# syllabification in WR dictionaries



## Whodunit

Hi Mike,

Wouldn't it be great to have a syllabification in our dictionaries? I know that would cost you a great deal of work, but I'm positive it is advantageous. I'd like to know others' ideas as well. My idea is to syllabize the main words in French, Spanish, Italian, and maybe in English like this:

[CODE] 
[font=Arial][b]house[/b][/font]	[font=Arial](dwelling)		 [color=blue]nf [/color]	 mai·son (habitation)[/font]
[font=Arial][b]house[/b]	(residence)	 [color=blue]nf[/color]	 ré·si·dence (maison)[/font]
[font=Arial][b]house[/b]	(provide			 hé·ber·ger[/font]
[font=Arial]	housing for)	 [color=blue]v[/color][/font]
[/CODE]

Thanks for considering this idea.


----------



## belén

Hello,

Sorry about my lack of knowledge on syllabification, but would you be so kind to point out the advantadges of this system, in order to balance pros and cons.
Thanks
Belén


----------



## Whodunit

belen said:
			
		

> Hello,
> 
> Sorry about my lack of knowledge on syllabification, but would you be so kind to point out the advantadges of this system, in order to balance pros and cons.
> Thanks
> Belén


 
Don't you think it would be practical to look up a word if you write a text in a foreign language (perhaps French), but you come to the ned of a line, so you have to separate a long word (perhaps éventualité) - and the text is supposed to be grammatically correct. I don't have a dictionary that indicates syllabification, so I'd be tremendously glad to have that system.

I don't know how often you use syllabification in Spanish, but it is very popular and advantageous in German (because we have very long words), so I always have to open Word, switch to "syllabification", and choose French.


----------



## Rayines

> I don't know how often you use syllabification in Spanish, but it is very popular and advantageous in German


*Hallo Daniel: syllabification is often used in Spanish, but I have actually never in my life used it in English. (it doesn't mean that it can't be necessary, of course).*


----------



## Whodunit

Rayines said:
			
		

> *Hallo Daniel: syllabification is often used in Spanish, but I have actually never in my life used it in English. (it doesn't mean that it can't be necessary, of course).*


 
However, I use it very often, so I wanted to know if there are yet more foreros who'd also like to have that feature.


----------



## Rayines

> However, I use it very often, so I wanted to know if there are yet more foreros who'd also like to have that feature.


*Sorry, Daniel..I actually ignore almost all about syllabification in other languages. In Spanish we use it in the everyday writing. I think that in English it isn't used for common writing, is it? When do you use it, for teaching the language?*


----------



## OlivierG

Sorry, but I consider that syllabification would make the words more difficult to read, and could be a source of mistake and confusion. For example in English: 
mo·ther-in-law, bum·ble·bee, black·bird,
or in French, between words like
casse-pied and casse·role


----------



## cuchuflete

> Wouldn't it be great to have a syllabification in our dictionaries? I know that would cost you a great deal of work



Well, would it be great?  Why?  For whom?

A brief look at a dozen dictionaries in my office seems to point to these conclusions:

1- Most good monolingual dictionaries show syllabification.
2- Most good and superior translation dictionaries do not.


Of course, eventually, WR dictionaries should be all things for all people.
Shorter term, the effort involved may be hard to justify.

If one is seeking a translation, the WR dictionaries do a nice job. If one is seeking etymology, or citations about earliest recorded usage, or syllabification, there are other fine resources available. 

At this time, most WR dictionary efforts are aimed at improving quality and quantity of translations. That strikes me as a good priority for the moment.


----------



## Whodunit

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Well, would it be great? Why? For whom?


 
At least for me. Of course I'm just one in a million, but aren't there ANY people who'd like it? 



> 1- Most good monolingual dictionaries show syllabification.
> 2- Most good and superior translation dictionaries do not.


 
Well, I was searching for a good syllabification dictionary for a French sentence, but I had to open Word for that. I couldn't find any that shows good syllabification.  So I thought WR could - but unfortunately, it did not. That's why I started asking here. Sorry about the confusion why it would be great and advantageous, but if I wrote a composition for school, I'd really be in need of a good dictionary that supports syllabification (I have one for English, but not for French )



> Of course, eventually, WR dictionaries should be all things for all people.
> Shorter term, the effort involved may be hard to justify.


 
I know that it would cost so much effort, but if there were enough interest, I thought maybe Mike will do that effort. 

Thank you all for your suggestions, anyway.


----------



## mkellogg

Yea, syllabification and a few other things I can think of (pronunciation symbols, audio clips, conjugations) would be great here.  And we will eventually get it all.

In the short term, my plans are to concentrate on the translations and link to monolingual dictionaries to provide people with the rest.

For instance, if you look up an English word and click through to the WR English dictionary, then to m-w or dictionary.com, then you can get that stuff.  So in many cases it is just a couple of clicks away.


----------



## Isotta

I feel like syllabification is not terribly useful. There is a method to the madness; there are rules that cover how to divide words into syllables, and even for how to divide them from phrases. We could discuss this in the forum now if you like.

I do think that, one day, accentuation would be helpful in languages in which it is phonemic--not in languages that have regular accentuation rules (French), but in irregular ones like English and to a much lesser extent Italian. From Who's post, I imagine this would be helpful in German if or when we someday have a German dictionary.

Z.


----------



## Whodunit

mkellogg said:
			
		

> For instance, if you look up an English word and click through to the WR English dictionary, then to m-w or dictionary.com, then you can get that stuff. So in many cases it is just a couple of clicks away.


 
But I was searching for the same feature with French. 

Thank you anyway for providing some links.


----------



## timpeac

Whodunit said:
			
		

> But I was searching for the same feature with French.
> 
> Thank you anyway for providing some links.


 
Syllabification in French is very regular (ok there are a few funnies, mainly around vowel combinations but almost always you can tell from the spelling). Same for Spanish.

I have never studied this in English or German, so I can't comment there, but I find it hard to think why you would need syllabification in the dictionary for French or Spanish.


----------



## belén

The thread on the actual syllabification of words continues here.

Belén


----------



## Eugens

belen said:
			
		

> The thread on the actual syllabification of words continues here.
> 
> Belén


 Hi Belén! Your link doesn't redirect to any thread...


----------



## belén

I fixed it 
I also edited the link in your thread. Thanks for telling me about it.
Belén


----------

