Write On! :: Discuss the art and craft of writing

Thesauruses (thesauri?)

by janra
Posted to Craft, The tools we use on Fri Jan 26, 2001 at 06:50:13 PM PST
[Print]

In one of the first classes of my first-year english course, the professor asked two questions: "How many of you own a thesaurus?" (about half of the class) and "How many of you actually use your thesaurus?" (about an eighth of the class). The people who didn't use their thesaurus looked sheepish, until she declared that a thesaurus often made your writing worse.

Her logic was that because different synonyms for the same word have subtly different meanings, if you simply substituted words you'd often get sentences that didn't mean quite what you thought they meant, especially if you weren't completely familiar with the word. And if you looked it up in a thesaurus, chances were (unless you knew it but were drawing a blank when trying to think of it) you weren't familiar with it.

Consider synonyms for (opening my thesaurus to a random page...) 'impenetrable'. Now my thesaurus says:

impenetrable adj. arcane, baffling, cabbalistic, cryptic, dark, dense, enigmatic(al), fathomless, hermetic, hidden, impassable, impermeable, impervious, incomprehensible, indiscernable, inexplicable, inscrutable, inviolable, mysterious, obscure, solid, thick, unfathomable, unintelligible, unpiercable.

So if you were talking about an impenetrable wall in your writing, but thought you were using the word 'impenetrable' too often, a lot of people would turn to their thesaurus. A 'fathomless' wall? 'fathom' means 'grasp or comprehend'. (when it isn't acting as a unit of measure... don't you just love the english language? ;-)

You can see the problem - and a thesaurus is especially bad for people for whom english is not their first language. But how do you get a variety of words in your writing, so you don't sound repetetive? Well, I just read a lot, starting when I was about 4, and I'm showing no signs of slowing down. How do you do it?

Make a new account

Poll

Votes: 9
Results	\|	Other Polls

Related Links

Thesauruses (thesauri?) | 20 comments (20 topical, 0 hidden)

What to do when you need another word (4.00/1) (#1)
by Caprice on Fri Feb 16, 2001 at 04:06:58 PM PST

I do use Thesauri. Several. Most of the time, it is for that reason given before, that I have an idea what word I want, but it's just beyond my memory to recall. I believe I have an above average vocabulary and I'm very picky about just what word I want in a given place.

One important point is that if you're looking for a synonym without already knowing what word you want is to USE A DICTIONARY!! This is why I don't like the thesaurus in my word processor or some of the "pocket" thesauri. The big desk thesauri often give help with shades of meaning in their entries, thereby making the choice easier. Even then, it's always, always best to look up words in the dictionary before you go ahead and use them.

The other tool I use a lot is one I'm surprised hasn't "caught on" better. It's published by Random House and called a "Word Menu". Author is Stephen Glazier. I sincerely love this reference and would give up my thesaurus before this gem. Words are grouped by category, according to usage. Many of the entries are accompanied by short descriptions or definitions. I find this especially helpful when I want to know what in the world you call a particular "thingy".

If you do your homework, and use it properly, I don't agree that using a thesaurus makes your writing worse. Only if it's misused or abused does it backfire. And if you're not willing to use it right, well, you may just be better off using the same word repeatedly. Truth is, that isn't good either.

Thesaurisizing . . . (4.00/1) (#3)
by Anonymous Writer on Fri Mar 16, 2001 at 12:42:53 PM PST

I voted (so far I take 100% of the opinion! THAT's a first!)

I treasure my (substantial) thesaurus. I also love my dictionary. If asked, I'd have to say that these are my top two favorite books of all those I own (in reverse order.)

I have a real need for knowing what things are called. I also love of knowing the true meaning of words. I enjoy expanding my vocabulary and improving my grammar and spelling capabilities (so if I make any mistakes, point 'em out, k?)

This is why I was taken aback a bit recently while in a writing class discussing the usuage of descriptive words. The teacher spent a good deal of time professing her preference for the usage of "familiar" words, vs. those that less common but which share the same meaning. I strongly disagree with this, and liken it to "the dumbing down of America." To me, that's appealing to the lowest common denominator, and contributes to "hack" writing.

