DSNA 23 VIRTUAL MEETING ANNOUNCED: JUNE 4, 2021


DSNA 23. President Elizabeth Knowles and the DSNA executive board are pleased to announce that DSNA’s 23rd biennial meeting will take place virtually on Friday, June 4th, 2021. Save the date for an exciting meeting, different in structure from previous DSNA biennials! Further details to come soon.

DSNA 24. To maintain DSNA’s history of meeting in odd-numbered years, the meeting previously scheduled for 2021 at the University of Colorado, Boulder will instead take place in 2023 at that university.

ELEXIS tools and services

17 ELEXIS partners are constantly developing and improving ELEXIS tools and services for lexicography.

https://elex.is/tools-and-services/

We are constantly enriching our resources to enable smart research not only for lexicographers and researches in Natural Language Processing, but also for teachers and other professionals without formal training in lexicography. And what better way to start off a new school year than with newly developed resources?

Below, you can find a comprehensive overview of all open-access resources that are currently available. The newest ones are listed first, but you can find a quick list of all resources right here:

  • OneClick Dictionary
  • Clusty
  • NAISC
  • Elexifier
  • VerbAtlas
  • SyntagNet
  • SketchEngine
  • Lexonomy
  • Elexifinder
  • Lexicographic newsfeed

New Editor of Dictionaries

The Executive Board of DSNA is delighted to announce that Lynne Murphy has been appointed as the next Editor of Dictionaries, to take over the role when Ed Finegan steps down next year. Lynne is an accomplished lexicologist and theoretical semanticist, the author of Semantic Relations and the Lexicon (Cambridge UP, 2003) and Lexical Meaning (Cambridge UP, 2010), as well as co-author of Key Terms in Semantics (Bloomsbury, 2010) and Antonyms in English (Cambridge, 2012). She is also author of the extremely popular The Prodigal Tongue: The Love-Hate Relationship between American and British English (Penguin, 2018), written with support of a very competitive National Endowment for the Humanities Fellowship for public-facing scholarship. She is the Lynneguist behind the blog, Separated by a Common Language. She has taught at the University of the Witwatersrand, Baylor University, and the University of Sussex, and has been a member of DSNA at least since 1992, when she was studying for her Ph.D. with Ladislav Zgusta at the University of Illinois.

Lynne’s scholarly sophistication and command of style, her experience with writing and editing in various registers, her deep roots in the Society and American lexicography, and her access to the United Kingdom and Europe, all contribute to making her an exceptionally well-qualified choice to take over Dictionaries. I know you will join me in welcoming her appointment in the warmest terms.

Elizabeth Knowles

President, DSNA

2021 Conference Postponed

2021 Conference Postponed

With great regret, but having carefully considered the circumstances relating to the COVID pandemic, the Executive Board of DSNA has agreed to postpone the planned in-person 2021 biennial meeting. The Board has an unwavering commitment to holding an in-person meeting, with the focus already publicized, at a later date to be announced as soon as possible. We are also exploring the feasibility of holding an exciting one-day virtual meeting in June of 2021.

More details will follow, but it seemed right to convey the key information without delay.

Elizabeth Knowles
President, DSNA

Call for Papers 23 Biennial DSNA

Call for Papers

The 23rd Biennial Dictionary Society of North America Conference will be held at the University of Colorado, Boulder, in June 2021. Presentations on any aspect of lexicography and lexicology in any language are welcome. Those focused on aspects of lexicology and lexicography of the American West are particularly encouraged. The conference will feature a workshop and plenary panel on lexicography of indigenous North American languages.

All presenters must be members of the DSNA. To join or renew membership, click on the “Join Us!” link at the website dictionarysociety.com. The program will begin with presentations on the evening of Wednesday, June 2 and will run through Saturday afternoon, June 5.

Workshop proposals (including pedagogy sessions) should be between 800 and 1000 words, excluding references. Submit these to Orin Hargraves, the conference host, at orin.hargraves@colorado.edu.

Abstracts for presentations of 20 minutes, 10 minutes Q&A, are invited. Submission of abstracts (300-500 words) is via EasyAbs (http://linguistlist.org/easyabs/DSNA2021Boulder). Please do not put any self-identifying references in your abstract.

Workshop submission (to conference host) is open from 1 Sept 2020 to 1 Dec 2020.

Abstract submission for papers (via EasyAbs)  will take place in two rounds:

  • Round 1 is open from 1 Sept 2020 to 15 October 2020. Round 1 presenters will be notified by 16 Nov 2020 of their acceptance.
  • Round 2 is open from 1 Nov 2020 to 5 Jan 2021. Round 2 presenters will be notified by 15 Feb 2021 of their acceptance.

