19 ms·

Using the wrong dictionary (2014)

231 points by cosmojg 5y ago

OJFord 5y ago
I look up 'ordinary' words like those (as opposed to those I don't know the meaning of beforehand) all the time, probably more than unknown words. But not for 'Draft #4' reasons, I look out of curiosity for etymology, older meanings, how common an alternative pronunciation might be, etc.
DonBarredora 5y ago
parentheses 5y ago
the devil’s dictionary is a solid turn the other way, sparse though it may be
dang 5y ago
Past related threads: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19763435 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19763435 - April 2019 (87 comments) Using the wrong dictionary - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7772557 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7772557 - May 2014 (138 comments)
carlbordum 5y ago
I thought this was such a good read that I created an online version of the 1913 dictionary. It's available at https://webster.bordum.dk/ https://webster.bordum.dk/ if anyone is interested.
devoutsalsa 5y ago
I find Urban Dictionary are to be pretty useful!
- Asraelite 5y ago
  Unironically I think Urban Dictionary is great. There's a very high barrier to entry for slang terms when it comes to being added to mainstream dictionaries, which means I'm often left confused about the meaning of a word I've encountered, unable to find it in these dictionaries. If it weren't for Urban Dictionary I would never learn many of their meanings.
itwrangler 5y ago
Thanks for posting this :-)
e-dant 5y ago
Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
notimetorelax 5y ago
I’m a foreigner - what does “a diversion of the filed” mean?
- anonnyj 5y ago
  *field Something like "Something you do to to pass time/have fun, played on a field."
- wiml 5y ago
  I think it's "diversion" in the (unusual) sense of "an enjoyable activity", and "field" in the sense of "an open outdoor area with grass or crops". Which is a kid of ... poetic? ... definition of a "sport" (e.g. football, a leisure activity you do on a grassy square).
  - kragen 5y ago
    I don't think that's an unusual sense of "diversion" 150 years ago. It's the main sense of the cognate in Spanish or French.
- mdoms 5y ago
  I'm a native English speaker. I looked at that sentence for a solid minute and couldn't figure it out.
  - I_complete_me 5y ago
    I think substituting the term with "fieldsport" would lose nothing.
  - donkarma 5y ago
    It made instant sense to me, I read it as something you wouldn't usually do in a field of study, unexpected.
- thewakalix 5y ago
  A diversion is an activity done for fun or enjoyment, rather than for money or similar. A sports field is the area in which the sport is carried out, and has the connotation of “outside” from its other meaning as a meadow. A definition of “sport” as “an activity undertaken for enjoyment, in a specific environment, commonly outside” is pretty decent in my view.
suction 5y ago
I couldn't disagree more with this piece, especially the idea of a "draft #4" where you go through what you've written and replace all "pedestrian" words with less common ones from the dictionary. I know these writers, and how they "write" - it's painful to read and oozes pretentiousness. You can always tell when someone tries to fake having a wider vocabulary.
- DarylZero 5y ago
  > You can always tell when someone tries to fake having a wider vocabulary. Doubt it. I know I've been accused of using a thesaurus when I was just compulsively and thoughtlessly posting stream of consciousness on social media. I think people who think such things just have small vocabularies. They can't imagine others have any fluency with words they don't know.
- dreamcompiler 5y ago
  Go read any book by John McPhee (the writer in question) and if you are not delighted I will donate $20 to the charity of your choice. I recommend Oranges but they're all quite good.
- elric 5y ago
  > I couldn't disagree more with this piece, especially the idea of a "draft #4" where you go through what you've written and replace all plain words with difficult ones. I know these writers, and how they "write" - it's painful to read, they want to make themselves seem better than they are. You can always tell when someone tries to pretend to know more words than they really do.
  - Veen 5y ago
    I have a word you may want to add to your vocabulary. chippy ADJECTIVE informal 1. resentful or oversensitive about being perceived as inferior
- adzm 5y ago
  The whole point here is not to mindlessly replace words but to be able to find words that more accurately describe what you are trying to convey. The expanded definitions and examples are great starting points for digging deeper into both the language and the underlying motivation.
asxd 5y ago
> Notice, too, how much less certain the Webster definition seems about itself, even though it’s more complete — as if to remind you that the word came first, that the word isn’t defined by its definition here I like this. A dictionary with an opinion, rather than a definition.
terinjokes 5y ago
The dictionary I use goes with: • arctic: Designating the celestial north pole, and the Pole Star that marks its position in the sky. • sport: Diversion, entertainment, fun. • magic: The use of ritual activities or observances which are intended to influence the course of events or to manipulate the natural world, usually involving the use of an occult or secret body of knowledge; • example: A person's conduct, practice, etc., regarded as an object of imitation or as an influence on the behaviour of others While not as expressive as Webster's, I was surprised by their color compared to the facsimiles given of other modern dictionaries.
- kangalioo 5y ago
  Those definitions are pretty but incomplete, right? It totally excludes the physical meaning of sport, and it forgets that an "example" doesn't need to come from a person
  - terinjokes 5y ago
    For all of these, this is just the first definition. They all had several more, that got more specific.
- gjm11 5y ago
