The word “ginormous” just became an official part of the English language. And when the press rolls the first copies of the new Merriam-Webster Collegiate dictionary, English-speakers worldwide will get a little dumber.

Locusts will destroy crops. The sun will darken. Rivers will run red. People will vote for Democrats. And countless other horrors will sweep across our mostly harmless world. Or maybe “ginormous” won’t bring the apocalypse. But it’s still a silly word.

The dictionary’s wordsmiths also added “smackdown.” As in, “I’m gonna lay the smackdown on your ginormous head.”

I wonder how a dictionary editor, pretentiously known as a lexicographer, can allow the inclusion of these words. Maybe we should all band together to change the word “lexicographer” to mean “someone who does something stupid.”

Use this sentence today: “George Bush is a lexicographer.” Or if one happens to believe otherwise, replace W’s name with someone else’s.

If we all band together on this, we can change the word’s meaning. That’ll teach ’em.

In Merriam-Webster’s defense, though, the inclusion of slang in the dictionary isn’t new. When I was a kid I was constantly reminded that “ain’t” was not a word, even though it has been defined since the dictionary’s early days.

The inclusion of these and other rather inane words reminds me of the movie “Idiocracy.”

In the movie, our hero is frozen and forgotten for some reason. When he thaws out and wakes up 500 years later, English has digressed into a cross between valley girl and hillbilly, with various grunts to fill in the gaps.

Are we on our way to such ends? Is it only a matter of time before any word compromised of more than three syllables is plutoed to the “antiquated” section of the dictionary?

It’s doubtful, but I wouldn’t rule out all possibility.

But the scary part of the dictionary’s modifications is that English is considered the international language of trade. The people who hire and fire thousands with the stroke of a pen use a language chocked full of dumb adjectives.

Jim Lowe, Merriam-Webster’s editor told The Associated Press, “Nobody has to use ‘ginormous’ if they don’t want to.”

He doesn’t.

And neither will I.