From the Johnson etymology discussion, which statement best describes the role of etymology in dictionaries?

• A. It could be waste of time.
• B. It should be studied extensively.
• C. It is not relevant.
• D. It is the sole focus of dictionary work.

Answer: (A)

In the Johnson etymology discussion, the role of etymology in dictionaries is treated as a practical consideration rather than an absolute necessity. Etymology can be informative, but its value depends on the dictionary’s purpose and audience. For many users, the essential content is current meanings, usage, pronunciation, and clear examples; digging deeply into word origins can consume time and space without adding proportional utility. That’s why the point that it could be waste of time best fits the discussion: etymology may be included or emphasized in some contexts, but it isn’t always the priority, and overemphasizing it can detract from the dictionary’s practical aims. The other options push toward extremes—that etymology must always be studied, that it’s irrelevant, or that it’s the sole focus—neither of which aligns with a balanced, usage-focused view of dictionary work.