The Penguin Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory (Reference Books)

The book is detailed in places; however there are some key terms and definitions missing. After reading the reviews I was disappointed and it's certainly not a definitive book for undergraduate level. Although it is useful at times, it's not always going to be there for you. I would recommend looking elsewhere

A good dictionary of literary terms, but by no means an introduction to theory. The scope is so vast that no one field is covered in encyclopedic depth: you'll find rhetorical figures such as "antiphora" (but not its synonyms "antipophora" or "hypophora") and the oft-overlooked "asteismus" (useful, but no examples), but not "diacope"; meanwhile, as another reviewer complained, contemporary literary theory is not given much space. The choice of entries sometimes seems idiosyncratic in its desire to be all-encompassing, particularly in dealing with literatures outside the English or Classical traditions (few readers will probably come to this book looking for "loa", "p'ing hua" or "rannaigheacht bheag"), but as concise explanations of the "generacion de 1898" are not so easy to come by, there's no reason to regret their presence here. On the whole, you can find more depth in a library, but it's a very convenient book to have on your shelf. (Refers to the 4th edition, 1998.)

I had to buy this for Uni, it's useful for getting to grips with technical terms but if you want something that's very simple to use you may want to try a different one, this book is useful but can get a little too technical sometimes.

This well-regarded book is best viewed solely as a dictionary of literary terms. It was originally published in 1977, immediately prior to the theoretical revolution in English studies, and subsequent attempts to extend its original remit to cover theory lack conviction. One notes immediately the absence of individual entries for major theorists (Derrida, Foucault, Barthes, Habermas, Gadamer, , Lacan, Saussure etc.) who have to be pursued under subject headings (Deconstruction, Structuralism, Linguistics), where their treatment is, to say the least, concise. Arguably the dictionary format is particularly ill-suited to the explication of theory, but even familar terms such as episteme are not granted an entry. The effect is to confirm the extent to which Anglo-American literary criticism had become disconnected from the wider philosophical context before 1980.

As a traditional dictionary of literary critical terminology, however, it is useful, wide-ranging,and is reasonably priced.

This book offers entries on the language of literature, literary criticsm and literary theory. For a very reasonable price, it offers a wealth of information and is simply a must for every student of literature.