Re: USAGE: -ic(al) Re: [CONLANG] Most developed conlang

Mark Reed/Charlie wrote:

> >"Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...> wrote:
>
> >The HAD is certainly major, although its reputation is not
> >uncheckered among serious students of English.
>
> What are the criteria for being a serious student of English?  Can you
> refer me to any sources that discuss the uncheckered reputation of AHD?
>
Some modern dictionaries are taken to task for erring too much on the side
of _usage_ versus _prescriptive correctness_ (thus abandoning the older
practice of marking certain forms "non-standard"). Linguists and the LSA
were said to be the culprits. I don't know where AHD stands.

It's my _impression_ that they're sometimes accused of citing incorrect
usages without comment-- e.g. disinterested vs. uninterested, mitigate vs.
militate, flaunt vs. flout, jive vs. jibe (gibe?); modern misuse of "beg the
question" is probably too recent to have made it into a dictionary.

IIRC Webster's 3d, which appeared back in the 60s under the editorship of
Philip Gove (see google and wikipedia), was the first to do so, and was
roundly criticized. There was a New Yorker cartoon of the receptionist at
the publisher's office saying to someone on the phone, "Dr. Gove ain't in"
:-))))

(signed) Miss Fidditch, 3d grade English teacher