Systematic Introduction Preliminary Remark ................................................... 124 1 What is Meant by Lexicography and Dictionary Research ? § 1 Lexicography as Cultural Practice .................................. 125 § 2 Lexicography and its Characteristic Forms............................ 125 § 3 Lexicography and Other Subject Areas of Dictionary Research ............. 127 § 4 Research Areas in Dictionary Research .............................. 129 2 How, for What, and for Whom are Dictionaries Made ? § 5 General Features of Lexicographical Processes in Printed Language Dictionaries .................................................. 130 § 6 The Preparation Phase in Lexicographical Processes ..................... 132 § 7 The Data Collection Phase ....................................... 133 § 8 The Data Editing Phase ......................................... 135 § 9 The Data Analysis Phase ........................................ 136 § 10 Specific Features of Computer-Assisted Lexicographical Processes .......... 137 § 11 Special Features of Computerised Lexicographical Processes .............. 141 3 How are Dictionaries Made ? § 12 Constitutive Features, Genuine Purposes, and Dictionary Functions .......... 142 § 13 The Components of a Dictionary Beyond Dictionary Articles .............. 145 § 14 The Components of Dictionary Articles .............................. 149 § 15 Textual Structures in Dictionaries : Basic Concepts and Possibilities of Presentation ........................ 158 § 16 Data Distribution Structures ...................................... 163 § 17 Text Compound Structure........................................ 164 § 18 Microstructures ............................................... 165 § 19 Items Structures and Addressing Structures ........................... 172 § 20 Search Area Structures .......................................... 175 § 21 Text Architectures ............................................. 179 § 22 Macrostructures ............................................... 183 § 23 Access Structures.............................................. 188
5 How are Dictionaries Used ? § 31 Procedures of Usage and Prerequisites to Investigate Them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 § 32 Usual and Non-Usual Situations of Dictionary Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 § 33 Types of Dictionary Users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 § 34 Opportunities for Usage and Contexts of Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
6 What is the Status of Lexicography in Society ? § 35 The Status of Dictionaries in Cultural Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 § 36 Problem Areas in the Relationship Between Lexicography and Society . . . . . . . 221 § 37 Dictionaries as Judged by the General Public . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
Preliminary Remark The Systematic Introduction to Lexicography and Dictionary Research written by the editors is a pivotal part of the learning component of this special-field dictionary. It was written with the backing of the contents of more than 5000 dictionary articles. At the end of all 37 paragraphs, the user will find cross-references to dictionary articles, which will deepen and broaden the ex-planations in the paragraphs. The user will find related subject-field literature in the articles, and will be cross-referred to additional articles. This layout of the dictionary enables the user to study the prevailing correlating sections of the terminology by means of systematic, dictionary-internal subject-field knowledge research.
1 What is Meant by Lexicography and Dictionary Research ? 125
1 What is Meant by Lexicography and Dictionary Research ?
§ 1 Lexicography as Cultural Practice
Lexicographical activities are directed towards the publication of dictionaries, and they form an important part of cultural processes in society. One can find rather controversial perspectives on questions about the status of lexicography, as well as on the details of all products related to lexicography, in all the different phases of international scientific involvement with dictionaries. For the conception of the present dictionary, a theoretical framework is decisive in which more than only features from the perspective of language systems and philology are taken into ac-count :
– Dictionaries are considered as part of a comprehensive lexicographical process, and viewed in relation to constellations of interests in society, individual circumstances of usage, and subject-field and other relationships of utilisation.
– Lexicography is valid as an autonomous cultural practice, which is oriented towards the origination of dictionaries as articles for usage. Their existence allows for another cultural practice, which should definitely be taken into account, namely, the use of lexicographical reference works.
– The different forms of scientific engagement with lexicography (as well as those which can be ad-dressed as non-scientific) are not themselves part of lexicography. Rather, they form its meta-area—as process-external scientific engagement with its facts ; this scientific part is called metalexicography.
Lexicography in its different forms (cf. § 2) is given empirically as a set of complete lexico-graphical processes, or processes still in progress. They form the central part of the subject area of dictionary research and a general theory of lexicography, from which its scientific objects are extracted for scientific areas of research (cf. § 5).—In the same way, each dictionary has a sub-ject area, from which the subject matter of the dictionary (entire single languages, individual varieties, language units of different types, special-field terms, symbols, etc.) is determined by the particular point of view taken and essentially dictated by the dictionary’s membership to a specific dictionary type.
On the uppermost level of classification within the framework of an approach oriented towards types of dictionary subject matters, one can distinguish between different partial areas of lexi-cography : language lexicography, subject lexicography and encyclopaedic lexicography. As a criterion for the distinction, one can state that lexicographical reference works (and other objects of use ; irrespective of who uses them) are used according to their genuine purposes (cf. § 12) ; here, in order to disclose information about the particular subject of the reference work by means of the lexicographical data : language-lexicographical purposes are present when one essentially needs to (or can) find out something about linguistic features of expressions by means of appro-priate comments in dictionaries (language lexicography with language dictionaries) ; subject lexicographical purposes are present when the perspective of the comments is such that one can
126 Systematic Introduction
obtain answers about corresponding non-language objects (in short : objects) (subject lexicogra-phy with subject dictionaries). Lexicographical reference works, which fulfil both language and subject genuine purposes in equal measure, are called encyclopaedic dictionaries, and the corre-sponding type of lexicography is called encyclopaedic lexicography. This classification is ori-ented towards types of subject matters in dictionaries as they are distinguished on the uppermost level of a phenomenological dictionary typology ; accordingly, it is a very rough distinction, but it closely resembles the approach of dictionary classification amongst the educated public. Other forms of dictionary classification, which have developed as independent partial areas, can be linked to user-related dictionary typologies, such as learners’ lexicography (for beginners, ex-perienced and advanced learners) and special-field lexicography (for lay persons, semi-experts and experts). Some classifications of dictionaries relevant to dictionary research such as, for example, classification according to dictionary functions (cf. § 27), have not yet resulted in the development of clearly distinguishable independent partial areas of lexicography (such as per-haps text reception lexicography or text production lexicography).
One can assign three types of metalexicography to the three types of lexicography distin-guished above, according to the types of dictionary subject matter : dictionary research, lexicon research and encyclopaedic dictionary research. Metalexicography is used as a generic term for the entire meta-area, which comprises more than the three types of lexicography (cf. § 4). In contexts where the distinction between different types of lexicography is not important, one can use the expressions dictionary research and metalexicography as synonyms.
The membership of an individual actual dictionary to one of these forms of lexicography can usually only be determined by a detailed analysis (of the dictionary introduction, other text parts and the dictionary articles) ; there usually is no guarantee that the given title of the dictionary will directly correlate to its classification, in view of the heterogeneous practice of naming lexi-cographical products (in German, for example, „Lexikon“ (= “lexicon”) and „Wörterbuch“ (= “dictionary”) are used for language dictionaries as well as subject dictionaries).
One can distinguish two forms of presentation in lexicography regarding the appropriate level of claims made for particular lexicographical products : scientific lexicography and non-scientific lexicography. The first type is a cultural practice which can essentially only be mas-tered by academically educated staff ; on the other hand—in relation to the usual conception of being scientific—the forms of lexicographical activities which cannot be described as scientific, can be autodidactically learnt as a cultural practice.
In the planning and arrangement of dictionaries, especially within the area of scientific lexi-cography, one needs practice-specific qualifications in which insights from partly totally differ-ent sciences play a role as resources. Theory-based reflections consequently accompany the lexicographical practice in this, without, however, these reflections being of a metalexicographi-cal nature, i.e. oriented towards scientific theory-building. Traditionally, especially the products of e.g. scientific language-lexicographical practice and lexicology are in a relation of mutual giving and taking. Language lexicography, however, is consequently not simply a branch of lexicology, a branch of linguistics, or applied linguistics.
In all the forms of presentation of lexicography (especially scientific lexicography) men-tioned so far, several academic disciplines can simultaneously serve as providers of data for one and the same dictionary. Academic disciplines, sub-disciplines and fields of study can be desig-nated as data providers if they are taken into account in lexicographical processes. Further dif-
1 What is Meant by Lexicography and Dictionary Research ? 127
ferentiations can be made between the relationship of the scope of the dictionary subject matter and the scopes of the subject matter of the particular disciplines.
When looked at exclusively from the point of view of data presentation (and irrespective of previous lexicographical processes), dictionaries are complex statistical information systems : special-field experts in the field of data-providing disciplines and sub-disciplines can recognize the results of their research in the details of dictionaries of scientific lexicography as the case may be ; and lay users of dictionaries can benefit by appropriately falling back on the best avail-able scientific results, although it would be totally dependent on their successful access into the data they requested.
Finally, one can furthermore draw the following distinction within scientific language lexi-cography : language-system lexicography and text lexicography. In the first type, language dic-tionaries are compiled for individual language systems (of English, German, etc.), or for one or more excerpts of such language systems, by taking into account the usage of units, especially in usual texts. In text lexicography, on the other hand, language reference works are compiled es-pecially on (a) particular written text(s) which form(s) the lexicographical corpus at hand. As in language-system lexicography, sub-classifications can be made according to the nature of spe-cialisation : one of the branches of text lexicography is author lexicography ; indices and concor-dances also resort under the products of text lexicography, but are often simply designated as “dictionaries”.
§ 3 Lexicography and Other Subject Areas of Dictionary Research
The first main part of the research field in dictionary research is lexicography in its recorded and other forms. A further differentiation in determining the status of lexicographical processes has to take account of the distinction between (computer-assisted and not-computer-assisted) lexico-graphical processes and computerized lexicographical processes : computer-assisted lexico-graphical processes are—like those which are not computer-assisted—part of the production process oriented towards editing data for further intellectual processing by a human user (cf. § 5). Computerized lexicographical processes, on the other hand, are partial processes in soft-ware development processes, and are oriented towards preparing data to be further processed by a computer (cf. §§ 5, 11). These processes are conceived, in contradistinction to (language) lexi-cography, within the framework of an independent scientific practice—computer lexicography ; computer lexicons are therefore only considered as being on the periphery of the empirical study field in dictionary research.
Dictionary products compiled in lexicographical processes can be printed dictionaries or digital ones (cf. §§ 10, 30). Computer assistance in lexicographical processes can already be incorporated into the dictionary plan and specified in more detail (especially in lexicographical processes in which the aim is media-neutral modelling of the data to be treated lexicographi-
128 Systematic Introduction
cally ; cf. § 10), but it could also only be initiated in order to convert a lexicographical process without computer assistance into one that is assisted by computer.
Many phases of computer-assisted lexicographical processes do not correspond to any partial phases of the lexicographical process without computer assistance (for example, the phase of semantic modelling of lexicographical data in media-neutral lexicographical processes ; cf. § 10). The principle of lexicographical text constitution is, however, valid in equal measure for computer-assisted lexicography and lexicography which is not assisted by computer. In printed lexicographical processes, at least one written lexicographical text is formulated, for purposes of compiling a printed dictionary on several language items ; in media-neutral lexicographical processes, representatives of specific data types (which should function on the level of presenta-tion as items giving characteristic features of a unit within the scope of the dictionary subject matter) are extracted from the database for presentation, and they are edited into presentable partial texts and ordered according to specific guidelines (cf. § 25).
An additional crucial research field—linked to the above-mentioned characterisation of lexi-cography—can be identified in relation to the generally prevailing user prerequisites for lexico-graphical practice : the user prerequisite entails that dictionaries were and are always only com-piled for the sake of being used. Accepting this condition, which can be specified according to membership to a specific dictionary type, forms the basis by means of which one can justify the existence of lexicography as an autonomous cultural practice. The user prerequisite is the indis-pensable basis of legitimation for lexicographical practice, which is focused on the realisation of dictionaries. Thereby, from a practical point of view, lexicography serves the goal of promoting the cultural practice of dictionary usage ; dictionary research, on the other hand, serves this goal in a theoretical sense in that it provides scientific knowledge about dictionary usage—involving other disciplines—by means of which new dictionaries and new editions of existing dictionaries can be more valuable to users.
If a general theory of lexicography wishes to observe not only descriptive duties but also pre-scriptive duties with regard to lexicographical practice (especially those which can lead to dic-tionaries being more valuable to users), one consequently will have to take into account that dictionary use will also have to be placed in the field of study in dictionary research. Apart from lexicography, the activities related to dictionary use, therefore, are also an additional crucial part of the object of study in dictionary research. It is empirically given as an unspecified number of individual procedures of usage which usually do not produce written results, and which do not include procedures of text compilation or writing—in contradistinction to lexicographical proc-esses and their resulting formulations.
Dictionary research which is obliged to follow a text-theoretical and an action-theoretical approach in the broader sense, however, consequently also has to bear in mind its own theoreti-cal past in a self-reflecting manner, and has to incorporate this into the consideration of subject areas for dictionary research ; after all, current dictionary research is legitimised by an almost unassessable amount of works on lexicography and dictionary use. Because of this, the available scientific and non-scientific works dealing with lexicography and dictionary use are considered as partial areas of the subject area of dictionary research : together, they form an additional part of the subject matter in dictionary research. Based on the products of lexicography—which can be considered for their part as (partially very complex) texts—and based on the textually-presented interim results of lexicographical processes, we have to do with secondary texts. Lan-
1 What is Meant by Lexicography and Dictionary Research ? 129
guage-reflective references of this kind (which can be considered as part of a meta-area) can also be focused on activities of usage (the second, crucial part of the object of study in dictionary research), which are only very rarely exteriorised for their part by means of protocols of these activities.
Dictionary research entails the totality of scientific engagements to supply appropriate answers to dictionary-related questions from theoretical, methodological, terminological, historical, documentation, didactic and culture-pedagogical points of view.
For the purposes of building a general theory of lexicography, one needs a theoretical ap-proach to the different individual aspects, which can then establish a unified theoretical basis for the details, which have to be taken into consideration. Because of the textual presentation of lexicographical results, and the references to such results found in equal measure in texts and the processes, which preceded them (the activities of which can be interpreted as actions), this can only be a text-theoretical and action-theoretical approach (cf. also §§ 12 and 31).
According to the current state of affairs, dictionary research can be divided into the following four research areas :
– Systematic dictionary research – Research on dictionary use – Historical dictionary research – Critical dictionary research.
The object of study in systematic dictionary research is research into invariant features of lexi-cographical processes. Theoretical statements about the characteristics of dictionaries and their classification resort under this.
The theoretical part of systematic dictionary research particularly entails the following as-pects : The theory of lexicographical data processing, the theory of lexicographical text carriers, the theory of dictionary classification.
The theory of lexicographical data processing consists in providing principles (and their cor-responding methods) regarding data provision, data editing and data analysis (cf. § 7ff.).—The text theory of lexicographical text carriers is as such very complex : dictionaries are text carriers consisting of texts of different types (word lists, phased-in inner texts, front matter and back matter texts of the most diverse kinds, and many more), which form a coherent unity according to certain given culture-specific conventions. Here, one can essentially distinguish between structure-related and object-related aspects ; the partial theories on dictionary structure and on the dictionary subject matter are relevant here.—The first part of the theory is a formally worked-out theory on the structures of lexicographical texts and text parts (macro- medio- and microstructures, as well as structural types which will additionally have to be differentiated ; cf. §§ 15ff.). The latter part consists in researching characteristic features of expressions mentioned in a particular dictionary (comments on semantics, syntax, pragmatics ; illustrations ; textual
130 Systematic Introduction
facts ; cf. for this §§ 18ff.). The object of study of a theory of dictionary classification serves to develop typologies or classifications by means of which one can obtain an overview on the vari-ety of presentations of lexicographical results (cf. for this §§ 26–30).
Research into dictionary use is justified by the idea (cf. § 3) that the user-friendliness of fu-ture dictionaries can be enhanced by knowledge about the use of dictionaries (cf. §§ 31–34).
The subject area of historical dictionary research includes lexicographical processes in their historical particularities as well as the historical relationships they have with other lexicographi-cal processes, and other cultural processes. In discussion with previous lexicographic-historical works, this component of the theory strives to extrapolate perspectives, which are useful for current lexicographical practices, over and above its descriptive goals.
The main subject field of critical dictionary research can be classified under the scientific and non-scientific meta-area of lexicography (cf. § 2). In this component of the theory, founda-tions for a theoretically responsible criticism of lexicography have to be constructed. Especially the development of manageable standards for appraisal tests for dictionaries forms part of this.
2 How, for What, and for Whom are Dictionaries Made ?
§ 5 General Features of Lexicographical Processes in Printed Language Dictionaries
A comprehensive amount of practice-related subject knowledge about the production of printed dictionaries has been handed down since the discovery of book printing ; after all, for a long time, lexicographical processes were mainly processes of book production, a fact which has changed fundamentally in the past few decades because of the application of computer technol-ogy. In the meantime, however, computer systems are not simply tools used in the production of books, but they are media by means of which digital dictionaries can be published. These dic-tionaries can be marketed on digital data systems such as disks or CD-ROMs, or distributed on computer networks such as the Internet. Lexicographical processes therefore increasingly aim towards producing several digital and printed dictionary products from one and the same com-puter-managed database. In computer linguistics and information science, there are also proc-esses in which one can compile digitally stored lexicographical data collections containing lan-guage data in a machine-tractable format, for use in programs for machine-aided language proc-essing (e.g. for morphological analysis, for language generation, for machine-aided translation).
One firstly has to distinguish between lexicographical processes and computerized lexico-graphical processes in order to understand the changes related to the expansion of digital media, before one can start answering the question on how dictionaries are made :
– Lexicographical processes aim towards providing lexicographical data, which can be further processed intellectually by human language users. When computers are used to assist these processes, we call
2 How, for What, and for Whom are Dictionaries Made ? 131
them computer-assisted lexicographical processes. The results of lexicographical processes are called dictionaries, irrespective whether they are published in a printed or digital format.
– Computerized lexicographical processes aim towards providing lexicographical data for machine-assisted language processing. The results are called computer lexicons and they can be classified into sub-classes according to additional criteria (cf. § 30).
Computerized lexicographical processes are partial processes in the development of software within the field of language technology. They distinguish themselves significantly from lexico-graphical processes with regard to their goals and technical constraints, and form an independent research area in computer linguistics (which does not fall under the core field of research in dictionary research). The explanations in § 11 therefore focus on possible effects of synergy when lexicographers work together with computer lexicographers, as well as on common useful methods and tools. For the rest, this special-field dictionary focuses on lexicographical proc-esses, namely, especially book-producing processes which are well researched (§§ 6–9). § 10 explains tools and methods by means of which one can support lexicographical processes through computer technology.
In the next paragraphs, the comprehensive knowledge which was passed down about the production of printed dictionaries is systematically presented in its most essential parts, namely, by describing an ideal-typical lexicographical working process (in short : lexicographical proc-ess) resulting in a comprehensive printed language dictionary.
Each completed lexicographical process consists of a specific number of lexicographical ac-tivities (or : procedures) which are—objectively—related to each other and performed with a view to each other, in order for a specific dictionary, as text carrier, to result. In each lexico-graphical process of a more comprehensive nature, one finds a process of text processing which leads from the dictionary basis as lexicographical source data, via the provisional lexicographi-cal data, to the lexicographical end data as storage of data. The latter can e.g. consist of the word list of an alphabetical printed dictionary. Printing the dictionary, which was the result of this text processing process, does not form part of the lexicographical process. Rather, the printing proc-ess and the lexicographical process (which can be divided into individual sections if dealing with separate volumes) both form part of the comprehensive book production process of which the end results are cultural objects of use, namely, a specific number of dictionary copies (deter-mined by the number of copies printed).
As in the case of other production activities the results of which are objects for use, lexico-graphical procedures are also guided by previous subject knowledge about relevant features of the lexicographical products to be generated. Knowledge of the different product features en-ables a precise distinction between various types of lexicographical procedures. By means of this, one can also determine what kind of knowledge and skills will be needed when a person wants to complete these procedures successfully. This implies that the entire book production process, and consequently also the lexicographical process which is of special interest here, be-comes calculable, especially from the point of view of finances, staff provision and time con-straints. Calculability is consequently an important feature of lexicographical processes which also links to other features. Calculable processes can be divided into partial processes, so that they can be effectively controlled. In addition, they can be manipulated : one can to a large ex-tent compile dictionaries according to guidelines which can be listed in lexicographical instruc-tion books. If one has the necessary subject knowledge and production knowledge, the quality of
132 Systematic Introduction
the lexicographical processes, and their provisional and end results, can be tested. In addition, this also means that the individual lexicographical procedures as well as the entire course of a lexicographical process can be learnt. Altogether, consequently, it can be said that lexicographi-cal processes have the following features in common with other production processes : these processes can be calculated, analysed, monitored, manipulated, tested and learnt.
Each complete lexicographical process without computer assistance which can be regarded as part of systems lexicography (or : language lexicography) can be divided into the following five partial phases :
– the preparation phase – the data collection phase – the data editing phase – the data analysis phase – the preparation of setting and phase.
Next, the recurring components of the individual partial phases will be discussed one by one. The use of computers is discussed separately later (cf. §§ 10 and 11).
► computerlexikographischer Prozess [computerised lexicographical process], lexikographische Datenaufbereitung [lexicographical data processing], lexikographische Datenauswertung [lexico-graphical data analysis], lexikographische Datenbeschaffung [lexicographical data collection], lexikographischer Prozess [lexicographical process], Textträger [text carrier]
§ 6 The Preparation Phase in Lexicographical Processes
Greater lexicographical projects arise out of social and scientific needs or objectives. In the preparation phase, these result in a dictionary program, usually designed by a group of experts and interested parties—often interdisciplinary in nature. The first part of the preparation phase can therefore be regarded as the programming phase. This is followed by the planning phase, in a first step towards executing the program. In this second part of the preparation phase, the dic-tionary plan is worked out. This concerns an organized number of stipulations in which the guidelines of the dictionary program are treated in such a way that concrete regulations can be made for the practical lexicographical procedures to be followed ; these concern the entire or-ganisation of the lexicographical process as well as the conception of the content of the diction-ary. Accordingly, a dictionary plan consists of an organisational plan and a conception of the dictionary. The organisational plan consists of several partial plans, which include at least a financial plan, a staff plan, a work plan, a timeframe and a printing plan.
The conception of the dictionary is the actual lexicographical part of the dictionary plan. This should, according to its purpose, contain a general section consisting of a descriptive overview of the planned dictionary. The goals of the dictionary, the dictionary type, the potential users, the subject matter of the dictionary, the collection of lemmas, the data distribution in the entire dic-tionary (thus of the phased-in texts and the different outer texts in the front matter and back mat-ter) and the dictionary basis should at least be discussed. A lexicographical instruction book should follow the general part of the dictionary conception, being its central part. Instruction books must be related to the practice, and should be compiled as guidelines for procedures. They can be compiled in different ways, but they should contain at least four chapters : the first on the dictionary basis as lexicographical source data ; the second on the provisional lexicographical
2 How, for What, and for Whom are Dictionaries Made ? 133
material ; the third on the preparation of the article texts and thus on the lexicographical end results ; and finally the fourth on the preparation for setting and printing. In each case, these chapters are related to one of the four phases of the lexicographical process without computer assistance, which follow one after another in the preparation phase.
In order for the plans to be executed on an empirical basis, it could be useful to include a lexicographical pilot study in the preparation phase. This could be related to different areas of the planned dictionary. It is especially important, however, to do pilot studies about the external size of the dictionary (thus on the collection of lemmas) as well as on the internal size of the dictionary (thus on the number of item types per dictionary article), in order to enable a realistic as possible estimation on the total size of the planned dictionary.
The construction of a dictionary plan for greater dictionary projects requires different aca-demic competencies, which means that it is best done by a team.
In the data collection phase, the aim of the lexicographical procedures is to compile a dictionary basis. A dictionary basis in a lexicographical process without computer assistance can be under-stood as the set of all sources for a dictionary. One can distinguish several types of sources : primary, secondary and tertiary sources. For specific dictionary types, the language competen-cies of the lexicographers involved and those of their informants could be regarded as a special type of source. The primary sources are, firstly, written texts or longer excerpts from texts in natural or quasi-natural situations of communication. Oral utterances recorded on sound sources can also be regarded as primary sources, but this is done less frequently. The set of written texts in a dictionary basis, which belong to the primary sources, form the lexicographical corpus. Consequently, this is always a text corpus in the sense of corpus linguistics, and usually consti-tutes only one specific part of the dictionary basis within systems lexicography. Secondary sources are all the dictionaries to be consulted according to the instruction book, either obliga-tory or optionally, especially in the data analysis phase. These dictionaries are also called source dictionaries. Lastly, the tertiary sources constitute all language material used, especially linguis-tic monographs, grammars, language atlases, and many more, which are related to the subject matter of the planned dictionary. The task to conceptualise and construct a dictionary basis dif-fers from one dictionary type to another, and has to be completed from scratch for each individ-ual dictionary. The appropriate construction of a dictionary basis essentially determines the qual-ity of the planned dictionary.
At least by the end of the data collection phase, when all the sources are actually available for use in the dictionary workplace, and when at least one outer access structure has been speci-fied for accessing the sources, so that it is clear how one can find which source—by means of e.g. a catalogue—the constructed dictionary basis forms the lexicographical source data. This thus consists of several databases to which the lexicographers can have access via several cata-logues, as intermediary sources to the documents of the lexicographical source data. A poten-tially expandable set of documents can be regarded as the data, in a broad sense (as in documen-
134 Systematic Introduction
tation science), for which the following set is valid : they have to share at least one feature ac-cording to their subject, have to be organised according to at least one ordering principle, and it should be possible to convert them into new data on the basis of at least one other feature. Documents are, for example : manuscripts, books, copies and filled-in questionnaires. Accord-ingly, data which could be regarded as sub-data of the lexicographical source data, are e.g. : collections of manuscripts, libraries or sections of libraries, collections of copies and card files with filled-in questionnaires.
In the process of data collection, one has to distinguish between data acquisition and data ab-sorption. When the data for a specific lexicographical process is directly drawn from the subject matter of the dictionary, e.g. by collecting it with questionnaires, or using similar process-external data which are not data from another lexicographical process (such as, for example, the archive of a magazine), we identify this as lexicographical data acquisition. If, on the other hand, one uses data from other lexicographical processes, this is lexicographical data absorption. Two cases can be clearly distinguished here :
1. When constructing the lexicographical source data, one draws on the lexicographical end data of one or more other lexicographical processes. This always is the case when constructing a database for the lexicographical source data with secondary sources, i.e. with other dictionaries serving as source dic-tionaries.
2. When constructing the lexicographical source data, one draws on the lexicographic source data and/or the provisional lexicographical data from one or more other lexicographical processes. By means of data absorption, several lexicographical processes are interlinked with one another.
Neither case (1) nor case (2) should be confused with the following possibility :
3. The lexicographical source data and the provisional lexicographical data are from the outset conceptu-alised and compiled in such a way that they can be used in the compilation of several dictionaries. This can be meaningful, for example, when these dictionaries have the same scope regarding their subject matter (e.g. contemporary standard German) but exhibit different dictionary subject matters because they belong to different dictionary types. In the case of (iii), there are several lexicographical processes which are different with regard to the preparation phase and the data analysis phase, but are similar with regard to the phases of data collection and data editing. There are many historical examples for these three characteristic cases. The comprehensive lexicographical process accompanying an individ-ual historical language presents a network of lexicographical processes which are not independent of each other, because the data absorption is to a great extent the same. These interdependent lexico-graphical processes may already be terminated (but can partly be opened up again with new editions of dictionaries), or can be terminated at present. When lexicographical processes are set into motion again, one has to do with dictionary maintenance, which can be done for many reasons.
The compilation of lexicographic source data requires that practical procedures have to be per-formed, apart from numerous scientific procedures—such as, for example, developing criteria for the selection of primary sources—for example, one has to order books, take them from the library, fetch them, arrange them on shelves ; or one has to compile catalogue cards and sort them, etc.
► lexikographische Ausgangsdatei [lexicographical source data], lexikographische Datenbeschaffung [lexicographical data collection], lexikographische Datenerhebung [lexicographical data acquisition], lexikographische Datenübernahme [lexicographical data absorption], lexikographische Quelle [lexi-cographical source], Wörterbuchbasis [dictionary basis], Wörterbuchpflege [dictionary maintenance]
2 How, for What, and for Whom are Dictionaries Made ? 135
§ 8 The Data Editing Phase
In the data editing phase, the aim of the lexicographical procedures is to compile a provisional lexicographical database in which the edited data is available in an organized format. Because dictionary articles are not normally written in such a way that, for example, if the lexicographer wants to add a lexicographical example to a lemma, he/she will select some document in a sub-database of the lexicographical source data that is regarded as a primary source, and look for a suitable citation text there. Rather, before writing the dictionary articles, especially the primary sources are processed in several steps first. That means that the inner selection, i.e. the selection of the language data from the lexicographical corpus which (can) become items in dictionary articles, is the result of two steps : in the first selection step, they land in the provisional data ; in the second step of the inner selection, which is only accomplished in the data analysis phase, they partly land in the lexicographical end data.
The next section deals with the first step of the inner selection. Traditionally, this consisted of constructing a card system, mainly of primary sources. All types of primary sources can be used for card systems, for example, manuscripts, interview protocols, all types of books, maga-zines and newspapers, etc. Making a card system can be done by hand or by a type-writer/computer. The result of making a card system is a set of written cards. From a documenta-tion-theoretical point of view, this is a card file system which is not sorted. Each such card is a non-accessible document in a potential card file system. This is a card file database, thus a spe-cial form of database. Depending on the guidelines in the instruction book, and determined by the particular dictionary type, the procedures to set up a card file system differ ; their results, which are the cards carrying the processed data, look very different regarding the details they present. For example, when one edits cards for a dialect dictionary using filled-in questionnaires, the procedures will be different from using a modern novel to edit cards for a general monolin-gual dictionary. One can also use photocopy machines when making cards ; the photocopies can then be cut and the excerpts which are considered as data can be pasted onto cards ; one can also make photos of the primary sources and cut the negatives into cards. The process of data editing can therefore be partially assisted by technical equipment. Lemmatisation or so-called normali-sation can go hand in hand with making the card file system. This usually happens, for example, in the process of data editing for comprehensive dialect dictionaries.
One of the most important lexicographical activities during the data editing phase is to make excerpts of the primary sources. This is done for various purposes, but most importantly so that the lexicographical statements about the lemma sign in the dictionary articles can be cited, and that the cited expressions can be interpreted in accordance with particular planned aspects (e.g. semantically in accordance with their meaning). Even though the guidelines for excerption in an instruction book can differ to a great extent, the most important result of excerption procedures is always a text excerpt ; this is a duplicate of an excerpt of the source text, and is called source excerpt (in short : excerpt). The excerpt segment, which is identical to the source text segment to be cited, is called a thematic excerpt segment. It becomes thematic in the excerpting process because at least one of its features should be cited. The actual carrier of an excerpt is at least one file card (called card in the language of the dictionary workplace).
By marking (e.g. underlining) the thematic excerpt segment and by adding an abbreviation of the source (which can e.g. consist of the planned citation title for the source and the page num-
136 Systematic Introduction
ber of the source text), the excerpt is transformed into a citation for the thematic excerpt seg-ment, for the purpose of citation. The file card then becomes a citation card ; and the ordered set of citation cards is a citation card index. The provisional lexicographical data can consist of one or more citation card indices.
In the guidelines for excerption one should also determine how to set up the citations. In ad-dition, it should be clearly stipulated which type of excerption should be chosen. For example, one should decide whether to undertake a mechanical excerption or an interpretative excerption.
Excerpts are seldom taken over into the dictionary exactly as they are written on the index card. Rather, the final citation texts, which become items giving the citation text in the diction-ary article during the data analysis phase, more often than not are extracts from the excerpts.
Once the provisional lexicographical data is constructed, the most important intermediate product on the way to the lexicographical end data is constructed, and the first step of the inner selection is finalized.
The analysis of the processed data consists—not exclusively, but mainly—of writing dictionary articles (in short : articles). How this is done, depends especially on the dictionary type to which the particular dictionary belongs, and therefore also on what is written in the particular instruc-tion book. It does not matter to which article type the particular article belongs : whoever writes dictionaries, has to follow the principle of lexicographical text constitution, according to which the following is valid : when a dictionary is compiled, a lexicographical text, which belongs to the text type of the dictionary articles, has to be formulated for the carriers of the guiding ele-ments. There are many different types of dictionary articles. The ones which appear most often in language lexicography are strongly standardized and highly condensed. Writing such articles can indeed take place in different ways ; what remains the same, however, is the fact that the particular pre-set textual structure of the article of a particular article type strictly determines the wording of a dictionary article. The individual textual article positions can, for example, be ed-ited in succession by only one lexicographer, which means that only he/she writes the entire dictionary article. Or the work can be organized in such a way that several compilers write an article in the following way : one e.g. compiles the position of the phonetics and formulates the items giving the pronunciation in phonetic signs ; a second one formulates the items giving the paraphrase of the meaning, and a third one compiles the co-text position. Another possibility is that the analysis of the data is done according to the parts of speech of the lemma signs : one compiles the noun articles, another the verb articles, and a third one the adjective articles, etc. Writing dictionary articles in lexicographical processes without computer assistance can also be organized in such a way that lexicographers can fill in ready-made forms for specific article types.
