SAN University of Bucharest x201C Pompous luxuriancex201D versus x201Cselectionx201D Canonized as one of the most significant texts of eighteenth century prescriptivism or x201Crede ID: 516768
Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "Dr Ruxandra VI" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Dr Ruxandra VI SAN, University of Bucharest “ Pompous luxuriance” versus “selection” Canonized as one of the most significant texts of eighteenth - century prescriptivism or “redeemed” as one of the first lexicographic texts that promote a “descriptive” approach, Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language has been regarded by many contempora ry histories of the English language (or by histories of English lexicography) as a “modern dictionary” (e.g. Beal 2004 : 43 ). In such texts, Johnson’s work is often contrasted with previous dictionaries (universal dictionaries of the eighteenth century , such as Nathan Bailey’s ), these previous works being regarded as heterogeneous ( “bewildering array of sources”, Starnes and Noyes 1946:124, about Bailey) or “disorderly” (Reddick 1996:13, about Bailey). In the Plan to his Dictionary , Johnson himself advertised his work as a text that avoided the “pompous luxuriance” of previous dictionaries, which he dismissed as “ miscellaneous ” . In texts such as the 1747 Plan or the 1755 Preface , the eighteenth - century lexicographer presented his work as resulting from careful “ selection ” , as an attempt of bringing (a modicum of) “order” to the English language. Emphasizing upon the importance of research into the ideological attitudes of historical linguists (Milroy 20 12) and f ocusing on label s such as “modern” , and on the role played by oppositions such as homogeneity/heterogeneity , comprehensiveness/selection , dictionary/encyclopaedia in the representation of the prototypical “modern dictionary” of the English language, this p aper will attempt to examine the ideologies underlying the attitudes expressed by contemporary historical linguists who envisage a dictionary such as Johnson’ s as a “modern dictionary”. References Beal, Joan C. 2004. English in Modern Times 1700 - 1745 . London: Arnold. Milroy, James. 2012. “ Sociolinguistics and ideology in language history ” . In Juan Manuel Hernandez - Campoy and Juan Camilo Conde - Silvestre, The Hand book of Historical Sociolinguistics , 571 - 585. Oxford: Blackwell. Reddick, Alan. 1996. The Making of Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary 1746 - 1773. Cambridge: Ca mbridge University Press . Starnes, DeWitt and Gertrude Noyes. 1946. The English Dictionary from Cawdrey to Johnson 1604 - 1755 . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.