What's the preoccupation with the 1828 Webster's Dictionary?

[snozzberry]

I was reading a fundie blog today where she was listing her favorite resources including the 1828 Webster's Dictionary. We're homeschoolers and I vaguely remember this dictionary for sale in *the* homeschool curriculum catalog (A Christian company, but they sell from many of the big secular publishers and are literally the only ones out there doing it, so what's a secular homeschooler to do?). I didn't pay it much mind then, but now I want to know. What do fundie's have against the Webster I can buy on the shelf at the bookstore?

Edited the post to change the year for a more precise reference.

[pamplemousse]

We've seen how some of them are so infatuated with their idea of the Victorian lifestyle and times. That, and the more modern versions might have (gasp!) language that no one should see!

[clibbyjo]

I was reading a fundie blog today where she was listing her favorite resources including the 1868 Webster's Dictionary. We're homeschoolers and I vaguely remember this dictionary for sale in *the* homeschool curriculum catalog (A Christian company, but they sell from many of the big secular publishers and are literally the only ones out there doing it, so what's a secular homeschooler to do?). I didn't pay it much mind then, but now I want to know. What do fundie's have against the Webster I can buy on the shelf at the bookstore?

Well, we are homeschoolers and we have a Webster's Children's Dictionary and I think a regular Webster and an Oxford I picked up at Goodwill. The kids are more likely to just look something up on the computer nowadays.

[kaetrin]

Vision Forum sells the 1828 with this asinine blurb:

"This gigantic, oversized, heavy book is perhaps second only to the Bible in terms of importance in your home. When Noah Webster first published this book, he understood that whoever defined the words of a culture would capture that culture. So he sought to give the American people a dictionary in which words have meaning in terms of their relationship to Jesus Christ. In fact, this is the only comprehensive dictionary of the English language in print that seeks to communicate a distinctively biblical worldview, even to the point of using Scriptures in the definitions.

Your children can join the ranks of those generations of American leaders who were weaned on Webster. Our book is sturdy and well bound with acid-free paper and a gold foil stamp. A worthy investment."

Talk about a prescriptive theory of language... No wonder normal people can't understand fundie-speak. They are "taking dominion" by ignoring almost 200 years of linguistic development and/or redefining words to suit themselves.

[Nora509]

Haha! Maybe in the 1868 Webster's, 'purpose' IS a verb!

[twin2]

If I'm ever purposed to write a dictionary, I'm going to put a big ol' picture of Dougie right next to the entry douche cannoe.

[Deleted12]

Maybe it's in the public domain?

[Guest Anonymous]

If I'm ever purposed to write a dictionary, I'm going to put a big ol' picture of Dougie right next to the entry douche cannoe.

And one with Dougie + interns alongside "douche flotilla."

[twin2]

Maybe it's in the public domain?

IIRC, at some point in time Webster became a stark raving Calvinist. That's probably why Dougie likes him. That and everyone needs a dictionary, and Dougie likes making money.

[GenerationCedarchip]

Maybe it's in the public domain?

It seems like a good chunk of the overpriced books at VF are in the public domain but they don't exactly advertise that inconvenient little fact. :naughty:

[kaetrin]

If I'm ever purposed to write a dictionary, I'm going to put a big ol' picture of Dougie right next to the entry douche cannoe.

The ATI child in me is compelled to point out (after seeing this mistake many times from others as well) that you can't be purposed. It's never used in the passive voice; only the active. So "If I ever purpose to write..." is what a real Gothardite would say.

Just helping to perfect everyone's undercover fundie skillz!

[O Latin]

Vision Forum sells the 1828 with this asinine blurb:

"This gigantic, oversized, heavy book is perhaps second only to the Bible in terms of importance in your home. When Noah Webster first published this book, he understood that whoever defined the words of a culture would capture that culture. So he sought to give the American people a dictionary in which words have meaning in terms of their relationship to Jesus Christ. In fact, this is the only comprehensive dictionary of the English language in print that seeks to communicate a distinctively biblical worldview, even to the point of using Scriptures in the definitions.

Your children can join the ranks of those generations of American leaders who were weaned on Webster. Our book is sturdy and well bound with acid-free paper and a gold foil stamp. A worthy investment."

Talk about a prescriptive theory of language... No wonder normal people can't understand fundie-speak. They are "taking dominion" by ignoring almost 200 years of linguistic development and/or redefining words to suit themselves.

In that case, it sounds like the same reason why they only like the King James Bible. They want the closest to the "original" that they can get. I don't know a whole lot about Noah Webster, but was he really interested in giving words "meaning in terms of their relationship to Jesus Christ" or was he maybe just trying to, you know, write a dictionary?

