What do you think?
Rate this book
Dictionary of Fine Distinctions: Nuances, Niceties, and Subtle Shades of Meaning
Swamp or bog? Guilt or shame? Club soda or sparkling water? From food to fashion, ethics to architecture, there are thousands of words and ideas that we tend to collapse, conflate, or confuse. For hairsplitters and language lovers, Dictionary of Fine Distinctions explores the world of the vanishingly small, offering up witty deep dives and lively illustrations to help sharpen these differences and bring us clarity at last.
208 pages, Hardcover
First published April 1, 2024
About the author
Eli Burnstein
5 books25 followersEli Burnstein is a humor writer whose work has appeared in The New Yorker, McSweeney’s, Slackjaw, Points in Case, and Weekly Humorist. His debut book, Dictionary of Fine Distinctions (Union Square & Co), was a Toronto Star bestseller described by Steven Pinker as "a tribute to the genius of the human mind for conceptual precision and the beauty of the English language in capturing it."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 135 reviews
March 24, 2024
In a Nutshell: The term ‘dictionary’ led my expectations askew. The book contains distinctions, but not just limited to common words. It covers too many topic areas and hence feels needlessly complicated. I did have fun with it and learnt much, but I wish it had stuck to more practical distinctions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Confusables (words/phrases that are easily confused with another in meaning or usage) are common in every language, but English is possible the champion when it comes to having the maximum number of confusables, courtesy its eclectic composition. Whether homonyms or homophones or homographs, English does its best to muddle up not just newbies but also native speakers. As such, a book that clarifies confusables is always welcome to teachers as well as students.
Except that this one does not exactly fit the above requirement.
I must begin by appreciating the efforts behind the book. The amazing array of distinctions clearly indicates the hard work put into compiling these terms and their differences. Over 200+ pages, the book covers many pairs, triads and quartets of confusables across a medley of subjects.
There are many word sets where I was already aware of the exact distinction (Goblin vs. Ogre vs. Troll), some that I didn’t know precisely (Pidgin vs. Creole), some that I never consciously thought about until I encountered them herein (Convince vs. Persuade), and some that I have read before but still get confused about as understanding them is beyond my mental processing power (Latte vs. Flat White vs. Cappuccino vs. Cortado.) Some were very common terms (Electric vs. Electronic) while some were more obscure comparisons (Hermit vs Anchorite.) A few were words I have never heard of in my life! (Schlemiel vs. Schlimazel!?)
Many words and examples are specific to the USA, which is fine as the book is meant for American audiences but this restricts its appeal outside of the country. Not docking off points for this.
There are extensive notes at the end for further elaborations on some of the words. There are also B&W illustrations for every distinction.
A special note of appreciation for the comparative pairs that begin and end the book. They were brilliant, and an apt way to set the ball rolling and bring it to a stop respectively.
Where I feel the book could have done better is in restricting itself to more practical and common distinctions instead of focussing on a wide range of topics. The ‘dictionary’ covers not just confusables in ordinary English vocabulary but also muddling terms from other subject areas such as geography (Great Britain vs United Kingdom), mathematics (Natural Numbers vs. Integers vs. Rational Numbers vs. Real Numbers), history (Flail vs. Mace vs. Morning Star), architecture (Porch vs. Veranda vs. Deck vs. Patio), and so on. There is even some jargon from topics that only professionals/enthusiasts would need to know, such as music (4/4 Time vs. 2/2 Time), computers (UI vs. UX), and sports (Deadlift vs. Romanian Deadlift.) Why would most people need to know these technical terms? By broadening the scope of topics too much, it ends up being a ‘jack of all trades, master of none.’
A few of the comparisons are unnecessarily convoluted. For instance, there’s one entry for ‘Irony vs Sarcasm’, which contrasts the two words taking into account just one meaning of ‘irony’, ignoring its alternative synonym of paradoxical contrast. And there’s a separate entry many pages later that explores ‘Verbal Irony vs. Dramatic Irony’. Such pairs of words could have been easily combined.
Moreover, with such eclectic topics, I would have preferred the book to have some kind of an organisational method, maybe by grouping the distinctions as per topic/subject or listing out the distinctions alphabetically. At present, the entries are too random and hence feel very jumpy when almost every turn of the page brings a word set from a new subject.
Honestly, I might have enjoyed this more had the content stuck to the fundamental differences between general language-related confusables. By delving into esoteric pairs, the book restricts its target audience. I might have said that this would be a great option for school libraries, except that a few entries are suitable only for adults (Kink vs. Fetish.)
All in all, this would still be a good gifting option for adult word nerds. But it is too abstruse to be recommended to a general reader and not child-friendly enough to be recommended to schools.
Just to clarify: My dissatisfaction has nothing to do with the topic or a lack of interest in it. I'm a language enthusiast and a huge grammar nerd. This was totally my kind of book had it lived up to the title.
3 stars.
My thanks to Union Square & Co. and Edelweiss+ for the DRC of “Dictionary of Fine Distinctions: Nuances, Niceties, and Subtle Shades of Meaning”. This review is voluntary and contains my honest opinion about the book.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Connect with me through:
My Blog || The StoryGraph || Instagram || X/Twitter || Facebook ||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Confusables (words/phrases that are easily confused with another in meaning or usage) are common in every language, but English is possible the champion when it comes to having the maximum number of confusables, courtesy its eclectic composition. Whether homonyms or homophones or homographs, English does its best to muddle up not just newbies but also native speakers. As such, a book that clarifies confusables is always welcome to teachers as well as students.
