View Single Post
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 03-Dec-2005, 07:46
Tdol Tdol is offline
Editor, UsingEnglish.com
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Country: UK
Posts: 25,137
Current Location: Phnom Penh
First Language: English
Thanks: 2
Thanked 246 Times in 235 Posts
Tdol has disabled reputation
Default Re: More depth would improve idiom explanations

This is an ESL site, so it is designed for non-native speakers. With idioms, meaning is more important than origin as meaning is, by definition, unclear to many of them. Therefore, our time is better spent adding idioms than examining origins, which we leave to etymology sites, linking to many in our links database (http://www.usingenglish.com/links/Et...y_and_History/). Interesting as the origins of idioms are, it would quite simply take up time that doesn't really help the people the site is designed for- if we can provide simple explanations of the meanings of idioms, then we can satisfy the people our site is primarily aimed at, though it may well be less satisfying for native speakers. As a free site, we have to rationalise our time and adding hundreds of idioms makes more sense for our users than adding dozens of origins. One thing I would disagree with, though, is the comparison with an opinion about a philospher- a one-sentence description of Marx would vary enormously and reflect the personal prejudices and beliefs or the writer, but there is far less variation about the meaning of words and phrases. While there always will be some differences, overall there wil be a general consensus. While some entries might be questioned by some in terms of degree, etc, there is general agreement. I recently added 'nut out' and wasn't sure whether to classify it as optionally or mandatorily separable, but couldn't find an example where it wasn't separated. I may well be wrong here, but such differences are fairly minor.

Last edited by Red5; 03-Dec-2005 at 13:31.
Reply With Quote