Conference Dates: Thursday, June 2 to Saturday, June 5, 2021

Location: the University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.

Information about the sponsor: The Dictionary Society of North America promotes the development, practice, and study of lexicography, and the use, compilation, curation, marketing, maintenance, and scholarly examination of dictionaries and related reference works. It provides forums for discussion and dissemination of information on all of these topics, including a peer-reviewed journal, a newsletter, a blog, and biennial meetings. The DSNA was formed in 1975 to bring together people interested in dictionary making, study, collection, and use. Our members include people working on dictionaries, academics who engage in research and writing about dictionaries, dictionary collectors, librarians, booksellers, translators, linguists, publishers, writers, collectors, journalists, and people with an avocational interest in dictionaries. The only requirement for membership is an expression of interest in language, in words, dictionaries and lexicography, or any combination of these.

Publishing Information Fall 2020

The DSNA Newsletter is usually published twice a year, in the spring and fall. The editor is David Jost. Associate Editor is Peter Chipman. Member news items can be sent to dsna.membernews@gmail.com. Other Newsletter correspondence, such as articles for publication, should be directed to the editor at dajebj@gmail.com.

Send correspondence re membership, etc. to

Kory Stamper, Executive Secretary, DSNA
PO Box 537
Collingswood, NJ 08108-0537

This issue:  Vol. 44 No. 2 (2020)

Cumulative issue #90

Quotations Elizabeth Knowles Fall 2020

Angel of the Pestilence

Elizabeth Knowles, April 2020

In the last week of January 2020, when I was exploring possible walks in the vicinity of the market town of Wantage, I noticed an unusual commemorative inscription on the (exterior) north wall of the chancel of the parish church of St Michael’s Wantage. (I had no idea, of course, that a couple of months later we would be one of many countries grappling with a twenty-first century version of a “pestilence.”) The inscription reads: “Between this Wall and the pathway were interred from Sept: 29th to Oct: 15th 1832 the bodies of sixteen persons, who with three others of this Town had died of the Asiatic Cholera, the ravages of which disease were mercifully terminated by Him, who alone could say to the Angel of the Pestilence—‘It is enough, stay now thine hand.’”  As the diligent editor of a dictionary of quotations, I immediately wondered about the source of the quotation, and how recognizable it would have been to the community for whom it was first put up. Ironically, by the time I was able to investigate it in detail my resources were somewhat limited, since lockdown in response to that modern pestilence of Coronavirus had closed the Bodleian and restricted my researches to what could be done from my desk at home, but I have at least been able to establish an outline picture. (I should perhaps say at the outset that my interest and investigation have been lexicographical in nature rather than theological.)

The OED entry for cholera (updated in March 2012) is helpful in providing a context for what happened in Wantage in 1832. It gives 1807 as the first recorded date of what is now the most common sense of the word, denoting an acute infectious disease caused by the bacterium Vibrio cholerae and frequently occurring in epidemics or pandemics. It provides the further information that it is endemic in parts of South Asia, and that the alternative term “Asiatic cholera” is still used. Cholera as defined here reached Western Europe in a pandemic of 1831, of which the outbreak in Wantage must clearly have been a part.

While it seemed likely that the source was biblical, and (given the date) from the Authorized Version, I did not recognize the words from the “Bible” entry in the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations. Research at home confirmed that they did not appear in ODQ; nor could I find them referenced in other collections. It took further work online to trace them to 2 Samuel 24:15-16, verses which recount a story of divine punishment enacted in the form of “a pestilence upon Israel” in the days of king David. Initially, seventy thousand died “from Dan even to Beer-sheba.” However, when Jerusalem itself was threatened, there was a change. In the words of the Authorized Version, “The Lord … said to the angel that destroyed the people, It is enough: stay now thine hand.”  As a churchgoing Anglican, I am reasonably familiar with texts forming part of the Lectionary, but I had never come across these verses being read or preached on. I wondered therefore how recognizable they would have been when the epitaph was placed on the church wall, and undertook some further exploration.  I was interested both in the use of the unattributed quotation itself, and in the phrase “Angel of the Pestilence.”  