Except that this one does not exactly fit the above requirement.
I must begin by appreciating the efforts behind the book. The amazing array of distinctions clearly indicates the hard work put into compiling these terms and their differences. Over 200+ pages, the book covers many pairs, triads and quartets of confusables across a medley of subjects.
There are many word sets where I was already aware of the exact distinction (Goblin vs. Ogre vs. Troll), some that I didn’t know precisely (Pidgin vs. Creole), some that I never consciously thought about until I encountered them herein (Convince vs. Persuade), and some that I have read before but still get confused about as understanding them is beyond my mental processing power (Latte vs. Flat White vs. Cappuccino vs. Cortado.) Some were very common terms (Electric vs. Electronic) while some were more obscure comparisons (Hermit vs Anchorite.) A few were words I have never heard of in my life! (Schlemiel vs. Schlimazel!?)
Many words and examples are specific to the USA, which is fine as the book is meant for American audiences but this restricts its appeal outside of the country. Not docking off points for this.
There are extensive notes at the end for further elaborations on some of the words. There are also B&W illustrations for every distinction.
A special note of appreciation for the comparative pairs that begin and end the book. They were brilliant, and an apt way to set the ball rolling and bring it to a stop respectively.
Where I feel the book could have done better is in restricting itself to more practical and common distinctions instead of focussing on a wide range of topics. The ‘dictionary’ covers not just confusables in ordinary English vocabulary but also muddling terms from other subject areas such as geography (Great Britain vs United Kingdom), mathematics (Natural Numbers vs. Integers vs. Rational Numbers vs. Real Numbers), history (Flail vs. Mace vs. Morning Star), architecture (Porch vs. Veranda vs. Deck vs. Patio), and so on. There is even some jargon from topics that only professionals/enthusiasts would need to know, such as music (4/4 Time vs. 2/2 Time), computers (UI vs. UX), and sports (Deadlift vs. Romanian Deadlift.) Why would most people need to know these technical terms? By broadening the scope of topics too much, it ends up being a ‘jack of all trades, master of none.’
A few of the comparisons are unnecessarily convoluted. For instance, there’s one entry for ‘Irony vs Sarcasm’, which contrasts the two words taking into account just one meaning of ‘irony’, ignoring its alternative synonym of paradoxical contrast. And there’s a separate entry many pages later that explores ‘Verbal Irony vs. Dramatic Irony’. Such pairs of words could have been easily combined.
Moreover, with such eclectic topics, I would have preferred the book to have some kind of an organisational method, maybe by grouping the distinctions as per topic/subject or listing out the distinctions alphabetically. At present, the entries are too random and hence feel very jumpy when almost every turn of the page brings a word set from a new subject.
Honestly, I might have enjoyed this more had the content stuck to the fundamental differences between general language-related confusables. By delving into esoteric pairs, the book restricts its target audience. I might have said that this would be a great option for school libraries, except that a few entries are suitable only for adults (Kink vs. Fetish.)
All in all, this would still be a good gifting option for adult word nerds. But it is too abstruse to be recommended to a general reader and not child-friendly enough to be recommended to schools.
Just to clarify: My dissatisfaction has nothing to do with the topic or a lack of interest in it. I'm a language enthusiast and a huge grammar nerd. This was totally my kind of book had it lived up to the title.
3 stars.
My thanks to Union Square & Co. and Edelweiss+ for the DRC of “Dictionary of Fine Distinctions: Nuances, Niceties, and Subtle Shades of Meaning”. This review is voluntary and contains my honest opinion about the book.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Connect with me through:
My Blog || The StoryGraph || Instagram || X/Twitter || Facebook ||
July 18, 2024
In what their publishers gamely call a compilation for "hairsplitters," Eli Burnstein and illustrator Liana Finck bend to the task of drawing distinctions between terms there is a general tendency to mix-and-match. Appealing to the lazybones in all of us - because who, really, wants to cart around the Oxford English to ensure proper usage? - here is a whimsical effort to throw one hundred and eighty-two pages of clarification against the wall in the hope that some of it might stick.
A little of what remains, for the moment, on my wall:
Envy is when you want something that someone else has. Jealousy is when you don't want others to have something - or someone - that you do.
Accuracy refers to how close you are to the correct answer. Precision refers to how closely or finely you're measuring.
A snitch informs on others (tattletale). A rat sells out their own (traitor).
Ordering a burger, fries, and a soft drink is a combination. You're forming one of many possible groups. Asking for the fries to come before the burger is a permutation. You're ordering that group in one of many possible ways.
To those who find a certain sense of satisfaction in this sort of parsing and are rushing for a pen to scribble out the title, I will warn you that it's a tiny book and an expensive one to boot. If you can, I would suggest that you wait until this modest gem of a reference is available in paperback. (Or remaindered because we're rare birds and there are sure to be some left.)
A little of what remains, for the moment, on my wall:
Envy is when you want something that someone else has. Jealousy is when you don't want others to have something - or someone - that you do.
Accuracy refers to how close you are to the correct answer. Precision refers to how closely or finely you're measuring.
A snitch informs on others (tattletale). A rat sells out their own (traitor).
