Customer Reviews

The New Oxford American Dictionary: Book and CD-ROM package (New Look for Oxford Dictionaries)

5 star:		(32)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

This new American dictionary from Oxford is fantastic. I have the American Hertitage that came out a few years ago and I was pleased with it--it was an up-to-date version of the dictionaries I've always had. But when I received this dictionary I was astounded. For the first time I'm using my dictionary for more than a simple spell check.

First of all, it lists the most common use of the word as the first definition. This seems so logical it's bizarre that other dictionaries don't do it. I no longer have to browse through archaic or niche uses of a word simply because they predate the most common. It creates a whole new level of clarity. On top of this, the pronunciation system is extremely easy to use and the layout is clean and straight forward. It has the feel of a classic (illustrations and drawings only when it informs a word, none of those do-dads, distractions, and unnecessary photos that make other dictionaries look cheap but the makers think will make it look more expensive.) The usage notes are excellent, and there are more new words in it than I've found anywhere else--must be the resources of the OED and Oxford's other power dictionaries that the American lexicographers have drawn on. I actually find myself opening this dictionary and simply browzing.

It's also great with American words. I was afraid that it would be a British dictionary with an American cover wrapped around it, but that's not the case. Look up words like "trunk" and "roundabout" and see what you get.

I do have one criticism, and it's about thumb indexing. I'm not sure other dictionaries have this problem, but the thumb indexing is way off in places because they make the notches equidistant from each other and some letters are larger than others. What's the point of providing a quick finder tool when it's not helpfull

Still, this dictionary is grand. The first American dictionary that has met my needs and made me realize that a good dictionary is the most amazing resource I've ever encountered.

--- This, probably, is the one to buy. But decide for yourself...
--- The New Oxford American Dictionary (NOAD) may be regarded as the American translation of the New Oxford English Dictionary (NODE), published in England in 1998. A great many definitions are word-for-word identical between the two works. However, NOAD introduces significant improvements.
--- For example, NODE omits pronunciations for "ordinary, everyday" words, and as a result you get no hint as to whether "corgi" rhymes with "orgy" or "Porgie". NOAD provides pronunciations for all words, using a more sensible respelling. Furthermore, entries contain raised dots to separate syllables. Unfortunately, the dots are more prominent than the hyphens, which are mere flyspecks in both dictionaries even though that is precisely the sort of information a user might need.
--- NODE has no illustrations, which are abundant in NOAD. The crude maps are close to useless, and many pictures are mere eye candy, but some are worthwhile, for example the illustration for "pasta", where you may encounter "orzi" for the first time.
--- A great many NODE entries have been deleted, especially those for Indian, Australian, African, and some British English entries such as "gain-up", precisely the items that might send an American user scurrying for the dictionary. Proper names of British import are frequent casualties. On the other hand, many American entries have been added, including the New England beverage "frappe", but not "tonic". Wherever NODE indicates that a word is "American", that designation is omitted, whereas NOAD supplies "British" for other entries. Of course, the fact that a particular word is "American" will often be of interest and perhaps importance to an American user.
--- Spellings have been Americanized, and some entries, such as those for "corgi" and "Welsh corgi", have in effect swapped places.
--- Political correctness is sometimes apparent. Someone decided there should be a new entry "altar girl", which (mutatis mutandis) is a clone of NODE's entry for "altar boy". Someone else decided that the definition of "altar boy" could be recast in terms of "altar server", but the latter term received no entry of its own. The result is a curious lack of parallelism that might lead readers to suspect that altar boys and girls have dissimilar functions. Something of the same sort befell the entries for "chairman" and "chairwoman".
--- NODE's etymologies for "cola" and "Coke-bottle" may be regarded as adequate, but since NOAD deleted the entries for the trademarks "Coca-Cola" and "Coke", the etymologies no longer suffice. NODE has an entry for the archaic exclamation "gad", which NOAD retains, while adding an entry for the interjection "Gad" with virtually the same meaning. NOAD's deletion of the ballet term "chaine" is hardly complimentary. In the entry for "gigabyte", NOAD places a digit and its exponent on separate lines, albeit hyphenated. The introductory matter retains "homonym" in a chiefly British sense.
--- The cover claims that NOAD offers a "descriptive picture of American English", which often seems to mean they have not put themselves in the user's place. You will have to go elsewhere if you seek clarification of "chinks" as used in "Romeo and Juliet" or "Shakespeare in Love". If you read that Buddha was sitting under a bo tree and desire further information on this botanical specimen, you are unlikely to be enlightened even though NOAD has the information. If your mother says you have "hazel eyes", you will think her color-blind if you rely on the NOAD definition. For a generation, most Christians have celebrated "Passion Sunday" a week later than NOAD indicates.
--- NOAD is probably the first one-volume American dictionary to include such avifauna from our 50th state as "ou, o'o, iiwi"; it's the first to include the Madagascar birds "asity" and "fody", but "jery" remains to be discovered.
--- For sheer browseability, NOAD is outstanding. It's a great book to have at your side if you are the phone-a-friend for a Millionaire contestant.
--- All the above quibbles can be multiplied a thousandfold for this or any work based on millions of decisions by dozens of people. As the owner of more than fifty English lexicons, I would recommend this one-volume dictionary over all competitors. Consider purchasing it with CD-ROM (not available when I bought mine). If the price or size of this dictionary is beyond your grasp, a reasonable alternative is "Webster's New World College Dictionary", which incidentally gets "chinks", "hazel", and "Passion Sunday" correctly, while concealing the information for "bo" in the same way as NOAD.

