Wow this is wonderful, thank you. I am wondering if something similar exists for German.
For french the best equivalent that I know of would be the littré[0] but I would also be interested in alternatives.
You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
11–20 of 90 posts
Re: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
#12While an interesting perspective, I do have to question whether this is simply a matter of the author preferring Webster's prescriptive nuances over more descriptive approaches, even when those nuances do not appear supported by use. Taking the example they use, fustian, the OED does not include the idea that it refers specifically to a mismatch between topic and style, and gives numerous examples, from Marlowe onwar…
Is there any reason to attempt to capture, as you're seemingly describing, the intersection of the usages of a word; the "beige" of definitions? Would it not make more sense to instead describe all the various shades of usage that the word has had emplaced within it by various writers' hands—at least those put forth with enough force for those shades to be recognized and understood by readers today—even if those usag…
If you're looking for inspiration, I don't think that what you're looking for is what we call a dictionary. Unless you're using the word "dictionary" in a poetic sense, or generally the senses of words inspire you.
Re: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
#13One of my favourite possessions is The Compact Edition Of The Oxford English Dictionary, which is the complete text of the multi-volume OED shrunk down into two volumes totalling about 4000 pages (it comes in a case with a drawer for a magnifying glass). I got it for next to nothing on eBay a few years ago. I don’t use it every day but it’s wonderful for browsing and inspiration in the way this article describes.
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-compact-oxford-e...
This is the single-volume second edition. Mine is the two-volume first edition.
Re: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
#14What can be said about some of the Wiktionary entries though?
Re: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
#15What can be said about some of the Wiktionary entries though?
Since Webster's dictionary is out of copyright, it was used as a source for many entries on Wiktionary. https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Webster%27s_Dict...
There's a category for entries that were imported mostly unmodified, with 26,433 pages. https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Webster_1913
Re: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
#16Wow this is wonderful, thank you. I am wondering if something similar exists for German.
Potentially the Deutsches Wörterbuch started by the Brothers Grimm: http://woerterbuchnetz.de/DWB
Re: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
#17The dictionary linked in this post has some formatting issues, so a kind soul improved upon it (Mac Dictionary.app dictionary):
Re: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
#18If you're interested in the same sort of beautiful, interesting dictionary for French, there's the classic Littré. It's not that the definitions themselves are colourful, but the quotes used as examples always are.
Re: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
#19If you enjoyed this article, you might also enjoy the novel The Great Passage by Shion Miura, a wonderful quiet novel about the creation of a Japanese dictionary.
Re: You’re probably using the wrong dictionary (2014)
#20Previous discussion from 5 years ago with 138 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7772557