online dictionaries
On-line Dictionaries | Mary Lynn Hughes | September 3rd, 2001
Dear All,
I decided to stick my neck out and sent the following message to Collins Cobuild, with copies to the publishers of Longman, Oxford and Cambridge learners' dictionaries:
Dear Cobuilders,
Having had a look at the website for the new Collins Cobuild 3 rd Edition English Dictionary and the CD-ROM version (which I am particularly interested in), I would like to offer my comments, for what they're worth.
The CD-ROM looks most interesting, and the samples and explanations on the website clarify to some extent what is available and how the various features work. In particular, the 'full text' option, with sentence-length citations from the 5m 'Wordbank' corpus, appears to provide more extensive information of this kind than I have seen in other dictionaries. I did not see any sample pages from the 'Guide to English Usage', 'Guide to English Grammar' and 'Thesaurus', however, although the introductory blurb says they are 'contained' in the CD-ROM. (Perhaps they are available elsewhere, I did not check).
After this tantalizing glimpse, I was disappointed to find that, unlike your competitor Cambridge*, you had elected not to make the CD-ROM version available on-line from the website. Without this kind of access, it is simply not possible to assess what is on offer. To give just one example, I would have liked to try out the 'full text' option on a few more words/phrases (if, in fact, one can search for 'phrases' - this was not clear). As a potential buyer - and promoter to my institution, colleagues and students - of the dictionary & CD-ROM, I would like to know what I'm buying before I make my decision. The reality is that, faced with a range of dictionaries and CD-ROMs from different publishers, I am hesitant to spend upwards of US$55 without more information.
*Cambridge appears to be the only major publisher of English learners' dictionaries to provide on-line versions from their website, so in fairness, I should address these comments to publishers other than Collins Cobuild (and have done so, as per copies above).
From my point of view, this gives Cambridge a competitive edge. In the first place, potential buyers are able to assess the range of information provided. Secondly, users of the website who may not initially intend to buy (some of my students, for example), are likely, through exposure and familiarity, to become predisposed towards these particular dictionaries. It seems a pity that the majority of ELT publishers are unwilling to take the calculated risk of making their dictionaries available to the public in this way. (This contrasts with publishers of 'native speaker' dictionaries, at least American ones - e.g. Merriam Webster and Newbury House dictionaries are available on-line from their websites). I realize these are commercial decisions, but it's a competitive world and in the long run, exposure to the product may be worth more than promotional material with a few selected samples.
A final quibble is that nowhere on the website can I find the publication date for the 'new' Collins Cobuild 3 rd Edition English Dictionary and CD-ROM version (or for that matter, other Cobuild dictionaries). While I presume it is 2001, the absence of this information on websites is a constant frustration. (This is a universal complaint, not restricted to Collins Cobuild!).
Am I being a crank, or is this a relevant issue? I'd like to know what others think. (I feel that, as teachers, we have a primary role in promoting particular dictionaries, whether we do so directly, or indirectly by the ones we use in class. And for many of us, and certainly for our students, they represent a substantial investment. In Mexico, where I'm currently teaching, the price of dictionaries is much higher than in the UK, sometimes as much as double. This seems ironic in an economy where wages are much lower! Buying a good dictionary is already seen as a luxury here and few can afford to make the wrong choice first time around. With the increasing personal use of computers and the internet everywhere, CD-ROM versions and website access are the next wave, and information is needed on what these actually provide.).
The websites for the publishers referred to are as follows, if you want
to have a look for yourself. (Cambridge is the one with the on-line versions
of their dictionaries).
Longman | Oxford | Cambridge
Other on-line dictionaries make for an interesting comparison. For example:
Merriam-Webster | Newbury House | Wordsmyth
Mary Lynn
Re: LEX (mainly) | Pinkie | September 3rd, 2001
Fresh back from a month of reading novels, visiting Athens, climbing mountains, watching birds, tending garden, abusing alcohol and (reluctantly) sitting on people-packed expanses of hot sand. Still, I guess even beaches beat exploding sheep!
Mary Lynn: very interesting your letter to Cobuild. I agree that putting dictionaries online would be ideal from our point of view: but presumably Cobuild think this would interfere with their sales? The massive full text of the Encyclopedia Britannica was available free online for about a year, but they've just limited access and started charging. Who knows which way this is going!
Hi to all the recent signer-uppers. Some interesting Special Purposes there!
