Re: Merriam-Webster's Unabridged vs Oxford English Dictionary
- From: "J. W. Love" <lovejw@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 21 Jun 2006 12:34:47 -0700
Alex wrote:
2. W3 underwent last major update in 1961 while OED was
updated in 1997, so OED reflects current language more
accurately. However, W3 has more entries (~470K) than OED
(~291K).
That may be an irrelevant statistic: does it equate "entries" and
"words"? If it refers to lemmas (headwords for articles), it could be
grossly misleading, since American dictionaries put many compounds and
other derived forms under unique lemmas, but the OED puts many such
words under one lemma. In brief: Webster is a splitter, and the OED is
a grouper. For example, MW makes <bed>, <bed board>, and <bed sore>
separate articles; but the OED puts <bed-board> and <bed-sore> under
the heading <bed>. So in this little universe of words, MW has three
times as many "entries" as the OED, but so what?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Merriam-Webster's Unabridged vs Oxford English Dictionary
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Merriam-Webster's Unabridged vs Oxford English Dictionary
- From: Alex Blekhman
- Re: Merriam-Webster's Unabridged vs Oxford English Dictionary
- References:
- Merriam-Webster's Unabridged vs Oxford English Dictionary
- From: Alex Blekhman
- Merriam-Webster's Unabridged vs Oxford English Dictionary
- Prev by Date: Re: Merriam-Webster's Unabridged vs Oxford English Dictionary
- Next by Date: Re: "Paleofonts V. 2" - Freeware paleographical fonts
- Previous by thread: Re: Merriam-Webster's Unabridged vs Oxford English Dictionary
- Next by thread: Re: Merriam-Webster's Unabridged vs Oxford English Dictionary
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|