Delaware gazette. [volume] (Delaware, Ohio) 1855-1886, 1860-07-27
The DICTIONARY WAR.

The contention that has existed between the
friends Of the Pictorial Editions of Webster
and Worcester has induced thousands TO
thoroughly examine and compare these two
works Much has been said on both sides, as
many of the best linguists Of the present age
have enlisted in the contest. Worcester has
the advantage of being last out, and having
its Cuts and SYNONYMS intersperced through
the body of the book. But on the other hand
we are led to believe that Webster contains
many essential qualities that will convince any
unprejudiced Investigator that it is the superb
or work We shall endeayor to support our
conviction by presenting and comparing fea-
lures, as they have occurred to our observa-
ton, commencing with the disputed points of
photography Worcester spells Plo1c Plough.
Let US for the same reason have Cough
Nough, Hough, &c. Again he writes ofence
and offensive Upon what principle is this va
ration based? Analogy, custom and reason
demand S in the former as well as in the latter
word. Fullness and duLiness he spells with
one L, and illness, stiffness, &c, with two
Here again is an instance of Woscester's fail
ure to adhere either to analogy or usage
Such photography only tends to corrupt the
mind of the young learner, and render obscure
ard uncertain settled form in after years.
1t can never become the established usage by
literary men. Why not, we ask, with Web
ster adopt principle OF orthography that viii
not violate the laws of the analogy of our Ian
guagc. We said the pictures of Worcester
were scattered through the book. but in respect
to size mechanical execution and variety OF
subjects, they are very defective and decidedly
inferior to those of Webster. The former
gives 9O1 in all, 1872 of which are bills or heads
of birds, and of no earthly use, that we can
conceive in a Dictionary Webster has 1900
cuts. neatly executed, and the subjects ilustra-
| ted, of the most interesting character If we
mistake not Worcester has taken his Syno-
MINIS extensively from other authors, and too,
| without either change of language or credit to
the parties from whom he has borrowed.
1t is asserted that Worcesters vocabulary
is more complete than Webster's, which we do
not hesitate in saying is false, True it con-
tains many words that Webster does not, and
which, in our opinion, no author of good taste
would retain Who wishes to see introduced
in q general Dictionary modern words like
slubberdeguHion, sol.ragous &C., long COM
pound ones such as unguarreiable unUulgeri=ed
interchangeable, obsolete words like enpierce,
enrhcrsm, enode, &c? On@stenth of all the
words in Worcester's vocabulary arc Of this
description, swelling the quantity very much
to the detrmont of the quality. As regards
dcf1itions-thc most important feature Of any
Dictionary-WebsteI evinces an originality, ac-
curacy and thoroughness in his method of de-
cester possesses. In our opinion all efforts to
displace Webster will have but little effect -
1t may be regarded as the standard Dictionary
of this nation. Almost every printer
in this country make Webster their standard
and it is said that upwarde of 50,000,00O
Newspapers and Periodicals are annually is
sued from the Press, recognizing Webstcrian
authority.