The large size of the Oxford American Dictionary, the high-quality paper, illustrations, and font all present an aura that beckons the reader in. The logical arrangement of the senses and sub-senses are so much easier to use that this effort will surely set a new standard in dictionaries. The older format, that of plowing through numerous entries that are seemingly unconnected, is doomed to fall by the wayside, and not a moment too soon. Older dictionaries lack the intuitive usefulness developed by the team that assembled this most excellent dictionary. Having the Oxford English Dictionary, a Merriam-Webster, and an older Webster, there is no question for us that for day-to-day use, and for the times when one needs to more fully develop very specific idea, this work will become the one that most will rely on. Those who desire exactitude will be pleased, and those who are "looking" will be drawn in, perhaps farther than they intended to be. A superior product that is long, long overdue.

I recently went through an exhaustive search for a nearly-unabridged dictionary. My criteria were simple: it needed to be newer, bigger, and more inclusive than my battered 1989 Webster's New World College Dictionary, yet still affordable. Other candidates included the venerable Webster's 3rd International (too big, too old), Random House Webster's Unabridged (not enough international words), American Heritage 4th (pretty, but not comprehensive enough), and the bargain Microsoft Encarta College (too preachy and computer-centric). After throwing a battery of new slang, British slang, international, biographical and high tech terms at all the books, I had many more hits in the New Oxford American than any of its competitors. My only caveat is that there are too many unnecessary photos - who needs Michael Jackson and Madonna in their dictionary, and who will care what Bob Dole and Al Gore look like in five years? There's also a full page of whale drawings, a waste of valuable word space in my view. If you're willing to overlook this minor flaw, this is the best choice of the big American dictionaries. For my needs, its picture-free cousin the New Oxford Dictionary of English (available at the Amazon.com UK site for the same price) is truly the best single-volume comprehensive English dictionary in the world.

I'm going to give it 5 stars, even though I have my doubts about some of it.

A new, current dictionary is a wonderful thing. I've never liked American Heritage as they've never seemed thorough or complete enough for my taste, but I think the NOAD editors have done well. If you need a current dictionary immediately it's a decent alternative to the yet-to-be-seen new Websters or next OED. (And if for some weird reason you need a definition for `doh', it's in here.)

It's not a substitute for technical dictionaries, but they have a surprising number of definitions for current technical terminology. That's probably a feature, but... that's where I start to have my doubts. For example, one of their entries is for `JPEG'. Their definition is of questionable usefulness if you don't already know what they're referring to.

Worse, it's going to severely date the dictionary. We've all seen some of the amusing and dated "technical terms" in older dictionaries (like Webster's 3rd), and I often have wondered why the compilers ever bothered to include them in the first place. I believe a lot of terms in NOAD like `JPEG' are going to be goofily dated, if not in 5 years then certainly in 10.

Other questionable features include photographs and definitions for people like the Clintons and Bob Dole (who?). I don't want to appear curmudgeonly, but photos and brief bios of currently famous but soon-to-be-forgotten people don't add any value whatsoever... especially when you consider that a new release will likely take longer than anyone would like. And this isn't a cheap dictionary. I'd rather they dropped the photos and added more obscure words; there are much better sources for current biographical information.

I'm also not thrilled with the font. It isn't horrible, but it isn't high on my list of "most readable fonts" either.

In summary: it's a great choice for a current dictionary. Just be warned that some of the advertised features are going to be obsolete long before the next release.

I love the layout of this dictionary! For its price, it can't be beat in my opinion. No - no colored pictures, but this is a dictionary, not an encyclopedia -- you use it to look for words. There is a bonus "reference" section at the end which has several uniquely American things like the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and various other goodies. While this dictionary excels in every aspect I am concerned with over the American Heritage Dictionary, it has a major problem. The paper quality is horrible! Thinner than rice paper. Print bleeds from the other side of the page. My first edition did not have this problem, but this third edition has definitely cost-cut and for that reason, I cannot recommend you buy this edition.