Ordering a burger, fries, and a soft drink is a combination. You're forming one of many possible groups. Asking for the fries to come before the burger is a permutation. You're ordering that group in one of many possible ways.
To those who find a certain sense of satisfaction in this sort of parsing and are rushing for a pen to scribble out the title, I will warn you that it's a tiny book and an expensive one to boot. If you can, I would suggest that you wait until this modest gem of a reference is available in paperback. (Or remaindered because we're rare birds and there are sure to be some left.)
January 17, 2026
'With Dictionary of Fine Distinctions, we put life under the microscope, teasing irony apart from sarcasm, driving a wedge between gullies and ravines, exposing goblins, ogres, and trolls to the harsh sunlight of analysis. The result? Crisp, sparkling clarity.'
RTF.
RTF.
March 25, 2024
This is a fun and quick read, but unfortunately I found it patchy and unsatisfying. Perhaps my expectations had been set too high by similarly styled books that offer a more rigorous treatment of their subject. This is difficult to review, because I’m not sure that the book even knows what it is. On the cover it is a dictionary, and inside it describes itself as a “synonymy” and an encyclopedia. The words “dictionary” and “encyclopedia” imply a level of rigor, completeness and organisation that the book isn’t really pretending to have (and as far as my limited research goes, “synonymy” refers to the state of being synonymous, so can’t even be used to describe a book in that way). If anything, I guess it’s a collection, a ragbag, a miscellany, an assortment… if only I had some kind of dictionary where I could distinguish between those words and choose the right one.
The book bounces between different levels of detail: straight out of the gate there is a very terse comparison of “emoji” vs. “emoticon” followed by a surprisingly complex discussion of the foam in various types of coffee. For some of the brief explanations of words that I was already familiar with, I sometimes found myself thinking “I’m sure it’s more nuanced than that”, and then found that there were extra details in the endnotes that added more clarity - and it’s not clear why those weren’t integrated with the main text. And there is a mixture of concepts (envy vs. jealousy, ethics vs. morality, shame vs. guilt) and things (leggings, tights, pantyhose and stockings) with no apparent ordering or organisation.
There are certainly plenty of “Aha!” moments, and it did have that quality of drawing me in by offering me “just one more…” before I put the book down. And the illustrations are whimsical and nicely drawn. This would be a great book to occupy yourself with while you’re on the toilet - but I feel that that’s not much of a recommendation for a book.
Thank you Edelweiss, Union Square & Co., and the author for the free review copy of Dictionary of Fine Distinctions in exchange for an honest review. All opinions are my own.
The book bounces between different levels of detail: straight out of the gate there is a very terse comparison of “emoji” vs. “emoticon” followed by a surprisingly complex discussion of the foam in various types of coffee. For some of the brief explanations of words that I was already familiar with, I sometimes found myself thinking “I’m sure it’s more nuanced than that”, and then found that there were extra details in the endnotes that added more clarity - and it’s not clear why those weren’t integrated with the main text. And there is a mixture of concepts (envy vs. jealousy, ethics vs. morality, shame vs. guilt) and things (leggings, tights, pantyhose and stockings) with no apparent ordering or organisation.
There are certainly plenty of “Aha!” moments, and it did have that quality of drawing me in by offering me “just one more…” before I put the book down. And the illustrations are whimsical and nicely drawn. This would be a great book to occupy yourself with while you’re on the toilet - but I feel that that’s not much of a recommendation for a book.
Thank you Edelweiss, Union Square & Co., and the author for the free review copy of Dictionary of Fine Distinctions in exchange for an honest review. All opinions are my own.
January 25, 2025
In my house one discussion that comes up fairly often is What IS the difference between supper and dinner? Is there one, or are they the same? This quaint little book finally answered that question for us.
Don't expect some university-press-like academic offering, what you do get is a fun take on explanations of the differences and meaning behind words, phrases and concepts. And while the definitions and distinctions are humorously serious in nature, the cute squiggly drawings remind you that the book also meant to be amusing.
And don't fret, I am not going to leave you hanging on that supper-dinner conundrum, there IS a difference! Dinner is the largest meat of the day and supper is a lighter evening meal eaten in rural areas where dinner is traditionally consumed at midday. In urban areas the 3 meals of the day are typically called breakfast, lunch and dinner, wheras in rural areas the meals are called breakfast dinner and supper. Pick up the book if you want to learn more about why this is the case!
Don't expect some university-press-like academic offering, what you do get is a fun take on explanations of the differences and meaning behind words, phrases and concepts. And while the definitions and distinctions are humorously serious in nature, the cute squiggly drawings remind you that the book also meant to be amusing.
And don't fret, I am not going to leave you hanging on that supper-dinner conundrum, there IS a difference! Dinner is the largest meat of the day and supper is a lighter evening meal eaten in rural areas where dinner is traditionally consumed at midday. In urban areas the 3 meals of the day are typically called breakfast, lunch and dinner, wheras in rural areas the meals are called breakfast dinner and supper. Pick up the book if you want to learn more about why this is the case!
October 3, 2024
Perfect. This book will allow me to be an even more insufferable pedant.
