When would one need a paper dictionary even if smartphone etc. are available?

When one’s electronic infrastructure isn’t working (battery, device, network, ISP, power), or when one wants a trusted familiar well-edited source that doesn’t require a subscription or login to get all the content, or when one prefers to use paper, or doesn’t want the possibility of what you looked up being tracked and recorded, or one doesn’t want to be charged for such services, or when the device is being used by others for other things (as a phone or the other 10,000 things those devices do) or when the teacher made you turn off your devices or confiscated them.

@Zaku Excellent answer.
@stanleybmanly I thought so.

I guess when he or she wants to get a thorough definition, etymology, synonym, antonym without having to squint at a tiny screen…like we did in the old days.

I trust my paper dictionaries far more than the electronic/internet ones. And my old “The New Century Dictionary”, 1944 edition, has definitions that aren’t shown in newer types, and the artwork is AWESOME!!
And my internet connection is slow, so finding definitions the old fashioned way is far speedier, for me.

If your electronic gadgets are available then I can’t think of any reason.

@Pachy… in the old days the print wasn’t tiny. Only for old people was the print tiny! Remember? ;)

I hadn’t thought about it before, but the internet must surely have destroyed the market for reference books. I wonder if you can even buy a set of encyclopedias.

The paper dictionary can be used when one wants to browse and increase one’s vocabulary.. I used to love flipping through pages and looking at all the possibilities..

Now, spell check corrects me and I only learn the words I already know.

I have one or two paper dictionaries. They are more reliable than electronic versions in terms of access and content. I also occasionally use them for browsing which you can’t really do online.

I have a giant paper dictionary that I stand on to reach stuff on upper shelves.
And if the power is out and I don’t want to use power on devices for that.

Comprehensive and properly-edited bound dictionaries are one of the best places to learn language. As great as it is to be “able to” click on a word and do an online search for a definition, how many people do you know who actually and regularly do that? Most people these days seem to believe that they can pick up a word’s definition from context (and to a certain extent that is possible), but reading and comprehending a full definition of a word – sometimes including its etymology, which adds to understanding, and including examples of the word as used in publication, which good dictionaries do routinely, is incomparably better. (Even worse is the habit of some people to simply ignore works that have unknown words as “not worth the time” to understand.)

And nothing beats a bound dictionary for the ability to browse it and learn new words at random.

I had a hard back dictionary growing up. A couple of times I sat and read it from cover to cover. It also cover the origin of languages in the back, and that was fascinating.

@Dutchess_III, my last seven words were incorrectly placed. I meant:

I guess when he or she wants to get a thorough definition, etymology, synonym, antonym LIKE WE DID IN THE OLD DAYS without having to squint at a tiny screen.

I would say it would depend on the circumstance more than anything else. For instance, if you’re doing an essay stressing vocabulary for a class in university, and the teacher requires a print source, as opposed to an app on your phone. Or, if you’re looking for that old-world tone of 20 years ago before online dictionaries appeared, then yeah, a print dictionary is useful.

For me, as a writer, I tend to like the print, as it feels more in depth and official, than some app on my phone that has filtered the terminology into modern terms. So, I use my print dictionary than electronic :)

(“tome.” Just sayin’.)

@Dutchess_III, actually, “tone” makes more sense in that sentence.

I see. What is “old world tone?” I mean, if it’s from 20 years ago I should recognize it.

Less affected by modern slang and usage.

Hm. Well, how would a printed dictionary help with that?

Re. @Pachy‘s “I guess when he or she wants to get a thorough definition, etymology, synonym, antonym without having to squint at a tiny screen…like we did in the old days.” ,
whether ithe words are “incorrectly placed” or not the mesage is clear.

@Dutchess_III, definitions and usage examples are constantly shifting in today’s world with capabilities for instant revision available.

Not wise to proudly declare :
I got rid of my paper dictionary ages ago.

That’s true. Take the word “gay” for example. It didn’t mean homosexual when I was growing up. In fact, I knew a girl whose name was “Gay.”

Not wise to declare
I don’t need to read and learn from other people’s great answers

* Looking atound * Who said that?

For examinations.

Well, that would depend on the exam, too. If they ask you to define something they defined in class, they wouldn’t want to you look it up in a dictionary.

When your spelling is so atrocious you are no where close to getting it right. Then ONLY a paper dictionary can bail you out.

The hardcopy can be nicer to handle, and easier to browse. The better ones are also more comprehensive. They’re usually quicker to access, thanks to slow UIs.

(Uls?) Is that related to ROUSs?