Humanities
Research Spotlight

Sarah Ogilvie

Dr Sarah Ogilvie is Senior Research Fellow at Campion Hall and the Faculty of Linguistics, Philology, and Phonetics, University of Oxford, as well as Director of the Dictionary Lab. She talks to us about her transformative academic journey and her latest publication, The Dictionary People.

Q: Your academic journey has taken you from Australia to Stanford and Cambridge, and now to Oxford. How have these diverse academic environments shaped your work and your approach to linguistics?   

Great question. Australia opened up the world of endangered languages to me - I lived with a remote Australian indigenous community in order to write a grammar and dictionary of a language that only had two fluent speakers left. Stanford, being situated in the middle of Silicon Valley, opened up the world of technology and built on my first degree which had been in pure mathematics and computer science. Cambridge allowed me to engage intellectually with colleagues in different disciplines, and to write and publish. Oxford is where I originally did my doctorate, so it is great to be back here and, as the Director of the new MSc in Digital Scholarship, it feels like everything has come together.  

Q: As Director of the Dictionary Lab at the University of Oxford, how do you envision the future of dictionaries in the digital age? Are there any challenges and opportunities you foresee? 

Twenty years ago, people were declaring that 'the dictionary is dead', but they didn't realise that dictionaries were actually powering the back-end of the internet and many of the digital tools imbedded in our phones and computers - think morphological analysers, word segmenters, named-entity recognizers, feature sets for pronunciations, text-to-speech tools, topic modelling, sentiment analysis. They all rely on dictionaries, so dictionaries have a bright future. That kind of structured and curated data is valuable in the tech world.  

Q: Your work extends beyond the English language to the documentation and revitalization of endangered languages. Can you share a bit about your experiences in this field and the importance of preserving these languages?  

Language is the key to culture and identity, and when a language dies it takes with it a unique view of the world. I believe in collaborating with indigenous communities to record and document their traditional languages, so that when members of those communities want to revitalize those languages, they are able to do so. In that way, their languages are not dead, but merely 'sleeping' and waiting to be awakened.  

At twenty volumes, the Oxford English Dictionary is the largest English dictionary in the world. It was a large crowd-sourced project, it’s like the Wikipedia of the nineteenth century! But we have never known who all those people were.

Q: You have had a very prominent publication recently.  Can you tell us more about it?  

The Dictionary People book coverIt’s a book called The Dictionary People: The Unsung Heroes of the Oxford English Dictionary and it’s about all the people around the world who helped create the first edition of the OED.  At twenty volumes, the OED is the largest English dictionary in the world. It was a large crowd-sourced project, it’s like the Wikipedia of the nineteenth century! But we have never known who all those people were. Nine years ago, I was down in the basement of Oxford University Press where the dictionary archive is stored, and I took the lid off a dusty box. Inside it was a little black book tied with cream ribbon.  When I undid the ribbon and opened it, I recognised the immaculate handwriting of James Murray, the longest-serving editor of the dictionary, and I realised that this was his address book that told us who all those people were.  It gave us their names and their addresses, each book that they read, the number of slips (a four by six-inch piece of paper bearing quotations illustrating the use of words to be defined in the dictionary) they submitted per book, and the date that he received the slips.    

Q: The structure of the book is particularly interesting. How did it come about?

It’s a simple structure, A-Z, but it was difficult to crack.  After I had been doing all this research for many years, I was still trying all sorts of different structures and they weren’t working because there are 3000 people and I wanted to ensure I was telling the general story of the creation of the dictionary while also featuring the most captivating and interesting people.  Then during the night, it came to me that I could use an alphabetic structure.  I had created two large databases during my research: one for all the people, and one for all the books that they read and the words they sent in.  I went through the people database and for each person I came up with a classification or a theme.  I then grouped the people according to their themes and classifications, and made chapters out of them - A for Archaeologist, B for Best Contributor, C for Cannibal, M for Murderers, Q for Queers, V for Vicars and Vegetarians - that kind of thing. It just worked! It was meant to be, and I feel satisfied that I managed to include almost everything that I wanted.    

Q: Over 3000 people contributed to the OED! It must have been an incredibly hard process to track them down and work out who they are.  

Yes, it was a laborious process that took 8 years. Some people were more difficult to research than others, especially the top contributor, someone called Thomas Austin, a volunteer who sent in 165,000 slips. He was the hardest to track down. At one stage, I thought he was a porter at Exeter College, or a porter at the Bodleian Library, but that ended up being wrong, and I eventually found out who he really was. Most of the contributors were unknowns but I did manage to track most of them down, and in the process I unravelled some fascinating and unexpected stories - dramatic and quotidien. For some of them, it was almost like they were crying out to be noticed after all of these years, so there was, for me personally, a social justice aspect to it all, where I realised how devoted these people were to helping the dictionary, and yet how little recognition they had received. This book was a chance to shine a light on them finally, and to give them credit because, without them, the dictionary could never have been written.  

I discovered that there were far more women contributing to the dictionary than we had previously thought - nearly 500 of them - which was extraordinary, given that they didn’t have access to the same educational opportunities as men.

Q: A particularly important aspect about your book is how it highlights the scale of women’s contributions to the dictionary when they have so often been neglected.   

Exactly! I discovered that there were far more women contributing to the dictionary than we had previously thought - nearly 500 of them - which was extraordinary, given that they didn’t have access to the same educational opportunities as men. There’s a whole chapter on women, and they’re fantastic women, from one of the first female Egyptologists, Margaret Murray, who contributed from Calcutta, to one of the first female astronomers, Elizabeth Brown, who travelled to Russia and the Caribbean observing the skies, and Mrs Anna Thorpe Wetherill, an anti-slavery activist in Philadelphia who hid escaped slaves in her house and sent in the words ‘Abolition’ and ‘abhorrent’, which seems appropriate. 

Q: Do you have a favourite word, having studied the dictionary for so long?  

I actually don’t! It’s a bit like asking a parent who is their favourite child. I used to be an editor on the OED, and what I discovered about words is that you can never tell whether a word will take a long or short time to edit and revise for the dictionary. A colleague worked on the word run for nine months. Delving into a word is just like getting to know a person. Everyone is interesting if you dig deep enough, and it is the same with words.  

 

The Dictionary People has been widely reviewed, including in the Guardian (here), Sydney Morning Herald (here), and New York Times (here). See here for further information about Sarah's work.