June 6, 2026
ایدهی کتاب واقعا جالب بود، اینکه تفاوت بین معنی و کاربرد دوتا کلمه رو توضیح میداد و واسه هر کدوم هم یسری طراحیهای کوچیک ساده و مثال داشت جذاب و کاملا قابل فهم بود و با اینکه شاید خیلی نِردیطور باشه و این تفاوتهای جزئی خیلی کم توی روزمره به کار بیاد ولی از اون دست کتابهایی بود که میشه دمدست گذاشت هر چند وقت یبار یه تیکهش رو خوند. (به جای اسکرول کردن توی دستشویی مثلا)
تنها چیزی که به ذهنم رسید میشد بهترش کنه این بود که دستهبندی داشته باشه و همه چیز انقدر رندوم پشت هم نیاد. مثلا تفاوت بین بالکن، تراس و پاسیو، بلافاصله بعدش تفاوت بین کینک و فتیش و صفحه بعد تفاوت بین الکتریک و الکترونیک؟ :))
تنها چیزی که به ذهنم رسید میشد بهترش کنه این بود که دستهبندی داشته باشه و همه چیز انقدر رندوم پشت هم نیاد. مثلا تفاوت بین بالکن، تراس و پاسیو، بلافاصله بعدش تفاوت بین کینک و فتیش و صفحه بعد تفاوت بین الکتریک و الکترونیک؟ :))
May 24, 2025
Very fun
book 22 of 2025
book 22 of 2025
May 7, 2024
This book could be so much exhaustive than it was. English is rife with near adjectives that are distinctively applied: obese is big but only applicable to people and animals, not mountains, for instance. I was hoping this book would parse this stuff out and be a good reference guide for adult ESL learners. It was not that.
January 1, 2026
I really love this one. Review to come!
April 8, 2026
A collection of differences between words commonly accepted as similar. This book was a quick, amusing and interesting read and if sitting in a group; makes for great trivia discussions.
June 21, 2025
Funny and useful enough.
March 10, 2026
4.5
a fantastic collection of linguistic trivia delivered with dashing wit
it's provided so much mansplaining ammunition that i apologise in advance to anyone who speaks to me in the next year
a fantastic collection of linguistic trivia delivered with dashing wit
it's provided so much mansplaining ammunition that i apologise in advance to anyone who speaks to me in the next year
December 14, 2024
I bought this for a few friends for Christmas present because of how often we have conversations about the distinctions between words. It’s exactly the kind of conversations we have, the ones that have one of us googling on our phones the difference between this word and that. I love that I have people in my life who care about such things! As I was flipping through it, I decided to buy one for myself also, and I loved it!
If you ever want to know the difference between a bay, cove, and a gulf, consult this book! My favorite was a difference between a tyrant, despot, autocrat, and dictator.
If you ever want to know the difference between a bay, cove, and a gulf, consult this book! My favorite was a difference between a tyrant, despot, autocrat, and dictator.
November 16, 2025
This book is so good, I’m keeping it on the coffee table. I mean, can you successfully define the difference between a bay vs. a gulf vs. a cove? Ethics vs. morality? Ristorante vs. trattoria vs. osteria? Flotsam vs. jetsam? Exactly.
January 14, 2025
words words words I love words!
I learned a lot-I need this on hand as a reference always.
I learned a lot-I need this on hand as a reference always.
August 20, 2025
My dad very thoughtfully gave this to me for my birthday, and it certainly seems like the sort of book I would really enjoy. To begin with, it is a lovely object - small, sturdy, smooth - that feels delightful in one's hands. It's also a good idea for a language book - who among us hasn't hesitated over the difference between strategy and tactics, or whether we are headed to a gala or a ball, or if those cute winter citrus fruits are actually mandarins, clementines, or tangerines? (See, the concept is pretty cool!) But surprisingly, perhaps, it ended up being kind of dull. The illustrations were uninspired and crude, and many of the descriptions (ie, the explanations of the "fine distinctions") just weren't that compelling (even if they were often clarifying). One hilarious exception: in the Trebuchet vs. Catapult section, the description reads, "Trebuchets are better." I'm still chuckling about this. But the rest of it was pretty forgettable.
April 29, 2026
I enjoyed reading all the fine distinctions between words such as convince vs persuade. Or poisonous vs venomous. Just wish I could remember them! Might be a boon to dip into now and then. Also enjoyed the accompanying drawings.
April 25, 2024
It’s a fun read.
I was amazed at how much I learned (and how little I already knew).
I was amazed at how much I learned (and how little I already knew).
July 10, 2025
for any aspiring etymologist, a must. Liana Finck's drawings are tasteful additions to a lovely and nuanced book of commonly misused words and their historic significances.
October 25, 2025
It’s cool
October 16, 2025
Perfect book for pedants.
Quote* of the month: "When a schlemiel spills their soup, it's the schlimazel whose lap it falls on."
(*Aphorism, there's a fine distinction 🌚)
Quote* of the month: "When a schlemiel spills their soup, it's the schlimazel whose lap it falls on."
(*Aphorism, there's a fine distinction 🌚)
January 11, 2025
advice for clear thinking
December 24, 2025
Fun quick read… though not too sure about the retention rate. Perhaps I just prefer a book with more depth rather than breadth. But then again this is not what this book is for. It’s a good gateway to discovering and delving into other interesting topics
December 7, 2025
“Autocrats rule with absolute power. Despots rule with absolute power cruelly and oppressively. Tyrants rule with absolute power cruelly, oppressively, and illegitimately (usurper). Dictators rule with absolute power cruelly, oppressively, and under a newly established regime”
“Shame is the feeling that your innate qualities don’t live up to the standards of beauty, intelligence, character, etc., as defined by your peers or society.