Call me crazy, but I love learning new words, and always feel disappointed when I can't pinpoint one that articulates my true meaning (whether in conversation or on the page.) I'm not suggesting the use of a distracting 50 cent word just for the sake of it when a more common word works even better. I'm simply saying, with however many thousands of words in the English language, why not mix 'em up a bit instead of rehashing the "same ol' " time and time again? As writers, I know we all share the rush of feeling begotten by putting together a perfect string of words that exactly and poetically describes our true aim.

My challenge to anyone who reads this: Pay attention to your conversations for the next week or so. How often do you use a word that you know is "right" but are unsure of it's exact meaning? You may surprise yourself. Pretend as if someone is asking you the meaning of a particular word you've used. This has been happening to me a lot as of late, as English is my new boss's 2nd language. I find most often that I'm able (as with a thesaurus) to provide a small list of synonyms as an answer, but am oftimes unable to "nail" an exact definition. This may be more important to me than it is to others. The challenge is yours to undertake or ignore.

BLLL

[ Parent ]

50-cent words... (4.00/1) (#5)
by janra on Sun Mar 18, 2001 at 06:51:59 PM PST

I'm not suggesting the use of a distracting 50 cent word just for the sake of it when a more common word works even better.

Call me oversensitive, but...

When I was a kid I had a vocabulary far more comprehensive than the other kids my age, and even quite a few kids a few years older. I also tended to use my vocabulary - not trying to show off or anything (at least, I don't remember trying to show off...) - and was frequently told off by other kids but mostly by my sister, for 'showing off' and 'trying to confuse' by using big words.

This disturbed me enough that I actually made a concerted effort to dumb down my spoken vocabulary. Fortunately I wasn't completely successful...

--
Who needs to be big and burly when you can just apply physics?
[ Parent ]

RE: 50 Cent Words (3.00/1) (#6)
by Bluelavalamplite on Wed Apr 18, 2001 at 05:26:58 PM PST

Hmmmm. I'm troubled with your response. By your taking one of my sentences out of its larger context, I get the feeling I've offended you -- and that was certainly not my intent!

I was actually in total agreement with you, and historically have suffered the same painful responses from those with less of a love for words.

I think "distracting" is the key word in the sentence. If a "50-cent word" is one that's more appropriate and befitting ("works even better")--then so be it/use it!

I hope you visit this space again in hopes that you'll understand my true meaning. I'm sorry if I struck a cord even if without meaning to.

BLLL

[ Parent ]

Distracting (3.00/1) (#7)
by janra on Wed Apr 18, 2001 at 06:31:17 PM PST

By your taking one of my sentences out of its larger context, I get the feeling I've offended you -- and that was certainly not my intent!

Oh gosh no. That's standard reply etiquette - quote only what you're replying to, trim the rest. I suppose MS Outlook's habit of getting you to type your entire reply at the top and either include the entire post below or cut it entirely has trained people out of it. But my reply was mostly just me musing and remembering people's reaction to my big vocabulary when I was little. No offense anywhere. I'm really hard to offend anyways.

I think "distracting" is the key word in the sentence.

No arguments there. Thing is, I apparently found '50-cent' words a lot less distracting than my sister did. I suppose you write at the level of diction you're comfortable with, and the audience you find will share that level. Can't please everybody, can't even please most - so figure out who you're trying to please, and please them first.

I hope you visit this space again in hopes that you'll understand my true meaning.

I hope I will too... since I run this site. ;-) Or didn't you notice that I've posted all the articles so far? (please submit one if you've got an idea! I've got a couple more that I'll write up once exams and term papers are all over and done with, but I can't carry this site on my own forever)

--
Who needs to be big and burly when you can just apply physics?
[ Parent ]

DUH! (3.00/1) (#8)
by Bluelavalamplite on Sun Apr 22, 2001 at 03:48:05 PM PST

I'm so dumb. I didn't realize until tonight that this was your site.

I remembered writing a response to your original post, and then it took me a month to figure out where to find it again in order to see if you'd responded (I originally found it via the Toasted Cheese Chat page. Tonight I accessed via your Sharing Knowledge post there.)

Don't mind me - I'm just a wee too easily confused. I'm mostly just glad that I didn't offend -- glad we seem to be on the same page on the subject. Phew.

BLLL

[ Parent ]

: No problem... (3.00/1) (#9)
by janra on Sun Apr 22, 2001 at 03:59:53 PM PST

I remembered writing a response to your original post, and then it took me a month to figure out where to find it again

So are you going to bookmark it this time, so it's easy to find? ;-)

Anyhow, don't worry about offending me. I actually find it kind of funny how people respond to my reply style. One person actually accused me of being hostile, because I made a point-by-point response refuting several misstatements and wrong facts she had written. I was even careful to agree with the points she had right, so she didn't think I was trying to make her out to be 100% wrong. She took that as 'patronizing'. *sigh*.

--
Who needs to be big and burly when you can just apply physics?
[ Parent ]

Oops! Didn't mean to be anonymous . . . (2.00/1) (#4)
by Bluelavalamplite on Fri Mar 16, 2001 at 01:00:28 PM PST

That was me, Bluelavalamplite. Sorry, I'm still learning the ropes here.
BLLL
[ Parent ]

agreed... (3.00/1) (#2)
by janra on Tue Feb 27, 2001 at 02:23:02 PM PST

/me reads article over again...

Oh good. I did say 'if you simply substituted words'.

With a good thesaurus, a good dictionary, and the willingness to use them, you're right, there's not much chance of misusing words found in a thesaurus.

(Off topic: you didn't vote in the poll!)
--
Who needs to be big and burly when you can just apply physics?
[ Parent ]

Your title (none/0) (#10)
by jason on Wed Jul 11, 2001 at 10:42:10 AM PST

According to my 1990 COD, "thesauri" is the preferred plural, though both are acceptable. Further, different definitions are given for US and GB usage (in def 1). Interestingly, definition 2 says it is usable simply as a synonym for "dictionary".

--
Someday I may have a .sig :)

Point well made (none/0) (#11)
by jason on Wed Jul 11, 2001 at 11:51:46 AM PST

impenetrable adj . arcane, baffling, cabbalistic, cryptic, dark, dense, enigmatic(al), fathomless, hermetic, hidden, impassable, impermeable, impervious, incomprehensible, indiscernable, inexplicable, inscrutable, inviolable, mysterious, obscure, solid, thick, unfathomable, unintelligible, unpiercable.

So if you were talking about an impenetrable wall in your writing, but thought you were using the word 'impenetrable' too often, a lot of people would turn to their thesaurus. A 'fathomless' wall? 'fathom' means 'grasp or comprehend'. (when it isn't acting as a unit of measure... don't you just love the english language? ;-)

IMHO, in your context (referring to a wall), only unpiercable comes truly close to being a synonym for impenetrable. Of the others; dense, hermetic, impermeable, impervious, inviolable, solid and thick might be attributes (or collories) of impenetrable and substitutable; depending on what meaning you intended to convey.

You can see the problem - and a thesaurus is especially bad for people for whom english is not their first language.

Point taken.

But how do you get a variety of words in your writing, so you don't sound repetetive?

Nit: given the "how do you do it?" below, the above would have better been "But how does one get ..." :)

Well, I just read a lot, starting when I was about 4, and I'm showing no signs of slowing down.

Good for you. Can't remember when I started reading, but it was well before first grade. In fact, on my sixth birthday I was given copies of Now we are six by A A Milne and Just So Stories by Rudyard Kipling. While my classmates were strugling over "Look, Jane. See Spot run." I was reading these with great enjoyment and relish. Other reading in my first decade included Heidi, Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, bowdlerized editions of Gulliver's Travels and Arabian Nights, and more. I also owned, but didn't like so didn't finish; Black Beauty and Treasure Island. I mention those because they are the only books I can recall of that era that I found so distasteful that I didn't complete them.

By the time I was twelve, I was not only reading "Boy's Life" on a regular basis, but I also discovered and started reading regularly adult Science Fiction.

And this is only the fiction (and nowhere near all of that). I won't go into the technical books that I started reading at about eight.

How do you do it?

Well, voracious reading (as mentioned above) to build a vocabulary (and mine was estimated at some 18 thousand words when I was 18) is part, but only part of it. The best writers (an honor to which I aspire, but don't claim) seem to find ways to avoid repetition without resorting to such subterfuges. Why does the wall (or jungle, or secret, or whatever) require the repeated adjective? Such repetition, even with variations, is IMHO a mark of a hack, being paid by word count and, not having anything useful to say, uses such means to get his word count up.

--
Someday I may have a .sig :)

Thank you! (none/0) (#12)
by janra on Wed Jul 11, 2001 at 01:39:32 PM PST

Nit: given the "how do you do it?" below, the above would have better been "But how does one get ..." :)

heheh... I suppose you're right. Using 'one' always sounds just a little pretentious to me, so I think I unconsciously avoid it. (I say 'unconsciously' because I actually hadn't thought about it until you pointed it out.)

Can't remember when I started reading, but it was well before first grade.

The only reason I remember is because the neighbour lady didn't believe I could read, because neither of her daughters could read and they were older than me. She thought I just had the books memorised :-)

(and mine was estimated at some 18 thousand words when I was 18)

You know, I don't think I've ever had my vocabulary tested. Or if they did, they didn't tell me. How is it usually done? Written test?

The best writers (an honor to which I aspire, but don't claim) seem to find ways to avoid repetition without resorting to such subterfuges. Why does the wall (or jungle, or secret, or whatever) require the repeated adjective? Such repetition, even with variations, is IMHO a mark of a hack, being paid by word count and, not having anything useful to say, uses such means to get his word count up.

amen. Unless, of course, we're talking about something like the Odyssey, where the author (and before that, the storytellers) used major amounts of repetition to remind themselves what happened next. But they weren't paid by the word.

--
Who needs to be big and burly when you can just apply physics?
[ Parent ]

: On Picking Nits (none/0) (#14)
by jason on Wed Jul 11, 2001 at 03:00:30 PM PST

BTW, my spell checker (ispell) didn't have "nit" in its vocabulary!

Nit: given the "how do you do it?" below, the above would have better been "But how does one get ..." :)

heheh... I suppose you're right. Using 'one' always sounds just a little pretentious to me, so I think I unconsciously avoid it. (I say 'unconsciously' because I actually hadn't thought about it until you pointed it out.)

Well, I would probably written the same thing, originally. Then, while reviewing, would have noticed the repetition (as I did while reading your article) and looked for a way to eliminate it. Not until then would I have, probably, considered the, actually more correct though less frequently used, phrase.

Gave up trying to avoid seeming "pretentious" and "condescending" decades ago. It's no use, really, unless one wants to lower oneself to the level of those that complain about such things. Have also found that the people that make such complaints are not ones that I would want to know well, anyhow. Depends partly on the context, also. While in the Army, and later in the workplace, I found that I had to limit my vocabulary and general word usage to a level that I found uncomfortable just to get along with my colleagues.

Aside. Seems to me that the expected quality of writing of comments should be higher on a site dedicated to writing than on a general site like K5. Double that for articles. Gets one into good habits. Further, commenting on poor (or even less than best) usage is a favor to the others in that it should help them to improve their writing.

--
Someday I may have a .sig :)
[ Parent ]
: On early reading and vocabulary (none/0) (#15)
by jason on Wed Jul 11, 2001 at 03:27:06 PM PST

The only reason I remember [reading early] is because the neighbour lady didn't believe I could read, because neither of her daughters could read and they were older than me. She thought I just had the books memorised :)

Well, bad for her :) Actually, what happened for you only two decades ago, happened for me some six decades ago.

IMHO, the schools teach reading so badly, and currently have so much emphasis on other media, that it is almost impossible for someone to become a good reader if they don't learn mostly on their own before starting school.

You know, I don't think I've ever had my vocabulary tested. Or if they did, they didn't tell me. How is it usually done? Written test?

As I recall, it was a pretty long multiple choice thing. They gave you a word and a choice of plausible-seeming definitions and you picked one. The words started out easy, then got more and more uncommon. So they would estimate your vocabulary based on how many definitions you got right.

