Lexical Heritage: The Birth of a Dictionary

Hey everyone! Today, I'm posting a longer entry about the creation of the American Heritage Dictionary, and how it came to be one of the greatest competitors of Merriam-Webster, currently the largest linguistic publisher in America.

Origins of Webster's New International Dictionary, Third Edition

W2 was extremely successful
because of its versatility and detail.

Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition (“W2”) was regarded as a masterful publication. With 600,000 entries, detailed illustrations, and varied appendices, it was the largest single-volume dictionary of its time, and it was extremely comprehensive. The dictionary also included many plates (pages of images, printed on different paper), filled with images from famous architecture to human anatomy, making it almost encyclopedic.

Despite W2’s success, Merriam-Webster felt a third edition of the New International Dictionary (“W3”) was necessary to continue the legacy of providing a current guide to the English language. The creation of W3 was justified in some ways. Between the release of W2 (1934) and W3 (1961), many world events had occurred, including WWII, Elvis' rise to fame, and the start of the Cold War.

W2 in red, W3 in beige. Image screen taken from here.

M-W’s chief editor Philip Babcock Gove added many new terms created from 1934 to 1961. But W3 had over 100,000 new entries! W2, an already monstrous publication with a spine over 3 inches thick, stretched the capabilities of mechanical bookbinding. Where did so many new terms come from, and how did they manage to cram it all into W3?

 Some "non-lexical material" is boxed in red.

The space for these terms was created at the cost of the breadth of information that W2 had provided, including the plates, appendices, and all bio- and geographical names. Gove removed all “non-lexical material,” with the justification that the extraneous information did not serve the linguistic purpose of a dictionary and because that material could be found in Webster’s Biographical Dictionary (1943) and Webster’s Geographical Dictionary (1949). Plates are pictured below.

While these revisions reduced the capabilities of the dictionary as a standalone resource, other deletions followed M-W’s recentness doctrine. Gove ordered the removal of many terms (and senses) which were nearly two centuries out of use, while keeping terms in classic literature. However, the benefits from the deletions were overshadowed by the ‘excessive’ additions.

When W3 was released, it was met with an onslaught of harsh criticism for what many called M-W’s “permissiveness.” Many of the 100,000 new terms in W3 were slang, and not proper English to some. Merriam-Webster was also reprimanded for its descriptive approach. Previously, M-W dictionaries had been very prescriptive, describing how language should be used; the detailed entries in W2 stand testament. However, W3 was mainly descriptive, describing only current (and not proper) usage.

M-W’s decisions especially enraged one person in particular. It was a man named James Parton who changed the lexical world with his ambitious goal of trying to buy — yes, buy — the G. and C. Merriam Company that published M-W dictionaries.

The Birth of the American Heritage Dictionary

James Parton, second from left.
Images taken from here.

The owner of the American Heritage magazine, James Parton, was outraged by M-W's inclusion of terms he considered improper English. In an effort to revert Gove's changes, Parton attempted to buy the G. and C. Merriam Company. Not surprisingly, that failed, but he was set on making things his way. He meant to make his own dictionary. That is exactly what he did. 

William Morris, the editor of American Heritage, brought together a Usage Panel consisting of 104 writers, speakers, novelists, and others known for their prescriptivism. Though Morris often ignored their advice on usage, the American Heritage Dictionary (AHD), released in 1969, was a commercial success, selling over one million copies within one year of its release.

Usage Panel (over 2 pages of names!)

Merriam-Webster vs. American Heritage: "ain't"

One of the most prominent examples in the world of lexicography of W3’s “permissiveness” is “ain’t,” because of its role in English as slang, and because of its use by some populations in the U.S. The AHD lists the definitions normally. But, as the dictionary strove to explain ‘proper’ usage (which they felt W3 failed to address), it also has a specific usage note, stating that the use of “ain’t” should only be “deliberately colloquial” or for “other special effect[s]”. [See image below.]

Rather than removing the term from the AHD, which would make the dictionary inaccurate by not including current usage, Morris decided to include it (with the usage note) since it was used in spoken English in parts of the US. However, W3’s entry for “ain’t” does not explain where its use is appropriate, only saying that it is “disapproved of by many.” Compare both entries below:

W3 entry: "ain't"
Image screen taken from here.

AHD entry: "ain't"

This is where James Parton’s desire to fix the entries in W3 becomes clearer. By reading the entry in W3, a writer that had never used “ain’t” before might not understand that it is only used in colloquial speech in certain parts of the US and almost never used in professional writing. This could lead to confusion and misunderstanding, which the AHD tried to change by including the usage note.