While I did not find significant general uses of the quotation from 2 Samuel, the Book of Common Prayer (1662) includes the text of a prayer for use “In the time of any common Plague or Sickness.” This refers directly to the “plague of Pestilence” which killed “threescore and ten thousand” in the time of David, and clearly alludes to the story in 2 Samuel 24:15-16. It is highly likely to have been used in in churches during the cholera outbreak of the 1830s, and would thus have ensured familiarity with the relevant biblical passage.

 “Angel of the Pestilence” as a phrase does appear to have been used in the context of 1832. It occurs in 1833 as the title of a poem by “J. W.”, appearing in The Aurora Borealis: a literary annual, edited by “Members of the Society of Friends”, and published in Newcastle upon Tyne and London. “The Angel of the Pestilence” in this collection is an eight-page dramatic poem in which the angel personifies the deadly infection spreading across the world. The phrase appears again two years later in the title of a prose reflection on “the Angel of the Pestilence”  as “the instrument of inflicting that disorder which hath lately visited the nations, and smitten its millions” (“The Angel of the Pestilence” in John Cox (ed.) The Friend of Sinners, 1835).  I take this to refer to the cholera pandemic.

From the admittedly rather limited resources I can currently look at, it does not look as though “Angel of the Pestilence” developed any very substantial use, other than in the particular context of the 1830s. There was of course already an established rival of which it is presumably a more specialized variant. OED dates the more familiar “angel of death” from the mid sixteenth century, and Byron’s 1815 poem The Destruction of Sennacherib provides a high-profile example from the early nineteenth century of a similarly fatal angelic visitor, in the couplet “For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast, /And breathed on the face of the foe as he passed.” (Lines which, of course, are likely to be found across a whole range of dictionaries of quotations.) It may well be that “Angel of the Pestilence” it is too specific to have the general utility that marks the linguistically successful quotation or phrase. When John Bright, Liberal politician and reformer, spoke in the House of Commons in February 1855 describing the impact on British households of losses in the Crimea, the more general phrase gave his words the necessary impact: “The angel of death has been abroad throughout the land; you may almost hear the beating of his wings.” A personification which limited the agency through which the angel exerted power would not have served him. Added to that, as time goes on, “pestilence” to a degree loses some range of usage, and acquires a more archaic flavour—although to the inhabitants of Wantage in 1832, faced with a terrifying new disease, it was presumably a vivid and immediate image. In terms of quotations, I find the Wantage epitaph a striking example of the way in which local circumstances may mean that in a certain time and place, a quotation that might more widely be considered obscure can be very well known.

State of Lexicography Orin Hargraves Fall 2020

The World English Dictionary that the World Didn’t Need

Orin Hargraves

Twenty years ago, the Society’s journal Dictionaries (No. 21) published a long and detailed review of the Encarta World English Dictionary (EWED) by Sidney Landau: a DSNA fellow, former Society president, and perhaps the most highly respected name in American lexicography for his widely read Dictionaries: the Art and Craft of Lexicography. In his 13-page review, Sidney takes apart and discards nearly every promotional claim made for the dictionary and then analyzes it carefully in comparison to its market peers, finding it wanting in nearly every respect.

I was one of the “more than 250 lexicographers from 10 countries” (a promotional claim) that worked on EWED over the three or so years when it went from flawed vision to published book. Now, 20 years after the fact, is a good time to reflect on EWED’s stunted career. When it was published, EWED was put forward as “a publishing event that will set the standard for all future dictionaries.” Its publisher (Bloomsbury, a then fairly young UK publisher) and financial backers (Microsoft) envisioned for it an eminent place on the reference bookshelf beside the other respected English dictionaries of the day.

Today, you can buy remaindered copies of EWED (updated only once, in 2004) for less than a fiver and you will probably have to search very deep in the stacks to find it in any library. What went wrong? I’ve reconstructed my involvement with EWED  from diary entries over the years I worked on it and added a few reflections at the end.

The story begins in London, which I was about to quit, having lived there for most of the ten previous years. During that time I had established a meagre livelihood as a freelance lexicographer, having worked on various projects for Longman and Cambridge.

20 March 1996: I had a meeting with Kathy Rooney [publisher at Bloomsbury] this afternoon. I signed a confidentiality agreement so restrictive that I probably run the risk of my heirs being sued by writing about the subject of our talk here – but anyway it emerges there is an all new, from scratch native speaker dictionary in the works and I might have the opp’ty to play a role in its formation – the next few weeks should tell.

Our continuing talks were fruitful, and I soon returned to the States. I began work compiling the headword list for letter A and also recruiting other freelancers to work on the project, for a bounty of £50 per head. My impression at this point was that money was no object for whatever needed to be done to move the dictionary forward.

