Review
of the Oxford Dictionary of American
English
|
Books |
Software |
|
Author(s):
Alison Waters (Ed.) |
Name:
Oxford Genie |
|
Title:
Oxford Dictionary of American English |
Platform:
PC w/ Windows 98+, Mac w/ OS X |
|
Series
(if applicable) N/A |
Minimum
hardware requirements: Pentium II, 128 MB Ram |
|
Publisher:
Oxford University Press |
Contact
info: www.oup.com/elt |
|
City
and country: Oxford UK |
Support
offered: |
|
2005 |
Target
language: English |
|
828
pages |
Target
audience: intermediate level ESL learner |
|
Price:
$29.95 |
Price:
included |
|
ISBN |
ISBN |
OVERVIEW
From
both marketing and research perspectives, these are exciting times for learner
lexicography. In the 1990s, publishers invested heavily in developing
research-informed, learner-oriented ESL dictionaries that drew on huge corpora
of natural language. Now the race is on to provide ever more sophisticated
computerized versions (both online and on CD-ROM) with ever increasing arrays
of interactive features designed to ease consultation and promote learning. It
is safe to assume that no time has been lost in verifying the sales appeal of
dictionary packages that include free CDs; inevitably, the research that can
verify the merits of the various technology options will be slower in coming.
Recently
a new dictionary, the Oxford Dictionary
of American English and its accompanying Genie CD-ROM software, entered the fray. This dictionary for intermediate-level learners of English has
the clear, uncrowded page format we have come to expect in ESL dictionaries, as
well as many of the other welcome features of its competitors, such as
colour print and a wealth of illustrations. But since the main claim for
innovation appears to be the electronic version, we will concentrate our review
on the accompanying CD-ROM.
DESCRIPTION
The
Genie software that accompanies this
new dictionary bills itself as “amazing technology amazingly easy to use,” a
claim that proved justified to the less technology-savvy of the two authors,
who had the tool up and running in minutes. Once installed, the tool is indeed
easy to use. Double click on the Genie
icon and what looks like the small hand-held electronic dictionary beloved of
many ESL learners appears on the computer screen (see Figure 1). Unlike the
other ESL dictionary software we examined (Longman
Dictionary of Contemporary English, CD-ROM, 2003), the interface does not
take up large amounts of screen space (though admittedly the Longman screen can be squeezed down, if
users are willing to explore). Once opened, Genie
simply hovers unobtrusively in the upper left corner of any text one might be
reading or writing, waiting to be called on. One can consult Genie in the usual type-and-enter way,
or amazingly, by simply pointing the mouse at a word to be searched in the text
(we tested both Word and html documents). The word’s definition appears
instantly in Genie’s display – no
typing, or even clicking, is needed. If an inflected form like “chunks” is
selected, the user is taken directly to the headword “chunk.” Then, should a word
in the defining language or example sentence be unfamiliar (e.g., “floating” in
the example “chunks of ice floating in the lake”), a double click on the
problem item brings up a definition of “float.” Once at “float”, the user can
chose between two types of go-back arrows — one returns the user to the
starting point (“chunk”) while the other is a next-on-the-shelf option that
shows entries that are listed near “float” (in this case “flit” and “flirt”).
Figure 1: From chunks in Word to chunk
in Genie
The
sheer effortlessness of using Genie
raises the question of whether this is actually a good thing for English
language learners. Studies of traditional dictionary use point to the
word-learning effects of searches that engage learners in cognitively demanding
processes such as recalling spellings, searching alphabetically, holding
information in memory, and scanning a page of near matches to find the targeted
word (Chun & Payne, 2004; Chun & Plass, 1996; Hulstijn, Hollander, M.,
& Greidanus, 1996; Knight, 1994; Laufer & Hill, 2000). Other
computerized ESL dictionaries we examined (on-line and in CD packages)1
also make look-ups easy, but they require some minimal effort on the part of
the user, such as typing words or pasting them into a box. Genie, too, responds to typed or pasted in look-ups, but it is the
effortless pointing function that poses intriguing questions for researchers
interested in vocabulary acquisition through computer-assisted reading: Will
making look-ups this easy mean that learners look up more words or fewer? Learn
more new vocabulary or less? As mentioned, the research can be expected to lag
well behind technology developments.
