Examples
The New Oxford American Dictionary contains many more examples of words in use than any other comparable dictionary. Generally, they are there to show typical uses of the word or sense. All examples are authentic, in that they represent actual usage. In the past, dictionaries typically have used
Word Histories
The etymologies in standard dictionaries explain the language from which a word was brought into English, the period at which it is first recorded in English, and the development of modern word forms. While the New Oxford American Dictionary does this, it also goes further. It explains sense development as well as morphologi- cal (or form) development. Information is presented clearly and with a minimum of technical terminology, and the perspective taken is that of the general user who would like to know about word origins but who is not a philological specialist. In this context, the history of how and why a particular meaning developed from an apparently quite different older meaning is likely to be at least as interesting as, for example, what the original form was in Latin or Greek.
For example, the word history for the word oaf shows how the present meaning developed from the meaning ‘elf,’ while the entry for compass shows how the sense ‘magnetic compass’ may have been influenced by Italian.
Additional special features of the New Oxford American Dictionary include “internal etymologies” and “folk etymologies.” Internal etymologies are given within entries to explain the origin of particular senses, phrases, or idioms. For example, how did the figurative use of red herring come about? Why do we call something a flash in the pan? See the internal etymologies under red herring and flash.
The New Oxford American Dictionary presents the information in a straightforward,
In a similar vein, folk
nevertheless well known to many
Researching word histories is similar in some respects to archaeology: the evidence is often partial or not there at all, and etymologists must make informed decisions using the evidence available, however inadequate it may be. From time to time, new evidence becomes available, and the known history of a word may need to be reconsidered. In this, the New Oxford American Dictionary has been able to draw on the extensive expertise and ongoing research of the Oxford English Dictionary.
Usage Notes (
)
Interest in questions of good usage is widespread among English speakers everywhere, and many issues are hotly debated. In the New Oxford American Dictionary, traditional issues have been reappraised, and guidance is given on various points, old and new. The aim is to help people to use the language more accurately, more clearly, and more elegantly, and to give information and offer reassurance in the face of some of the more baffling assertions about “correctness” that are sometimes made.
This reappraisal has involved looking carefully at evidence of actual usage (in the Oxford databank, the British National Corpus, the citations collected by the Oxford North American Reading Program, and other sources) in order to find out where mistakes are actually being made, and where confusion and ambiguity actually arise. The issues on which journalists and others tend to comment have been reassessed and a judgment made about whether their comments are justified.
From the 15th century onward, traditionalists have been objecting to particular senses of certain English words and phrases, for example, “due to” and “hopefully.” Certain grammatical structures, too, have been singled out for adverse comment, notably the split infinitive and the use of a preposition at the end of a clause. Some of these objections are founded on very dubious arguments, for example, the notion that English grammatical structures should precisely parallel those of Latin or that
34