The Whole World in a Book: Dictionaries in the Nineteenth Century ed. by Sarah Ogilvie and Gabriella Safran (review)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: The Whole World in a Book: Dictionaries in the Nineteenth Century ed. by Sarah Ogilvie and Gabriella Safran Michael Hancher (bio) The Whole World in a Book: Dictionaries in the Nineteenth Century, edited by Sarah Ogilvie and Gabriella Safran. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. Pp. xxiii + 328. Hardcover $48.99. ISBN: 978-019-0913-19-9. This collection of twenty-six chapters originated in a two-day workshop titled "Nineteenth-Century Lexicography Conference: Between Science and Fiction," which the editors hosted at Stanford University in April 2018. The twenty-eight contributors, leading scholars of linguistic and lexicographical history, often refer to the relevance of each other's work. Such attentive cross-referencing, combined with the broadly chronological sequencing of the chapters and a brief but helpful editorial introduction, gives the book a continuity that is unusual in such collections. The book is bracketed by a retrospective chapter by John Considine, which efficiently identifies a set of precedents and unresolved questions that faced lexicographers at the end of the eighteenth century, and a final, prospective chapter by Jorge Bidarra and Tania Aparecida Martins, which looks toward a new lexicography for sign language in Brazil to resolve questions that date back to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The intervening chapters assess the motives, circumstances, and accomplishments of dictionary-makers in the nineteenth century as they worked to describe the lexis of a broad range of Western and Asian modern languages. A leitmotif in the book is linguistic evolution, which the authors invoke some two dozen times, not always with reference to James A. H. Murray's Romanes Lecture The Evolution of English Lexicography (1900). [End Page 149] NATION One of the questions framed in the call for papers was, "What role, if any, did nationalistic enterprises play in the planning and execution of these texts?" (Ogilvie and Safran 2016). Many of these chapters highlight that role. "Christian Nationalism in Noah Webster's Lexicography" is the title of Edward Finegan's contribution, which characterizes the nationalism signaled by the first epithet in the title of Webster's major work, An American Dictionary of the English Language (1828). Volker Harm's chapter on the Deutsches Wörterbuch, begun by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm early in the nineteenth century though not completed until 1961, makes clear that "the Grimms explicitly identified language and nation"—characterized as "the folk"—decades before the consolidation of the German nation-state (78). Harm points out that Anne Dykstra's chapter, "Joost Halbertsma and the Lexicon Frisicum," registers similar pressures in Dutch and Frisian lexicography, attenuated in the latter case by Halbertsma's resort to a Latin meta-language for his dictionary (94, 97). "The First Scottish 'National' Dictionary: John Jamieson's Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language (1808/1825)," by Susan Rennie, and "French Lexicography in Québec: The Works and Ideas of Oscar Dunn," by Wim Remysen and Nadine Vincent, are also germane: Walter Scott understood Jamieson's project to be "an important national task" (114), and Dunn advocated for "a French nation in America" (145). In all three of these latter cases—Frisian, Scots, Québécois—the independent status of the language as a language rather than a dialect is disputable (thanks in part to the uncertainty of the general distinction between language and dialect), even as the independence of the polities involved—Frisia, Scotland, Québec—has been less than assured. And even where independence had been secured, as in the United States, Webster's American Dictionary described not the American language but a dialect of the English language. The taxonomic question of where to draw the line, and at what level, inflects nineteenth-century lexicography in this respect and in others that will be noted below. Other chapters that engage the relation of language and nation include "Lord of the Words: Vladimir Dahl's Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great-Russian Language as a National Epic" by Ilya Vinitsky, "Lexicography of the Entrenched Empire: Banihûn's and Pu-gong's Manchu-Chinese Literary Ocean (1821)" by Mårtin Söderblom Saarela, [End Page 150] "Steingass's Comprehensive Persian–English Dictionary and the Rise and Fall of Persian as a Transregional...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it