“Discuss how this kind of definition differs from the kind of definition you might find in a dictionary? Think particularly about the type of information provided and the tone. ” All day long, people everywhere post what they are feeling, thinking or doing right at the moment on the World Wide Web. Whether it is on Facebook, Twitter or some kind of other blog, many people share their thoughts and even issues in the internet. William Safire wrote an article about blogs, published on the 28th of July 2002 in The New York Times.
While reading this article with an extended definition of blogs, the question arises in which way this kind of definition differs from the kind of definition in a dictionary. One can say that the definition of blogs in the article is different to one in a dictionary because the extended definition is subjective and entertaining. One reason why the extended definition of William Safire differs from a normal definition in a dictionary is because the extended definition is not written objectively.
A definition in a dictionary always looks the same. A word or thing is described in an objective way, without judgment, evaluation or personal opinions so that it is obvious and comprehensible to everyone. Whereas in this article, while describing a blog, the author also expresses his critical opinion about blogs and lets the reader know that he himself would never set one up because he does not want anyone to know what he thinks (Safire). Using such expressions, the author indirectly appeals to the reader to think critically about blogs, too.
This is totally different in a dictionary because in dictionaries the reader is not at all influenced in his opinion. Due to the fact that definitions in a dictionary are written objectively and the definition in the article is written subjectively, one can say that those two kinds of definitions differ from each other. Furthermore, a reason why the definition of blogs in the article is different to one in a dictionary is because the writer of the article also tries to entertain his readers.
A definition like this one in the article is, due to the fact that it is published in a newspaper, not just written because the author wants the readers to learn something, but also to entertain them. The author of the extended definition wants to make his text interesting, uses irony or exaggerations like “from cops and firemen to peach-growing farmers and cancer-curing scientists, from local churches to TV comedians to blogging. ” This would never be the same in a dictionary. Dictionaries just describe the word in a simple way, they do not entertain.
Considering the fact that the author of the newspaper article wants his readers to be interested in what they read and he wants to entertain them, definitions in dictionaries obviously differ from the kind of definition by William Safire. To summarize, definitions like this one in the article and general definitions in dictionaries have many differences. While in a dictionary the whole definition is written in a simple and totally objective way, the author of an article writes from his point of view and thus in a subjective way.
He also uses irony, exaggerations and consequently wants the readers to be entertained. These are things one would never find in a dictionary. -definition of blogs: subjective description, ironic(reed between the lines) and judgmental tone of the writer,makes the reader think critically, entertaining and specific examples of other texts,authors, using new words like blogiverse (nicknames? ) -definition in a dictionary: objective,simple, understandable, no opinion or judging, language is academic but easy to understand. allday-examples, gives no reasons to think critical about term definated.