Webster's/Oxford

[Rat]

To make it clear, I have no axe to grind over American English. Many great English words are American in origin, and many (more than you'd imagine) 'typical Americanisms' are British in origin. So I hold no imperial snobbery over the language. (Well, not much.)

I notice that Americans tend to cite Merriam-Webster as the be all and end all of the English language. In England, this means little to us. The defining dictionary of the English language here is the Oxford. Obviously (to me) the Oxford is more comprehensive, but does it have any currency/standing in the US?

I find it a little bizarre (kind of) that the name of Webster lives on, considering the idiosyncrasies of his definition and spelling.

Thoughts?

Cheers,
Rat.

[Foofer]

I prefer the Oxford English Dictionary. I know a lot of people that use Merriam-Webster, but the individuals I know that are really into reading and/or writing seem to like Oxford.

[Ed]

I prefer the OED but I find it a bit cumbersome (don't have the cd).

[Cain]

Here's a humorous article in Slate comparing popular dictionaries: http://slate.msn.com/id/2091949

A quote:

[M-W's] usage notes are at once the least prescriptive and the most haughty of any of the dictionaries; the note for "disinterested"—and there's nary a contested usage whose cause Merriam-Webster's doesn't take up—reads in part: "Use of senses 1a and 1b [not interested] will incur the disapproval of some who may not fully appreciate the history of this word or the subtleties of its present use." This is the aristocrat who can afford to be a Marxist. This is the one to buy.

[Richard G]

Never heard of, or seen an Oxford dictionary. Been a book worm all my life. It may have more to do with the number of copies published in this country.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Given all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the definition of atheist I have decided to accept dictionaries as guides and not authorities. Personally I find a consensus definition to be more valuble than one from a single source.

Lift is indeed a verb and a noun. We are all speaking English and words do mean things.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Richard G
Never heard of, or seen an Oxford dictionary. Been a book worm all my life.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Uh, Dick? Reading "NRA Pikovdaweek" doesn't count as being a 'bookworm' (and yes, it's a compound word- I know the author of "Why I Done Carry Me a Concealt Weppon" doesn't spell it that way, but that's how it's spelt).

[Regnad Kcin]

Originally posted by Richard G
Never heard of, or seen an Oxford dictionary.:eek:

[Rat]

Originally posted by Richard G
Never heard of, or seen an Oxford dictionary. Been a book worm all my life. It may have more to do with the number of copies published in this country.
That takes some beating. I tried to emphasise that, while I prefer Oxford (though I have only little experience of M-W), each has equal standing in the world, and each is as much of an authority, if one considers dictionaries "authorities" in the first place.

But the Oxford is not some provincial British thing that we can't expect anyone else to be familiar with. I'm sure that even when in Ohio I would have had little difficulty finding one.

This is what I get for accidentally posting this in P&CE, I guess.

Cheers,
Rat.

[Darat]

OED is the authority for the history of the English language. Picking up the OED and reading an entry is fantastic and peels away the years of changes, and reveals the origins and roots of words. There is no other dictionary that can be compared to the OED as a complete reference.

However day to day I use Encarta World Dictionary: Couple of reasons, it is instantly available through Word and it gives good brief, current usage definitions.

But nothing compares to the depth of the OED.

There was a debate a while ago about the word "Niggardly" and a teacher being reprimanded for using it.

Reading the OED definition is an eye opener:

(I'll not reproduce all the pronunciation notes and full details, just enough to give you the flavour.)


Niggardly
Late ME. [Alteration, with substitution of suffix -ARD, of earlier nigon probably Scandinavian origin.]
1. A mean, stingy, or parsimonious person; a miser.
2. dialect A false bottom for a grate, to economize fuel. Also n.iron 1688

1. The negard then saith to his money.., my god arte thou 1510. Be niggards of advice on no pretence,

...snip...


And it continues for another few paragraphs or examples and uses.

Compared to the Encarta World Dictionary:

niggardly [nígg?rdli]
adj (comparative niggardlier, superlative niggardliest)
1. not generous: very reluctant to give or spend anything
2. small or inadequate: very small or inadequate in quantity

…snip…


One is the fast food approach the other is a sumptuous banquet, but both have their valuable uses.

[BillyTK]

OED. Like what Darat says!

[UnrepentantSinner]

Originally posted by Darat
OED is the authority for the history of the English language.

Agreed.

I lament the changes that Dictionary.com made a few years ago where the eliminated the etymology entries when you looked up a word. Not quite OED, but fascinating none the less.

[ZeeGerman]

English not being my native language, it's hard to decide, so I have and use both:D

Zee

[hgc]

Agreed that OED is the king of the English language dictionaries. Simple reason why you don't people citing it online: it's a pay site, and damned expensive too.