...

The NEW OXFORD AMERICAN DICTIONARY fills the bill quite nicely and in grandiose form. Not only is this tome arguably the best product for the English lexicon currently on the market, it meets the weight test...in spades--at a full 9 pounds!

The NEW OXFORD AMERICAN DICTIONARY somewhat breaks with tradition by providing the user with "core" senses. The core senses appear first for each definition and are followed by subsenses. The uses of "senses/subsenses" represents the most literal use of the word in the American lexicon rather than the more traditional, according to the publishers. This, in and of itself, makes this dictionary extremely timely and staggeringly useful to significantly any professional, manager or student.

One other area which makes this dictionary extremely timely and which has been improved upon by the publishers is the seemingly infinite number of new words and acronyms forged by the presence of the Internet. Although you'll not find all of the poignant slang associated with your surfing activities, you may be surprised at how many you will find. My favorite example (as noted by another reviewer) and one that is used by most who email and participate in chat rooms is "LOL" (laughing out loud). The advent of this feature will benefit older users of the net much more than the younger ones (LOL)!

As with most dictionaries, the pronunciation for each word is provided with its core sense and subsenses. Although somewhat strafed by commercial reviewers, the fact that the pronunciation key is found only in the introduction did not pose a monumental problem for this reviewer. Illustrations are abound in this volume although in black-and-white and greyscale. Again, this seems to be a point of contention for many but I think one has to ask themselves WHY they're using a tool such as this. If its for full-color photography, there are other resources available which would prove more beneficial than a dictionary.

Other odds-and-ends...a "ready-reference" section has been placed at the end of this mammoth. It truly does represent a potpourri of items. A sampling includes: the United States Constitution, Hall of Fame members (baseball, football, basketball and even rock n' roll!), heat index and wind chill matrixes and a variety of other resources. The upside of this strange mix is that it should provide something for everyone, which is what I'm sure the publisher had in mind.

Net,net...this is an incredible piece of work and one that every professional should 'invest' in, which is one other nice feature. Its tough to get your hands on a volume this nice for the price featured here on Amazon. All reference tools have shortcomings inasmuch as differing needs exist relative to each user. However, if you need an outstanding dictionary, you'll not go wrong purchasing this one.

..Mammoth, lexicography, illustration, language root, nuance, readability, affordability...are few key words that I can think of when using this dictionary. This book will serve both languists and seasonal home users, it is good enough for library use and it is inexpensive enough to belong to homes.

I am always a fan of Oxford publisher for its authority of the subject. The dictionary provides the core definition of word, its derivatives, origin (Greek, Latin, et al), usage and pictures. With this comprehensiveness, it comes with 2000 pages and library reference page size (try to look for Beetle). It is BIG, so it is not portable. With good paper and construction, this one will last.

I would never have believed I could get this excited about a dictionary! I bought this last year for my fifth grade son when he and I both became dissatisfied with the Merriam-Webster School Dictionary. The M-W was our first attempt at upgrading from his picture dictionary but my son, an average student, struggled with the lack of usage examples. I found that the M-W system of listing the most archaic meanings first was also a hindrance, sometimes maddening. What a joy when the New Oxford American arrived. My son instantly warmed to their profuse usage examples and I was impressed with the more intuitive presentation of words which have multiple meanings. Finally, I found that the font type is very easy on the eyes.

This is absolutely the best dictionary of American English currently on the market. I researched American Heritage, Websters etc. The Oxford is clearly a level above them all.

First, this dictionary has the unprecendated level of clarity in its entries. It's not just the idea that the most common senses of the word should go first (unlike Marian-Webster's, where they are presented chronologically), it's the idea that among all the senses of the word, some are the "core" meanings, while the others are the sub-meanings, sub-senses, and can be grouped accordingly. You don't need to go through 15 senses of the word "belt", for example, to find the meaning you were looking for. All the meanings are grouped by their "core" meaning, with other subsenses attached to them. As a result, it's so much easier to grasp all the meanings of the word, because, think about it, this is exactly how your mind works. The Oxford editors believe (based on the extensive phychological research) that this is how the dictionaries of the future should be written, and this stem structure of senses and subsenses makes a lot of sense.

I was surprised to read other reviews of this dictionary where reviewers were critisizing the New Oxford American Dictionary in favor of Mariam-Webster's and others because some obscure words were present there, but not here. Don't kid yourself, unless you have 70 other dictionaries at home and lots of spare time to compare the entries in each of them, you'll find the Oxford dictionary excellent, definately better than anything else on the market, and sufficient for most of your needs and more.

Highly recommended.