Dictionaries no NOT contain factual information

[Chuz Life]

Yes, I'm glad you finally seem to be getting it. Dictionaries do NOT contain factual information. They contain subjective definitions of words that can (and do) change over time.

Looks like an interesting poll question.

Dictionaries do NOT contain factual information

A: True

B: False

 

[Binary_Digit]

A.

Dictionaries do contain facts about language, and they do change over time because language changes over time. Sometimes they define the language and sometimes they reflect the language, it's like a circular dependency.

(Maybe a mod can help get a poll going)

 

[spud_meister]

well, lets look it up in the dictionary, as we must have a few definitions to play with.


dic·tion·ar·y
   /ˈdɪkʃəˌnɛri/ Show Spelled[dik-shuh-ner-ee] Show IPA
–noun,plural-ar·ies.
1.
a book containing a selection of the words of a language, usually arranged alphabetically, giving information about their meanings, pronunciations, etymologies, inflected forms, etc., expressed in either the same or another language; lexicon; glossary: a dictionary of English; a Japanese-English dictionary.
2.
a book giving information on particular subjects or on a particular class of words, names, or facts, usually arranged alphabetically: a biographical dictionary; a dictionary of mathematics.



and only in one definition does it mention facts, so therefore we should all nitpick the definition we wish to use to suit our arguments.

 

[Josie]

Dictionaries aren't fiction. I think we all learned this in 3rd grade.

 

[Chuz Life]

well, lets look it up in the dictionary, as we must have a few definitions to play with.

dic·tion·ar·y
   /ˈdɪkʃəˌnɛri/ Show Spelled[dik-shuh-ner-ee] Show IPA
–noun,plural-ar·ies.
1. a book containing a selection of the words of a language, usually arranged alphabetically, giving information about their meanings, pronunciations, etymologies, inflected forms, etc., expressed in either the same or another language; lexicon; glossary: a dictionary of English; a Japanese-English dictionary.
2. a book giving information on particular subjects or on a particular class of words, names, or facts, usually arranged alphabetically: a biographical dictionary; a dictionary of mathematics.

and only in one definition does it mention facts, so therefore we should all nitpick the definition we wish to use to suit our arguments.

The claim was that a dictionary contains NO facts at all.

That's kind of an absolute.

 

[MyOwnDrum]

Dictionaries define things. Those definitions are factual.

 

[Arch Enemy]

The claim was that a dictionary contains NO facts at all.

That's kind of an absolute.

Then why do you make any sort of statement if there is no factual definition for any word?

Language would be absolutely tragic if your way of thinking way true and there was no fact with the words in the dictionary, which is just jotting down common language.

 

[Caine]

Dictionaries are liberally biased.

:mrgreen:

 

[Arch Enemy]

Dictionaries are liberally biased.

:mrgreen:

Cynical Asshole

 

[Apocalypse]

Sun -noun
1.
(often initial capital letter) the star that is the central body of the solar system, around which the planets revolve and from which they receive light and heat: its mean distance from the earth is about 93 million miles (150 million km), its diameter about 864,000 miles (1.4 million km), and its mass about 330,000 times that of the earth; its period of surface rotation is about 26 days at its equator but longer at higher latitudes.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sun

Clearly the above is factual information, hence we have an example of a dictionary that contains factual information.

Answering otherwise is going against facts. :2razz:

 

[Caine]

mar·riage

   /ˈmær

ɪdʒ/ Show Spelled[mar-ij] Show IPA
–noun1.a.the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.

b.a similar institution involving partners of the same gender: gay marriage.

Total Liberal bias....

 

[spud_meister]

Sun -noun
1.
(often initial capital letter) the star that is the central body of the solar system, around which the planets revolve and from which they receive light and heat: its mean distance from the earth is about 93 million miles (150 million km), its diameter about 864,000 miles (1.4 million km), and its mass about 330,000 times that of the earth; its period of surface rotation is about 26 days at its equator but longer at higher latitudes.
Sun | Define Sun at Dictionary.com

Clearly the above is factual information, hence we have an example of a dictionary that contains factual information.

Answering otherwise is going against facts. :2razz:

how do you know thats fact, i demand you get a tape measure and a thermometer and a set of scales and confirm it.

 

[Chuz Life]

Then why do you make any sort of statement if there is no factual definition for any word?

Language would be absolutely tragic if your way of thinking were true and there was no fact with the words in the dictionary, which is just jotting down common language.

I agree.