Especially when compiling the co-text position of a dictionary article, that is when selecting lexicographical examples and transforming them into items giving the citation, the second step of the inner selection is performed by drawing on the provisional lexicographical data. When all
2 How, for What, and for Whom are Dictionaries Made ? 137
articles are written, they are sorted according to the chosen macrostructural arrangement, e.g. strictly initially-alphabetically (cf. § 22). After that, the lexicographical end data is available. By adding planned insertions and/or outer texts, one obtains the typescript of the dictionary.
► lexikographische Datenauswertung [lexicographical data analysis], Prinzip der lexikographischen Textkonstituierung [principle of lexicographical text constitution], textuelle Artikelposition [textual ar-ticle position], Wörterbuchartikel [dictionary article]
§ 10 Specific Features of Computer-Assisted Lexicographical Processes
Lexicographical processes can be supported in all phases by computers ; which instruments and techniques will be used in a concrete situation depends on the available hardware and software equipment. Three concepts for the management, processing and publication of lexicographical data are very important regarding technical support by computers in lexicographical processes : data bank systems, hypertext and markup languages.
All the data inventories relevant to the lexicographical process—from the sources, via the provisional data up to the lexicographical end data—can be managed with flexibility and com-fort with data bank management systems. In addition, equipped with a user interface, the lexico-graphical end data can be directly published as a dictionary data bank (cf. § 30).
The writing and reading technology designated as hypertext supports users in their selective and self-directed reading process by presenting data on the screen as modules for autonomous reception, also called “nodes”, which are linked by computer-managed cross-references (the (hyper)links) to other modules. Links are represented on the screen by link indicators, and can be activated by the user with the click of the mouse. Even though printed dictionaries were al-ready converted into hypertext applications during the 1980s, the concept had only been recog-nised through the worldwide web (www), the hypertext platform on the Internet, for its potential for digital publication of lexicographical products. The publication of a hypertext dictionary on the internet brings about additional advantages, apart from flexible access to data and simple cross-referral supported by hyperlinks : the possibility of networking a dictionary with other sources published on the internet by means of external links, the worldwide availability, and the possibility to refresh the data quickly, as well as the uncomplicated communication with users per e-mail. The technology developed for the Internet to support hypertext projects, with com-pilers spread over different localities, offers new options for hypertext lexicography. Prominent examples for lexicographical use of wiki-technology are the online encyclopaedia “wikipedia” (http://www.wikipedia.org) and the online dictionary “Wiktionary” (http://www.wiktionary.org).
Markup languages support the management of metadata related to the structure and contents, which are explicitly coded as “markup” in documents, separately from the lexicographical data ; markups can therefore be used for the technical computer processing of documents, e.g. for pre-paring printing templates, or for specifying views into databases of digital dictionaries, which can be adapted according to the users. Marking documents with markup language is called anno-tating (also “tagging”) ; the markup documents which emerge are called annotated documents. An important standard for the definition of markup languages is the standard SGML (Standard Generalized Markup Language) of 1997, which was published in a simplified version with re-gard to electronic publications by the World Wide Web Consortium as XML (Extensible Markup Language) in 1998. On the basis of this, markup languages can be developed for several
138 Systematic Introduction
databases which are used in lexicographical processes. The Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) which is concerned with the development of standards for document annotation in the field of humanities, has submitted proposals for the annotation of dictionary structures which should simplify exchanges between dictionaries and which are used in many retrospective digitalisation projects of printed dictionaries.
The three concepts mutually complement each other : on the one hand, data bank systems are suitable for managing hypertext structures as well as managing documents with SGML and XML annotations, thus annotated lexicographical corpora or annotated dictionary texts. On the other hand, hypertext structures can also be modelled by means of markup languages ; a very well-known example for this is the Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) which was developed for the annotation of documents on the Internet.
What is important for all three conceptions is the fact that the conceptional data model can be separated from the specification for the presentation format of the data, in a printed version or on an electronic visual display unit, e.g. a computer monitor or a cellphone display. The pre-difference of the data modelling in contrast to the presentation of the data on a data-carrying medium allows for the generation of different “views”, using the same data, but which adapt with regard to their format and appearance, according to the user and situation-specific parame-ters. This possibility for separation also constitutes the technical prerequisite for media-neutral lexicographical processes, which aim at producing electronic and printed products from one and the same database in which only specific data types are extracted in each instance, and which are published in the appropriate format suited to the particular medium (cf. § 25). Even when the commercial advantages are obvious in this objective called “cross-media publishing”, several lexicographical processes are still based on retrospectively digitalized formats of printed dic-tionaries, which originally came into being as a result of printed lexicographical processes (with or without computers being involved), and which were only later on processed for cross-media publishing.
Even when computer-assisted data management enables more flexibility in the succession of steps during the work, and many partial procedures can be fully or partially automated, the clas-sification of lexicographical processes into five phases, as was taken as a basis in §§ 5–9, still provides a sound framework for sketching the essential techniques used in computer-assisted lexicographical processes, whether they are printed or media-neutral. Admittedly, the lexico-graphical processes as one can observe them in the formation of collaboratively produced online dictionaries such as the “Wiktionary” cannot be adequately described by the traditional classifi-cation of phases ; the steps they use have only been researched cursorily up to now.
The selection of hardware and software and the consideration of staff costs for the develop-ment and maintenance of software belong in the financial plan of the preparation phase of a computer-assisted lexicographical process. The organisational plan has to be expanded with questions about technical computer assistance of the “workflow” and the computer-assisted communication between the participants in the project, and should also contain aspects such as access rights to the provisional data and the end data, management of the different versions, and the data protection services. In the case of media-neutral lexicographical processes, the design of sample articles and the compilation of the corresponding instruction book is replaced or com-plemented by the compilation of a conceptual data model for the dictionary subject matter. A prerequisite for this modelling are the prescriptions for criteria for the inner and outer selection
2 How, for What, and for Whom are Dictionaries Made ? 139
of language data to be collected in the data collection phase from the lexicographical corpus, which should be taken into account in the dictionary. On the basis of the conceptual data model, one can then devise filters and views, related to the dictionary function, for presenting the data in digital dictionaries, or determine the dictionary structure in printed dictionaries. Because the conceptual model is ideally pre-different in contrast to the presentation format, several sample articles with different microstructures or article structures can be generated ; a final stipulation is essential in printed lexicographical processes only for reasons of estimating the comprehensive-ness, and that can still be changed during the process.
The changes in the lexicographical process during the phases of data collection and data compilation are decisive when the lexicographical corpus is managed by computer technology. One can draw on tools, methods and procedures from so-called corpus linguistics in the re-search, editing and analysis of text corpora. Corpus linguistics is a research area shaped by com-puter linguistics and it deals with the compilation, computer-technical management and linguis-tic editing of large collections of data (corpora) by means of citations (texts, audio-/video re-cordings, transcripts) of spoken and written language. For linguistic compilation, one uses pro-cedures of automatic annotation which can be either based on statistics, or on rules, or can com-bine the statistical and rule-based approaches. The compilation focuses on several aspects : the segmentation of a text into word forms (tokenisation) and the recognition of sentence borders, the automatic reduction of each word form to its root (automatic lemmatisation), the comprehen-sive morphological and phonological analysis of word forms (e.g. analysis of compounds) and the classification of word forms into morpho-syntactical categories, called “part-of-speech tag-ging” in English. The additional analysis of syntactic units based on this (in the process of “chunk parsing”) can be processed further with semi-automatic methods into a syntactically completely annotated corpus of sentence structures (called “treebank” in English), or into an annotated corpus with semantic categories.
The digital management of lexicographical corpora enables quantitative and qualitative analyses in the data analysis phase, which could not be done efficiently on conventional citation cards. If the lexicographical corpus is annotated in a linguistically subtle way, one can develop search tools, filtering tools and tools for analysis which can be integrated into the computer-assisted lexicographical workplace. With this, lexicographical descriptions can be placed on a sound empirical basis. According to the sophistication of the annotations in the corpus and ac-cording to the research tools that are available, the possibilities range from a simple analysis of frequency items to word forms and their correlation with parameters such as text types, time and place of origin, via systematic investigations into the combinatory potential of lemma signs (e.g. samples for word formation or collocations) right up to fine-grained quantitative and qualitative syntactic and semantic analyses. The description of present-day language can be kept topical by continuously expanding the corpus, in the sense that neologisms are identified and observed while they are in the process of being lexicalised.
Many long-ranging lexicographical processes were started without the aid of computers, but wanted to benefit from the advantages of computer technology at a later stage. One can therefore distinguish between lexicographical processes originally planned for computer assistance, and lexicographical processes which were reorganised to incorporate computer assistance at a later stage, in the already existing project. If the process of excerption is already finalised at the stage of restructuring the project, it is often not worthwhile to digitalise the lexicographical corpus in
140 Systematic Introduction
hindsight. Nevertheless, even only the digitalisation of the citation cards and their management in a data bank can enhance the data editing process, and can facilitate consistent processing by various lexicographers over a longer period of time. The strongly narrowed-down variation of reorganising lexicographical processes entails that only lexicographical end data themselves are managed in a structured format by a data managing system, ideally a data bank system, and that the editing of the articles is supported by input masks. The input masks can perform consistency tests, defining value ranges for specific article positions. In addition, as part of the work, they facilitate the organisation of the process of data analysis, just as in the case of “traditional” pro-cedures where ready-made forms are used (cf. § 8), that means editing is arranged according to lemma types and article positions. An advantage of the application of data bank systems is the computerised management of cross-reference relations in which articles and article positions are assigned to each other, bringing with it the possibility of automatic monitoring of cross-references. Cross-references consequently are not merely cognitive entities to be opened up by the user (cf. § 24), but they are available as data which can be managed by means of computer technology. One can formulate conditions for consistency and well-formedness and rules about these data according to which they have to appear in printed media in the form of items carrying cross-references, and in digital media in the form of link indicators.
In processes oriented towards printed lexicographical works, the phase of preparation for typesetting and printing consists in the final stipulation of the layout, and the preparation of the printing format template. In the case of digital dictionaries, this task is replaced by designing the user interface, the tools in it which enable access to the data and the presentation format of the data on a monitor (cf. § 25). In media-neutral lexicographical processes, one can obtain several printed or electronic products from one and the same database. Especially in the case of elec-tronic products, the same interface is normally used for several products, and marketed as a digi-tal compound of dictionaries with hyperlinks to each other. Such an approach is cost-effective for production, and accommodates users, who can access new data by means of familiar meth-ods and tools.
The planning of electronic products distinguishes itself from the planning of printed diction-aries with regard to one crucial point : whereas in the printed medium one has to save printing space, the storage space in digital media is not any longer a relevant cost factor. In this way, not only the lexicographic end data can be made available as a product, but also the corresponding edited lexicographical provisional data or the linguistically annotated lexicographic corpus itself. This enables users to trace the path from the dictionary articles to their sources, to reconstruct the decisions taken by the lexicographers, and to undertake their own independent research. If the lexicographical corpus and its provisional data can be available in digital format in this way, it will add additional value without considerable additional costs.
2 How, for What, and for Whom are Dictionaries Made ? 141
§ 11 Special Features of Computerised Lexicographical Processes
Computerised lexicographical processes have as an objective the construction of lexical data collections for language editing by machines, and we call these computer lexicons (cf. § 30). Since they form part of software development processes in the field of language and text tech-nology, they have other underlying constraints than the lexicographical processes which result in printed and digital dictionaries for human users. Computer lexicography is an independent, highly active research area in the overlapping area between computer linguistics, cognitive sci-ence and information science, and it does not fall in the core area of lexicography. In the follow-ing section, we therefore only look at the aspects of computerised lexicographical processes where computer lexicography makes use of lexicographical methods, or where the results of lexicographical processes have been processed further, in order to construct computer lexicons.
Computer lexicons play an important role in machine-aided language processing. Robust systems which want to analyse, recognise, generate or translate language data beyond small domains need extensive computer lexicons to do that. To develop them, however, is often closely linked to the technical prerequisites and representation formats of a specific system of language processing, and this development cannot be readily used for other computerised lan-guage systems and applications. This led to the problem designated as the “lexical bottle-neck”, which means that high-quality and comprehensive lexicons are needed for the improvement of performance of language editing systems, but that these cannot be developed anew for each sys-tem, because of time constraints and financial constraints. In order to solve the problem, com-puter lexicography has since the 1980s engaged in investigating how existing lexical databases can be used in new applications, and how new databases can be represented in such a way in so-called multifunctional lexical data banks that they can provide lexical data for several applica-tions in the field of machine-assisted language editing. Regarding this objective, several over-lapping areas of interest have emerged between computer lexicography and computer-assisted lexicography : computer lexicography tried, in several studies on the re-usability of lexico-graphical data, to transfer data from digitalised dictionaries, or dictionaries which can already be read electronically (automatically or semi-automatically), into a format which can be adequately used for machine-assisted language editing. The studies show, however, that lexicographical items made for human users are usually not explicit enough for the purposes of machine-assisted language editing, and that they can at most be used as a foundation for the construction of com-puter lexicons.
In order to make studies possible about re-usability, dictionaries often first have to be brought into a structured format. For this purpose, so-called dictionary parsers were developed. Dictionary parsers segment a computer-readable dictionary text and allocate the segments to a structural description by means of a grammar. The dictionary data banks resulting from the pars-ing process are not only of interest to computer lexicography, but they also form a valuable basis for the development of digital dictionaries, into which human users can get access to individual article positions in a flexible way. In the case of re-structured computer-assisted lexicographical processes, dictionary parsing can make the digitalisation of already-edited dictionary articles easier. Not only computer-assisted lexicography benefits from computerised lexicographical tools in this regard ; theories and methods from computer-assisted lexicography can also, vice versa, be made useful for the development of grammars for dictionary parsing. All in all, one
142 Systematic Introduction
can expect that computer lexicography and computer-assisted lexicography will experience a long-term convergence. The objectives of media-neutral lexicographical processes can definitely be understood as a modest variant of the ambitious concept of a multifunctional lexical data bank, from which computer lexicons for machine-assisted language editing and digital and printed lexicographical products for human usage can be acquired.
§ 12 Constitutive Features, Genuine Purposes, and Dictionary Functions
Lexicography in all its forms owes its existence of more than four millennia to the anthropologi-cal fact that a single individual cannot know everything, and to the historical experience that situations present themselves in which people lack specific delimited knowledge with a narrow scope, but which they urgently need in order to proceed with actions they have already com-menced. Such situations occur especially while reading and producing texts, and during transla-tion activities. In addition, there are situations beyond working with texts which are concerned with the related appropriation of greater portions of coherent knowledge which one assumes will be needed to complete actions later (e.g. preparation of a subject-field paper). To serve as an appropriate textual resource in such situations where particular knowledge is missing, the fol-lowing is valid for all printed language dictionaries : the textually presented lexicographical data, especially the data characterising features of language expressions (such as e.g. pronunciation, spelling, part of speech membership, having meaning) and, less frequently, the data on features of the dictionary basis and additionally also data on non-language cultural phenomena, are dis-tributed over specific partial texts of the dictionary (cf. § 16). These lexicographical partial texts (especially dictionary articles, but also other accessive dictionary entries such as e.g. the para-graphs of a dictionary grammar) are arranged according to the particular guiding elements (e.g. alphabetically). The guiding elements are features, or parts of the carrier of the guiding element ; the latter is an obligatory part of all lexicographical accessive entries in which ready-to-be-accessed lexicographical data is presented which have to be looked up by the user. These entries are called accessive lexicographical entries ; they are partial texts together with carriers of the guiding element. By ordering them (e.g. by alphabetical arrangement of dictionary articles, § 22), a partial text with outer access structure comes into being (e.g. a word list). A user who knows the arrangement criteria of this access structure and therefore also knows how the acces-sive entries are ordered, can access this structure quickly and purposefully.
In modern alphabetical dictionaries, the carrier of the guiding element of a dictionary article is at least one lemma by means of which e.g. a word or an affix is named. Thus, in contemporary dictionaries, the guiding element is usually the entire sequence of letters which the lemma exhib-its. In the Middle Ages, for example, the sequence of letters of the first syllable was often the guiding element. In systematically ordered dictionaries, the access text elements can, for exam-
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 143
ple, exhibit the following form : § 1 , § 2 , § 3 , … The guiding elements here are only the numbers. The guiding element is therefore always that feature, or that part of an access text ele-ment, by means of which this can be ordered and found, on the basis of pre-determined ordering.
Each printed dictionary exhibits three constitutive features. The first two constitutive features which all printed language dictionaries exhibit in different forms—according to the dictionary type—can be given as follows :
1. The first constitutive feature has to do with the dictionary structure ; this entails that a dictionary has to exhibit at least one outer access structure (cf. § 23).
2. The second constitutive feature has to do with the dictionary subject matter : this entails that by far the most of the lexicographical data in the particular texts are presented in such a way that they convey fea-tures of language expressions, with the assumption that information related to language can be extrapo-lated.
Language dictionaries share the features mentioned in the first instance with non-lexicographical reference works, such as e.g. telephone directories and bibliographies, but also with subject dic-tionaries. This does not apply to the feature mentioned in the second instance, which therefore serves as a criterion to distinguish non-lexicographical reference works from language-lexico-graphical reference works.
Subject dictionaries have one feature in common with those mentioned under (ii), which can be presented as follows : it consists of the fact that by far the most lexicographical data present features of non-language entities or facts. In special-field dictionaries, for example, these are special-field entities or facts, which means that special-field knowledge can be extrapolated.
The third constitutive feature of language dictionaries comes into view when one thinks about the fact that dictionaries do not only consist of one (or more) word list(s). At least the title page with the dictionary title precedes the word list (which is a complex partial text with outer access structure). This applies to dictionaries which appear as loose-leaf collections as well as bound ones, i.e. books. Usually, however, a scientific dictionary contains several texts belonging to different text types before the (first) word list, e.g. the dictionary preface and the guidelines for usage. All texts which proceed the word list of a dictionary resort under the designation dic-tionary front matter. This is a mandatory part of a language dictionary, which can be configured totally differently, depending on the dictionary type and the cultural tradition to which the par-ticular lexicographical processes belong. As a whole, the dictionary front matter does not present an independent genuine purpose. Only its constituents present genuine purposes. One can there-fore conclude :
3. The third constitutive feature has to do with the dictionary structure ; this entails that a dictionary exhibits a dictionary front matter.
Like all other objects of use, dictionaries also have genuine purposes (or : genuine functions). This means that they can be used on the basis of specific features in order to fulfil the purposes for which they were compiled. If one provides an abstract of the membership of a dictionary to a dictionary type, all language dictionaries have only one general genuine purpose. This entails that a language dictionary is used to rapidly extrapolate information by means of the lexico-graphical data (especially those in partial texts with outer access structures) about the features in language expressions which belong to the subject matter of the particular dictionary. One can assign a type-specific genuine purpose to each dictionary type. Stipulating the genuine purpose
144 Systematic Introduction
is related to the dictionary subject matter. Specified is the class of lexicographical information containing the information which can be extrapolated by means of specific lexicographical data. One can usually reconstruct the genuine purpose by looking at designations for dictionary types where the dictionary subject matter is hinted at (which accordingly belong to typologies of a phenomenological nature), such as e.g. antonym dictionary, etymological dictionary, and dic-tionary of language contact.
Specifying a genuine purpose does not contain anything specific about the social situations in which the particular information is needed. This means at the same time that one cannot get to know anything about the dictionary functions assigned to a dictionary of a particular type on the basis of knowledge of the genuine purpose.
By a dictionary function is meant that a dictionary covers a specified set of types of usual situations of dictionary use in such a way that the informed user has a good chance of fulfilling his/her user goal in a concrete situation of usage which forms part of the covered situations of usage. An accurate stipulation of dictionary functions therefore presupposes a detailed worked-out typology of situations of dictionary use. One can distinguish two main sub-classes of dic-tionary functions :
1. Dictionary functions related to conflict situations when dealing with texts, namely problems with text production, text reception and in translation activities : – the function supporting text production (in short : text production function) – the function supporting text reception (in short : text reception function) – the function supporting translation (in short : translation function).
These three functions are generically called text-related dictionary functions or language-conflict related dictionary functions, and they belong to the first sub-class of dictionary func-tions.
2. To the second sub-class belong dictionary functions covering types of situations of dictionary use which include concrete situations of usage where a user does not consult the dictionary while working on texts, but because he/she wants to know something specific, or wants to obtain more knowledge on a specific topic of the particular dictionary subject matter. This is called the knowledge-related dictionary function or study-related function. The dictionary function of the first sub-class can largely be sub-classified by taking into account the distinction between first language and foreign language users ; the knowledge-related dictionary function can be specified, among others, by the distinction between dif-ferent types of knowledge.
The three above-mentioned constitutive features of a dictionary are the prerequisites that
(a) a dictionary can be used according to its genuine purpose, that means in such a way that one can learn something about a specific dictionary’s subject matter ;
(b) a dictionary can be used according to its dictionary functions, that means in situations which belong to the covered types of situations of dictionary use.
The dictionary subject matter and the dictionary function (and therefore the dictionary type) determine the dictionary structure, or should determine it. §§ 12 to 25 deal with selected aspects of the dictionary structure.
tion [dictionary function], Wörterbuchvorspann [dictionary front matter], Zugriffstextelement [access text element]
§ 13 The Components of a Dictionary Beyond Dictionary Articles
All printed dictionaries, and therefore also printed language dictionaries, are lexicographical text carriers (or : text type carriers). Therefore they are printed works consisting of several texts be-longing to different text types. The arrangement of the different texts into a two-dimensional text carrier is determined by practical and pragmatic factors, and has historically evolved within the framework of the traditions of book production in different cultural contexts, and was thus also influenced by different writing systems. In a specific historical era, as a result, different ways of combining texts into a lexicographical text carrier become fashionable, and potential users ex-pect this when they have an everyday idea of what one can understand a dictionary to be. At the same time, variants of text arrangements are allowed, which means that one can distinguish spe-cific dictionary styles, taking into account additional factors (such as e.g. the choice of letter types), which could have evolved e.g. in the production traditions of leading publishing houses. The style for arranging texts into text carriers is influenced by pragmatic factors. At present, for example, one can observe how the use of the presentation possibilities of the hypertext medium in electronic dictionaries (on-line and off-line dictionaries which are published on the internet or e.g. on CD-ROM) influence the textual design of printed dictionaries.
Printed dictionaries, in contrast to e.g. daily newspapers, belong to text carriers of which the texts are related to each other—more or less shaped according to the dictionary (type). The rela-tionship of the texts to each other is acquired in two ways : firstly, it is established on the basis of rules for text types of outer texts belonging to the lexicographical metatexts. For example, the guidelines for usage necessarily relate to other texts in the dictionary, e.g. to the word list, to the dictionary grammar, or to the index. Secondly, the relationships of lexicographical partial texts to each other is established by cross-references which can be found in every text of the text car-rier, thus through the dictionary-internal mediostructural relationships on the whole (cf. § 24).
If the texts of a text carrier stand in a relationship to each other, this constitutes a text com-pound (or : greater text) which thus exhibits an internal intertextuality. From the perspective which brings textual properties into the foreground, a dictionary is consequently a text com-pound with dictionary-internal intertextuality between its partial texts.
All printed dictionaries consist of functional components. One also calls them the structural components of a dictionary. All components have, on the whole, a specific genuine function. In principle, one can distinguish two types of components : firstly, there are components which are partial texts and therefore exhibit textuality, such as, for example : dictionary prefaces, guide-lines for usage, lexicographical introductions, dictionary grammars, and the different types of dictionary articles. Secondly, there are components which exhibit a specific function, but do not present partial texts, such as, for example, the volume numbers on the back side of a multi-volume dictionary, the alphabetised lemma column (or : header) on a dictionary page, and last but not least the dictionary items (in short : items) as the most important functional text segments of condensed dictionary articles, and other accessive entries (cf. § 18). The function-related components can then be further sub-classified.
146 Systematic Introduction
Next, an overview is given of the most important components of printed dictionaries which appear outside dictionary articles. This applies predominantly to comprehensive general mono-lingual dictionaries ; reference is made to some special components of other dictionary types. The presentation is laid out in such a way that an intuitive overview of the construction of mod-ern printed dictionaries can be formed.
A one-volume general monolingual dictionary is used as a sample dictionary. On the upper level of textual segmentation (or : segmentation), this dictionary exhibits the following elements of functional components, given here in the order in which they are presented in the text com-pound :
(a) Short guidelines for usage (on the front endpaper) (b) Dictionary title (c) Overview of contents (d) Dictionary preface (e) Guidelines for usage of the dictionary (f) Dictionary grammar (g) Alphabetical glossary and simultaneously index to the dictionary grammar (h) Guidelines for the phonetic transcription (i) Lexicographical introduction (j) Alphabetical index to the lexicographical introduction (k) First word list (words and affixes) (l) Second word list (abbreviations) (m) List of sources (n) Alphabetical index to the processed affixes (o) List of abbreviations (on the back endpaper)
Because the lexicographical partial texts (a) to (o) present the direct result of a textual segmenta-tion of the entire dictionary as a text compound, these partial texts on the first segmentation level are direct text compound constituents of the entire dictionary as a text compound. All the direct text compound constituents exhibit a genuine purpose and a textual position specific to them-selves, as well as their own individual structure (e.g. word list structure). They can be segmented further into smaller functional parts.
On the level of the direct text compound constituents, one can distinguish the outer texts from the word list. The set of outer texts which precede the word list (or several word lists) is called the dictionary front matter (in short : front matter). In the sample dictionary the outer texts (a) to (j) thus form the front matter ; the outer texts which appear in the front matter are also called front matter texts. The set of outer texts which follow after the word list (or word lists) is called the dictionary back matter (in short : back matter) ((m) to (o)) ; the texts in the back mat-ter are also called back matter texts. Except for the dictionary preface, there are no specific bind-ing rules for placing outer texts in either the front matter or the back matter.
A series of at least two word lists, such as (k) and (l) in the sample dictionary, is called word list series. If two word lists run horizontally parallel to each other over the pages of the diction-ary, this is a word list block. A front matter and at least one word list are obligatory parts of a dictionary ; the back matter, on the other hand, is optional. A dictionary consisting of a front matter and only one word list, represents a lexicographical text compound type of simple text compounds (cf. § 17). Whereas all lexicographical partial texts are functional parts of the text compound, this does not apply to the front matter, the word list series, the word list block and
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 147
the back matter, because viewed on the whole, they do not exhibit any genuine purpose of their own. There is only an exception when e.g. the front matter exhibits only one partial text ; in this case, one can say that the front matter exhibits the same genuine purpose as the only partial text placed in the front. This also applies to the back matter. If a dictionary has a front matter as well as a back matter, it possesses a textual frame ; in this case the outer texts are also called (front or back) frame texts, and the word lists are called inner texts.
A multi-volume dictionary exhibits mandatory insertions as direct text compound constitu-ents, namely all the volume titles from the second volume to the last volume. On this level, one can also have optional insertions. These are found e.g. when the guidelines for usage are found in the front matter of each volume of the multi-volume dictionary.
A further distinction is important with a view to the components and especially to the outer texts. This can be made when one takes into account the relationship of the components to the genuine purpose of the dictionary to which they belong. For example, if one looks at the front matter texts (a) to (e) of the sample dictionary, one finds : they all have a specific genuine func-tion, but they have evidently not been written with the purpose that a user can extrapolate infor-mation about language expressions on the dictionary subject matter from their functional parts. This means that they are not directly integrated into the genuine function of the dictionary. This is totally different in the case of, for example, the lexicographical partial texts (f), (k) and (l) ; these partial texts are directly integrated into the genuine purpose. Because from the functional parts of dictionary grammars (e.g. from tables giving inflection, items giving sample sentences, etc.) and the word lists, thus from lexicographical data, a user can extrapolate lexicographical information. Outer texts which are integrated into the genuine purpose of a dictionary (such as e.g. (f)), are therefore called integrated outer texts ; they are usually mediostructurally linked to the word list. Accordingly, outer texts which are not integrated into the genuine purpose (such as e.g. (a) to (e)), are called non-integrated outer texts. The same applies to other components. In each adequately thought-through dictionary, all integrated outer texts belong to the partial texts with outer access structure, because lexicographical data can be looked up in them. A dictionary grammar, for example, can exhibit two outer access structures. For example, it can be divided into paragraphs ; in this case, the outer access structure is numerical, e.g. : ⟨§ 1, § 2, § 3, …, § n–1, § n⟩. One can then cross-refer to these paragraphs in the dictionary articles, e.g. with an item giving the cross-reference such as “cf. § 17”. In the second place, the dictionary grammar can also be provided with an alphabetical glossary to the grammatical terms, which can simultane-ously function as an index.
Lexicographical partial texts with outer access structure, e.g. an alphabetically ordered word list, a dictionary grammar with paragraph divisions, or a systematic introduction into a special field with paragraph divisions in the front matter of a special-field dictionary, can exhibit either one or more outer access structures. In the first case, they are externally mono-accessive ; this means that all the search paths established by the users-in-action into the lexicographical data in the particular accessive entry belong to exactly one type of search path. In the second case, these partial texts are externally poly-accessive ; this means accordingly that the individual search paths can belong to at least two types of search paths (cf. § 23).
All lexicographical partial texts of a dictionary with outer access structure and therefore all the lexicographical partial texts in which an informed user can find lexicographical data in a purposeful way, form the data memory of a printed dictionary. If there is only one word list in a
148 Systematic Introduction
dictionary, this word list is identical to the lexicographical data memory. In the sample diction-ary, the data memory consists of the lexicographical partial texts (f), (g), (k) and (l), and it ex-hibits several outer access structures.
The most important lexicographical partial text of a printed language dictionary on the level of the direct text compound constituents is the word list. A word list does not, however, neces-sarily exclusively lists words positioned (or : primarily posted) as lemmas, it also lists e.g. ab-breviations, affixes, individual letters of the alphabet, or idioms. In many dictionaries (such as e.g. general monolingual and bilingual dictionaries as well as learners’ dictionaries and diction-aries of language stages) the designation word list can be justified with the indication that by far the most of the lexical units which are primarily posted, belong to words.
A word list in an alphabetical dictionary consists of several article stretches. The number of article stretches is directed towards the number of letters of the particular alphabet according to which the carriers of the guiding element are ordered. This alphabet is called the lexicographical access alphabet (in short : access alphabet) of a dictionary. If the Latin alphabet of the Modern High German writing system is the access alphabet, a general monolingual dictionary on con-temporary standard German e.g. has a word list with 26 article stretches. Each article stretch is usually preceded by the corresponding elements of the access alphabet (e.g. “A” preceding the first article stretch and “Z” the last one in a German dictionary). These letters or pairs of letters (e.g. “B, b”) are access structure indicators. The article stretches are named after the particular initial letters (e.g. R-article stretch or article stretch R), and they exhibit an article stretch access structure (in short : stretch access structure). Each article stretch has one lemma stretch ; in gen-eral monolingual dictionaries of the European languages with well-established lexicographies, there are figures, based on experience, which can be used to determine the length of these stretches when planning their scope.
Inner texts can be phased in into the individual article stretches. For example, a dictionary grammar can be spread over a learner’s dictionary in a modular format by such phased-in inner texts. The position of the inner texts in the word list can then be determined by e.g. lemmas such as noun, declination, verb, etc., which then function as inner text titles. Phased-in inner texts of this type can exhibit an outer access structure. For the set of all phased-in inner texts in a word list, there is a list of contents in the dictionary front matter which will enable access to the spe-cific page. Even illustrations which are not part of a dictionary article, but which can be related to many dictionary articles, are considered to be phased-in inner texts into the word list. Phasing in inner texts leads to the development of expanded article stretches. Their partial stretches, which emerge through this phasing in, are non-functional parts of the article stretches. They have to be distinguished from functional partial stretches of an alphabetically ordered dictionary such as e.g. article niches and article nests, which exhibit a genuine purpose as entire partial stretches (§ 22).
A word list in a systematically ordered dictionary usually consists of thematic columns of which the number is determined by the system in the dictionary, such as e.g. a subject group system. They are called differently, e.g. main section, sub-section, group, etc. External access to the titles of the thematic columns and their sub-titles is only possible via an alphabetical index. Therefore, the titles are not carriers of the guiding elements, but carriers of the cross-reference addresses. The user can find the cross-reference addresses in the index. The dictionary articles in
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 149
the thematic columns can either be ordered alphabetically or according to more specific subject-related aspects.
The dictionary articles (in short : articles) are the most important accessive dictionary entries. They are the central partial texts of printed language dictionaries. In alphabetically ordered dic-tionaries, they are direct text constituents of an article stretch and thus indirect text constituents of a word list. The lexicographical text type “dictionary article” allows for three fundamentally very different forms. There are non-condensed dictionary articles, which form a natural language text and can be read continuously. They consist of a mandatory lemma and the associated lemma co-text, and possibly article-internal illustrations phased in into the lemma co-text or e.g. phased out onto the page margin. Such dictionary articles can be found in either language dictionaries (e.g. dictionaries of youth language) or in special-field dictionaries of all types. They conse-quently do not have a fixed series of separable items ; they rather form one item text and do not exhibit any standardized text condensation—apart from occasional abbreviations.