18 Oct 1996: Kathy Rooney [now editor-in-chief of EWED] and Faye Carney [executive editor], her right hand, visited last weekend. It was one of these classic fall days. We had lunch [in nearby Hanover, PA] in a big sunny room overlooking lawns. It went splendidly. They asked if I would work in London for 2-3 months next year and I said yes, not wanting to say no, and wanting to keep a door open. . . . At present I’m still rounding up lexicographers for them and editing a section that one of their English lexies compiled.

I continued to work on EWED for the next three months, defining. At the time I was living rent free but with no other income at a meditation retreat center, where I was the caretaker and cook; the income from Bloomsbury was useful, and the work agreeable. We worked on Windows-based software, homegrown at Bloomsbury just for EWED. The part of the screen reserved  for the definition was tiny and if you went over 25 words it beeped at you, irritatingly. This was to discourage prolix definitions.

On New Year’s Day, 1997, I wrote “I can picture one version of myself just plodding along here for the next 2 or 3 years, feeding at the Bloomsbury trough, arranging occasional diversions here and there – but this seems too stultifying.” Two weeks later I wrote “Bloomsbury requires cogitation which suddenly I have little patience for. At best I seem to be get in a couple of hours a day, much preferring to attend to all the things that want doing around here [at the meditation center].”

The opportunity arose for me to spend some months in Australia with my meditation teachers. Though I knew it would mean much less or no work on the dictionary, it was appealing to me at the time: the teachers were getting on in years and I knew I would never have another such opportunity. So I packed up and set off for Perth, Western Australia, pretty much leaving EWED behind and becoming completely absorbed into the busy life of the meditation center there. I didn’t return to the states until late April, and didn’t properly get back to work on EWED till June, where I find this entry in my diary.

6 June 1997: The week has passed quickly and appears in memory as a steady slog in the dictionary, broken up with minor diversions. This is of necessity. Bloomsbury is up in arms at my long idleness; industry is necessary to regain their high opinion. It’s been tedious but I’ve kept at it with good results.

Six weeks later, I’m still at it:

21 July 1997: My nose is almost continuously buried in the dictionary as I dutifully try to redeem myself with Bloomsbury. I think it’s working, and a side benefit has been the fairly hefty earnings – about $750 a week for the 15 or so hours I give it. The center suffers proportionally and is in a state . . .

In September I returned to London for the promised working on site at Bloomsbury, which I began after spending some time on a retreat with my teachers in Wiltshire.

28 Sept 1997: I don’t think anything could have prepared me for the very sudden transition from meditation retreat to Soho Square office and I spent the first 2 days in shock, waiting only for the day to end but then sleeping fitfully under the weight of stress. By week’s end, however, I seem to have made the adjustment and had mastered behaving, perhaps even feeling, like an ordinary working stiff. The office and its inhabitants are all agreeable, save for the “other American,” with whom I share a space: he’s a sad divorcé who swears too much and is disillusioned with life.

It may sound exotic to work in office overlooking Soho Square; it was not. Our workspace was a tiny converted storage closet, in which three adjacent work stations had been set up, with a narrow aisle behind them. One of my colleagues lay down in this aisle one day to rest; we complained because we were then unable to scoot our chairs back. But the work had to go on, and we all adapted.

11 Oct 1997: I am caught up in the demanding routine of work, which takes far more time than I ever thought it would. Though the weeks seem to pass quickly the days drag by; the work is so tedious and lacking in variety. I had hoped there might be a variety of things to do here, but the production schedule is such that there is nothing for anyone to do but work, work, work. I’m checking sections of the dictionary, giving it the penultimate read and allegedly getting it into publishable form. I am unused to dedicating hours of unbroken attention to such a task, and it is dreary.

8 Nov 1997: Work, to my surprise, has settled into an easily manageable routine. In the first weeks here I never imagined this would happen, it just seemed too unnatural to spend so many hours a day concentrating in front of a monitor and I was sure it could only be done by grim force, but now it comes easily. And suddenly only three weeks remain in my 10-week onsite commitment.

I took a short vacation on the continent following the time in London and returned to the States in December, continuing EWED work remotely as I had done before. It was not all roses but it was by then my longest running lexicography gig and still going strong.

22 Dec 1997: The dictionary rolls on in the background with unprecedented dullness. A long section I have now contains block, blood, blow, and blue – all major quagmires. And this is only B. After more months of this I’ll be barking, but oh-so-flush with cash.