[xDreamerx]

Well, as an English major and someone who studies language I prefer the Oxford English Dictionary. It's just regarded as more comprehensive and kind of the authoritative source when it comes to scholarship. Webster's is regarded as more of a general use, every day kind of dictionary. Perhaps others will disagree with me on this point, but it's what I have observed in my studies. Webster's dictionary is distinctly American and was kind of crafted with an American agenda or ethos. I can't find the quote online, but I remember reading it in my textbook. He basically said he thought language was a vehicle to reflect the "city on a hill" kind of values. If you google quotes by him it is painfully obvious he felt God and politics were intertwined. In the movement of 18th Grammarians, he was kind of regarded as the bumpkin of the bunch, but in America he made huge gains especially with Protestants. One also must keep in mind that dictionaries were not just created to further education or the understanding of language. They were regarded as vehicles by which one could acquire a skill, the proper command of language, which could help one climb the social ladder. It has that middle class Victorian ethos of helping the poor.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

(about the 1828 dictionary) Talk about a prescriptive theory of language... No wonder normal people can't understand fundie-speak. They are "taking dominion" by ignoring almost 200 years of linguistic development and/or redefining words to suit themselves.

NO KIDDING.

Of course, they don't care to learn American English as spoken by modern American people, and seem to take a certain pride in not understanding it at times, so using these old dictionaries can only help that project I suppose.

I realize it's not quite the same thing, but I remember getting very simplified English to Japanese dictionaries at school for use in English as a Foreign Language classes (in Japanese school). By accident of life, I spoke English already, and the first thing I'd look up in any of them were swears. Of course those words weren't in there. I asked about it and was told that since you shouldn't ever be using those words, there is no reason to put them in the dictionary, certainly not for high school kids. I strongly disagree - what if someone uses those words AT YOU? You need to know to get mad, right? Put the words in there with some notation as "vulgar, if you use this word you're picking a fight, don't ever use this word" or whatever, but put it in there! :D Not to mention, what if you want to sincerely try to learn from modern American movies? You will need a wider dictionary.

That said, at home we had an encyclopedia (in English! It was Collier's, I believe) with pictures of people living in domes on Mars and the caption "Life as it might be in 1985." Reading that in 1986 was interesting...

Old (non-updated) dictionaries are great for the "hey, look at this!" value, but they shouldn't be your main go-to dictionaries.

[Vex]

Well, as an English major and someone who studies language I prefer the Oxford English Dictionary. It's just regarded as more comprehensive and kind of the authoritative source when it comes to scholarship. Webster's is regarded as more of a general use, every day kind of dictionary.

I agree. I'm not an English major, but I grew up on the Oxford English Dictionary and I find it the most comprehensive dictionary out there. I agree about Webster's, too.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

Later in my high school years though my school managed to get a copy of the multi-volume OED. That thing was awesome. I was only upset when they finally moved it out of the library and into the teacher's lounge (where only the teachers had access to it) because I don't think anyone was looking through that thing as much as I was.

...granted, at the same time I was also reading books such as "you can read porn with only junior high English!" in the stacks (I would never check such a thing OUT, oh no).

One thing I am thrilled with about living in 2011 is that now all these dictionaries (particularly Japanese ones also!) I can have on my PHONE. All right there, at my fingertips, with easy search capabilities, in an eye-pleasing font.

[xDreamerx]

I agree. I'm not an English major, but I grew up on the Oxford English Dictionary and I find it the most comprehensive dictionary out there. I agree about Webster's, too.

OT~I'm currently trying to convince my dad to either buy me or chip in with me on getting me a Complete Compact OED for graduating Uni soon. It's costly, but I really really want one. I don't want a stupid school ring or money. I want the damn dictionary lol :geek:

[mythoughtis]

1868 dictionary, prairie school dresses, early 1800 Victorian dating rituals (chaperones, etc), no pants on women, no jobs for women......

exactly what about living 200 years behind the times makes a person a beter Christian?

on the other hand... I don't see any of them turning down penicillin, cell phones, cars, trips in airplanes. Have they checked to see if the makers of those were religious or not?

[sugaree]

That said, at home we had an encyclopedia (in English! It was Collier's, I believe) with pictures of people living in domes on Mars and the caption "Life as it might be in 1985." Reading that in 1986 was interesting...

Old (non-updated) dictionaries are great for the "hey, look at this!" value, but they shouldn't be your main go-to dictionaries.

Dude. Seriously? We had the same set; it was Collier's. And I loved it. Loved it. I read it all--I do feel that it gave me a good grounding in history, literature, mythology, that kind of stuff.

Everybody used to make fun of me for (among other things) reading encyclopedias. I feel somewhat vindicated now that everyone reads Wikipedia.

It seems like a good chunk of the overpriced books at VF are in the public domain but they don't exactly advertise that inconvenient little fact. :naughty:

Yes, it's in the public domain, and yes, the entire thing has been archived in searchable form on the 'net. And...it's blowing my mind, for real...yes, yes, purpose is listed as a verb. http://www.1828-dictionary.com/d/search/word,purpose

PUR'POSE, n. [L. propositum, propono; pro, before,and pono, to set or place.]

