Customer Reviews

The Thinker's Thesaurus: Sophisticated Alternatives to Common Words

5 star:		(28)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(8)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

Back in the day, say 1852, Peter Mark Roget, finding no thesaurus on the shelf, decided to write one himself, grouping words by related ideas and earning for himself a place in lexicographical history.

Subsequent thesauruses, rivals to Roget, dispensed with the grouping principle and simply listed words alphabetically. Not all of the synonyms were direct substitutes for the word synonymized. The assumption was (and is) that we readers know the nuances and simply need our mind jogged a bit. If we wanted a synonym for "steal" we might come across embezzle -- but we'd have to know that embezzling is a particular kind of stealing. (You can't embezzle a candy bar from the grocery store, but you can steal one. But you really shouldn't.)

Most of the synonyms in these word books were also likely as common as the original word -- ho-hum! Frankly, if we are looking for a sparkling alternative to quotidian diction, the thesaurus is a dinosaurus.

Of course, we might well turn to the many books that alphabetize unusual or obsolete words, but we can't have archaic and eat it, too, since how would we know that "natterjack" was just the word we wanted for a Western European toad that runs rather than hops?

Enter Philadelphia attorney Peter E. Meltzer who, after a decade of sedulous work on his avocation, has published "The Thinker's Thesaurus: Sophisticated Alternatives to Common Words" ($16.95 in paperback from Marion Street Press). Attempting to write the wrongs of thesauruses past (which he does in a marvelous 50-page introduction), Meltzer goes on to deliver the goods, thousands of ordinary words coupled with one or more less common synonyms. But he doesn't stop there. Some 75 percent of the entries contain "clarifiers" helping us understand the particular synonym's "spin." So wrongdoing "in public office" is malversation. And an occupation "requiring little work but paying an income" is a sinecure.

Meltzer writes that he has avoided the use of obsolete words (Shakespeare used a lot of them, but they weren't obsolete then, don't you know). To show their currency, the "thinker's synonyms" get illustrative quotations drawn from magazines, newspapers, and even books published in the last decade. The author quotes from a story in the Sydney Morning Herald from 2000 about the newest in adult education courses -- stripping. The quote comes in the entry for "bravado" and its synonym "fanfaronade": "Fanfaronade," says the story, "will take you through the steps necessary to become a confident exotic dancer. Each participant is expected to have partially completed a semester each of Tassel Making, Cracking Walnuts with Your Own Buttocks on Stage and Booking the Light Entertainment Circuit." Just so you know, there's also a good word for "having a nicely proportioned rear end": callipygian. Time magazine used it of Jennifer Lopez.

Some words cry out to be used in this day and age. Under "superficial (knowledge of a subject while pretending to be learned)" we find "sciolism" and a quote from a Montreal newspaper referring to talk show hosts. Oh, Canada: You, too?

What has me eupeptic (cheerful but, you know, in a scholarly way) is that "The Thinker's Thesaurus" is not a book for impressing friends with a lot of fanfaronade. It's a book that helps us think a little more clearly as we search for just the right word -- especially those who yearn to be philosophers and not mere philophasters.

This book may, however, make you a philosopher faster!

Dan Barnett teaches philosophy at Butte College. Copyright 2006 Chico Enterprise-Record. Used by permission.

Whenever I consider a new thesaurus, I look up the entry for "delay" to see whether "cunctation" appears. Needless to say, I am often disappointed. I think it's a thesaurus's role to alert users to such forms, even if the right time for using them rarely arises. Mr. Meltzer's opus not only provides this rare synonym, but also includes a citation of its use.

This book is designed to take off where other thesauri stop, so you won't want to get along without an ordinary thesaurus. This one rewards browsers. The 35-page introduction covers so many bases that it's worth the price of the book all by itself.

I suppose I would quibble with the author's heavy reliance on ephemeral sources (magazines and newspapers) rather than books, but some might regard that as a plus. In any event, consider this book: it may well be just the one you're looking for.

I agree with the reviews below which said that this thesaurus doesn't work quite as well as a stand-alone reference work because it was not uncommon for certain of the "look-up words" not to be found in this book (though not often). However, that is easily compensated for by the fact that when I did find an applicable entry in this book, it was inevitably a much better and "cooler" word than anything I could find in my present thesaurus (Roget's). It also helped me to expand my vocabulary by teaching and giving examples of words which my thesaurus doesn't contain. On balance, I found that the success rate was more than enough for me to recommend this book to anyone who really enjoys words and who wants more from a thesaurus than simply to be reminded of old words. The Introduction also presented a persuasive case for why the words in this book are "real" (as the author says) and should be used more often.

I am a free-lance writer and I have owned this book for about 3 weeks and have found it to be much more useful than other reference sources in my library which offer word synonyms. Ordinary thesauruses can be helpful if you're just trying to find a word that you already knew but had temporarily forgotten. So-called "reverse dictionaries" are for the exact same purpose--simply to remind you of words you already knew. Thus these books are rarely helpful for me, except when I have a brain freeze on a certain word. Two instances come to mind which really brought home the difference between this book and others--I wanted a synonym for the words "large" and "grouchy". For "large", my thesaurus and reverse dictionary offered up such "unusual" possibilities as big, enormous, giant, huge and sizable. Well, duh! Did I really need a reference book to suggest those useless synonyms to me? Meltzer's book offers far more interesting alternatives, namely Bunyanesque, elephantine, brobdingnagian, leviathan, pachydermatous, pythonic, and the one which I eventually chose, "Pantagruelian". For "grouchy", my thesaurus and reverse dictionary offered up irritable, surly, testy and touchy. Thanks but no thanks. Meltzer's book suggested instead tetchy, bilious (or atrabilious), liverish, querulous, shirty and splenetic. Also, all of the entries in this book have examples of their use. Some of them are quite funny, and many explain the historical derivation of the words (such as Pantagruelian). The one thing I would have liked to see would be an alphabetized listing of all the hard words, so I could more easily check to see if a hard word was in the book. Anyway, if you want to expand your vocabulary with real words that are not found in the "same old" reference books, I suggest this one.

Finally, a reference book that offers its users more sophisticated word choices in a format that makes such inherent sense! Peter Meltzer's book stands out in the way that he differentiates his thesaurus from other, heretofore, conventional ones. The Rogets of the world, as Meltzer states, "start out with the premise that the user already knows the synonyms," and their guidebooks merely help to "jog his or her memory." Meltzer's book provides its users with new, sophisticated synonyms which, importantly, are neither archaic nor obsolete. In fact, nearly every synonym is followed by an example of its usage that is taken from actual articles or books, which is fascinating. Additionally, Meltzer offers what he calls "clarifiers" to 75% of his entries. These clarifiers amplify the single word you may be seeking. For example, there are seven uses for "unusual," each with its own specific synonym that more aptly describes "unusual", as in unusual/unconventional, unusual/supernatural, unusual/person, etc. Don't expect to find the simple synonyms that you're used to seeing in other thesauri. Meltzer gives you the benefit of the doubt that you already know those words and offers you a more exciting, more intelligent way to shape your vocabulary. Regardless of your writing needs, this book is a must-have. I enjoyed reading the introduction, it gave me a strong sense of the book's layout and reminded me why a thesaurus is not just for writing college term papers.

Write Peter Meltzer's name down and remember it! Meltzer's book titled The Thinker's Thesaurus: Sophisticated Alternative to Common Words was recently published and it is several light years in front of the "other" Thesauri currently on book shelves. I am a lawyer, a teacher, and a doctoral student and much of my time is spent writing or reading what someone else wrote. Meltzer's book provides the perfect key to finding the
exact word. I highly recommend this book to any one who writes or who just loves our language in all of its nuanced complexity. The book is well organized and easy to use as well as being fun just for browsing. It is a word hunter's delight and treasure trove. Remember the name Peter Meltzer.

Adolphus Levi Williams Jr.

I was very excited to get this book based on the description. As I scanned through several entries my jaw fell open. I thought it had to be a fluke, so I kept flipping through. It was no fluke. I can't say I've ready every page in the book, but every page I looked at had at least one entry from a right-wing publication or talking head disparaging the Democratic party, individual Democrats, or other politically left-of-center people or topics.

The first page I flipped to had this:

dishonest adj.: mendacious. Clinton continues to injure himself with optional nonsense like his bragging about his agricultural knowledge. Voters know nonsense when they hear it... (It goes on from there.)

I turned the page and found this:

dispute (characterized by internal...) adj.: factious. Before this switch from anti-government to pro-government, the most conspicuous feature of Democratic conventions was divisiveness... (It goes on from there.)

Flip to the next page and you'll find:

distortion (of words or of language) n.: verbicide. One manager, Rep. Steve Buyer of Indiana, said the president [Clinton] really is guilty of verbicide for his linguistic gymnastics and personal definitions. "He murdered the plain-spoken English language," Mr. Buyer said.

See a pattern? How did this trash get published? Please help expose this complete fraud.

Being a connoisseur of words and language, I picked up The Thinker's Thesaurus, thinking it would be this month's edition to the coffee table, good for an occasional glance or two. Since cracking it open, it has spent more time in the palm of my hand. After feverishly devouring it the first time around, I found myself starting all over again, like hitting play on the DVD remote again immediately after watching a new favorite movie. Professor Meltzer's entries, while esoteric, never seem altogether unfamiliar; he has an uncanny ability to mine through our often frustratingly byzantine language and emerging with not just one, but several options that are vastly superior to the quotidian rhetoric near all of us use on impulse. This is not a collection of cute words and phrases meant to briefly titillate the suburban party goers at the coffee table in between sips, as so many of these types of books are, but rather a treasure trove of synonymous upgrades that serve as a reminder of how often and easily our communication skills range from mundane mimicry to outright misused.

At the time of purchasing this thesaurus there were only two cheerleading type reviews and I bit the hook. What I have now is a book that doesn't have alternatives to words like 'legacy', or 'maintain'. However, there are plenty of alternatives to 'masturbation' and 'paraphernalia'. So what Meltzer is thinking when he chooses which words go in his thesaurus and which do not is the real question. This should be titled supplement to an actual thesaurus because as a stand alone it falls way short, especially with it's choice of second tier pulp-esque vocabulary.

Anyone who would be in need of a thesaurus like this should know that the longest word is not always the best word. So this book should be used sparingly. Hang on to your Roget's. But for those times when your prose or dissertation requires le juste mot or something just a little bit fancier, pick up TTT. Also, many of the entries cite French synonyms, which I was tickled to discover. Also know that due to the sophisticated nature of the synonyms, there may only be one or two or three for any given entry. Quality versus quantity? Something to think about.