Customer Reviews

Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (Larger Format, Leather-Look, Indexed)

5 star:		(67)
4 star:		(12)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(7)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

Noah Webster wrote the first American English dictionary in the 1806 and his name has come to be synonymous with the word "dictionary" in the US. As a result, every dictionary in the US that wants to make any sales calls itself a "Webster's."

The M-W, however, is the original and still the best. I have every major American English dictionary in publication, and several British dictionaries, including the Random House, the Webster's 3rd (the unabridged dictionary), Microsoft's dictionary, the Oxford Dictionary, and several learner's dictionaries.

Frankly, the differences among the top three,i.e., the M-W, the Random House, and the Microsoft (on CD), are not that great--choose a word like "efficiency" and see how each is defined. You might think they were all working together. That said, I have so say the M-W is still my favorite. Further, the M-W dictionary is consistently rated #1 in surveys of academics and language scholar.

I am a professional language and test preparation instructor and rely on good dictionaries for precise definitions of words. The M-W consistently gives clear, accurate dictionaries and apposite examples. One extra feature that helps word lovers like me understand the words better is that M-W lists definitions in the order that they came into use, with the most recent usage last. This type of listing is extremely helpful for understanding how a word has evolved and what it is about that word that remains and what is not essential to the meaning. Such an understanding of words is essential for GRE and SAT preparation and is one of the main reasons I regularly turn to the M-W.

In short, it's your best option for an American English dictionary.

In it's promotional materials, Merriam-Webster takes pride in its large scholarly editorial staff, and huge citation files. In fact, it is a company devoted to producing high quality scholarly references, and its pride is justified.

Because no dictionary can include everything, the art of producing a fine dictionary is the art of choosing wisely, what to include and what not to incorporate. Some desk dictionaries are too concerned with inflating their word stock with esoteric chemical names and proper nouns, leaving little room for the true lexical entries you are more likely to investigate. Some of these books only give a few near-synonyms to define a word. Others fill valuable space with thumb nail photos, which are fine if you want a picture book.

Merriam-Webster's 10th Collegiate chooses its word stock with care. It uses font sizes and page space judiciously and therefore offers more of the information one is likely to want. It provides carefully crafted definitions, based on citational research that reveals the subtlety of connotation as well as the more obvious denoted sense.

M-W's illustrative phrases are excellent, with many cited from literature. The word stock is extensive as well as current. The synonym studies are truly useful, revealing the fine shades of difference between the synonyms listed. The usage notes are based on citational evidence, not on the opinion of elitist "usage panels". When a word's usage is at issue, this dictionary gives you the facts, not opinion. It's dating of the first known appearance of words is perhaps not essential, but it is a welcome feature lending historical interest to the entries.

I have only one complaint about this otherwise exemplary dictionary. It's treatment of trademark entries reveals a reluctance to report the actual usage of such terms. Taking the safe approach, it reports for example that 'band-aid' is always to be capitalized, thus: 'Band-Aid', and it defines it only in its most limited sense:

"Band-Aid: trademark--used for a small adhesive strip with a gauze pad for covering minor wounds"...Trademark issues aside, this is the desk dictionary of choice. If you have never owned a Merriam-Webster Collegiate, you will be pleasantly surprised to learn how much better a desk dictionary can be. Use this reference for a year or so, and you will seldom bother with other dictionaries. If you care about the English language and value its mastery, this dictionary will inspire a passion for it.

The standard edition with its bright red dust jacket, is a handsome and rugged volume. This invaluable reference is bound in sturdy boards with a durable linen covering. The thin paper stock results in a thinner volume, yet it contains more substance than the bulky thick competing books.

This is a very high quality collegiate dictionary. I am a member of a word puzzle organization (puzzlers.org) and this is our standard reference, along with the unabridged version, "Webster's Third New International Dictionary". Many very obscure words show up in puzzles, but it is relatively rare I find I have to go to the unabridged dictionary to look them up.

In addition to being thorough (with excellent sections on abbreviations, foreign words and phrases (such as "en plein jour" or "inshallah") it includes compressed but informative etymological data. For example, the entry on "spacious" has this - ME, fr. MF spacieux, fr. L spatiosus, space, room -- more at SPEED (14c)"; in a little over a single line you get the lineage, with a reference to yet more information. You may have to learn some of the abbreviations (Middle English, Middle French, 14th century) but I found them generally intuitive and didn't need to look them up much at all.

