As per this [definition](https://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book-Z-H-10.html#%_sec_1.1.5), it defines applicative and normal order evaluation in one form saying:

>> This alternative ``fully expand and then reduce'' evaluation method is known as normal-order evaluation, in contrast to the ``evaluate the arguments and then apply'' method that the interpreter actually uses, which is called applicative-order evaluation.

while as per this [explaination](https://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/sicp/book/node85.html), it defines the other way around 

>> applicative-order language, namely, that all the arguments to Scheme procedures are evaluated when the procedure is applied. In contrast, normal-order languages delay evaluation of procedure arguments until the actual argument values are needed

They both contradicts.

Does these definitions means one and the same or its vice versa to you as well?