  It seems a pity for a definition of "arctic" not to mention the connection with bears. (Greek arktos means "bear". The Arctic is the north because the constellation called the Great Bear, or Ursa Major, is in the north, and one of its stars is pretty much right over the north pole.) Just to give some idea of what a more comprehensive dictionary might offer, here's the definition of "sport" from the Chambers Dictionary (1991; I really must buy a newer edition...), one of the most thorough single-volume UK-English dictionaries, for "sport": sport, v.i. to play (arch.): to frolic (also v.t. with it; arch.): to make merry: to practise field diversions: to trifle: to deviate from the normal. -- v.t. to amuse (obs.): to wear, use, exhibit, set up, publicly or ostentatiously: to wager: to squander (rare): to force open (obs). -- n. recreation: pastime: dalliance, amorous behaviour: play: a game, esp. one involving bodily exercise: mirth: jest: contemptuous mirth: a plaything (esp. fig.): a laughing-stock: field diversion: success or gratification in shooting, fishing, or the like: a sportsman: a person of sportsmanlike character, a good fellow: an animal or plant that varies singularly and spontaneously from the normal type: (in pl.) a meeting for races and the like. Here's the Shorter Oxford (two volumes, a bit less concerned than Chambers with cramming in as many words and senses as possible, hence less terse; more concerned with showing the historical development of the language, hence things like M18 meaning "first found in the middle 18th century"): 1 a Diversion, entertainment, fun; an activity providing this, a pastime. LME. b Lovemaking, esp. sexual intercourse, viewed as a game. M16-L18. c A theatrical performance; a show, a play. Only in L16. 2 a A matter providing amusement or entertainment; a joke. arch. LME. b Jesting, joking; merriment. arch. L16. 3 a An activity involving physical exertion and skill, esp. one in which an individual competes against another or others to achieve the best performance. Later also, participation in such activities; such activities collectively. E16. b In pl. A meeting consisting of various athletic and occas. other sporting contests. See also sports day below. L16. c The recreation of hunting, shooting, or fishing. M17. 4 a A thing tossed about by natural forces as if a plaything. M17. b An object of amusement, diversion, jesting, etc.; a laughing-stock, a plaything. L17. 5 BIOLOGY. A plant (or part of a plant), animal, etc., which exhibits some abnormal or striking variation from the parent stock or type, esp. in form or colour; a spontaneous mutation; a new variety produced in this way. (Earliest in sport of nature below.) Cf SPORT verb 7b. M17. 6 a A gambler, a gamester. US. b A person who follows or participates in (a) sport; a sportsman or sportswoman. L19. c A toung man; a fellow. US. L19. d. A fair-minded, geneous person; a lively, sociable person. See also good sport below. colloq. L19. e Used as a familiar form of address, esp. between males. Chielfly Austral. & NZ. E20. 7 The sports section of a newspaper. Freq. in pl. (treated as sing.) colloq. E20. 8 In pl. (treated as sing.) A sports car; a sports model of a car. colloq. M20. Followed by several citations illustrating the various meanings, and then a lengthy set of phrases such as "in sport", "the sport of kings", "sports bar". Those are all just for the noun; there is then a section of similar length for the use of "sport" as a verb. The full OED's entry is much longer still, mostly because it provides many citations for each meaning, from the oldest its editors have been able to find up to (where possible) something like the present day. E.g., the OED's version of the hunting/shooting/fishing meaning (3c in the SOED) is "Success, pleasure, or recreation derived from or afforded by an activity, originally and esp. hunting, shooting, or fishing. Frequently with adjectives expressing the level of success." and it has 17 citations ranging from approx 1450 to 1998. [EDITED to fix a minor error.]
Youden 5y ago
The dictionaries the author starts with seem to be the concise dictionaries which are intended to be that way. I don't blame him since the full dictionaries (e.g. OED) are hidden behind paywalls but the full dictionaries are really, really good. The entry for "flash" in the OED for example contains literary examples of the kind the author seems to want, like "red the gaze that flashes desolation". The OED also includes several senses of the word and its etymology. The OED costs $100/year for US residents or £100/year for everyone else [0] but you can often get access through a library. The San Francisco Public Library has a proxy you can use if you have a library card there [1]. [0]: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/oxford-english-dictionary-online-9780198605553?q=oxford%20english%20dictionary%20online&lang=en&cc=gb https://global.oup.com/academic/product/oxford-english-dicti... [1]: http://www.oed.com.ezproxy.sfpl.org http://www.oed.com.ezproxy.sfpl.org
- kragen 5y ago
  Also I scanned the OED and put it on the Internet Archive so everyone can access it for free and build on it. The whole thing is in the public domain now, at least in the US, though of course not the second and third editions.
  - janandonly 5y ago
    That must have been a gargantuan task..
    - kragen 5y ago
      It took me about a month (thanks to the Archive for lending me the machinery!) but that was mostly because I kept getting distracted by reading the damned thing. If I'd had greater discipline, I would have missed out on a very pleasant month of evenings reading the OED and listening to the Crash Test Dummies, but I probably would have been able to finish in a week, and then I would have been much better prepared for moving out of my house and into a Volkswagen Vanagon.
- stavros 5y ago
  This is a bit off topic, but why do I need a subscription to access a dictionary? How often should I be expecting the language to change? Not to mention that the UX got much worse since the 90s, when I had a program on my desktop to instantly look up words.
messo 5y ago
I just read a book from 1854 covering a dry agricultural topic. To my suprise, the language was more poetic and rich than most modern prose! It was a delight to read and never felt contrived or difficult to follow. Extending our personal vocabulary can spice up a text ... just make sure it doesn't get too spicy.
logifail 5y ago
I was given a copy of Chambers Dictionary[0] by my sister for my 18th birthday, I still have it. According to wiki, it is "widely used by British crossword solvers and setters, and by Scrabble players[..] It contains many more dialectal, archaic, unconventional and eccentric words than its rivals, and is noted for its occasional wryly humorous definitions". I've always loved its definition of "éclair": > "a cake, long in shape but short in duration" [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chambers_Dictionary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chambers_Dictionary
- serverlessmom 5y ago
  Wow! That's certainly a good one. A couple old favorites of mine are: mullet – a hairstyle that is short at the front, long at the back, and ridiculous all around, and regift – to give (an unwanted present) as a gift to another person, in a process which is likely to continue almost indefinitely.
- DarylZero 5y ago
  Funny about the eclair. My girlfriend said the same thing.
- nichijou 5y ago
  Except that I totally didn't get what "éclair" is.
  - marginalia_nu 5y ago