14 Feb 1998: I’ve received via email a lengthy feedback report on one of the batches of work I edited months ago. It has had a galvanizing effect, the thrust of which is to work myself out of this lexicographical gig as soon as circumstances permit. It’s mostly an ego thing and comes down to this: I don’t conceive of myself as having lived these 44 years so I would have the opportunity to quietly read on my screen the pedantic criticism of this ___________, Bloomsbury’s ex-OUP “senior checker” who has clearly relished her role of documenting the minute failings in all that she sees. If I stay in this business, really all I have to look forward to is becoming her or becoming _________, well-intentioned and bright but charged with an impossible task of turning out the perfect dictionary in record time, using only mortals.

21 Feb 1998: I purr away at the dictionary, sometimes contentedly, sometimes exasperatedly. It is a monumental task of monotony but it pays so exceedingly well I couldn’t think of abandoning it—not now anyway.

11 May 1998: The weekdays follow a set pattern: after breakfast I work without respite on the dictionary till I finish the day’s quota, being at least 1/5 of the batch in hand. If I’m lucky I finish by 2:30.

24 Aug 1998: There is this raspberry seed in my wisdom tooth: Bloomsbury has drastically cut my pay (owing mostly to budget mismanagement, I think), and I’m suddenly earning $200 a week less than formerly. I’m trying every weapon in my arsenal to squeeze more dimes out of them, so far without success.

28 Aug 1998: Bloomsbury has relented half-way on their swingeing pay cut and restored some $ (and dignity) to my checks, but not before an awfully bad taste developed in my mouth about the whole affair.

6 September 1998: Little passes under my nose but the dictionary. I don’t actually mind doing it, I even enjoy it a good deal of the time, but I don’t like the notion that life is ever passing by as I do it. It requires so much of my time that there is none to reflect about what I’d rather be doing. I suppose I should be thankful.

7 Oct 1998: Bloomsbury has not restored me to the full glory of £19 an hour, which I feel that I so richly deserve, so I’m going to take on a tentative project from OUP for $30 an hour. If it’s enjoyable I might push over Bloomsb. altogether, though it’s probably prudent to keep a foot in both doors.

11 Nov 1998: Dictionary duty has finally stabilized and now won’t require anything but my time and attention for the next several months. OUP is a reasonable afternoon diversion for 2 or 3 hours, and the morning is still Bloomsbury. Kathy Rooney has finally relented and restored my pay to what it was before the August cut.

21 Jan 1999: The dictionary has arrived at the most stultifying stage, where one is asked to quickly review hundreds of entries, checking that they are technically complete and correct. It requires no creative effort, only mind-numbing attention to detail.

4 April 1999: Bloomsbury, at last, is in death throes and I expect the dictionary will be all finished on Friday.

The published dictionary appeared in July 1999 with much promotional fanfare. Sidney was not alone in being underwhelmed by its achievement; it received at best lukewarm reviews everywhere. There are many reasons for its failure but they can all be summarized under the heading of the main one: you can’t write a quality dictionary of English from scratch in three years using a workforce of internationally dispersed lexicographers with little training, varying ability, and wavering commitment.

Having built the database, Bloomsbury (and Microsoft, initially) were eager to recoup their investment, and very soon spun off a reduced version of EWED to compete with the “college” dictionaries. It was called Microsoft Encarta College Dictionary: The First Dictionary For The Internet Age. A serious miscalculation there was that the dictionary wasn’t published on the internet. This volume also did not succeed in making its way onto the reference shelf of many schools, libraries, or high school graduates.

A couple of years later, both EWED and the college dictionary were updated, now with “Webster’s” added to the titles of both. This didn’t work either and was, to my mind, the dictionary version of jumping the shark.

Today, the data from the EWED database has disappeared from public view and it isn’t even licensed on any of the dictionary aggregator sites—a shame, to my mind, because there are thousands of solid and original definitions that stand in good comparison to others and that merit study. No titles drawn from EWED data are in print. The reference shelf of contemporary dictionaries in book form no longer exists, Microsoft has mothballed the Encarta brand, and Bloomsbury, though no longer in the dictionary business, has achieved great international success in many other areas of publishing. Think Harry Potter, for example.

I benefited greatly from my association with EWED and I’m grateful for the experience and the income it provided. If the money and the market had been there, it could have been raised to a higher standard and I think it would have eventually established itself beside its more respected peers. But the money was withdrawn and the market collapsed.

I have lunch with Kathy and Faye whenever I’m in London; we reminisce nostalgically about the old days in Soho Square.