Status
Available
Call number
Publication
Halcyon House
Pages
607
Description
The essential handbook for songwriters, poets, students, teachers, speechmakers, and members of the performing arts This simple-to-use, exceptionally complete reference work has been updated, expanded and redesigned to meet the needs of today's most demanding wordsmiths. Included here are: * Over 10,000 new entries--over 60,000 in all * More rhymes than any other book * Sight, vowel, consonant, and one-, two-, and three-syllable rhymes * Proper names, slang, and scientific words * Guide to techniques and forms of poetry
Collection
Language
Physical description
607 p.; 8.6 inches
Similar in this library
User reviews
LibraryThing member bookweasel
An excellent reference work, but I personally love to just read it aloud--it makes some very interesting, funny and sometimes profound statements that way, sort of stream of consciousness style.
One of my favourite works, and of course, very useful if you need or want to rhyme in English.
One of my favourite works, and of course, very useful if you need or want to rhyme in English.
LibraryThing member the1butterfly
This is one of the coolest books ever! It makes rhyming easier, and it's an easy to follow dictionary once you get the hang of it. It's great for teachers, too, because it makes it easier to develop word families.
LibraryThing member unclebob53703
A wonderful and much-used resource.
LibraryThing member datrappert
This is an updated version of Clement Wood's original work from 1936, which I have reviewed separately, although LIbraryThing seems to have combined the two. There is little difference, except for the addition of 10,000 new entries. Wood's original essay on "The Poet's Craft" is included basically
I do find it a bit amazing that his highly opinionated and prescriptive essay is still in print, but I guess rhyming dictionaries are not on the top of the list for paying anyone to make substantial updates. In any case, it is mostly a good introduction, though he dwells too long on really obscure French forms of poetry. I am convinced that Stephen Fry used Wood's work as the basis for his brilliant "The Ode Not Taken" which provides, in a much more modern and humorous manner, the same sort of instruction, minus the non-essentials, and with integrated exercises along the way--in line with Wood's own suggestion.
As for the rhyming dictionary itself, it is laid out in a phonetic arrangement that takes a while to get used to compared to a rhyming dictionary that includes an index (or an ebook where you can easily search for the word you want to rhyme with). But by omitting an index, there is a whole lot more room for actual rhymes.
This newer version continues to insist, quite vehemently, that "north" and "forth" (and "nor" and "fore" as well) don't rhyme because the 'o' sound is different. The contention is that the 'o' in "old" and the 'o' in "for" are different sounds. But I don't buy it. Nor do the Penguin Rhyming Dictionary or Merriam-Webster Rhyming Dictionary I bought at the same time.
Of all four rhyming dictionaries I purchased, the M-W, which is organized alphabetically by the letters to be rhymed (such as "orth") may be the easiest to use. It doesn't really require an index, and you don't have to look at a lot of phonetic symbols.
Show More
intact, except for at least one slight edit, which replaces the N-word with "peoples". Other than that, the original essay, with its references and quotes to poets both well-known and largely forgotten--including Clement Wood himself--appears unchanged. (Wood was a prolific writer of all types of books, including poetry, pulp fiction, pornography, and pretty much anything else you can imagine, as well as being a socialist and atheist--which didn't sit too well with many folks in Alabama, where he grew up.)I do find it a bit amazing that his highly opinionated and prescriptive essay is still in print, but I guess rhyming dictionaries are not on the top of the list for paying anyone to make substantial updates. In any case, it is mostly a good introduction, though he dwells too long on really obscure French forms of poetry. I am convinced that Stephen Fry used Wood's work as the basis for his brilliant "The Ode Not Taken" which provides, in a much more modern and humorous manner, the same sort of instruction, minus the non-essentials, and with integrated exercises along the way--in line with Wood's own suggestion.
As for the rhyming dictionary itself, it is laid out in a phonetic arrangement that takes a while to get used to compared to a rhyming dictionary that includes an index (or an ebook where you can easily search for the word you want to rhyme with). But by omitting an index, there is a whole lot more room for actual rhymes.
