I typed this is defense of the word "squee" in the forums.
"Squee is not a verb. In fact, it isn't even a word"
Actually, this is not a valid statement. The fact that it is a collection of letters with a meaning attached makes it a word. The problem in this situation is that it is not in any dictionary... yet. You see, language is constantly shifting, and is never, EVER static. A dictionary is in no way a definer of what is and is not a word. A dictionary is nothing more than a collection of words which were commonly accepted when it was published.
What I'm trying to say is that "squee" is in fact a word. All that's required for something to be a word is a signifier (the collection of letter s+q+u+e+e) and the signified (the act of producing a squee (which is an onomatopoeia)), combine and poof, a word is created. It goes along with how "ain't" is a word. According to the descriptive rules (which I laid out for you earlier) "ain't" is a perfectly fine word, but the prescriptive rules (which are rules set up by the "language authorities") say it isn't to be used.
Also, there is a debate in the academic community as to whether or not this type of language (referred to as the abnormal discourse) should be allowed. This abnormal discourse basically covers the use of language that applies to ones individual experience (such as using terms one would find in an anime community, "squee" for instance), but many groups feel that the language should be more of a standard, so that meanings are more easily pulled form the texts. I for one believe in the abnormal discourses due to the fact that I feel that pushing the standard academic discourse stifles the creative faculties as wll as dimmishing the individual personality of the writer.
Don't mind me too much, I'm just an English teacher with a bit too much time on my hands tonight.