Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- I Toward a Taxonomy of Cross-Linguistic Lexical
- II Lexicographical Considerations
- 5 Introduction
- 6 Zero equivalence
- 7 Multiple equivalence
- 8 Partial equivalence
- 9 Lexical anisomorphism in machine-readable dictionaries
- 10 Lexicographic considerations: summary
- 11 Outlook
- References
- Index
5 - Introduction
from II - Lexicographical Considerations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2016
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- I Toward a Taxonomy of Cross-Linguistic Lexical
- II Lexicographical Considerations
- 5 Introduction
- 6 Zero equivalence
- 7 Multiple equivalence
- 8 Partial equivalence
- 9 Lexical anisomorphism in machine-readable dictionaries
- 10 Lexicographic considerations: summary
- 11 Outlook
- References
- Index
Summary
I now turn to the question of lexicographic considerations of CLA. The idea is to follow the format of one of the basic control structures in programming, namely:
if (condition) ﹛do the following﹜
The types of CLA established in Chapter 2, along with the parameters of the dictionary in question (which include the author's intention, target audience and their needs, size, etc.), constitute a certain condition that triggers a particular lexicographic strategy. We thus have something like:
if (CLA type A) ﹛ if (dictionary parameter1) ﹛strategy A1﹜ else if (dictionary parameter 2) ﹛strategy A2﹜
[…]
﹜
else if (CLA type B) ﹛ if (dictionary parameter1) ﹛strategy B1﹜ else if (dictionary parameter 2) ﹛strategy B2﹜
[…]
﹜
Prior to the discussion of lexicographic strategies, the parameters of the dictionaries relevant in this respect will need to be addressed. The following parameters are likely to affect the treatment of CLA:
(1) production versus reception character;
(2) the lexical scope and size;
(3) the target audience;
(4) the microstructure; and
(5) the rendering medium.
These parameters are now discussed in turn.
Production (most commonly production-reception) dictionaries are more demanding, in that they require a translational equivalent (not merely a definition or an explanation). A purely reception dictionary can have an explanation on the TL equivalent side. Thus a definition of the Serbian slava might read “Serbian Orthodox Church tradition of the ritual glorification of one's family's patron” in a purely reception dictionary. In contrast to this, in a production or, more commonly, a production-reception dictionary the definition would need to be “slava (Serbian Orthodox church tradition of the ritual glorification of one's family's patron).” Production dictionaries necessitate the strategy of providing a TL equivalent, which can be inserted in translations, which is not the case with purely reception dictionaries.
Another important difference is that production dictionaries need to provide glosses to discriminate multiple equivalents, while purely reception dictionaries do not need to include them.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Lexical ConflictTheory and Practice, pp. 167 - 171Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2015