The second form of the text type “dictionary articles” is the one which appears most often in language dictionaries. These are condensed dictionary articles ; their article text is condensed in a standardized way. One can distinguish between fully condensed and partially condensed dic-tionary articles. The latter exhibit at least one item text. From a theoretical point of view, con-densed dictionary articles can be seen as condensates which emerged through stepwise applica-tion of methods of text condensation on an associated full text exhibiting the same propositional qualities as its condensate. One can calculate the degree of text condensation of a dictionary article very precisely. Condensed dictionary articles, which frequently occur in printed lexicog-raphy, do not exhibit a syntactical structure which belong to the syntax of a natural language on the level of the dictionary structure. If a specific degree of text condensation is exceeded, this can affect the usefulness of dictionary articles, and thus the user-friendliness of a dictionary. Observing specific cultural-dependent and historical-pragmatic well-practiced conventions with regard to text condensation has to do with dictionary style.
In addition, the dictionary articles discussed here are not only standardized with regard to their text condensation, but also with regard to other aspects. Lexicographical text standardisa-tion (in short : standardisation) means, among other things, that the dictionary articles are proc-essed according to a lexicographical method of standardisation which consists of an ordered set of standardizing guidelines. Standardisation results in consistent formats for specific textual features in dictionary articles. Standardisation can e.g. have to do with the abbreviations for terms used as descriptive lexicographical language (e.g. “dim.” for “diminutive form”, “v.” for “verb”, “coll.” for “colloquial”), and also with the order in which dictionary items are presented, with performing text condensation and with the selection of typography, thus the form of the items. The relative consistence obtained through standardisation in dictionary articles allows for
150 Systematic Introduction
lucid and efficient guidelines for usage, and contributes to the user-friendliness of a dictionary. Observing historically well-practised conventions with regard to standardisation also has to do with dictionary style.
Tabular dictionary articles, lastly, constitute a third form of the text type “dictionary arti-cles”. They form parts of word lists which are as a whole organized as tables with several col-umns. A dictionary article then consists of several table fields, each providing for specific items.
Next, we are looking more closely at condensed dictionary articles with regard to their most important article-internal components. A completely condensed (relatively simply structured) dictionary article from the sample dictionary is selected as example.
Ka|si|no das; -s, -s | kaˈziːno [ital. casino ≡ Gesellschaftshaus. Dim. von: casa ≡ Haus < lat. casa]
1. Gebäude mit Räumen für gesellige Zusammenkünfte: Sie feierten ihre Ver-lobung im K. || Die Abende im K. waren für ihn unvergeßlich (Fontane E, 118)
2. Speiseraum für Offiziere: Die Mannschaften gingen in die Kantine, die Offiziere ins K.
3. Speiseraum in Betrieben oder Büro-häusern: Das Essen in der Mensa der Uni-versität war teurer und schlechter als in den Kasinos der städtischen Betriebe
4. ⟨kurz für:⟩ �Spielkasino Zu 1 Clubkasino, Strandkasino Zu 2 Offizierskasino Fig. 1 : First sample article (da1) : Abbreviations : Dim. = diminutive form ; item symbols : “≡” has to be read as means ; “<” has to be read as derived from
A condensed dictionary article usually consists of several functional text segments which are organized in a specific way. In the case of functional text segments, the text segments with an item function are distinguished from non-typographical structural indicators. Likewise, three types of article-internal text segments with item functions can be distinguished : items, item texts, and functional item supplements. Article text constituents (in short : article constituents) exhibit a form of their own, a function of their own and a position of their own. Items, item texts and non-typographical microstructural indicators are article text constituents ; functional item supplements are not article text constituents, because they do not have a position of their own in the language series with regard to their direct neighbours. A bi-functional item supplement is realized by the underlining under the item form segment “i” in „Ka|si|no“ ; this is a word accent marker, which is at the same time a marker of vowel quantity with regard to the length (of the vowel). Each functional text segment exhibits a form and a genuine purpose. For an item, the following is e.g. valid : each item consists of a item form and a genuine item function (or : a genuine item purpose). The item form of an item is its particular graphic form. Specific features of the graphic form, such as e.g. italic font, normal spacing, bold font, etc. can be used to distin-guish between items belonging to a specific item class. In the sample article, for example, all the items giving the meaning, and only they, are printed in italic font (and normal spacing). On the
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 151
basis of these features of the item form, the items giving the meaning can therefore be set in visual contrast to their textual environment, and be easily recognized by informed users. They consequently contribute somewhat to the fact that the distribution of items in the dictionary arti-cle can be recognized by means of discernable typographical features in the item form, without knowledge of the contents of the dictionary subject matter. Because the article-internal distribu-tion of items is regulated by the concrete hierarchical microstructure of a dictionary article (cf. § 18), these features of the item form are called typographical microstructural indicators. They are therefore not independent text constituents of the dictionary article. This distinguishes them from the non-typographical microstructural indicators standing between items on the dictionary line, of which the genuine purpose only consists of helping with the recognition of the particular items and thus also the recognition of parts of the microstructure. In the sample article, for ex-ample, the first semicolon, the first comma, the vertical line in bold printing “|”, the square brackets “[ ]” and the narrow vertical double line “||” are non-typographical microstructural indi-cators.
The item form is assigned a specific genuine item function by the lexicographer. This entails that, by its specific features, the user is enabled to fulfil those user goals for the sake of which the lexicographer made the item. For example, the item giving the meaning „Gebäude mit Räumen für gesellige Zusammenkünfte“ from the sample article has been formulated in such a way that the user is able to obtain the goal of the procedure of usage he/she performed because of his/her search question for a meaning of Kasino. The feature by means of which the user goal can be obtained, is the meaning of the particular language expression that functions as an item giving the meaning.
The item in a dictionary article has to be strictly differentiated from that which is designated by it. That which is designated is always a form of at least one feature of something else which can be considered to be worth a comment. Each item therefore exhibits an item relationship, a relationship to something else. The relational rule for the item relationship is : x is an item for y. In language dictionaries, the latter is at least one featural form for a language expression. The item relationship is realized in two different ways : one realisation is obtained by simply naming (or : mentioning) a language expression. For example, the lemma sign Kasino is presented in such a way that it is named by the internally expanded item giving the form of the lemma sign Ka|si|no. The other realisation is done in such a way that, for expressions which are already mentioned article-internally, something is stated, thereby giving predicates for their features.
Citing the variables “x” and “y” of the relational rule x is an item for y on the basis of sample article da1, one obtains e.g. the sentence : „das“ is an item for Kasino. In this sentence, Kasino is the lemma sign named by the item giving the form of the lemma sign. Reversing the item rela-tionship gives the processing relationship with the relational rule y has been lexicographically processed by x ; here, “x” is a variable for items, item texts, and functional item supplements. Thus one can e.g. state : “Kasino has been lexicographically processed by ‘das’”. Nota bene : not the item giving the form of the lemma sign in da1 has been lexicographically processed, but Kasino, the lemma sign that is named by this item. The 2-tuple ⟨Kasino, das⟩ is called a lexico-graphical processing unit. It is an element of the binary processing relation belonging to da1. One should definitely distinguish the addressing relationship from the item relationship and the processing relationship. The addressing relationship with the relational rule x is addressed to y is the lexicographical substitute for the missing text-syntactical relationship which occurs in con-
152 Systematic Introduction
densed dictionary articles (and other condensed accessive entries). It is valid for da1 that e.g. “‘das’ is addressed to Ka|si|no” ; „das“ is the addressed item. „Ka|si|no“ is the reference address for „das“ (from a semiotic point of view, expressed in a shortened format). Only users who are in a position to relate an item or a functional item supplement to the corresponding reference address (in short : address), can cognitively generate the lexicographical information which is the answer to their search questions. When a user relates „das“ to Ka|si|no, he/she obtains lexi-cographical information about Kasino, namely, that Kasino takes the specific article „das“, and is therefore a neuter.
Item texts are not addressed, because they consist of at least one sentence and thus exhibit a natural language syntax. Most items and functional item supplements in a dictionary article have an address ; the item giving the form of the lemma sign, e.g. has no address. Cross-reference items can have a second address outside the article. This then is no reference address, but a cross-reference address (cf. § 24). For example, the article-external address of the cross-reference item „�Spielkasino“ is the discontinuing lemma Spiel ka si no. Normally, the item giving the form of the lemma sign is the main address in a monolingual dictionary article, be-cause most of the items refer to the particular lemma sign. This is also the case in the sample article. Some of the items, however, are not addressed to the item giving the form of the lemma sign ; the item identifying the language „ital.“, for example, is addressed to the item giving the form of origin “casino”.
The item giving the form of the lemma sign functions as an item on the basis of a relation-ship of mentioning, which is accompanied by a type of exemplar relationship. It is an example for all concrete written forms of the lemma sign. That which is presented by it is the visible se-ries of a fixed number of specific letters given in each (correctly) written realisation of the sign. The item giving the form of the lemma sign mentions that specific sign from the dictionary sub-ject matter (in the sample article : Modern High German) for which the following is valid : all items which are characteristic to the dictionary type refer to its typical forms of presentation and/or those of members of the same lemma sign paradigm.
A dictionary article is composed in lexicographical descriptive language which differs ac-cording to dictionary type. In the sample article, the descriptive language is Modern High Ger-man (e.g. in the items giving the paraphrase of the meaning), linguistic terminology (e.g. „Dim. von“ = “dim. of”) and several symbols such as e.g. “≡” and “<”.
The items can be divided into numerous different classes. The most important item classes are the item classes with the same general genuine purpose with relation to the dictionary subject matter. Names for such item classes are e.g. item giving the pronunciation, item giving the ge-nus, item giving the meaning, item giving the synonym, item giving the part of speech, item giv-ing the example, item giving the etymology.
The item giving the pronunciation “kaˈziːno” from the sample article, for example, belongs to the class of items giving the pronunciation. All the other items giving the pronunciation in the sample dictionary also belong to this class. The same general genuine purpose is the class-building criterion determining the membership to the item class. It entails conveying something about some specific feature, namely, the pronunciation of language expressions. The specific genuine purpose of each member of the class, on the other hand, is different, and entails the presentation of the form of the feature “pronunciation” specifically for a particular expression. The specific genuine purpose of “kaˈziːno” entails the presentation, by means of the item giving
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 153
the pronunciation, of the specific form of the feature ‘pronunciation’ of the lemma sign Kasino. That which has been explained by means of the example of the class of items giving the pronun-ciation accordingly also applies to all other classes of items which have the same genuine pur-pose with relation to the dictionary subject matter.
If one proceeds from a perspective based on language theory, one can select a specific num-ber of features of language expressions in order to pool together the hundreds of item classes with the same general genuine purpose into a smaller number of generic classes. This formation of generic classes can be done in different ways. The following is e.g. one possibility :
– Items for the form of the sign – items giving the phonetics – items giving the orthography – items giving the abbreviations
– items on grammar – items giving the morphological inflections – items giving the morphology of word formation – items giving the syntax
– items on semantics and pragmatics – items giving the meaning – items for the paradigmatic relationship – items giving the pragmatic labelling
– items for cultural subject knowledge – encyclopaedic items – illustrations
– items for language development – items giving diachronic information – items giving etymology
– items for frequency – cross-reference items.
One can form numerous sub-classes for each of the listed item classes. These will be explained next by means of a few selected examples.
The following items belong, for example, to the items giving the phonetics : items giving ir-regular pronunciation, items giving regular pronunciation (as in the sample article with the item giving the word accent), item giving the word accent, item giving the vowel quantity (either for the brevity or the length of the vowel), items giving variations in pronunciation and numerous other sub-classes. The items giving the phonetics can be materialized in different ways, e.g. by applying an internationally imported phonetic transcription, simplified especially for the diction-ary. Items giving the phonetics can also be presented by functional item supplements, e.g. by dots or lines below elements in the lemma position (cf. Ka|si|no) ; in the latter instance, only specific aspects of the pronunciation can be taken into account.
Items giving the orthography only occur in dictionaries of which the dictionary subject mat-ter forms a language which possesses an orthographic norm. Items giving the orthography (or : items giving the spelling) are usually given at the same time as the item giving the form of the
154 Systematic Introduction
lemma sign which also functions as an example for the spelling. If the language which is lexico-graphically treated has recently changed its orthographic norms, the changes in spelling which have to do with the norms can be especially marked (e.g. by coloured printing). In spelling dic-tionaries, there usually is an outer text which contains the spelling prescriptions and which is linked by means of cross-references to the word list.
Items giving abbreviations can stand in the articles of those lemma signs of which they are an abbreviation. Or they could also be presented as lemmas on their own. In that case, the dic-tionary article contains as its most important item an item giving the solution for the abbrevia-tion. Articles on abbreviations in a general monolingual dictionary can also be listed in a sepa-rate word list, as is the case in the sample dictionary.
Items giving the morphological inflections are e.g. items in articles by means of which one can deduce the genus and the part of speech ‘noun’ („das“ in the sample article), the item giving the genus (e.g. „n.“ for neuter), the item giving the formation of the singular (in the sample arti-cle the first („-s“), the item giving the formation of the plural (the second „-s“), the item giving the word only occurring in the singular (e.g. “only sg.”), the item giving the word only occurring in the plural (e.g. “only pl.”), the item giving the part of speech (e.g. “prep.” for preposition), the item giving the class of the conjugation (e.g. “str v.” for strong verb), and many more. If a dic-tionary has a dictionary grammar with an outer access structure, a majority of the items giving the morphological inflections can exhibit the form of numbers by means of which the experi-enced user can cross-refer to a paragraph or a table with inflections in the dictionary grammar.
Items giving the morphology of word formation can include e.g. items giving compounds (as under „Zu 1“ and „Zu 2“) or items giving derivations, especially items giving diminutives and items giving changed forms. If one plans articles giving word formation in a dictionary, affixes will be presented as lemmas. In such affix articles, one can then eventually find items giving the productivity of affixes. Especially learners’ dictionaries emphasize items giving the morphology of word formation.
Items giving the syntax relate to sentence formation in the language which is treated lexico-graphically. In items giving the syntax, it is relevant to distinguish between explicit and implicit items. Implicit items can be found when the lemma sign (Kasino), the abbreviated lemma sign („K.“), or the place-keeping symbol for the lemma sign (e.g. a tilde in an item giving an exam-ple), or some form from the morphological lemma sign paradigm (e.g. „Kasinos“), acts as part of the item. Explicit items, on the other hand, occur when this is not the case. All items giving examples in the sample article are therefore implicit items. The item giving the article „das“, or the item identifying the language „ital.“, on the other hand, are explicit items. All implicit items for the co-texts are at the same time implicit items giving the syntax. Explicit items giving syn-tax can e.g. be items giving the case government, items giving the valency, or items giving sam-ple sentences. These items serve to support the construction of syntactically well-formed sen-tences with the lemma sign, and therefore are called items giving construction, and they can especially be found in dictionaries resorting under pedagogic lexicography, consequently e.g. in learners’ dictionaries and valency dictionaries. They often have the form of structural formulas, and can also be phased out onto the margins of the dictionary page.
The items giving the meaning are not only the dictionary items with which lexicographers have the most difficulties to formulate, but there are also different metalexicographical points of
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 155
view about their functioning in the different types of lemma signs, about their demarcation from other items (especially from encyclopaedic items), and about their appropriate naming.
The most important items giving the meaning in monolingual dictionaries are items giving the paraphrase of the meaning, such as e.g. „Speiseraum für Offiziere“ in the sample article. Contrary to the viewpoints on the form of definitions in all internationally known theories of definitions, items giving the paraphrase of the meaning are often incorrectly called lexicographi-cal definition. In many monolingual dictionaries, the items giving the meaning have the form of an item giving a synonym, by means of which a synonym for the lemma sign is mentioned, or it exhibits an item giving a synonym giving several synonyms. Items giving the paraphrase of the meaning for nominal lemma signs (nouns, verbs, adjectives) name characteristic features of those objects and facts which are usually designated by the lemma sign. This is different in the case of items giving the meaning for lemma signs of other parts of speech (e.g. for sentence connectors, conjunctions, and interjections). Here, the characteristic features for the usage spe-cific to parts of speech have to be described in relation to the possible co-texts. Only the point of view that items giving the paraphrase of the meaning are formulations of rules for the semanti-cally appropriate use of lemma signs, allows for a unified approach to all items giving para-phrases of meaning in monolingual language dictionaries. In special-field dictionaries, items giving paraphrases of meanings can be applied as items defining a lemma sign which is a term. Accordingly, one can speak of items giving a definiens.
In bilingual dictionaries, at least one semantic equivalent of the lexicographical target lan-guage is mentioned for the lemma sign in the lexicographical source language. This happens by means of items giving equivalents which mention either a word or a word combination as substi-tute. If there is no target language equivalent, a target-language item giving a paraphrase of the meaning has to be formulated for the source language unit. If there are several equivalents and therefore several items giving equivalents, one should supply items indicating the discrimination of equivalents (also called glosses), so that it can support the selection of an equivalent by the user.
In items for paradigmatic relationships (e.g. items giving synonyms, antonyms, and hypero-nyms), the detection of meaning by users, among others, should additionally be supported by items giving the paraphrase of the meaning. The items for the paradigmatic relationships can be explicitly marked by means of items belonging to the class of identifying items, placed in front of them, such as e.g. „sy.“ for synonym, or „ant.“ for antonym (e.g. „weiß … Ggs. schwarz“) (= “white … ant. black”).
In formulating items giving the paraphrase of the meaning, one also draws on paradigmatic relationships in the vocabulary, especially on hypernyms. Therefore, in the sample article, Ge-bäude in the first and Speiseraum in the second and third items giving the paraphrase of the meaning are (not explicitly identified) hypernyms for Kasino.
Illustrations can support the user’s detection of searched-for meanings. Especially in the case of lemma signs which designate cultural-specific phenomena, the items giving the paraphrase of the meaning have to be supplemented by encyclopaedic items.
Languages historically became means of cognition and communication ; they are spoken by speakers with different interests, who are in contact with speakers of other languages. For this reason and other reasons, languages are not homogeneous, even when they are to a great extent
156 Systematic Introduction
rule-governed. Especially lexical units exhibit idiosyncrasies which are obvious when compared to other units.
For example, if one compares dog and cur, it becomes clear that when one talks about a spe-cific dog with these words, only the use of cur has a negative connotation. Therefore, one says : cur is labelled in comparison with dog. The labelling of an expression is always related to a pragmatic dimension of labelling. Labelling dimensions are e.g. : evaluation, language area, time period, language culture, subject-relatedness, relatedness to the medium of communication. Each labelling dimension has several labelling predicates, which can be formulated differently in in-dividual dictionaries, and be different in their comprehensiveness, e.g. :
Evaluation : negative, written German, neutral, positive, etc. Area : Northern German, Southern German, only in Austria, etc. Time period : obsolete, becoming obsolete, neologism, etc. Language culture : formal, poetical, educational language, normal language, crude, vulgar, etc. Special-field relatedness : medical, astronomy, botany, etc. Medium of communication : spoken, written, etc.
The labelling predicates appear in the dictionary article (partly also abbreviated) as pragmatic items giving the labelling (in short : pragmatic items, also items giving the labelling). They func-tion only in conjunction with a specific item giving the meaning. That also means that one can find several different pragmatic items in one dictionary article on a polysemantic lemma sign. When a lemma sign is unlabelled, this is not explicitly indicated. For example, the lemma sign Kasino is unlabelled in all four its meanings with regard to all the labelling dimensions taken into account. In this case, one can also call this pragmatic zero marking. The experienced user recognises this in the fact that they are missing in the positions in the article where one can ex-pect them.
Linking with structuralist terminology, one also talks of diasystematic labelling, and the dis-tinctions between diachronic, diatopical, diaphasic, diaevaluative, diatechnical, diaintegrative, diamedial and dianormative labelling.
In a language dictionary, the items for cultural subject knowledge (world knowledge) serve especially to support the user’s efforts to acquire searched-for meanings. Items of this type which are usually called encyclopaedic items, can especially be found in articles on lemma signs which designate culture-specific phenomena, and especially in learners’ dictionaries and in bi-lingual dictionaries.
Illustrations serve the same purpose in a different way. There are numerous types of illustra-tions in the dictionary. The choice of the type depends on whether the lemma designates con-crete objects, abstract phenomena, static facts, events, circumstances, etc. If an explanation is needed, for example, of how a concrete object is built, a structure-related illustration is appropri-ate. If one has to show how something functions, a function-related illustration is chosen. If phases of an event have to be explained, an illustration showing the phases can be used. Illustra-tions have a different function in pictorial dictionaries, which belong to onomasiological dic-tionaries, than they have in e.g. a learners’ dictionary.
The items for language development are especially found in diachronic dictionaries, which deal with the history of words. Here, one e.g. finds items for expansion of meaning, restriction of meaning or items for motivating the naming of objects, as well as those for language contact. Items for language development also appear in etymological dictionaries and in dictionaries for
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 157
language contact. In addition to these, one also finds items for comparative language forms, items of reconstructed (not documented) forms, and others.
Items for language development also appear in synchronic dictionaries, usually in the form of etymological items. In the sample article, the etymological item reads : „ital. casino ≡ Haus < lat. Casa“. This can be divided further into partial items.
The items for frequency can refer to different features or forms of language expressions. They often only express approximate estimations by lexicographers ; predicates such as e.g. “seldom”, “often” are used for these. Accordingly, one then finds e.g. items such as “pl. seldom” (for “plural forms seldom occur”). Statistically correct items giving the frequency in the form of numbers are only possible in relation to a corpus. These are especially found in frequency dic-tionaries.
One can find items giving cross-references in each position of a dictionary article. The cross-reference addresses under which one can find the cross-reference goals can be other lemmas in the same dictionary. Then the cross-reference goal lies within another dictionary article. Or the cross-reference address can be a paragraph number in the dictionary grammar ; then the cross-reference goal lies within the corresponding paragraph. Easily locatable cross-reference ad-dresses are always elements of outer access structures. In longer dictionary articles, the cross-reference addresses can also be part of the article to which the item giving a cross-reference belongs (cf. § 24).
Elementary items having the same general genuine purpose and which belong to the same class, according to an item classification based on language theory (such as e.g. all items giving the phonetics), lead to information of the same type when they are related to their address, and this can be bundled into one type of information (e.g. the phonetic information). Accordingly, one position for information (e.g. the phonetic information) in a dictionary article then forms a specific textual section of the article, in which specific information appears belonging to the information of a specific type (e.g. one of the items giving the phonetics).
Elementary items can be condensed. All items which are abbreviations, such as e.g. the item identifying the language „lat.“ in the sample article, are condensed items. All items which con-tain an abbreviation of the lemma sign, such as e.g. the item giving the competence example „Sie feierten ihre Verlobung im K.“ (= “they celebrated their engagement in the c. (casino)”), as well as all items giving examples containing a place-keeping symbol (e.g. a tilde “~”) instead of the lemma sign, are also condensed items. In addition, all items indicating omissions, such as e.g. „-s“ (for : Kasinos), the item giving the formation of the plural in the sample article, resort under condensed items. Finally, several language expressions for an item can be nested into each other. This is, for example, the case when the item giving a competence example such as „grünende Hecken, Wiesen, Zweige“ (= “greening hedges, pastures, branches”) can be found for the lemma sign grünen (= “to turn green”) in a dictionary article. On the basis of this item, one can infer three examples.
Finally, one has to mention that items can also be expanded in different ways. For example, the item giving the form of the lemma sign in the sample article is internally expanded with two items giving the syllable divisions “|”.
ment unit], lexikographische Standardisierung [lexicographical standardisation], lexikographische Textverdichtung [lexicographical text condensation], nichttypographischer Mikrostrukturanzeiger [non-typographical microstructural indicator], Wörterbuchartikel [dictionary article]
§ 15 Textual Structures in Dictionaries : Basic Concepts and Possibilities of Presentation
Up to now, chapter 3 has concentrated especially on the components of dictionaries. There, it has already implicitly become clear that when one wants to make a dictionary, the different components should indeed be combined in different ways, but not randomly. The possible com-bination of the components lead to the fact that the individual components in dictionaries each stand in specific relationships. The dictionary type and the dictionary functions determine the nature of these particular relationships. This also means that each dictionary exhibits specific textual structures. The following section presents an elementary explanation of the structural concept, and the possibilities of presentation, suitable for textual structures and their parts in dictionaries, will be given.
In the sciences, different structural concepts are applied. In dictionary research, it has proven to be sensible to select a structural concept which meets formal requirements. In addition, it is characteristic of the selected structural concept that not only the set of relationships that the parts of the whole have with each other (thus the relationship structure) determine the structure of this whole ; rather, the functional parts (thus the components) also belong to the structure. This can be explained further by means of the following second sample article :
Tüll m; -s, -e feines, durchscheinen- des Gewebe
Fig. 2 : Second sample article (da2)
This sample article is considered as a functional whole to which one can attribute specific struc-tures. When one wants to determine its functional parts, one needs to have previous knowledge about dictionary articles as well as a method of analysis, namely a method of segmentation. Not every section from previous knowledge about dictionary articles necessarily plays a role when applying a method of segmentation. If one draws on language-theoretical knowledge, a segmen-tation based on language theory evolves ; this means, among others, that the text segments which functionally belong closer together than the rest of the article-internal text segments, are valid as partial wholes.
A segmentation of article texts is done in several steps. In the first step of segmentation, one takes into account that a language sign consists of form and meaning, which can be described separately. Accordingly, the first segmentation juncture (“|x”) is set in such a way that it sepa-rates the items for the form from those for the meaning. Accordingly, one gets :
Tüll m; -s, -e |1 feines, durchscheinen-des Gewebe
To the left of the first segmentation juncture “|1” stands a non-elementary item giving the form consisting of four elementary items for the form, separated from each other by non-typographical structural indicators ; to the right of this juncture stands only one item giving the meaning with which a paraphrase giving the meaning is named, and is therefore called the item giving the paraphrase of the meaning. The left part can be segmented further. Here also, it does
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 159
not happen that one immediately obtains all the elementary items as functional text segments in one step. Rather, the functional proximity of the items is crucial for further segmentation. Thus, among others, one takes into account that the lemma sign is named by Tüll and therefore its written form is provided textually, which then enables lexicographical statements in the form of items about the lemma sign and its forms of inflection. Tüll is for this reason clearly distin-guished from the subsequent items for the form. Accordingly, a second segmentation junction is set as follows :
Tüll |2 m; -s, -e
To the right of the segmentation junction stand only three elementary items which have in com-mon that the object of the items are morphological features of the lemma sign, and they are sepa-rated by two non-typographical microstructural indicators, the semicolon “;” and the comma “,” from each other. The three items and both structural indicators form a part-whole, namely the non-elementary item for morphology in nouns, which can thus be segmented further into partial items.
Lastly, when proceeding with further segmentation, one has to decide at this stage of seg-mentation of da2 whether one wants to attribute the status of text constituents to the non-typographical microstructural indicators as text segments, or whether they have to be omitted. If one decides to omit them, one is left with fewer functional text segments and therefore with only those text constituents belonging to the items and—if available—those belonging to the item texts. This means at the same time that one chooses a specific variant of the method of text seg-mentation, namely a non-exhaustive functional-positional segmentation, in which application only the items and item texts are taken into account with relation to their textual position and genuine function.
In the next step of segmentation, one now takes into account that both the items „-s“ and „-e“ functionally belong better together than e.g. „m“ and „-s“. Accordingly, the third juncture in the segmentation can be set as follows :
m |3 -s, -e
With the third step of segmentation, the semicolon is omitted on the level of the dictionary struc-ture in its function as non-typographical structural indicator. To the left of the segmentation juncture the condensed item giving the genus „m“ stands (as abbreviation for „maskulin“ (= “masculine”). The text segment to the right of the juncture determines the declination class of the lemma sign. Therefore one has to do with the non-elementary item giving the declination which is segmented as follows in the fourth step of segmentation :
-s |4 -e
To the left of the segmentation juncture now stands the condensed item giving the formation of the singular ; to the right of the juncture the condensed item giving the formation of the plural. After the fourth step of segmentation, one can consider the segmentation of the second sample article as done.
The results of the segmentation can be found in altogether eight items which belong to eight different item classes with the same general genuine purpose related to the dictionary subject matter. In the following listing, the names for the item classes in round brackets are attributed an
160 Systematic Introduction
abbreviation as a class symbol, and the eight items from da2 in square brackets receive a lower-case letter from the Latin alphabet as an item name ; this is an individual name which is only valid for the particular item to which it is attributed (by means of an equal sign), so that it unam-biguously identifies exactly one specific item from da2.
Of the eight items belonging to da2, the following three are non-elementary items :
– the item giving the form (IF) : Tüll m; -s, -e [= a] – the item giving the morphology at nouns (IMor.n) : m; -s, -e [= d] – the item giving the declination class (IDecC) : -s, -e [= f]
In addition the following five elementary items are found :
– the item giving the form of the lemma sign (IFLS) : Tüll [= c] – the condensed item giving the genus (c.IG) : m [= e] – the condensed item giving the formation of the singular (c.ISF) : -s [= g] – the condensed item giving the formation of the plural (c.IPF) : -e [= h] – the item giving the paraphrase of the meaning (IPM) : feines, durchscheinendes Gewebe [= b]
If one now wants to present the structure of the sample article, one has to determine the relation-ships in which the identified items stand within the dictionary article. One’s interest in the struc-ture determines the selection of relationships. A crucial interest in the structure consists in being able to present the distributions of the items, and thus the genuine partial functions within a dic-tionary article. To obtain that, one firstly has to be able to explicitly name all the part-whole relationships which occur in the items ; one has to take into account the reflexivity of the part-whole relation in this, according to which is valid that all items, as well as da2, are parts of them-selves. Secondly, one has to be able to explicitly stipulate the linear order (the precursor-successor relationships) for all article-internal items. In order to obtain this in a concise and ele-gant way, the individual names for items were introduced above. By using them, one can com-pose the expanded set of all items for da2 which apply to da2
; this is called SA. The expansion with da2 is necessary because if one wants to present part-whole relationships, one also needs the whole, that is da2. The following is valid :
SA = {da2, a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h}.
SA is called the set of carriers of the structure to be presented for da2. For all nine elements of SA, all part-whole relationships now have to be named. Put differently, one can say : one has to stipulate fully on which ordered pairs (or : 2-tuple) of elements from SA the two-fold relationship R “x is a partial item of y” is applicable. One can also describe this as : one has to define a two-fold part-whole relation (or : partitive relation) on SA. When performing this procedure of defin-ing, one proceeds from the set of carriers SA to an ordered set of which the elements are all 2-tuple (x, y) which can be built from the elements of SA and for which is true that they are appli-cable to the relational term R. This set is called Rpart, and can be presented as follows :
With Rpart the partitive structure of SA is presented completely and explicitly ; the presentation, however, is visually not very understandable. Therefore one usually makes use of two-dimensional presentations with organized tree graphs. With this formal and at the same time
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 161
visually more understandable type of presentation, only the text segments and their part-whole relationships are explicitly presented, which are segmented in one step of the segmentation, as well as those which directly result from the segmentation. The individual names of these text segments are underlined in Rpart. Only they go into the presentation of the tree graph. This reduc-tion in the presentation of the structure is adequate because the following is valid, because of the transitivity of the partitive relation : If x is a partial item of y and y is a partial item of z, then x is also a partial item of z. On the basis of the transitivity of a partial relation, the part-whole rela-tionships which are not explicitly presented in a tree graph (by means of a line) can be inferred completely and systematically ; the ring arrows (e.g. from a to a) which could stand at each node to illustrate the reflexivity, are also left out—as is usually the case (cf. Fig. 3).
That which has just been explained for the part-whole relation, is also valid in analogy for the precursor-successor relationship. A precursor-successor relation (or : precedence relation) is consequently defined on the set SA. One can also present this relation completely and explicitly by means of the writing convention for sets, and illustrate it formally and at the same time visu-ally understandable by means of a tree graph. This can usually happen in the same tree graph with which the partitive relation is illustrated. In this, one adheres to the convention that the precursor-successor relationship does not receive an individual graphic representation by means of a line. Rather, the tree graph has to be designed in such a way that one can immediately read the sequence of the segments by looking at the sequence of their labels (the so-called node la-bels).
If the elements of a set of carriers is an article text, and all its methodically conveyed article constituents (thus all items, all item texts and all non-typographical microstructural indicators) are article texts, and a partitive relation and a precedence relation were defined on the set of carriers, then the given textual structure is a special type of text constituent structure, namely the concrete hierarchical (pure) article constituent structure. This is always a hierarchically organ-ized structure. It provides for the distribution of article text constituents in a dictionary article, and separates them from one another.
If only the items and item texts were taken into consideration in the segmentation (item texts do not appear in da2), so that only items appear in the set of carriers (besides the entire dictionary article), then the textual structure which can be obtained through defining both structure-forming relations on this set of carriers is a partial structure of the (pure) concrete article microstructure (in short : microstructure). This is illustrated in Fig. 3. Text constituent structures are considered pure when they exhibit element-homogeneous sets of carriers ; this is the case when they only exhibit elements with text constituent status, such as SA, the set of carriers of da1. If one explic-itly takes into account functional item supplements which appear in dictionary articles in the formation of text constituent structures, element-heterogeneous sets of carriers will have to be composed which not only exhibit text constituents as elements, but also exhibit functional item supplements and non-functional text segments, such as segments for the form of an item and item segments. Text constituent structures with element-heterogeneous sets of carriers are called hybrid. One can always present pure and hybrid text constituent structures for dictionary articles such as da1, which exhibit at least one functional item supplement. If the hybrid structures have to be formed, at least one additional relation has to be defined on element-heterogeneous sets of carriers. In order for the hybrid text constituent structures of da1 to be obtainable, one e.g. has to take into account the subordinate relationship in which the bifunctional item supplement stands
162 Systematic Introduction
to the item form segment “i”, so that a subordinate relation must be defined on the correspond-ing element-heterogeneous set of carriers. Whereas the functional item supplements in pure text constituent structures only appear as supplements for expanded items, they obtain their own structural position in hybrid text constituent structures.
