>he hasn’t read the dictionary at least one timehow embarrassing
>>24706676I did that all the time as a kid
>his dictionary is a single volumeWhy even live?
>>24706676>he read the dictionary >but hasn't read a usage dictionary All those words mean nothing if you don't understand their place in language.
>>24706916Garner's might be my favorite book.
>>24706676>>24706733>>24706784>Has a collection of dictionaries>Looks at definition of vaccine 1950>Looks at definition of vaccine 1970>Looks at definition of vaccine 1990>Looks at definition of vaccine 2010>Looks at definition of vaccine 2020 Wait, it changed, (((who could have added that)))
>>24706983>does not know what a historical dictionary is>but thinks he is smart
>>24706733Same here. These days I use the Harper Dictionary Of Contemporary Usage as a doorstop, but have read it 4X for entertainment.
>>24706676personally I like reading phone books because there are more people>kek
Okay I'll buy 1 dictionary 1 thesaurus and a usage dictionary. What should I get?
The American Heritage Dictionary and Thesaurus is excellent.
>>24708764The Compact Edition OED The Synonym FinderGarner's Modern English UsageMake sure the OED comes with the magnifying glass, or go digital with it, I bought a tablet for the OED but still use my print edition a good amount. Thesauri are a toss up. Synonym Finder seems a little more slanted towards literature than general usage compared to most. Nothing needs to be said about Garner but make sure to get the newest edition, a great deal gets added with each edition, not just updates of usage.
>>24709311>The Compact Edition OEDthat's pretty cool I'm gonna have to save for it though
>>24709337It is worth the money and if you are patient and keep an eye out you can get it for ~$75. Just make sure it has the magnifying glass, the micro printing is to such an extreme that you can't use any old magnifying glass, any flaws in the lens will become very noticeable and can be very difficult to read it through. Buying a magnifying glass of good enough quality will cost more than a used copy of the dictionary. Also, the one that comes with it makes reading the text easy since it just sits on the page, once you get used to using it it becomes second nature.
>>24706676I started, but had to put it down about a quarter way in. The prose was poor, it was just a jumble of words that came one after another. Some kind of avant garde work, I'm too dense to figure it out.
>>24707002>Collect dictionaries and know how to use them? FUCK THAT just buy one and be spoon fedYou're beyond retarded.The point, that you clearly missed, is the definition of vaccine was changed. I could also explain it at a technical level but you don't seem to care about objective reality.
>>24709375>does not know what a historical dictionary is>but thinks he is smart
>>24709382>historical dictionaries are written in the present>he thinks dictionaries published at different times in history are worse sources for historical definitions than a historical dictionary
>>24709750>does not know what a historical dictionary is>but thinks he is smart
>>24706676I've read the dictionary. It's crazy how much knowledge there is. Last time I read it, it stimulated my brain so much that it made my face drenched with sweat. Need to make it a habit.
>>24709761Damn you sound like a retard. The other guy too for taking the bait but you sound extra stupid
>>24709922Only the last one is me, but it is not bait. That anon does not even know what a dictionary is let alone a historical dictionary; thinks usage is prescribed and that he proved a conspiracy. Also, getting strong samefag vibes.
Will reading an earlyish dictionary actually benefit me? I very rarely run into words I don’t know and I’m not sure how much information you’d retain just reading through it
>>24709922First two were me, was not bait. >>24710036Usage dictionaries are the best for reading, they will get you thinking more about how the words are used and stop seeing them as definitions. The essays in Garner's are worth the price on their own, it did an amazing job of breaking me of habits which were not bad or wrong but often were not as concise or as clear as they could be. Personally I would not read an early dictionary unless you have a reason like writing or reading something set in that time period and for reading it generally is not needed. Historical dictionaries do a better jib than period dictionaries, period dictionaries assume you have a decent grasp on the periods usage.
>>24706676>Not being able to figure out what any word means from context cluesHow embarrassing
>>247069832 more weeks amirite?
>>24710425kek.
>>24710425The reason they redefined "vaccine" is so people wouldn't question the deaths and just write it off as your normal everyday sort of dying. Pull your head out of your ass and whipe the shit out of your eyes, it has been going on for almost 4 years now.
>>24706983what did they change definitionally?
>>24710462My guess would be that it was updated to include the new sorts of vaccines, but no clue.
>>24706983>Looks at definition of 'election tourist' in 2025>Screenshot of this post
>>24709382>>24709761>>24709962>>24710060You have no idea what dictionaries are in my collection. Your dedication to embarrassing yourself is truly impressive. You very clearly don't know anything about etymology either.I'm not pushing any conspiracy. It was the CDC, in 2021, that published the change, for the first time ever, for the definition of vaccine to include palliative gene therapy (MRNA).It was done by CONGRESS you fucking retard.Thanks for demonstrating, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the stupidity and ignorance of vaxtards.
>>24710462>>24710476The original definition of a vaccine was specific about how it's made. A vaccine was always a dead or inert culture of the virus introduced into the body to generate an immune response and build immunity. In 2021 congress modified the CDC definition to include palliative gene therapy. The mechanism of immune response from mRNA hijacking is extremely different than the original process for vaccines but in order for the medical cartels to have the legal immunity granted for vaccine they needed mRNA to be included in the definition -- so that's what they did. mRNA treatments of this kind ALREADY had a name: palliative gene therapy. MRNAVaxtards have always been the biggest crowd following retards to ever walk the earth.
>>24710457That was part of it. The main reason though is there is a long standing hold harmless legal protections for vaccine producers. If you die from a vacciene you can not sue the vacciene producer.They wanted this legal immunity for mRNA so they got Congress to force the CDC to change the definition of vaccine.
>>24711804>I'm not pushing any conspiracy So, what does some dictionary changing its definition a year prior have anything to with this? And what did >Wait, it changed, (((who could have added that)))Refer to?
>>24711970>Why does it matter that congress changed the CDC definition in 2021I already explained it. I can't tell if you're intentionally obfuscating my point or really are just a turbo-retard with brain damage.
>>24712097I asked what does it matter that a dictionary changed its definition in 2020, your original point and who the mysterious group is your referred to was. Are we supposed to ignore this stuff just because you eventually cited something that is fairly common knowledge? At best you got your years mixed up and are now trying to waffle and strawman it away, but it really comes off like you believe there is a conspiracy there.
>>24706676I want to read Johnson's dictionary one day, maybe when I'm retired
>>24712111There was no mysterious group you delusional moron it was Congress and I explained why, twice. I would say you're intentionally ignoring my posts but vaxtards are very fucking stupid as a baseline so it makes sense.At no point did you remotely demonstrate you understood anything I posted. At this point it's pretty obvious your a disingenuous piece of garbage.
>>24711827ah, thanks for the explanation
>>24706676I used to do this as a kid, that's how literally bored I was growing up, when all we had was PBS and ABC.
>>24712769nta but , are you saying congress got some dictionary to redefine it in 2020? Congress is who you alluded to in that initial post? If so, that is a conspiracy. If not you have /pol/rot and took this thread off topic. Probably have /pol/rot either way
