Every year, a linguistic revolution quietly unfolds, and this time, it’s hitting closer to home than ever. Lake Superior State University has just unveiled its 2026 list of banned words, and it’s sparking conversations far beyond its Michigan campus. For half a century, this quirky tradition has served as a mirror to our evolving language, reflecting the phrases that have overstayed their welcome. But here’s where it gets controversial: this year’s list includes everything from corporate buzzwords to Gen Alpha slang, leaving many to wonder—are these words truly past their prime, or are we just being too quick to judge?
Since its inception as a New Year’s Eve party idea in 1976, the Banished Words List (https://www.lssu.edu/resources/about-lssu/traditions/banishedwords/) has grown into a global phenomenon. Over 1,400 submissions poured in from all 50 states and beyond, each nominating words or phrases deemed overused, misused, or simply grating. From boardroom jargon like incentivize to Gen Alpha’s cryptic 6-7, the 2026 list is a testament to how language shifts—and how some phrases can wear out their welcome faster than others.
Let’s dive into the top offenders and the reasons behind their banishment:
6-7 (six seven): “There are six or seven reasons why this phrase needs to go,” quipped Paul E. from Wisconsin. Scott T. from Utah added, “It’s time for ‘6-7’ to be 86’ed.” But is this Gen Alpha shorthand really a problem, or just a generational gap in communication?
Demure: “It’s very said, not very done,” remarked Tammy S., highlighting its overuse in phrases like “very demure, very mindful.” Madison C. argued it “waters down the real meaning.” Yet, some might ask—isn’t repetition just part of language evolution?
Cooked: “Hearing it makes my brain feel ‘cooked,’” complained Zac A. from Virginia. James C. from Washington went further, suggesting a ban on “all forms of the word ‘cook.’” But isn’t “cooked” just the latest slang to enter the lexicon? Should we really police its use?
Massive: “Way overused—and often incorrectly,” noted Don and Gail K. from Minnesota. Fair point, but isn’t exaggeration a natural part of how we express ourselves?
Incentivize: Two submissions compared it to “nails on a chalkboard,” with Patricia from Texas asking, “What’s wrong with ‘motivate’?” But in a corporate world, isn’t jargon just inevitable?
Full stop: “Redundant punctuation,” explained Marybeth A. from Oregon, echoing the banishment of “period.” Yet, doesn’t emphasis sometimes require repetition?
Perfect: “When does it ever truly apply?” asked Jo H. from California. Char S. from Ohio added, “How do they know it’s perfect?” But isn’t “perfect” just a harmless way to express satisfaction?
Gift/gifted (as a verb): “It’s been on the list before, but it still grates,” said James S. from Oklahoma. But language evolves—shouldn’t we embrace new uses of old words?
My Bad: “It sounds infantile,” said Elizabeth P. from Michigan in 1998. Andrea R. from Ohio added, “It’s a weak apology.” But isn’t brevity sometimes the soul of wit—and apologies?
Reach Out: “It’s lost its original meaning,” said Kevin B. from the UK. Once a phrase of emotional support, it’s now “absurdly overused.” But isn’t adaptability a strength of language?
And this is the part most people miss: the list isn’t just about banning words—it’s about sparking conversations about how we communicate. Is it fair to label these words as ‘overused,’ or are we simply resisting natural linguistic change?
To nominate a word for 2027 or learn more about this tradition, visit lssu.edu/traditions/banishedwords. And here’s a thought-provoking question for you: Which word or phrase do you think deserves to be banished next—and why? Let’s debate it in the comments!