Note: I have since found out that I always do pretty well on a multiple-choice test. I can even expect to get close to 50% being tested on a subject with which I am not familiar. (That last line looks funny, but "that I am not familiar with" looks worse! :)

--
Someday I may have a .sig :)
[ Parent ]
: And back to repetition ... (none/0) (#16)
by jason on Wed Jul 11, 2001 at 03:35:00 PM PST

amen. Unless, of course, we're talking about something like the Odyssey , where the author (and before that, the storytellers) used major amounts of repetition to remind themselves what happened next.

Ah, but that's poetry. Goes by different rules than prose. Repetition that may be distracting and disconcerting in prose might be quite desirable in poetry, partly to improve the metre and partly for emphasis.

But they weren't paid by the word.

Who knows? Perhaps they were :)

--
Someday I may have a .sig :)
[ Parent ]

Thesaurus vs. Dictionary (none/0) (#13)
by jason on Wed Jul 11, 2001 at 02:19:09 PM PST

Well, I don't own a thesaurus, have never found one particularly useful, and have no intention of getting one.

What I do use frequently, and not just for getting definitions, are my dictionaries. I have two, a Concise Oxford (1990) and a 70-year old Websters Collegiate.

I use the "synonym" lists in these to get words with similar (rarely identical) meanings when the word I think of first doesn't mean quite what I want and can't think of the right one. Starting from your example above, suppose I really wanted the word "impenetrable", couldn't think of it off hand, but the word "impermiable" came to mind. A really useful tool would give me a list of similar words (both in meaning and sound) from which I could pick the word I wanted (assuming it was there).

--
Someday I may have a .sig :)

Thesauri: a blessing! (none/0) (#17)
by pkej on Thu Dec 06, 2001 at 01:45:05 AM PST

I use thesauri for going on tangents, especially Roget's. Take a word like "grace", by going through the synonym list at the back of Roget's and cross referencing with the articles in the main body, I got inspired in my writing of a poem.

The worth of a tool is proportional to the worth of the craftsman using it. And using a tool needs care and knowledge, especially such dangerous tools as we are discussing here.

Paul
--
When in doubt,
turn around,
cry and shout

spdyvkng - my homepage

Agreed (none/0) (#18)
by gordian knot on Thu Dec 06, 2001 at 04:55:53 AM PST

The professor's statement was one of those generalizations that's easy to pick apart. It's true that people who don't read enough to have a decent vocabulary and a feel for language are just going to run into trouble using a thesaurus. Maybe comp courses should have a section on how to use a thesaurus.

I never thought of it as going off on a tangent, but I do use my thesaurus that way sometimes. I may be looking for a word that expresses my intent better than the one I've thought of at the moment, but may run into something that actually changes my direction or slant. And, as someone said in an earlier comment, sometimes you know the word you want, but just can't think of it. So the thesaurus is a memory tool.

I have an old Roget's, which I hardly ever use since I bought the Super Thesaurus, put out by Writer's Digest Books.

[ Parent ]

DIP (none/0) (#19)
by pkej on Thu Dec 06, 2001 at 05:12:22 AM PST

I've neaver heard about the Super Thesaurus, I'll have to look it up and see what it is. Perhaps order it as christmas present to myself.

But my ultimate tool would be the DIP, digital idea processor (TM, R, 1991-2001 Paul K Egell-Johnsen), an project I thought out ten years ago. It features a word processor with built in thesaurus, dictionary, rhyming, antonym etc.and most importantly an association database (which a British company had developed based on interviews, this was around 1990).

The word processor would be built around hyper text (I had just read about AmigaGuide at that point) and some ideas I have about integrating the writing of several documents with the flow of writing.

I might yet finish it (at least hire someone to do it for me ;).

Paul
--
When in doubt,
turn around,
cry and shout

spdyvkng - my homepage
[ Parent ]

: Project for a new century? (none/0) (#20)
by gordian knot on Thu Dec 06, 2001 at 05:39:26 AM PST

Your idea sounds fabulous--and probably impossible to pull off. But who knows? My dream is for a wordprocessor that makes internet research, db access, and just about everything a writer could think of completely intuitive. Yours would certainly be a big step in the right direction. Let me know when it's ready for beta testing. :-)

[ Parent ]

Thesauruses (thesauri?) | 20 comments (20 topical, 0 hidden)

	uniformly	22%
	reiteratedly	22%
	otherwhiles	0%
	exceptionally	22%
	never	33%