PDA

View Full Version : [Dixonary] OT: That "aborigenes" question


Dodi Schultz
November 3rd, 2006, 11:39 PM
Dan (other players are welcome to read this, too), we were having this
discussion about--no, EXACTLY--a month ago, and something's come along that
may throw some light on the question.

You referred to a 1913 edition of what was presumably the Merriam-Webster
dictionary.

I said (having determined that the same def for cooey, but with the word
"aborigines" spelled right, appears in the 1934 M-W, which I have): "I'd
bet that the goof doesn't appear in the real-world book and is a typo
introduced in the online version."

You said, "I poked around hyperdictionary.com and see that they claim their
source is WordNet 1.7.1, (c) 2001 Princeton University. Researching WordNet
indicates that the full name for this source is 'Webster's Revised
Unabridged Dictionary, 1913 Edition' and according to Wikipedia, is indeed
a Merriam-Webster publication."

Wikipedia, as is often the case, is wrong. There is a fascinating article
in the current New Yorker (cover date 6 Nov) about Noah Webster and his
original (1828) dictionary, as well as those published by G. and C. [for
George and Charles] Merriam (subsequently Merriam-Webster), which were
legitimate sequels, that firm having acquired the rights from Webster's
heirs. They changed the company name after the courts unaccountably decided
that any old dictionary could use the word "Webster" (or "Webster's") in
its title.

The article is "Noah's Mark: Webster and the original dictionary wars."
Author Jill Lepore, a Harvard history professor, says that, after Webster
died (1843), Merriam published various revised and abridged editions. The
next major release was the big Unabridged of 1864 (of which I have a copy).
Next was the New International of 1909, followed by the Second
International of 1934, and the Third (roundly criticized for laxity) in
1961. There was no 1913 edition.

Lepore notes that if you look up "Webster" in Wikipedia's Wiktionary,
you'll find text telling you that the New International was published in
1911, that it was in the public domain, and that another such edition was
published in 1913.

As Lepore comments: "Pfui."

--Dodi

Daniel B. Widdis
November 4th, 2006, 07:11 AM
On 11/4/06, Dodi Schultz <schultz (AT) compuserve (DOT) com> wrote:
> As Lepore comments: "Pfui."

You could have dealt PFUI and got some interesting defs!

Thanks for the interesting history. So it brings back the mystery of
what written source the online dictionaries cite as "Webster's 1913"
and whether the typo was in such source, which is apparently not M-W.

--
Dan Widdis