Guilt, by contrast, is the feeling that the actions or thoughts over which you have control transgress standards of right and wrong as dictated by the law, your parents, your conscience, or your god.
One is about who you are and are not, the other about what you do or don’t do: I feel ashamed of my puny muscles—and guilty for not going to the gym.”
“Cardinal numbers are for counting.
Ordinal numbers are for ordering.
“You convince someone to believe something.
Zoe convinced Michael of the existence of God.
You persuade someone to do something.
Then she persuaded him to go to church.”
“Crypts house the dead in vaulted chambers under churches.
Catacombs house the dead in extensive networks under cities.
“JPEGs take up less storage space and are good for photographs that would otherwise be hefty.
PNGs preserve resolution and are good for simple graphics that aren’t that b”
“Joints contain nothing but cannabis.
Spliffs sprinkle in a little tobacco.”
“Hues are colors. Tints add white to make them lighter. Shades add black to make them darker. Tones add gray to make them worse.
“Ristorantes are formal.
Trattorias are casual.”
“Hay refers to the cuttings of certain grasses or plants (e.g., alfalfa, orchard grass) that have been grown and harvested for the express purpose of feeding livestock.
Straw, by contrast, refers to the dried yellow stalks of cereal plants (wheat, barley, oat) left over after the edible grain of the plant has been removed.
“Streets are urban.
Boulevards are wide.
Avenues are boulevardish.
All of them are roads.
“Drives are winding, scenic, private, or all of the above.
Crescents are circular, semicircular, or crescent-shaped.
Places are simple dead ends.
Courts are dead ends that terminate in an open circle (i.e., a cul-de-sac).”
“Modernity refers to the period roughly spanning the mid-1400s to the mid-1900s, though some historians start later or extend it to the present day. Whatever your dates, the idea is that modernity generally refers to the post-medieval world—a world that gradually became more rational, urban, industrial, individualistic, secular, capitalist, and liberal. What follows modernity is sometimes called the contemporary period, though in lay contexts both modern and contemporary roughly mean nowadays as opposed to the past, or up-to-date as opposed to old-fashioned.”
“Slapstick is exaggerated physical comedy.
Screwball is exaggerated rom-com.”
“Electric devices convert electricity into other forms of energy (heat, light, etc.).
Electronic devices manipulate electricity to convey different kinds of information (images, sounds, etc.).”
“Monks live in monasteries.
Friars don’t.
“Christian monks live in closed communities where they lead a life of prayer, study, and manual labor. They are effectively cut off from society.
Friars, by contrast, live among laypeople to wander, preach, serve the community, and lead a life of poverty subsidized by alms. They belong not to monastic, but to mendicant (begging) orders like the Franciscans and the Dominicans. Many historical figures commonly thought of as monks (at least by me) were, in fact, friars, including:
Thomas Aquinas (theologian)
Martin Luther (Protestant reformer)
Roger Bacon (protoscientist/wizard)
Meister Eckhart (mystic)
William of Ockham (razor guy)”
“A kink is an unconventional sexual preference.
A fetish is an unconventional sexual requirement.
Wanting to touch someone’s feet is a kink.
If you can’t be aroused otherwise, it’s a fetish.”
“Shame is the feeling that your innate qualities don’t live up to the standards of beauty, intelligence, character, etc., as defined by your peers or society.
Guilt, by contrast, is the feeling that the actions or thoughts over which you have control transgress standards of right and wrong as dictated by the law, your parents, your conscience, or your god.
One is about who you are and are not, the other about what you do or don’t do: I feel ashamed of my puny muscles—and guilty for not going to the gym.”
“Cardinal numbers are for counting.
Ordinal numbers are for ordering.
“You convince someone to believe something.
Zoe convinced Michael of the existence of God.
You persuade someone to do something.
Then she persuaded him to go to church.”
“Crypts house the dead in vaulted chambers under churches.
Catacombs house the dead in extensive networks under cities.
“JPEGs take up less storage space and are good for photographs that would otherwise be hefty.
PNGs preserve resolution and are good for simple graphics that aren’t that b”
“Joints contain nothing but cannabis.
Spliffs sprinkle in a little tobacco.”
“Hues are colors. Tints add white to make them lighter. Shades add black to make them darker. Tones add gray to make them worse.
“Ristorantes are formal.
Trattorias are casual.”
“Hay refers to the cuttings of certain grasses or plants (e.g., alfalfa, orchard grass) that have been grown and harvested for the express purpose of feeding livestock.
Straw, by contrast, refers to the dried yellow stalks of cereal plants (wheat, barley, oat) left over after the edible grain of the plant has been removed.
“Streets are urban.
Boulevards are wide.
Avenues are boulevardish.
All of them are roads.
“Drives are winding, scenic, private, or all of the above.
Crescents are circular, semicircular, or crescent-shaped.
Places are simple dead ends.
Courts are dead ends that terminate in an open circle (i.e., a cul-de-sac).”
“Modernity refers to the period roughly spanning the mid-1400s to the mid-1900s, though some historians start later or extend it to the present day. Whatever your dates, the idea is that modernity generally refers to the post-medieval world—a world that gradually became more rational, urban, industrial, individualistic, secular, capitalist, and liberal. What follows modernity is sometimes called the contemporary period, though in lay contexts both modern and contemporary roughly mean nowadays as opposed to the past, or up-to-date as opposed to old-fashioned.”