    In which case you're probably looking for an encyclopedia, rather than a dictionary.
    - zamadatix 5y ago
      You'd go to an encyclopedia to find out the history, origins, detailed variations, regional specialities and so on about the topic of éclairs not to understand what an éclair itself is. A dictionary should perfectly well describe a thing without needing to pull out an encyclopedia and if you look at a updated/modern version of the Chambers Dictionary you'll get just such a definition: "A long cake of choux pastry with a cream filling and chocolate or coffee icing."
kieckerjan 5y ago
Reminds me of Mark Forsyth's quip in his delightful book _The Elements of Eloquence_: "To write for mere utility is as foolish as to dress for mere utility"
- teddyh 5y ago
  Utility has an esthetic all of its own.
presentation 5y ago
This is the essence of why anime is better in Japanese than with subs/dubs - not only is the wording much better than a straight translation but the voice acting is much more passionate in turn.
- lopis 5y ago
  It's becoming annoying to watch any netflix animes because the subtitles focus on the official translations instead of what's being said. After 15 years of watching anime, I can understand several expressions and sentence structures, and English translations are really lacking. English is a good international language because it's simple, not because it's subtle, and it shows.
  - feupan 5y ago
    The thing about translations is that they’re not written by the author. You can translate something and convey the same approximate meaning, but it will always be an approximation, sometimes reduced, of the original intent of the writing. Sometimes you just can’t translate feelings well, even if an apparent direct translation exists. Swear words are a glaring example. You can translate motherf* either word for word or with a similar swear word, but it either won’t feel native or it won’t have the same connotation. English itself is fine. I recently read “The Gradual Extinction of Softness” [1] and I was unable to translate it into my language and maintain the same feeling. 1: https://hippocampusmagazine.com/2021/11/the-gradual-extinction-of-softness-by-chantha-nguon-with-kim-green/ https://hippocampusmagazine.com/2021/11/the-gradual-extincti...
    - presentation 5y ago
      That said I think any translation even with a great deal of love and care can’t really express things the same way just due to cultural/innate differences in languages. Def don’t agree that English is somehow less capable of expression than Japanese, but just that any translation is an approximation, and usually it’s a half hearted one.
  - taylorius 5y ago
walterbell 5y ago
iOS version of 1913 Webster's: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/websters-1913/id1397172520 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/websters-1913/id1397172520 content and layout: http://www.websters1913.com/ http://www.websters1913.com/
phgn 5y ago
For anyone trying to install Websters' Dictionary on a modern mac, downloading it from https://github.com/mortenjust/webster-mac https://github.com/mortenjust/webster-mac worked for me.
- kubb 5y ago
  Thanks, you're a cool person and your comment should be as high as possible.
- cosmojg 5y ago
  There's another option with better CSS up on the front page right now: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29733648 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29733648 Direct link: https://github.com/cmod/websters-1913 https://github.com/cmod/websters-1913
BlueTemplar 5y ago
Linguee is also great because it gives many examples of words in the context where they are used. (Context which isn't necessarily high quality though.) And of course if you want to go deeper into a word, Wikipedia usually has its etymology... though I guess that for English that old Webster might be better ?
- Asraelite 5y ago
  I've found Wiktionary to be far more objective than other dictionaries about its etymology. If there are multiple competing theories, it will say as much, instead of simply presenting one chosen possibility without qualifying it.
V-2 5y ago
vocabulary.com is pretty nice in its more casual, chatty approach.
nanna 5y ago
And here's how to integrate Webster's into Emacs :) http://mbork.pl/2017-01-14_I'm_now_using_the_right_dictionary http://mbork.pl/2017-01-14_I'm_now_using_the_right_dictionar... Actually there's more than one way, of course. See the comments here: https://irreal.org/blog/?p=6546 https://irreal.org/blog/?p=6546
minimilian 5y ago
It's nice for once to see a web page with decent typography.
kubb 5y ago
I looked up the definition of 'light'. > Light was regarded formerly as consisting of material particles, [...] but it is now generally understood to consist [...] in the propagation of vibrations or undulations in a subtile, elastic medium, or ether [...]. Feels like being taken to a different age. In fact the most apparent weakness of such a dictionary is that it doesn't reflect the changes in the language since it was written.
evancoop 5y ago
This would suggest that we are not simply using the wrong dictionaries, but in fact, learning to deploy language inaptly from grade school onward. Students are examined on definitional understanding rather than the "hues" to which the author alludes. Command of language would necessarily include details of how one word is subtly different from another. How should our system of teaching language be altered?
- throwaway98797 5y ago
  The system of school is to create a passable drone to do as they are told. To find color in the world you have find it yourself it can’t be taught.
- Vrondi 5y ago
  TL:DR: by expecting/allowing less, we offer less, and get less from our students. The first place to stop would be to stop lowering our expectations of all children. The more the drive standards down to the lowest common denominator in order to pass the greatest number of students each year, the more the lower the bar that the brightest are given an opportunity to achieve. It also lowers the level of language students of all abilities are exposed to, and reduces what they can achieve. I strongly believe in remedial teaching as needed for diverse subjects, but the USA educational systems often target offerings to the lower end of the masses, and do a disservice to the academically gifted and academically challenged in the process. Read the writing of Mark Twain, Frances Hodgson Burnett, and other authors of what were considered children's (elementary school age) books 100-150 years ago. Notice the rich and colorful language in them. Notice that everyone thought that 8-9 year old children should be reading them. Then notice that while we have some exceptions in modern publishing, the general language standard has been simplified greatly