Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (78)
- Article (47)
- Conference Proceeding (12)
- Book (9)
- Other (6)
- Preprint (2)
Keywords
- Deutsch (46)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (42)
- Wörterbuch (37)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (26)
- Wortschatz (17)
- Internet (16)
- Benutzer (13)
- Geschlechtergerechte Sprache (13)
- Benutzerforschung (11)
- computerunterstützte Lexikographie (11)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (72)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (34)
- Postprint (22)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (60)
- Peer-Review (30)
- Verlags-Lektorat (8)
- Peer-review (2)
- (Verlags)Lektorat (1)
- Verlagslektorat (1)
Publisher
- De Gruyter (20)
- de Gruyter (18)
- Wilhelm Fink (15)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (12)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (10)
- IDS-Verlag (5)
- Narr (4)
- Benjamins (3)
- MDPI (3)
- Buro van die WAT (2)
Wir stellen eine empirische Studie vor, die der Frage nachgeht, ob und in welchem Ausmaß Wörterbücher und andere lexikographische Ressourcen die Ergebnisse von Textüberarbeitungen verbessern. Studierende wurden in unserer Studie gebeten, zwei Texte zu optimieren und waren dabei zufällig in drei unterschiedliche Versuchsbedingungen eingeteilt: 1. ein Ausgangstext ohne Hinweise auf potenzielle Fehler im Text, 2. ein Ausgangstext, bei dem problematische Stellen im Text hervorgehoben waren und 3. ein Ausgangstext mit hervorgehobenen Problemstellen zusammen mit lexikographischen Ressourcen, die zur Lösung der spezifischen Probleme verwendet werden konnten. Wir fanden heraus, dass die Teilnehmer*innen der dritten Gruppe die meisten Probleme korrigierten und die wenigsten semantischen Verzerrungen während der Überarbeitung einführten. Außerdem waren sie am effizientesten (gemessen in verbesserten Textabschnitten pro Zeit). Wir berichten in dieser Fallstudie ausführlich vom Versuchsaufbau, der methodischen Durchführung der Studie und eventuellen Limitationen unserer Ergebnisse.
Der folgende Leitfaden bietet eine grundlegende Übersicht darüber, welche Schritte bei der Konzeption und Durchführung einer empirischen Untersuchung in der germanistischen Linguistik zu beachten sind. Wir werden den grundlegenden Ablauf und die zugrunde liegenden Konzepte allgemein bzw. modellhaft beschreiben und sie anhand von einfachen Beispielen illustrieren. Eine stärkere Ausgestaltung anhand von Beispielen zu verschiedenen linguistischen Forschungsfragen und -feldern und damit auch mehr Illustrationen, wie die einzelnen Schritte für bestimmte Forschungsfragen umzusetzen sind, finden Sie in den Fallstudien im —> Teil III dieses Bandes. Detailliertere Ausführungen zu den zentralen Konzepten des empirischen Arbeitens in der Linguistik finden Sie in —> Teil VI dieses Bandes. Weiterführende Literatur findet sich am Ende des Beitrags.
Einführung
(2022)
To design effective electronic dictionaries, reliable empirical information on how dictionaries are actually being used is of great value for lexicographers. To my knowledge, no existing empirical research addresses the context of dictionary use, or, in other words, the extra-lexicographic situations in which a dictionary consultation is embedded. This is mainly due to the fact that data about these contexts are difficult to obtain. To take a first step in closing this research gap, we incorporated an open-ended question (“In which contexts or situations would you use a dictionary?”) into our first online survey (N = 684). Instead of presenting well-known facts about standardized types of usage situation, this chapter will focus on the more offbeat circumstances of dictionary use and aims of users, as they are reflected in the responses. Overall, my results indicate that there is a community whose work is closely linked with dictionaries. Dictionaries are also seen as a linguistic treasure trove for games or crossword puzzles, and as a standard which can be referred to as an authority. While it is important to emphasize that my results are only preliminary, they do indicate the potential of empirical research in this area.
Introduction
(2015)
This chapter presents empirical findings on the question which criteria are making a good online dictionary using data on expectations and demands collected in the first study (N=684), completed with additional results from the second study (N=390) which examined more closely whether the respondents had differentiated views on individual aspects of the criteria rated in the first study. Our results show that the classical criteria of reference books (e.g. reliability, clarity) were rated highest by our participants, whereas the unique characteristics of online dictionaries (e.g. multimedia, adaptability) were rated and ranked as (partly) unimportant. To verify whether or not the poor rating of these innovative features was a result of the fact that the subjects are not used to online dictionaries incorporating those features, we integrated an experiment into the second study. Our results revealed a learning effect: Participants in the learning-effect condition, i. e. respondents who were first presented with examples of possible innovative features of online dictionaries,judged adaptability and multimedia to be more useful than participants who did not have this information. Thus, our data point to the conclusion that developing innovative features is worthwhile but that it is necessary to be aware of the fact that users can only be convinced of its benefits gradually.
In this paper, the authors use the 2012 log files of two German online dictionaries (Digital Dictionary of the German Language and the German Version of Wiktionary) and the 100,000 most frequent words in the Mannheim German Reference Corpus from 2009 to answer the question of whether dictionary users really do look up frequent words, first asked by de Schryver et al. (2006). By using an approach to the comparison of log files and corpus data which is completely different from that of the aforementioned authors, we provide empirical evidence that indicates - contrary to the results of de Schryver et al. and Verlinde/Binon (2010) - that the corpus frequency of a word can indeed be an important factor in determining what online dictionary users look up. Finally, we incorporate word class Information readily available in Wiktionary into our analysis to improve our results considerably.
The main aim of the study presented in this chapter was to try out eyetracking as form to collect data about dictionary use as it is – for research into dictionary use – a new and not widely used technology. As the topic of research, we decided to evaluate the new web design of the IDS dictionary portal OWID. In the mid of 2011 where the study was conducted, the relaunch of the web design was internally finished but externally not released yet. In this regard, it was a good time to see whether users get along well with the new design decisions. 38 persons participated in our study, all of them students aged 20-30 years. Besides the results the chapter also includes critical comments on methodological aspects of our study.