You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
“A Dictionary Which We Do Not Want”: Defining America against Noah Webster, 1783–1810
The William and Mary Quarterly
Vol. 71, No. 2 (April 2014), pp. 229-254
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5309/willmaryquar.71.2.0229
Page Count: 26
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Dictionaries, Language, Words, American literature, News content, Writers, Political partisanship, Political revolutions, Pronunciation
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Preview not available
Noah Webster has usually been understood as a cultural nationalist whose advocacy of an “American-English” language helped to unify the fledgling American republic after the Revolution. That understanding, however, elides the overwhelmingly bad reception of Webster and his linguistic ideas in the early national United States. Even as Webster's 1783 spelling book became ubiquitous in American primary education, his subsequent plans to discard British linguistic standards and institutionalize “American” spellings, pronunciations, and vocabulary prompted an extensive and vehement print backlash. Newspapers and magazines devoted hundreds of thousands of words in the 1790s and 1800s to condemning Webster's “vulgar perversions,” “horrible irregularity,” “subtle poison,” and “illiterate and pernicious” ideas about language. Although these controversies arose around apparently narrow linguistic issues, they persisted because they implicated broad and thorny questions about the meaning of America. For several decades, opposing Webster was a powerful way for Americans to articulate their ambivalent desires for self-differentiation from Europe, their uncomfortable sense of diversities within and among the United States, and their enduring commitments to transnational norms and identities.
Copyright 2014 Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture