Lexicography: A Dictionary of Basic Terminology

281 Pages·9.664 MB·English

by  Igor Burkhanov

Igor Burkhanov
LEXICOGRAPHY
A Dictionary of Basic Terminology
PREFACE
Over the last twenty years the number of publications on various
aspects of dictionary-making has increased drastically. Scholars are
trying to develop the typology of lexicographic works of reference, to
specify their objectives and techniques of lexicographic description of
both the general vocabulary and specialized terminologies, as well as
to determine efficient methods of lexicographic representation of
commonsense notions, expert concepts, and realia (see bibliography).
It is fair to say that lexicography has ceased to be a step-daughter
of the study of language or its poor relative that can hardly find an
appropriate place within the family of linguistic disciplines. It is
becoming a respectable subject field of not only a linguistic nature -
an independent, or at least semi-independent, discipline that has to lay
down the foundations of its own theory and methodology. The
publication of the International Encyclopedia of Lexicography edited
by F.-J. Hausmann, O. Reichmann, H.E. Wiegand and L. Zgusta was
an important landmark, if not a turning point, in the development of
this subject field, though a great deal of work yet has to be done.
In view of the aforementioned developments in the disciplinaiy
status of lexicography, one of the urgent needs of metalexicography is to
specify its concepts and standardize its terminology. For this very reason
this discipline needs a series of reference books of a terminological
nature which are not encyclopedic either in their scope or in their
treatment of lexicographic data, but rather belong to those reference
works that are usually referred to as specialized or terminological
‘dictionaries’, ‘glossaries’, ‘lexicons’, etc., depending on a particular
national lexicographic tradition and/or on the lexicographer’s own ideas
about the denotational structure of these terms.
The functions of those publications should be as follows:
a) to specify lexicographic concepts proper, i.e. the question is
not so much to define lexicographic terminology, but to formulate
7
the basic notions of the field, and then to consider the terminological
units which seem to be most appropriate to denote these concepts;
b) to specify the concepts which have been borrowed from other
linguistic and non-linguistic academic and applied disciplines and
note the modifications which these notions have undergone within
the framework of lexicographic description;
c) to provide sufficient information about the basic
lexicographic categories so that those publications could be
efficiently used in the course of lexicographer training;
d) not to impose the author's ideas or only one, even
predominant, viewpoint on the intended audience, but to introduce
the dictionary user into the heart of present-day controversy.
A solution concerning a controversial matter may, and should be
suggested, but in no way it can be propogaded as the only one.
The available small-scale publications, for instance, J. Robinson’s
Glossary of English Lexicographic Terms (1984) and A.D. de
V. Cluver’s Dictionary of Terminography (1989) were not intended to
fullfil the aforementioned requirements. When Robinson’s publication
was produced, such an endeavour was not at all feasible, whereas A.D.
de V. Cluver’s reference work had to account for not only the
terminology of specialized lexicography, but also for the terms of
information science, translation theory and terminological studies.
The present publication does not have an ambitious goal to
fullfil the existing gap between the encyclopedia and those reference
books; it should be regarded as a step to the comprehensive
specialized reference work of lexicographic terminology. The present
dictionary is an attempt to highlight only the basic concepts of
lexicographic theory and practice in a handy one-volume format.
Due to the fact that lexicography is by nature an interdisciplinary
field, a number of its notions have been borrowed from various
neighbouring fields: theoretical and applied linguistics, philology,
history, ethnography, sociology, semiotics, information science, etc.
Since dictionary-making is intrinsically related with linguistic
description, a particular emphasis has been put on the categories of
the theoretical study of language - particularly those of linguistic
semantics and lexicology - that either have been incorporated into
8
dictionary-making or may be successfully implemented in
lexicography. Nevertheless, all these concepts are viewed from the
standpoint of lexicographic theory and practice.