on average in children's books. If you aren't exposed to colorful and complex writing, you'll never get better at understanding it. In the past, many schools also employed more time with the teacher reading novels years above their grade level to children, then verbally discussing it in chunks. This prepares them for later reading them on their own and writing about what they've read, as verbal language comes more easily to most. If you read a chapter a day of the first Harry Potter book to a 5 year-old who really can't read it on their own yet, then talk about what happened in each chapter as you go, and ask them/allow them to describe why characters did certain things, you help increase their own language ability in both comprehension and expression. Some public schools now frown on this, as they dogmatically stick to the official list of reading levels. Some teachers are simply too overwhelmed by the sheer number of students they must deal with, the other social needs of students they must deal with, and the rest of the modern mess.
rvba 5y ago
A very nice trend is that medical terms are named in a more descriptive way - "shoulder joint" is much easier to understand than some latin term or something named after a doctor/patient. "Wilson's disease" is much harder to understand than "excess copper buildup disease"...
yawnxyz 5y ago
I've been reading Brene Brown's "Atlas of the Heart" - a book that tries to wrangle the definition of emotion words. It's a sort of dictionary crossed with Brene's own stories and her research. Really good read for those into language and psycholgy.
martinjacobd 5y ago
‘Hal, you are here because I am a professional conversationalist, and your father has made an appointment with me, for you, to converse.’ ‘MYURP. Excuse me.’ Tap tap tap tap. ‘SHULGSPAHHH.’ Tap tap tap tap. ‘You’re a professional conversationalist?’ ‘I am, yes, as I believe I just stated, a professional conversationalist.’ ‘Don’t start looking at your watch, as if I’m taking up valuable time of yours. If Himself made the appointment and paid for it the time’s supposed to be mine, right? Not yours. And then but what’s that supposed to mean, “professional conversationalist”? A conversationalist is just one who converses much. You actually charge a fee to converse much?’ ‘A conversationalist is also one who, I’m sure you’ll recall, “excels in conversation.” ’ ‘That’s Webster’s Seventh. That’s not the O.E.D.’ Tap tap. ‘I’m an O.E.D. man, Doctor. If that’s what you are. Are you a doctor? Do you have a doctorate? Most people like to put their diplomas up, I notice, if they have credentials. And Webster’s Seventh isn’t even up-to-date. Webster’s Eighth amends to “one who converses with much enthusiasm.” ’ -- Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace
HeckFeck 5y ago
"A thought flashed through me, which I clothed in act" I can read and understand phrases like these, because I can read the same language. But I can never create anything with the same ring, or richness of metaphor, when I compose my own. It saddens me greatly. I wonder how one gets the mind for it.
- leephillips 5y ago
  I don’t know of your habits, so this advice may not apply to you. But we are living through a slow-motion crisis in language, in the English-speaking world. It is caused by mostly everyone reading, routinely, constantly, and nearly exclusively, garbage prose. This description applies to nearly all journalism, technical discussion, essays of opinion, and any writing related to politics, computers, society, or technology. And we imitate what we read, even if not consciously. Eventually, we lose the ability to express ourselves well. Spend some time every day reading Shakespeare, Joyce, or Nabokov. Maybe some PG Wodehouse or Oscar Wilde. After a year or so, it will start to seep in. You will notice your own writing becoming more beautiful, and more precise (which is largely the same thing.) I can guarantee this, because you care, and that’s 90% of what’s required.
  - quercusa 5y ago
    That's good advice. The apparently effortless prose of a Wodehouse or McPhee is only achieved through a lot of work.
  - HeckFeck 5y ago
    Comments like these are what keep my attention here. Thanks very kindly for your encouragement. To learn from the greats, we ask from whom did they learn? It's an apt question. And you're right, I have had the desire this long, it is a cruelty to deny myself any longer. Wishing you a very literate 2022!
- cosmojg 5y ago
  Make a habit of drawing connections between disparate concepts, but be careful not to go too crazy with it.
j0ej0ej0e 5y ago
Is there a less bureaucratic one for british english?
metabagel 5y ago
If you’re an American, you should be using the excellent American Heritage Dictionary.
janandonly 5y ago
Some years ago this same article came up on HN. I remember downloading a special app to run Webster’s 1913 version on my iOS device. I also remember being very jealous of macOS users for having a dedicated dictionary.app. Now I happen to have a Mac myself so guess what daddy is going to do this evening? Indeed, get himself an upgrade .
allochthon 5y ago
I like much of what the author is getting at. Not all dictionaries are not equivalent, and you can really see the difference when you start paying attention. But his prose is overwrought and distracting. The best acting doesn't draw attention to itself as acting; you just see the character. The best music, in my view, doesn't draw attention to itself as music; you're just immersed in it. The best English prose doesn't draw attention to itself as writing; you're just immersed in a description of something, or a story about something, or an account of something. It's understated to the point of being easy to underestimate.
Apreche 5y ago
I loaded up the suggested Webster's 1913 dictionary on my ereader to test it out. I picked two random words on the current page of the book I'm reading. Neither "condolences" or "constraint" were in that dictionary. Quality of definitions doesn't help if you don't have the quantity because the dictionary is over 100 years old. I also agree with other commenters regarding the OED.
- mkwarman 5y ago
  I just checked the copy of Websters Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) I loaded into a free app from the URL included in the article. "Condole", "condoled", "condolement", "condolence", "condoler", "condoling", "constrain", "constrainable", "constrained", "constrainedly", "constrainer", "constraining", "constraint", and "constraintive" are all present when searching for the root of both of those words. You can also search here: https://www.websters1913.com/words/Condolence https://www.websters1913.com/words/Condolence https://www.websters1913.com/words/Constraint https://www.websters1913.com/words/Constraint
liups 5y ago

