<< I have to say when I read Pynchon, even during a reread of one of his novels, I have to keep a dictionary handy. Preferably, the OED if I *had* one, but I'll settle for my "Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary", weighing in at some 8, 9 pounds. Pynchon has to have the widest vocabulary of any fiction writer I've ever read save Joyce. Where the HELL did he ever find "quaquaversal" (page 238 of "Mason & Dixon")? I haven't read any Burgess, but I can't imagine he surpassed TRP in the Vocab department. Salinger seems like his vocabulary is more limited to me than other writers. Cheers, D.>> Yeah, I love Pynchon too, but I don't recall having to look Quite so often with him as with Burgess. Pynchon's use of language creates not only characters, but an entire atmosphere, a whole culture. Burgess creates, it seems, a particular kind of character (in the TEENY LITTLE BIT I've read :) ), all of whom have incredible vocabularies in contemporary English (this century, at least). Salinger creates a single mind with his use of language ;) Jim ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]