This dictionary is primarily intended for undergraduate and post­
graduate students of Linguistics Departments at Philological
Faculties and provides an overview of lexicography and its
correlation with relevant linguistic disciplines. It may be particularly
useful in the seminars and special courses on lexicography,
lexicology and linguistic semantics. The dictionary is designed for
classroom and home use, whenever a need for a quick reference
arises. No prior knowledge of linguistics or lexicography is required.
I would like to express my gratitude to Prof. B. Lewandowska-
Tomaszczyk who read the original draft of the manuscript. Many
thanks to Prof. M.H. Heliel who encouraged me to undertake this
project. I would never have completed this dictionary without their
moral support, inspiration, encouragement and critical comments. I am
particularly indebted to Prof. R. Kalisz, the official reviewer of the
present publication, for his invaluable and illuminating comments on
several points of primary importance. Naturally, the present dictionary
does not necessarily represent the views of any semanticist who
helped me to improve the final product: responsibility for errors,
misconceptions and inconsistencies is entirely mine.
It is almost inevitable to avoid making errors in a publication of
this kind. Since every terminological dictionary is, in fact, an
ongoing project, I would appreciate any comments, critical remarks
and suggestions concerning this reference book. Your considerations
may be sent to me at the following address:
Department of English
Rzeszow Pedagogical University
Rejtana 16 B
35-959 Rzeszow
Poland
Igor Burkhanov
9

USER’S GUIDE
1. The word list in the dictionary' is characterized by word-by-
word alphabetical arrangement, i.e. dictionary articles are placed in
accordance with the graphemic composition of their titles.
2. The boldfaced title of an article is immediately followed by an
italicized part-of-speech label, as ACRONYM n The terms in this
dictionary are mostly nouns (a composite term which is syntactically
a noun phrase is also labeled n as a noun); verbs and adjectives, in
accordance with lexicographic conventions, are labeled v. and adj.
respectively.
3. Nouns are labeled as countable [C] or uncountable [U], This
grammatical information immediately follows the part-of-speech
label; for instance, ABSOLUTE SYNONYM n. [C]. If the term is
polysemous and at least one of its senses is different in this respect,
the grammatical subclass label is provided for every sense after its
number; for instance, ABBREVIATION n. 1. [C] ... . 2. [C] ... . 3.
[U] ....4. [U]....
4. In the explanatory definition which comprises the main part of
the dictionary article different notions represented by the same term
are designated by numbers 1, 2, 3, etc.
5. Conceptually related or associated terms are listed at the end
of the explanatory text in square brackets after ‘see also’ or/and
‘compare’ lexicographic indicators that represent cross-references;
for instance, the article BACK MATTER contains the following
cross-reference section: [compare front matter; inside matter;
see also outside matter; word list; distribution structure],
6. A ‘see also’ cross-reference is primarily intended to represent
superordinate and subordinate concepts denoted by appropriate
terms, as outside matter in the example above. It may also refer the
dictionary user to another article containing pertinent information
11
indispensable for the correct understanding of the the first concept;
though the notion described there does not not have to be
hierarchically subordinate or superordinate to the latter, as word list
and distribution structure in the sample reference section. A
‘compare’ cross-reference refers to correlated notions, as front
matter and inside matter. Thus a ‘compare’ cross-reference may
direct to co-hyponyms, antonyms, or otherwise associated terms of
the same rank.
7. If a term used in the explanatory text is included into the word
list, it is italicized when it is first mentioned in a given article. It is a
hidden cross-reference which directs the user to look elsewhere in
the dictionary for furher information in the case of need.
LIST OF SYMBOLS
The following symbols are used in the dictionary:
[...] square brackets for: a) countable or uncountable nouns; b) cross-
references within the word list;
/.../ slashes for phonological transcription;
{...} curly brackets for morphemes;
+ plus for word formation or inflection;
* asterisk for grammatically or/and semantically ill-formed
sentences;
- » a simple arrow for: a) the connection between defmiendum and
defmiens in an analytical definition; b) the semantic relationship of
subordination between lexical items; c) the relation between the
process and the result of word formation;
< -> a double-headed arrow for: a) oppositeness in meaning between
lexical items; b) paraphrastic interchangeability between sentences.
