Why Are Words Like "The" And "It" In The Dictionary?

[Palve]

I think it's pretty obvious that anybody who's going to use an English dictionary are well aware of what little words like "the" and "it" mean, so why waste the ink and paper to print them in the dictionary?

[KneadToKnow]

I've never heard a dictionary referred to as a book for people who already know what words mean. Obviously, the lexicographers responsible for words like the and it feel they are meeting the needs of people who don't know what they mean. Perhaps misguidedly, but perhaps out of a scientific interest in being complete, or meeting needs they can't predict.

[zut]

Well, Palve, quickly:

Suppose I not native speaker of English. Explain, please, to me, difference between "a" and "the"? And in what circumstances is "the" appropriate, please? Definitioin, please, to include all usages of "the"?

I note in passing that dictionary.com lists eight entries for "the", each with a slightly different shade of meaning.

[Polycarp]

Note that the use of articles (a/an/the) in French is to a great extent contrary to their use in English -- when one is used and when one is not, for example.

Also, the variety of potential meanings of a "simple" word can lead to some interesting consequences:

It all depends on what you mean by "is" --WJClinton

[SpoilerVirgin]

So exactly what does "it" mean?

Suppose I yell out "You're it!"?

How about if I tell you that you're "with it"?

What if I read your answer to a post and declare "That's it!"?

What if I've read twelve of your posts, and I tell you "That's it!"?

I'd come up with a few more examples, but it's getting late.

[erislover]

Myself, I've always wondered why 'dictionary' is in the dictionary. That one seems to defy even the stoutest of "is" logic.

However, many moons ago I thought I would be witty and send this in as a question to Cecil. The response from, I think, Manny (though I really don't remember, maybe it was Dex), was something along the lines of, "I'm not sure why you think that 'dictionary', a word, shouldn't be in the dictionary."

I admit, that was a hard one to topple. But I am still working on it as one of the Erisian Mysterees. Hail Eris, etc.

[RealityChuck]

Originally posted by erislover
Myself, I've always wondered why 'dictionary' is in the dictionary. That one seems to defy even the stoutest of "is" logic.

Same logic -- you see a book named "The Devil's Dictionary."

Or there's the computer term "Dictionary attack."

[Weeks]

What if Clinton needs to look up "is"?

[kniz]

And if they weren't in the dictionary, you would have started a thread WTF? "The" and "it" aren't in the dictionary.

[dwc1970]

Often times it is the simple, everyday words that we don't even think about their actual meaning that are perhaps the most difficult to define. Sometimes when I am bored (I mean really bored) I will see how the lexicographers came up with a complete and meaningful definition or series of definitions for a word we use all the time, such as, well "as", for example. The challenge here is to define the word without using the word itself in the definition.

[Achernar]

I think that there are plenty of good reasons for these words' definitions to appear, but even if everyone knew the definition, don't you think they should still include it? I mean, wouldn't it be odd to see a book with every page numbered except for page 104? Sure, everyone knows what page it is, because it's opposite 105, but doesn't it seem a little silly to leave that one out?

[sailor]

So Palve, what is your list of words so obvious they should net be in the dictionary? How about yes, no, I, you, they, me, more, less, big, small, car, ... I mean *everybody* knows what they mean, don't they? Well, if you read this board it seems some people do not know when to use less or fewer, your or you're.. etc. Is "it" a noun, an adjective, a verb or the cat's mother? You really think everybody can answer that?

[Frylock]

It seems to me that a lot of those little words don't really *mean* anything at all. They have a usage, but I don't know if that's the same as a meaning.

But I think it would be valid for a dictionary to describe the usage of "the" or other words like that.

-Kris

[Lost In Reality]

Originally posted by erislover
Myself, I've always wondered why 'dictionary' is in the dictionary. That one seems to defy even the stoutest of "is" logic.

A dictionary's only use is not to define words. It also gives pronunciation, and usually roots. So maybe someone wants to know the correct way to pronounce dictionary and now its root.

[manhattan]

Does there remain a General Question here?

[kniz]

No, not by my definition.

[galt]

Originally posted by manhattan
Does there remain a General Question here?

That depends on what you mean by "a".

[Kwyjibo]

Originally posted by Weeks
What if Clinton needs to look up "is"?

Danny-boy should have used one for "Potatoe" er...I mean..."Potato".

[kanicbird]

Before Manhattan gets trigger happy with the close thread button, I would like to add that the dictionary defined the valid words in the language. Every year new words are added - some are taken away - by being in the dictionary you can use that word in an English class and in scrabble

[Muffin]

Although sales to folks wanting definitions and spellings pays the freight, a top dictinonary (e.g. O.E.D.) is really a work of many generations with a far greater purpose. It works toward understanding how words and language change over time. The most commonly used words (often also the oldest words) form the backbone of our language, and so must be included.

[Muffin]

Re. the above:

The O.E.D. was started in 1857. Its first edition was completed in 1928. Its second edition was completed in 1989.

The O.E.D. only covers modern English. Its companion dictionary for Middle English was started in 1927 and is only now approaching publication of its first edition.

In terms of ongoing committment and multi-generational effort, these dictionaries are the modern day equivalents of mediaeval cathedral projects.

Not including words such as "it" or "the" would be no more than building a cathedral without foundation stones.

[Johanna]

Originally posted by KneadToKnow
I've never heard a dictionary referred to as a book for people who already know what words mean.

The OP has a 16th-century sensibility as to what a dictionary should be. The original English lexicography in those days only included the "hard" words. Reading was considered a gentleman's occupation then, don't you know. Why, the very thought that a proper Tudor gentleman would ever need to look up "easy" (common) words! At least that was what they thought at first. It wasn't until Dr. Johnson in the 18th century that English lexicography began to include all classes of words.