Bob Walkden wrote:
what do you do when different dictionaries give mutually-incompatible definitions of the same word?
You take the one from the dictionary that's accepted as *the* reference. But could you please give some examples.
In this very thread you have cited one that specifies 'chemical' as part of the definition, and somebody else has cited another that doesn't require a photograph to be chemical.
Were they muttually-incompatible or was one definition longer and more complete than the other. A sane approach is to look for the most complete definition. There are "pocket" dictionaries and huge ones in several volumes. Obviously the pocket ones have shorter definitions, fewer words explained, and some senses of a word missing completely. Which would you pick as the "reference".
What is *the* reference, and who has made that decision? There is no such thing in English. There is no English equivalent of the French Academy.
Go to some University that has an Arts and Letters Faculty and is giving British Language Culture and Civilisation courses. Ask the professors there, they should be able to give you the proper answer.
cheers, caveman