1. That which a person sets before himself as an object to be reached or accomplished; the end or aim to which the view is directed in any plan, measure or exertion. We believe the Supreme Being created intelligent beings for some benevolent and glorious purpose, and if so, how glorious and benevolent must be his purpose in the plan of redemption! The ambition of men is generally directed to one of two purposes, or to both; the acquisition of wealth or of power. We build houses for the purpose of shelter; we labor for the purpose of subsistence.

2. Intention; design. This sense, however, is hardly to be distinguished from the former; as purpose always includes the end in view.

Every purpose is established by counsel. Prov.20.

Being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will. Eph.1.

3. End; effect; consequence, good or bad. What good purpose will this answer? We sometimes labor to no purpose. Men often employ their time, talents and money for very evil purposes.

To what purpose is this waste? Matt.26.

4. Instance; example. [Not in use.]

5. Conversation. [Not in use.]

Of purpose, on purpose, with previous design; with the mind directed to that object. On purpose is more generally used, but the true phrase is of purpose.

PUR'POSE,v.t. To intend; to design; to resolve; to determine on some end or object to be accomplished.

I have purposed it,I will also do it. Is.46. Eph.3.

Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem. Acts. 19.

I reassure you all, though, that fellowship is not shown as a verb, and fictional is not shown at all. And the definition of courtship says not one thing about the parents of the lovers involved.

[sugaree]

1868 dictionary, prairie school dresses, early 1800 Victorian dating rituals (chaperones, etc), no pants on women, no jobs for women......

exactly what about living 200 years behind the times makes a person a beter Christian?

on the other hand... I don't see any of them turning down penicillin, cell phones, cars, trips in airplanes. Have they checked to see if the makers of those were religious or not?

Actually, a few of them are turning down penicillin. Seriously, there's a fundie move away from modern medicine.

[dianapavelovna]

OT~I'm currently trying to convince my dad to either buy me or chip in with me on getting me a Complete Compact OED for graduating Uni soon. It's costly, but I really really want one. I don't want a stupid school ring or money. I want the damn dictionary lol :geek:

Nerds/English majors unite! I would LOVE a compact OED, omg.

[snozzberry]

The kids are in bed now so I looked up Noah Webster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster). Granted, it's Wikipedia, but if their tale of Webster's life is accurate I can see why the fundies, particularly the VF-types love him so much. It fits the classic godless, tolerant liberal to rabid fundie transformation tale they drool over.

I also pulled up the big catalog from the homeschool vendor to see how they listed it. I try to reference the catalog as sparingly as possible to minimize the impact on my blood pressure (Seriously, they are literally one of a kind when it comes to curriculum sourcing - even the big name secular publishers). They seem to echo the sentiments of VF, but as an extra bonus they work in an inference to gay marriage AND our "Christian" nation. Bonus!

The meanings of words change over time. Take the word "marriage," for example. Who knows how a modern secular dictionary will define it tomorrow? Fortunately, we can have a standard available that will not change, because the definitions are based on the word's Biblical usage and basis in one of 26 original languages. This reprint of Noah Webster's classic is nearly a textbook in itself, as it gives examples of word usage from classical literature and the Bible. What better way to understand the writings of America's founding fathers than to define their words as they would have understood them.

This has been one of those oddly fascinating discussions...Go figure.

[PennySycamore]

Dude. Seriously? We had the same set; it was Collier's. And I loved it. Loved it. I read it all--I do feel that it gave me a good grounding in history, literature, mythology, that kind of stuff.

Everybody used to make fun of me for (among other things) reading encyclopedias. I feel somewhat vindicated now that everyone reads Wikipedia.

I was (still am, actually) a big encyclopedia reader. When I was a kid, I'd frequently be found sitting on the floor surrounded by open volumes of World Book where I'd been looking up cross-references. I'd just pull out a volume looking for nothing in particular and find interesting stuff.

Have you ever read the book The Know-It-All by AJ Jacobs? He decided to read the Encyclopaedia Brittanica from first entry to last. Most of the book is AJ's frequently hilarious thoughts about various Brittanica entries.

[O Latin]

OT~I'm currently trying to convince my dad to either buy me or chip in with me on getting me a Complete Compact OED for graduating Uni soon. It's costly, but I really really want one. I don't want a stupid school ring or money. I want the damn dictionary lol :geek:

Haha, I'm still trying to get up the courage to admit to my family that I would really like the (out of print but used copies are available on the internet) Oxford Anthology of Medieval Latin Verse for Christmas or something. Go nerds!

My mom has the OED, with font so tiny it came with a magnifying glass to read it with. Apparently when I was a small child I liked to play with the magnifying glass, so it is long gone now. :D

[xDreamerx]

I want that too!!! I thought I was the only one! :D.

I'm so jealous of your mum. lol. I mean, sure I might go blind reading that way, but wouldn't it be a delicious way to go blind?