This newer version continues to insist, quite vehemently, that "north" and "forth" (and "nor" and "fore" as well) don't rhyme because the 'o' sound is different. The contention is that the 'o' in "old" and the 'o' in "for" are different sounds. But I don't buy it. Nor do the Penguin Rhyming Dictionary or Merriam-Webster Rhyming Dictionary I bought at the same time.
Of all four rhyming dictionaries I purchased, the M-W, which is organized alphabetically by the letters to be rhymed (such as "orth") may be the easiest to use. It doesn't really require an index, and you don't have to look at a lot of phonetic symbols.
Show Less
LibraryThing member datrappert
I bought this after reading reviews of some newer versions which said that they didn't include the long introductory part on The Poet's Craft. However, my newer version does include it, with at least one slight edit, which replaces the N-word with "peoples". Other than that, the original 1936
I do find it a bit amazing that his highly opinionated and prescriptive essay is still in print, but I guess rhyming dictionaries are not on the top of the list for paying anyone to make substantial updates. In any case, it is mostly a good introduction, though he dwells too long on really obscure French forms of poetry. I am convinced that Stephen Fry used Wood's work as the basis for his brilliant "The Ode Not Taken" which provides, in a much more modern and humorous manner, the same sort of instruction, minus the non-essentials, and with integrated exercises along the way--in line with Wood's own suggestion.
As for the rhyming dictionary itself, it is laid out in a phonetic arrangement that takes a while to get used to compared to a rhyming dictionary that includes an index (or an ebook where you can easily search for the word you want to rhyme with). But by omitting an index, there is a whole lot more room for actual rhymes. I haven't done any sort of comparison with the newer edition, which claims to include 10,000 new entries, but the arrangement is the same.
Both books also insist that "north" and "forth" (and "nor" and "fore" as well) don't rhyme because the 'o' sound is different. The contention is that the 'o' in "old" and the 'o' in "for" are different sounds. But I don't buy it. Nor does the Penguin Rhyming Dictionary or Merriam-Webster Rhyming Dictionary I bought at the same time.
Of all four rhyming dictionaries, the M-W, which is organized alphabetically by the letters to be rhymed (such as "orth") may be the easiest to use. It doesn't really require an index, and you don't have to look at a lot of phonetic symbols.
Show More
essay, with its references and quotes to poets both well-known and largely forgotten--including Clement Wood himself--appears intact. (Wood was a prolific writer of all types of books, including poetry, pulp fiction, pornography, and pretty much anything else you can imagine, as well as being a socialist and atheist--which didn't sit too well with many folks in Alabama, where he grew up.)I do find it a bit amazing that his highly opinionated and prescriptive essay is still in print, but I guess rhyming dictionaries are not on the top of the list for paying anyone to make substantial updates. In any case, it is mostly a good introduction, though he dwells too long on really obscure French forms of poetry. I am convinced that Stephen Fry used Wood's work as the basis for his brilliant "The Ode Not Taken" which provides, in a much more modern and humorous manner, the same sort of instruction, minus the non-essentials, and with integrated exercises along the way--in line with Wood's own suggestion.
As for the rhyming dictionary itself, it is laid out in a phonetic arrangement that takes a while to get used to compared to a rhyming dictionary that includes an index (or an ebook where you can easily search for the word you want to rhyme with). But by omitting an index, there is a whole lot more room for actual rhymes. I haven't done any sort of comparison with the newer edition, which claims to include 10,000 new entries, but the arrangement is the same.
Both books also insist that "north" and "forth" (and "nor" and "fore" as well) don't rhyme because the 'o' sound is different. The contention is that the 'o' in "old" and the 'o' in "for" are different sounds. But I don't buy it. Nor does the Penguin Rhyming Dictionary or Merriam-Webster Rhyming Dictionary I bought at the same time.
Of all four rhyming dictionaries, the M-W, which is organized alphabetically by the letters to be rhymed (such as "orth") may be the easiest to use. It doesn't really require an index, and you don't have to look at a lot of phonetic symbols.
Show Less
Subjects
Call number
ENG A.107