It has been determined that the vast majority of studies conducted in the studies and researches directed to the review and criticism of the glossary were made with a linguistic point of view. In dictionary reviews, dictionaries are often seen as language material and dictionary; the vocabulary of the period in which it was written, the phonological and morphological characteristics of the period, and so on. were taken from the fronts. There is no comprehensive theoretical study on the structure and function of the dictionary in the studies conducted under the heading of 'Lexicographical analysis. It is important to establish theoretical and objective examination and criticism methods since the main purpose of dictionary reviews and criticisms is to improve the dictionary on a scientific basis and to enable the user to better respond to their needs. The Modern Theory of Lexicographic Functions (Bergenholtz, 1996, 1998; Tarp, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002; Bergenholtz/Kaufmann, Bergenholtz/Tarp 2002) sets the user-dictionary relation at the center of lexicographical studies and based on the arrangement of the structures in the dictionary and the functions of these structures in the framework of user needs. In this study, according to the ‘The Modern Theory of Lexicographic Functions’, a dictionary called Mehmet Şevket es-Sayyid's Eser-i Şevket, written in 1851, was examined in relation to how to organize the basic structures of the dictionary according to the userdictionary relation It has been determined that the vast majority of studies conducted in the studies and researches directed to the review and criticism of the glossary were made with a linguistic point of view. In dictionary reviews, dictionaries are often seen as language material and dictionary; the vocabulary of the period in which it was written, the phonological and morphological characteristics of the period, and so on. were taken from the fronts. There is no comprehensive theoretical study on the structure and function of the dictionary in the studies conducted under the heading of ‘Lexicographical analysis. It is important to establish theoretical and objective examination and criticism methods since the main purpose of dictionary reviews and criticisms is to improve the dictionary on a scientific basis and to enable the user to better respond to their needs. The Modern Theory of Lexicographic Functions (Bergenholtz, 1996, 1998; Tarp, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002; Bergenholtz/Kaufmann, 1997; Bergenholtz/Nielsen, 2002; Bergenholtz/Tarp 2002) sets the user-dictionary relation at the center of lexicographical studies and based on the arrangement of the structures in the dictionary and the functions of these structures in the framework of user needs. In this study, according to the ‘The Modern Theory of Lexicographic Functions’, a dictionary called Mehmet Şevket es-Seyyid's Eser-i Şevket, written in 1851, was examined in relation to how to organize the basic structures of the dictionary according to the userdictionary relation. In this study, Eser-i Şevket, written by Mehmed Şevket es-Seyyid, was examined from the point of “The Modern Theory of Lexicographic Functions”. In this review; By moving from its front matter, preface and organization of macro and microstructure, it has been determined that Eser-i Şevket (EŞ) is a pun dictionary, In addition, according to Atkins and Rundell’s point of view (2008: 24-25) EŞ is a monolingual dictionary, it was written in Ottoman Turkish, size of this dictionary is standard and also is a printed dictionary. The target population is poets who write in Ottoman Turkish. The dictionary, performs the function of using the word in the right context. The author of EŞ stated in the preface that in this dictionary, the words which hattî cinâs (type of pun which based on the use of dotted letters, subtype of lafzî cinâs) and lafzî cinâs (type of pun which based on the use of letters) are listed. Although there are different examples with different dotted letters in this dictionary related to hattî cinâs, these headwords were not included as much as other puns in dictionary. In the dictionary, the most common type of pun is the muharref cinas (type of pun which based on Arabic letters’ vowel points). The macrostructure arrangement of the EŞ is quite convenient to find examples of this type. EŞ is the first and unique example of its type in Turkish lexicography. Although many works have been written in Arabic literature on the art of pun, these works are mostly reference sources related to eloquence. Macrostructure of EŞ adopts the alphabetical principle arranged according to Arabic alphabet, this alphabetical arrangement has been customized for the purposes of the dictionary by the dictionary writer. In the work, the headwords are located at the end of the previous entry, not on the right side of the page and not down from the top (according to the Arabic alphabet), and the only sign that separates the headword from the item is the heading in parentheses. That is, if the dictionary is prepared in plain text format, it is difficult to find a headword and to use the dictionary. EŞ was benefited from several important books written before it. The dictionary writer mentioned this in the preface but because it is the first example to be written, the dictionary writer of EŞ has benefited from important general purpose dictionaries of the period in which it was written, not the same kind of dictionaries that were written before itself. There are many hidden quotations and allusions in EŞ. In this study, no statistical data about the hidden quotations and allusions were collected but it was found that the dictionary writer benefited from some other dictionaries while the work was transcribed. The hidden quotations and allusions in the dictionary are of a kind and contextual change according to the user and the dictionary. In EŞ, many headwords are word-forms. The reason why the he