/lit/ - Literature

>>18289129
cant you just google definitions?

>>18289129
terrible shitpost

>>18289133
>he doesn't read dictionary in his free time and memorize new words
NGMI

>>18289133
this. Massive physical databases for information like this have been made pretty redundant.

>>18289133
>implying Googling can replace OED

>>18289142
That's the point, it's not physical, it is online.

>>18289137
Are you retarded, my dude?

>>18289153
>Are you retarded
probably

>>18289142
No. Most online dictionaries provide a limited number of senses of a word, with limited information (if any) on said sense's first usage. If you're doing any philological or historical work beyond "googling tough words", OED or something similar is incredibly helpful.

>Googling definitions
This is great if you want the 'updated', 'revised', or otherwise altered definitions. For me, when I look up 'homosexuality' I'd like to see 'a paraphilia of same-sex attraction, widely considered to be a mental impairment.' or something along those lines.

>>18289254
>widely considered to be a mental impairment
That's literally not true, though, it's not widely considered to be so anymore.
Also, interestingly enough, "homosexuality" is altogether missing in the 1913 edition of Merriam-Webster or in the 1901 OED (1st edition, https://archive.org/details/newenglishdict05murrmiss).).

>>18289129
>What is Wiktionary?

>>18289535
A hot turd. Are people really so dumb they don't know how in-depth a proper dictionary is? 20 tomes (with supplements) of historical linguistic research can be replaced by a site managed by stupid amateurs who delete entire languages off the site?

>>18289129
Do you need the latest version? I'm not overly familiar with the OED, I know they take a while making new versions, but is there going to be words in the new one that you'll ever need to research that aren't in the last one?

>>18289505
>it's not widely considered to be so anymore.
Due to the aforementioned manufactured consent.

>>18289647
I have the digital exe version based upon the 2nd edition, and it serves me well, sure, but the newer updates seem worthwhile. They publish new additions to the online version quarterly.

>>18289647
Also, they don't just add new words, but improve and expand the old entries.

>>18289129
A couple months ago I tried to find a pdf version of OED. Nothing, and I looked — hard. My e-reader doesn’t come with a dictionary so I wanted to have one on it. In fact, I couldn’t even find a decent database of definitions.

>>18289688
>>18289694
Yeah, had thought maybe you didn't just want the new one for the definition of "YOLO" but wasn't sure. May I ask, where did you get your old one from? Is it simply available on your favourite torrent site?

>>18289709
Try this thing: >>/lit/thread/S18062235#p18062768
I downloaded the .7z archive, extracted it, and it works well. However, it's not a PDF, but a program for PC. Scanning the whole physical thing would be a massive and still somewhat inferior to the program, which also contains the supplementary volumes.
For quicker definitions in English I rather use Merriam-Webster app on my phone.

>>18289729
See above. I also linked the archive.org scan of the 1st edition in one of the previous posts.

>>18289129
I'm not paying for it until they are nigger, nigga, kike and chink

>>18289833
Thanks