Merriam-Webster just happens to have the most popular of the free online American dictionaries, and also a pay site for it's unabridged version.

[Cleon]

Try as I might, for some inexplicable reason I just cannot form an opinion on this topic.

[Luke T.]

I have an OED at home next to the computer. Dang thing must weigh 25 pounds!

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by ratcomp1974
I notice that Americans tend to cite Merriam-Webster as the be all and end all of the English language. In England, this means little to us. The defining dictionary of the English language here is the Oxford. Obviously (to me) the Oxford is more comprehensive, but does it have any currency/standing in the US? At least from an online perspective Merriam-Webster (http://www.webster.com/) is free while Oxford English Dictornary (http://www.oed.com/) requires a subscription fee. Oxford may be the superior source, but Webster is far more accessable as a resource.

[Luke T.]

For an on-line dictionary, the google search takes you to Dictionary.com, so I end up using that the most.

[Tony]

Interesting thread.


Originally posted by ratcomp1974
Many great English words are American in origin, and many (more than you'd imagine

Examples?

'typical Americanisms' are British in origin.

Examples?

I notice that Americans tend to cite Merriam-Webster as the be all and end all of the English language.

In school, Webster's was the standard. We had Oxford in the classroom, but it was always "that other dictionary".

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Cleon
Try as I might, for some inexplicable reason I just cannot form an opinion on this topic.

Then why did you post on this thread?

[MoeFaux]

I've got the OED.
I use encarta's online dictionary almost daily for when I need a quick reference. I'm awful at spelling (noticed?) and it's right there for me. But, when I want to really "know" a word and have some fun, I'll whip out the OED. Also, online places just don't have all the words.
Webster's seems like nothing to me.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Luke T.
For an on-line dictionary, the google search takes you to Dictionary.com, so I end up using that the most. I've used that one too, but I found the Webster site first so that's the interface I'm the most used to. Familiarity and all that.

Interestingly (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/about.html), Dictionary.com uses the following resources: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University
The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, © 1993-2001 Denis Howe
Jargon File 4.2.0
CIA World Factbook (1995)
Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary
Hitchcock's Bible Names Dictionary
U.S. Gazetteer, U.S. Census Bureau
Acronym Finder, © 1988-2001 Mountain Data Systems
On-line Medical Dictionary, © 1997-98 Academic Medical Publishing ® CancerWEB

I'm not saying Webster's is better, just that it is easier to get to. That probably accounts for some of it's popularity.

[DVFinn]

The OED is widely considered the definitive authority on the English language. It is equally respected here in the US. The Webster dictionary is simply cheaper, smaller and often more convenient, so it has a place in the market as well.

[Rat]

Originally posted by Tony
Examples?
In England, there is a type of person who finds 'Americanisms' of any sort, but most especially words, to be profoundly distasteful. These people are almost always deeply ignorant of the history or 'proper' usage of the English language. I suspect that there are Americans who are, mutatis mutandis, much the same.

The most obvious ones are 'gotten' and 'fall' (meaning autumn). Both are good English words that fell out of use here, but lived on in the US. Most British people now wouldn't know how to distinguish got/gotten, but bizarrely have no trouble with forgot/forgotten. Fall for autumn is another that died out here, and which many now think of as an Americanism.

'I guess' meaning I suppose, is another good Elizabethan word that fell out of usage here, and is now regarded as a suspect trans-Atlantic import. Bill Bryson (in Mother Tongue) also points out mad as in angry, assignment meaning job, hog for pig, mayhem, chore, skillet, healthful, homespun, and others too numerous to list.

Bryson also points out that many of these have been re-established themselves so successfully over the last 60-100 years, after centuries of extinction, that few people know that they were ever gone.

He also lists many words that really are Americanisms. Many of these are so established that those who rail against the use of American imports (of words) use them with not the slightest idea of their heritage. This makes me smile.

The telephone may be a British invention (or at least that of a British (Scottish) inventor), but the word is undoubtedly American.

Recent(ish) British inventions include weekend, gadget, miniskirt, radar, smog, and several others. I don't know how much currency these actually have in the US, but some of them I know to be everyday words there.

Lots of folk here complain about how they can't use the word 'gay' anymore since the ghastly American meaning has taken over. Gay to mean homosexual is a British invention.

Finally, to quote Bryson again:In dismissing the 'vile and barbarous word talented', Samuel Taylor Coleridge observed that, 'most of these pieces of slang come from America'. That was ground enough to detest them. In point of fact, I am pleased to tell you, talented was a British coinage, first used in 1422.

Cheers,
Rat.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Richard G
Never heard of, or seen an Oxford dictionary. Been a book worm all my life. It may have more to do with the number of copies published in this country.

Well, it's official: Richard G is a moron (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870224982#post1870224982). He's the only one in this forum who hasn't heard of the OED.