In addition, there are excellent usage paragraphs scattered throughout. These are of two types. One type compares the usage of different words with very similar meanings. For example, the entry on "satiate" provides a usage paragraph that compares "satiate", "sate", "surfeit", "cloy", "pall", "glut" and "gorge", identifying the precise differences of usage between them. The paragraph is cross-referenced at each of the other six words, so you don't have to just stumble across satiate to find it.

The other kind of usage paragraph discusses correctness. A good example is "hopefully", which in its sense "I hope that" is controversial. The dictionary asserts the validity of this controversial use, which is sure to annoy some purists, but it does acknowledge the debate and cite grammatical arguments for its position.

The dictionary is available online, and I strongly recommend you take a look at it. There is a CD-ROM for sale too, which is worth getting as it adds some fancy search features, though if you're like me you'll want the paper version to keep by the bed.

When I recently discovered that the dictionary I owned was out of date (it didn't even have the word "internet" in it!), I set out to find a new one. Because I'm a professional writer, I can't afford to have a substandard or incomplete volume; yet, I didn't want one that was so bulky that I couldn't easily slip it from the bookcase and balance it on my lap. After going to bookstores and browsing through those in stock, I finally settled on the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate. The text is printed on paper thick enough to block out the print on the reverse side, but thin enough to take up minimal room on the shelf. When opened, the pages lie flat without assistance. The comprehensive listings are easy to read and understand for most people over the age of 14. In addition to the usual guide to pronunciation, you'll find sections in the back on biographical and geographical names, abbreviations, foreign words and phrases, signs and symbols, and a "handbook of style." Although much has been made about the added line drawings to supplement the definitions, I find them sparse and only mildly interesting.

I recommend this for high school and college students as well as anyone who owns an older, pre-high tech version. If you are searching for a mid-size, comprehensive dictionary, you've found your book.

Previously I rated this dictionary with 4 stars; I now amend it to 5 stars. At the back of the book I found pages and pages of abbreviations (a godsend for use in my work!). I can't think of a better reference. In fact, we have purchased a copy for everyone in our office for instant answers.

The MW Tenth is the latest in my nearly complete collection of this company's series of dictionaries. I began with the Fifth and bought each as they were published This current edition (Tenth) has increased the size and scope of desk dictionaries -- it is much larger than many previous editions (the Eighth and Ninth are of similar size) and contains such a wealth of information that almost no one would outgrow it. I find the Tenth useful not only in itself, but in the context of its predecessors. Words change their meaning over time and a new dictionary is essential to knowing exactly where a word is at this time -- as well as using previous editions to see where it came from. I am proud to have contributed a word to the Ninth edition, still listed in the Tenth: "hizzoner." It took years of research, but how many people get their own entry in a major dictionary? The MW Tenth is a great book for just browsing and (not incidentally)learning just when a word entered the language. More "family reading" of dictionaries such as this might help young children enjoy their language.

As a professional who writes a lot, the 10th edition of "Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary" meets my needs. But I rarely use this book? Why?

Merriam-Webster has placed its Collegiate Dictionary and Collegiate Thesaurus on-line... Access is free. Since I usually keep my Internet browser on-line as I work, I just use the on-line version of the dictionary and thesaurus.

I suggest that you consider first using the on-line resources. If you find that you need a hard-copy version of the dictionary, you can always buy it.

What I appreciate about this dictionary are the marvelous lists of words using prefixes. Whether to hyphenate a word or not frequently comes up in my work involving proofreading and copyediting; this dictionary is the first reference I consult. It would be nearly perfect if there were a like list of common abbreviations, e.g., how does one abbreviate curriculum vitae? I had to go to the web to find out.

As an attorney, I often need to cite dictionary definitions for the meaning of words. I often use several dictionaries to find the best definition for my purposes. I have been disappointed by other dictionaries, even ones with big names. But I consistently find that this dictionary contains the best, most concise, precise and usable meanings. It is even better than the much heftier Webster's Unabridged dictionary.

A British copyeditor who increasingly works for American publishers, I was keen to have an up-to-date reference to American usage. Although the M-W is undoubtedly a very pleasant dictionary to use, and excellent for most purposes, I have been perturbed to discover that Americanisms such as 'SUV' and 'buff' are missing. Both of these are included in the (British!) Concise Oxford Dictionary (tenth edition), published shortly after the Collegiate (buff: 'Amer. informal in good physical shape; muscular'; SUV: 'abbrev. sport utility vehicle'). Surprisingly, therefore, I have to rate the Oxford higher for American usage than the M-W, although the latter remains a valuable addition to my reference library.