Tüll m; -s, -e feines, durchscheinendes Gewebe [= wa2]
-s [= g] -e [= h] Fig. 3 : Not commented structural graph of the concrete hierarchical (pure) microstructure of the second sample article da2
; the comments are in square brackets
It has already been explained that each item of da2 belongs to a different class of items with the same general genuine purpose. The membership can be illustrated as follows, where “∈” means is an element of :
da2 ∈ DA a ∈ IF b ∈ IPM c ∈ IFLS d ∈ IMor.n e ∈ c.IG f ∈ IDecC g ∈ c.ISF h ∈ c.IPF
We can now construct a set of which the elements form the eight item classes and the class of dictionary articles. The set is called SIC and can be presented as follows :
If one defines a partitive and a precedence relation on SIC, one obtains the abstract hierarchical (pure) microstructure which belongs to da2. This is illustrated in Fig. 4.
DA
IPM IF
IFLS IMor.n
c.IG IDecC
c.ISF c.IPF Fig. 4 : Not commented structural graph of the abstract hierarchical (pure) microstructure of the second sample article da2
If one compares the structural graphs in Figures 3 and 4, one recognizes that the number of lines “——”, the number of nodes and the progression of the lines are the same. Only the node labels
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 163
are different. That means : the concrete hierarchical and the abstract hierarchical microstructure are isomorphous ; they therefore belong to the same isomorphous type and are consequently also equal in their relationship structures. Statements about the relationship structures of an abstract structure therefore also are valid for the relationship structures of all isomorphous concrete structures. In the investigation of lexicographical texts, the abstract textual structures are of spe-cial interest, because they allow for generalisations which are then valid for all isomorphous concrete structures.
In order to simultaneously have at one’s disposal a concrete text constituent structure as a graphical example when presenting an abstract text constituent structure, one preferably selects a way of presentation in dictionary research which combines the tree graph for an abstract con-stituent structure and a tree graph for an isomorphous concrete constituent structure into one structural graph. Then structural illustrations such as the one in Fig. 5 come into being :
DA
IPM IF
IFLS IMor.n
c.IG IDecC
c.ISF c.IPF
Tüll m -s feines, durchscheinendes Gewebe-e Fig. 5 : Not commented structural graph of the (abstract and isomorphous concrete) hierarchical (pure) microstructure of da2
; x ----- Y means x ∈ Y (thus : x is an element of Y)
In Fig. 5, only the terminal text constituents of the concrete hierarchical microstructure are ex-plicitly presented. All others can be derived.
By means of the conceptions, methods of structuring and methods of presentation explained so far, all types of constituent structures which occur in dictionaries within and outside of dic-tionary articles, can be analysed and formally presented.
For textual structures which are no text constituent structures—such as, for example, the ad-dressing structure, the items structure and the mediostructure of dictionary articles—corresponding methods of presentation are available.
In every dictionary, the lexicographical data have to be distributed in a specific way among the integrated components. Therefore each dictionary exhibits a specific data distribution for each class of lexicographical data. The integrated components which are taken into account in the data distribution stand in specific relationships in each dictionary. This means that one can stipu-
164 Systematic Introduction
late data distribution structures for each dictionary. There are many different types of data distri-bution structures, in fact for each class of lexicographical data. Dictionaries which only exhibit an alphabetically ordered word list and no integrated outer texts, always have a simple data dis-tribution structure ; because only an alphabetical relation forms the structure in this case, the corresponding structure is called simple mono-alphabetical data distribution structure. If a dic-tionary exhibits two alphabetical word lists and no integrated outer texts, a simple bi-alphabetical data distribution structure is at hand. Dictionaries which exhibit one or more inte-grated outer texts, always have an expanded data distribution structure. The sample dictionary in § 12 exhibits an integrated outer text ; accordingly a simple expanded bi-alphabetical data distri-bution structure is at hand.
Especially in special-field dictionaries, one finds synopsis articles alongside individual arti-cles. Then we have to do with article-heterogeneous word lists. In such word lists, the lexico-graphical data belonging to specific data classes can be distributed over individual and synopsis articles according to different models of distribution. Depending on which distribution model prevails, one can distinguish additional data distribution structures. The selection of a particular data distribution structure for a dictionary is determined in the first instance by the dictionary functions which have to be covered by a dictionary.
The question of which kind of data distribution and which dictionary functions a dictionary should exhibit, is one of the most important decisions to be taken when a dictionary is planned on a scientific basis.
► artikelheterogenes Wörterverzeichnis [article-heterogeneous word list], Datendistributionsstruktur [data distribution structure], lexikographische Datendistribution [lexicographical data distribution]
§ 17 Text Compound Structure
§ 13 explains that a dictionary exhibits a text compound (= t). By means of the sample dictionary (SD) an explanation was given of what text compound constituents are, and a demonstration was given that the sample dictionary exhibits 15 direct text compound constituents (a-o). These di-rect text compound structures stand in part-whole relationships to the text compound, and in precursor-successor-relationships to each other ; one can therefore present a concrete hierarchi-cal text compound constituent structure. In Fig. 6, this concrete structure of the sample diction-ary is illustrated by applying a simple commented structural graph.
Fig. 6 : Simple commented structural graph for the concrete hierarchical text compound constituent struc-ture of the sample dictionary ; “x——Y” means (read from below upwards) x is a functional part of y
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 165
The text compound constituent structure is the most important partial structure of the text com-pound structure, because it determines the distribution of the greater partial texts of a dictionary. It is furthermore always a one-level hierarchy, so that it only exhibits direct constituents. It is of the utmost importance for the concept of constituents that constituents as part-wholes have a genuine function within the framework of the whole, along with a fixed position and an own form. This also applies to text constituents such as e.g. article text constituents and text com-pound constituents. Not all textual parts of the text compound which were distinguished in § 13 are text compound constituents, because they do not exhibit an own genuine function as part-wholes. In this way, for example, the sample dictionary exhibits a front matter, back matter and a word list series ; these three textual parts of the dictionary are not text compound constituents, because one cannot state which own genuine function they have within the framework of the entire dictionary. Consequently, the front matter and back matter as well as the word list series are as a whole non-functional parts of the dictionary ; for their partial texts, the following is valid : they are only functional with regard to the entire dictionary. For example, it is valid : the genuine function of (e), the guidelines for usage of the dictionary, consists in explaining to the potential user of the dictionary how it should be used ; it obviously does not consist in explaining to the user the usage of the front matter. Therefore, the lexicographical partial text (e) is a func-tional part of the entire dictionary, and a non-functional part of the dictionary front matter. This applies to all other parts of the sample dictionary (a-d and f-o). One therefore has to take into account two different part-whole relations when defining the text compound structure : a transi-tive one, for which the relational rule is a functional part of is valid, and a non-transitive one, for which the relational rule is a non-functional part of is valid. The concrete hierarchical text com-pound structure is illustrated in Fig. 7.
Text compound(Sd) t
Dictionary front matter a–j
Word list series k–l
Dictionary back matter n–o
Short guide
lines for usage
a
Diction-ary title pages
b
List of contents
c
Diction-ary
preface
d
Guide-lines for usage ...
e
Diction-ary gram-
mar
f
Alphabet-ical
glossary
g
Guide-lines for phonetic transcrip-
tion h
Lexi-cographic introduc-
tion i
Alphabet-ical index
j
1st word list
k
2nd word list
e
List of sources
e
Alphabet-ical index
e
List of abbrevia-
tions
e
CONCRETE HIERARCHICAL TEXT COMPOUND STRUCTURE
C. H. FRONTMATTER STRUCTURE C. H. STRUCTURE OF
THE WORD LIST SERIES
C. H. BACKMATTER STRUCTURE
Fig. 7 : Simple commented structural graph of the concrete hierarchical text compound structure which the sample dictionary exhibits ; Abbreviations : C. = CONCRETE ; H. = HIERARCHICAL ; “x ·····► y” means x is a non-functional part of y
The explanations of the article microstructures (in short : microstructures) also apply to con-densed dictionary articles such as e.g. da1 and da2. Because the concrete and isomorphous ab-
166 Systematic Introduction
stract hierarchical microstructure of da2 is already partially known, the next section links to this knowledge.
Firstly, the terminological convention will be introduced that all and only those direct text constituents of a dictionary article which are items, will be called comments. The comments summarise items which can be considered as belonging together from the point of view of lan-guage theory. The second sample article thus exhibits two comments : the comment on form (= CF) and the comment on semantics (= CS) ; consequently, it is true that a ∈ CF and b ∈ CS. A concrete hierarchical partial structure of the concrete hierarchical microstructure belongs to each comment. The terms for the partial structures remain the same for all forms of a comment (cf. Figures 9 and 10) ; for example, all comments on form exhibit a concrete hierarchical left core structure and all comments on semantics exhibit a concrete hierarchical right core structure. These abstract partial structures belong to all the concrete structures. In the presentation of mi-crostructures by means of tree graphs, one can identify the microstructures and their partial structures by borders which are labelled with the class names of the particular structures. The convention prevails that, for pure text constituent structures, the expression pure can be omitted in the structural name. The result will then be commented structural graphs such as in Fig. 8.
DA
Tüll m -s -e feines, durchscheinendes Gewebe
c.ISF c.IPF
IDecC c.IG
IMor.nIFLS
CF
IPM
CS
A. H. SIMPLE MICROSTRUCTURE
A. H. BASIS STRUCTURE
A. H. LEFT CORE STRUC-
TURE
A. H. RIGHT CORE STRUC-
TURE
Fig. 8 : Simple commented structural graph of the abstract (and isomorphous concrete) hierarchical micro-structure of da2
; Abbreviations : A. = ABSTRACT ; H. = HIERARCHICAL
It is important, for example, for the systematic planning of article types which belong to specific types of lemma signs, for the conception and preparation of input masks and also for the system-atic investigation of given dictionary articles to which one can link a systematic analysis of their usefulness, to distinguish precisely between different types of microstructures. The possibilities for distinction vary to a great extent. Therefore, only a rough sketch is given here of how two of the most important partial typologies for microstructures can be obtained. If we talk from now on simply of microstructures, we always mean the abstract hierarchical microstructures ; the same applies to partial structures.
As a first typology criterion (TC), the application of which leads to a partial typology of mi-crostructures which corresponds to a partial typology of article types, we select a criterion with
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 167
three parameters, namely : TC1 = ‘number, type and order of comments’. In the sample article da2, this typology criterion is presented as follows :
Presentation structure of TC1 in da2 : number : 2 ; type : CF, CS ; order : CF < CS (with “<”
for precedes). The parameter ‘order’ simultaneously provides an article structure scheme ; this is a short-
ened feature of the corresponding article types ; for da1, it is : DA�CF < CS ; here “�” means consists of.
Now the following is true : if a dictionary article (such as e.g. da2) only has two comments, namely a comment on form (CF) and a comment on semantics (CS), or a comment on form and semantics (CFS) or another second comment, and if the first directly precedes one of the latter, we have to do with a basal dictionary article ; da1 belongs to this article type. A basal dictionary article exhibits a microstructure which belongs to the type “simple microstructures” (cf. Fig. 8). Simple microstructures always have three partial structures (differentiated by fixed structural names) : the left and the right core structure and the basis structure (cf. Fig. 8).
In contrast to basal dictionary articles with simple microstructures we have textually ex-panded dictionary articles with expanded microstructures. The following is true : always when the first quantitative parameter of the typology criterion is higher than 2 and when thus at least three comments belong to a dictionary article, such a textually expanded article exhibits an ex-panded microstructure. The textual expansion can be in different positions in a basal dictionary article ; one can distinguish between external positions and internal ones. In the case of an exter-nal expansion, one can put items before the comment on form. These then form the pre-comment (= Pre-C) ; the left frame structure as partial structure of a microstructure belongs to this type, and it gives a presentation of the type “left-expanded microstructures”. The article structure scheme of the corresponding article type is : DA�Pre-C < CF < CS. Or, secondly, items can follow on the comment on semantics. These then form the post-comment (PC) to which the right frame structure as partial structure of the microstructure belongs, and this gives a presentation of the type “right-expanded microstructures”. The corresponding article type exhib-its the article structure scheme : DA�CF < CS < PS. For an article which have both a pre- and a post-comment, the article structure scheme is : DA�Pre-C < CF < CS < PC, and this exhibits a microstructure which belongs to the type “externally completely expanded microstructures”. The general microstructural image for dictionary articles exhibiting both external comments and which lemma signs are monosemantic, is found in Fig. 9.
168 Systematic Introduction
da
Pre-C
LEFT FRAME
STRUCTURE
CF
LEFT CORE
STRUCTURE
CS
RIGHT CORE
STRUCTURE
PC
RIGHT FRAME
STRUCTURE
BASIS STRUCTURE
EXTERNALLY COMPLETELY EXPANDED MICROSTRUCTURE
Fig. 9 : General microstructural image for externally completely expanded microstructures in articles with monosemantic lemma signs ; Abbreviations : Pre-C = Pre-comment ; PC = Post-comment
A general microstructural image is an extract from the tree graph of an abstract microstructure, composed according to exact prescriptions, and is therefore a formal medium of presentation. It enables a quick overview of the microstructural type. Exactly one article structure scheme be-longs to each general microstructural image. Dictionary articles can also be internally expanded. The most simple possibility for this is given when items stand between the comment on form and the comment on semantics. These then form the central medial comment (cMC) ; the central interstructure as partial structure of the microstructure belongs to this type, which gives a presentation of the type “microstructures with internally expanded basis structure”. The microstructure that da1 exhibits, belongs to this type of microstructure. The following article structure scheme belongs to the corresponding article type : DA�CF < cMC < CS.
Additional internal expansion can be made possible by splitting up both basic comments. This is e.g. the case when items are bedded which do not refer to the form of the lemma sign into the comment on form. Such items split the comment on form into a frontal comment on form and a back comment on form (fCF, bCF) and constitute the left medial comment (lMC) ; to this belongs a left interstructure as partial structure of a microstructure, which gives a presentation of the type “microstructures with left-expanded basis structure”. The article exhibiting a micro-structure of this type belongs to the article type with the following article structure scheme : DA�fCF < lMC < bCF < CS. The same applies to the comment on semantics ; the terminology is analogous.
In Fig. 10, the general microstructural image for completely expanded and internally com-pletely expanded microstructures is given.
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 169
DA
LEFT FRAME
STRUCTU-RE
FRONTAL LEFT CORE STRUCTU-
RE
LEFT INTER-
STRUCTU-RE
BACK LEFT CORE
STRUCTU-RE
CENTRAL INTER-
STRUCTU-RE
FRONTAL RIGHT CORE STRUCTURE
RIGHT INTER-
STRUCTU-RE
BACK RIGHT CORE
STRUCTURE
RIGHT FRAME
STRUCTU-RE
Pre-C fCF lMC bCF cMC fCS rMC bCS PC
INTERNALLY COMPLETELY EXPANDED MICROSTRUCTURE
COMPLETELY EXPANDED MICROSTRUCTURE Fig. 10 : General microstructural image for completely expanded and internally complete microstructures in articles with monosemantic lemma signs ; Abbreviations : fCF = frontal comment on form ; lMC = left medial comment ; bCF = back comment on form ; cMC = central medial comment ; fCS = frontal comment on semantics ; rMC = right medial comment ; bCS = back comment on semantics
Figures 9 and 10 allow for the recognition of three external and seven internal possibilities for expansion in a basal dictionary article. Because each external expansion can be combined with each internal expansion, there can be 21 possible mixed expansions, which gives a total of 31. The application of the selected typology criterion therefore produces 32 types of microstruc-tures. All structural types can be demonstrated in dictionaries of the languages spoken in Europe.
The sample article da3 in Fig. 11 is internally expanded as well as externally expanded ; con-sequently it exhibits a mixed expanded microstructure, and we have to do here with a left-expanded microstructure with left-expanded basis structure, the structural image of which can be found in Fig. 12. The article structure scheme for da3 is : DA�Pre-C < fCF < lMC < bCF < CS.
*Kạdmium (gr.) n; -s, , oPl: ein dem Zink ähnliches Metall, das meistens in Zinkerzen vorkommt
Fig. 11 : Third sample article (da3) ; Abbreviations : “*” means loan word : gr. = Greek ; oPl = ohne Plural (= “without plural”)
170 Systematic Introduction
DA
cFC
IFLS||_Wacc| vocq.b|Isp|
IWF.ns
Pre-C
IILW
lMC
c.I-LO
bCF
IMor.n
c.IG IDecC
c.ISF c.IoSF
CS
IPM
oPl -s n in dem Zink [...] vorkommt
gr. Ka.dmium *
A. H.LEFT
FRAME STRUCTU-
RE
A. H.FRONTAL
LEFT CORE STRUCTU-
RE
A. H.LEFT
INTER-STRUCTU-
RE
A. H. BACK LEFT CORE STRUCTU-RE
A. H. RIGHT CORE STRUCTU-RE
A. H. LEFT-EXPANDED BASIS STRUCTURE
LEFT-EXPANDED MICROSTRUCTURE WITH LEFT-EXPANDED BASIS STRUCTURE
Fig. 12 : Simple commented structural graph of the abstract (and isomorphous concrete) hierarchical left-expanded microstructure with left-expanded basis structure which da3 exhibits ; Abbreviations : IILW = item identifying a loan word ; “||_” = expanded below ; Wacc|vocq.b = marker for word accent and at the same time for the quantity of brevity of the vowel ; Isp = item giving the spelling ; c.IoSF = condensed item giving the word occurring only in the singular
With this, the reflection on the first partial typology of microstructures, which corresponds to a partial typology of article types, is done.
Next, a brief exposition of a second partial typology follows. The typology criterion for this is the distribution of items giving the meaning and those items influencing the meanings of the lemma sign (such as e.g. items giving examples of various types) within the comment on seman-tics of an article on polysemantic lemma signs, thus the internal structure of the right core struc-ture as partial structure of the microstructure. If the number of presented meanings of a lemma sign determine the number of sub-comments on semantics, and if all the items external to the comment on form which are influenced by a particular meaning, are integrated into the sub-comment on semantics together with the item giving the meaning, then the particular dictionary article exhibits an integrated microstructure. This is the case in da4, the fourth sample article in Fig. 13.
Konzẹrt das; -(e)s, -e ‹ital.› 1. öf-fentliche Aufführung von Musik-werken: ins K. gehen; ein K. besuchen; ein K. geben, dirigieren; das K. wird vom Rundfunk übertragen 2. Komposi-tion für ein oder mehrere Soloinstru-mente mit Orchesterbegleitung: ein K. für Violine und Orchester; das berüh-mte K. in A-Dur; ein K. komponieren.
In Fig. 14, the abstract hierarchical and the isomorphous concrete hierarchical right core struc-ture, which belong to the comment on semantics of da4, are illustrated.
DA
1. [iBIj] öffentliche Aufführung von Musik-
werken
ins K. gehen
ein K. besuchen
ein K. geben,
dirigieren
das K […]
übertra-gen
2. [iBIj] Komposition […] Orches-terbegleitung
ein K. […]
Orchester
das berühmte K. […]
ein K. kompo-nieren
I- pragZM
IPM c. IComEx
c. IComEx
c. ICom2Ex
c. IComEx
I- pragZM
IPM c. IComEx
c. IComEx
c. IComEx
pragsemI I:Iex4 pragsemI IComEx3
S-Csem IP IP S-Csem
CS (second)
A. H. INTEGRATE (first) A. H. INTEGRATE
A. H. RIGHT CORE STRUCTURE
Fig. 14 : Simple commented structural graph of the abstract (and concrete isomorphous) right core struc-ture, exhibited by the comment on semantics of da4 ; Abbreviations : pragsemI = pragmatic-semantic item ; I:Iex4 = item consisting of 4 items giving examples partly from different classes (= heterosegmentary item giving examples with 4 items giving examples) ; c.IComEx = condensed item giving the competence ex-ample ; v.KBei2A = condensed item giving the competence example with 2 competence examples ; IComEx3 = non-elementary item giving a competence example consisting of 3 items giving competence examples
For the sample article da4, the following condition is valid : It belongs in a dictionary in which guidelines for usage one can read that the labelling items directly precede the item giving the paraphrase of the meaning, and if they are missing, it means that the treated lemma sign belongs to standard language. For this reason, an item for the pragmatic zero marking (I-pragZM) has to be put into the abstract right core structure which corresponds to a blank item (BI) in the con-crete structure. Fig. 14 clearly shows that all items of the comment on semantics which are de-termined or influenced by a meaning of the lemma sign Konzert, are integrated, in each case, into an integrate as partial structure of the right core structure.
In a typology of article microstructures, the integrated microstructures are the most important sub-type of microstructures with integration. Additional sub-types of the latter microstructural type are given when items within the comment on semantics are phased out either to the left in front of the item giving the polysemy, or to the right after the last sub-comment on semantics. Phasing out to the left results in text condensation ; phasing out to the right results in text relaxa-tion. Dictionary articles with items in the comment on semantics which are phased out to the left exhibit a partially integrated microstructure with pre-integrate. Articles with items phased out to the right, such as in example da1, exhibit a partially integrated microstructure with post-integrate. In such dictionary articles, an annex (of which the corresponding partial structure of the microstructure forms the post-integrate) is found after the last sub-comment of the comment
172 Systematic Introduction
on semantics, and therefore these microstructures are also called annexed microstructures. They exhibit several sub-types.
The microstructures with integration, to which several sub-types belong, but which have not been mentioned here, stand in contrast to the microstructures without integration. The most im-portant sub-type here are non-integrated microstructures. In articles with non-integrated micro-structures, the distribution of items determined or influenced by the meanings of the lemma sign is organised in a totally different way. In the first sub-comment on semantics, which is then called sub-comment for the lexical meaning, all items giving the meaning stand for a polyseman-tic lemma sign. The additional sub-comments of the comment on semantics are determined by a system of context classes. For example, in the second sub-comment on semantics, one finds the lemma sign in all the given meanings in co-text with nouns, and in the third sub-comment on semantics, in co-text with verbs.
Finally, there are dictionary articles with semi-integrated microstructures. In the comment on semantics of such dictionary articles, at least the items for the meaning are distributed like arti-cles with integrated microstructures ; this is followed by the items giving examples, ordered ac-cording to co-text classes, as in the case of articles with non-integrated microstructures. Also in semi-integrated microstructures, there are several sub-types. This ends the explanation of the second partial typology.
Each microstructure can simultaneously be classified into a microstructural type of both par-tial typologies. For the sample articles da1–da4, the following is then true :
– da1 exhibits a simple annexed microstructure with internally expanded basis structure ; – da2 exhibits a simple integrated microstructure ; – da3 exhibits a left-expanded integrated microstructure ; – da4 exhibits an integrated microstructure with internally expanded basis structure.
Classifying a microstructure into a microstructural type of both partial typologies, unambigu-ously characterises it.
In § 18, it was already explained that items stand in an item relationship with something else, and also that most items are addressed to other items. The addressing relationships in a con-densed dictionary article replace the text-syntactical relationships which got lost in the process of text condensation ; they enable the experienced user-in-action to reconstruct the item relation-ships to the particular part of the dictionary subject matter. For example, in da4, the condensed item giving the language of origin „ital.“ is addressed to the item giving the form of the lemma sign Konzẹrt (which is expanded downwards), so that the user can relate it to the lemma sign
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 173
Konzert, and the lexicographical information can emerge that Konzert has been borrowed from Italian.
The items structure therefore is the structure with which all article-internal item relationships are conceived. It can be obtained by expanding the microstructure with the corresponding ad-dressing structure (cf. Figures 16 and 17). The presentation of the items structure by means of tree graphs takes place as follows : The labelling of the nodes with the abbreviated class names for items is expanded to the right with an address symbol, with which the reference address is mentioned ; the address symbol is written in italics, after a dot printed in bold and placed in the middle of the line. For the fifth sample article, da5 in Fig. 15, the abstract and the isomorphous concrete hierarchical item structure is illustrated in Fig. 16.
Montag der; -(e)s, -e erster Tag der Woche: an Montagen sind viele Restaurants geschlossen
+ u m g . blauen M. machen (an einem Montag unbegründet der Arbeit fernbleiben)
Fig. 15 : Fifth sample article (da5)
CF
Montag der -(e)s -e [iABj] erster Tag der Woche
an Monta-gen […]
geschlossen
+ u m g . blauen M.
machen
am […] fern-
bleiben
CISF2· IFLS
C.IPF· IFLS
IDecC· IFLS
IFLS||_wac| Idvocq.l| WF.ns|
Isp IArt.�G| pSp·IFLS
IMor.n· IFLS
I- pragZM·
IFLS
IPM· IFLS
IComEx· IFLS
pragsemI·IFLS
CS·IFLS
IIPhras·c.IPhras
pragI.n·c.IPhras
c.Phras IPM· c.IPhras
PC:Phras
DA
A. H. INTEGRATED RIGHT-EXPANDED ITEM STRUCTURE
A. H. BASIS STRUCTURE/IsS
A. H.LEFT
CORESTRUC-
TURE/IsS
A. H. RIGHT CORE STRUCTURE/IsS
A. H. RIGHT FRAME STRUCTURE/IsS
Fig. 16 : Simple commented structural graph of the abstract (and isomorphous concrete) hierarchical items structure exhibited by da5 ; Abbreviations : IsS = ITEMS STRUCTURE ; RIGHT CORE STRUCTURE/IsS to be read as “right core structure as partial structure of the items structure” ; Ii·Ij to be read as “item Ii ad-dressed to item Ij” ; IIPhras = item identifying the phraseme ; c.IPhras = condensed item giving the phraseme
In Fig. 16, all items of which the class names are not expanded with one address symbol to the centre, are non-addressed items ; these are the comment on form (CF), the item giving the form
174 Systematic Introduction
of the lemma sign (IFLS), the post-comment for the phraseme (PC:Phras), and the condensed item giving the phraseme (c.IPhras). All other items of da5 are addressed items ; in da5, there are two reference addresses. The item giving the form of the lemma sign is the reference address for the items in the comment on form, and in the comment on semantics. The condensed item giving the phraseme is the reference address in the post-comment on the phraseology. A topic switch accompanies the switch of the reference addresses : in the comments on form and semantics, the features of the noun „Montag“ (= “Monday”), which belongs to the dictionary subject matter, form the topic ; in the post-comment on the phraseology, these features of the phraseme „blauen Montag machen“ (= “extending the weekend”) form the topic.
One can also distinguish different types of items structures. An important partial typology can be found e.g. when one takes into account the different article-internal addressing constella-tions for the formation of types. For example, if all addressed items of a dictionary article are addressed to the item giving the form of the lemma sign, we have an addressing constellation of complete lemmatic addressing, such as e.g. in da2 and da3
; an addressing constellation of par-tially lemmatic addressing is present when other items, apart from the item giving the form of the lemma sign, are reference addresses, such as e.g. in da1, da4 and da5. One can therefore dif-ferentiate items structures with complete lemmatic addressing from items structures with partial lemmatic addressing. The former are called complete lemmatic focussed items structures, the latter are called partial lemmatic focussed items structures.
Da1, for example, exhibits a simple annexed items structure with internally expanded basis structure and partial lemmatic addressing. Da2, on the other hand, exhibits a simple integrated items structure with complete lemmatic addressing. If one takes into account additional address-ing constellations, further sub-types of items structures emerge.
It has been stated that items structures can be obtained by expanding microstructures with addressing structures. Next, the addressing structure belonging to the sample article da5 is intro-duced, namely the addressing structure with which the microstructure of da5 was expanded in such a way that the items structure presented in Fig. 16 is given. Addressing structures are not hierarchical text constituent structures. Nevertheless, they also have a concrete and an isomor-phous abstract presentation. Next, the abstract presentation of the addressing structure of da5 will be presented. For this, one firstly needs a set of carriers ; the elements of this set are already known : they are the item classes from the set of carriers for the abstract hierarchical integrated items structure expanded to the right in Fig. 16 of which the elements are addressed items, and the item classes of which the elements are items carrying reference addresses. Accordingly, the set of carriers for the abstract addressing structure can be presented as follows :
On SIC (da5), a two-part asymmetrical and irreflexive relation—it is called RAdr (da5)—is de-fined ; RAdr
;(da5) is a relation from the type of addressing relations with the relational rule x is article-internally addressed to y. The structure-forming relation RAdr (da5) induces a partition P(da5) on the set of carriers SIC (da5) ; that means that RAdr (da5) divides the set of carriers SIC (da5) into two disjunct partial sets, namely into SIC.adI(da5), the set of item classes of which the ele-ments are addressed items (adI) and into SIC.Adr, the set of item classes of which the elements are
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 175
addressed (Adr), together with their reference addresses carriers. Accordingly, the partition P(da5) is defined as follows :
P(da5) : {SIC.adI(da5), SIC.Adr(da5)}.
SIC.adI(da5) is the front domain, and SIC.Adr(da5) is the back domain. If one applies the presentation method for finite rules by means of arrow diagrams, the abstract addressing structure which e.g. belongs to the sample article da5, can be presented in Fig. 17.
SIC.adI(da5)
IMor.nIArt
IDecCc.ISF2
c.IPlCS
pragsemIIComEx
I-pragZMIPM1
IIPhrasPragI.n
IPM2
SIC.Adr(da5)
IFLS
c.IPhras
Fig. 17 : Arrow diagram for the abstract addressing structure belonging to the sample article da5
Finally, it has to be pointed out expressively that one should distinguish between items struc-tures and item structures. The latter are the textual structures of items. For example, all com-ments which are in fact non-elementary items, exhibit an item structure. In the comments, these item structures have a fixed structural name ; thus, a comment on form e.g. always exhibits a left core structure. But non-elementary items which do not have the status of comments, also exhibit an item structure, only here, the structural names are not fixed.
In the application of the method of functional-positional segmentation of dictionary articles, which has the purpose of constructing their article constituent structures and their microstruc-tures, line-bound language series, which are constituted in writing, are segmented in several steps by taking into account categories from language theory. Article-internal sections and the formation of text blocks related to them, grey background printing in text blocks, article-internal switches from column-free sections to two-column sections, and many more strategies, are not taken into account. There is, however, a second strategy for the segmentation of dictionary arti-cles. This is planned in such a way that the visually clearly discernable inner construction of the two-dimensional textual structure of dictionary articles (consisting of textual partial structures) are taken into account in the first step of segmentation. At the earliest in the second step of the
176 Systematic Introduction
segmentation of dictionary articles will one draw on categories from language theory, or—when dealing with special-field dictionary articles—special-field categories, as the case may be.
In the construction of search area structures, dictionary articles are regarded as textual search areas which are unambiguously demarcated from the outside. Then, they are considered as an ordered set of potential search goals for a set of search questions on a fixed topic ; this is deter-mined by the particular lemma sign and by the microstructural programme, and thus also by the dictionary type. Most of the items are then regarded as potential search goals. Ordered sets of items which are clearly demarcated by line-bound semiotic tools or items which are not line-bound, form search zones, irrespective whether the items belong to a category, considered from the perspective of language theory. The search zones are direct text constituents of the search area. They can exhibit sub-search zones. The individual zones of a search area are demarcated from each other by structural indicators which are not line-bound (e.g. two-dimensional signs for grouping together, such as grey background printing or borders) and by line-bound structural indicators (such as e.g. dots and commas on the level of the dictionary structure). Accordingly, typographical and non-typographical search area indicators, search zone indicators, sub-search zone indicators and search goal indicators can be distinguished. The non-typographical structural indicators can have text constituent status—according to the prevailing segmentation conven-tion. Line-bound search zone indicators are always functional text segments of the search zones that they designate.
The perspective from which dictionary articles are viewed as search areas, is closer to the user perspective than to a perspective in which they are viewed as the ordered presentation of lexicographical data on the basis of distinctions made in language theory.
Search area structures are hierarchical text constituent structures. As in the case of article constituent structures and microstructures, one can distinguish between concrete and abstract ones.
In Fig. 18, the sample article da6 is given, which belongs to a special-field dictionary of in-formation science.
Aussageform Teilgeb.: Logik Äquiv: sentential form Syn: Aussagefunktion Abk: Ø Def: Sprachliches Gebilde, das Vari-
ablen enthält und durch Ersetzung aller Variablen durch zulässige Objektna-men in eine Aussage übergeht.
