| ----- | |
| --- 21918384 | |
| Hello /lit/, what dictionary should I purchase? | |
| --- 21918490 | |
| >>21918384 (OP) | |
| --- 21918578 | |
| What do you need a dictionary for? | |
| --- 21918610 | |
| >>21918578 | |
| To learn words I don't know. I would like a reliable source for the definition of words so that I know what I am saying when I speak them. | |
| --- 21918628 | |
| >>21918384 (OP) | |
| I have that same dictionary kek some 1500 pages | |
| --- 21918997 | |
| >>21918628 | |
| This is becoming absurd. You glown-words need to quit spying my shit. I'm fucking serious here. Quit it. | |
| --- 21919018 | |
| >>21918997 | |
| >>21918628 | |
| Can one of you post a picture of the pages of your dictionary next to a US coin? I have the third international unabridged and it's a pain in the ass to read anything in it. Would not recommend. | |
| --- 21919644 | |
| >>21918610 | |
| In that case, what you posted is good. So is the Oxford Dictionary of English. Both are standard modern dictionaries of English, extremely reliable, MW focusing on American and ODE on British usage. | |
| --- 21919689 | |
| >>21918384 (OP) | |
| An old one. The older the better. | |
| --- 21920157 | |
| >>21918384 (OP) | |
| I have the websters third international edish. It has etymologies and I love it very much. | |
| --- 21920258 | |
| >>21919689 | |
| This. Anything after 1968 isn't worth your time. | |
| --- 21920331 | |
| Isn't the internet far superior as a dictionary tool? You get every language, all etymological pathways, syntactic/prosaic examples, visual aids, etc. | |
| I read physical books generally, but a physical dictionary is extremely limited compared to an online search engine. | |
| --- 21920341 | |
| >>21920331 | |
| you wouldn't get it | |
| --- 21920714 | |
| I have a pocket Websters with 40k words but it is limited. 40% of the time I end up just searching the word on my iPhone. So iPhone is the best dictionary. Protip to iPhone users: swipe down from the home screen | |
| --- 21921058 | |
| >>21920331 | |
| For me it's mostly enjoying the analog version when I'm writing. It's cheesy but it does feel like there is more SOVL when going slow and using a physical item. Plus, in a more paranoid sense, it's not tied to the internet and won't get edited sometime in the future to remove wrong-think words. So if there is a loss of power I can still in theory look up a word if I'm writing a short story by candle light. | |
| --- 21921099 | |
| >>21920331 | |
| >You get every language, all etymological pathways, syntactic/prosaic examples, visual aids, etc. | |
| What online dictionaries do you use? | |
| --- 21921141 | |
| >>21921099 | |
| generally dictionary.com and wiktionary.com. sometimes grammarist or other resources. toss it into google and you'll always get an adequate result | |
| --- 21921162 | |
| >wiktionary.com | |
| this is edited by trannies and merriamwebster online or what ever it's called lies a lot | |
| stick to OLD and PHYSICAL dictionaries or at least pre-2020 dictionaries | |
| --- 21921218 | |
| >>21921162 | |
| I've got a dictionary from the 80s that says something like "see also: negro" lol. | |
| --- 21921233 | |
| >>21921218 | |
| lol | |
| --- 21921250 | |
| >>21921162 | |
| The greater point is you'll always find the historical and current meanings of words alongside their histories through simple search engine searches. But I understand why physical dictionaries appeal to folks. | |
| --- 21921257 | |
| >>21921250 | |
| >you'll always find the historical and current meanings of words | |
| the pozzed meanings | |
| > folks | |
| go back to twitter | |
| --- 21921267 | |
| >>21921162 | |
| >capitalizing an adjective | |
| Oof. | |
| --- 21921271 | |
| >>21921257 | |
| You have to be willfully obtuse to think only physical dictionaries have "unpozzed" definitions given the nature of our current conversation. | |
| It's a good thing for the world that people like you are a dying breed. Nobody sensible is freaking out over a color as a synechdoche being capitalized. If you spent less time seething about this stuff, you might actually get published. | |
| --- 21921524 | |
| Don't forget to also get a thesaurus and maybe other reference books as well to round it out. | |
| --- 21921549 | |
| >>21921271 | |
| >It's a good thing for the world that people like you are a dying breed. Nobody sensible is freaking out over a color as a synechdoche being capitalized. | |
| bait | |
| --- 21921567 | |
| >>21920258 | |
| Why? | |
| --- 21921683 | |
| >>21920331 | |
| Where do you think the data on the Internet comes from? | |
| >>21921141 | |
| Dictionary.com is far from the best you can find in English, MW and Lexico (Oxford Dictionary of English, sadly they killed the site recently) are/were better. Wiktionary is uneven, has many mistakes in smaller languages, and has plenty of schizos pushing their pet theories especially when it comes to etymology and language reconstruction. | |
| I edit Wiktionary too, so I see it first-hand. Most of my contribs are simply replicated from respectable print sources. | |
| >>21921271 | |
| >Nobody sensible is freaking out over a color as a synechdoche being capitalized. | |
| Try capitalising "White" and see the people capitalising "Black" freaking out. | |
| --- 21923368 | |
| >>21918384 (OP) | |
| why do you need to purchase a dictionary? pirate one | |
| --- 21923419 | |
| >>21923368 | |
| see >>21921058 | |