I appreciate the Google Search free dictionary, but I have found the service to be, well, terrible. If you have not tried it yet, type any single word in Google Search, and usually, Google will show the word's definition as the first item. I suspect, however, that Google definitions derive from the colloquial use of the word, culled from the Internet ecosphere, and do not represent the curated meaning of the word. Such is the problem when 'facts' have been democratized through social networking.
The Google definitions also provide a short etymology, which is admirable, but Google does not indicate the source. There can be a chasm of difference between The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) definitions versus Merriam-Webster or Random House. The Google definitions are primitive, and marginally inaccurate, the equivalence of a Neanderthal grunt.
Recently, for example, I sought to describe a counter-party in a negotiation as 'circumspect.' Google defines 'circumspect' as "to be wary and unwilling to take risks." That would be hardly complimentary. Nor would it reflect the true meaning of the word. The Random House definition is:
1. watchful and discreet; cautious; and
2. well-considered.
BIG difference. The Google definition is unflattering, and connotes my counter-party to be an indecisive putz, whereas the true definition describes someone who is admirably prudent.
It would helpful if Google would publish the source institution that provided the definition, but even more helpful if the definitions were accurate. Words matter.
Wayne Weddington