Why, after a quick lookup at the Google online library, allowing the browsing of the content of available books, can I inevitably find instances prior to the first known use in the dictionary of certain words?

  • 5
    Mostly it'll be because the dates in google books aren't very reliable - witness all these instances of Internet before 1950 Oct 30, 2011 at 16:36
  • I must confess: It was me who used my time machine, and wrote a book about Internet before 1750.
    – apaderno
    Oct 30, 2011 at 17:07
  • 1
    The OED, which has the best quality of "first known use" AFAIK, was populated by readers sending in slips of paper with early quotations they could find (plus its editors doing their best). This crowd-sourcing was the best they could do at the time. Take a look at Murray and the OED and OED#History, or the book The Meaning of Everything: The Story of the Oxford English Dictionary. Oct 31, 2011 at 3:18
  • 1
    I've also read great reviews of The Surgeon of Crowthorne (titled The Professor and the Madman: A Tale of Murder, Insanity, and the Making of the Oxford English Dictionary in North America), a book about one of the most prolific contributors. (E.g. NYT: The Strange Case of the Madman With a Quotation for Every Word) As Hugo says, if you find earlier quotes that aren't (say) OCR errors, please do contribute. Oct 31, 2011 at 3:20
  • 1
    @Lrc007 Please will you share some of these words you've found with earlier first known use? Thanks!
    – Hugo
    Oct 31, 2011 at 6:52

2 Answers 2


Because the fist known use of a word is exactly that: the first known use. If and when they find an antecedent, they will usually update the dictionary entry.

There's no way for them to search every single book and document ever published, and not every publication still exists. However, more documents are being computerised and indexed so this makes it easier to find antecedents.

The OED are very happy to receive antedatings for inclusion in future editions, as well as new meanings. Check their FAQ to find out how to contribute.

  • It appears that They haven't been very efficient.
    – Lrc007
    Oct 30, 2011 at 16:28
  • 4
    The editors of the OED have strict criteria for including words and citations. Oct 30, 2011 at 16:47
  • 3
    "They haven't been very efficient." -- This assessment only seems plausible in our current world. Most of the work in finding first usages was done long before computers and digital texts, much less the internet making some of them available to casual users.
    – mgkrebbs
    Oct 30, 2011 at 18:18
  • +1 for making me look up and learn another word, I'll let you guess which one. ;-) Oct 30, 2011 at 18:52
  • @JoachimSauer Antecedent/antedate? And I challenge the OP to antedate the late 14c. antecedent or find an antecedent of antedate prior to the 1580s :)
    – Hugo
    Oct 30, 2011 at 19:20

This is a good question. And the answer is pretty simple: the dictionary is huge and it takes a while to do the research to update it. Therefore, when you're searching right now with Google Books, sometimes you're competing with research that was done decades ago by people who didn't have access to the internet.

The internet, specifically things like Google Books and other databases that have searchable text of old documents, makes etymological research so much easier. And it's still getting better as OCR improves and more stuff is scanned into databases.

In the online OED you might see something like this:

Red text from OED that says: "This entry has not yet been fully updated (first published 1915)."

This is your signal that the page is out-of-date.

(Note: The one thing that needs to be said about Google Books is that it doesn't always get the year right. Be sure to check the front page of the book to see what date is printed there before getting your hopes up.)

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.