< pointed bracket: a) directed to the left for “comes from”; b)
directed to the right for “becomes”.
13
A
ABBREVIATION n.
1. [C] The term '‘abbreviation” is often used to refer to graphical
abbreviations, i.e. shortened or contracted forms of written one-word
lexical items and phrases used in place of the whole and made by
leaving out some of the letters or morphemes, using only the initial
letters of the words, or substituting lexical constituents with shorter
forms, as ‘ft.' for ‘foof’, ‘e.g.' for ‘for example'.
Graphical abbreviations are characteristic for writing, whereas in
reading these graphical signs are substituted by the lexical items and
phrases they are intended to represent, as ‘Rd' for ‘Road’-, ‘St.' for
‘Streef or ‘Sainf. English graphical abbreviations include quite a
number of shortened variants of Latin and French lexical items and
phrases: ‘vzz’. (Latin - ‘videlicet’) ‘that is to say, namely’; ‘i.e.’
(Latin -idesf) - ‘that is’; ‘R.S. V.R' (French— ‘Repondez s’il vous
plait') ‘reply please’. To indicate a plural word form, a one-letter
sign is often doubled, as ‘p.’ stands for "page' but pp. represents
‘pages'.
It should be obvious from these considerations that graphical
abbreviations are not lexical items proper, but rather their graphical
signs intended to substitute the corresponding lexical items, and are
used in written communication only.
It is interesting to note that in the course of language
development some graphical abbreviations gradually penetrate into
the domain of oral communication and become lexical items used in
both written and oral verbal interactions as synonyms of
corresponding lexical items and phrases. That is the case, for
instance, with ‘a.«z.’ (Latin - ‘ante meridiunf) ‘in the morning,
before noon'; and ‘p.m.' (Latin - ‘post meridium') ‘after noon',
[compare lexical abbreviation],
2. [C] This term is also used to refer to lexical abbreviations, i.e.
acronyms. In fact, in both cases the linguistic phenomenon is the
14
same. What is meant by a lexical abbreviation is a one-word lexical
item formed by the initial letters, syllables or morphemes of all or
only the principal lexemes of a phrase, usually a composite name.
[compare graphical abbreviation].
3. [U] An act of making graphical abbreviations, i.e. shortening
a lexeme or phrase by omitting letters, substituting with shorter
forms, etc. so that the sequence of letters can represent the whole; a
process resulting in abbreviations (1). [see also shortening; compare
lexical abbreviation].
4. [U] A word-formation process of making lexical
abbreviations, i.e. acronyms - lexical items formed from the initial
letters, syllables or morphemes of a set of lexemes, [see also
shortening; compare graphical abbreviation].
The matters concerning abbreviation are of a considerable interest
for lexicography for a two-fold reason. First, various types of
abbreviation and related lexical phenomena arising as the result of
shortening or reduction (acronyms, clipping, backformation, etc.) should
be, and actually are, represented in lexicographic works of reference, i.e.
dictionaries of various types, encyclopedias, usage guides, etc.
Moreover, some reference works deal specifically with abbreviations, as
The Oxford Dictionary of Abbreviations (1992).
Secondly, a characteristic feature of contemporary lexicography
is an extensive use of abbreviations (1). In the majority of modem
works of reference, labels are abbreviated in order to save space.
Most of the dictionaries and encyclopedias are provided with a list of
abbreviations which forms a part of the outside matter of these
lexicographic publications. Abbreviated labels, as a particular kind
of lexicographic indicators, may be regarded as a constituent
element of metalanguage of lexicographic description.
ABRIDGED DICTIONARY / ENCYCLOPEDIA n. [C]
A reference book which is condensed from a more comprehensive
lexicographic publication is called “abridged”. For instance, in the
case of abridged linguistic dictionaries, their word lists do not include
obsolete lexical items and senses, or terminological lexical units. Thus
15