Merriam-Webster's Advanced Learner's English Dictionary (review)

Abstract

Reviews1 43 Merriam-Webster'sAdvanced Learner's English Dictionary. 2008. Springfield: Merriam-Webster. Pp. 2016. JL b 1IiC world of dictionaries for advanced learners of English has long been dominated by two British publishers: Oxford University Press, which published the first modern learner's dictionary, die learner's Dictionary of Current F.nglkh (now the Oxford Advanced learner's Dictionary, or OAlJ)), in 1948; and Longman, which entered the market with die Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (IJ)OCF) in 1 978. Both publishers have followed dieir flagship products with dictionaries for intermediate and basic learners, with picture dictionaries, and with electronic products. In 1981, Longman published an American version of its intermediate-level dictionary as the Ixmgman Dictionary ofAmerican English, and for more than a decade this dictionary was about all diat was available to learners who preferred American English—die huge market of students living and working in die United States, as well as learners outside die US (particularly in Japan and many countries in die Americas). American dictionary publishers did not specialize in dictionaries for learners and were relative latecomers in spotting die market potential in ESL products. When diey did decide to enter die fray in die 1990s, diey badly miscalculated. Some, such as Merriam-Webster and Webster's New World, created "basic" dictionaries by adapting an existing data set; others, such as Heinle, Random House, and NTC, opted for single-audior works. These books showed little or no evidence diat dieir compilers were aware ofwhat by dien was more dian forty years' wordi of research and innovation in die production of learner's dictionaries—of die importance of using a controlled defining vocabulary, of showing pronunciations in the International Phonetic Alphabet, ofshowing grammatical patterns, of examining corpora oflearners' essays to aid in die writing ofusage notes, ofusing corpora to determine die relative frequency ofwords, patterns, and expressions so as to aid in making inclusion decisions. In die meantime, bodi Cambridge University Press and Longman produced new corpus-based editions of intermediate-level American dictionaries, and Longman published the lemgman Advanced American Dictionary, essentially an Americanized version of the Ixmgman Dictionary ofContemporary Englkh. With the exception of die Newbury House dictionaries published by Heinle, which have had some success, the home-grown American products have not presented a real challenge to the dominance of the American English learner's dictionary market by British publishers. A decade ago, die publishers at Merriam-Webster saw, quite righüy, that there was room for a strong American contender, and set out to produce one. The resulting dictionary, Merriam-Webster's Advanced learner's F.nglkh Dictionary (MWAlJJ)), largely avoids the clear weaknesses of its predecessors, and represents a solid, well-edited, and authoritative resource. In reviewing the text, I will make reference to its chiefcompetitors, the Dictionaries: journal ofthe Dictionary Society ofNorth America 30 (2009), 143-150 144Reviews Macmillan F'.nglkh Dictionaryfor Advanced Learners ofAmerican F.nglkh (MFD) and the Longman Advanced American Dictionary (IAAl)) . Headwords and the Organization of Entries The number ofdiscrete lexical items—"100,000 words and phrases"—that are defined in MWAIFJ) is comparable to that of its competitors. Most learner's dictionaries list each part ofspeech as a separate homograph; MWAUDAso gives separate homographs for etymologically distinct words, e.g., calf the baby cow and the calf of your leg. It includes some British English terms and expressions, much as British dictionaries include some American ones. But sometimes the choice of inclusion is odd, and I suspect this may be because while the MerriamWebster citation resources are voluminous, a citation bank does not have the characteristics of a corpus that make it possible for a lexicographer tojudge centrality and frequency when considering whether to include a given term. Thus MWAIFJ) has an entry for cloud-cuckoo-land while the British edition of MFJ) does not include the American equivalent, la-la land; yet MWAIJD fails to provide an entry for earlier, even though this comparative form is frequent and its use should be illustrated for learners. MWIAFJ) gives the pronunciation of headwords in the International Phonetic Alphabet, which is now the undisputed norm for a learner's dictionary. Unfortunately , stress patterns are not shown...