word novel to see if I'd used it in any of the dialogue and it wasn't found.... though I had used 'luvvies' in a conversation where a character was referring to partygoers from the theatrical profession - It's a term that's in common use here in the UK.
In the U.S., "luvvies" is rare, used only by people who picked it up abroad (or are trying to sound like they did).
 

Honest Bill

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
377
Reaction score
43
I have to disagree. The difference in pronunciation between "love" and "luv" is slight in the U.K., and nonexistent or practically nonexistent in the U.S. Over here, "luv" is just an affected spelling.

This is true. There would be no real difference in pronunciation even in England, you would pronounce 'love' in the same way you would pronounce 'luv'
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
The spoken version has a longer history of idiomatic usage.
I don;t think anyone advocated using it anywhere other than dialogue, so I'm still not certain why that short period is fine, when others are not.


I have to disagree. The difference in pronunciation between "love" and "luv" is slight in the U.K., and nonexistent or practically nonexistent in the U.S. Over here, "luv" is just an affected spelling.

In the US, I suspect so (so I wouldn't be surprised if it was changed in a US edition, but Us English is not a direct equivalent to British English, right, or we wouldn't have the different editions of all sorts of books, with changes i spelling and language). Over here, the contexts/implications/meanings are very different, so the different spelling perhaps work better. And pronunciations v spellings -- well if that were the case, we wouldn't have homophones, right?

For me, if it's in the dictionary (and it is) then you're good to go (or at least contemplate using it), at least in dialogue, depending on said usage noted in the dictionary (mine notes it is informal, so dialogue only for me). But as you say, that might not work in a US set/issued book.

Also, it's permissible in Scrabble :D

ETA: Frankly, I'm not sure what the fuss is about. It's a perfectly common piece of slang with a specific tone and usage. Use it that way, with a character that would use it, and what's the problem? No different to using 'Y'all' (which sounds little different to you all to my ear), surely? I wouldn't make a cockney say that, and I wouldn't make someone from the deep south of the US say luv. If it fits the character, the tone of the book etc, what's the problem?
 
Last edited:

Alpha Echo

I should be writing.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
9,615
Reaction score
1,852
Location
East Coast
Wow. I had no idea "luv" was used more than as slang. I'm in NE US, I guess (suburb of DC in Virginia), and I've never used it. I just thought some people used it almost as short hand, in texts and instant messages and stuff. Interesting.
 

Rhoda Nightingale

Vampire Junkie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
4,470
Reaction score
658
Yeah, I'm quite new to this idea that "luv" is actually a word. (Heh, my spellchecker doesn't recognize it either.) I'd understand seeing it in dialogue, maybe, but it strikes me as excessively text-y. It'd be like seeing "lol" in a book. (Which I have seen, and it makes me cringe every time.) If there's actually a difference in pronunciation, I can't hear it. But I'm also Virginian, so I guess I wouldn't.
 

LA*78

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 5, 2013
Messages
2,142
Reaction score
243
Location
A sunburnt country
Luv and love have different connotations in this part of the world. Love indicates a greater level of familiarity and emotional connection. Luv is said in a more throw-away manner. For eg. A check-out operator you've never met in your life might say "Here's your receipt, luv." They're unlikely too say "Here's your receipt, love." Pronunciation is different also - luv has a shorter 'v' sound.

Luv and luvvie are also used in a belittling/derogatory manner at times. It really just comes down to context.

Luv is a colloquial term. I don't know at what point colloquialism meets 'real words'.
 

Rhoda Nightingale

Vampire Junkie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
4,470
Reaction score
658
^See, I had no idea. I've heard it thrown my way plenty, but always spelled it in my head the same way.
 

LA*78

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 5, 2013
Messages
2,142
Reaction score
243
Location
A sunburnt country
FWIW, 'hun' seems to be taking over as the preferred term of endearment lately. Personally I hate both equally.
 

Rhoda Nightingale

Vampire Junkie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
4,470
Reaction score
658
^Blech--I've seen that spelled "hon," but the "u" is taking things a bit far.
 