231 points by cosmojg 5y ago

I look up 'ordinary' words like those (as opposed to those I don't know the meaning of beforehand) all the time, probably more than unknown words. But not for 'Draft #4' reasons, I look out of curiosity for etymology, older meanings, how common an alternative pronunciation might be, etc.

DonBarredora 5y ago

parentheses 5y ago

the devil’s dictionary is a solid turn the other way, sparse though it may be

dang 5y ago

Past related threads: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19763435 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19763435 - April 2019 (87 comments) Using the wrong dictionary - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7772557 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7772557 - May 2014 (138 comments)

carlbordum 5y ago

I thought this was such a good read that I created an online version of the 1913 dictionary. It's available at https://webster.bordum.dk/ https://webster.bordum.dk/ if anyone is interested.

devoutsalsa 5y ago

I find Urban Dictionary are to be pretty useful!

Asraelite 5y ago
Unironically I think Urban Dictionary is great. There's a very high barrier to entry for slang terms when it comes to being added to mainstream dictionaries, which means I'm often left confused about the meaning of a word I've encountered, unable to find it in these dictionaries. If it weren't for Urban Dictionary I would never learn many of their meanings.

itwrangler 5y ago

Thanks for posting this :-)

e-dant 5y ago

Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

notimetorelax 5y ago

I’m a foreigner - what does “a diversion of the filed” mean?

anonnyj 5y ago
*field Something like "Something you do to to pass time/have fun, played on a field."
wiml 5y ago
I think it's "diversion" in the (unusual) sense of "an enjoyable activity", and "field" in the sense of "an open outdoor area with grass or crops". Which is a kid of ... poetic? ... definition of a "sport" (e.g. football, a leisure activity you do on a grassy square).
- kragen 5y ago
  I don't think that's an unusual sense of "diversion" 150 years ago. It's the main sense of the cognate in Spanish or French.
mdoms 5y ago
I'm a native English speaker. I looked at that sentence for a solid minute and couldn't figure it out.
- I_complete_me 5y ago
  I think substituting the term with "fieldsport" would lose nothing.
- donkarma 5y ago
  It made instant sense to me, I read it as something you wouldn't usually do in a field of study, unexpected.
thewakalix 5y ago
A diversion is an activity done for fun or enjoyment, rather than for money or similar. A sports field is the area in which the sport is carried out, and has the connotation of “outside” from its other meaning as a meadow. A definition of “sport” as “an activity undertaken for enjoyment, in a specific environment, commonly outside” is pretty decent in my view.

suction 5y ago

I couldn't disagree more with this piece, especially the idea of a "draft #4" where you go through what you've written and replace all "pedestrian" words with less common ones from the dictionary. I know these writers, and how they "write" - it's painful to read and oozes pretentiousness. You can always tell when someone tries to fake having a wider vocabulary.

DarylZero 5y ago
> You can always tell when someone tries to fake having a wider vocabulary. Doubt it. I know I've been accused of using a thesaurus when I was just compulsively and thoughtlessly posting stream of consciousness on social media. I think people who think such things just have small vocabularies. They can't imagine others have any fluency with words they don't know.
dreamcompiler 5y ago
Go read any book by John McPhee (the writer in question) and if you are not delighted I will donate $20 to the charity of your choice. I recommend Oranges but they're all quite good.
elric 5y ago
> I couldn't disagree more with this piece, especially the idea of a "draft #4" where you go through what you've written and replace all plain words with difficult ones. I know these writers, and how they "write" - it's painful to read, they want to make themselves seem better than they are. You can always tell when someone tries to pretend to know more words than they really do.
- Veen 5y ago
  I have a word you may want to add to your vocabulary. chippy ADJECTIVE informal 1. resentful or oversensitive about being perceived as inferior
adzm 5y ago
The whole point here is not to mindlessly replace words but to be able to find words that more accurately describe what you are trying to convey. The expanded definitions and examples are great starting points for digging deeper into both the language and the underlying motivation.

asxd 5y ago

> Notice, too, how much less certain the Webster definition seems about itself, even though it’s more complete — as if to remind you that the word came first, that the word isn’t defined by its definition here I like this. A dictionary with an opinion, rather than a definition.

terinjokes 5y ago

The dictionary I use goes with: • arctic: Designating the celestial north pole, and the Pole Star that marks its position in the sky. • sport: Diversion, entertainment, fun. • magic: The use of ritual activities or observances which are intended to influence the course of events or to manipulate the natural world, usually involving the use of an occult or secret body of knowledge; • example: A person's conduct, practice, etc., regarded as an object of imitation or as an influence on the behaviour of others While not as expressive as Webster's, I was surprised by their color compared to the facsimiles given of other modern dictionaries.

