The American Heritage Dictionary: Fifth Edition

I'm a lexicographer and computational linguist by profession -- I have very nearly read this book (and a couple others) cover to cover. I just have to say that AH is a superior dictionary for everyday use. I work for companies that maintain online dictionaries, and am, among other things responsible for comparing the contents of these lists with the latest published dictionaries to ascertain which entries should be deleted and which new ones included. I find that AH very rarely has bad judgement with respect to selection of entries. Perhaps the reason another reviewer didn't find Carl Gauss or Reimann is because their names are actually Karl Gauss and Riemann. And I appreciate the fact that AH has gone a long way toward rectifying the perception conveyed by most older biographical dictionaries that all great people have been white, European and male. We need Gauss in there of couse, but we also need Robeson and St. Vincent Millay who won a Pulitzer Prize just like Frost, and who wrote just as beautifully. Its goal obviously is to both be a desktop dictionary in a single volume, and yet include the words that educated American speakers are likely to encounter in modern, non-technical publications. (And yes, it is an American dictionary, which is why colour is defined as 'Chiefly British, variant of color'.) This objective becomes harder and harder to achieve as the base of English-speaking people expands, and the Internet makes so many more things available to the average reader. The average person may use words like 'alacrity' less often than they did 200 years ago, but in point of fact, the average person's active vocabulary is expanding. I prefer the way they organize their word senses to what Webster does. (I never compare things to the OED, because that is a work of art, deserving of veneration.) It reserves entirely new entries for an entirely unrelated sense. AH will give iris(flower) and iris(of the eye) two different senses, but Webster's gives (though not entirely consistently) the nominal and verbal senses of, say, 'claim' entirely different entries. AH includes them under the same entry, because they are semantically very closely related. The etymological Appendix of AH is also kind of famous among linguists. They have very nicely systematized and cross-referenced their entries against their hypothesized Indo-European roots. It's quite well researched, and also a lot of fun.

I am a man of many dictionaries, in many languages. I keep a Webster-Merriam Unabridged in my study, plus earlier editions of the American Heritage, and I also keep one-volume dictionaries in each room of my house. But this present 4th edition American Heritage is very special; it has quickly become my favorite of all the English-language dictionaries that I own. First, there is the physical layout -- the beautiful pictures, the type face that makes for easy reading, the wonderful color. But mainly it is a matter of sheer amount and quality of information. Try, for instance, the "f-word." Of course we all know how to spell it and what it means when a teenager yells it. But did you its history in the English language ? The 4th edition tells it. You may think that you don't want to know, but after you read this word history, and many others in this book, you know that you will not want to do without this dictionary ever again. Of course, this book is no substitute for an unabridged. I tried it on the phrase "term of art," something that comes up frequently in court opinions and other learned discussions. This dictionary will not tell you what the phrase means, but my trusty Webster-Merriam Unabridged will. So you see, you too need to be a person of many dictionaries, or at the very least of two.

This dictionary is one of the most informative dictionaries of the English tongue (both in Britain and America) I have come across so far. Other dictionaries such as Britain's Chambers dictionary offer merely the definitions. The American Heritage Dictionary, however, offers the words' definitions, etymologies, and various pronunciations and spellings. In addition, this dictionary is also encyclopedic, succinctly explaining about certain people, places, events, et cetera. Moreover, many of these encyclopedic explanations are accompanied by small photographs. I do question, however, the title "The American Heritage Dictionary". Many of the words in this dictionary are also spoken in other countries such as Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and Ireland. Indeed, there are Americanisms included in this dictionary. But one may also find these Americanisms in British dictionaries such as Chambers. Nevertheless, as a whole the American Heritage dictionary will be beneficial to English speakers of all nationalities.

This has 10,000 more words than the Random House Webster's portable that I had before. The definitions are clear and useful. I have the hardcover at home, which is an amazing reference book. I have this at work, and it's faster to just grab it than to go to the computer dictionary.

This is the best everyday dictionary I have yet found. What defines a dictionary? A dictionary should be precise in it's definitions. The breadth of vocabulary must be wide. It should be light-weight and compact for easy, daily use. Look up dictionary and this American Heritage should be listed.