Lit: Müller 1995 · Wagner 1998 Fig. 18 : Sixth sample article (da6) ; Abbreviations : Teilgeb. = sub-area ; Äquiv = Equivalents ; Syn = synonyms ; Abk = Abbreviations ; Def = definition ; Lit = literature ; “Ø” means usually no abbreviation
The special-field dictionary article consists of seven search zones. Search zones can be either numbered one after the other, or one can give each one an appropriate name. The first-mentioned method is used when search zones have a heterogeneous content ; the latter method is used in the case of homogeneous ones, such as in da6. Each of the seven search zones is semioti-cally emphasised in such a manner that it forms an individual text block, and in addition presents
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 177
a special search zone indicator. In the first search zone, the form zone, the typographical search zone indicator is the feature ‘bold’ in the item form of the item giving the form of the lemma sign. This search zone indicator simultaneously functions as the search area indicator. The fol-lowing six search zones of da6 all start with a condensed item giving some kind of identification (cf. Fig. 20). The first five and the seventh search zone are strongly standardised and highly condensed. The sixth search zone, the definition zone, on the other hand, is an item text. Fig. 19 presents the general search area image for da6.
DA|SA
FZ
FORM ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
SUB-AREA ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
subAZ EZ
EQUIVA-LENT ZONE STRUCTU-
RE
SynZ
SYNONYM ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
AbrZ
ABBREVI-ATION ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
DfZ
DEFINITION ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
LitZ
LITERATU-RE ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
ONE-LEVEL SEARCH AREA STRUCTURE
Fig. 19 : General search area structural image for da6 ; Abbreviations : DA|SA = dictionary article as search area ; FZ = form zone ; subAZ = sub-area zone ; EZ = equivalent zone ; SynZ = synonym zone ; AbrZ = abbreviation zone ; DfZ = definition zone ; LitZ = literature zone
One can also distinguish between different types in the case of search area structures. The search area structure exhibited by da6 belongs to the type of one-level search area structures, because only search zones are given as direct text constituents. Articles with sub-search areas (of the first degree), on the other hand, have two-level search area structures. Fig. 20 contains the presenta-tion of the abstract (and isomorphous concrete) hierarchical search area structure of da6.
With the three types of text constituent structures of dictionary articles discussed so far, namely, the type of article constituent structure, that of the microstructure and that of the search area structure, two types of form-giving rules were given : the type of partitive relations (with the relational rule x is a functional text segment of y) and that of precedence relations (with the rela-tional rule x precedes y). The position of the text constituents to each other in the two-dimensional space can, however, not be expressed with relations belonging to these types. Text block formation, among others, is taken into account by the strategy of segmentation which is followed in the identification of text constituents of search area structures (cf. § 20), but the position of the text blocks to each other is not. Therefore, the sample article da6 and the sample article da7 in Fig. 21, which contains the same lexicographical data as da6, but only in a different format, have the same structural presentation.
Aussageform Teilg: Logik Syn: Aussagefunk-tion
Äquiv: sen-tential form Abk: Ø
Def: Sprachliches Gebilde, das Vari-ablen enthält und durch Ersetzung aller Variablen durch zulässige Ob-jektnamen in eine Aussage übergeht. Lit: Müller 1995 · Wagner 1998
Fig. 21 : Seventh sample article (da7)
In order to clearly understand the difference between the textual article structures of da6 and da7, one needs positional relations : these are called text-topological or text-architectonic (in short : architectonic) relations. There is a distinction between the vertical and the horizontal relational types : the type above-relation and the type below-relation belong to the first type ; the left- and right-relations belong to the latter type. All relations belonging to these types are two-fold. The corresponding relational rules are : x is above y and y is below x, and x is to the right of y and y is to the left of x.
In the construction of text architectures, one can distinguish three cases.
1. If one defines text-architectonic relations on sets of which the elements are microstructural text con-stituents, one obtains microarchitectures.
2. If the elements of the sets of carriers on which the text-architectonic relations are defined are article-structural text constituents, article constituent architectures (in short : article architectures) become available.
3. Finally, one has at one’s disposal search area architectures when one defines text-architectonic relations on sets of which the elements are search area structural text constituents.
Depending on the type of relation to which the text-architectonic relations belong, one obtains a text architecture of another type. If the structure-forming relations are above- and/or below-relations, one obtains vertical text architectures ; if, on the other hand, we have to do with right- or left-relations, we obtain horizontal text architectures. Accordingly, one can distinguish verti-cal article-, micro- and search area architectures and horizontal article-, micro- and search area architectures.
180 Systematic Introduction
A dictionary article which exhibits a vertical microarchitecture has a vertically architectonic extended microstructure ; an article with horizontal microarchitecture exhibits a horizontally architectonic extended microstructure.
The same applies to both the other text constituent structures. The text constituent structure of a specific dictionary article can be architectonically extended both vertically and horizontally. We also find a partial architectonic extension of text constituent structures. Longer dictionary articles of which the text constituent structure are extended architectonically, are more user-friendly than dictionary articles with the same supply of data, but without text architecture.
The means of presentation for text architectures of whatever nature are text architectural im-ages, of which there are several types. Although these are clear, they are not ad-hoc illustrations with a didactical purpose, but formal presentations of text architectures.
Next, we look at the search area architecture of da6. This sample article exhibits seven search zones ; each belongs to a search zone class (cf. Fig. 22). The seven search zone classes (SZC) can be summarised into the following set of carriers for the search area architecture :
SSZC = { FZ, subAZ, EZ, SynZ, AbrZ, DfZ, LitZ}
An above-relation and a below-relation is defined on this set ; put differently, this means : For the set SSZC, an ordered set is determined of which the elements are all ordered pairs (or 2-tuple) of search zone classes, and on which elements (thus the search zones of da6) a pair of statements are applicable in each instance which can be formed with the mentioned relational rules. For example, “(FZ, subAZ)” is an ordered pair from RSZC
; the following statements are true : (i) “FZ is above subAZ” and (ii) “subAZ is below FZ”. All true statements of this type which
are possible for RSZC, are illustrated in the general architectural image in Fig. 22, and can be extrapolated systematically.
With this, it is clear that da6 exhibits a one-level vertically architectonic extended search area structure ; da6 is therefore differentiated from da7 from a textual-structural point of view. Be-cause the search area structure of da7 is architectonically extended vertically as well as horizon-tally.
The text-architectonic extension of text constituent structures of dictionary articles can also be taken into account in the presentation of these structures by means of tree graphs. This hap-pens when the nodes representing such text constituents, and which belong to the set of carriers of the text architecture, are linked by defined arrows or double arrows (such as e.g. “◄===►▪▪▪▪ ”). In this way, the search area structural image of da6 in Fig. 22 can be converted into a general search area structural- and search area architectural image, as can be seen in Fig. 23.
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 181
DA|SA
FZ
subAZ
EZ
SynZ
AbrZ
DfZ
LitZ
ABSTRACT VERTICAL SEARCH AREA ARCHITECTURE Fig. 22 : General search area architectural image for the abstract vertical search area architecture exhibited by da6 ; Presentation conventions : “x ◄===►▪▪▪▪ y” means x is above y and y is below x ; grey background are all elements of the set of carriers SSZC ; Abbreviations cf. Fig. 19
DA|SA
FZ
FORM ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
SUB-ZONE STRUCTU-
RE
subAZ EZ
EQUIVA-LENT ZONE STRUCTU-
RE
SynZ
SYNONYM ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
AbrZ
ABBREVI-ATION ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
DfZ
DEFINITION ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
LitZ
LITERATU-RE ZONE
STRUCTU-RE
ONE-LEVEL VERTICALLY ARCHITECTONIC EXTENDED SEARCH AREA STRUCTURE
Fig. 23 : General search area structural image and search area architectural image for da6
When we cast a brief look on the sample article da1, we immediately see that it exhibits a verti-cal text architecture, because five text blocks can be discerned clearly. Whereas one can proceed from five search search zones as direct text constituents of the search area in the construction of the search area structure and the vertical search area architecture, it is not possible to construct a microarchitecture ; because only the last text block in fine print is a microstructural text constitu-ent, namely the annex within the comment on semantics. The four other text blocks are not mi-
182 Systematic Introduction
crostructural text constituents ; rather, we have to do here with series of microstructural text constituents. Thus the first text block of da1 consists of the comment on form (CF) which is di-rectly followed by the central medial comment (cMC) (CF < cMC). The four text blocks which each start with an item giving the polysemy (IP) are also not microstructural text constituents. Because the item giving the polysemy is not part of the sub-comment on semantics (S-Csem) which follows it, but it is a direct text constituent of the comment on semantics which directly precedes the sub-comment on semantics. Therefore, the four text blocks also consist of a series of microstructural text constituents (IP < S-Csem).
If one wants to ensure that a microarchitecture is attributed to da1, one has to allow that not only microstructural text constituents, but also series of microstructural text constituents have to be taken into account as elements of sets of carriers on which architectural relations should be defined. The set of carriers of the corresponding classes can then be presented as follows for da1
If one defines a text-architectonic relation on sets of carriers which contain at least one series of text constituents as elements, one obtains hybrid text architectures, and consequently, in the case on hand, a hybrid vertical microarchitecture of which the general structural image can be found in Fig. 24. For the sample article is now valid that it exhibits an abstract (and isomorphous con-crete) hybrid vertically architectonic extended microstructure with internally expanded basis structure, of which an expanded general microstructural and architectural image can be found in Fig. 25.
DA
CF < cMC
CS
IP < S-Csem
IP < S-Csem
IP < S-Csem
IP < S-Csem
ANNEX
VERTICAL HYBRID MICROARCHITECTURE Fig. 24: General microarchitectural image for the vertical hybrid microarchitecture exhibited by da1
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 183
DA
CF cMC SK
S-Csem IP
1.
S-CsemIP
2.
S-CsemIP
3.
S-CsemIP
4.
ANNEX
HYBRID VERTICALLY ARCHITECTONIC EXTENDED MICROSTRUCTURE WITH INTERNALLY EXPANDED BASIS STRUCTURE
Fig. 25: Expanded general microstructural and microarchitectural image for da6
► allgemeines Textarchitekturbild [general text architectural image], Artikelkonstituentenarchitektur [article constituent architecture], hybride Textarchitektur [hyrbid text architecture], Mikroarchitektur [microarchitecture], Suchbereichsarchitektur [search area architecture], textarchitektonische Relation [text-architectonic relation], Textarchitektur [text architecture]
§ 22 Macrostructures
One can distinguish two fundamentally different types of macrostructures on the uppermost level of observation : macrostructures characterised by their structure, and those which are not characterised by their structure. Characterised by their structure here means that a macrostruc-ture is arranged according to features of language structures constituted in writing. Next, we can only look at those macrostructures characterised by their structure, found in printed dictionaries, which are the most important ones in the sphere of written cultures using alphabetic writing systems : alphabetical macrostructures. Not characterised by their structure accordingly means that a macrostructure is arranged according to features not given by language structures consti-tuted in writing, but by their usage.
Next, we look at alphabetic macrostructures. Firstly, it is always valid : an alphabetic macro-structure determines the outer arrangement in the word list of an alphabetical dictionary ; if an alphabetical dictionary exhibits several word lists, the alphabetical macrostructure determines the outer arrangement in several word lists. Because the outer arrangement is alphabetical, an alphabetical macrostructure is either structurally identical to the alphabetical main access struc-ture (meaning that there is a mono-alphabetical macrostructure), or it exhibits several alphabeti-cal access structures as its macrostructural partial structures (meaning that a poly-alphabetical macrostructure is present). In addition, an alphabetical macrostructure has a general genuine function which is criterial for distinguishing it from alphabetical outer access structures ; this entails that it completely exhibits the macrostructural coverage of the dictionary, specific to the dictionary type. In the case of alphabetical dictionaries, by far the greater part of the lexicographical coverage of the dictionary is always given with the macrostructural coverage ; the share of the microstructural coverage is usually small.
After these explanations, one can characterise an alphabetical macrostructure as follows : an alphabetical macrostructure is the ordered set of all the alphabetical outer access structures of
184 Systematic Introduction
which the outer access text elements contribute to the macrostructural coverage specific to the dictionary type. In the case of mono-alphabetical macrostructures, the set of alphabetical outer access structures is a set with only one element.
In observing alphabetical macrostructures and thus also when planning them, one has to take into account a series of aspects ; the most important ones are the following :
1. The selection of the language units which have to belong to the macrostructure ; 2. The distribution of these units into the macrostructural access structures, when the macrostructure is
poly-alphabetical ; 3. The position in space that the macrostructural access structures have to each other ; 4. The stipulation of the alphabetical form of arrangement within the macrostructural access structures ; 5. The macrostructural coverage and thus the quantitative relationship of the macrostructure to the subject
matter of the dictionary.
To (1) : The selection of the language units for the alphabetical macrostructure is concerned with the outer selection. In the case of mono-alphabetical macrostructures, only one lemma selection results from the dictionary basis as the set of all sources. In the case of poly-alphabetical macro-structures, the outer selection includes the selection of the language units which e.g. are men-tioned with the macrostructural outer text entrances. The outer selection stands in contrast to the inner selection ; this concerns the macrostructural data offering. The selection of citations e.g. belong to the inner selection.—The outer selection is determined by numerous factors, which receive different measures of importance in each particular case. The following four are among the most important factors :
a) the assumed or known needs in the circle of addressees of the dictionary and thus the dictionary func-tions ;
b) the economic guidelines to the extent that they are actual prescriptions for the comprehensiveness of the dictionary ;
c) the features of the dictionary which constitute the type to which it belongs ; d) the given possibilities for the construction of the dictionary basis.
The outer selection has a qualitative and a quantitative aspect. The qualitative aspect is con-cerned with questions about the types of language units to which the selected language signs should belong, e.g. : should affixes be presented as lemmas ? The quantitative aspect especially deals with questions about how high the share of the different units should be with regard to the total inventory of macrostructural elements, or in the case of mono-alphabetical macrostructures, with regard to the collection of lemmas, e.g. : How many verbs should be presented as lemmas ? Or : how many abbreviations from the dictionary’s subject matter should be mentioned with the outer text entrances of a macrostructural access structure for the list of abbreviations ?
To (2) : The distribution of the selected language units over the alphabetical macrostructural access structures, and thus over the partial structures of a poly-alphabetical macrostructure, re-sults in accordance with the data distribution programme for the dictionary. In this, one can e.g. provide for the lexicographical treatment of affixes and affixoids in a separate outer text, and see to it that they are mentioned accordingly with the outer text entrances of an alphabetical outer text access structure, which is a partial structure of the poly-alphabetical macrostructure, because the outer access text elements (namely the outer text entrances) contribute to the macrostructural coverage specific to the dictionary type.
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 185
To (3) : For the position of the macrostructural access structures to each other, there are dif-ferent possibilities. Macrostructural outer text access structures can be situated in the back mat-ter or in the front matter, and can thus be placed either in front of or after the main word list with its alphabetical main access structure. Alphabetical macrostructural insertion access structures can be inserted, with their corresponding insertions, into the main word list in such a way that there is a discontinued poly-alphabetical macrostructure. This is also given e.g. when a non-macrostructural outer outer text access structure is placed between the alphabetical main access structure and a macrostructurally post-positioned outer text access structure. If all macrostruc-tural partial structures of a poly-alphabetical macrostructure directly follow each other, this is a continuous macrostructure. The alphabetical macrostructural access structures can also either run vertically or horizontally, and the macrostructural inner text access structures are phased in into the corresponding inner texts in a main word list. General macrostructural images serve as illustrations for the construction of poly-alphabetical macrostructures. Fig. 26 gives an example of a discontinuous poly-alphabetical macrostructure of a general monolingual dictionary.
DISCONTINUOUS POLY-ALPHABETICAL
MACROSTRUCTURE
PRE-POSITIONED ALPHABETICAL MACROSTRUCTURAL OUTER TEXT ACCESS STRUCTURE
PRE-POSITIONED NON-MACROSTRUCTURAL OUTER
TEXT ACCESS STRUCTURE
ALPHABETICAL MAIN ACCESS STRUCTURE
POST-POSITIONED ALPHABETICAL MACROSTRUCTURAL OUTER TEXT ACCESS STRUCTURE
POST-POSITIONED ALPHABETICAL MACROSTRUCTURAL OUTER TEXT ACCESS STRUCTURE
Fig. 26 : General macrostructural image for the type of discontinuous poly-alpbabetical microstructures ; Presentation convention : “x —–► y” means x precedes y
The discontinuous poly-alphabetical macrostructure illustrated in Fig. 26 exhibits the following partial structures :
186 Systematic Introduction
– a pre-positioned macrostructural outer text access structure to the outer text which is internal to the front matter, with the sub-title “Names of countries and designations for their inhabitants” ;
– the alphabetical main access structure for the main word list ; – a post-positioned macrostructural outer text access structure to the first outer text which is internal to
the back matter, with the sub-title “2500 abbreviations and shortened words” ; – a post-positioned macrostructural outer text access structure to the second outer text which is internal to
the back matter, with the sub-title “affixes and affixoids”.
A pre-positioned non-macrostructural outer text access structure is situated between the pre-positioned macrostructural outer text access structure and the alphabetical main access structure.
To (4) : All selected language units which have to function as outer access text elements, thus either as lemmas or as entrances for entries, are considered to be carriers of the guiding element with regard to the alphabetical arrangement. The guiding element is the presentation of the fea-ture in a carrier of the guiding element which enables its systematic (e.g. alphabetical) ordering. The guiding element is a sequence of letters if the outer access text elements neither contain any units consisting of more than one word (which exhibit at least one lemma sign), nor any alpha-numerical special-field expressions. Accordingly, the guiding element of the lemma in da1 is the sequence of letters <Kasino>. Knowledge of the guiding element is a prerequisite for effective consultation of the dictionary.
The arrangement of guiding elements takes place through application of a method of alpha-betisation ; this consists of a set of ordered arrangement principles which have to be applied. The main prescription is the naming of the basic alphabet which forms the basis for the alphabetisa-tion. Other prescriptions govern, among others, the sorting of the alphabet-external letters ; for German, they are e.g. ä, ö, ü, and ß. The arrangement value of the blank character and the access numbers which have to be taken into account are also specified by diacritic signs. All in all, this establishes the dictionary-specific access alphabet, according to which the alphabetical arrange-ment(s) of a particular dictionary will actually be made. Next, we look at selected methods of alphabetisation and the results of their application, on the basis of examples of mono-alphabetical macrostructures, thus those which are structurally identical with alphabetical main access structures.
One can distinguish numerous methods of alphabetisation. The method used most widely at present is the exhaustive mechanical method of alphabetisation. This deals with the complete letter-by-letter alpabetisation either in the direction of writing, or against the direction of writing, taking into account all letters of the carriers of the guiding elements. In the first instance, one obtains initial-alphabetical macrostructures, and in the second instance, one obtains final-alphabetical ones, which occur in so-called retrograde dictionaries. Especially in the case of initial-alphabetical macrostructures, one can distinguish numerous sub-types. Only a few of these types of macrostructures will be explained now.
It is possible to apply the exhaustive mechanical method of alphabetisation either strictly or not strictly. A strict application leads to strictly initial-alphabetical macrostructures. A non-strict application entails that either supplementary prescriptions have to be taken into account in the process of alphabetisation, or a controlled alternation of at least two methods of alphabetisation is allowed. In the case of non-strict application, one obtains non-strictly initial-alphabetical mac-rostructures.
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 187
The alphabetical arrangement of lemmas does not take into account any relationships with regard to the content that lemma signs (named by lemmas following each other) may have to one another. If is it necessary to point out relationships between lemma signs to the user in alpha-betical macrostructures, one has to establish functional article partial stretches, which can be easily recognised by experienced users. This can be done by either using the method of niche formation or the method of nest formation. In the case of niche formation, one has to retain a strictly initial-alphabetical arrangement. Niche formation occurs as follows : several dictionary articles which follow each other and which lemma signs belong together with regard to their content, are gathered into article niches (in short : niches) which are recognisable to the user in the sense that they are put together in one text block and are provided, if necessary, with niche indicators, of which there are several types. These indicators are macrostructural indicators. The first lemma in an article niche is called the niche entrance lemma ; all other lemmas in an article niche are either niche lemmas or niche sub-lemmas. A strictly initial-alphabetical macrostructure with sets of carriers of niche entrance lemmas and niche lemmas or niche sub-lemmas, belongs to the type of niche-alphabetical macrostructures ; here are also several sub-types, depending on the type of lemma to which the niche lemmas belong.
If one makes use of nest formation in establishing functional article stretches, one does not have to retain the strictly initial-alphabetical arrangement of the lemmas within the article nest. Nest indicators are used in nest formation. An article nest exhibits a nest entrance lemma and nest lemmas or nest sub-lemmas, which follow the nest entrance lemma. A non-strictly initial-alphabetical macrostructure with sets of carriers of nest entrance lemmas and nest lemmas or nest sub-lemmas, belongs to the type of nest-alphabetical macrostructures ; there are also several sub-types in this type of macrostructure—depending on which type of lemma the nest lemmas belong to.
If one discards every type of establishment of functional article partial stretches, and if all the lemmas stand in the beginning of the line of a first line of a dictionary article, the accompanying strictly initial-alphabetical macrostructure belongs to the type of straight-alphabetical macro-structures. In this case, the dictionary has a vertical complete lemma stretch. Straight-alphabetical macrostructures can often be found in special-field dictionaries. Macrostructures can also be architectonically extended. Straight-alphabetical macrostructures are always ex-tended vertical-architectonically, because one can define relations on the set of all lemmas which belong to both vertical relational types.
To (5) : Lexicographical coverage is concerned with the quantitative relationship that the set of all the lexical units treated systematically in a dictionary has with the lexicon of a language (which forms the subject matter of the dictionary). Not all lexicographically treated lexical units have to be elements of the set of carriers of the macrostructure. For example, in general mono-lingual dictionaries, fixed expressions are often not macrostructural elements, but only elements of the particular article microstructures. Therefore, one can make a distinction between macro-structural and microstructural lexicographical coverage, which means that one has to take into account microstructural elements in calculating the scope of the lexicographical coverage. In general monolingual dictionaries, for example, the lexicographical coverage is calculated by dividing the counted number of lexicographically treated lexical units into the estimated number of lexical units of the lexicographically treated language. The lexicographical coverage is inves-
188 Systematic Introduction
tigated e.g. to enable an indication of the relative completeness of a dictionary, so that dictionar-ies can be compared regarding this aspect.
Next, we briefly deal with the macrostructures which are not characterised by their struc-tures, which occur in the sphere of written cultures using alphabetical writing systems. These are the non-alphabetic macrostructures. Here, one can distinguish randomised macrostructures from systematic macrostructures. The latter are also called system-related, semantic or conceptual or thematic macrostructures, or macrostructures according to subject groups. All non-alphabetic macrostructures have the feature in common that they do not exhibit any direct external data accessivity—in contrast to alphabetical ones—which means that access to them can only occur externally indirect, namely with the aid of an alpabetical access index.
With randomised macrostructures, the linear order of the outer access text elements are arbi-trary ; that means they are arranged in an arbitrarily selected manner into all kinds of possible linear arrangements which belong to the same set. The outer access text elements of a random-ised macrostructure are not carriers of the guiding element, but they are carriers of cross-reference addresses. The cross-reference addresses are named by the index entrances of an al-phabetical access index of which the index items are page numbers, which means that one can access the carriers of the cross-reference addresses via the page number access structure.
In contrast to dictionaries with an alphabetical macrostructure, the lexicographical presenta-tion of relationships regarding the content has priority in dictionaries with a systematic macro-structure. The elements of the set of carriers of the macrostructure here are the designations for classes of objects and facts. One then defines e.g. a partial class relation on a set of such designations, which means that a classification system is given. The lexical units are classified into macrostructural rubrics which emerge in this way, and which are named differently in individual dictionaries. The rubric-internal arrangement can be initial-alphabetical, or can take place according to a refined second systematic classification.
Access structures guarantee access to data of a dictionary, and therefore the possibility to look up the lexicographical data and have access to them. One can distinguish between external and internal data accessivity. External data accessivity is established by setting up outer access struc-tures, and internal data accessivity is established either by setting up inner access structures, or it is already given in different ways by inner access structures over which experienced users dis-pose cognitively, and which can assist access. A special form of external data accessivity is ex-ternal mediostructural data accessivity ; this is obtained by setting up special outer mediostruc-tural access structures, and is thus given when outer access structures become transparent re-
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 189
garding the cross-references when one uses externally oriented cross-references in a dictionary. Next, we firstly look at outer access structures.
Outer access structures are compulsory for dictionaries, which means that each dictionary has to exhibit at least one outer access structure. A dictionary could have several outer access structures. One can distinguish pure (or : non-hybrid) outer access structures from hybrid outer access structures. Pure access structures are linear ordering structures in the strict mathematical sense. All strictly alphabetical access structures are pure outer access structures. If one intui-tively knows the ordering rules which are valid for a linear ordering structure, and has learnt and mastered the practice of accessing access structures, one can work with reference works. Since potential dictionary users know at least one of the alphabets and can also count, this cultural knowledge is used as a knowledge prerequisite to establish outer access structures in texts, which enable external access to specified textual parts, when certain procedures of usage are performed correctly. The specified textual parts form the access area of an outer access structure. For example, the access area of an alphabetic main access structure is the central word list of a dictionary ; or the access area of an alphabetic outer outer text access structure is the set of all accessive outer text entries. Each access area consists of several access sectors ; these are the accessive entries of a dictionary. For example, the dictionary articles are the access sectors in a central word list ; or the accessive inner text entries are the access sectors of a phased-in inner text with outer inner-text access structure. Each access sector exhibits an outer access text ele-ment. In dictionary articles, these are the lemmas. In the case of all other accessive entries, these are the entry entrances, e.g. the outer text entrances or the index entrances. All outer access text elements are elements of the set of carriers of the corresponding outer access structure.
Not only reference works have access structures, but also e.g. books on subjects have them. Each type of alphabetical index in a subject book has an index access structure ; its direct access area is the set of all index items which follow on the index items. The user can find data on sources, e.g. page numbers in the index entries. Such an index also has an indirect index access area, which consists of the set of all pages of which the page number is mentioned in the index.
Apart from the strictly alphabetical outer access structures, all numerical and alphabetical outer access structures which often appear as outer outer text access structures, are pure access structures. However, because, there cannot be hybrid numerical or alpha-numerical access struc-tures (in contradistinction to alphabetical ones), one cannot speak of pure numerical or pure alpha-numerical outer access structures.
All not-strictly alphabetical outer access structures belong to hybrid access structures, and they are not linear ordering structures in the mathematical sense. The most well-known are nest-alphabetical main access structures, in which one can break the alphabetical order nest-internally so that expressions which belong closer together regarding their contents, can stand closer to-gether.
As already indicated in § 22, all alphabetical outer access structures, apart from the index ac-cess structures, can be partial structures of a poly-alphabetical macrostructure. Then we have macrostructural access structures, which are also called macrostructure-internal access struc-tures. All alphabetical outer partial text access structures, that is, inner text access structures, insertion access structures, and outer text access structures, can be macrostructural access struc-tures. They are such when their entry entrances contribute to the macrostructural coverage spe-
190 Systematic Introduction
cific to the dictionary type. When this is not the case, they are non-macrostructural access struc-tures which are also called macrostructure-external access structures.
In the case of strictly initial-alphabetical outer access structures, one can distinguish numer-ous sub-types. The most important are straight-alphabetical and niche-alphabetical outer access structures, which also have additional sub-types ; the latter are usually presented as main access structures, which means that their access area is the central word list. For straight-alphabetical access structures, an above-relation is additionally defined on the set of carriers, which means that all the lemmas stand vertically beneath each other at the beginning of the line, and the entire lemma stretch of the dictionary thus runs in a vertical line. One can present general access struc-tural images and access architectural images for all outer access structures. Fig. 27 illustrates the general access structural image and access architectural image for the type of straight-alphabetical main access structures.
VERTICAL TOTAL LEMMA STRETCH
Lemma1
sia
Lemma2
sia
Lemma3
sia
Lemman–1
sia
Lemman
STRAIGHT-ALPHABETICAL MAIN ACCESS STRUCTURE
Fig. 27 : General access structure architectural image and access architectural image for the type of straight-alphabetical main access structures. Presentation convention : “x ─sia→ y” means x precedes y strictly alphabetically. “x ===►▪▪▪▪ y” means x is above y
Another important type of outer access structure is mediostructural outer access structures. Me-diostructural outer access structures guarantee the mediostructural external data accessivity in two different ways :
1. Mediostructural index access structures in poly-accessive dictionaries enable external access to mediostructural source data in their direct index access area, namely to index items carrying cross-references with which cross-reference addresses are named, and which are needed as mediostructural guiding elements to perform procedures of following up external cross-references.
2. Alphabetical, alpha-numerical or numerical cross-reference goal area access structures organise their outer access text elements (which are not carriers of the guiding element, but carriers of the cross-reference address) in such a way that the cross-reference addresses (which are e.g. mentioned in dic-tionary articles with items giving the cross-reference) can be systematically looked for in the process of performing the procedures of following up external cross-references. Cross-reference goal area access structures are often presented as non-macrostructural outer outer text access structures.
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 191
In alphabetical dictionaries in which cross-references are made from one dictionary article to others, the alphabetical main access structure is transparent regarding the cross-reference ; it also functions as cross-reference goal area access structure, which means that it is bi-functional.
Lexicographical tables of contents belong to a special structural type. The first part of the ta-ble of contents of the sample dictionary (cf. § 13) has the following structure :
A user who uses this table of contents, reaches in each instance the page on which a text com-pound constituent of the dictionary begins, as mentioned by the heading. Considered on the whole, a table of contents is not an outer access structure. It also does not exhibit an outer access structure ; because a user, coming from outside the dictionary, cannot access a table of contents externally. But with the aid of the table of contents, the user can access the beginnings of the text compound constituents of the text compound. A numerical outer access structure is mentioned by a table of contents which usually—like in the example—is a page access structure, of which the elements are exactly the page numbers of the pages on which a text compound constituent begins.
For each dictionary, one can give a data accessivity profile ; this consists of an outer and an inner access profile. The outer access profile mentions all the outer access structures (and if neccessary briefly characterises them). The outer access profile for the sample dictionary in § 13 exhibits the following structure :
1. The page number access structure in the lexicographical table of contents for page-specific access to the beginning of the text compound constituents ; (c)
2. Two outer text indices in the front matter : 1. an expanded access index with alphabetical index access structure for access to the accessive outer
text entries, with which the terms of the dictionary grammar are mentioned by the outer text en-trances ; (g)
2. a pure access index to the lexicographical introduction with alphabetical index access structure for access to the accessive outer text entries, with which the terms used in the lexicographical introduc-tion are mentioned by the outer text entrances ; (j)
3. a poly-alphabetical macrostructure which consists of both the following macrostructural partial struc-tures, forming an alphatically-based access structure series : 1. a niche-alphabetical main access structure for the first word list of the word list series ; (k) 2. a straight-alphabetical main access structure for the second word list of the word list series ; (l)
4. two outer outer text access structures in the back matter : 1. a straight-alphabetical non-macrostructural external outer text access structure for the list of
sources ; (m) 2. a straight-alphabetical non-macrostructural external outer text access structure in the list of abbre-
viations ; (o) 5. a straight-alphabetical index access structure by which index entries the lexicographically treated af-
fixes in the first word list are mentioned ; (n).
Inner access structures helps one’s orientation in accessive entries, especially in longer diction-ary articles. Inner access structures are optional. One can distinguish alphabetical ones from
192 Systematic Introduction
non-alphabetical ones. The first-mentioned function like alphabetical outer access structures. One can e.g. find alphabetical inner access structures in special-field dictionaries. They usually exhibit a literature position at the end, as a textual article position. The literature titles are placed there in an alphabetical order, which constitutes an alphabetical position-specific inner access structure.
Non-alphabetical inner access structures have another quality. There are no generally-known ordering structures external to dictionaries of which the ordering rules are such that one can access them. The user will first have to acquire knowledge of such non-alphabetical inner access structures through extensive reading of the particular relevant and appropriate metatexts, such as the guidelines for usage in particular. This means that only experienced users who have read these texts can use inner access structures.
Mediostructures are the structures amongst the textual lexicographical structures which exhibit by far the highest degree of complexity. Mediostructures deal with text segments carrying cross-references, and thus also with their functional partial segments, namely the text segments carry-ing addresses ; they also deal with items giving the sources of cross-references, thus also the reference addresses of items giving cross-references, and last but not least, the cross-reference addresses with their cross-reference goal areas. The term mediostructure was selected in re-search because mediostructures can be understood in a transferred sense as structures which stand “in the middle” of other lexicographical structures. By standing in the “middle”—according to the conception behind this designation—mediostructures function as mediators between other lexicographical structures. The semiotic feature enabling this mediating function is the common practice of using specific parts of cross-referring text segments (such as e.g. “===►”, “�”, “�”, “��”, „s.“ for „siehe“ (= “cf.”), „vgl.“ for „vergleiche“ (= “compare”), and others). With these parts of text segments carrying cross-references, the textual assumptions are given that a user can extrapolate a cross-reference as lexicographical information. If he/she cog-nitively has at his/her disposal a cross-reference, he/she can perform a procedure of following up a cross-reference that he/she is looking for, by using the mentioned address for the cross-reference carrying text segment, under which the cross-reference goal can be found in the cross-reference goal area.
