|
|
(Larger Image)
|
Pocket Oxford English Dictionary
by Oxford Dictionaries, Sara Hawker, Julia Elliott
Product Group: Book
Publisher: OUP Oxford (2005-04-07)
ISBN: 0198610297
EAN: 9780198610298
Dewy Decimal #: 423
Hardcover: 1098 pages
Edition: 10
SKU: B560-C-1015
Condition: As New
Comments: UNREAD but may have minor imperfections such as a crease or mark. In stock - quick dispatch, from an efficient and professional leading British bookselling firm.
|
Customer Reviews
|
Umm... It's a Dictionary
Rating  (5)
Date: 2008-02-16
Well, what can I say? It's a dictionary!
It's pretty much a normal dictionary - and don't get fooled by the word 'pocket' because you'd have to have a pretty big pocket to put it in! BE WARNED.
I gave it 5 stars because it's a dictionary and it does it's purpose. What's good about it is that it gives extra things like Usage Notes, which include things like spelling confusion and meanings e.t.c.
It is a useful dictionary, clear to read, things like origins, formality, spelling tips, pronuncuation, e.t.c that help it to do it's job efficently.
All in all a good dictionary but if you don't have it it's not like you need to get it - it's just a dictionary with a few extras.
|
|
Brilliant
Rating (5)
Date: 2007-06-26
4 out of 4 customers found this reveiw helpful
I can tell you now that this book is a gem. It has helped me for years on end with academic research and I always find the word I'm looking for. The explanations in the book are detailed, without using words which are over-complicated. It also says briefly where the word originated from and gives deriveatives. Very impressive for a smaller dictionary.
|
|
"new" does not mean better
Rating  (1)
Date: 2006-04-07
5 out of 32 customers found this reveiw helpful
NEW POCKET OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY is not new, it is abridged although the editors claim it is updated. Check out all possible vulgarisms that come to your mind...even the "less vulgar" ones. THERE AREN'T ANY!!!!!! Is that a reliable picture of the English language???? And since there are no vulgarisms there is no usage note "VULGAR". What we get instead is "DEROGATORY" and "OFFENSIVE". And how would you account for "bimbo" being INFORMAL and DEROGATORY but "coon" being INFORMAL and OFFENSIVE? Where is the logic?
The previous edition of Pocket OED is far better than the newer one. New words (if any), scarce usage boxes and layout are not enough to call it new and the content leaves a lot to be desired
|
|
|
|
|