But
the question intended users of these materials (learners of English at the
intermediate level) will ask is likely
to be more instrumental: How well does this resource meet my needs? Genie is clearly designed to appeal to
users of the electronic bilingual dictionaries that are so popular with ESL
learners today, and if its easy-to-use interface and trendy design succeed in
seducing some fraction of this population into using an Oxford dictionary, then
it will have accomplished a great deal. The two intermediate university ESL
learners we asked to examine the paper dictionary certainly saw the computerized
format as a highly desirable aspect.
We
asked both learners to examine two dictionaries, the Oxford dictionary under
review (designed for intermediates) and another larger dictionary designed for
advanced ESL learners, Longman Dictionary
of Contemporary English, (Summers, 2003, henceforth LDOCE), and to complete a questionnaire based on the quiz that
appears on p. vii of the Oxford paper dictionary. The quiz is designed to raise
users’ awareness of the information available in entries by asking them to explore
questions such as “Which letter is silent in the word receipt?” and “What do you call a person who comes form
Norway?” Obviously, the observations of
just two learners provide a limited basis for generalizations; nonetheless, the
exercise provided a number of useful insights. For instance, one learner
complained that the smaller Oxford dictionary refuses to lie flat when opened
to particular page, an aspect that other users might also find inconvenient.
Although the two learners were in intermediate-level ESL classes, both stated
that they would prefer to own the larger advanced-level dictionary simply
because it seemed likely to have more entries. This impression is correct; the
advanced LDOCE appears to have
106,000 entries while the Oxford Dictionary
of American English has just 40,000. Products by Cambridge (Landau, 1999)
and Heinle (Rideout, 2004) that also target intermediate learners offer a
similar number of entries, while Longman’s
Dictionary of American English (2005) offers the somewhat higher figure of
52,000 entries.
Most
of the look-ups in the two dictionaries prompted no-difference responses from
our informants. That is, they both found that both dictionaries provided useful
and clear information of various types (definitions, part of speech,
pronunciation, etc.). One point worthy of note arose when the learners were
asked to look up “hash browns” in the two dictionaries and assess the clarity
of the definitions. One informant noted his preference for Oxford’s more
natural sounding fried over the LDOCE’s
“cooked in oil.” This observation
prompted us to wonder whether “cooked in oil” reflects Longman’s attempt to
avoid special cooking terms like fry in favor of using a basic defining
vocabulary made up of general, frequent words like cook. The LDOCE is explicit on this point and
actually lists all 2000 words of its defining vocabulary. However, in the
introductory guide to the Oxford dictionary, the editors note that meanings are
“given in simple English using words that are easy to understand” (p. v) but
give no further indication of what these simple words are, on what basis they
are deemed “easy,” or how learners would be able to check that they know them.
This omission is striking given the great emphasis other publishers (Longman, Collins
COBUILD, Cambridge) place on using corpora of ‘real’ language to select the
words, meanings, examples, and defining lexicons that appear in their
dictionaries.
There
is evidence of a corpus-informed approach in Oxford’s guide on p. iv, where it
is noted that blue stars highlight “important” (frequent?) words, but the
authors have clearly chosen to emphasize other features. For instance, the book
cover mentions special mid and end sections that provide a variety of
interesting resources, including practice activities for phrasal verbs,
information on US and Canadian governments, tips for writing resumes, and a
practice TOEFL test. One informant waxed enthusiastic about these attractively
presented resources; the other did not comment other than to note the list of
irregular verb forms found at the back. Neither of these Montreal ESL learners
remarked on the distinctive North American character of Genie, despite our efforts to make this apparent by asking them to
look up Canadianisms like toonie (or $2 coin, an item not found in LDOCE).
Genie’s headwords are all
pronounced on a mouse click, and in a North American voice; by contrast, the LDOCE requires the user to choose a
British or American voice (and sometimes gives the wrong one).
A
truly interesting feature of Genie
that neither of our users noticed is its smart definitions. This is an
innovative attempt at implementing something that has long been seen as a
potential advantage of electronic lexicography: the ability to draw on the
language of the text a user is reading to deliver the relevant sense of a word.
Since research shows failure to determine relevant sense to be the main
obstacle to learners’ use of paper dictionaries (e.g., Nesi, 2002), smart
definitions may well prove to be an important and research-indicated
contribution to learner-oriented lexicography.
How
this works is as follows (unfortunately, we could not find much explanation of
it in the one-page quick start guide buried in the menu options and perhaps
this is why our testers did not discover it):
the reader moves the mouse over the word “find” in a sentence such as
“Move the cursor over the word you want to find out about.” One would
ordinarily expect that this would simply take users to the headword “find”,
leaving them to sort through the “find” entries for possible combinations with
other words. But Genie’s smart
definition feature is able to use the text input to take the user directly to
the entry for “find out – phrasal verb.” This is clearly a major advance, and
one worthy of dictionary researchers’ interest. However, this feature appears
to be in the early stages of its development. In the sentence, “Since 1999 we
have had this problem, but since we learned the cause we are no longer
worried,” there are two uses of since — one as a “prep.” and the other
as a “conj.” But passing the mouse over either of them merely leads to the same
definition, which users must read through for themselves to determine which
sense they are dealing with. Even though the phrase “Since 1999” contains an
obvious clue to the “prep.” meaning, Genie
is not yet able to use this input to identify the appropriate sense. So this is
at least one step in the look-up process from which cognitive effort has not
yet been eliminated. Oxford will no doubt continue to work on the smart
definitions feature in future versions (which will be made available to
purchasers via the “Check for updates” link).
The
problem described above can be seen as a challenge to be overcome on the way to
developing a new and interesting resource. Other weaknesses cannot be so
readily ascribed to the difficulties of innovation. For example, paper
dictionary and Genie alike provide
many clear and useful illustrations with their definitions, but not all words
pictured in the paper version are also pictured in the computerized version,
and the choice of omissions does not always make sense. Strangely, pictures for
“horse” and “cat” – both simple items that even beginning learners may already
know – appear in Genie, but more
useful images from the paper version do not such as those that distinguish
common confusables like “licking,” “biting,” and “swallowing.”
CONCLUSION
No
doubt the issue of pictures and other problems we have noted will be addressed
in future editions of the Oxford Dictionary
of American English. Using computer technology to good advantage in learner
lexicography is no simple matter, but publishers of ESL dictionaries are
clearly committed to this venture, and with strong teams working on problems
and exploring opportunities we are likely to see much progress in coming years.
With the ODAE and Genie, Oxford has managed to produce a
competitive product and is well positioned to contribute to this progress. The
challenge for applied linguistics researchers will be to keep pace!
REFERENCES
Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996). Effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 80, 183-198.
Chun, D., & Payne, S. (2004). What makes students click: working memory and look-up behavior. System, 32(4), 481-503.
Hulstijn, J.
H., Hollander, M., & Greidanus, M.
(1996). Incidental vocabulary learning
by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses,
dictionary use, and reoccurrence of unknown words. Modern Language Journal, 80, 327-339
Knight, S. M. (1994).
Dictionary use while reading: The effects on comprehension and
vocabulary acquisition for students of different verbal abilities. Modern
Language Journal, 78, 285-299.
Landau, S. I. (Ed.). (1999). Cambridge dictionary of
American English. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Laufer, B. and Hill, M. 2000. What Lexical
Information do L2 Learners Select in a Call Dictionary
and How Does it Affect Word Retention? Language Learning & Technology, 3(2),
58–76.
Longman Dictionary of American English (4th ed). (2005). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited.
Nesi, H. & Haill, R. (2002). A study of dictionary use by international students at a British university. International Journal of Lexicography, 15(4), 277-305.
Rideout, P. (Ed.) (2004). Newbury House dictionary of American English (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson Heinle.
Summers, D. (Ed.).
(2003). Longman dictionary of contemporary English (3rd
ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education
Limited.
ENDNOTE
These
included the on-line dictionaries available on-line at http://www.ldoceonline.com/ and http://dictionary.cambridge.org/
and the CD-ROM that accompanies the Longman
Dictionary of Contemporary English (Summers, 2003).
Marlise
Horst is Assistant Professor at the TESL Centre of the Department of Education
at Concordia University in Montreal. Her research focuses on extensive reading
and computer-assisted vocabulary learning.
E-mail:
marlise@education.concordia.ca
Tom
Cobb is Associate Professor in the Département de linguistique et de didactique
des langues at Université de Québec à Montreal. He specializes in developing
on-line tools for vocabulary learning and research.
E-mail:
cobb.tom@uqam.ca