Re: pronounciations at www.m-w.com


"name" <dohduhdah@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1131070073.058877.277180@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Alan wrote:
>> "name" <dohduhdah@xxxxxxxxx> wrote :
>> >
>> > When I look up a word online it takes me little more effort than a few
>> > mouseclicks. In a dictionary you need to search for words manually
>> > whereas on the computer you instantly get the information you're
>> > looking for.
>>
>> Let's examine that proposition a little more closely by comparing the
>> actions involved in looking up a word "manually" in paper dictionary vs.
>> looking it up on-line, using the word "vehement" as an example:
>> ON-LINE LOOK-UP:
>> 1. turn the computer switch "on" (bend down and press a button)
>
> Unless your computer is on (and online) all the time, like mine. Skip
> to step 3.
>

>> 1a. wait anywhere from one to five minutes (depending on your computer)
>> for
>> it to "warm up"
>> 2. establish internet connection (perhaps a mouseclick or two)
>> 3. open browser (another mouse-click)
>
> Unless you always have a browser window open, pointed at m-w.com, like
> I have.
> Skip to step 5.
>
>> 4. connect to on-line dictionary (perhaps a mouse-click or two, if
>> you've
>> already bookmarked the site, otherwise several keystrokes)
>> 5. type "vehement" in the search bar (eight keystrokes), hit "Enter")
>
> Typing?! You probably never selected a word and copied it to the
> clipboard.
> So there is no typing involved here... just a few mouseclicks (to
> select the word and
> copy/paste it to m-w.com).
>
>> 6. et voila, in *milliseconds* (after you've hit the Enter key,
>> anyway) ---- there is your super-abridged definition: deficient in a
>> complete guide to pronunciation, no etymologies given, no comments on
>> usage,
>> no alternative pronunciations, no complete list of alternative or
>> specialized meanings, etc, etc.
>
> You never used m-w.com did you?
> It features etymology, example sentences, etc..
>
>> "MANUAL" LOOK-UP:
>> 1. Pick up the book (depending on weight and size, a one-handed or
>> two-handed maneuver) (Youdon't need to turn it on --- it's always ready,
>> even in the event of a power-failure or server breakdown, and you don't
>> have
>> to wait for it to "warm up")
>
> By the time you manage to grab your paper dictionary I've already been
> able
> to look up the word online.
> ******************************************************
Well, you got me there, didn't you? I WILL have to concede, that IF you've
paid your electricity bill (or charged your batteries), and IF you've paid
up your internet connection bill, and IF there's not been a power failure,
and IF you server has not suffered a breakdown, and IF you've always a
browser window open to your online dictionary, and IF you happen to also
have open another document from which you can cut & paste the word you're
looking for, THEN I myself will even wager that you'll beat me to the punch
as far as retrieval speed . . . perhaps by as much as 30 seconds.
For you to conclude from a handicapped 30-second edge that "Books are vastly
inferior to digitized information.." and that
> " Books are an obsolete form of technology" betrays a rather shallow,
> self-narrowing approach to the treatment of information that was popular
> among self-styled "internet gurus" a decade ago. Although you've
> suggested that I throw my computer out the window and stick to paper, I am
> *not* tempted to suggest you throw your paper out the window.
Books are quite useful.
Computers are quite useful.
I'm going to continue using both.
***************************************************
>> 2. Open it where you'd estimate the "V's" to be (usually a singlehanded
>> motion can do it)
>> 3. Flip pages either forward or backward, using the words at the tops
>> of
>> the pages as your guide (involves tricky use of thumb in concert with
>> other
>> fingers, but a pretty easily mastered technique)
>> 4. Scan the page for "vehement"
>> 5. et voila, in *milliseconds* (after your eye has focused on the word)
>> you
>> have your basic definition and complete pronunciation guide (including
>> alternate pronunciations, as well as your alternate and specialized
>> meanings, comments on usage, and your etymological history, etc etc.
>>
>> On balance, it looks like to me like you end up spending MORE energy to
>> get
>> INFERIOR results if you look it up on-line.
>
> I suggest you throw your computer out the window and stick with paper.
>
>>
>> > Also, a really good electronic dictionary (unlike the online version of
>> > m-w.com) would
>> > allow advanced search options, like looking for all entries where a
>> > certain word occurs
>> > in the discription.
>>
>> On the other hand, if you REALLY wanted to look up ALL entries where a
>> certain word occurred in the definition (although I really can't imagine
>> how
>> useful that would be --- if you can't think of the word you're looking
>> for,
>> a thesaurus might be what you really need), then "advanced search
>> options"
>> of an on-line dictionary is just the ticket.
>
> On the computer I can just as easily plug in the word of my choice in a
> couple
> of dictionaries and an encyclopedia. You just can't retrieve
> information that fast
> using books. Books are vastly inferior to digitized information.
> A computer compares to a book (or library if you will) as a book
> compares to smoke signals. Books are an obsolete form of technology.
>


.