One can distinguish different types of text segments carrying cross-references : items giving cross-references, items with cross-reference labelling, and item text segments which carry cross-references. These three types exhibit numerous sub-types. In the following section, only the complete items giving cross-references will be taken into account. The item „�Spielkasino“ in the sample article da1 belongs to this type. It therefore also is a non-elementary item ; thus it can be segmented completely into partial items with regard to function and position. It consists of an
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 193
elementary item giving the cross-reference relationship, which is realised by the item symbol “�” as well as the elementary item giving the cross-reference addesss „Spielkasino“. Each text segment carrying the cross-reference has a mediostructural orientation which can be extrapo-lated by means of the text segment carrying the cross-reference address. One can distinguish, among others, between external and internal orientation. The cross-reference address
|Spielkasino| which lies in the alphabetical macrostructural outer access structure, is named by the item giving the cross-reference address „Spielkasino“. The carrier of the cross-reference address is the discontinuing lemma Spiel ka si no. The cross-reference address named by the item giving the cross-reference therefore belongs to the type of lemmatic cross-reference exter-nal addresses, and „�Spielkasino“ is a lemmatically oriented item, thus an item giving an exter-nal cross-reference. By cross-referring the user by the item giving the cross-reference to a cross-reference address, the lexicographer refers him/her to the accompanying cross-reference goal area to which the cross-reference address opens access ; in the example, the cross-reference goal area is an article giving the cross-reference goal, namely the dictionary article for the lemma sign Spielkasino.
Apart from the lemmatically oriented (or : article-oriented) cross-reference items, one also finds e.g. items giving the cross-reference which are oriented towards outer texts, towards inser-tions and towards inner texts. The item giving the cross-reference at the end of each paragraph of this Systematic Introduction is an item giving the cross-reference lemmatically oriented to-wards the outer text, exhibiting a non-elementary item giving the cross-reference address as partial item, to which belong several elementary items giving the cross-reference address as partial items, and which all belong to the type “items giving the external address”.
Each item giving a cross-reference not only has at least one cross-reference address, but it also has exactly one reference address. The reference address situated to the left of the item giv-ing the cross-reference „�Spielkasino“ is the reference address |Kasino| given with „Ka|si|no“, the expanded item giving the form of the lemma sign of da1, which means that the item giving the cross-reference „�Spielkasino“ is non-adjacently addressed to the left to the item giving the form of the lemma sign. Therefore, the item giving the form of the lemma sign is simultaneously the item giving the source of the cross-reference for the item giving the cross-reference „�Spielkasino“. All items giving cross-references are addressed twice ; apart from the article-internal item addressing relationship in which „�Spielkasino“ stands to „Ka|si|no“, the item giving the cross-reference also stands in a mediostructural addressing relationship to the cross-reference address |Spielkasino|, which opens access to the cross-reference goal article. Because of its genuine function to open access to a cross-reference goal area, cross-reference addresses are also called access addresses.—The item giving the cross-reference „�Spielkasino“ belongs to the type of mediostructurally mono-addressed items giving cross-references, because exactly one cross-reference address is named with its item giving the cross-reference address. The item giving the cross-reference at the end of each paragraph of this Systematic Introduction, which reference address is the particular paragraph title, belongs to the type of mediostructural poly-addressed items giving cross-references, because at least two cross-reference addresses are named with their non-elementary items giving the cross-references. Because these cross-reference addresses fall in the same access structure, the items giving the cross-references at the end of the paragraphs belong to the sub-type of mediostructurally homogeneous poly-addressed items giving cross-references, whereas e.g. the item giving the cross-reference „→ § 14 | Angbe,
194 Systematic Introduction
Angabe der Aktantenklassen, Kompetenzbeispielangabe“ (= “item, item giving the actant classes, item giving the competence example”) from the dictionary article with the lemma „An-gabe der Anschlusspräposition“ (= “item giving the connecting preposition”) from this dic-tionary belongs to the sub-type of mediostructurally heterogeneous poly-addressed items giving the cross-reference, because the cross-reference address |§ 14| appears in the outer outer text access structure of this Systematic Introduction, and the additional three named cross-reference addresses are in the alphabatical macrostructural outer access structure.
With this, the most important conceptions needed to understand the construction of medio-structures have been introduced. Each type of text segment carrying a cross-reference belongs to a mediostructural type. Next, we firstly introduce the mediostructural type which belongs to the type of mediostructural mono-addressed items giving external cross-references. The item giving the cross-reference „�Spielkasino“ from da1 belongs to this type of items giving the cross-reference. The corresponding mediostructural type is the type of simple mono-focussed medio-structures. The mediostructures belonging to this type can be presented as abstract and concrete mediostructures. Next, we firstly look at the concrete simple mono-focussed mediostructure which belongs to „�Spielkasino“. Firstly, a set of carriers (that is a structure-carrying set) is needed. Its elements should have the values relevant to cross-references. All of these are already known, because they are as follows :
– the externally oriented mediostructural mono-addressed item giving the cross-reference „�Spielkasino“ – the item giving the source of the cross-reference „Ka|si|no“ with the reference address |Kasino| from
„�Spielkasino“ – the cross-reference external address (in short : external address) |Spielkasino| – the cross-reference article with the lemma Spiel ka si no, which carries the external address |Spiel-
kasino| (= daz).
The set of carriers for the concrete (c), simple (s) mono-focussed mediostructure (med)—it is called Ssmed
The following structure-forming relations can then be defined on Ssmedc :
– a three-part relation of the type of cross-reference relations with the relational rule x cross-refers with u to z ; here, “x” is a variable for items giving the source of the cross-reference, “u” is a variable for items giving the cross-reference and “z” is a variable for a cross-reference goal area ;
– a two-part asymmetric and irreflexive relation of the type of mediostructural addressing relations with the relational rule u is mediostructurally addressed to v ; here, “u” is a variable for items giving the cross-reference and “v” a variable for cross-reference external addresses ;
– a two-part asymmetric and irreflexive relation of the type of item addressing relations with the rela-tional rule u is addressed to x ; here, “u” is a variable for items giving the cross-reference and “x” is a variable for items giving the source of the cross-reference.
The concrete simple mono-focussed mediostructure is presented in Fig. 28.
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 195
C. SIMPLE MONO-FOCUSSED MEDIOSTRUCTURE
Ka|si|no � Spielkasino |Spielkasino|
daz
Fig. 28 : Concrete simple mono-focussed mediostructure for the mediostructural mono-addressed item giving the external cross-reference. Abbreviations : C. = CONCRETE ; „�Spielkasino“ from da1
; “x —•—•––► u —•—•––► z” means x cross-refers with u to z ; “u – – –► x” means u is addressed to x ; “u ——> v” means u is mediostructurally addressed to v
The abstract simple mono-focussed mediostructure which is isomorphous to the concrete one in Fig. 27, can be obtained by defining the three structure-forming relations on a set of carriers of which the elements are classes, namely the class of externally oriented mediostructural mono-addressed items giving the cross-reference (ICr-ref.exor.mono), the class of items giving the source of the cross-reference (Isour-Cr-ref), the class of external addresses (Exad) and the class of cross-reference goal areas (Cr-refGA). The set of carriers for the abstract (a) simple (s) mono-focussed mediostructure (med)—it is called Ssmed
The abstract simple non-focussed mediostructure is presented in Fig. 29.
A. SIMPLE MONO-FOCUSSED MEDIOSTRUCTURE
IsourCr-ref ICr-ref.exor.mono Exad
CR-refGA
Fig. 29 : Abstract simple mono-focussed mediostructure for all externally oriented mediostructural mono-addressed items giving cross-references in the sample dictionary : Abbreviations : A. = ABSTRACT ; Ar-rows such as in Fig. 28
If one proceeds from the assumption that the sample dictionary only contains items giving cross-references which belong to the type of externally oriented mediostructural mono-addressed item giving cross-references, then the abstract simple mono-focussed mediostructure presented in Fig. 29 is simultaneously the mediostructure exhibited by the dictionary. If one, on the other hand, proceeds from the assumption that the sample dictionary exhibits several types of text segments carrying cross-references, then several types of abstract mediostructures belong to the sample dictionary, in the same way that several abstract microstructures belong to a dictionary. The particular mediostructural programme determines which types of abstract mediostructures belong to a dictionary.
Mediostructures with three structure-forming relations can be minimised ; then one can dis-pose of the three-part relation of the type of cross-reference relations, because the three-part cross-reference relation is a result of the other two relations. By means of the concrete simple mediostructures, one can form concrete expanded mediostructures. These always consist of sev-eral concrete simple mediostructures belonging to the same structural type. The expanded me-diostructures can also be formed as minimised mediostructures (cf. Fig. 31).
The dictionary articles da8–da10 are short articles carrying cross-references to the shortened words named by the items giving the form of the lemma sign. Each of the three articles exhibits an item giving a cross-reference belonging to the type of externally oriented mediostructural mono-addressed items giving cross-references. Next, the concrete minimised expanded mono-focussed mediostructure for the articles da8–da10 will be formed. For this, one needs the set of carriers of which the elements are the values relevant to the cross-references from the three arti-cles ; values of the same type are consolidated into partial sets. One then defines a two-part rela-tion of the type of mediostructural addressing relations and of the type of item addressing rela-tions on this set of carriers. The result is the mediostructure presented in Fig. 31. In order to really understand this structure and its structural names, the following explanations are neces-sary. The short articles in Fig. 30 are similar in relation to the subject matter of the dictionary, to the extent that they are articles for shortened words. If all articles for shortened words in the sample dictionary would be taken into account, one would have the completely expanded mono-focussed mediostructure for all cross-references with which shortened words are named by items giving the source of the cross-references. For this reason, the mediostructure in Fig. 31 is only an excerpt from the concrete mono-focussed mediostructure for shortened words. If one pro-ceeds from the assumption that the sample dictionary also exhibits other mediostructures apart from mono-focussed ones, which means that the mediostructure of the sample dictionary can only be given when several different abstract mediostructure are named, it becomes clear why partial appears in the structural name.
EXCERPT FROM THE C. M. EXPANDED PARTIAL MONO- FOCUSSED MEDIOSTRUCTURE FOR SHORTENED WORDS
Abi Deo Ki|lo
� Abitur � Deodorant� Kilogramm
|Abitur| |Deodorant| |Kilogramm|
IsourCr-ref (da8–da10)
ICr-ref.exor.mono (da8–da10)
Cr-refAd(da8–da10)
·
Fig. 31 : Excerpt from the concrete minimalised and expanded partial mono-focussed mediostructure for shortened words. Abbreviations : C. = CONCRETE ; M. = MINIMISED ; arrows as in Fig. 28
If one would minimise the abstract simple mono-focussed mediostructure presented in Fig. 29, one would obtain an abstract minimised simple mono-focussed mediostructure which does not distinguish itself in any respect from the abstract mediostructure which is isomorphous with the concrete one in Fig. 31. Therefore, in the presentation of the abstract mediostructure, the class symbols for the item classes are expanded with abbreviations for the designations of the lan-guage units which are named by the items belonging to the classes ; for example : IsourCr-ref [shw], ICr-ref [balex], which have to be read as “class of items giving cross-references with which a shortened word is named”, and “class of items giving cross-references with which a basis lexeme is named”. In this way, one can ensure that the mediostructures for „�Spielkasino“
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 197
and „�Abitur“ can be distinguished from one another, even though the items giving the cross-references belong to the same item type.
There are numerous totally different types of mediostructures. For example, if a special-field dictionary has an article-heterogeneous word list with synopsis articles, and if there are several pure cross-reference articles in which cross-reference is made to one and the same synopsis arti-cle, we have to do with a mediostructure which is called a synopsis-oriented article network with lemmatic cross-reference periphery.
The extra-lexicographical presuppositions for a lexicographer to perform meaningful cross-reference procedures consist of relationships between various language units within the diction-ary’s subject matter, e.g. in a language or language variety, which belong to the dictionary’s subject matter. Such relationships are e.g. etymological relatedness, lexical-semantic relation-ships such as e.g. synonymy and antonymy, terminological hyponymy, relatedness of an inflec-tion-morphological nature, relationships of shortened words, and many more. If one takes into account such relationships in a dictionary, they belong to the dictionary’s subject matter ; they thus form the presuppositions for cross-references (determined by the dictionary’s subject mat-ter) to perform lexicographical cross-reference procedures.
Apart from these, presuppositions for cross-references can also be found which are deter-mined by the dictionary structure. Their first feature is that the language units with relationships to each other are distributed as lexicographical data within the fixed two-dimensional printing space of the printed dictionary (with regard to its comprehensiveness) in such a way that the lexicographical treatment of the units standing in relationships do not realise in one position only, which means that it is not possible to discern them within a single procedure of usage. Secondly, they are delimited in their scope, which means that cross-references are made because one wants to save printing space. The most important part of the dictionary structure functioning as a presupposition for cross-references which are determined by the dictionary structure, are therefore the data distribution structures of the dictionary. For example, if all the grammatical items taken into account stand in the comment on form of the particular dictionary article in a general monolingual dictionary, the data distribution internal to the dictionary is totally different for the class of items on grammar than in the case where all the inflection-morphological items stand in tables of a dictionary grammar. The differences in data distribution determine other partial mediostructures, and therefore also other mediostructures. Whereas in the first case no cross-references determined by inflection-morphological factors are mandatory, article-internal items giving cross-references are necessary in the second case, with which items giving the cross-reference addresses (as partial addresses) the cross-reference external addresses of the dictionary grammar are named.
Not all relationships of language units distributed as lexicographical data in a dictionary (ac-cording to data distribution structures) can be taken into account in this dictionary. The diction-ary functions determine which of the given extra-lexicographical relationships, which are valid for the lexicographical data distributed in the dictionary, are taken into account in the medio-structural programme of the dictionary. In a German-english dictionary for English users, of which the dictionary functions are text reception functions and target language translation, for example, the thematic item giving the cross-reference „Sy Fahrstuhl, Lift“ in da11, with which two cross-reference external addresses are named, would be without a function, and therefore unnecessary.
198 Systematic Introduction
Lift m; -(e)s; -e u. s lift Sy Fahrstuhl, Lift Fig. 32 : Eleventh sample article (da11) ; Abbreviations : Sy = synonyms
The item giving the cross-reference would be offered if da11 e.g. would have appeared in a bilin-gual learners’ dictionary, which also has the function of text production.
The cross-references that a user can open up by means of items carrying the cross-reference, can belong to different types. According to the textual place of the cross-reference position one can distinguish, for example : cross-reference to an article, cross-reference to an index, cross-reference to an outer text ; if the typology criterion is the neccessity to follow up a cross-reference, one can distinguish obligatory cross-references from optional ones. Numerous other types of cross-references can be distinguished.
► adressenvermittelndes Textsegment [text segment carrying the address], einfach monofokussierte Mediostruktur [simple mono-focussed mediostructure], einfach polyfokussierte Mediostruktur [simple poly-focussed mediostructure], Mediostruktur [mediostructure], mediostrukturelle Adressierung [me-diostructural addressing], Verweis [cross-reference], Verweisadresse [cross-reference address], Ver-weisadressenträger [carrier of the cross-reference address], Verweisausgangsangabe [item giving the source of the cross-reference], verweisvermittelndes Textsegment [text segment carrying the cross-reference], Verweiszielbereich [cross-reference goal area], wörterbuchgegenstandsbedingte Verweis-voraussetzung [presupposition determined by the dictionary subject matter]
§ 25 Specific Features of Digital Dictionaries : Conceptual Data Structure and Presentation Format
The features of digital dictionaries can only be sketched or problematised provisionally regard-ing their current status, but not yet exhaustively described. With regard to the emergence of me-dia-neutral publication processes and digital forms of publication in the area of practical lexicog-raphy, one can discern changes for which an exhaustive theoretical development of the current status can only be regarded as desirable—in the area of conception, compilation and publication of lexicographical reference works, especially for the profile of lexicographical processes and for the dictionary structure of the products resulting from these processes. However, the core issues regarding these changes can be sketched to the extent that the currently important con-cepts—data bank systems, markup languages and hypertext—are discussed well enough and are already partially reflected in the area of lexicography regarding their applicability.
One can list the core issues of the above-mentioned changes as follows : the database under-lying a digital lexicographical reference work is recorded on digital storage media, managed by software and represented semiotically by presentation media. Because of the pre-difference of the data disposition in relation to the particular specific presentation formats of the particular database on a visual display screen (e.g. monitor, cellphone screen), one has, in principle, to isolate the level of conceptual modelling of dictionary structures from the level of the specifica-tion of the presentation format(s) on one or more presentation media. From this point of view, the result of a lexicographical process, namely the lexicographical end data, should firstly be regarded as the representation of the inventory of lexicgraphically treated data in a digital stor-age medium. This representation of the database is structured in a specific way (conceptual data structure) ; the nature and manner of the structuring process is motivated here primarily by the
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 199
functionality that the units from the database have to receive when they are presented in some kind of presentation medium as lexicographical partial texts, and not (or only in special cases) by the specific demands set by a specific presentation medium regarding the presentation format of lexicographical partial texts. On the modelling level, there firstly are no lexicographical par-tial texts, but only a set of data of which the units are identified as representatives of specific data types, and described according to the functions which they could fulfil in a potential semi-otic representation in a presentation medium, and in relation to the genuine purpose of the dic-tionary for a user. Added to this, there usually is a hierarchical structuring, which acts as a repre-sentative of several data types of identified units (which can e.g. be desbribed in a document type grammar in the modelling processes based in SGLM/XML), and modelling of semantic and thematic relationships between the data units, determined by the dictionary’s subject matter. Consequently, for example, the series of letters <femininum> is a data unit which can be repre-sented semiotically in theoretically many different arbitrary presentation formats, as a lexico-graphical partial text—when it is described as a representative of a data type called “data for the genus of a lemma sign” and in addition identified as standing in a relationship to a data unit <Rose> (= “rose”) which has been described as “lemma sign” (e.g. by means of a hierarchical subordinacy)—which functions as an item belonging to the item class “item giving the genus” and which exhibits the item purpose to provide the user with the data needed to open up infor-mation about the genus of the lemma sign „Rose“, represented by the lemma „Rose“. If, in addi-tion, the data unit <Rose> is described in the database as an object in a semantic network for which a “is a hyponym of”-relationship to another data unit <Blume> (= “flower”) is declared, one can generate, if necessary, a cross-reference element over and beyond this for the presenta-tion which makes it possible for a user to reconstruct the semantic relationship between the two language expressions represented by „Rose“ and „Blume“. The specific features of the semiotic representation of data units in the particular selected presentation format (e.g. typographical differentiation of partial texts with different purposes ; text condensation ; arrangement of the items for one lemma sign ; typographical and non-typographical microstructural indicators ; labelling of text segments which have to function as cross-reference elements ; text architectures and search area architectures ; book page layouts or screen designs) do not necessarily have to be described on the level of the conceptual data structure, but they present specifications—especially in cross-media publication processes—which only play a role in the overlap between the level of conceptual data structure modelling and the representation of units of the database in a specific presentation format.
There are different architectonic levels for the structures on (i) the level of the conceptual data modelling, the structures on (ii) the level of presentation, and the stipulation of specifica-tions for the representation of units from (i) and (ii) in one presentation medium (e.g. definition of screens and filtering possibilities, stipulating presentation formats suitable to the specific me-dia) in the various software systems, which can be used as editing systems for dealing with lexi-cographical processes. The pre-difference, in principle, of the conceptual data structure in con-tradistinction to the presentation format makes it possible to materialise several dictionaries from one database, in different presentation media (e.g. printed product, hypermedia application on CD-ROM or on the internet, for presentation on cellphone screens), or several partial dictionar-ies, specifically for different user groups. In this way, digital dictionaries can be set up on one and the same data structure, but with different presentation formats—for example, in relation to
200 Systematic Introduction
a user profile, transmitted by a programme simultaneous to the usage of a dictionary, or in rela-tion to several pre-defined views on the database available in the data store—which not only differ with regard to the way the data is presented and selected, but also with regard to the man-ner they are presented, arranged and networked with other data. It is thus conceivable that one can offer the user of a digital special-field dictionary three different user profiles at the begin-ning, from which he/she can choose (e.g. “expert”, “semi-expert” or “lay person”) and for which in each instance different views are offered into the underlying database, each with its own de-fined presentation format (and thus, as the case may be, each with specific textual structures, for example, with more or less differentiated microstructures), and each with its own filtering tools (and thus also, as the case may be, with the possibility that the user can compile individual arti-cle structures from an inventory of item classes). In addition, it is conceivable to offer the user several presentation formats into the database, each with specifically motivated access possibili-ties, which are available through search and request tools (e.g. access via an alphabetical list of the units in the database, identified by the lexicographer as lemmas ; access via the categories of the system in the dictionary’s subject matter ; also full text searches in which not only represen-tations of lemma signs, but fundamentally each letter series functions as carrier of the lemma sign). Alternative cross-reference relationships between the units of the identified database (de-termined by the subject matter of the dictionary, didactically-motivated, etc.), alternative styles for the user surface design, and alternative presentation formats for article texts (printed vs. hy-pertext-specific, with text condensation versus without text condensation, etc.) can also be of-fered in the presentation.
For the structural analysis of digital dictionaries, there are the following consequences : it can either focus on the functionality of the data in its presented form (thus from the user’s perspec-tive) ; then the structure of the dictionary is described in one specific way of presentation on a monitor. The description of the dictionary structure of digital dictionaries can, however, also include the functionality of the conceptual data structure and the ensuing totality of alternative possibilities of presentation formats (included and/or actually realised by the lexicographer) ; then the conceptual data structure is described with regard to the structures which can be deter-mined and/or materialised for the database on the level of presentation. Depending on the per-spective, this leads to changed concepts for that which has been designated with the term dic-tionary structure in relation to printed dictionaries.
From this kind of perspective, printed dictionaries have to be considered as special cases, to the extent that the conceptual modelling for them, and thus the representation of the lexico-graphical data on the level of the conceptual data structure, is not pre-different as compared to the presentation format, but from the very beginning focussed on the presentation by means of one medium only, namely a book. Retrospective digitalisation of dictionary databases originally compiled within the framework of purely printed lexicographical processes sometimes leads to problems, when the aim is to loosen the particular data from their (conceptual) fixed printed form and to make them re-usable for presentation formats in digital presentation media. Retro-spective digitalisation requires more than merely making available the particular data in a digital storage medium ; rather, the conceptual structure of the databases have to be modified to the extent that they can be further edited in an interface in a way that can ensure that all the data units that can function as potential cross-reference elements can be identified as such for the programme.
3 How are Dictionaries Made ? 201
The existing theoretical concepts (genuinely developed for printed dictionaries) for the de-scription of structures on the level of the dictionary structure firstly should also be considered, from this perspective, as a descriptive approach for a “special case”—namely that of the printed dictionary (even when printed dictionaries currently make out the greatest majority of publica-tions in the dictionary market, quantitatively as well as qualitatively). Just as the conceptual data modelling in genuine printed lexicographical processes is exclusively focussed on presentation in one medium, the existing theory on dictionary structure has up to now been almost exclu-sively oriented towards printing as the medium of presentation in determining the dictionary structure. How far the theory of dictionary structure, worked out on the basis of structures as they can be described in printed dictionaries (data distribution structures, macrostructures, mi-crostructures, article constituent structures, mediostructures), can be called upon without corre-sponding modifications of the theory for the description of the structure of dictionaries in digital presentation media, first has to be seen. One can expect that the concept of microstructures and article constituent structures can be taken over, even if only for the description of concrete struc-tures on the level of the presentation format and, if needed, for the disclosure of abstract micro-structures and article constituent structures defined in the interface between conceptual data structure and presentation format, in the form of microstructural programmes and article struc-ture programmes as views ; the conceptual data structure underlying these specifications on the conceptual level (specific with regard to presentation format) can, however, exhibit a totally different structure. The concept of mediostructures could only be used fruitfully in a modified form to describe digital dictionaries, because in digital dictionaries, there is no need for a fixed set of units (determined by the lexicographer) functioning as a set of carriers of a mediostructure and which is presented on the level of presentation in the form of cross-reference elements ; rather, it is conceivable that a user profile can be generated (with relation to runtime and user reaction) on the basis of which data types determined by the programme can be selected and presented to the user as cross-reference elements. The concept of macrostructure can become problematic in relation to digital dictionaries, because the possible navigation and search tools in digital presentation environments fundamentally allow for each unit from the underlying data-base to function as a guiding element (and not only those units with the status of lemma). Sec-ondly, because on the level of presentation an arrangement of lemmas does in principle not have to play a role anymore ; at best, the arrangement of units relevant for access only exists on the medium of storage ; it is not the user who accesses this, when he/she looks something up ; rather, the access tools take away the task of manually “looking up” from the user (who, for example, simply types in the requested language expression in a field) and the access tools present to the user only those data units as a search result which relate to the searched-for expression, and which will make it possible for the user to open up the neccesary information to this expression. Because, according to the theory of dictionary structure, the defined ordering relation in the macrostructural programme of a dictionary is simultaneously also the structure-forming relation for the data distribution structure, the possibility to stipulate a data distribution structure for digital dictionaries could fall away (with the exception of digital dictionaries which are strongly oriented towards printed formats regarding their presentation format, for example online diction-aries in the form of e-texts, or groups of static internet documents). The data distribution, how-ever (which primarily does not provide a structure, but is an important conceptual part within the framework of the planning and editing phases of dictionaries), could receive an important place
202 Systematic Introduction
in the description of digital dictionaries, to the extent that questions important for the conceptual data modelling, of which the answers provide frameworks for decisions about the functions of the units in the lexicographical database, should have in the entire envisaged structures and pres-entation formats—precisely because of the pre-difference in principle of the conceptual data structure in contradisctinction to the structures of possible presentation formats, especially in cross-media publication processes. Inevitably, this brings about a changed view on what has been contained in the term “data distribution” in the existing theory up to now : in cross-media processes, it is not of primary importance to make decisions beforehand about how the represen-tatives of different data types from the data type range of a dictionary have to be distributed among their integrated components, but it is important to decide what functions specific data types could have in possible presentation formats, and how they should thus be described as units of the database, in such a way that they can be distributed and presented on the level of the presentation format to the user in the form of lexicographical partial texts, as data representa-tions for the forms of features of a searched-for expression.
► digitales Wörterbuch [digital dictionary], Dokumenttyp-Grammatik [document type grammar] konzep-tionelle Datenmodellierung [conceptual data modelling]
4 How are Dictionaries Classified ?
§ 26 Principles and Methods of Dictionary Classification
Whenever one speaks about the world, there always is an underlying classification of excerpts of the world, determined by the particular selected language. The classifications given with every-day language serve practical purposes ; they are seldom clear and they only function locally. This also applies to the pre-scientific classification of dictionaries. The usual classification of printed language dictionaries in monolingual and bilingual dictionaries, for example, and thus the practicable historical tradition of the predicates accompanying dictionaries, is sufficiently accurate for many purposes. In view of the question, however, whether e.g. a German dictionary of Anglicisms is a monolingual or a bilingual dictionary, the knowledge available from the tradi-tion of everyday language for dictionary predicates is not sufficient to answer this question con-clusively. For that, both the dictionary predicates have to be put into terminology, so that metalexicographical terms can be available. Classification of subject areas are also always de-pendent on language. When it is impossible to determine what a dictionary is, then it is also not clear which set constitutes the entity for classification.
One can distinguish two types of scientific classifications : classifications and typologies. If a classification of a set S of dictionaries is valid as a scientific classification, at least the four fol-lowing conditions should be fulfilled :
1. The set S should be dissected as the classification entity into n (with n > 1) non-empty partial sets C1, C2, …, Cn, which are the classification classes (in short : classes) of S.
4 How are Dictionaries Classified ? 203
2. This classification should then result according to a classification criterion for which the following is true : it should be formulated in such a way that for each dictionary from S, one can clearly decide, in each instance, to which type of the classes C1, C2, …, Cn it belongs.
3. The classification of S should be very clear. This is precisely the case when all classes of S are pairwise disjunct.
4. The classification of S should be exhaustive ; this is precisely the case when the union of sets of all classes in S are identical to S.
If a classification criterion is once applied to a set, a one-level classification comes about. If another classification criterion is applied on their classes, a two-level classification is obtained, etc.
Classifications of dictionaries are not specified beforehand. Rather, each specifically identi-fiable feature, formed according to the particular classification entity of the dictionary, can be enlisted as a classification criterion. The feature or combination of features chosen in each in-stance depends on the purpose of the particular classification.
Typologies form the second sort of scientific classifications. Dictionary typologies are sets of dictionary types. A dictionary type is a set of features. A dictionary belongs to a dictionary type when the type-constituting features are presented in it. One can completely know a dictionary type without having to know how many dictionaries belong to this particular type. One can only know a dictionary class completely when one can indicate the number of dictionaries which belong to that class. One can develop scientific dictionary typologies according to strict meth-ods. They help orientation in this field by bringing about terminology for different research pur-poses, and therefore bring about order, especially within the area of genuine dictionary predi-cates with which dictionary types can be named. As in the case of the classification of dictionar-ies, one can enlist each feature which can appear in dictionaries as typology criteria for the for-mation of typologies. The preferred medium of presentation for dictionary typologies are typol-ogy graphs.
Accordingly, dictionary research does not only have at its disposal a dictionary typology, in which all the distinguishable dictionary types specifically have a typological place. But there are also different typologies which serve different purposes. Several typologies can be grouped to-gether into a typology system.
One can bring about an overview of the numerous already existing and the possible future dictionary typologies, by grouping the numerous typology criteria into classes. Class formation of this nature, again, is oriented towards the purpose the classes serve. In the next sections, four classes of typologies will be distinguished, according to the set of features from which the typol-ogy criterion originates. Accordingly, typologies emerge in relation to users, in relation to the dictionary subject matter, in relation to the dictionary structure, and in relation to features related to media used for carriers.
In lexicography, the presupposition is that dictionaries are used by users (cf. § 3). For each dic-tionary of a specific type, a specific presentation of the user relationship is consequently given.
204 Systematic Introduction
The particular user relationship can be specified in a dictionary itself. Such specifications, how-ever, are often not correct, especially in the products of commercial lexicography, because eco-nomic interests can result in alleging e.g. too wide a scope in the circle of addressees, or too many possibilities for usage. Therefore, it is always better to determine the user relationship of a dictionary by means of dictionary analysis, before one classifies a dictionary into a dictionary type on the basis of its user relationships.
There are numerous possibilities to set typologies according to user relationships. The main typologies are ones in accordance with dictionary functions (cf. § 12).
We can look at a first example of this. Given is a set S1 of bilingual dictionaries as classifica-tion entity, and in addition to that, the typology criterion TC1 types of situations of use which stand in a communicative context of use. TC1 exhibits a four-fold presentation structure ; this means : one can distinguish four classes of types of situations of use :
1. Types of situations of dictionary use for which the reason is the disrupted free reception of a foreign language text. Dictionaries which are in the first place conceptualised for use in such situations, exhibit a dictionary function supporting text reception (in short : reception function) and they are called recep-tion dictionaries.
2. Types of situations of dictionary use for which the reason is the disrupted free production of first lan-guage texts resulting from translating from foreign texts. Dictionaries which are in the first place con-ceptualised for use in such situations, exhibit a help function for passive translation (in short : passive translation function), and they are called passive translation dictionaries.
3. Types of situations of dictionary use for which the reason is the disrupted free production of foreign language texts. Dictionaries which are in the first place conceptualised for such situations, exhibit a dic-tionary function supporting text production (in short : production function), and they are accordingly called production dictionaries.
4. Types of situations of dictionary use for which the reason is the disrupted free production of foreign language texts resulting from translating from the first language into a foreign language. Dictionaries which are in the first place conceptualised for such situations of use, are called active translation dic-tionaries ; accordingly, their function is a help function for active translation (in short : active transla-tion function).
With this, we have a one-level typology of functions for bilingual dictionaries (which can be considerably refined) ; it can be presented as in Fig. 33.
bilingual dictionary
reception dictionary
passive translation dictionary
production dictionary
active translation dictionary
TK1: Types of situations of use standing in a com-municative context of use
Fig. 33 : Typology excerpt for bilingual dictionaries with relation to users ; “■—–►” means the application of TC results in the sub-classification
Dictionaries exhibiting only one function are mono-functional dictionaries. Polyfunctional dic-tionaries, on the other hand, exhibit at least two dictionary functions. Bilingual dictionaries ex-hibiting reception and passive translation functions, are called passive dictionaries ; dictionaries which exhibit production and active translation functions, are called active dictionaries.
4 How are Dictionaries Classified ? 205
Finally, we need to look at a simple example from special-field lexicography. The classifica-tion entity is a set S2 of monolingual dictionaries. The typology criterion is : TC2 = status of special-field knowledge in the circle of addressees.
A three-fold presentation structure needs to be attributed to the typology criterion, and the status of the special-field knowledge can be characterised by the following designations for the different carriers of the knowledge : lay persons, semi-experts, experts. Accordingly, the follow-ing three types of dictionaries result :
– special-field dictionaries for lay persons – special-field dictionaries for semi-experts – special-field dictionaries for experts
These few examples of typologies with relation to users already illustrate that the designations for dictionary types are not customary for typologies in non-scientific public circles. This does not, however, say anything about their scientific role in research. The explicit classification of a dictionary into one or more functional types already during the planning phase is meaningful because, among others, numerous features of the dictionary are determined by the functions—with regard to the dictionary subject matter and the dictionary structure.
