Job Discussion Forums

[fluffyhamster]

[LongShiKong]

[fluffyhamster]

Partridge's dictionary looks pretty detailed (I had a peek inside it here: http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Etymological-Dictionary-Modern-English/dp/0517414252/ ). What's the 'List of learned compound-forming elements' in it like?

Perhaps something like NTC's Dictionary of Latin and Greek Origins would be useful for your purposes? Then, there are presumably similar works (e.g. the one by Ayers seems to have good reviews). http://www.amazon.com/NTCs-Dictionary-Latin-Greek-Origins/dp/0844283215/

For etymologies I usually find the short ones given in general dictionaries like the NODE are enough, but I sometimes consult the several more specialized dictionaries that I have (The Oxford Essential Dictionary of Word Histories, ed. J. Chantrell; Ayto's Dictionary of Word Origins; and last but not least, Barnhart's (in a box somewhere so I use the online version at etymonline.com instead)). I was also pleased to see that at least the online version of the OALD (and the CD-ROM accompanying the print edition, but not the book itself, due to lack of space) now includes Word Origin boxes, see the posts in my 'Gnawings from the Sawdust Pit' thread LOL. Edit: the NODE and OALD etymologies seem identical.

[LongShiKong]

You're right about more sense meanings. The quality and quantity of example sentences also adds to the value.

[fluffyhamster]

Yeah I'd checked inside the NTC and noted (to myself at least LOL) that it didn't have fame etc in the English index, so I knew you'd say it wasn't comprehensive enough. The operative words were ultimately 'Perhaps something like'.

[buravirgil]

No one is citing Skeat yet? Weekly? Woods is great. I don't have a copy, but I do of Skeat, a reprint of the original, along with the Webster. I bought Ayto when it came out and it was enjoyable, in a leisurely way. His choices demonstrated a great effort, but it's not a reference to me. I have a Partridge copy, too, and it was a mainstay for many years to many people, but I consider it ancillary, along with a few others I'm not recalling as they're back home. Having said that, those are nearly always better than what's online.

Barnhart/Chambers is a reference to me. The OED is, well, necessary, but I never afforded the 300 bucks it was, with that cool viewing lens it came with. Any early, 20th century unabridged references can be as valuable as an etymologcial collection in my opinion. Vellum editions are astoundingly thin.

As far as a contemporary lexicon, I'm a Random House fan.

[fluffyhamster]

Yeah Ayto isn't really comprehensive enough, though his ?8000ish selections are as you say pretty good choices, B. I like the Oxford Word Histories one as it's paperback size and thus very portable, but the Barnhart is definitely the best of the few I've got. I guess the NODE takes pride of place among my native desk-cruncher dictionaries (though I have a soft spot for the more manageable 21st Century Chambers, which is available free online). ALDs, I've realized the OALD is probably the best for students, tho the LDoCE, MED, CIDE and COBUILD 3 say are all useful too, and teachers can always do with more reference works than fewer!

[LongShiKong]

Weekly Skeat shooting in the Woods with Barnhart and Chambers?

Thanks for this, Buravirgil, I'll go hunt them down.

I thought it was a Random House dictionary that's available online as a txt file through Project Gutenberg but it turns out it's an unabridged Webster's. Someone elsewhere suggested that the Julia software may have the capability of multiple retrievals. I'd have to check. Anyway, here's the URL:
https://github.com/adambom/dictionary

[buravirgil]

Thanks to you, as well, for the links. Ah, github, you are a techie.

But I wanted to ask about something you said in passing earlier in the thread, and, if you're free to (NDAs and stuff), maybe tell a little more about leaving Pearson-Longman (they're a monster) and how any one individual would have so impacted the Thorton Unplugged title.

[LongShiKong]

[bythesea]

ummm it's more likely it's because Pearson is a publisher and Teaching Unplugged was about not using course books in the classroom... slight conflict of interest there!

[LongShiKong]

[LongShiKong]

[buravirgil]

I could of (omg, have) used that for auditing exams a team created. Very niiiiice.

Early works like Woods and Skeat were a foundation for others like Weekely (online) and Partridge (online).

I don't quite follow the logic of the earliest works being exhaustive/comprehensive, but forgive a mistaken inference. Fluffy first mentioned Ayto and Ayto does do what you're talking about. Most entries end with connections to others, are often surprising, and it demonstrates how much work it was. Ayto's scholarship to achieve what he did is remarkable and his choices are an example of concision/relevance. However I doubt Ayto's online because he still sells, and it's not a database to query.

I used to survey university libraries for works I didn't own, rare prints, but not necessarily old, and I recall one (from the 60s maybe) that emphasized families. I'm sorry to tantalize anyone with a reference I can't name, but interpreting words as families isn't without caveat. Supposed roots are exactly that and the whole business of Indo-Germanic roots is murky with its Sanskrit adherents and opponents.

I'm unsure how one would go about "doing it themselves". I'm intrigued, yet skeptical.

[fluffyhamster]

@LSK: Yeah but that WFF isn't going to tell you for instance that the -turb in disturb is related to perturb or turbulence, and so on. Maybe your 1837 work will still come in then?

Oh and (BC!) I think it could do with positioning the New Search button higher - that, or allowing one to go Back in one's internet browsing history. Smart students will soon work that out but it could take even them a minute or two.