Comments on: But the dictionary says… http://blog.oup.com/2011/06/dictionary-courtroom/ Academic insights for the thinking world. Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:22:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Terminologia etc. » » Leggi e dizionari (negli Stati Uniti) http://blog.oup.com/2011/06/dictionary-courtroom/#comment-223735 Terminologia etc. » » Leggi e dizionari (negli Stati Uniti) Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:03:22 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=17206#comment-223735 [...] 28 giugno 2011 – But the dictionary says… aggiunge alcuni esempi e conclude ribadendo il ruolo di dizionari e [...] [...] 28 giugno 2011 – But the dictionary says… aggiunge alcuni esempi e conclude ribadendo il ruolo di dizionari e [...]

]]> By: Dennis Baron http://blog.oup.com/2011/06/dictionary-courtroom/#comment-223707 Dennis Baron Mon, 27 Jun 2011 18:55:26 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=17206#comment-223707 @cfh: the law makes much of how the average person, the reasonable person, understands language, as well as what it often refers to as the plain meaning of the text. while the lexicographer must consider the many meanings of apparently simple words, the ordinary person isn't usually asked to do this. the average person considers many words beyond dispute, but lawyers, judges, and justices of the supreme court, as well as the chief justice of the united states, still feel compelled to seek out finer shades of meaning. sometimes they are simply curious, and sometimes they do so seeking support for their point of view. but we all use language that way, don't we? @cfh: the law makes much of how the average person, the reasonable person, understands language, as well as what it often refers to as the plain meaning of the text. while the lexicographer must consider the many meanings of apparently simple words, the ordinary person isn’t usually asked to do this. the average person considers many words beyond dispute, but lawyers, judges, and justices of the supreme court, as well as the chief justice of the united states, still feel compelled to seek out finer shades of meaning. sometimes they are simply curious, and sometimes they do so seeking support for their point of view. but we all use language that way, don’t we?

]]> By: CFH http://blog.oup.com/2011/06/dictionary-courtroom/#comment-223706 CFH Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:34:15 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=17206#comment-223706 "One of the words Chief Justice Roberts looked up last week in a patent case was of. These are words whose meanings even the average person might consider beyond dispute." In fact, _only_ the "average person" would think that. No linguist, aware of the myriad and multifarious uses of the word "of" -- nor for that matter even an "average person" who consulted a dictionary and noticed those many uses -- would make such a statement, except perhaps to set up a dishonest dig at someone's intelligence. “One of the words Chief Justice Roberts looked up last week in a patent case was of. These are words whose meanings even the average person might consider beyond dispute.”

In fact, _only_ the “average person” would think that. No linguist, aware of the myriad and multifarious uses of the word “of” — nor for that matter even an “average person” who consulted a dictionary and noticed those many uses — would make such a statement, except perhaps to set up a dishonest dig at someone’s intelligence.

]]>