I’ve read Roget’s, and something is lacking–really difficult synonyms. Are there any thesauri that list more obscure words?
What do you mean by “Roget’s”? The older editions had many more synonyms, since they were set up under a different system.
Roget’s system was to list a bunch of synonyms, grouped by subject. Then, there was an alphabetical list in the back.
Some time in the 70s, there was a switch to an alphabetical format. This meant that synonyms had to be repeated, and that each listing had less room.
There seems to be a online listing using Roget’s original system from the 1911 edition at http://humanities.uchicago.edu/forms_unrest/ROGET.html
Perhaps I should have been more specific–Roget’s Int’l Thesaurus, Fifth Edition. It sucks.
I was gonna say, my Roget is excellent. I have the “Roget’s Thesaurus in Dictionary Form,” edited by Norman Lewis, first published in 1961. This revised edition is 1978.
A sample:
“Forgetfullness - amnesia, fugue, hypoamnesia, paramnesia; short (untrustworthy, poor or failing) memory; Lethe, nepenthe, nirvana, amnesty; limbo, oblivion, oblivescence; suppression, repression…” etc, etc…
I’m assuming this is what you’re after. I don’t know where I found mine, but I’m assuming a used book store. It’s got a green cover and it’s published by Berkeley… As for more modern ones, je ne sais pas.
Yeah, I checked Amazon, to no avail. I want a thesaurus that contains obscure, precise synonyms.
There’s a book I keep seeing advertised in a catalog called Highly Selective Thesaurus for the Extraordinarily Literate
by Eugene Ehrlich. I haven’t held it in my hands, so I can’t make a recommendation one way or the other.
Continuing my string of popular, crowd-motivated comments, theraurus have rather limited value in the first place. Consider this: most of the words cited are actually near synonyms, that is, not defined the same way in a dictionary.
A thesaurus is a device to identify words that are broadly similar. Expanding an existing thesaurus has little point, since the expansion would need to include words that, by-and-large, are largely distantly associated.
Not sure whether this is any different, but try it:
Roget’s Interactive Thesaurus™
I’m not sure if I’m exactly disagreeing or not, partly_warmer, but in my opinion, thesearuses (thesauri?) are absolutely invaluable. You are right, the words given are not exact synonyms, but when writing you often have a word on the tip of your tongue, and a thesaurus helps you find that word. Especially one in the traditional Roget’s form in which you look up categories of words. Used in conjunction with a dictionary, a thesaurus can help you find the word with the exact shade of meaning that you need.
For example, the other day I needed a word that described something that causes one to forget. I looked up forgetfulness (as cited above), and came across the exact reference I was looking for: Lethe, the river in Hades which erases one’s memory. I find myself constantly using my thesaurus to help expand my vocabulary and to help find those letholigical words.
The thesaurus concept was published to meet just the purposes you describe.
The problem lies in expanding it from its current scope. If the thesaurus groups words together that are not necessarily close synonyms, what would an expanded thesaurus do?
I should add that English teachers used to tell us writers that the thesaurus was unnecessary for professionals, since they should have memorized much of the material incidentally, anyhow. As a writer, I’ve found this to be true. I’ve occasionally looked at a thesaurus, but I don’t use one. I’d have no use at all for an expanded version.
I use a Thesaurus the same way Pulykamell does. Sometimes the word I’m using isn’t quite right, and I want a similar word that better fits the meaning of what I’m trying to convey. While I have a moderately large vocabulary, I find that the older I get the harder it is to recall all those words I supposedly know (recognition is a lot easier to do than recollection). Either that or I have crossed the Lethe.
I have a well-worn paperback: “The New American Roget’s College Thesaurus in Dictionary Form” (edited by Albert Morehead, 1962). I have periodically perused the reference book section of the book store looking for an updated edition, but have not been successful finding a version I like as well.
I clearly need a replacement though. My Thesaurus doesn’t even have an entry for Forgetfulness. Perhaps the version listed above by Pulykamell will meet my needs.
A good one will need to be expanded to include new terms and usages.
Absolutely.
I’d go further. Since there are large differences between how England, America, and Australia use the terms, and even more detailed subcultural differences, a thesaurus should explain to a “local” user which terms are appropriate to their setting. I could get excited about that kind of thesaurus.
I find the thesaurus tool in MS Word quite useful (I realise that I’m inviting scorn in saying this) It’s not exhaustive, but it allows the user to browse easily through the trees of synonyms that branch off each other.