kangalioo 5y ago
Those definitions are pretty but incomplete, right? It totally excludes the physical meaning of sport, and it forgets that an "example" doesn't need to come from a person
- terinjokes 5y ago
  For all of these, this is just the first definition. They all had several more, that got more specific.
gjm11 5y ago
It seems a pity for a definition of "arctic" not to mention the connection with bears. (Greek arktos means "bear". The Arctic is the north because the constellation called the Great Bear, or Ursa Major, is in the north, and one of its stars is pretty much right over the north pole.) Just to give some idea of what a more comprehensive dictionary might offer, here's the definition of "sport" from the Chambers Dictionary (1991; I really must buy a newer edition...), one of the most thorough single-volume UK-English dictionaries, for "sport": sport, v.i. to play (arch.): to frolic (also v.t. with it; arch.): to make merry: to practise field diversions: to trifle: to deviate from the normal. -- v.t. to amuse (obs.): to wear, use, exhibit, set up, publicly or ostentatiously: to wager: to squander (rare): to force open (obs). -- n. recreation: pastime: dalliance, amorous behaviour: play: a game, esp. one involving bodily exercise: mirth: jest: contemptuous mirth: a plaything (esp. fig.): a laughing-stock: field diversion: success or gratification in shooting, fishing, or the like: a sportsman: a person of sportsmanlike character, a good fellow: an animal or plant that varies singularly and spontaneously from the normal type: (in pl.) a meeting for races and the like. Here's the Shorter Oxford (two volumes, a bit less concerned than Chambers with cramming in as many words and senses as possible, hence less terse; more concerned with showing the historical development of the language, hence things like M18 meaning "first found in the middle 18th century"): 1 a Diversion, entertainment, fun; an activity providing this, a pastime. LME. b Lovemaking, esp. sexual intercourse, viewed as a game. M16-L18. c A theatrical performance; a show, a play. Only in L16. 2 a A matter providing amusement or entertainment; a joke. arch. LME. b Jesting, joking; merriment. arch. L16. 3 a An activity involving physical exertion and skill, esp. one in which an individual competes against another or others to achieve the best performance. Later also, participation in such activities; such activities collectively. E16. b In pl. A meeting consisting of various athletic and occas. other sporting contests. See also sports day below. L16. c The recreation of hunting, shooting, or fishing. M17. 4 a A thing tossed about by natural forces as if a plaything. M17. b An object of amusement, diversion, jesting, etc.; a laughing-stock, a plaything. L17. 5 BIOLOGY. A plant (or part of a plant), animal, etc., which exhibits some abnormal or striking variation from the parent stock or type, esp. in form or colour; a spontaneous mutation; a new variety produced in this way. (Earliest in sport of nature below.) Cf SPORT verb 7b. M17. 6 a A gambler, a gamester. US. b A person who follows or participates in (a) sport; a sportsman or sportswoman. L19. c A toung man; a fellow. US. L19. d. A fair-minded, geneous person; a lively, sociable person. See also good sport below. colloq. L19. e Used as a familiar form of address, esp. between males. Chielfly Austral. & NZ. E20. 7 The sports section of a newspaper. Freq. in pl. (treated as sing.) colloq. E20. 8 In pl. (treated as sing.) A sports car; a sports model of a car. colloq. M20. Followed by several citations illustrating the various meanings, and then a lengthy set of phrases such as "in sport", "the sport of kings", "sports bar". Those are all just for the noun; there is then a section of similar length for the use of "sport" as a verb. The full OED's entry is much longer still, mostly because it provides many citations for each meaning, from the oldest its editors have been able to find up to (where possible) something like the present day. E.g., the OED's version of the hunting/shooting/fishing meaning (3c in the SOED) is "Success, pleasure, or recreation derived from or afforded by an activity, originally and esp. hunting, shooting, or fishing. Frequently with adjectives expressing the level of success." and it has 17 citations ranging from approx 1450 to 1998. [EDITED to fix a minor error.]

Youden 5y ago

The dictionaries the author starts with seem to be the concise dictionaries which are intended to be that way. I don't blame him since the full dictionaries (e.g. OED) are hidden behind paywalls but the full dictionaries are really, really good. The entry for "flash" in the OED for example contains literary examples of the kind the author seems to want, like "red the gaze that flashes desolation". The OED also includes several senses of the word and its etymology. The OED costs $100/year for US residents or £100/year for everyone else [0] but you can often get access through a library. The San Francisco Public Library has a proxy you can use if you have a library card there [1]. [0]: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/oxford-english-dictionary-online-9780198605553?q=oxford%20english%20dictionary%20online&lang=en&cc=gb https://global.oup.com/academic/product/oxford-english-dicti... [1]: http://www.oed.com.ezproxy.sfpl.org http://www.oed.com.ezproxy.sfpl.org

kragen 5y ago
Also I scanned the OED and put it on the Internet Archive so everyone can access it for free and build on it. The whole thing is in the public domain now, at least in the US, though of course not the second and third editions.
- janandonly 5y ago
  That must have been a gargantuan task..
  - kragen 5y ago
    It took me about a month (thanks to the Archive for lending me the machinery!) but that was mostly because I kept getting distracted by reading the damned thing. If I'd had greater discipline, I would have missed out on a very pleasant month of evenings reading the OED and listening to the Crash Test Dummies, but I probably would have been able to finish in a week, and then I would have been much better prepared for moving out of my house and into a Volkswagen Vanagon.
stavros 5y ago
This is a bit off topic, but why do I need a subscription to access a dictionary? How often should I be expecting the language to change? Not to mention that the UX got much worse since the 90s, when I had a program on my desktop to instantly look up words.

messo 5y ago

I just read a book from 1854 covering a dry agricultural topic. To my suprise, the language was more poetic and rich than most modern prose! It was a delight to read and never felt contrived or difficult to follow. Extending our personal vocabulary can spice up a text ... just make sure it doesn't get too spicy.