“Slapstick is exaggerated physical comedy.
Screwball is exaggerated rom-com.”
“Electric devices convert electricity into other forms of energy (heat, light, etc.).
Electronic devices manipulate electricity to convey different kinds of information (images, sounds, etc.).”
“Monks live in monasteries.
Friars don’t.
“Christian monks live in closed communities where they lead a life of prayer, study, and manual labor. They are effectively cut off from society.
Friars, by contrast, live among laypeople to wander, preach, serve the community, and lead a life of poverty subsidized by alms. They belong not to monastic, but to mendicant (begging) orders like the Franciscans and the Dominicans. Many historical figures commonly thought of as monks (at least by me) were, in fact, friars, including:
Thomas Aquinas (theologian)
Martin Luther (Protestant reformer)
Roger Bacon (protoscientist/wizard)
Meister Eckhart (mystic)
William of Ockham (razor guy)”
“A kink is an unconventional sexual preference.
A fetish is an unconventional sexual requirement.
Wanting to touch someone’s feet is a kink.
If you can’t be aroused otherwise, it’s a fetish.”
May 19, 2024
The concept for this book is what interested me. As I began to go through it, I wondered why, in the age of the Internet, was a book like this even necessary? Anyone can find the distinctions addressed here using a simple Google search.
Would the book help a person if their electricity or Internet was down?
Authors who write in longhand by candlelight?
Maybe this would be a useful book for writers. But, would some authors bother to research the difference between many of the terms addressed in the book? Probably not. We've all read interviews with writers who boast about how they let the creative process flow and can turn out a book in a week. I cringe. Those people will not use this book.
As an avid reader, there are a few distinctions I regularly encounter that are mistakenly used by writers - even well-known ones - who should know better after selling their first million copies. Or at least their editors (if publishers still employ editors) should clue them in.
Here are three common mistakes that I looked for. Alas, they are not included in the text or the index, but were easily found via Google:
Lie vs. Lay: Lay means "to place something down flat," while lie means "to be in a flat position on a surface." The key difference is that lay is transitive and requires an object to act upon, and lie is intransitive, describing something moving on its own or already in position.
Further vs. Farther: Farther means a greater DISTANCE in a literal, physical sense i.e. it can be measured, whereas further is a greater figurative or metaphorical distance.
And my number one example, found in just about every book I read:
Cement vs. Concrete. Cement is a binding agent made from limestone and clay; whereas concrete is a building material created through the proper mixing of CEMENT, water, sand, and rock. If you speak with any person who works in that industry, they will be sure to correct you.
These distinctions are so simple to understand, and really should have been learned in grade school or high school English class. Their misuse is what makes English teachers and librarians drink heavily. Pity. Please pass the wine.
Using correct terminology makes for a more pleasurable reading experience.
Optional purchase, optional read.
Would the book help a person if their electricity or Internet was down?
Authors who write in longhand by candlelight?
Maybe this would be a useful book for writers. But, would some authors bother to research the difference between many of the terms addressed in the book? Probably not. We've all read interviews with writers who boast about how they let the creative process flow and can turn out a book in a week. I cringe. Those people will not use this book.
As an avid reader, there are a few distinctions I regularly encounter that are mistakenly used by writers - even well-known ones - who should know better after selling their first million copies. Or at least their editors (if publishers still employ editors) should clue them in.
Here are three common mistakes that I looked for. Alas, they are not included in the text or the index, but were easily found via Google:
Lie vs. Lay: Lay means "to place something down flat," while lie means "to be in a flat position on a surface." The key difference is that lay is transitive and requires an object to act upon, and lie is intransitive, describing something moving on its own or already in position.
Further vs. Farther: Farther means a greater DISTANCE in a literal, physical sense i.e. it can be measured, whereas further is a greater figurative or metaphorical distance.
And my number one example, found in just about every book I read:
Cement vs. Concrete. Cement is a binding agent made from limestone and clay; whereas concrete is a building material created through the proper mixing of CEMENT, water, sand, and rock. If you speak with any person who works in that industry, they will be sure to correct you.
These distinctions are so simple to understand, and really should have been learned in grade school or high school English class. Their misuse is what makes English teachers and librarians drink heavily. Pity. Please pass the wine.
Using correct terminology makes for a more pleasurable reading experience.
Optional purchase, optional read.
December 24, 2024
It's disappointing when a book of this nature lets you down in the Preface. On the second page the author tries to force a distinction between a Preface and an Introduction, namely that the former is designated by Roman numerals and the latter by Arabic numerals. All one need do is look in any of the hundreds of Oxford World Classics, the Penguin Classics, the many series from Harvard University Press, or the Library of America volumes (to name a few) to see Introductions designated by Roman numerals. Some publishers do as the author writes, but in my experience it is far more common to see the pages in an Introduction in Roman numerals, and the choice is certainly not bound by any 'distinction'.
He has a similar problem trying to distinguish between mazes and labyrinths, stumbling over the famous Labyrinth on Crete. Simply looking at the first definition in the OED or Merriam-Webster would have shown him that a labyrinth can be hard to get in and out of (hence the need for Ariadne's thread), and that they are in fact a type of maze.
