- •Т. Н. Суша Лингвистические основы лексикографии
- •Минск 1999
- •Introduction 56
- •In the Introduction the major linguistic problems of dictionary-making arc outlined; some of the linguistic/lexicographical terms are explained; and points for discussion are formulated.
- •I am grateful to Galina Kulbatskaya, Olga Petrova and Eugene Sologtibov, whose assistance in typing the manuscript greatly facilitated publication.
- •Introduction
- •Ipa International Phonetic Alphabet, International Phonetic
- •Inflectional endings it may have or the number of words it may contain. A lexeme is an abstract unit;
- •A) knowing how a word is pronounced;
- •The grammatical patterns with which a word is used;
- •The meaning or meanings of the word;
- •Discussion
- •1. Лексикография сегодня
- •2. Статичность словаря и динамичность языка
- •3. Словарь как справочник и как учебное пособие
- •4. Словарь и грамматика
- •38 Интегральным.
- •5. Лексикографические портреты и типы: перспектива
- •1. Lexicography as scientific practice and as the subject of a general theory of lexicography
- •The second field of activity includes all the activities involved in establishing a dictionary base and in processing this base in a lexicographical file.
- •The third field of activity includes all the activities concerned directly with the writing of dictionary texts and thus with the writing of the dictionary.
- •2. Sketch of the struc ture and contents of a general theory of lexicography
- •1St component purposes of dictionaries
- •1St component data collection
- •2Nd component data processing
- •Discussion
- •In what way does the author characterize the subject matter of linguistic lexicography?
- •1. The linguistic basis of lexicography
- •2. Lexicography and lexical description
- •It is true, of course, that standards of appropriateness in language are not
- •3. The lexeme as the basic unit in dictionary-making
- •In lexicography, semantic relationships of this kind are not always (or cannot
- •51 To the contexts in which they are used, For the same reason, it is not always possible to draw a clear dividing line between the dictionary and the encyclopaedia.
- •5. The metalanguage of lexicography
- •6. What are dictionaries for?
- •In 1854 the famous German linguist, grammarian and lexicographer Jacob
- •1. Introduction
- •2. Contrastive linguistics and its divisions
- •2.1. General Contrastive Analysis
- •2.2. Special Divisions of Contrastive Linguistics
- •3.1 Contrastive Phonology
- •3.2. Contrastive Graphology
- •3.3. Contrastive Lexicology
- •4. Open questions
- •Discussion
- •The bilingual dictionary5
- •1. The purpose of the bilingual dictionary
- •2. The anisomorphism of languages
- •3. Collection of material
- •4. Selection of entries
- •If the dictionary is intended to help to generate German texts, the lexical meanings of the German equivalent will have to be specified, for example in the following way:
- •It is probably not necessary to describe the different possible entries of a German-Chinese dictionary.
- •Old method, old custom, old dream, old archive;
- •Old industry equipment, old material, old clothes, old house.
- •81 Accompanied by examples or not). One can assume that the entry could have a form like the following one:
- •British and american lexicography6
- •I've selected twelve pairs of items of which there is {I trust) one American equivalent
- •Items all reflect what you might call the terminology of everyday life — the everyday
- •3Rinsh and American English. Nevertheless, some conclusions can be drawn from it.
- •Conclusion
- •Discussion
- •Is thematic ordering an alternative to alphabetical ordering in word books?
1. Introduction
In spite of the long tradition of comparative studies in linguistics, 'contrastive analysis' is a relatively young discipline. Its relevance to bilingual lexicography (here taken to include all types of interlingual or polyglot dictionaries) has not been explored in a systematic fashion before, except perhaps in connection with the notion of translation 'equivalence^ <...> This article is included to give an outline of contrastive linguistics and its most important divisions in relation to the main issues of bilingual lexicography; examples will be drawn largely from English, German and French.
2. Contrastive linguistics and its divisions
2.1. General Contrastive Analysis
Most statements about language in general may be called contrastive in the sense that they deal with similarities and differences (and thus need a common denominator, and the so-called tertium cnmparationis, cf. Hartmaim 1960).<...> Any language of any of its varieties or subsystems is thus capable of being contrasted with any other language or corresponding variety or sub-system. Contrastive analysis can be carried out on these for a number of different purposes. The object may be to
elucidate the production of errors in the acquisition of a foreign language, to explain the complexities of bilingualism, to analyse the processes of translation and interpreting, to aid the compilation of teaching gratmTiars and bilingual dictionaries, or to isolate a set of common linguistic universals.
The antecedents of contrastive linguistics in the widest sense go back to diachronic, genetic and other variants of historical-comparative linguistics (referred to as 'philology1 in some quarters); in the narrower sense, however, contrastive analysis is barely 100 years old. Contrastive studies can take many forms, according to the period or place when or where they are carried out, and no single or unified paradigm has emerged yet. Indeed, there are striking differences in approach even between the various treatments of relatively closely related language areas (compare, e.g., such diverse traditions as [for English and German] Leisi 1953 and Kufher 1971, [for English and French] Vinay/Darbelnet 1958 and Delattre 1966, and [for French and German] Malblanc 1961 and Ternes 1976). Some language pairs are still inadequately covered: the selective bibliography by Siegrist (1977) lists 977 studies for European languages and only 56 for African, Asian and American languages. Two sets of distinctions are sometimes made to characterise the main types of contrastive linguistics (also called 'differential1 or 'confrontative' linguistics, in the Romance and Slavonic domains, respectively). One is the dichotomy, already hinted at, between historical-comparative (or diachronic) studies and descriptive-contemporary (or synchronic) studies, the other is between typological-theoretical (or disciplme-based) studies and practical-applied (or problem-based) studies.