§ 28 Typologies According to the Dictionary Subject Matter
The dictionary subject matter of a language dictionary is the set of the presentations of features, treated lexicographically in the dictionary, of one or more language features from a specific set of language expressions which are mentioned in the dictionary. For example, the dictionary sub-ject matter of a pronunciation dictionary is the presentation of the feature ‘pronunciation’ in all lemma signs. The dictionary subject matter should not be confused with the scope of the diction-ary subject matter. In language dictionaries, that is the area from which the lexicographically treated expressions originate.
In principle, one can get a specific dictionary for every feature which can be developed for a lexicographical unit, and for every combination of features. The typology possibilities according to dictionary subject matter are just as comprehensive, and results in phenomenological partial types ; these can only be mentioned here.
Dictionaries of which the dictionary subject matter consists only of presentations of one fea-ture, are called mono-informative dictionaries. Examples are : synonym dictionaries, antonym dictionaries, abbreviation dictionaries, pronunciation dictionaries, and many more. The diction-ary-specific lexicographical information which can be obtained by means of a mono-informative dictionary in usual situations of use, all belong to one information class.—Dictionaries of which the dictionary subject matter consists of features of several language features, are called poly-informative dictionaries. Examples are : general monolingual dictionaries, dictionaries of lan-guage stages, general bilingual dictionaries, general mono- and bilingual learners’ dictionaries, and many more.
206 Systematic Introduction
Most, but not all of the so-called special dictionaries are mono-informative. Dictionaries with career designations or dictionaries of plant names, for example, are special dictionaries, but poly-informative. The same applies to dictionaries for difficult words.
If one only takes into account one class of lemma signs in the lemma selection, a mono-selective dictionary comes into being. Examples are : dictionaries of archaisms, dictionaries of neologisms, dictionaries of loan words, dictionaries of swear words, dictionaries with sexual vocabulary, and many more. Also all dictionaries related to parts of speech, such as e.g. a dic-tionary of prepositions, are mono-selective. Mono-selective dictionaries can be either mono-informative or poly-informative. Abbreviation dictionaries are examples of the first type, and dictionaries of loan words are examples of the latter.
If the lemma selection is not limited to one class of lemma signs, we have to do with poly-selective dictionaries. General monolingual dictionaries are poly-selective, and poly-informat-ive. There is, however, scope within the macrostructural and the microstructural supply of data : for example, many general monolingual dictionaries also include proper names as lemmas, oth-ers, however, do not. Microstructural differences can manifest themselves e.g. by the question whether syllable divisions are taken into account or not.
The fact that types are the same on a specific level of typology formation, therefore, does not mean that the lexicographical data supply of dictionaries of the same type will be categorically the same, i.e. with regard to the types of data taken into account. Within the dictionary type, one can thus distinguish variants of the type.
A feature of language expressions consists in the fact that they are used in time and therefore can be used in different time spans. This results in the distinction between synchronic and dia-chronic dictionaries. Synchronic dictionaries can be related to the present and to a historical period. Synchronic historical dictionaries are e.g. dictionaries of language stages. Diachronic historical dictionaries are e.g. etymological dictionaries.
Each historical individual language exhibits inner differentiations which are determined in the first place by social and regional factors. Lexical units therefore have the feature that they belong to a language variety. If this feature is enlisted as a typology criterion, one obtains dic-tionaries of language variety, such as e.g. standard language dictionaries, dialect dictionaries, dictionaries of special fields, and many more.
Lexical units appear as parts of syntagmatic series. If one selects this feature as a typology criterion, one obtains syntagmatic special dictionaries ; dictionaries of constructions, especially valency dictionaries and collocation dictionaries belong to this type, and in addition dictionaries of phraseology (which are also called idiomatic dictionaries), dictionaries of proverbs, dictionar-ies of citations, and dictionaries of sentences.
Dictionaries of antonyms, dictionaries with distinctive and cumulative synonyms, word fam-ily dictionaries, and other dictionaries belong to types which result when one uses as a typology criterion the feature that language expressions stand in paradigmatic relationships to each other. Syntagmatic special dictionaries consequently stand in contrast to paradigmatic special diction-aries.
The diversity of typology possibilities for language dictionaries according to the dictionary subject matter, discussed here, gives rise to the following statement : a language dictionary ty-pology according to the dictionary subject matter always is a phenomenological typology ac-cording to features of language expressions. Differentiating and naming language features are
4 How are Dictionaries Classified ? 207
determined by language-theoretical conceptions. A unified and exhaustive typology according to the dictionary subject matter in which all dictionaries have their typological place, would only be possible if one had a language theory which would specify all conceivable language expres-sions ; this is currently not the case. Nevertheless, by using the basic conceptualisations of clas-sical language theory with relation to De Saussure, such as especially synchrony vs. diachrony, form vs. function, paradigmatics vs. syntagmatics, language vs. variety, markedness vs. non-markedness, and by enlisting additional conceptualisations from grammatical theory and lexi-cology, one can establish a coherent system of partial typologies. The mentioned typology crite-ria and additional concepts, therefore, adopt an ordering function, regulating the creation of ge-neric types, which means, for example, that generic types such as syntagmatic vs. paradigmatic dictionaries are established.
► Wörterbuchgegenstand [dictionary subject matter], Wörterbuchgegenstandsbereich [scope of the dic-tionary subject matter]
§ 29 Typologies According to the Dictionary Structure
A second type of phenomenological typologies are the typologies of dictionaries according to the dictionary structure. The most well-known typological distinction is one according to the typology criterion of the macrostructural arrangement in alphabetical and non-alphabetical dic-tionaries. The latter is designated by different terms, such as e.g. conceptual-semantic dictionary and onomasiological dictionary and dictionary of subject groups. On the basis of the explana-tions in § 22 about the macrostructural arrangement structures, one can see that there are numer-ous sub-types belonging to the type of alphabetical dictionaries, such as e.g. initial-alphabetical vs. final-alphabetical dictionaries.
In line with § 23, a typology results in which one can distinguish between mono-accessive and poly-accessive dictionaries.
Typological classifications according to so-called classes of comprehensiveness are also well-known, in which admittedly the scope of the comprehensiveness is not quantitatively speci-fied exactly. One can distinguish e.g. between comprehensive dictionary, pocket dictionary, etc. Also, the number of volumes can function as a typology criterion ; accordingly, one talks about one-volume, two-volume and multi-volume dictionaries.
In § 17, it was explained that dictionaries form a text compound. Accordingly, a typology of printed dictionaries exists according to the type of text compound which they represent. In this typology, each printed dictionary occupies an exact typological place. If, for example, a diction-ary exhibits a front matter and a word list, we have to do with a simple text compound ; if a dic-tionary has a front matter, word list and a back matter, we have to do with a right-expanded text compound. If a series of word lists follow the front matter, we have to do with a centrally ex-panded text compound. If the dictionary consists of a series of word lists in which one precedes the front matter and follows on a back matter, we have to do with a centrally and right-expanded text compound. These four text compound types form the core of a complete typology for dic-tionaries as text compounds.
Numerous typologies according to the dictionary structure are possible, but have not been fleshed out at present ; they are necessary for an in-depth understanding of dictionaries, because
208 Systematic Introduction
they facilitate the formation of concepts and thus the formation of terminology, in order for clear and accurate designations for features of dictionary structures to develop.
§ 30 Typologies According to the Features of the Medium of Storage and Publication
Typologies according to the features of the medium of storage and publication aim toward a classification in which especially the features are taken into account which emerge from the possibilities of digital data storage, the structures of computer-assisted data modelling, and the presentation formats of lexicographical data on digital media. On the uppermost level, one can classify reference works according to the nature of the process, and the results or products they provide ; with relation to the distinction introduced in § 3 and § 5 between lexicographical proc-esses and computerised lexicographical process, a sub-classification of dictionaries on the one hand and computer lexicons on the other hand is given (cf. Fig. 34, TC1) : in the case of diction-aries (as products of lexicographical processes) the treated data is processed for further intellec-tual editing by a human user, whereas in the case of computer lexicons (as products of computer-ised lexicographical processes) the processing of the data is aimed towards further machine-assisted editing. Dictionaries can be sub-classified further according to the nature of the lexico-graphical processes and the results or products they provide (cf. Fig. 34, TC2). Printed lexico-graphical processes which are aimed towards the compilation of dictionaries for presentation formats specific to printing, generate databases with structures that are strongly oriented towards printed formats ; in media-neutral lexicographical processes, on the other hand, which are not directed beforehand towards the presentation of lexicographical data in one specific medium of presentation, databases emerge which can be oriented towards several (or theoretically any number of) publication media with relation to their structuring. For dictionaries with a database processed for printed lexicography, only the printed medium is consequently at stake as a direct medium of publication (cf. Fig. 34, TC3) : of course one can also develop digital dictionaries, via retrospective digitalisation, from printed dictionaries, but retrospective digitalisation processes have the status of subsequent editing processes, to the extent that digitalisation was not planned (yet) in the original process for printed lexicography which led to the compilation of the particu-lar printed dictionary (cf. Fig. 34, TC4). Dictionaries with media-neutrally processed databases, on the other hand, can in principle be published in printed format as well as in a ditigal medium (cf. Fig. 34, TC3).
4 How are Dictionaries Classified ? 209
Reference work
as product of a lexi-cographical process
as product of a computerised lexicographical process
TC1: nature of the process of which the product forms a reference work
Computer lexicon Dictionary
(cf. Fig. 38 & 39)
TC2: nature of the lexicogra-phical process of which the product forms a dicti-onary
as product of a printed lexi-cographical process
Dictionary with printed lexi-cographic processed database
as product of a media-neutral lexicographical process
Dictionary with media-neutral processed database
TC3: […] TC3: medium of publication
Printed medium Digital publication media
Digital dictionary
(cf. Fig. 34–37)
Printed dictionary
TK2: Retrospective processing
Retrospective Digitalisation
No retrospective processing
Retrospectively digitalised dictionary
Fig. 34 : Typology excerpt for reference works ; Abbreviations and presentation conventions : TC = typol-ogy criterion ; “■—–►” means the application of TC leads to the sub-classification
Digital dictionaries and computer lexicons can be further sub-classified by means of additional typology criteria. For digital dictionaries, several such possibilities for typologies are available (presented in Fig. 35, 36 and 37) ; for computer lexicons in Figures 38 and 39. Apart from that, one can create sub-typologies for digital dictionaries also according to their relationship to users and the subject matter of the dictionaries ; for this, one can use the typologies in § 27 and § 28.
Figure 35 illustrates a typology excerpt for digital dictionaries in which, on the uppermost level, the availability of the lexicographical database is set as typology criterion (TC1). This criterion leads to a sub-classification into offline and online dictionaries. For the first-mentioned, it is typical that access to the database is only possible when it is locally available on a storage medium (removable storage media such as CD-ROM, DVD or disk). In the case of online dic-tionaries, on the other hand, the database is available on a so-called host computer which is a node in a computer network (e.g. internet, intranet) and the database is made available for access in so-called client applications (e.g. an appropriate retrieval interface on a PC or on a cellphone with access to the particular network). An additional sub-classification for offline and online dictionaries can be done according to the nature of the medium of storage (for offline dictionar-ies, TC2-1) or according to the nature of the network service (for online dictionaries, TC2-2).
210 Systematic Introduction
Digital dictionary TC1: availability of the lexi-
cographical database
offline online
dictionary application that assumes local availability of
the database (offline dictionary)
dictionary which database can be accessed via a computer
network (online dictionary)
TC2-1: storage medium
TC2-1: network service
Disk CD-ROM DVD (other) World Wide Web(WWW)
WAP (other)
internet-based dictionary
WAP-based dictionary
disk dictionary
CD-ROM-dictionary
DVD-dictionary
so-called “PC dictionaries”
Fig. 35 : Typology excerpt for digital dictionaries according to the availability of the lexicographica data-base and medium of storage or network service
An additional typology for digital dictionaries can be undertaken according to the state of com-pleteness/imcompleteness of the lexicographical process (cf. Fig. 36, TC1). A subtype emerging from this is the type finalised dictionary in which the database processed within the framework of the lexicographical process exhibits a static nature, to the extent that the range of data types and the set of data units for the particular individual data types cannot be expanded after the process has come to an end. With regard to the impossibility to expand, the representatives of the type of finalised digital dictionaries are related to printed dictionaries, which also present a finalised and thus static database as data supply in their particular printed editions. Then there is the type expandable dictionary, which is not conceivable in a format comparable to printed me-dia of which the individual editions are resistant to subsequent expansions, because they have the characteristics of an artefact : in expandable dictionaries, the database which is accessible via a presentation medium at a specific point in time, only exhibits the latest update of the lexico-graphical process, which is either not finalised yet, or planned in principle to be continued for ever. Expandable dictionaries are therefore not static with regard to the qualitative and quantita-tive composition of their databases, but they have the features of a work-in-progress. Expand-able dictionaries can be sub-classified further according to the modalities of the expansion of their databases ; it is conceivable here that there could be dictionaries where only the dictionary editors have exclusive rights to expand the database (expandable dictionaries constituted and edited by the editors), in contradistinction to dictionaries where the users are also given an op-portunity to make suggestions for extension and initiate expansions, to the extent that one can call the exchange dependency between lexicographer and users expandable dictionaries consti-tuted by the editors and edited with the involvement of users (cf. Fig. 36, TC2). We finally need to mention here the type of network-based dictionary projects such as “wikipedia” or “wiktion-ary”, where a classification of compilers into “editors” and a group of “users contributing to the expansion” is hardly useful anymore. In such projects, any interested person can participate in the compilation of the lexicographical resource from the beginning (which means that editorial staff do not first compile a basis of articles). Such resources can be designated as expandable
4 How are Dictionaries Classified ? 211
dictionaries constituted not by editors and edited collaboratively. Depending on which of the features of the database and the conceptual data structure enable subsequent expansions (data set, data type range, article structures, cross-reference elements, etc.), one can create further sub-typologies, if necessary.
Digital dictionary TC1: completeness/incompleteness of
the lexicographical process
not finalised finalised
finalised dictionary expandable dictionary TK2: groups of persons participa-
ting or involved in the com-pilation and expansion
users dictionary editors and users
dictionary editors
expandable diction-ary and edited by the
editors
expandable dictionary constituted by the editors and edited with involve-
ment by the users
expandable dictionary not constituted by editors and edited
collaboratively
Fig. 36 : Typology excerpt for digital dictionaries according to the state of completeness/incompleteness of the lexicographical process
Digital dictionaries can furthermore be classified according to the nature of the semiotic coding used for the lexicographical database. Such a typology can only be generally outlined here, be-cause a differentiated and semiotically adequate classification can only be undertaken when taking into account different aspects of semiotic viewpoints. One can operate according to the nature of the symbol systems used (writing, images, sound) as well as semiotic codes (graphic, iconographic, acoustic) and also according to perceptual modes (visual, auditive ; monomodal, multimodal) or according to the time dependence of the presentation of the particular signs and sign complexes (discrete versus continuous media). The typology illustrated in Fig. 37 only gives a rough classification in this regard, according to the types of media used (text, image, moving image-animation, video and sound), and therefore leads to a classification of (pure) text-based dictionaries versus so-called multimedia dictionaries. This classification, however, can only be a provisional one, because ultimately the particular interaction of text and image, text and video or text, image, video and sound has not been taken into account. Because one cannot proceed from the assumption that, for example, in a multimedia dictionary presenting texts, im-ages, animation as well as video and audio sequences to its users, the different media types con-tribute in equal measure to opening up information, and in addition, that the basis for opening up information can only exist when they function in specific combinations with each other, an elaborate typology of (digital) dictionaries according to the nature of the semiotic coding of lexicographical data can, for the time being, only be wished for.
212 Systematic Introduction
digital dictionary TC: nature of the semiotic
coding of the lexicographi-cal database
only text text, image, moving image-animation, video, and sound
multimedia dictionary text-based digital dictionary
Fig. 37 : Typology excerpt for digital dictionaries according to the nature of the semiotic coding
After having looked at the illustrated typologies in Figures 35, 36 and 37, individual representa-tives of digital dictionaries can be allocated to designations of dictionary types, which allow for a differentiated characterisation according to features of the medium of storage and publication, e.g. “(digital) web-based expandable dictionary not constituted by editors and edited collabora-tively with pure text-based semiotic coding” or “(digital) multimedia finalised dictionary con-ceptualised for CD-ROM”. This designation of types can be expanded with additional predicates from typologies according to the user relationship (e.g. “passive dictionary for lay persons”, “active dictionary for semi-experts”) and according to the subject matter of the dictionary (e.g. “poly-informative dictionary of dialects”, “synchronic syntagmatic special dictionary”) (cf. § 27 and § 28). Within restrictions arising from the specific format of digital dictionaries (conceptual data structure versus presentation format, cf. § 25), one can also use complementary predicates from typologies according to the dictionary structure (cf. § 29) (e.g. “onomasiological diction-ary”, “poly-accessive dictionary”).
One can also create sub-typologies for computer lexicons, that means reference works in which the editing of lexicographical data was conceptualised for machine-aided further process-ing (cf. Fig. 34, TC1). Because in the current dictionary, dictionary research is the central focus of the subject matter (that is, research with relation to reference works which are made for hu-man users), only two examples of possible sub-typologies will be given here with regard to computer lexicons. Computer lexicons can be classified according to the area of application on the one hand, in which context the lexicographical database could be further processed by ma-chines (cf. Fig. 38), and, on the other hand, according to the nature of the data types taken into account (cf. Fig. 39).
computer lexicon TC: area of applica-
tion
machine-aided translation
(MAT)
MAT lexicon
language generation
language-generating lexicon
language analysis
lexicon for langua-ge analysis
(other)
Fig. 38 : Typology excerpt for computer lexicons according to area of application
5 How are Dictionaries Used ? 213
computer lexicon TC: nature of data types
taken into account
data on morphology
morphological lexicon
data for sub-classification
sub-classification lexicon
(other)
Fig. 39 : Typology excerpt for computer lexicons according to the nature of the data types taken into ac-count
§ 31 Procedures of Usage and Prerequisites to Investigate Them
Research into dictionary use, as the youngest of the research areas in dictionary research, has the task of providing scientific knowledge about the use of printed dictionaries. This knowledge can firstly link to experiences gained by oneself, and expressed by others in their dealings with dic-tionaries, and also always have to be linked to such experiences. Because dictionaries are used by individuals who use them without verbally uttered reflections, details are not well known about who uses which dictionaries when, how, how often, with which purposes, and with which results. Expressions of the nature “a dictionary of the type of monolingual dictionaries for basic vocabulary” is used when learning the first language, or also (more often) “a dictionary of the type A is used in the field of B, namely for usage situations C,D,E, etc” show that the existence of the user prerequisite, that research into dictionary use shares with lexicography (cf. § 27), is specifiable, at least with regard to dictionary types and situations of use.
Individual use of dictionaries consists of performing purposeful activities, which can be in-terpreted from the perspective of the observer as one or more actions. Therefore a theoretically well-founded basis and a sound action-theoretical foundation for research into dictionary use is indispensable. In contrast with other activities (which can be interpreted as one or more actions), the central part of the subject matter of research into dictionary use is given as an unknown number of individual actions, each performed by users, but which are only partly discernable as user activities. Therefore, even collecting the data which can be expected to be underlying such an empirical investigation, is not a simple task. In this respect, research into dictionary use has to draw on all the appropriate methods for data collection and data analysis developed in empirical social research and statistics.
214 Systematic Introduction
Descriptions of actions are firstly interpretations expressed in language of here-and-now ac-tivities, and they therefore have the structure of sentences in which either the same or different activities can have different perspectives, and thus be interpreted differently in language (“A has opened the window”, “A has allowed air into the room”, etc.). Classifying activities into action types can be considered a crucial possibility of performing the action of interpreting non-language world facts (which is as such complex in itself and can also be pointed out as an ac-tion).—All this is normally not a problem in everyday communication, because it is usually unproblematic to classify an individual case (a single action and its interpretation) to a known action type, as a sample, on the basis of the availability of language rules for usage.
With regard to actions pertaining to the use of dictionaries, other conditions are given which are specifically related to this action : in so far as one can draw on existing everyday descriptions of actions, they are not differentiated for systematic purposes. Therefore, for a more precise description, one needs systematisations which have a higher degree of differentiation than eve-ryday expressions of the nature “someone is using a dictionary”, or than an action predicate TO USE A DICTIONARY, which can be formulated on the first level of an action-theoretical systematisation.
Whoever uses a dictionary, approaches a copy of a book representing a dictionary type with what can be designated as a search question. A user A, for example, wants to look up the mean-ing of “to let the cat out of the bag” in the dictionary. To do this, the user firstly has to perform an external search action : this belongs to the type of generic action types SEARCHING A CARRIER OF THE GUIDING ELEMENT IN A DICTIONARY. It is this specific user action, carried out by an alternative question of the type IS THE CARRIER OF THE GUI-DING ELEMENT AVAILABLE IN THE DICTIONARY OR NOT ?, by means of which a search is done, via a guiding element in that particular place in the partial text of a dictionary assigned to it by the application of lexicographical arrangement methods used in this partial text (in short : in the word list). Such external search actions, which can be designated as “search strategic” actions, usually can be linked to internal search actions : after all, the user has to find (as in the example) an answer to the search question (after having found the carrier of the guid-ing element in the corresponding accessive entry), here : “What does ‘to let the cat out of the bag’ mean ?”—The answer for this is not simply to be found by A, or even “decoded” by A, “deciphered” by A, or “transported” to A, but has to be worked out on the basis of the data (and on the basis of the existing cognitive prerequisites in A) as cognitive entity. Therefore, action types of internal search actions are also called internal data treatment procedures or internal information derivation procedures ; the action type name for the generic action type is : WOR-KING OUT AN ANSWER OF AN ACCESSIVE ENTRY IN A DICTIONARY BY MEANS OF THE LEXICOGRAPHICAL DATA.
A theory of activities of use is focussed on making expanded descriptions of the activities on the basis of empirical data, which means that one can obtain an overview of the various possi-bilities to perform these actions belonging to the action type TO USE A DICTIONARY and its sub-types. Basic data for such a systematisation can especially be obtained through protocols on dictionary use, in which test persons write down the user actions performed by themselves, or where they comment on issues around their dictionary use, recorded on tape.
In order to interpret the data appropriately and ensure clarity about them, which is absolutely necessary in empirical investigations, one needs an appropriate special-field terminology (which
5 How are Dictionaries Used ? 215
can be justified by language theory). For the questions pointed out above, these will be terms from action theory. They form the basis for enabling the stipulation of crucial features of proce-dures of usage, and then enabling the stipulation of inter-relationships between them.
However, one has to make crucial decisions much earlier, namely already before investigat-ing the various possibilities for performing actions belonging to the type TO USE A DICTIO-NARY : dictionary users are called the subjects of the procedure (in short users) ; procedural modalities designate the way in which procedures are performed (e.g. quick or laborious) ; with regard to dictionary use, we also have to consider user skills ; circumstances of procedures have to do with facts of an external procedural context, namely the time it takes to use a dictionary, the duration of use, and the place of use. Additional differentiations are, among others : reason for use (someone e.g. wants to understand a text), cause for using a dictionary (someone e.g. has difficulties to understand a text), usage goal (someone aims towards solving this problem), and results of use (someone succeeds to break down this difficulty by consulting a dictionary).
► Benutzungsanlass [cause for use], Benutzungsgrund [reason for use], Benutzungshandlung [proce-dures of usage], Suchfrage [search question], Wörterbuchbenutzer [dictionary user], Wörterbuchfor-schung [dictionary research], Wörterbuchbenutzungspraxis [practice of dictionary use]
§ 32 Usual and Non-Usual Situations of Dictionary Use
Dictionaries are objects to be used—in the sense explained in § 1. One produces them so that potential users can obtain specific goals of action. One has usual usage when dictionaries are used according to their genuine purpose : the main type of usage can be regarded as using it as a reference work, that is the direct utilitarian, selective consultation of a dictionary with at least one specific search question.
Search questions within the framework of usual usage are usually directed towards the word list of a dictionary (in whichever way it is imparted internally in the dictionary). Whoever uses a dictionary as a reference work, performs an action of consultation which e.g. consists of asking about the meaning of an expression. Working out answers to search questions in each particular instance is very complex.
Also, whoever does not use a dictionary selectively in this way, can still use it in a usual way ; after all, there are those users who read dictionaries without search questions and find information via the lexicographical data. In most cases, however, this user has a totally different user interest than the one who quickly wants to look up something : an interest in the language, especially in its history, in the etymology of conspicuous word forms, etc. Such a user searches e.g. for instruction or for recreation. For situations which are, from the point of view of research into dictionary use, peripheral situations of dictionary use, there are many testimonials in litera-ture ; on the whole, however, the “dictionary reader” is definitely a scarce phenomenon. The question whether one can read a dictionary from beginning to end, depends in the first place on the type of dictionary (in a dictionary of abbreviations, it might not be possible), and on the de-gree of text condensation.
Non-usual procedures of dictionary use are found when a dictionary is not used according to its genuine purposes :
– If dictionaries are used as objects for examination (e.g. to write a review), the corresponding activities can indeed be interpreted as communicative actions. This type of use, however, is not usual, because
216 Systematic Introduction
dictionaries are not made for the purposes of being reviewed. Apart from in scientific contexts, search questions of the examining kind can also be directed towards a dictionary when deciding whether to buy it or not.
– A non-usual usage is also present when a dictionary is used simply on the basis of its physical nature, e.g. to put under the leg of a table to keep the table upright. These activities cannot be interpreted as communicative actions in dealing with dictionaries ; rather, a purpose foreign to the usage exists, which cannot be considered as the subject matter of research into dictionary use.
The experimental use of dictionaries can be distinguished from the usual and non-usual ways of using dictionaries, and this entails that usual usage first has to be acquired. In this process, one progresses step-by-step via failed and successful attempts of use, to expertise in usage. These user actions, which can be classified under the special type of usage in propaedeutic dictionary use, can hardly be classified either exclusively into either usual dictionary use or non-usual use. The user actions resorting under this type of usage are especially performed in learning and teaching processes in schools, experimentally performed step-by-step with the goal of acquiring dictionary usage as such (the general practice of usage), or a specific practice of usage. Whoever masters the general practice of usage, only has to acquire a few supplementary specificities of usage regarding the usage details of a particular dictionary.
► Benutzungsart [type of usage], Benutzungseffizientquotient [efficiency ratio of usage], Benutzungs-situation [situation of usage], Konsultationswörterbuch [consultation dictionary]
§ 33 Types of Dictionary Users
It is necessary for empirical investigations in research into dictionary use, and also for the part of dictionary didactics concerned with the education of users, to systematically distinguish between different types of dictionary users, if possible : a dictionary user is each person who can use a dictionary as a reference work, as a reading book, as an object of examination, or as an object for practising. Regarding the actual performance of these activities, which can be interpreted as procedures of usage, they are users-in-action.
Dictionary users act in situative roles, linked to their social positions. The focus on user roles, conceived as bundles of normative expectations, e.g. emerges from dictionary introduc-tions which consider specific reference needs to be linked to professions or groups of profes-sions. These—potential—users of a dictionary are the addressees of the particular dictionary, and further distinctions can be made according to the set of addressees which are addressed by a particular dictionary.
Dictionaries which determine a user role can only be used efficiently by the persons who cor-respond to the expectations, by having previously acquired specific user skills. In this regard, one can distinguish informed users from uninformed users. Only an informed user is in the posi-tion to make full use of the value a dictionary has for users. One can draw additional possible differentiations according to the scope of the knowledge and the degree of experience in dealing with dictionaries, which can be estimated for potential users. Regarding obtaining the goals by means of procedures of usage, differentiations are also possible (e.g. according to successful and unsuccessful users). In addition, one can distinguish between first-language users, users who are lay persons and scientific users.
5 How are Dictionaries Used ? 217
There are errors when using dictionaries, such as selecting the wrong dictionary, on the one hand, and consultation errors on the other hand. Even well-trained users cannot be guarded against the first-mentioned type of errors, because the reasons for selecting the wrong dictionary can lie in an insufficient knowledge of language, and in an insufficient knowledge of dictionar-ies. But especially trained users have a better chance of avoiding this type of usage error.
► allgemeine Wörterbuchbenutzungspraxis [general practice of dictionary use], Benutzer [user], Benutz-erfehler [user error], Benutzerrolle [user role]
§ 34 Opportunities for Usage and Contexts of Use
Procedures of usage are related to other communicative actions and with cognitive events ; they can be presented firstly in a very general manner, by designating types of social situations in which dictionaries can be used ; this type of user opportunities are e.g. “when doing homework”, “when studying special-field texts”, etc. More precisely, the following four types of dictionary consultation can be distinguished : dictionary use connected to the reading of texts ; with diffi-culties in hearing, with formulating written pieces and oral expressions. Consultative actions in the context of communicative usage always exhibit a relationship with already performed ac-tions, or actions which still have to be performed.
Procedures of usage in the context on non-communicative usage can be distinguished from the above-mentioned. These occur e.g. in the process of acquisition of a foreign language, when a learner wants to continuously supplement his/her vocabulary book while consulting a mono-lingual or bilingual dictionary. Also when using special-field dictionaries, such actions are often performed, such as when gathering material for the purposes of writing a paper or presentation. Here, one talks about the situation of knowledge research. The distinctions drawn here factually correspond to other distinctions where the consultation actions within a communicative context can be considered as direct functions of a dictionary, and the rest can be seen as indirect func-tions.
Further distinctions can be drawn according to different usual user goals. For the causes for usage (e.g. when reading texts) and disruptions which can occur, one can also draw further dis-tinctions through a more precise analysis, and also for disruptions in text reception which e.g. can be blamed on voids in the inventory of an individual’s lexicon. Considerably more complex are the relationships in the formulation of written texts. Some formulation problems occurring in the production of written texts can be solved with the support of dictionaries. A cause for usage can e.g. consist in the author not being able to differentiate between several first-language ex-pressions (which he/she masters) with good motivations. In this case, the disruption in text pro-duction has to do with an insecurity about the selection of an expression. More disruptions of this type are e.g. difficulties in finding an expression, and doubt about the correctness of an ex-pression.
§ 35 The Status of Dictionaries in Cultural Context
With the specification as “cultural practice” (cf. § 1), the embeddedness of lexicography in gen-eral cultural matters of particular societies has already been pointed out. In their historical forms, these matters are, however, diverse to such an extent that for purposes of really capturing mean-ingful details, one has to make distinctions at least regarding dictionary types, stage of develop-ment, and status of the particular languages, and distinctions regarding the political, economic and other needs of the relevant societies in different cultural spheres.
The existence of lexicographical reference works is generally based firstly on the fact that, because of a multitude of language and language varieties (and the evident experiential extracts expressed in language), there has always been a necessity for reaching understanding through language in these reference works on matters considered to be significant spheres of life. Dic-tionaries have accompanied all kinds of written cultures ; in the process, it has essentially been the culture-carrying groups that have created civilised society, and the institutions established by them, that have promoted lexicography. For the formation of lexicographical processes, one in principle takes into account the so-called driving forces, as they also determine present-day so-cieties worldwide, namely economy, politics, religion, poetry, science, education, administra-tion, including emerging trends in language planning and language cultivation, when one looks at facts in former societies (which resorts under research on the subject matter of historical com-ponents of dictionary research) :
– Dictionaries were essential for the study of the Holy Scriptures, and for purposes of reading old and foreign texts in literature.
– Scientific interests, missionisation, colonisation, nationalisation, activities in diplomatic and war-related foreign policies, etc., created contacts with other cultures and therefore the need for interpreters and dictionaries.
– In the educational system everywhere, lexicographical products were needed as aids, in order to im-prove first language competence and to facilitate the study of foreign languages, which essentially con-tributed to the development of current monolingual and bilingual general language dictionaries.
– In especially the states of Europe, there was a need for dictionaries to support in economical matters and in the migration of work forces.
Nowadays, regionalism (apart from nationalism), based on language, is a trigger for lexico-graphical undertakings, which should not be underestimated.
Within this context, dictionaries were made and are made with the goal of fulfilling individ-ual and group-specific reference needs of a language-related and object-related nature. These products for use in lexicography have always aimed to improve communication between mem-bers of different language communities, or groups of speakers within one language community, or at least make available the necessary basis for this : after all, foreign language, but also unfa-miliar aspects in one’s own language—like all types of confrontation with unfamiliar objects and facts—cause an immediate need for information in situations of reception.
In societies with active language contact, lexicographical involvement with foreign lan-guages has always been part of their elementary tasks. Foreign languages necessitate bilingual dictionaries, especially when they occur within the borders of a state. In the process, the onus of
6 What is the Status of Lexicography in Society ? 219
lexicography usally seems to be on the weaker partner when there is cultural, demographic and political imbalance between two languages.
Regarding the need for subject-oriented information, an increasingly long list of valuable reference works have come into being : encyclopedias, subject-field lexicons, but also telephone directories, catalogues for goods, cultural road maps, etc. Especially given the multitude of spe-cial fields and their proliferation, the present worldwide technological transfer resulted in an explosion of dictionaries : the reduction of communication barriers related to special fields within individual and between different language communities has become an important task in society and politics, which necessitates the co-operation of dictionary research in a special way.
