- Also check our best rated Biography reviews
Dr Johnson's Dictionary: The Book that Defined the World: The Extraordinary Story of the Book That Defined the World Hardcover – 11 Apr 2005
Customers who bought this item also bought
What other items do customers buy after viewing this item?
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
'We know a great deal about Samuel Johnson...Hitchings approaches the formidable presence from a different angle, showing us how the whole man can be found in the pages of his Dictionary'. (Literary Review)
Hitchings offers us a highly entertaining guided tour...anyone interested in dictionaries, Dr Johnson or the English language will surely spend many happy hours with this book (The Independent)
A goldmine of pleasures . . . Hitchings has an infectious relish for words . . . Ingenious and fascinating (The Sunday Times)
Excellent. (Daily Express)
Immensely enjoyable, easily erudite (Scotland On Sunday)
I can warmly recommend Henry Hitching's book...affectionate in its portrayal of Johnson, the book itself is immensely likeable, written with serious intent and gentle good humour. (Spectator)
Lively and entertaining (Observer)
A pleasant stroll, with a genial guide, through Johnson's life...anyone who picks up this book will have a whale ("the largest of the fish") of a time ("the measure of duration") (The Independent on Sunday)
Clever, wittily-written and amusingly-arranged (The Guardian)
A rich, lively and attractive book. (The Times Literary Supplement)
The brilliant story of how Dr Johnson suceeded in writing the first great English dictionary.See all Product description
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
We start with a brief history of Johnson’s early life: his very modest upbringing in Litchfield; his education – and his obsessive reading habits; and his subsequent move to London where he worked as a jobbing writer. We hear about the Dictionary’s beginnings too, about the London booksellers who commissioned Johnson to write it, his reluctance to take it on, and the failed patronage of the Earl of Chesterfield. Then finally, work on the Dictionary begins, and we learn about the house in Gough Square where Johnson lived and worked and the team of amanuenses he gathered to help him.
With each Chapter titled with a headword from the Dictionary Hitchings inevitably introduces us to a wealth of Johnson’s definitions, some pithy (“patron, …commonly a wretch who supports with insolence, and is paid in flattery”), some sad (“melancholy, …a kind of madness, in which the mind is always fixed on one object”), some wrong (“pastern, the knee of a horse”), some that hint at the effort taken to dedicate eight years of his life to this work (e.g. “lexicographer, a writer of dictionaries, a harmless drudge”), and many others, almost all providing an insight into the thinking of the man himself. Hitchings also reveals some gems still extant in our modern-day dictionaries (“éclair, a cake, long in shape but short in duration”, Chambers, 13th Ed.), and litters his own text with words I had to look up (e.g. “rebarbative” meaning “repellent”), which would have annoyed me in any other book.
"Dr Johnson’s Dictionary" is obviously well-researched. It’s also well written – although heavy going in places – and I recommend it for any lover of English.
Initially Johnson hoped to `stabilise' the English language, to exclude `low terms' from it, and, through many of the elevating passages he chose to illustrate the use of a word, to promote education, religion or morality. Later, however, he felt the responsibility to record how English was actually being used in his time - that being the view which predominates among modern lexicographers. If he has to include words of which he really disapproves, he notes that they are `cant'. But he happily included some robust slang expressions of his time and certain vigorous words of abuse. He was suitably idiosyncratic in deciding which words are cant (bamboozle, nervous, the drink stout, flirtation), which are `low' (ignoramus, simpleton) and which are not. He also had a great dislike for words recently imported from France, though he includes them: bourgeois, unique, champagne, cutlet, trait, ruse, finesse. He would of course have known what a huge range of French words came into the English language with the Norman Conquest; but for him any word, of whatever origin, that had been used by the Elizabethans, had a respectable pedigree.
Johnson's methodology is interesting. He began with underlining a word in passages from his vast reading; that word would then be written on a slip of paper, together with the passage or passages in which it had figured; and the slips were then arranged in alphabetical order. Hitchings writes that `fundamentally Johnson was less interested in language than in its use by writers'. Johnson noted the etymological origin of words, but was more interested in how they had then developed therefrom through usage. He quoted lavishly from the Bible (4,617 times) and from some 500 authors, ranging from the famous to some who are today almost completely unknown - but refused to quote from writers such as Hobbes or Bolingbroke whom he thought too wicked. His quotations give one an insight into his own tastes and that of his contemporaries. As a result the Dictionary becomes what Hitchings calls `a giant commonplace book'.
In chapters on Johnson's melancholia and introspection we are give quotations which are reflections on such experiences. Others were chosen to illustrate the frustrations of marriage - Johnson's own marriage having been a very difficult one.
In the course of the book Hitchings quotes nearly 500 of the Dictionary's 42,733 definitions. Some of these are exceedingly polysyllabic and Latinate, rightly characterized by Hitchings as a `sesquipedalian avalanche'; in others, like his references to Scots, to Whigs or to Catholicism and Presbyterianism, he avowedly and robustly airs his prejudices, as he does in his laudatory quotation following the word `royalist'. He regards suicide as `a horrid crime'; he shows his contempt for foxhunters; his prejudice against alcohol is given expression in his definition of distillers. And there are many words now, alas, lost and not to be found in my Collins Dictionary (though they are in the great Oxford English Dictionary). Hitchings provides a feast of them throughout the book; here are just a few: abbey-lubber, giglet, extispicious, pickthank and pricklouse, jobbernowl and dandyprat, fopdoodle and witworm. Johnson also listed the delightful-sounding trolmydames because he had found it in Shakespeare, but confessed that `of this word I know not the meaning'. (The OED does not list it; but Webster's 1913 Dictionary does know it: the source seems to be a trou-madame, meaning a pigeonhole, and trolmydame is the name of `the game of nineholes'.)
Hitchings draws out very well how the Dictionary entries relate to the customs and fashions of his time, to its science and its entertainments.
The last forty pages of the book mainly tell the later history of the Dictionary and of its later editions. Although the Dictionary did have some violent critics, it quickly became a classic. In 1773 a fourth edition appeared, with significant changes made by Johnson himself. The Dictionary's definitions even figured in 20th century legal cases about the American Constitution, with lawyers claiming that the 1787 wording of the Constitution would have carried the meanings ascribed to them by the then standard authority of the Dictionary.
Although the 42,733 definitions in the first edition were but a small part of the 250,000 to 300,000 words in the English language at that time, Johnson's achievement was immense. He was after all the sole compiler of the Dictionary, compared with the 40 members of the French Academy who had toiled for 55 years to produce theirs. Johnson had hoped to complete the work in three years. In the end it took him nine, from 1746 to the first edition in 1755. And he had laboured without much help from the Earl of Chesterfield, to whom Johnson had submitted the original plan in hope of the Earl's patronage. By the time the Dictionary was about to be published, Johnson had made a name for himself with other writings, and the Earl now belatedly posed as Johnson's patron. Hitchings tells well the story of that famous put-down of the Earl by Johnson which was also a watershed in the history of patronage.
One feels like cheering. I have always had a liking for Johnson's quirky and forthright character. The Dictionary shares these qualities, and what I have learnt from this admirable, charming and scholarly book has further reinforced my affection for him.
Would you like to see more reviews about this item?
Most recent customer reviews