Compare the aims of dictionary writers Johnson and Ramson. W

This concern for a national language is one that is debated in many countries around the world and, probably, dates back to the time when it was not even possible to write those concerns down in an English of any nationally, recognisable form. The influence of invading forces have had serious effects on languages globally, and English, one of the most internationally spoken tongues, has had, and still has, significant problems in standardising its use.

I intend to look at two people, Samuel Johnson and W.S.Ramson, who have compiled dictionaries in an attempt to regulate the grammar, spelling and pronunciation of English. Both have tried to give a particular, nationalistic feel to their dictionaries; Johnson’s return to Anglo-Saxon spellings and refusal to include colloquial orthography and Ramon’s use of Aboriginal words and uni

The English language was going through a great change during the life of Johnson; in the time of the Renaissance there was a general trend of looking back in history for great literature. Homer, Plato etc were being read and translated by the elite members of society and the pronunciation of English was a mish-mash of regional dialects, accents and words from foreign influences. Johnson’s decision to try and amass a list of spellings and correct pronunciations came from a sincere desire to keep the language pure. In 1755 he wrote of his concerns thus, ‘ When I took the firft furvey of my undertaking, I found our fpeech copious without order, and energetick without rules’ (In Graddol, Leith & Swann.pg159) He was not alone in his unease, however, Jonathon Swift also wrote about his anxiety over the English language; in 1712 he expressed his desire to refine the language to ‘ to a certain standard’ (Crowley 1998. In Graddol et al, pg 157)

accessible to all who can read. However, there is a significant difference in the way the two men approach this point. Johnson looks to the past in Greek and Latin for the roots of his own

Many words were spelt with a local pronunciation and Johnson omitted some of theses words that were not generally known. He explained his reasons for doing this by saying ‘This fugitive cant, which is always in a ftate increafe or decay, cannot be regarded as any part of the durable materials of a language, and therefore muft be fufferd to perifh with other things unworthy of prefervation’ (pg 159)

The polemic over the standardisation of English is one that continues to be debated throughout the world and, given the even wider use of the English language, is one that will continue in intensity. Johnson’s dictionary was compiled for very specific reasons, all of them evolving from a sincere desire to regulate the language. His look into the past for grammatical structure and spellings were understandable during a time when the ancient world was seen as the height of civilisation, as was his desire to distance himself from the encroaching French language. Ramon’s parameters were similar, in that he too, wanted to distance himself from the ‘Britishness’ of The Oxford English Dictionary and to give Australia its own reference tool. He chose to look into Australia’s own culture to do this, however, giving it a distinct Australian feel, indeed the meanings of some of the words may only be understood by Australians. It is also significant that the timing of Ramon’s dictionary fell in with the move

Some topics in this essay:
Pronouncing Dictionary, France English, Australian English, Webster’s Dictionary, Jonathon Swift, Homer Plato, Anglo-Saxon French, British English, Greek French, Dictionary Australia, english language, british english, al pg, et al, et al pg, graddol et, graddol et al, words unique, ramon’s dictionary, oxford english dictionary, looks past, sincere desire, australian english, al pg 158,