Explanation please on the change of the term "worldly"
They may have stopped using the term "worldly" in literature as others have observed. However, there is nothing published - that I'm aware of - which gives counsel against using the term in day to day speech. I heard it used only last week.
What I would say, is that the printed language used by the governing body is even worse than their choice of "worldly" hitherto. Consider the language employed in the January 2018 study Watchtower for instance, which is truly egregious....
"Likewise, many of us live and work with those who are infected with attitudes and characteristics that run counter to godly qualities.... We will also see how we can protect ourselves from being infected..."
So now, non JWs are infected individuals who spread contagion from which JWs need protection. Not a Christian way to see others. More than anything else, this is a revelation of the dark thinking of the governing body and its writing committee. Far far removed from anything which could be considered as even remotely edifying!