I hope you weren't of the impression that I believed otherwise.

 

[The Uncola]

meh...

... this requires a "poll?"

Wow.:roll:

 

[MyOwnDrum]

meh...

... this requires a "poll?"

Wow.:roll:

Anything can warrant a poll, my friend...

 

[earthworm]

No vote, again
Neither T nor F.
A great deal of "factual info" is only good for the short term, and this term may mean one second or one millienia...
As I "speak" a man is inventing a word, at the same time another word is on its way to obsolescence..
Its an ever changing world in which we live, the tea-baggers will be left behind with their hats and guns, and, dare I say, Bibles.

 

[earthworm]

Cynical Asshole

Civility a must??

An effective ban should also be a must!

 

[Apocalypse]

Anything can warrant a poll, my friend...

Your actions in this forum have made that statement a factual information. :2razz:

 

[MyOwnDrum]

No vote, again
Neither T nor F.
A great deal of "factual info" is only good for the short term, and this term may mean one second or one millienia...
As I "speak" a man is inventing a word, at the same time another word is on its way to obsolescence..
Its an ever changing world in which we live, the tea-baggers will be left behind with their hats and guns, and, dare I say, Bibles.

Cue Outrage: “Teabagger” Is An Oxford Word Of The Year Finalist | Mediaite

teabagger made the finalist list for New Oxford American dictionary's new word of the year.

In a press release touting “unfriend” as the word of the year, the New Oxford American Dictionary may have unwittingly made a more controversial move than the New Oxford American Dictionary pretty much ever does.

No, it wasn’t another cutesy tech neologism: they included “teabagger” as one of their Word of the Year finalists.

According to the release, they define “teabagger” as “a person who protests President Obama’s tax policies and stimulus package, often through local demonstrations known as ‘Tea Party’ protests (in allusion to the Boston Tea Party of 1773).”

Their definition doesn’t touch upon any of the raunchier, more testicular connotations of the word, which Keith Olbermann and Anderson Cooper had a lot of fun with in April. Cooper can take a lot of credit for the popularization of the phrase: in response to David Gergen’s questions about the Republican Party’s abilities to organize and articulate a message, Cooper infamously quipped, “It’s hard to talk when you’re teabagging.”‘

Lest anyone too quickly accuse the New Oxford American Dictionary crowd of insidious liberal bias, it’s worth pointing out that “Obamanation,” “Obamamessiah,” “Obamacles,” and “Obamalypse” were highlighted as notable words.

Also, “tramp stamp” made the cut. Finally.

 

[1069]

The claim was that a dictionary contains NO facts at all.

That's kind of an absolute.

A dictionary contains no objective facts.
Language is a social construct, and a constantly-evolving one at that.
That's why new, revised editions of dictionaries are issued all the time.
It doesn't mean the previous edition of the dictionary was fiction, or that it was wrong (at the time); but it's wrong and/or incomplete now, and therefore needs to be revised.

Hope this helps. :2wave:

 

[Arch Enemy]

Civility a must??

An effective ban should also be a must!

Caine assumes the title.

 

[molten_dragon]

I stand by what I said. For a dictionary to be useful, the definitions within it must reflect current usage of words. While those usages might be agreed on by large groups of people, they're still subjective.

However, I will concede that the definitions of some words seem to be pretty much fixed, and don't seem to change over time.

 

[Kelzie]

I stand by what I said. For a dictionary to be useful, the definitions within it must reflect current usage of words. While those usages might be agreed on by large groups of people, they're still subjective.

However, I will concede that the definitions of some words seem to be pretty much fixed, and don't seem to change over time.

Over enough time, all words change. That's the nature of language and the reason there are so many languages.

 

[molten_dragon]

Over enough time, all words change. That's the nature of language and the reason there are so many languages.

My point is that words (and their definitions) don't define what a thing IS. Therefore, dictionary definitions aren't factual information. Since the OP took my original post out of context, I'll use it as an example.

He was making the argument in the abortion forum that a human embryo, zygote, or fetus is a child for the sole reason that a medical dictionary lists something like "an unborn fetus" as one of the definitions of the word "child".

My counter argument was that just because a dictionary calls something by a certain name does not mean that it is that thing. That's why I still say that dictionaries don't contain factual information. Dictionaries tell us a lot about what things are called, and how society uses language, but that's it. They aren't a source of facts.

 

[winston53660]

Over enough time, all words change. That's the nature of language and the reason there are so many languages.

Well isn't that just totally bad ass:mrgreen: