Which American Dictionary?

[Copy-editor]

Hello,

Would some folk please recommend an American-English dictionary? Which one do teachers of US-English use?

For UK-English it's necessary to have Collins and Oxford dictionaries to cover most spelling variations. Is there one dictionary that all Americans defer to?

Cheers!

 

[Rover_KE]

I'm guessing it's Merriam-Webster, but I stand to be corrected.

Rover

 

[Copy-editor]

Thanks for the reply.

I used to use MW online, but I've found too many errors recently and those videos have started to annoy me. I want to buy a hardback American dictionary. American Heritage? What do American students and teachers prefer?

 

[Raymott]

Thanks for the reply.

I used to use MW online, but I've found too many errors recently and those videos have started to annoy me. I want to buy a hardback American dictionary. American Heritage? What do American students and teachers prefer?

Are the pronunciation symbols a factor? M-W does not use IPA.

 

[Copy-editor]

Pronunciation would be a bonus. However, the primary objective is to locate a consistent, reliable, and authoritative source to mention should I need to explain a spelling correction in US-English copy.

 

[thatone]

M-W is widely regarded as the best American dictionary, and I fully agree.
What kind of "errors" have you found?

 

[Barb_D]

I'm curious about that too. I use Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online all the time. Daily. I've never even noticed that there are videos on the site.

 

[Offroad]

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language is the biggest I have ever seen.

 

[Raymott]

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language is the biggest I have ever seen.

Is it any good?

 

[thatone]

American Heritage (AH) is one of the major American dictionaries, the other being of course MW (there's also Webster's New Collegiate, but it's very similar to MW). It's quite big because it has a lot of pictures, it's kinda like an encyclopedia.

The main difference between AH and MW (Collegiate) is that the first is prescriptive and the second (very) descriptive. This applies to :

1.Pronunciations, where AH largely ignores secondary/dialectal pronunciations, whereas Merriam Webster just goes on and includes everything (Think of "nuclear" pronounced "nucular," you can find that variant only in Merriam Webster)

Example, take a look at the pronunciation of the word "didn't" in AH and then MW. Also the word "particularly" AH, MW.

Note: MW's Third New International goes even further, and includes even more dialectal pronunciations, as in the word
"bag" /'bag, -aa(ə)g, -aig/ where the second pronunciation can be found in the Inland North Dialect. I think that the Collegiate dictionary does, however, mention that in the introduction.

2.Definitions, where AH has a panel of language "experts" and gives you what percentage of them considers a particular usage acceptable, whereas M-W is much more lenient, with things like "some critics object...".

Example "fortuitous", AH and MW.

Besides this, AH's definitions are more "average joe"-oriented, whereas M-W's try to be very exact, and therefore can end up being more complicated (maybe that's why MW has been used in court). An example is the word "coy" in AH and MW

To try out more words on your own:

American Heritage and Webster's New Collegiate
Merriam Webster

 

[Offroad]

Is it any good?

You bet it is.

American Heritage (AH) is one of the major American dictionaries. It's quite big because it has a lot of pictures, it's kinda like an encyclopedia.

Mine has no picture, and yet it has almost 9,000 pages. Needless to say, a great dictionary.

I can't remember the last time I looked for a word or verb that I couldn't find in it. I also like the Cambridge online dictionary, it usually defines whether a noun is countable or uncountable, and provides examples, whilst The American Heritage Dictionary does not, but one can count on far more words/verbs to look up.

Excuse my English. I haven't used it for quite a while.

 

[thatone]

Mine has no picture, and yet it has almost 9,000 pages. Needless to say, a great dictionary.

That's interesting, the current edition has about 2100 pages and is full of pictures. Which edition do you have?

 

[Masood_S]

I'm guessing it's Merriam-Webster, but I stand to be corrected.

Rover

Agreed. A well-established dictionary.

I'm not American, but my US colleagues refer to it often.

 

[Offroad]

That's interesting, the current edition has about 2100 pages and is full of pictures. Which edition do you have?

Third edition

 

[Copy-editor]

[Reply to Thatone and Barb_D]

Looking to check that Americans use the acute accent for rosé
(wine), I looked up 'rose' but when clicking on 'next word rosé' I was taken
back to 'rose'.

A couple of weeks ago I checked whether Americans used 'ruck' as well as
'ruckus'. The definitions of 'ruck' did not give a meaning equivalent to
'ruckus' but the example usage did. That is not helpful.

Spec is an abbreviation of specification or speculation. I've never heard of it as an abbreviation for 'special' or 'specifically' -- even in the US!

I've found several more. I wrote to MW to grumble and received a hearteningly thoughtful and considered response from someone there. I have used MW for the past couple of years and was a fan, but I find the new website is more concerned with marketing than with word definition. I now try to nip in for a definition and escape to my homepage before the video can download. They've tried to scupper this by adding an advert page between the click and the definition page. Still, won't have that problem with a hardback

 

[Barb_D]

Yes, I guess it is more advertising heavy now, but I just click through without a thought. Those are good examples, and obviously not ones I've come across.

Many people swear by "onelook" which gives you options.

 

[5jj]

I swear by my Webster's Third. It's a bit dated now (my primitive ink-on-paper copy has addenda only up to 1993) and the pronunciation guide is a disaster.

However, the definitions (much derided when it first appeared) are wonderful. On those occasions when I've had to look up the meaning of a word that I didn't know, the definitions have been much more helpful than those in the full OED or indeed those in any other dictionary I have tried.

 

[thatone]

Copy-editor, I see that some of your complaints have to do with the online version. While I find the videos interesting, I agree currently their website is a little...unpleasant to surf without ad-blocking. But as you said yourself, that won't be a problem if you use one of their books, and I would also add computer or Phone applications, all of which are :up:

A couple of weeks ago I checked whether Americans used 'ruck' as well as
'ruckus'. The definitions of 'ruck' did not give a meaning equivalent to
'ruckus' but the example usage did. That is not helpful.

That's interesting because on their Advanced Learner's Website, that definition is as follows:

3 [singular] Brit informal : a fight especially among a group of people ▪ He got drunk and started a ruck with the police.

That's where they took the problematic example from, it seems. I'm gonna contact them on this one.

Spec is an abbreviation of specification or speculation. I've never heard of it as an abbreviation for 'special' or 'specifically' -- even in the US!

I'm no lexicographer, but it must have some grounds, unless it's a "heuristic" entry.

 

[birdeen's call]

I don't like the online version of MW either. It's the longest loading of all the online dictionaries that I know about. Fortunately I have my paper copy. As for online dictionaries, I use the Free Dictionary which has definitions from the British Collins and the American AH. I also use Wiktionary, which has the best pronunciation part (in whichever entry it's been done already) and many other nice features.