Good Dictionaries - A Call for Action How Translators Would Like Dictionaries Prepared

Translators are constantly grumbling about the Three Big Vices of a great number of the specialized dictionaries on the market: Inaccuracy, Incompleteness (i.e. they do not contain terms one would expect from the stated area of coverage) and Ballast (i.e. they do contain all kinds of material one can find in any polytechnic or even general dictionary).Experienced translators have reacted to these difficulties in a number of ways. Some are canny purchasers: before a single cent can be wrested from their clutches they call their friends for opinions and examine reviews. Others state flatly that "all dictionaries are useless; you have to go to original sources".One remedy is already at hand: the "rated dictionary catalog" along "Linguatech' lines. The proposal has been made by one ATA member that we all compile lists of our dictionaries and score them on a scale of 1 to 10. Another member has proposed that all relevant publications be scanned for existing reviews, and that these be synthesized to provide a sort of "bird's eye review" of each important work.We start thinking about the following questions: which dictionaries do we use most frequently, and why? What do we need that we don't find in dictionaries? What do we find in dictionaries that we don't need? Do you have thoughts on the topic that you have scribbled down in moments of frustration or elation? Do you have carbons of angry or com plimentary letters to publishers? Unless translators take an intelligent stand, we can look forward to an endless succession of useless and increasingly expensive dictionaries palmed off as respectable scholarship.