Wikipedia:You Are Probably Not a Lexicologist or a Lexicographer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an essay. It is not a policy or guideline, it simply reflects some opinions of its authors. Please update the page as needed, or discuss it on the talk page. |
When multiple edit wars keep occurring over the intro paragraph of an article on a controversial topic, people naturally turn to more NPOV sources, like the dictionary. The dictionary is one source among many that is generally considered more authoritative than your personal opinion.
Sometimes, for a controversial topic like homophobia or marriage or truth, the dictionary definition seems inadequate to capture all senses of the word as it is currently used. Wikipedians can and do argue over whether the dictionary definition is accurate, or which sense of a word is prevalent in mainstream thought. You may not like the dictionary definition, but if it is a reputable dictionary, it generally carries more weight than your personal opinion. You can't generally make it disappear from the article simply by claiming that "it is a bad definition" based on your (explicitly or implicitly asserted) expertise as an expert on dictionary formation. You Are Probably Not a Lexicologist or a Lexicographer.
Lexicology (from lexiko-, in Late Greek lexikon) is that part of linguistics, a science which is dealing with the study of words, the relations between words (i.e. semantical relations), and the whole lexicon.
Lexicography is divided into two related disciplines: practical lexicography is the art or craft of compiling, writing and editing dictionaries. Theoretical lexicology is a branch of linguistics concerned with the scholarly discipline of analyzing and describing the semantic relationships within the lexicon (vocabulary) of a language and developing theories of dictionary components and structures linking the data in dictionaries. This is sometimes referred to as metalexicography.
Let’s face it, you are probably not trained in Lexicology or Lexicography. You may have opinions about semantics (how words are defined or used within in a lexicon), or how YOU would have written the dictionary, but your opinion does not countervail the efforts of trained lexicographers.
[edit] Praxis (what to do)
When faced with a dictionary definition that you disagree with, your alternatives are limited; you can either find a better dictionary with a better definition, or you can cite reputable sources that discuss the changing meaning of a given word. What you generally cannot do within Wikipedia is discount the dictionary definition by claiming to know a lot about words and dictionary writing. You Are Probably Not a Lexicologist or a Lexicographer. Even if you are, you still need to cite sources.
[edit] Arguments against using the dictionary definition in the lead paragraph
Not all wikipedians agree with this essay. Some arguments against this are as follows:
- Since Wikipedia is not a dictionary (see WP:NOT), some editors think that using dictionary definitions to start an article makes it sound more like a high school freshman essay than a reputable encyclopedia.
- Additionally, dictionary definitions, while accurate, often do not convey the full connotations and context of the use of a word. The large space that we dedicate to each entry allows us to explore details like this without constricting ourselves to the brief and limited sense described by a dictionary. While a dictionary definition may be an appropriate component of a lead paragraph, it is not always in itself a complete and sufficient exposition of the subject.
- Dictionaries are extremely conservative in what they recognize, and are descriptive of an existing definition, not creators of it. More immediate sources, like books, academic writings, or others are often more direct and accurate, especially when they are responsible for the definition in the first place. Stephen Colbert is a much better source for a definition of Truthiness than Webster's.
- Moreover, original sources may have a more nuanced and in depth treatment of definitions; for example, Plato's Republic and other philosophic inquiries into the meaning of justice may occasionally outweigh dictionary citations on the definition of Justice. Then again, Plato is a published source, and you are Probably Not Plato.
[edit] See Also
- WP:CITE Citing Sources
- WP:V Verifiability, Burden of Proof, Sources of Dubious Reliability
- WP:RS Defining what is a reliable source.
- Appeal to authority
- Oxford English Dictionary
- Merriam-Webster#Today
- Webster's Dictionary
