Teacher Discussion Forums

What the f*c* is going on here?

The 1828 dictionary reflects our nation's Christian heritage, and the Christian philosophy for life, government, and education.

http://www.christiantech.com/

The American Dictionary of the English language is based upon God's written word, for Noah Webster used the Bible as the foundation for his definitions.

http://www.christiantech.com/.

http://www.historyhouse.com/in_history/webster/

http://www.historyhouse.com/in_history/worcester/

http://www.historyhouse.com/in_history/merriam/

$25 for a CD of an out of copyright work.

These Christians sure know how to rip you off.

Stephen Jones wrote:$25 for a CD of an out of copyright work.

These Christians sure know how to rip you off.

From now on, I'm going to ask every one of my students to swear on the dictionary before they explain why they haven't done their homework.

Everyone knows the Bible was written in English.

British English, of course.

God is British, you see.

JuanTwoThree wrote:British English, of course.

God is British, you see.

Hey you! Student! Come and lay your hand on my Brit dic.

The prescription-description controversy may have something to do with this. When the first American linguist dictionary came out in 1961 (Webster's third), many editors decided on the spot that the second edition written in 1932 would still be their reference. There is still demand for that edition today because definitions are solid and no apologies are made for advice in usage. The 1828 dictionary has a demand as well based on this factor — not just the Christian one. I believe the sentences demonstrating the words are in the Bible.
http://englishplus.com/news/news1100.htm

American Noah Webster's An American Dictionary of the English Language (1828) was also prescriptive. Webster had been publishing a spelling book for schools since the 1780's. He was motivated by a utilitarian view of spelling as well as a concern for precise communication. His definitions tend to be far more precise than those in many dictionaries today. His book also prescribes certain spellings and uses for many words. About twenty years ago, a publisher saw a need and reprinted the 1828 Webster dictionary. It has been a steady seller since then in spite of its lack of modern terms because many people are still looking for dictionaries to provide guidance.

It's also one of the dictionaries listed in Onelook:
http://onelook.com/
Here's an interview with the editor of Encarta on the need for a more accurate and precise dictionary:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/cyberspa ... _9-06.html

Typo alert.

decided on the spot that the second edition writting in 1932 would still be their reference

.

There is still demand for that edition today because definitions are solid and no apologies are made for advice in usage.

Are you a prescriptivist, Jotham?

The

1828 dictionary has a demand as well based on this factor---not just the Christian one.

We're talking about it being sold as a "Christian dictionary".

We're talking about it being sold as a "Christian dictionary".

Why introduce such a subject about the commerce or buying habits of Christians other than to make fun of them? Are there academics in linguistics or in the literature department broaching this very issue? Does it help us understand linguistics any better? At least I was trying to go down a more substantive track.
Earlier I was criticized for always criticizing things not of my culture, ideology, race, language, and all other similar things, but I can't imagine this being any different. You know what they say about those who live in glass houses... (They also must dress downstairs).

Are you a prescriptivist, Jotham?

Again, what are you saying? That you can freely criticize people who don't have your ideology, even when other people can't do the same with yours?

Typo alert.

I don't always have time to carefully proofread my comments or practice my English skills. Sometimes, I just only have time to quickly communicate my thoughts in whatever crass form, which isn't a goal too far removed from your ideology. This isn't an academic report; it's a casual forum. If you were really interested in typo alerts, you'd be posting hundreds of them on each forum. But you're not interested in typo alerts — you're interested in typo alerts committed by me, because you just can't stand the fact that someone thinks that stellar English is a goal that ought to be and can be attained by everyone, and you want to catch such a person you disagree with in error when that person is sometimes lazy in casual discourse, to prove how hypocritical or impossible or wrong such a goal is. Even if I make mistakes despite my lofty goals, it doesn't change the fact that the ability to speak or write fluent English is a desirable goal, even if I don't always attempt or intend to use it in every venue (nor should I).

Why introduce such a subject about the commerce or buying habits of Christians other than to make fun of them?

No idea. I posted it to make fun of those Christians.

Does it help us understand linguistics any better?

It might.

Again, what are you saying?

Can't you answer the question?

I see you don't like people talking about your errors, yet your posts are full of criticisms of other people's usage.

Now, can we get away from talking about you?