Dictionary Reviews

Idioms are always difficult. For people learning English as second language this is even harder. This book offers a detail list of idioms that people often use, with their meanings and examples. Using this book along with the "NTC's Dictionary of American Slang" helps to develop your skills in understand the way American speaks that not always is taught in school. The book is clear, perfect. I'm happy to have it in my bookcase.

I thought I knew English pretty well. But when I came to Canada and had a chance to talk to people whose first language was English, I realized that sometimes I just can't get what they mean. When someone says "I'm off the hook" what does he really mean, was he "hanging" from a hook!! After realizing that I went to a bookstore and started searching for something which would help me in this regard. Then I came across this book and after a glance, I decided to buy it. It's been more than two years and I'm still happy that I bought this dictionary. Even though I know a lot many idioms now, I still refer to this book almost daily. And it has never disappointed me!!

This book is a must-have for Soka Gakkai members and any interested in the study of Nichiren Buddhism.

I have actually read this book from cover to cover. For anyone wanting to deepen their understanding of the Buddhism of Nichiren Daishonin, this book provides detailed explanation of concepts and practices. Most entries are cross referenced to a number of related entries. Having been a practitioner myself, for over 20 years, I needed a greater and more detailed understanding and reference for my reading. I found it in this dictionary. It is not for the casual reader, but for one who really wants to learn in detail.

An excellent reference for the student or professional. Very comprehensive, up to date, and error free. A good investment for anyone looking for a good chemistry dictionary.

This book is extremely good for science and chemistry. It had got me through all my chemistry tests with 95 scores. EXCELLENT!

This book is excellent for RAD ballet teachers. I describes in detail the technique required for specific steps in the RAD majors syllabi. It is a great companion book to the major syllabus books and is helpful in refreshing your memory of what certain steps and specific positions are. It has pronouciations as well as the translated meaning of the steps (which should be included in any ballet class!).
It has helped me out greatly in re-aquainting myself with the exercises I learned in my student training.
I would not recommend this book to anyone who doesn't know much about ballet. It doesn't have pictures and is too detailed for a non dancer to get a lot out of.

I've had this book for only a short period of time and have found it to be helpful thus far in a ways that suggest to me that I am going to find it to be increasingly helpful over time. For those who have been interested in classical ballet or who are just becoming interested, as well as those who are possessed of at least some, if not considerable, knowledge of it, including actual training and experience as ballet dancers, it may be very helpful, at least, because it appears to be quite comprehnsive (as the dictionary that it is, with 92 pages of definitions and/or descriptions, including cross-references, but no photographs or illustrations). I am not one of those in the latter category. I am an an adult who is am simply and only interested in classical ballet, and I would like to know more about it at the present time. I would like to say, however, that because I have already benefitted thus far from having had it in ways I did not foresee, I expect to continue to benefit from having bought the Royal Academey of Dancing's Dictionary of Classical Ballet Terminology , since I have already done so. I recommend it, therefore, to anyone who is interested in it.

The _Dictionary of Classical Hebrew_ (DCH) is a book to die for. But prospective users should realize that it is fundamentally different both in conception and in execution from lexicons like Koehler-Baumgartner's _Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament_ (HALOT) and the antiquated Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicon (BDB). In fact, DCH does not stand in the grand tradition of BDB and HALOT at all. It descends from the equally grand line of concordances authored by scholars like Solomon Mandelkern, Gerhard Lisowsky, and Abraham Even-Shoshan. DCH is a glorified concordance--and shows just how glorious a concordance can be.

_Major Differences between DCH and Traditional Lexicons of the Old Testament (OT)_

(1)HALOT, BDB, and other traditional lexicons are philological works: they attempt to define the vocabulary of a specified literary corpus. They are not dictionaries of a _language_. They do not even restrict themselves to a single language: since a tiny portion of the OT is written in Imperial Aramaic, tiny portions of these lexicons define the tiny sample of Imperial Aramaic words found in the OT--fewer than 800 terms. DCH, on the other hand, is linguistically oriented. It aims to describe the entire Hebrew language, up to and including the era of the Dead Sea scrolls, insofar as we know it from the extant literature and inscriptions. It has no interest in describing a tiny subset of the Imperial Aramaic vocabulary.

