Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Is the Dictionary a Good Source for Word Debs

Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:04:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
It is always better to use something which both you and your opponent can quickly check. An online dictionary usually contains the exact same things but in a more efficient way.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:04:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/18/2012 11:02:59 AM, Mr.Cogburn wrote:
Is my hardback dictionary just as good as something like dictionary.com or word.com for sources in word debates?

Why would you not just use the online one? Some people claim books in their debates as sources (with page number) so I guess it would be okay. But people will probably give the other guy the points for sources if he has links.
kfc
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:12:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Depends on the dictionary. I always use oxford dictionary or princeton dictionary for my definitions (oxford 26 volume dictionary :P).

I never trust merriam-webster or dictionary.com because of the number of times that it has got a definition wrong.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:13:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
It's good but having the link makes it easier for the voters and your opponent accessing it.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:14:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/18/2012 11:12:35 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Depends on the dictionary. I always use oxford dictionary or princeton dictionary for my definitions (oxford 26 volume dictionary :P).

I never trust merriam-webster or dictionary.com because of the number of times that it has got a definition wrong.

Using oxford VS dictionary.com would still get you a loss on sources would be my guess.
kfc
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:19:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/18/2012 11:14:57 AM, Koopin wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:12:35 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Depends on the dictionary. I always use oxford dictionary or princeton dictionary for my definitions (oxford 26 volume dictionary :P).

I never trust merriam-webster or dictionary.com because of the number of times that it has got a definition wrong.

Using oxford VS dictionary.com would still get you a loss on sources would be my guess.

No Oxford would win.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:22:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/18/2012 11:19:34 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:14:57 AM, Koopin wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:12:35 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Depends on the dictionary. I always use oxford dictionary or princeton dictionary for my definitions (oxford 26 volume dictionary :P).

I never trust merriam-webster or dictionary.com because of the number of times that it has got a definition wrong.

Using oxford VS dictionary.com would still get you a loss on sources would be my guess.

No Oxford would win.

^This. Oxford is centuries old, well written, full of etymologies and contextual remarks (the word "illogical" in my 26 volumes took up half a page of a font size I can only guess to be in the negatives). dictionary.com, on the other hand, hasn't got back to me or changed its definition of the word "illogical" after I have wrote to them 5 times now and pointed out how a definition they have is erroneous and misleading.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:25:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/18/2012 11:22:28 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:19:34 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:14:57 AM, Koopin wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:12:35 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Depends on the dictionary. I always use oxford dictionary or princeton dictionary for my definitions (oxford 26 volume dictionary :P).

I never trust merriam-webster or dictionary.com because of the number of times that it has got a definition wrong.

Using oxford VS dictionary.com would still get you a loss on sources would be my guess.

No Oxford would win.

^This. Oxford is centuries old, well written, full of etymologies and contextual remarks (the word "illogical" in my 26 volumes took up half a page of a font size I can only guess to be in the negatives). dictionary.com, on the other hand, hasn't got back to me or changed its definition of the word "illogical" after I have wrote to them 5 times now and pointed out how a definition they have is erroneous and misleading.

+1
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:30:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/18/2012 11:25:43 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:22:28 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:19:34 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:14:57 AM, Koopin wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:12:35 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Depends on the dictionary. I always use oxford dictionary or princeton dictionary for my definitions (oxford 26 volume dictionary :P).

I never trust merriam-webster or dictionary.com because of the number of times that it has got a definition wrong.

Using oxford VS dictionary.com would still get you a loss on sources would be my guess.

No Oxford would win.

^This. Oxford is centuries old, well written, full of etymologies and contextual remarks (the word "illogical" in my 26 volumes took up half a page of a font size I can only guess to be in the negatives). dictionary.com, on the other hand, hasn't got back to me or changed its definition of the word "illogical" after I have wrote to them 5 times now and pointed out how a definition they have is erroneous and misleading.

+1

You guys are not talking into account who is voting. Yeah, if pro's were thjudges and there were not a bunch of noobs that could cast their choice. In the next debate, use historical books vs your opponent's source. People are gonna give it to your opponent.
kfc
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 11:58:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/18/2012 11:32:46 AM, Mr.Cogburn wrote:
Is there an oxford dictionary.com?

http://oed.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 3:59:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/18/2012 11:30:43 AM, Koopin wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:25:43 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:22:28 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:19:34 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:14:57 AM, Koopin wrote:
At 2/18/2012 11:12:35 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Depends on the dictionary. I always use oxford dictionary or princeton dictionary for my definitions (oxford 26 volume dictionary :P).

I never trust merriam-webster or dictionary.com because of the number of times that it has got a definition wrong.

Using oxford VS dictionary.com would still get you a loss on sources would be my guess.

No Oxford would win.

^This. Oxford is centuries old, well written, full of etymologies and contextual remarks (the word "illogical" in my 26 volumes took up half a page of a font size I can only guess to be in the negatives). dictionary.com, on the other hand, hasn't got back to me or changed its definition of the word "illogical" after I have wrote to them 5 times now and pointed out how a definition they have is erroneous and misleading.

+1

You guys are not talking into account who is voting. Yeah, if pro's were thjudges and there were not a bunch of noobs that could cast their choice. In the next debate, use historical books vs your opponent's source. People are gonna give it to your opponent.

You can use oxford dictionary online silly.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...