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 this [explanation](https://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/sicp/book/node85.html) 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 seem to contradict each other. Do these definitions mean the same thing?