Again, since traditional lexicons are corpus-specific, they naturally include entries only for those terms that are found in the OT. DCH, on the other hand, includes all terms found in Classical Hebrew, whether or not they are found in the OT.

(2)In keeping with their philological orientation, the traditional lexicons hew to a strongly diachronic and comparative-linguistic line--they rely heavily on the history of words as a guide to their meaning in the OT. To discover this history, they look not just at Hebrew or Aramaic but at various languages in which the terms in question appear. One of the most entertaining features of an entry in a traditional lexicon is the listing of cognate terms from languages like Arabic, Akkadian, Ugaritic, accompanied by wooden and necessarily misleading English glosses that encourage non-specialists in the bizarre belief that they can handle this material intelligently. (People who know the languages in question well enough to make competent use of the evidence provided by these cognates do not need the wooden English glosses.)

DCH, on the other hand, omits references to languages other than Hebrew, just as many English dictionaries omit etymological discussions--and for the same reason: DCH assumes that the best guide to the meaning of a Hebrew term is the way it is used in Hebrew, not the way it is used in some other language.

HALOT and DCH are broadly contemporaneous--HALOT's first volume is actually more recent (1994) than the first volume of DCH (1993). Both works effectively use the Dead Sea scrolls and other extra-biblical material, and both works' later volumes benefit from the recent revolution in Dead Sea scrolls scholarship. But they use extra-biblical materials in completely different ways, of course: in HALOT, these materials appear only when they can illuminate the meaning of a biblical term, and Hebrew words that are not found in the Bible are not given entries in the lexicon. In DCH, biblical and extra-biblical sources and terms are granted equal weight.

(3)Many users, especially users influenced by modern linguistic theory, expect a lexicon to offer genuine definitions, rather than simply glosses--English terms that are roughly synonymous with the original-language term. In lexicons of New Testament Greek, for example, it has become popular to augment glosses with true definitions. One of the definitions of the Greek word _orphanos_ in the latest edition of _A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature_ (BDAG) is "pert.[aining] to being deprived of parents, _without parents_, orphan": the gloss _orphan_ is preceded here by a genuine definition. Similarly, the _Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains_ offers the definition "an offspring whose parents either are no longer alive or no longer function as parents (as the result of having abandoned their offspring) - 'orphan.'" These definitions are not merely long-winded expansions of the gloss 'orphan': they make it clear that (in the view of the lexicographers, at any rate) the Greek word _orphanos_ does _not_ mean the same thing as the English word 'orphan', which refers not only to children who have lost both parents but also to those who have lost only one.

Neither the traditional Hebrew lexicons nor DCH offer genuine translations. In the case of the traditional lexicons, this is because they are remarkably unsullied, even in their most recent incarnations, by modern linguistic theory: they betray very little suspicion that users might want or benefit from more than simple glosses. The authors of DCH, on the other hand, like good concordance-writers, want above all to provide users with a convenient and orderly presentation of the data that they need in order to make their own decisions regarding the sense(s) of an ancient Hebrew word. Like Mandelkern, Lisowsky, and Even-Shoshan, DCH provides glosses--the merest glosses--as a convenience for the user. DCH does not try to palm these off as definitions: those are the responsibility of the user.

Some users who yearn for genuine definitions may find traditional lexicons more satisfying than DCH, because traditional lexicons, assuming that their glosses _are_ definitions, sometimes offer fuller and more detailed glosses than DCH does. For example, HALOT glosses the Hebrew word _kfr_ as 'open village'; DCH offers simply 'village.' On the other hand, enterprising users are likely to prefer DCH, which intelligently organizes and displays the contexts in which a word is used--and this typically means _all_ the contexts in which it is used: every single instance in which the word in question is found in Classical Hebrew.

This is an excellentdictionary, comparable to Brown- Driver-Briggs and Kohler-Baumgartner, the previous standard in dictionaries of Biblical Hebrew. It is the only one--because it is more recent--to incorporate most of the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls in its corpus of Classical Hebrew texts.

Most of my students have purchased the 7th Edition. They say, this Dictionary is very good and comes in handy for class and homework assignments.
The definitions used are clear enough for new computer enthusiasts; as well as the more advanced student. I like it.

