• MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hahaha good edit. Could you imagine?!

      (Checks for myself)

      …Oh…

      It’s sensible that maintaining a current up to date dictionary is worthy of compensation, but I think the tragedy is that such endeavors as “maintaining current information on human language” aren’t just publicly funded, so here they are panhandling for “Dictionary plus” lol.

    • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      The OED has been like this for at least 15 years (possibly longer but that’s when I first encountered it). So I wouldn’t consider this an appropriate example of the enshittification that’s been taking place of late.

    • Daniel F.@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m surprised people still use commercial dictionaries when Wiktionary exists. Is there a reason more people don’t use it?

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        The OED goes very in-depth into etymology in the way other English dictionaries do not. It’s the size of an encyclopedia. This is the print version of the second edition, which has been supplemented several times since: