Oxford English Dictionary

Finnish: Kielitoimiston sanakirja contains over 100,000 headwords and is the best dictionary for contemporary Finnish. It is edited by the Research Institute for the Languages of Finland . A larger but more dated dictionary Nykysuomen sanakirja from the 50's that contains over 200,000 headwords. More on reddit.com

I think Cambridge is better for learners. It's been a while since university years when I had them both at hand, but as far as I remember, Cambridge would ofer definitions and sentence examples (obviously helpful to learners), while Oxford would offer definitions and origin of the words (more useful for people who study language history and linguistics). I think in a way it was more of a conversational practical English vs technical and all-encompassing English (i.e. Cambridge vs Oxford). As one who likes to be specific with my words, I used to prefer Oxford, but I think Cambridge is easier to use. More on reddit.com

So how much does a printed copy cost? Quick look up on amazon $995.00. http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-English-Dictionary-Vols-1-20/dp/0198611862 More on reddit.com

Dictionaries usually have front matter that explain their goals, their coverage, their methods, and so on. I looked through the front matter, didn't find anything that jumped out at me except that I'd need to go to the New Oxford Dictionary of English (which I don't have handy) if I wanted a better idea of their methods with respect to technical vocabulary, and then I went to the entry. Given that the sense is given a specific label indicating that it's a technical term in logic, I would have expected this to be worded a bit better. But the goal of the COD is to be brief and nontechnical for the most part, and I think that Smith is bringing out something for students that might be relevant without the COD being strictly wrong. The premiss might appear chronologically after the target conclusion, but it is the input to the conclusion, so procedurally it is previous to the inference; in that sense, the COD can be interpreted as being technically correct. At the very least, however, Smith's admonition encourages students to consider the complexities of logical inference, because a plain reading of the COD certainly favors the chronological interpretation. Technical meanings are best discerned from technical literature, not from general-purpose dictionaries, so students should begin to trust specialized work over broad work when they want technical meanings. More on reddit.com