Best wishes,
Pinkie
Spain
Re: LEX & dics. | Raymond Sheehan | September 10th, 2001
Mary Lynn: a thought-provoking letter on dictionaries. It made me wonder why these techno-lexicographers can't begin by offering a beta version of their software, which they would then refine and upgrade into a commercial package based on learner-teacher feedback. Instead, they launch what may seem to be an overpriced and untrialled version upon us. To be proactive, let us offer ourselves as guinea pigs to these lexicographers as they prepare to create a whole new generation of dictionaries and be generous with our feedback to them.
Frankly, I'm disappointed with the mediocrity of non-paper dictionaries. Admittedly, they have a search facility, but they are very far from utilizing the full audio and visual effects of multimedia. I've got Encarta dictionary - not just on CD, but also on DVD, and I'm disappointed that it under exploits the available technology. I'm going to continue using the old bulky dog-eared dictionaries until such time as on-line dictionaries do something much more exciting than just offer me the information on my monitor instead of on the page.
Raymond Sheehan
PS: I also teach in a part of the world were software piracy is rampant, despite the best government efforts, and I can "burn" an expensive CD ROM on my home computer for a pittance, so I am not too surprised that publishers are overcautious. However, I don't think the honest and needy majority should be punished for the sake of the dishonest few.
Re: LEX and dics (catchy heading, huh?) | Mary Lynn | September 10th, 2001
Raymond & any dictionary buffs out there,
Like your idea about lexicographers offering a Beta version (what is that, exactly?), getting feedback and then refining their product before putting it on the market. Two of the on-line dictionaries I use have a feedback option (the Cambridge learners' dictionaries mentioned before and Wordsmith) but I don't know what they do with the feedback (I'll have to give it a go and see). I presume/hope lexicographers do trial their dictionaries to some extent, but again, don't know if/how etc. What bugs me is publishers' glossy promotional websites that offer little hard information about what is actually IN the dictionary/CD-ROM (Oxford in particular springs to mind).
About your reactions to on-line dictionaries: I suppose they could make more of the multi-media potential, and no doubt they will in time. But, at least some of them are offering more than just the dictionary text. For example, according to their website promo, the new Cobuild English Dictionary (3 rd Ed) for Advanced Learners has a direct link from dictionary entries (every entry, I wonder?) to whole-sentence concordances (admittedly the corpus they're using is 'small' cf the entire Bank of English, but probably quite sufficient for learners). This is something I haven't seen offered anywhere else, and could be a very nice feature from the point of view of providing more information about possible contexts of use, polysemy, etc (Unfortunately, I haven't been able to try it out). Also, I now have the full CD-ROM version of the Cambridge Learner's Dictionary (= Intermediate level) on my computer, and it has additional features too. To use an example, searching for 'clear' (my favourite test-a-dictionary word!) produces a list of all the dictionary entries (headwords; plus phrasal verbs, phrases and compounds; and a huge list of semantically-related words/phrases) in the 'Index' (left window); clicking on any one opens the dictionary entry in another window; from there you can get more info by clicking on 'related words' (a new list, mostly field-related items, appears in the left window), and so on...
There is also a list of Filters you can select from to refine your search results. One of the things I particularly like about the Cambridge dictionaries is their use of semantic labels, with each 'sense' getting a separate headword. This makes it easy to quickly find the particular meaning/sense you're looking for. For example, just for 'clear' (adj) you get separate headwords with the following semantic labels: [UNDERSTAND], [HEAR/SEE], [NO DOUBT], [CERTAIN], [NOT BLOCKED], [WITHOUT CLOUDS], [TRANSPARENT]. A similar list for verbs. Unfortunately the Cambridge Web version dictionaries don't offer the extra features available on the CD-ROM, but still the basic dictionary is there for anyone to use.
Of course, right after I sent my message to Cobuild etc, I discovered that Longman also have a free on-line dictionary on the Web (based on their Dictionary of Contemporary English & Advanced American Dictionary as far as I can tell). It's called the 'Longman Web Dictionary' if anyone wants to try it.
And aha! (I've just quickly checked their entries for 'clear'), they have also started using semantic labels (though not separate headwords for each), and there is a 'Related Words' function as well, although it seems restricted to morphologically related items.
Well, I've gone on long enough. Hope others might find the available free on-line dictionaries useful.
Best,
Mary Lynn
with 
and 
