Slashdot Mirror


New Online Dictionaries Automate Away the Linguistic Middleman

An article in The New York Times highlights two growing collections of words online that effectively bypass the traditional dictionary publishing system of slow aggregation and curation. Wordnik is a private venture that has already raised more than $12 million in capital, while the Corpus of Contemporary American English is a project started by Brigham Young professor Mark Davies. These sources differ from both conventional dictionary publishers and crowd-sourced efforts like the excellent Wiktionary for their emphasis on avoiding human intervention rather than fostering it. Says founder Erin McKean in the linked article, 'Language changes every day, and the lexicographer should get out of the way. ... You can type in anything, and we'll show you what data we have.'

3 of 60 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Good idea? by vlm · · Score: 4, Funny

    Though I still cringe when people say they "could care less."

    That begs the question if inappropriate use of "begs the question" is like, worse, like, than like using the word like, like in as the first like word after every like lung inhalation. I think that is a full 360 degree reversal from your suggestion.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  2. Wordnik is a dictionary aggregator by NaCh0 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I wonder what kind of sales pitch it takes to get $12 million for a free web dictionary.

    'Just imagine if we could provide 100 definitions from other people for the word "butt", how much is that worth to you?'

  3. Re:Lexicographers out of the way by VortexCortex · · Score: 4, Funny

    Obviously, I'd suppose you still needed a few lexicographers to come up with the system.

    And to maintain it, right?

    The problem seems to be when you've put 95% of lexicographers out of a job, who's going to train the next bunch, and will it be cost-effective at a university level to have a graduate program in such for 1 or 2 individuals?

    Syntax error on line(s): 1 thru 1
    Ambiguous contraction in "I'd".

    Syntax error on line(s): 1 thru 1
    Mixed tense in "still needed".
    Note: Root word "need" satisfies the expression.

    Syntax error on line(s): 3 thru 3
    Incomplete sentence.

    Syntax error on line(s): 5 thru 5
    Expected colon after "be" in "to be when".

    Syntax error on line(s): 5 thru 5
    Expected capitalization of "when" in "to be when".

    Syntax error on line(s): 5 thru 5
    Extraneous comma.
    Note: This message is generated only once for multiple errors.

    Point taken: Screw the Lexicographers!