[Course Forum] SAT Comprehensive by jonny

Hi, everyone.

Here is the list of words that I think it has confusing definition. Still rough shape, but I think you can see the idea.

I think they can be classified as follow:

  • Type A: Same Definition
    Literally same (or almost same) definition.
    ex) words in the list I previously posted.

  • Type B: Similar Definition
    Definitions which mean (almost) same thing.
    antagonism: n. state of hosterity
    animosity: n. a state of ill will

  • Type C: Partially Distinguishable Definition
    Combination of adequately specific definition and ambiguous definition.

    annex: n. addition to a building or document – (1)
    addendum: n. additional text added to document – (2)

    I can identify annex from definition (1), but I can think of both annex and addendum from definition (2).

    ex. 2)
    flexible: adj. capble of bending – (1)
    pliable: adj. easily bent; flexible – (2)

    I can identify pliable from (2) because it lists flexible as a synonym, but I can think of both flexible and pliable from (1), because it doesn’t exclude pliable as a synonym.

  • Type D: Distinguable
    It confuses me because I am stupid :slight_smile:

Next time I will classify words with above categories. I think we should focus on type A and B. I think that narrows list in half and fixing those definition will be nice improvement.

Update: I just added @duaal and @stream_nine90 as contributors. Welcome aboard and happy editing. Just make sure to check out my guidelines for editors.

Hi all.

Here is the classified version of confusing words list.

Type X is temporary category that means:

  • definitely NOT type A
  • probably NOT type B
  • maybe C or D

I also attach link to dictionaries and definitions from vocabulary list that I can find on the Internet. “sat6000” is from here, “sat5000” is from here, “barron3500” is, I believe, from well known book.

Next, I start writing in new definitions from type A words, but I won’t change database for a while. I want you to review new definitions before do that.

Hi, everyone.

I start writing first few groups and create several pattern of them.
I want your opinion before I go further.

  • Original
    for reference

  • Small Change
    Minimum change from original. List synonyms that is necessary to distinguish words.
    PRO: minimum confusion for learners.
    CON: not following new guideline.

  • Midium Change
    Rewrite definition if appropriate. List synonyms that exists in the course.
    PRO: more elaborate than original.
    CON: still not follwing new guideline.

  • Big Change 1
    Follow the new guideline. Have multiple definitions. Have a lot of synonyms.
    PRO: following new guideline
    CON: too much information. “alias” have 3 (adverb, verb, noun) different part of speech, chooing which one for audio might be a problem for similar words.

  • Big Change 2
    Remove synonyms from Big Change 1
    PRO: less information,
    CON: still too much information

  • New Approach 1
    Use attribute for part of speech, grammatical note, etc. No synonym unless it is necessary. Allow duplicated word for different part of speech.
    PRO: definition become bit simpler. solves “alias” problem.
    CON: not following new guideline. still too much information.

  • New Approach 2
    Remove sublevel ex) 1.1. , 1.2.
    PRO: starting to feel like appropriate amount of information
    CON: not following new guildeline.

I think there is a reason why we don’t put too much information on memory cards. Above from Big Change 1 (possibly Medium Change too) look like different course from the current one to me. If we want drastic change, I think we should create a separate couse, so current learners don’t get confused.

What do you think?

You’re putting a lot of thought into this, which is good or we might end up doing extra work when changing our minds about the setup of the course later.

I prefer New approach 2 but with not setting up a whole new course. This course had over a thousand learners just last week. You can’t let all those learners start again from scratch. Most of them probably would not even realize there would be a new and improved course. Because they are on the app or even on the web but have never found the new forums.

For implementing New approach 2 we would need extra attribute columns set to Show at tests though. And since we can’t add them ourselves we would have to ask Memrise staff to do that for us.

Hi, all.
How about this.

Instead of overwriting current definition, we add new ones as new items. Then, we create a new level for old definitions (let’s call it “Obsolete” level) and move old items into it.

By doing this way,

  • Current learners can choose to learn new item and ignore old one, or stick to old item and ignore new one.
  • By putting “Obsolete” level at the end, new learners will naturally learn new definitions.

Caveat is that mems people attached to the old items won’t appear to new items.

Guys, it’s just a guideline, no need to adhere to it strictly. Also, the example I provided is just that - an example. An item does not have to contain all that (synonyms, multiple definitions and meanings etc.) As long as you add stuff only where needed, you can keep certain items pretty much intact. Also, there’s no need to keep the originals - if they required a change there’s no point in keeping them in the first place. :slight_smile: Thanks for the hard work though, it is appreciated. @stream_nine90

Made a start by removing one of each of the duplicates from your list (X in picture) from the database. Except for polemic and polemics. Most dictionaries give a subdefinition for the plural form.

Then added audio for the remaining words. I’ve not edited the definitions. Just added the alternative galvanise for galvanize.

Hi, all.

Thank you, that helps me.

I have no problem.

In the meanwhile, I was taking a backup of the course.
Here is links if you are interested. RAW data, CSV
I will spend a few more days around it, and move on to writing of definitions.

Hi @oneyedananas and @stream_nine90

Yesterday I sent a polite request to Lien to add these extra columns.
At my request she has now:

  • added two columns in the course for us Extra information and Synonyms set to Show at tests,
  • removed the empty columns Pronunciation and Gender.

These new columns give us a lot of extra room.

1 Like

Hi all.

This is good. Thank you duaal and Lien.

Hi everyone.

I’m sorry to be late, I was a little busy recently.
Anyway, here is the first batch of new definitions. It covers words that have literary same definitions.

Please review it when you have time.
I don’t plan to apply change to the course yet. I’ll keep writing other definitions before I do that.

Hi @stream_nine90,

What did you use to make this backup?

I’ve looked at just three words from your “carefree” group sofar.


My suggestions:

improvident (not foreseeing and providing for the future) is slightly related to happy-go-lucky but no synonym.

@oneyedananas, @stream_nine90,

In the meantime I’ve been adding audio to the words. Sofar 200 handpicked pieces of audio from Forvo and several dictionaries, many of them edited for cleaner audio. For each word there are at least two voices, male and female if available. And some extra audio for pronunciation variations.


I wrote a script.

Yeah. I list “improvident” there for disambiguation. Because I can think of it from the definition “not worry about the future” too.
I didn’t change “improvident”'s definition, because I can safely rule out “happy-go-lucky” from “improvident”'s definition.

Maybe if we add “cheerfully” to the definition of “happy-go-lucky” like Oxford dictionary do, we can rule out “improvident”.

Same situation can happen to other words too, when word A has broader meaning than word B. In situation like that, we need some kind of hint for disambiguation. We don’t need such a thing if we are writing a dictionary, because in distionary, word and definition always come together.

Also, I fogot to mention about use of attribute “Synonyms”. I tried that, but it looks confusing with other attributes on Memrise. And in case of multiple definition, each definition might have different synonyms. I find that problematic too. Let’s keep the database layout for a while. Maybe I’ll change mind or we’ll find other use of it.

Don’t we need to worry about copyright situation?

Hi all.

Before I forget, I post rest of my memos.
These are items I think it has a mistake.

Spread Sheet

Most courses use audio from Forvo (or some TSS but they do not always sound right). There was already some audio from Forvo present in the course.


I see.

Here is my recent update.

Hi all.

Here is the latest update.

Any comment will be appreciated.


Here is the latest update of new definitions.

I also collect items that doesn’t have a part of speech neither as an attribute nor in its definition.