There is an even better source for Esperanto etymology, the perpetually out of stock: ETIMOLOGIA VORTARO DE ESPERANTO, (vol.1 - 5)

Oh, there’s also the English-Esperanto Dictionary by O’Connor and Hayes, made free on the net by the Gutenberg Project. It’s published in 1906, so there won’t be any internet terms and such, but it’s “approved by Dr. Zamenhof”, so you won’t have to deal with accusations of neologisms, either.

*Edit: There’s a more recent collection of “word lists” and a shortish but more up-to-date dictionary here.

Bemused:for example extensive use of the ge prefix in the singular

Then it's indeed bad

Mi estas nur Esperantisto, sed absolute ne Geesperantisto

>> "Vortaroj: (mi kreas novan apartan fadenon)" <<

Bemused:One dictionary to avoid is the "English, Esperanto, English Dictionary", 2010 Edition, by John C Wells.
It is available in hardcopy.
It is an often recommended dictionary, however contains unofficial elements, for example extensive use of the ge prefix in the singular.

Which words are you referring to with reference to extensive use of ge- in the singular, and are they marked in any way? For example, people like to take a crack at Benson's dictionary for his "bensonajxoj" -- but there isn't a more complete English-Esperanto dictionary around, and Benson clearly marks his own words, so you can avoid them if you want.

Also -- beginners should be aware that EVERY dictionary will have extensive unofficial elements. A dictionary limited to official elements only would likely be missing a lot of common and universally-accepted words. It takes a long time for words to be made official, and some surprisingly common words are not official. Officializing an element involves coming up with an official definition, which is sometimes a surprisingly difficult task for members of the Academy. For a small example -- the root penis/ was only made official in the 9th "oficiala aldono" in 1997. There is no other polite word for it, but earlier generations were perhaps embarrassed to be dealing in such words, and it was officialized very late in the game.

erinja:
Also -- beginners should be aware that EVERY dictionary will have extensive unofficial elements. A dictionary limited to official elements only would likely be missing a lot of common and universally-accepted words. It takes a long time for words to be made official, and some surprisingly common words are not official. Officializing an element involves coming up with an official definition, which is sometimes a surprisingly difficult task for members of the Academy.

Thank you, that's helpful to know. How the language evolves helps in understanding how to use it given it's a constructed language with the academy in charge.

erinja:

Bemused:One dictionary to avoid is the "English, Esperanto, English Dictionary", 2010 Edition, by John C Wells.
It is available in hardcopy.
It is an often recommended dictionary, however contains unofficial elements, for example extensive use of the ge prefix in the singular.

Which words are you referring to with reference to extensive use of ge- in the singular, and are they marked in any way?

I have not gone through the dictionary from cover to cover.

However these are some words I have found using ge in the singular:

grandparent - geavo, spouse - geedzo, sibling - gefrato, grandchild - genepo, parent - gepatro

There is no marking of "official" or "unofficial" words, and no mention that there is even such a concept.

BeardedBloke:

erinja:
Also -- beginners should be aware that EVERY dictionary will have extensive unofficial elements. A dictionary limited to official elements only would likely be missing a lot of common and universally-accepted words. It takes a long time for words to be made official, and some surprisingly common words are not official. Officializing an element involves coming up with an official definition, which is sometimes a surprisingly difficult task for members of the Academy.

Thank you, that's helpful to know. How the language evolves helps in understanding how to use it given it's a constructed language with the academy in charge.

As erinja says any dictionary setting out how the language as currently spoken will contain unofficial elements.
How the language is used is largely determined by consensus among speakers.
The academy tends to lag behind.
You will find that there is often no "right" way or "wrong " way to say something, but that some usages are more common than others.

robbkvasnak:Missing are (words for) elbow grease, confabulation, talking points, amarillo and boombox (maybe these won't be around too much longer, I hope)- and landfill, clay pigeon, not, hobnob and eggnog. I still recommend it.

I'm a bit confused, unless this is a joke. None of those words exist in many a foreign language and "amarillo" isn't a word (armadillo?). Stuff like "elbow grease (hard work)" and "boombox (large portable radio)" are phrases that language-learners need to think about a little more before they use them, as in, what is it that the words actually mean? Same as we can't say "a scrap of paper" or "someone who I'm cohabitating with and dating but not married and have no plans to marry as of now" in one concise word in English.

For examples said earlier - crockpot, meatloaf, landfill. The key is to think about what the item actually does or is. Crockpot is a word that doesn't exist in Swedish. So how would I translate it? I would personally say "slow-cooking food-pot", "food-pot for simmering" (by the way, if I wanted to say simmer I could say "small-boil" ), or even simply fail to mention it at all and say just "food-pot", as anyone who doesn't own a fancy, expensive thing like a crockpot would use a normal pot on the stove.

Meatloaf is "a baked dish consisting of minced meat moulded into the shape of a loaf". So why can't you say "mince-meat dish"? Or loaf-shaped mincemeat? Or "formed/shaped/moulded mincemeat" if there's no word for loaf?

Landfill is translated as "garbage dump/deposit", or even "filling land with garbage", etc. Even if you think it sounds a bit strange, context would make it clear anyway, just as "landfill" could technically refer to filling a hole with dirt or something, not just garbage (if we take the meaning straight from the compound and not "what it has evolved to mean" ).

Similarly, in Swedish you say "food pie" (ex. the so-called "Aussie pies" ) and "dessert pie"
food muffin and dessert muffin (cupcake)
doughnut (berliner, jelly doughnut) and doughnut with hole in it / American doughnut
sweet water (freshwater) and salt water.
Going back in time, "sweet milk" (normal milk) and "sour milk"
"sweet cream" (coffee cream, whipping cream, etc) and "sour cream"

Icelandic doesn't have a word for "cookie", it says "small cake". "Fridge" could be "cold cupboard", "sofa" could be "soft, wide chair".

Anyway, my point is that when learning any language you should be taught how to think about the meanings of words and use that to form your own words. English-natives are at a disadvantage since they're not used to every word being a compound, (even if every word is, they don't know it) and they tend to see language as more "fixed", but if you ask a German, Swede or Japanese for example, they might think otherwise.

I wrote this because I thought that maybe it'd help someone who's dissatisfied with dictionaries.

This brings up the point that those who are just beginning to learn a new language -- not only Esperanto! -- who have had no other experience beyond their native language seem to think that the new language is nothing more than their own language with other "strange" words substituted (the concept of relexification).

I remember when I first studied French as a young person long ago, there were other students who were baffled that "Je suis allant" was not perfectly good French for English "I am going." They had trouble wrapping their heads around the idea that "Je vais" covers "I go," "I am going," and "I do go" and that "Je suis allant" would seem literally bizarre to a native francophone. And so on with most other languages.

The same holds true with Esperanto for those komencantoj who have not yet internalized what we might loosely call the "spirit" of the tongue.

There's also the growing http://www.actingaustralia.com.au/eo/filmindustria... based on film industry words. Since the birth of Esperanto-TV this has been a major problem for those taking part.