Even though Merriam-Webster had included “ain’t” in W2, there was a fundamental difference in the approach to defining slang terms between W2 and W3. W2 aimed more to show that “ain’t” was present in only some variations of English, while W3 gave examples of its use without notifying readers that it was slang. W2’s entry for “ain’t” was very minimal, giving only definitions, and stating that the word was specific to a dialect (Dial.) and that it was used where education was not feasible (Illit.). Note the tiny space "ain't" occupies on the page.

W2 entry for "ain't"

Page 54 of W2.

The American Heritage Dictionary in Detail

The American Heritage Dictionary grew to become one of the leading lexicography series in the country. If you are still in primary or secondary school, you might see a large row of dictionaries in your classroom or English room. Most likely they have a cover that looks like one of these, with the with the word “dic·tion·ar·y” shown with syllable breaks on the front:

Image source

Image source

Image source

Image source

If you have seen a cover that looks like this, then you’ve seen an American Heritage dictionary.

The first American Heritage Dictionary was special in many ways. The dictionary's appearance manifests the first noticeable difference from W2. The dictionary is presented beautifully, with padded front and back covers, gold gilded edges, and gold embossing in the cover and spine. The bright red-orange really makes it stand out.

Compare the brown W2 to the vibrant red American Heritage Dictionary.

Aside from its beautiful presentation, the dictionary also has hundreds of photographs (as opposed to drawn illustrations) throughout, a new move in lexicography at the time, also bringing back the "non-lexical material" that M-W's editor Gove removed from W3. There are images of various subjects, from plants and animals to famous people and places. It was basically a rebirth of the W2 plates, but without creating separate pages of images.

 

The dictionary was also the first to use corpus linguistics, a method of studying a corpus (body) of works in a certain language to look for frequency and usage of words. This method was pioneered by Henry Kučera, a Czech linguist who invented one of the first spell-checking systems. Kučera was contacted by Houghton-Mifflin (publisher of AHD) to create a million-word citation base as a record for the dictionary’s terms. Merriam-Webster uses similar technology today, looking through all kinds of print and web documents searching for new words in the 21st century.

First page of the article, "Computers in Language Analysis and in Lexicography."

The frontmatter of the American Heritage Dictionary contains 50 pages of articles and other information, some shown above. There are seven articles, of which one is entitled, “Good Usage, Bad Usage, and Usage,” clear evidence that guidance on proper usage was one important goal of the dictionary. Another article, “Grammar and Meaning,” explains that no regional or “personal” dialect is correct, and that different grammar can aim to teach different things.

The extra information to add to the value of the dictionary
includes advanced etymological detail, appendices, and articles, shown in orange boxes.

First paragraph of the article "Grammar and Meaning."

First page of the article, "Good Usage, Bad Usage, and Usage."

As I showed above, the American Heritage Dictionary makes a special effort to show its readers proper usage of the terms for which usage can be ambiguous. "Ain't" is only one example of the American Heritage Dictionary's mission. The word "either" also has an elaborate 30 lines of usage details, and "escape" has two short "mini-appendices" on 'synonyms' and 'usage.' All of this extra effort to provide information serves to clarify fuzzy areas of English, which Parton felt W3 did not do. The American Heritage Dictionary was, in essence, a resurrection of W2, but with a more appealing presentation and the technology of corpus linguistics to back it up.

AHD entry for "either."

AHD entry for "escape."

The word "OK" or "O.K." or "okay" has an interesting etymology, and it is described in detail, along with its use as a noun, a transitive verb (affects a noun), and adjective, an adverb, and an interjection. It also includes, you guessed it, a usage paragraph about the different ways OK can be used in a sentence, formally and informally.

AHD entry for "okay."

The final gold star on the dictionary is the advanced etymology. The American Heritage Dictionary makes a special effort to increase the detail of the etymologies in the entries. The most striking example of this goal is the Indo-European Roots appendix. Following the entries in the dictionary, there is a whole section about the early roots of the English language. This section makes the dictionary unique in yet another way: the American Heritage Dictionary was the first dictionary to include word history tracing back as far as the oldest reconstructed language, the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE). This advancement marked a change in the path that lexicography would take in the coming years.

First page of the "Indo-European Roots" appendix.

And that is the lexicography history-changing tale of the American Heritage Dictionary. If you liked this post, be sure to leave your comments in the space below. Tune in again next week for another post!

Vijay