2 ms·
I want exactly the opposite - to be able to construct dictionaries where there are no words used in definitions that don't also have their own entries. To me t
by mmjaa 9y ago
I want exactly the opposite - to be able to construct dictionaries where there are no words used in definitions that don't also have their own entries. To me this is a key feature of a dictionary - definition completeness.
And its one of the reasons I'd like to know about the toolset used to construct dictionaries - I'd give anything to be able to throw a word set at these tools, have a custom dictionary constructed from it, and repeat until unity...
- Nition 9y agoI actually assumed that was already a general rule, because any word I've ever cross referenced in a dictionary has always been there. In fact, in the diminutive "Little" Oxford[1] there are few enough words available for definitions that you can get stuck in a loop between two words! Although there's always at least one other synonym word in the definitions. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Little-Oxford-English-Dictionary/dp/B00A2KP7GA https://www.amazon.com/Little-Oxford-English-Dictionary/dp/B...
- mmjaa 9y agoI'd really love to know the technology behind lexicography, as a state of the art. If anyone works in this field, any pointers you might provide are highly appreciated. I understand that unity is a difficult thing to attain in dictionaries, but perhaps there are tools and methods used by lexicographers that I need to learn about, as an interested party.