logifail 5y ago

I was given a copy of Chambers Dictionary[0] by my sister for my 18th birthday, I still have it. According to wiki, it is "widely used by British crossword solvers and setters, and by Scrabble players[..] It contains many more dialectal, archaic, unconventional and eccentric words than its rivals, and is noted for its occasional wryly humorous definitions". I've always loved its definition of "éclair": > "a cake, long in shape but short in duration" [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chambers_Dictionary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chambers_Dictionary

serverlessmom 5y ago
Wow! That's certainly a good one. A couple old favorites of mine are: mullet – a hairstyle that is short at the front, long at the back, and ridiculous all around, and regift – to give (an unwanted present) as a gift to another person, in a process which is likely to continue almost indefinitely.
DarylZero 5y ago
Funny about the eclair. My girlfriend said the same thing.
nichijou 5y ago
Except that I totally didn't get what "éclair" is.
- marginalia_nu 5y ago
  In which case you're probably looking for an encyclopedia, rather than a dictionary.
  - zamadatix 5y ago
    You'd go to an encyclopedia to find out the history, origins, detailed variations, regional specialities and so on about the topic of éclairs not to understand what an éclair itself is. A dictionary should perfectly well describe a thing without needing to pull out an encyclopedia and if you look at a updated/modern version of the Chambers Dictionary you'll get just such a definition: "A long cake of choux pastry with a cream filling and chocolate or coffee icing."

kieckerjan 5y ago

Reminds me of Mark Forsyth's quip in his delightful book _The Elements of Eloquence_: "To write for mere utility is as foolish as to dress for mere utility"

teddyh 5y ago
Utility has an esthetic all of its own.

presentation 5y ago

This is the essence of why anime is better in Japanese than with subs/dubs - not only is the wording much better than a straight translation but the voice acting is much more passionate in turn.

lopis 5y ago
It's becoming annoying to watch any netflix animes because the subtitles focus on the official translations instead of what's being said. After 15 years of watching anime, I can understand several expressions and sentence structures, and English translations are really lacking. English is a good international language because it's simple, not because it's subtle, and it shows.
- feupan 5y ago
  The thing about translations is that they’re not written by the author. You can translate something and convey the same approximate meaning, but it will always be an approximation, sometimes reduced, of the original intent of the writing. Sometimes you just can’t translate feelings well, even if an apparent direct translation exists. Swear words are a glaring example. You can translate motherf* either word for word or with a similar swear word, but it either won’t feel native or it won’t have the same connotation. English itself is fine. I recently read “The Gradual Extinction of Softness” [1] and I was unable to translate it into my language and maintain the same feeling. 1: https://hippocampusmagazine.com/2021/11/the-gradual-extinction-of-softness-by-chantha-nguon-with-kim-green/ https://hippocampusmagazine.com/2021/11/the-gradual-extincti...
  - presentation 5y ago
    That said I think any translation even with a great deal of love and care can’t really express things the same way just due to cultural/innate differences in languages. Def don’t agree that English is somehow less capable of expression than Japanese, but just that any translation is an approximation, and usually it’s a half hearted one.
- taylorius 5y ago

walterbell 5y ago

iOS version of 1913 Webster's: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/websters-1913/id1397172520 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/websters-1913/id1397172520 content and layout: http://www.websters1913.com/ http://www.websters1913.com/

phgn 5y ago

For anyone trying to install Websters' Dictionary on a modern mac, downloading it from https://github.com/mortenjust/webster-mac https://github.com/mortenjust/webster-mac worked for me.

kubb 5y ago
Thanks, you're a cool person and your comment should be as high as possible.
cosmojg 5y ago
There's another option with better CSS up on the front page right now: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29733648 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29733648 Direct link: https://github.com/cmod/websters-1913 https://github.com/cmod/websters-1913

BlueTemplar 5y ago

Linguee is also great because it gives many examples of words in the context where they are used. (Context which isn't necessarily high quality though.) And of course if you want to go deeper into a word, Wikipedia usually has its etymology... though I guess that for English that old Webster might be better ?

Asraelite 5y ago
I've found Wiktionary to be far more objective than other dictionaries about its etymology. If there are multiple competing theories, it will say as much, instead of simply presenting one chosen possibility without qualifying it.

V-2 5y ago

vocabulary.com is pretty nice in its more casual, chatty approach.

nanna 5y ago

And here's how to integrate Webster's into Emacs :) http://mbork.pl/2017-01-14_I'm_now_using_the_right_dictionary http://mbork.pl/2017-01-14_I'm_now_using_the_right_dictionar... Actually there's more than one way, of course. See the comments here: https://irreal.org/blog/?p=6546 https://irreal.org/blog/?p=6546

minimilian 5y ago

It's nice for once to see a web page with decent typography.

kubb 5y ago

I looked up the definition of 'light'. > Light was regarded formerly as consisting of material particles, [...] but it is now generally understood to consist [...] in the propagation of vibrations or undulations in a subtile, elastic medium, or ether [...]. Feels like being taken to a different age. In fact the most apparent weakness of such a dictionary is that it doesn't reflect the changes in the language since it was written.

evancoop 5y ago

This would suggest that we are not simply using the wrong dictionaries, but in fact, learning to deploy language inaptly from grade school onward. Students are examined on definitional understanding rather than the "hues" to which the author alludes. Command of language would necessarily include details of how one word is subtly different from another. How should our system of teaching language be altered?

throwaway98797 5y ago
The system of school is to create a passable drone to do as they are told. To find color in the world you have find it yourself it can’t be taught.
Vrondi 5y ago
TL:DR: by expecting/allowing less, we offer less, and get less from our students. The first place to stop would be to stop lowering our expectations of all children. The more the drive standards down to the lowest common denominator in order to pass the greatest number of students each year, the more the lower the bar that the brightest are given an opportunity to achieve. It also lowers the level of language students of all abilities are exposed to, and reduces what they can achieve. I strongly believe in remedial teaching as needed for diverse subjects, but the USA educational systems often target offerings to the lower end of the masses, and do a disservice to the academically gifted and academically challenged in the process. Read the writing of Mark Twain, Frances Hodgson Burnett, and other authors of what were considered children's (elementary school age) books 100-150 years ago. Notice the rich and colorful language in them. Notice that everyone thought that 8-9 year old children should be reading them. Then notice that while we have some exceptions in modern publishing, the general language standard has been simplified greatly on average in children's books. If you aren't exposed to colorful and complex writing, you'll never get better at understanding it. In the past, many schools also employed more time with the teacher reading novels years above their grade level to children, then verbally discussing it in chunks. This prepares them for later reading them on their own and writing about what they've read, as verbal language comes more easily to most. If you read a chapter a day of the first Harry Potter book to a 5 year-old who really can't read it on their own yet, then talk about what happened in each chapter as you go, and ask them/allow them to describe why characters did certain things, you help increase their own language ability in both comprehension and expression. Some public schools now frown on this, as they dogmatically stick to the official list of reading levels. Some teachers are simply too overwhelmed by the sheer number of students they must deal with, the other social needs of students they must deal with, and the rest of the modern mess.

