>>cyanba+(OP)
If I remember correctly, the original version of wordle used a word list that was run past the creator's wife, who had learned English later in life. The result was a really accessible game - none of the words felt like ones you wouldn't know. It probably makes sense to reuse words than risk losing that accessibility.
(I kept a copy of original wordle, and it seems to have 2,315 words that are possible answers.)
>>trotha+lg
It’s this. There are many five letter words that are not “wordley”. Words such as, idk, bokeh, are technically part of the lexicon but would never appear as a solution. The wordle bot will even tell you this if you guess them — “good guess, but unlikely to appear as a solution”. The crossword has a similar sort of unwritten rule, maybe not as strict, but really hard technical words seldom appear.
>>groggo+Q41
Wouldn’t that make Scrabble only harder and more annoying to play? With that limitation you’ll get situations where you play a perfectly valid word, but it gets rejected because it’s not in the list of approved words. To get good at that version of the game, you’ll have to study the Scrabble word list instead of the dictionary.
With Wordle the limitation is only put on the words the game generates as answers. You can use obscure words to guess, they just won’t be the answer.
>>wartij+QA1
this is already the case with scrabble; there is a strictly defined scrabble word list that determines whether a word is acceptable or not, and it often leaves out words that you might find in some other dictionary that is not the official scrabble one (collins for most of the world, or a custom dictionary for american scrabble)