A wonderful reference book as you muddle through the jorgon of the computer world. This book offers short and concise explainations needed to understand the growing technology surrounding computers. A must for any home or business computer.

"The Dictionary of Concise Writing" is a thorough examination of how to write tight, well-crafted prose. The book begins with a section on "Perfectibility of Words" which defines wordiness and provides various examples of the different types. The following section is "The Imperfectability of People" which discusses the prevalence and acceptance of wordiness in society.

The extensive dictionary actually begins on page 49. Each listed phrase or word combination is followed by suggested substitutions, an example using the "wordy" phrase, and the same example using the correct substitution. If you are wondering if your writing could be more concise or looking for a suggestion for a phrase that just doesn't feel right, or just want to learn better writing skills then this is the book for you. It is the largest and most useful compendium of excessively wordy phrases and practical, workable substitutions that I have had the pleasure of using. A highly recommended purchase for anyone doing any serious writing.

...Any writer worth his or her salt has heard of author Robert Fiske's books, created and designed to help the aspiring, novice and experienced writer alike to hone their craft. In his Dictionary of Concise Writing, Fiske shows not only how to avoid common pitfalls but also how to strive for originality. He is also an expert on one particular handicap of many writers'... the tendency to use redundant or extraneous, excessively wordy phrases in their narrative prose.
This compilation of experience and wisdom is divided into two major parts; the first covers identifying and correcting excessive wordiness, which in itself may take many authors several months to thoroughly peruse. The second part is a collection of the worst of these writers' sins and his remedy to rectify them. Of course, you don't have to take his advice, but it's strongly advised that you do. After all, he's the expert.
And lest this reader/reviewer succumb to the temptation to wax over long praising this neat, fun and easy to read example of terse prose, let me suffice it to say that no writer with any grit should be without this reference.

this is an excellent reference piece to any biologist. It has alot of the key words that any biologist who is in the fields of evolution, ecology, systematics, taxonomy to name a few. I myself am a graduate student and a couple of us have it and has become an invaluable piece to our librairies.

I bought the dictionary of first edtion twelve years ago. I found its explanation about ecology, evolution, and systematics is very easily reading and useful to students majoring biology. It let me understand many terms, and read the texts and references more easily. I'm very gald to know the new edition was published. I believe that the new edition will give readers more useful and modern words of ecology, evolution, and sytematics.

I am a recent graduate from college holding a diploma in forestry. I found this book to be essential in my studies and highly recommend to both students and any persons interested in the study of forestry. It contains all the essential termonology used for forestry with detailed information on their meaning. It is an all accounts a must have book.

For most of my life, I have had a deep interest in the subject of forestry, and while time and circumstances have dictated that attending a school of forestry was not possible, I have still maintained my interest by purchasing and reading materials about forestry. It holds a very big interest with me and having "The Dictionary of Forestry" in my library was an absolute must. John A. Helms, the editor, has put together a fantastic reference book for anyone who is a student, or anyone who has an abiding interest in this field. This reference has helped me when reading other books about forest and related topics, such as "Young Men and Fire." When I come to a term such as "smokejumper", I go to the reference in the this dictionary and get helpful information. In this case, when I looked up "smokejumper", I was referenced to "helijumper", where an apt description was told. There are many other terms that have been helpful, such as fire tools (the pulaski), or "fire behavior" where I find such terms as "blowup", or "backfire" which Dodge used in "Young Men and Fire" (actually it was termed an escape fire). Also, such defintiions about fire suppression, such as "mop-up" and "direct attack." While I may never get to attend a forestry school, I have this great reference dictionary to satiate my appetite for a great interest of mine - forestry. I appreciate the many people who put this book together and I want you to know that I consider it as essential in my library.

A great book for the amateur genealogist. It is light enough that, unlike many books on the subject, it is readable, yet it contains a wealth of information. The book description says "some entries will provoke a chuckle, others a bit of embarrassment, still others a sense of wonder and pride." This is certainly true. As a person of German heritage who (sadly) does not speak German, I was indeed filled with a sense of wonder when I looked up my great-grandfather's name, Hundesauger.

For anyone who is researching German names and family genealogy this book is the definitive, in-depth, and scholarly work in the field of German names. A "must own" book for the serious researcher of German families and names