Can Authority be Sustained while Balancing Accessibility and Formality?

Nigar Hashimzade,Gareth D Myles,Georgina A Myles

doi:10.7146/hjlcb.v27i52.25132

Abstract

Economics has developed into a quantitative discipline that makes extensive use of mathematical and statistical concepts. When writing a dictionary for economics undergraduates it has to be recognised that many users will not have sufficient training in mathematics to benefi t from formal definitions of mathematical and statistical concepts. In fact, it is more than likely that the user will want the dictionary to provide an accessible version of a definition that avoids mathematical notation. Providing a verbal description of a mathematical concept has the risk that the outcome is both verbose (compared to a definition using appropriate mathematical symbols) and imprecise. For the author of a dictionary this raises the question of how to resolve this conflict between accessibility and formal correctness. We use a range of examples from the Oxford Dictionary of Economics to illustrate this conflict and to assess the extent to which a non-formal definition can be viewed as authoritative.

Highlights

The paper is based on our experiences of preparing the revised edition of the Oxford Dictionary of Economics and especially with delivering appropriate formality and rigor while ensuring that the dictionary provided definitions that were accessible by its intended audience. It was determined at the start of the revision process that the primary audience would be first-year undergraduate students in economics
We describe some of the landmarks in this evolution to provide a context for the issues that need to be confronted when writing a dictionary of economics
In this paper we described our approach to preparing a new edition of the Oxford University Press Dictionary of Economics

Summary

Introduction

The paper is based on our experiences of preparing the revised edition of the Oxford Dictionary of Economics and especially with delivering appropriate formality and rigor while ensuring that the dictionary provided definitions that were accessible by its intended audience. The revised version given in the 3rd edition abbreviates the definition to maintain the core information It provides the correct statement on the utility function and briefly explores the implications of satisficing: consumer behaviour The way in which consumers choose how to spend their incomes. Example 4 Further difficulties are illustrated by the definition of duality which has proved an important concept in the analysis of the consumer and the firm It has found numerous application in applied fields of economics. The observations made about defining a corner solution take us into a discussion of the appropriate level of mathematics and abstraction in the definitions This was a central concern in revising the Dictionary.

Example 6

Moving online

Conclusions

Dictionaries

Findings

Other literature