Apart from the concern to make available language and subject knowledge for individual needs, general language lexicography has since its inception also been associated with far-reaching documentation goals : in language dictionaries, subject dictionaries and encyclopedic dictionaries to an equal measure, “documentation lexicography” fulfils a collective need for documentation for the future with particular national, political and scientific intentions : stabilis-ing a standardised language as the main variety, attempts to purify a language, intended en-forcement of language norms and other language-cultural, cultural-pedagogical or language-political concerns, advancement of scientific endeavours, practising selective and direct lan-guage management, etc.
Users can open up knowledge about language from language dictionaries dealing with gen-eral language, but at the same time, they can (with regard to the nominal lexicon) open up part of the subject knowledge, and important excerpts from the ideological knowledge of a language, or a group using a language variety. Especially the leading monolingual dictionaries always also make comments about their identification. These could be intended by the particular lexicogra-phers and the institutions behind them as non-binding aids when making decisions in the process of transmitting culture, and be accepted by the users as such. In the case of conscious ideological orientation in dictionaries, such identification comments, however, serve in enforcing cultural programmes (e.g. the establishment of a specific language variety as the written main variety) ; in the most extreme case, indoctrination of an entire nation paves the way for closed ideological monuments, prescribed by the state.—In most cases, however, the free comments of lexicogra-phers, who feel themselves unbound by politics and authoritarian orders of an ideological nature, somehow always stand in a mixed relationship. Both can, however, have the same conse-quences : accepting the lexicographically transmitted contents, and unconscious and conscious identification with them.
Even irrespective of deliberate or forced ideological dependency, lexicographical practice fundamentally does not offer a supposedly disinterested or “objective” presentation of data ; rather, it always consists of writing texts with hidden interests, which includes the intellectual processing of data, and therefore also the selection : societal interest are always at least ex-pressed in lexicographical products where the principle of semantic comment is valid, and where the practice of commenting is thus aimed at the semantic and pragmatic features of lemma signs. Where the ideological exertion of influence takes on especially blatant forms, all varieties of lexicography are used : denial of ideological polysemy of lemma signs by normative monose-mantic comments, and distortion of the historical aspects of the lexical meaning.
Apart from these sections in dictionary articles which are to a large extent susceptible to the exertion of ideological influence (in the narrower sense), activities resorting under aspects of
220 Systematic Introduction
language manipulation or—in less blatant forms—activities towards standardisation already have significant importance, especially regarding the selection of lemma signs, selection of sources, selection of examples, but also the comments on form : such an approach deviates from a practice thought to supposedly be purely “descriptive”, and, related to text segments and their variants, deviate from the normative claims already raised in the dictionary introduction of such dictionaries. Interventions of standardisation in language usage emerge, however, in various details when demonstrable criteria for the inner and outer selection include the systematic exclu-sion of specific areas of the language.
Among the facets of normative activities, some trends emerge which—apart from “stan-dardisation”—can be described as language planning, language reform and language cultivation, but which have up to now not been very clearly distinguished from one another. In history, the most important official language planning by the state was concerned with standardisation, and thus with stabilisation of written languages ; this intention would have been unthinkable without (orthographic and/or general monolingual) dictionaries being authorised for this purpose. This development can be traced in dictionaries from ancient China and the first French dictionaries to the German lexicography of Duden : because, wherever a written language was raised to become the generally prescribed medium of orientation, dictionaries were first developed. That also ap-plies to every type of language reform which e.g. had as an objective to promote a change to other writing systems, such as in the 19th century in Romanian and in the 20th century in Turkish. Apart from that, language engineering in the narrow sense can occur with the objective to bring about cultural efficiency, and thus democratisation of education, by means of normative explanatory dictionaries, such as e.g. in the earlier Sovjet Union.—The world over, however—not only in reconstructable earlier times, but also at present—the forms of purism ordered by the state, and to the same extent purism spontaneously motivated by religious or national forces, do not seem to have lost their influence on lexicographical processes.
The most important dictionaries are descriptive dictionaries, each with specific restrictions through aspects of lexicographical normativity : a normative claim is always implicitly linked with the exemplary nature of the lemmas ; each one is at least inherently rated as “correct” via the normative expression in the comment on form (with regard to pronunciation, spelling, syn-tax, accentuation). In this regard, in language societies with developed lexicographical traditions and democratic social orders, the present situation all over the world is really not very spectacu-lar, because the prescriptions for spelling have been done long ago and put into practice ; being accustomed to written conventions in all the culturally developed societies with writing systems, still does not do away with the need for advocacy.
Whole areas of lexicography are presently affected by the situation that language change has significantly accelerated in the lexicon since the beginning of the 20th century. This calls for permanent lexicographical work to be done, which can hardly be managed satisfactorily, even in countries with a traditionally substantial supply of lexicographical products. The fact of lexico-graphical activities playing a significant role in society at present, also being recognised in inter-national politics, has been expressed, among others, in promoting lexicography, already taken up in the final act of the Conference for Security and Co-operation in Helsinki.
Since then, the interest for lexicography and its products has increased considerably all over the world, which can be seen at present in a flood of publications (also in view of existing lan-guage barriers) over which one can hardly get an overview. There are several science-internal
6 What is the Status of Lexicography in Society ? 221
and extra-scientific causes for this trend : The extra-scientific causes, among others, include : the ever increasing internationalisation in economic exchange, the construction of supra-national organisations, the development of the tourism branch, etc., which are accompanied by an in-creasing demand for knowledge of foreign languages. Science-internal causes for this develop-ment consist, among others, in the fact that the lexicon plays an increasingly important role as a model component in language-theoretical approaches, that several newer lexicon models—to the same extent regarding first language and foreign language education—stand in the centre of attention, and that the integration of the computer in lexicographical processes also accommo-dates these trends regarding vocabulary.
§ 36 Problem Areas in the Relationship Between Lexicography and Society
Problem areas in the relationship between lexicography and society emerge especially in con-nection with questions of the commodity nature of dictionaries, as well as the cultural-pedagogical role that dictionaries have, or should have more clearly, in society (according to the particular posed requirements). More recent dictionary research has indeed played an important role to point out conflict areas in the relationship between lexicography and society. Exactly because dictionary research does not end in an isolated reflection of language features of lexico-graphical products, but rather submits more or less precise suggestions for the improvement of dictionaries, and also focusses its attention on cultivating existing well-known dictionaries, and points out voids in the dictionary landscape of particular language communities, they always publicly unveil existing conflicts in the relationship of lexicography and society, and lifts them out from the condition of speechlessness, or the simply tentative resonating condition about such conflicts.
Problems can be seen especially with regard to extreme presentation forms such as either perfectionism alien to a society on the one hand, or of interests underlying the market economy with an exaggerated accommodation of potential users on the other hand : the danger of discon-necting from the general interest in society can be extremely great in the area of scientific lexi-cography, having been practised for so long, and even when having been legitimitely given tasks for documentation and user lexicography, one could loose sight or narrow one’s perspective of what the purpose of lexicographical products entails, namely the cultural practice of enabling their usage. Without pressure of being profitable, many undertakings sponsored by the state can have a tendency towards perfectionism, slowness and extravagance in their aspirations. After all, dictionaries are in the first place only sponsored by the state (except in dictatorships) when they exhibit a purely scientific character. In so far as risk-related pioneering lexicography is con-cerned, these private publishing houses are not to be encouraged unconditionally, because they have to do profitable business from a marketing point of view.
Commercial lexicography depending on profitability is intent on accommodating society in a special way. It cannot afford to expect too much of users with their lexicographical products. When a user is, however, unchallenged, questions for the improvement of the dictionary culture
222 Systematic Introduction
can simultaneously be asked ; questions of quality which come into play here can of course only be answered by investigating individual cases.
This also applies to unethical forms of marketing dictionaries in the area of commercial lexi-cography : because they are put on the same level as products in other branches, dictionaries which can ethically hardly be justified are marketed alongside dictionaries with a sound back-ground. Even where the gullibility of inexperienced groups of buyers is incalculated, incomplete and misguiding product information can take on the form of “dictionary criminality” : dishonest advertising on title pages and covers which does not mention, or distorts information about the first publication, scope and type of a revised edition, the date of publication of the editions, etc., or when an older dictionary is published under a new title (even with new editors or with another publisher), or when the same dictionary is distributed in different countries under different titles, etc.
Dictionary criticism points out most extensively when secondary sources are not mentioned, or dependency on sources is hidden. In this case, the unethical irresponsible behaviour is di-rected towards other dictionary producers. All forms of dubious work as well as inferior lexicog-raphy is to the disadvantage of dictionary culture as such. One can, however, patent language expressions ; and it normally is also completely unproblematic that especially language diction-aries link to a successful practice of existing dictionary traditions and their main dictionaries. One should also explicitly point out the plagiarising nature of dictionaries from the perspective of dictionary criticism, which sits in a grey area regarding copyright. With the development of computer technology and the possibilities brought about by the computer to manipulate data, these types of problems surely have gained in importance.
The reliability of lexicographical data and the possibility to find them is an essential quality criterion for dictionaries, which in turn is decisive for the utilisation value of dictionaries. Socie-tal responsibilities are nearly not as spectacular in scientific lexicography as they are in other fields of activity in society, but they are nevertheless not to be underrated. Lexicographers are responsible for the conception of a dictionary in which especially observing the principle of referring to sources and citations in dictionaries is valid as an indicator of a scientific approach.
Dictionaries compiled by responsible lexicographers are valuable aids when acquiring knowledge of scientific and technical learning processes in the first language, foreign language, and special-field language. The classification of lexicography as “cultural practice” already in-cludes the significant cultural-pedagogical role lexicography has : language dictionaries, such as subject lexicons, have an important status in educational processes in schools and career training of the most diverse types ; in addition, they are not only used in academic circles, but also at least to the same extent in the greater part of all other career sections within the framework of multi-faceted work-related activities. The work-related necessity for usage, moreover, puts aside totally private interest-related usage concerns. In this regard, some critical facts can also be linked to catchwords such as “user-friendliness” and “dictionary culture”, which are often used : a crucial aspect is that of determining the purpose of dictionaries, namely that they are there so that reference procedures, directed towards them, can take place quickly and successfully. This, however, is only possible when lexicographers and the public meet each other on the same level of the language. For several reasons, such harmony is always in jeopardy, inter alia because the production processes of dictionaries are subject to specific constraints. Among this counts espe-cially the constraint of having to present the textually transmitted data in a condensed format
6 What is the Status of Lexicography in Society ? 223
within a small printed space, which forms a partial aspect of general professionalisation. Suc-cessful use of a dictionary depends on the extent to which the lay user brings along the necessary prerequisites, in order to be able to understand the professionalised instrument “dictionary” : requirements for user-friendliness therefore aim at presenting lexicographical results in accor-dance with needs in society ; suggestions for improvement of the dictionary culture essentially owe their existence to the effort of bringing potential users groups nearer to existing lexico-graphical accomplishments.
The question about what kind of contribution dictionary research can make to dictionary cul-ture and to raising the level and user-friendliness of lexicographical products, can presently be put into perspective only in a very general way : even though dictionary research is on its way to become a scientific discipline, it has up to now not been seen as very promising to make it an obligatory part of language study in teacher training ; apart from it being considered stronger in schools and in university courses, the transmission of basic metalexicographical knowledge would also be desirable in education institutions outside the university. Beyond education, in which it certainly deserves a key position, services regarding comprehensible formulated infor-mation about dictionaries spread over the entire society (in all media, through publications in non-scientific journals, through benchmarking tests in associations which otherwise evaluate other consumer goods regarding consumers) can certainly contribute that members of all classes of the population gain reflective insights about the status and quality matters of lexicographical products. The necessity to influence dictionary projects and lexicographical products by means of critical involvement, and measure them according to presently obtainable quality standards, is an independent matter.
Dictionaries are certainly purchased in great quantities, which can be proven by sales figures. According to the market share, products from language and subject lexicography to which the status of a cultural product is linked, are apparently pushed aside by a multitude of cheap and partly second-class and third-class compilations, which can be found on the bargain counters in department stores and other places. Apart from several investigations in the area of empirical research into dictionary use, not much is known as such about the question whether dictionaries which are bought are indeed used, and if so, to what extent, and in which situations it is the case, etc. Much less reliable can even be said about the opinions of purchasers and non-purchasers of dictionaries. Opinions documented elsewhere indicate by and large conflicting results : dictionaries are seen as banal-practical objects of use, on the one hand, which are not worthy of reflection, and on the other hand several of them are regarded as cultural goods and prestige objects which simply have to be deeply respected. The latter positive and excessive approach to dictionaries is especially popular among writers, although even they have the most diverse range of judgments and prejudices : on the one hand, they are fascinated by dictionaries (especially those by significant undertakings), and on the other hand they—sometimes even simultaneous-ly—consider them as the prototype of boring, dry and unimaginative objects.
224 Systematic Introduction
One cannot talk with certainty about a somehow structured and clear division between these positive and negative judgments among professional groups. The most prevalent attitude to-wards dictionaries seems to be the implicit and unconditional recognition of the authority of dictionaries. With this is simultaneously expressed—much less than in the case of the equally observed critical questioning of their status—a dubious lack of critical distance, and the lack of availability of criteria for a differentiated evaluation of dictionaries. What prevents dictionaries from being regarded as attractive cultural products is difficult to explain in detail, and it can entail many aspects, nevertheless comprehensible and absolutely clear—in view of the general situation especially regarding education matters in schools and professions : essentially, diction-aries are not regarded as manufactured products (of which the painstaking organisational and formulating processes are brought about by lexicographers) which are fixed on foreign and own knowledge, and which also in the era of mass media “culture” and the accompanying superficiality are the main objects expressing the strive for accuracy, especially the struggle to find adequate expressions. Such prerequisites do not apply to telephone directories which, in parts of the public consciousness, are often put on the same level as dictionaries. Even special-field experts of non-philological disciplines have difficulty with the conception that one could focus, regarding the lexicographical practice, on more than the features of dictionaries, which are supposedly banal-practical objects of use.
The fact that, in parts of public life, dictionaries have a great attraction—especially in the area of language lexicography—can be attributed to the fact that dictionaries share in the fasci-nation people have with language matters, because many lay people, in all times, have them-selves worked on a dictionary, or have planned one : because, via dictionaries, individual knowl-edge is confirmed, and unfamiliar knowledge can be opened up ; but among that is much that can lead to contradiction. With the educated public, especially different types of special diction-aries are popular, e.g. cumulative synonym dictionaries and dictionaries of loan words, which fulfil their role as easily manageable tools, when working with them does not lead to the devel-opment of special affective relationships to these dictionaries. All aspects of language change, on the other hand, receive special fondness, and that is why dictionaries are often evaluated ac-cording to the extent to which they present conspicuous neologisms and popular etymological information. The same applies to dictionaries of figures of speech, names, dialectic peculiarities, and traditionally also to onomasiological dictionaries and dictionaries with etymological expla-nations (real etymological dictionaries with a scientific approach, on the other hand, are hardly accessible for lay users). Numerous smaller special dictionaries especially accommodate this interest : they can stay abreast of changes, can present data in a more appealing way than the more comprehensive general language dictionaries, usually exhibit a lower degree of text con-densation, and use contemporary language in their comments.
When one keeps in mind the possible average experiences of users, one tends by all means to show understanding for the fact that dealing with dictionaries is not only experienced as gratify-ing. This cannot only be attributed to the fact that users fall back on inappropriate dictionaries, or ones which are not suitable for the purposes of the particular reference need, or that they have developed reference experiences by using inferior prototypes ; rather, dictionary use entails a certain amount of surmounting and tenaciousness in view of the hardship of looking something up, of the uncertainty of finding something and the expected utilisation ; and finally, it takes time
6 What is the Status of Lexicography in Society ? 225
as well. In addition, there does not seem to be an unconditional prestige linked to dictionary use, but only the acknowledgement of one’s lack of language competence or subject competence.
In case a part of that which constitutes the status quo in dealing with dictionaries has been captured with the above-mentioned judgements and prejudices (including several aversions against dictionaries), dictionary research all the more has to explain its cultural-pedagogical task in public, namely by investigating lexicographical processes and their products and the use of dictionaries, by emphasising the usefulness of dictionaries, and thus succeed in raising con-sciousness about dictionaries.
cf. research into dictionary use action type TO USE A DICTIONARY 214ff
cf. research into dictionary use
– cause for use 217 – circumstances of procedures 215 – dictionary user 215 – procedural modalities 215 – reason for use 215 – results of use 215 – usage goal 215
action-theoretical foundation 213 cf. research into dictionary use
active dictionaries 204 cf. bilingual dictionaries
active translation dictionaries 204 active translation function 204
cf. dictionary functions address
– and item giving the cross-reference 152 – and item giving the form of the lemma sign 152
addressed items 174 cf. items
addressing relationship 151 – as replacement for text condensation 151-152 – versus item relationship 151 – versus processing relationship 151
cf. inner access structures alphabetical index 148 alphabetical macrostructures 183ff.
cf. macrostructures – alphabetical arrangement 186f – characterisation 184f – distribution of the selected units 185f – illustration of the construction Figure 26
– possibilities for expansion 169 bilingual dictionaries 155
– active 204 – passive 204 – typology excerpt according to the user relationship
204; Figure 33 – typology of functions 204; Figure 33
bilingual lexicography 218
C calculability 131 card in a card file 135 carrier of the cross-reference address 193 carrier of the guiding element 142, 186, 214
cf. alphabetical macrostructure cause for use 217
cf. action type TO … characterised by their structure 183
cf. macrostructures, characterised by their structure circumstances of procedures 215
cf. action type TO … citation card 136 citation card index 136 citation texts 136 classes of typologies 203ff.
cf. dictionary typologies – according to features of the medium of storage and
publication 208ff. – according to the dictionary structure 207 – according to the dictionary subject matter 205f. – according to the user relationship 203f.
components of dictionary articles 149 cf. dictionary article
comprehensive lexicographical process 125, 134 computer lexicography 141f.
– and computer-assisted lexicography 141f. – and lexicographical processes 209 – and the re-usability of lexicographical data 141 – as branch of research 141 – special features 137ff.
computer lexicons 131, 141, 208ff. – and dictionaries 208 – and digital dictionaries 208 – and lexical bottle-neck 141 – role in machine-aided language treatment 141 – typology 212 – typology excerpt according to application area 212 – typology excerpt according to the nature of the data
137ff. – and computer lexicography 141 – data bank systems 137f. – hypertext 137f. – markup languages 137f. – organisational plan 138 – preparation phase 138
structure, mediostructural – no direct external 188; cf. mediostructures, non-
alphabetical data accessivity profile 191
cf. access profile data acquisition 134 data analysis phase 134f., 136 data bank systems 137ff. data banks, multifunctional 141ff. data collection 130ff. data collection phase 133ff.
cf. lexicographical practice/processes data distribution 163f.
– role in digital dictionaries 201 data distribution structure(s) 163f, 201f.
– article-heterogeneous word lists (single article, syn-opsis article) 164, 197
– and user-friendliness 130, 149f., 222f. – approaches: judgements and prejudices 223f. – as aids in acquiring knowledge 222 – as authorities 224 – as objects of use 143, 223f. – as results of lexicographical processes 131 – commodity nature 221 – cultural-pedagogical role/task 219ff. – dictionary maintenance 134 – in the public opinion 223 – marketing 221f. – plagiarising nature 222 – planning printed … 140 – quality criteria 222 – reasons and driving forces for their existence 218 – sponsored by the state 221 – status in cultural context 218ff. – stipulation of purpose 222 – user-friendliness 130, 149f., 222f. – usual usage 215f. – with ideological orientation 219 – work-related necessities for use 222
dictionaries for difficult words 206 dictionaries of constructions 206
cf. syntagmatic special dictionaries dictionaries of language variety 206 dictionaries of phraseology 206
cf. syntagmatic special dictionaries dictionaries of standard language 206
cf. dictionaries of language varieties dictionary
– alphabetical 142, 183, 191, 207 – and computer lexicons 208 – as result of lexicographical processes 131 – as text carrier/text type carrier 131, 145 – as text compound 145ff. – bilingual 155; cf. bilingual dictionaries – components 145ff. – descriptive 220 – diachronic 206 – digital 141, 198ff., 209ff.; cf. digital dictionaries – features 142ff. – functions 142ff. – genuine purposes/functions 142ff. – mono-accessive 207 – mono-functional (with one function) 204 – mono-informative 205f. – mono-selective 206 – non-alphabetical 207 – poly-accessive 190, 207 – polyfunctional (with at least two functions) 204 – poly-informative 206 – poly-selective 206 – poly-selective and poly-informative 206 – retrograde 186 – special special-fields 206; cf. dictionaries of langua-
ge variety – synchronic 157, 206 – textual structures 158ff.
dictionary according to subject fields 207 cf. non-alphabetical dictionaries
dictionary article(s) – as accessive dictionary entries 142, 149 – as text type 149f. – comment on form 167ff. – comment on semantics 167ff. – components 149ff. – condensed 149ff. – non-condensed 149 – simple 165 – tabular 150 – types 136 – with vertical microarchitecture 180ff. – writing/formulation tasks 136
dictionary back matter 146ff. dictionary basis 133ff.
– and mediostructural programme 197 – function supporting text production (production
function) 144, 204 – function supporting text reception (reception functi-
on) 144, 204 – function supporting translation (translation function)
144, 204 – help function for active translation 204 – help function for passive translation 204 – knowledge-related function/study function 144 – text-related/language conflict-related 144 – typology of functions for bilingual dictionaries 204
dictionary functions related to language conflict 144 cf. text-related dictionary functions
dictionary maintenance 134 cf. dictionary research, role in society cf. dictionaries
dictionary plan 132f. – dictionary conception; cf. dictionary conception – organisational plan 132, 138
dictionary predicates 202f. – everyday language 202 – terminologised 202f.
dictionary predicates in everyday language 202 dictionary programme 132 dictionary projects, network-based 210
cf. network-based dictionary projects dictionary research 129ff., 213ff.
– and metalexicography 125ff. – as scientific discipline 223 – contribution to dictionary culture 223 – critical 130 – improvement of user-friendliness 130, 223 – raising the level of lexicographical products 223 – research areas 129 – role in society 220ff.
– subject matter 125ff., 132ff. – text-theoretical and action-theoretical approach 128 – theory of dictionary classification 129f. – theory of lexicographical data editing 129f. – theory of lexicographical text carriers 129f.
cf. scientific classifications – according to the nature of the text compound 207;
cf. text compound types – classes of typologies 203ff. – means of presentation 203ff.
dictionary use – as subject matter of dictionary research 128ff, 213ff. – consultation errors 217 – disruption in text production 217 – disruption in text reception 217 – doubt about correctness 217 – errors in dictionary selection 217 – problems in finding expressions 217 – situation of knowledge research 217
dictionary users 215 cf. action type TO … – informed 216 – uninformed 216 – other users 216 – user-in-action 172, 217
digital dictionaries 137ff., 198ff., 209ff. – and computer lexicons 208 – and lemma signs 199 – and printed dictionaries 136, 201, 209 – and the concept of macrostructure 201 – and the concept of mediostructure 201 – conceptual data structure 198ff. – conceptual modelling of dictionary structures 201 – expandable dictionary 210ff.; Figure 36 – finalised dictionary 210ff.; Figure 36 – functionality 199f. – hierarchical structuring 199 – modelling level 199 – multimedia 211ff.; Figure 37 – offline dictionaries 209ff.; Figure 35 – online dictionaries 137, 201, 209ff.; Figure 35 – planning 140, 201 – pre-difference of the conceptual data structure 198 – pre-difference of the data disposition 198ff. – pre-difference of the data modelling 138 – presentation formats 138ff., 198ff., 208, 212 – (pure) text-based 212; Figure 37 – role of data distribution 201f. – role of data distribution structure 201f. – semiotic representation of the data units 199 – specific features 198ff. – stipulation of presentation formats 199f.
232 Systematic Introduction
– structural analysis 200 – typology excerpt according to complete-
ness/incompleteness of the lexicographical process 210f.; Figure 36
– typology excerpt according to the availability of the lexicographical database and the storage media 210; Figure 35
– typology excerpt according to the nature of the se-miotic coding 211f.; Figure 37
digital special-field dictionary 200 direct external data accessivity 188
cf. macrostructures, alphabetical disruption in text production 217 disruptions in dictionary use 217
cf. dictionary use documentation lexicography 219
cf. lexicography; purposes and concerns documents, annotated 137
cf. annotated documents
E elementary items 157ff.
cf. items encyclopaedic dictionary research 126 encyclopaedic dictionary 125f. encyclopaedic items 155f. encyclopaedic lexicography 125ff. end data 131, 134ff., 140, 198
cf. lexicographical end data entire lemma stretch, vertical 190
cf. macrostructure, straight-alphabetical example 135f.
cf. lexicographical example excerpt 133, 135f. excerption 133, 135f.
exhaustive mechanical alphabetisation 186 cf. method of alphabetisation – against the direction of writing 186 – in a not strict application: not strictly-alphabetical
macrostructures 186 – in a strict application: strictly initial-alphabetical
macrostructures 186 – in the direction of writing 186
expandable dictionary 210ff. cf. digital dictionary
expanded data distribution structure 164 cf. data distribution structure
194ff.; cf. mediostructural type – mediostructural heterogeneous poly-addressed 194 – mediostructural homogeneous poly-addressed 193 – mediostructural mono-addressed 193ff. – oriented towards the inner text 193 – oriented towards the insertion 193 – oriented towards the lemma (oriented towards the
article) 193 – oriented towards the outer text 193, 198
items – addressed 174 – condensed 157, 159f. – elementary 157ff. – for frequency 157 – giving cross-references; cf. item(s) giving the cross-
reference – non-addressed 173
items carrying cross-references 140, items completely focussed towards the lemma 174
cf. items structures with complete lemmatic addressing items giving abbreviations 154 items giving citation texts 136 items giving construction 154 items giving cross-references oriented towards insertions
193 cf. item(s) giving the cross-reference
items giving cross-references oriented towards the inner text 193 cf. item(s) giving the cross-reference
items giving cross-references oriented towards the lemma 193 cf. item(s) giving the cross-reference
items giving cross-references oriented towards the outer text 193, 198 cf. item(s) giving the cross-reference
items giving the meaning 150ff. cf. item classes – item giving synonyms 155 – item giving the synonym 155 – items giving equivalents 155 – items giving the definiens 155 – items giving the paraphrase of the meaning 152,
155, 158 – lexicographical definition 155
items giving morphological inflections 154 items giving the morphology of word formation 154 items giving the orthography 153 items giving the phonetics 153, 157
– and addressing structures 172, 174 – illustration by means of tree graphs 173 – integrated right-expanded 173; structural graph: Fi-
gure 16 – types 174 – versus item structures 175 – with complete lemmatic addressing 174 – with partial lemmatic addressing 174
L labelling dimensions 156 labelling items 156, 171
cf. pragmatic items language change 220, 224
cf. lexicography and language change language dictionaries
– as lexicographical text carriers/text type carriers 145 – constitutive features 142ff. – of general language 218f., 224 – normative explanatory 220 – typologies according to the dictionary structure
207ff. language lexicography 125ff.
– language system lexicography 127 – text lexicography 127
language system lexicography 127 cf. language lexicography – and text lexicography 127 – partial phases 132
lexicographical pilot study 133 lexicographical practice/processes
– analysable 132 – and computerised lexicographical processes 141,
208f. – and language management 219 – and purism 220 – as text processing processes 131 – as writing texts with hidden interests 219f. – calculability 131 – comprehensive 125, 134 – computer-assisted 127ff., 131, 137ff., 208
– features 130ff., 137, 141, 198ff. – in digital dictionaries 130, 137, 139ff., 198f. – not assisted by computers 128 – oriented towards printed lexicographical works 128,
138ff., 200f., 208f. – data analysis phase 134f., 136 – data collection phase 133ff. – data editing phase 135 – manipulation of … 131 – preparation phase 132ff.; cf. preparation phase – retrospective digitalisation 139f., 208 – trends in standardisation 149f., 220 – with ideological orientation 219 – without computer assistance 128, 132; cf. partial
– versus item relationship 151 lexicographical provisional data 135, 137f., 140 lexicographical source data 131ff. lexicographical sources 133ff., 137, 140, 184, 222
cf. sources lexicographical text standardisation 149f.
cf. standardisation lexicographical processing unit 151 lexicography
– and academic disciplines 126 – and data-providing disciplines 126 – and language change 220, 224 – and metalexicography 125f. – and society; cf. lexicography and society – as author lexicography 127 – as cultural practice 125ff., 218, 222 – as language system lexicography; cf. language sys-
tem lexicography – as text lexicography 127 – bilingual 202, 204ff. – commercial 204, 221ff. – documentation purposes 219, 221 – its promotion 220 – non-scientific 125, 130 – pedagogical; cf. learners’ dictionaries – purposes and concerns 125ff., 219, 222 – scientific 126f, 221f. – status 125, 218ff.
lexicography and society – availability of language and subject knowledge
130f., 156, 219 – documentation purposes 219, 221 – formation of lexicographical processes 218 – ideological exertion of influence 219 – interventions in language standardisation 220 – language planning, language reform, language culti-
vation 220 – lexicographical tasks 133, 140, 213, 218f., 221, 225 – problem areas in the relationship 221ff. – promotion of lexicography 220 – purism 220
236 Systematic Introduction
lexicon research 126
M machine-assisted language editing 141f. macrostructural coverage 183ff.
– according to subject groups 188 – alphabetical 183ff. – characterised by their structure 183 – conceptual 188 – discontinuous poly-alphabetical 185; macrostructu-
macrostructures characterised by their structure 183 manipulation of lexicographical processes 131 markup languages 137f., 198 mediostructural external data accessivity 190
cf. items structures with partial lemmatic addressing partial texts (of a printed dictionary) 142ff., 147ff., 165,
199ff. cf. lexicographical partial texts – as storers of data 131 – external mono-accessive 147 – external poly-accessive 147 – word list 142ff., 146ff., 165
– and digital dictionaries 136, 201, 209 – as text carriers (text type carriers) 129, 145 – constitutive features 142ff. – prerequisites for cross-references 197 – typology 202ff.
Alphabetical Index 239
printed language dictionary cf. printed dictionaries
printed lexicographical processes 128, 138f., 200f., 208f. cf. printed dictionaries – relationship to digital dictionaries 138f., 141, 200f.,
208f. procedural modalities 215
cf. action type TO … procedure of excerption 135ff., 139 procedure of usage 151, 197
cf. research into dictionary use procedures of usage
cf. dictionary consultation – experimental 216 – in communicative context of use 204, 215ff. – in non-communicative context of use 216f. – non-usual 216f. – usual usage 205, 215ff.
production dictionaries 204 production function 144, 204
cf. dictionary function promoting lexicography 220
cf. lexicography, its promotion propaedeutic dictionary use 216
cf. procedures of usage, experimental protocols about dictionary use 129, 135, 214
cf. research into dictionary use pure (non-hybrid) outer access structures 189
cf. outer access structures pure text constituent structures 162, 166
cf. text constituent structures
Q quality criteria for dictionaries 222
cf. dictionaries
R randomised macrostructures 188
cf. macrostructures reason for use 215
cf. action type TO … reception dictionaries 204 reception function 144, 204
cf. dictionary function supporting text reception reference address 152, 173ff., 192ff. reference work(s): typology excerpt 209, Figure 34 research into dictionary use 130, 213ff.,223
– action predicate 214 – action type 214 – action type TO USE A DICTIONARY 214 – action-theoretical foundation 128f., 213f.
– activities, interpreted as action 129 – concept of action 129, 213ff. – descriptions of action 214 – internal data treatment procedures 214 – procedure of usage 151, 192 – protocols about dictionary use 129, 135, 214 – systematisations 214
research into use cf. dictionary research cf. research into dictionary use
results of usage 215 cf. action type TO …
retrograde dictionary 186 cf. dictionary
retrospective digitalisation 139f., 208 re-usability of lexicographical data 141, 200
cf. computer lexicography re-usability
cf. re-usability of lexicographical data right core structure 166ff., 173
cf. macrostructures, systematic thematic columns 148f. theory
cf. dictionary research – of dictionary classification 129f. – of dictionary structure (in printed dictionaries) 201 – of lexicographical data editing 129, 135 – of lexicographical text carriers 129 – of the structures of lexicographical texts and partial
cf. scientific classification cf. dictionary typologies – according to dictionary functions 126 – according to the user relationships 203f.; cf. classes
of typologies typology graphs 203
cf. dictionary typologies
U uninformed users 216
cf. dictionary users usage errors 217
cf. dictionary use usage goal 215
cf. action type TO … usage 128f., 144ff., 151, 189, 197, 213ff.
cf. dictionary use – as reference work 125, 215f. – with a search question 151f., 214ff.
user prerequisite 128f., 213 user relationship 203ff. user-friendliness 130, 149f., 222f.
cf. dictionaries user-in-action 172
cf. dictionary users usual usage 205, 215ff.
cf. procedures of usage
V valency dictionaries 154, 206
cf. syntagmatic special dictionaries vertical entire lemma stretch 190
vertical text architecture(s) 179, 181 cf. text architectures
W wiki technology 137, 210
242 Systematic Introduction
word list 129, 131, 143, 145ff., 164f., 183, 185f., 189ff., 197, 207, 214f. – and outer texts 146f. – article stretches of a word list 148f. – article-heterogeneous 164, 197; cf. data distribution
structure – as lexicographical partial text 148 – with phased-in inner text 148 – with thematic column 148f.