rvba 5y ago

A very nice trend is that medical terms are named in a more descriptive way - "shoulder joint" is much easier to understand than some latin term or something named after a doctor/patient. "Wilson's disease" is much harder to understand than "excess copper buildup disease"...

yawnxyz 5y ago

I've been reading Brene Brown's "Atlas of the Heart" - a book that tries to wrangle the definition of emotion words. It's a sort of dictionary crossed with Brene's own stories and her research. Really good read for those into language and psycholgy.

martinjacobd 5y ago

‘Hal, you are here because I am a professional conversationalist, and your father has made an appointment with me, for you, to converse.’ ‘MYURP. Excuse me.’ Tap tap tap tap. ‘SHULGSPAHHH.’ Tap tap tap tap. ‘You’re a professional conversationalist?’ ‘I am, yes, as I believe I just stated, a professional conversationalist.’ ‘Don’t start looking at your watch, as if I’m taking up valuable time of yours. If Himself made the appointment and paid for it the time’s supposed to be mine, right? Not yours. And then but what’s that supposed to mean, “professional conversationalist”? A conversationalist is just one who converses much. You actually charge a fee to converse much?’ ‘A conversationalist is also one who, I’m sure you’ll recall, “excels in conversation.” ’ ‘That’s Webster’s Seventh. That’s not the O.E.D.’ Tap tap. ‘I’m an O.E.D. man, Doctor. If that’s what you are. Are you a doctor? Do you have a doctorate? Most people like to put their diplomas up, I notice, if they have credentials. And Webster’s Seventh isn’t even up-to-date. Webster’s Eighth amends to “one who converses with much enthusiasm.” ’ -- Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace

HeckFeck 5y ago

"A thought flashed through me, which I clothed in act" I can read and understand phrases like these, because I can read the same language. But I can never create anything with the same ring, or richness of metaphor, when I compose my own. It saddens me greatly. I wonder how one gets the mind for it.

leephillips 5y ago
I don’t know of your habits, so this advice may not apply to you. But we are living through a slow-motion crisis in language, in the English-speaking world. It is caused by mostly everyone reading, routinely, constantly, and nearly exclusively, garbage prose. This description applies to nearly all journalism, technical discussion, essays of opinion, and any writing related to politics, computers, society, or technology. And we imitate what we read, even if not consciously. Eventually, we lose the ability to express ourselves well. Spend some time every day reading Shakespeare, Joyce, or Nabokov. Maybe some PG Wodehouse or Oscar Wilde. After a year or so, it will start to seep in. You will notice your own writing becoming more beautiful, and more precise (which is largely the same thing.) I can guarantee this, because you care, and that’s 90% of what’s required.
- quercusa 5y ago
  That's good advice. The apparently effortless prose of a Wodehouse or McPhee is only achieved through a lot of work.
- HeckFeck 5y ago
  Comments like these are what keep my attention here. Thanks very kindly for your encouragement. To learn from the greats, we ask from whom did they learn? It's an apt question. And you're right, I have had the desire this long, it is a cruelty to deny myself any longer. Wishing you a very literate 2022!
cosmojg 5y ago
Make a habit of drawing connections between disparate concepts, but be careful not to go too crazy with it.

j0ej0ej0e 5y ago

Is there a less bureaucratic one for british english?

metabagel 5y ago

If you’re an American, you should be using the excellent American Heritage Dictionary.

janandonly 5y ago

Some years ago this same article came up on HN. I remember downloading a special app to run Webster’s 1913 version on my iOS device. I also remember being very jealous of macOS users for having a dedicated dictionary.app. Now I happen to have a Mac myself so guess what daddy is going to do this evening? Indeed, get himself an upgrade .

allochthon 5y ago

I like much of what the author is getting at. Not all dictionaries are not equivalent, and you can really see the difference when you start paying attention. But his prose is overwrought and distracting. The best acting doesn't draw attention to itself as acting; you just see the character. The best music, in my view, doesn't draw attention to itself as music; you're just immersed in it. The best English prose doesn't draw attention to itself as writing; you're just immersed in a description of something, or a story about something, or an account of something. It's understated to the point of being easy to underestimate.

Apreche 5y ago

I loaded up the suggested Webster's 1913 dictionary on my ereader to test it out. I picked two random words on the current page of the book I'm reading. Neither "condolences" or "constraint" were in that dictionary. Quality of definitions doesn't help if you don't have the quantity because the dictionary is over 100 years old. I also agree with other commenters regarding the OED.

mkwarman 5y ago
I just checked the copy of Websters Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) I loaded into a free app from the URL included in the article. "Condole", "condoled", "condolement", "condolence", "condoler", "condoling", "constrain", "constrainable", "constrained", "constrainedly", "constrainer", "constraining", "constraint", and "constraintive" are all present when searching for the root of both of those words. You can also search here: https://www.websters1913.com/words/Condolence https://www.websters1913.com/words/Condolence https://www.websters1913.com/words/Constraint https://www.websters1913.com/words/Constraint

liups 5y ago