LA*78

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 5, 2013
Messages
2,142
Reaction score
243
Location
A sunburnt country
'Hunny' is doing the rounds too. Makes me want to stab myself in the eye with a blunt pencil.
 

Mary-ellen D

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
146
Reaction score
8
Location
Connecticut
IMO, dialogue should be reflective of the time/region in which it occurs, even if the spelling isn't correct. That whole "theater of the mind" thing.
Not sure I agree in reference to luv vs love as they are both pronounced the same. IDK, not being snarky, just don't think using a slang abbreviation is warranted unless, as I said earlier, it is the character texting.
 

Katana

On the edge...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Messages
344
Reaction score
61
Location
Calgary, Canada
luv should only be used if your character is texting IMHO

As others have mentioned, the word 'luv' has been used in dialogue long before there was texting. I don't see a problem in using it where it's appropriate, where it suits the character.
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
Not sure I agree in reference to luv vs love as they are both pronounced the same. IDK, not being snarky, just don't think using a slang abbreviation is warranted unless, as I said earlier, it is the character texting.


Slang abbreviations:

Maths
Y'all
Exam

etc etc


Words spelt differently but pronounced the same

Eye, I, aye.

etc etc


Luv doesn't mean the same as love*, or not in certain regions anyway. If your character is from one of those regions, they would use the words differently. The words your character uses says something about them.

*and there is a small difference in pronunciation (though I'll grant it may be very small if you're not from one of those regions, the same way that y'all sounds very much like you all to me. But then, I'm not saying you can't use it because I can't hear it. ;))
 

HapiSofi

Hagiographically Advantaged
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
2,093
Reaction score
676
So 'luvvies', a word coined in the C20th, is fine because it's in common use, but 'luv', a word coined in the C19th and also in common use, is an affectation.

Right.
When it's used by writers in the U.S., it is.

I've got no problem with Brits using it. They know where it's appropriate. But it's not an indigenous idiom in the U.S., no matter how you spell it, and Americans who've picked it up don't differentiate their pronunciation of "love" and "luv." For them, spelling it "luv" is an affectation.

The other reason is because there really are a lot of readers whose teeth are set on edge by the inappropriate use of it. Most of the writers who get that effect are Americans.

If you want to argue about the history of English, I can do that.
 

Alpha Echo

I should be writing.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
9,615
Reaction score
1,852
Location
East Coast
FWIW, 'hun' seems to be taking over as the preferred term of endearment lately. Personally I hate both equally.

'Hunny' is doing the rounds too. Makes me want to stab myself in the eye with a blunt pencil.

I've noticed this too, and I can't stand it!

If you want to argue about the history of English, I can do that.

I do not know the history of English which is why I found this thread fascinating. I love learning about words and how they came about even if I have never done the research myself.
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
I've got no problem with Brits using it. They know where it's appropriate. But it's not an indigenous idiom in the U.S., no matter how you spell it, and Americans who've picked it up don't differentiate their pronunciation of "love" and "luv." For them, spelling it "luv" is an affectation.

(My bold) Ahh, right, see, now it becomes clear. That wasn't coming through earlier

I'd never use it for an American character (just as I wouldn't use y'all for a cockney) or for a Brit lawyer or a Geordie because all words have to fit the character. And sometimes, this one does.
 

HapiSofi

Hagiographically Advantaged
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
2,093
Reaction score
676
I'm a Londoner like Cruncy Blanket although I no longer live there. I have no problems with luv or love being written in slang speech if the accent of the speaker is appropriate, however it can be seen by women to be very patronising. If I walked through Petticoat Lane ( a huge outdoor market for those of you who are non Londoners and the streets that make up the market do not include one which is called Petticoat Lane) then I perfectly accept the stall holders calling me over and addressing me as luv. If an older man, a work colleague or a professional addressed me in that manner, I'd bawl him out for being sexually derogatory. So if your usage fits into that sort of situation but in modern day London it is not much used except as I suggested.
That's a beautiful example of London vs. U.S. use of "luv". You have an intimate acquaintance with the word: when and how it's used, and by whom, and what all those those different uses mean. Too many of the American writers I've seen use it just think it looks cool on the page.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.