When he's not trying to force a distinction, Burnstein shares a lot of nice tidbits. And the book is short, many pages having only a picture and/or a few lines of text. It would be a quick read if not for the need to refer to a dictionary to check up on some of the entries. Speaking of: Oddly, he gets unnecessarily condescending when he states that people who say they look something up in the OED really mean they looked it up in the ODE because they surely don't have the twenty volume OED at home. Apparently he's unaware that one can get free access to the OED online through an institution (for me, it's my public library), or one might have the CD-ROM version on their computer (which I use when writing).
Notes at the end of the book clarify a few of the author's entries (saving shame/guilt, but not his drives, courts, roads, etc., definitions, some of which don't hold up in real life or in the dictionary). The illustrations are usually helpful and often add a touch of humor. There's no reason not to read this book, but keep a dictionary and encyclopedia at hand to do further research. Whether from them or from Mr. Burnstein, you'll learn something interesting.
He has a similar problem trying to distinguish between mazes and labyrinths, stumbling over the famous Labyrinth on Crete. Simply looking at the first definition in the OED or Merriam-Webster would have shown him that a labyrinth can be hard to get in and out of (hence the need for Ariadne's thread), and that they are in fact a type of maze.
When he's not trying to force a distinction, Burnstein shares a lot of nice tidbits. And the book is short, many pages having only a picture and/or a few lines of text. It would be a quick read if not for the need to refer to a dictionary to check up on some of the entries. Speaking of: Oddly, he gets unnecessarily condescending when he states that people who say they look something up in the OED really mean they looked it up in the ODE because they surely don't have the twenty volume OED at home. Apparently he's unaware that one can get free access to the OED online through an institution (for me, it's my public library), or one might have the CD-ROM version on their computer (which I use when writing).
Notes at the end of the book clarify a few of the author's entries (saving shame/guilt, but not his drives, courts, roads, etc., definitions, some of which don't hold up in real life or in the dictionary). The illustrations are usually helpful and often add a touch of humor. There's no reason not to read this book, but keep a dictionary and encyclopedia at hand to do further research. Whether from them or from Mr. Burnstein, you'll learn something interesting.
August 27, 2024
I spend a lot of time these days driving my daughter around, and even more time sitting in parking lots waiting for her. If I decided to use my "parking lot time" to quickly jot down a few seat-of-the-pants definitions instead of enjoying my latest audiobook, and then accompany them with some scribbled sketches, I'd come up with something more or less just as good as this book.
I expected this book to be humorous and enlightening. It is neither. It is a list of definitions of words I can already define quite accurately (and with precision!), accompanied by god awful illustrations. Worst of all: it is not funny. Not even a little bit.
Examples: assume vs presume, accuracy vs precision, tights vs leggings vs pantyhose vs stockings, first cousin vs once removed, amps vs volt vs watt (I just can NOT with this, this is when the book started to lose me - are people honestly confused by these terms? are these same people confused by the difference between inches and pounds and gallons?), porch vs deck vs veranda vs patio, sorbet vs sherbet, dinner vs supper (in which I actually disagree with him), lager vs ale, speedometer vs odometer (I mean, REALLY? people don't know the difference???), stock vs bond (again: who is confused by these??), hay vs straw (come ON people, one is food and one is bedding!), couch vs sofa (hint: there is actually no difference between them), poisonous vs venomous (is there truly anyone left on this planet who does not know the difference here?? go ahead, go on any social media platform and mention a "poisonous snake" and within SECONDS someone will reply to correct you).
I admit I am hard pressed to say what the difference is between fusilli and rotini, but he waffled on that one anyway, and basically ends up saying "rotini is the American term." I also would not have known the difference between gondola & funicular (the funicular is on tracks, which I feel like I knew, it just wasn't coming to me), and hors d'oeuvres & canapes (a canape is basically an hors d'oeuvre on bread - it's also easier to spell, imo)
I expected this book to be humorous and enlightening. It is neither. It is a list of definitions of words I can already define quite accurately (and with precision!), accompanied by god awful illustrations. Worst of all: it is not funny. Not even a little bit.
Examples: assume vs presume, accuracy vs precision, tights vs leggings vs pantyhose vs stockings, first cousin vs once removed, amps vs volt vs watt (I just can NOT with this, this is when the book started to lose me - are people honestly confused by these terms? are these same people confused by the difference between inches and pounds and gallons?), porch vs deck vs veranda vs patio, sorbet vs sherbet, dinner vs supper (in which I actually disagree with him), lager vs ale, speedometer vs odometer (I mean, REALLY? people don't know the difference???), stock vs bond (again: who is confused by these??), hay vs straw (come ON people, one is food and one is bedding!), couch vs sofa (hint: there is actually no difference between them), poisonous vs venomous (is there truly anyone left on this planet who does not know the difference here?? go ahead, go on any social media platform and mention a "poisonous snake" and within SECONDS someone will reply to correct you).
I admit I am hard pressed to say what the difference is between fusilli and rotini, but he waffled on that one anyway, and basically ends up saying "rotini is the American term." I also would not have known the difference between gondola & funicular (the funicular is on tracks, which I feel like I knew, it just wasn't coming to me), and hors d'oeuvres & canapes (a canape is basically an hors d'oeuvre on bread - it's also easier to spell, imo)
July 28, 2024
My favorite parts of this book were the illustrations. Credit to the illustrator Liana Finck.
