Merriam-Webster Launches Open Dictionary

sweganeer writes "Merriam-Webster just released Open Dictionary to better take and share the pulse of language through the Web. Of course, Webster's has long celebrated and conveyed language's evolution - unlike linguistic prescriptivists who fail to grasp that's just what language does; and - where I've compared entries - they've certainly done so in a more consistent, professional fashion than online amateurs have in recent years: might Open Dictionary - in conjunction with Webster's standard Online Dictionary - yield the best of authoritative (top-down) and organic (bottom-up), online lexicography?"

Comments

OOoh. How original.

[Seumas]

An "Open dictionary"?

Gee. Where have I heard of that before?

Wiktionary.org

For once - not censored

[tomhudson]

It realy is open - it has definitions for fuck and shit

So, how long before someone says they should be boycotted becasue they don't promote "family values"

Re:For once - not censored

[Comatose51]

I once wrote "motherfucker" in one of my emails using Thunderbird (IIRC). I ran the spell check. It caught other mistakes but accepted "motherfucker". I thought that was very avantgarde of them.

In any case, I think this open dictionary (although one already exists) is a brilliant idea and really reflects how languages really behave. We don't speak the same way as the previous generations nor should we expect future generations to follow us. I remember when I was taking cognitive science and the professor was going over linguistics. He mentioned that no human spoken language is more advanced or superior to another. While some people still hold Latin in higher esteem than other languages, he mentioned that another way of looking at Latin is to called it "bastardized, proto-Italian". Languages change and evolve. Dictionaries should also reflect that.

How fast will their storage be filled with crap...

[David Hume]

like this:

pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconios isistic (adjective) : Showing characteristics of pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.
        The man became pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosisistic after he was exposed to volcanic dust.
        Submitted by: Anonymous on Dec. 02, 2005 14:21

Anti-prescriptivism? Why?

[koreaman]

I'm going to make a few points defending prescriptive teaching of language. Although it's absurd to say that there is one right way to speak English (or any other language), and it's also absurd to set down hard and fast rules like "thou shalt only use 'good' as an adjective", saying that one thing is "correct" and another "incorrect", it is important to know how to accurately convey meaning, speak in a way that will not alienate your audience, and get your point across persuasively and effectively. That is what all good prescriptivists advocate.

Restrictivists?

[Rydia]

I like how "language evolves" has turned into "language shouldn't even attempt to stay the same." There's a real problem with both extreme views on the issue, and the idea-- and what is borne out in most all languages-- is that there is a conservative section of the language's population which works as a retentive force and another section that works as a changing force. The changing force is always stronger, but the retentive force is still important... it's why we can still read older materials and understand them (although as they get older it gets more and more difficult). That's really valuable. By removing that retention, we run the risk of rending a lot of important writing incomprehensible to most, and at worst having dialects make the jump to separate languages by way of regional syntax.

So yes, language evolves. But the idea that we should throw whatever retention we have out the window because things eventually change is a really, really stupid view.