This was a quick read. I finished it in a couple short sittings and I'm glad I read it. I genuinely found some of the entries interesting (Envy vs Jealousy, Ethics vs Morality, Shame vs Guilt). It's a book that will probably make you feel a little smarter while reading it. It could just make you more annoying though if you start correcting people around you for misusing words.
My main criticism is that this book feels a little unfocused. It's somehow both too modest and too ambitious. Burnstein should have either written a longer book or, if that wasn't economically feasible, he should have narrowed the subjects he covers. When he goes over the difference between Shame and Guilt I'm interested, but he lost me a bit when he covers topics like Latte vs. Flat White vs. Cappuccino vs. Cortado or 4/4 Time vs. 2/2 Time in tiresome detail. The 4/4 Time vs. 2/2 Time entry was the longest in the book for some reason. Burnstein is clearly smart, but this book starts to feel trivial, a little half-baked, empty calories for pedantic people. Does anyone actually confuse Satin and Sateen? Or, the difference between a hansom, barouche, stagecoach, or troika? When he started explaining the difference between a JPEG and a PNG in excessive detail I couldn't help but think, "Who cares?"
The back cover promises "witty deep dives" and introduces Burnstein as a "humor writer." I felt that set some unfair expectations on the book to be witty and humorous. Some of the images are amusing I guess, but I found the entries straight-faced.
If I sound overly critical it's because I liked the idea more than the execution. I think this could have been much better. This is Burnstein’s first book and I'm confident that his best work is still ahead.
This was a quick read. I finished it in a couple short sittings and I'm glad I read it. I genuinely found some of the entries interesting (Envy vs Jealousy, Ethics vs Morality, Shame vs Guilt). It's a book that will probably make you feel a little smarter while reading it. It could just make you more annoying though if you start correcting people around you for misusing words.
My main criticism is that this book feels a little unfocused. It's somehow both too modest and too ambitious. Burnstein should have either written a longer book or, if that wasn't economically feasible, he should have narrowed the subjects he covers. When he goes over the difference between Shame and Guilt I'm interested, but he lost me a bit when he covers topics like Latte vs. Flat White vs. Cappuccino vs. Cortado or 4/4 Time vs. 2/2 Time in tiresome detail. The 4/4 Time vs. 2/2 Time entry was the longest in the book for some reason. Burnstein is clearly smart, but this book starts to feel trivial, a little half-baked, empty calories for pedantic people. Does anyone actually confuse Satin and Sateen? Or, the difference between a hansom, barouche, stagecoach, or troika? When he started explaining the difference between a JPEG and a PNG in excessive detail I couldn't help but think, "Who cares?"
The back cover promises "witty deep dives" and introduces Burnstein as a "humor writer." I felt that set some unfair expectations on the book to be witty and humorous. Some of the images are amusing I guess, but I found the entries straight-faced.
If I sound overly critical it's because I liked the idea more than the execution. I think this could have been much better. This is Burnstein’s first book and I'm confident that his best work is still ahead.
July 29, 2024
We sometimes don't know the right word to use because it doesn't come to mind. Other times we don't know the right word to use because two come to mind, and we're unsure which is correct. For these latter cases, Burnstein's book comes in handy.
It's rather simple: oft-confused words are explained, and simply pencil illustrations are added to help clarify the differences, and perhaps help them sink deeper into your mind. Of course, out in the wild these distinctions are not always followed properly. But perhaps they will be more so in light of Burnstein's work!
I might as well dip into the dictionary at random to provide some examples. So, on page 90 we have the lute and the lyre distinguished and illustrated. The facing page then includes some more helpful information in remembering the difference. Basically all the entries have this helpful note--and some also include an endnote as well, for even further distinguishing.
Let's find some more examples. Opening randomly to page 56 I see maze and labyrinth. Page 132 distinguishes civil law vs. common law (I knew that one!).
What's that, you say? You'd like an example that includes the definitions. Okay, let's open again: now we're on page 34, squash vs. racquetball. I shall quote: "In squash, you hit a firm ball with a narrow racket. In racquetball, you hit a bouncy ball with a fat racket." The facing page provides a few paragraphs of explanation, and then (and this is not typical!) a humorous quote from Frasier. There is also a short endnote for this entry.
Some entries have mnemonic devices provided, which further clarify things.
A fun book, well worth reading and enjoying.
It's rather simple: oft-confused words are explained, and simply pencil illustrations are added to help clarify the differences, and perhaps help them sink deeper into your mind. Of course, out in the wild these distinctions are not always followed properly. But perhaps they will be more so in light of Burnstein's work!
I might as well dip into the dictionary at random to provide some examples. So, on page 90 we have the lute and the lyre distinguished and illustrated. The facing page then includes some more helpful information in remembering the difference. Basically all the entries have this helpful note--and some also include an endnote as well, for even further distinguishing.
Let's find some more examples. Opening randomly to page 56 I see maze and labyrinth. Page 132 distinguishes civil law vs. common law (I knew that one!).
What's that, you say? You'd like an example that includes the definitions. Okay, let's open again: now we're on page 34, squash vs. racquetball. I shall quote: "In squash, you hit a firm ball with a narrow racket. In racquetball, you hit a bouncy ball with a fat racket." The facing page provides a few paragraphs of explanation, and then (and this is not typical!) a humorous quote from Frasier. There is also a short endnote for this entry.
Some entries have mnemonic devices provided, which further clarify things.
A fun book, well worth reading and enjoying.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 135 reviews