@incollection{Strauss2017,
  author    = {Gerhard Strau{\"s}},
  title     = {Die B{\"a}nde I und VI der Neubearbeitung des Deutschen W{\"o}rterbuches: Unterschiede in der lexikographischen Bearbeitung},
  series = {Studien zum Deutschen W{\"o}rterbuch von Jacob Grimm und Wilhelm Grimm. Band II.},
  booktitle = {Das Deutsche W{\"o}rterbuch, Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm; volumes I and VI revised: Differences in Lexicographical Treatment},
  editor    = {Alan Kirkness and Peter K{\"u}hn and Herbert Ernst Wiegand},
  publisher = {Niemeyer},
  address   = {T{\"u}bingen},
  isbn      = {3-484-30933-4},
  doi       = {10.1515/9783110914269.627},
  url       = {https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:mh39-68209},
  pages     = {627 -- 702},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {In this article the treatment of the first two volumes of the Grimms' Deutsches W{\"o}rterbuch, i.e. volume I (A - Affrikata: revised by the Berlin working group) and volume VI (D: revised by the G{\"o}ttingen group) are compared. Section 1 of the article outlines the genesis of the revision of volumes I and VI. Section 2 summarizes the theoretical concept of the revised edition and its translation into the structure of the dictionary entries. The conceptual principles which were laid down for both groups, i.e. Berlin and G{\"o}ttingen, as largely binding are briefly outlined. It becomes apparent that especially as far as the delineation of the historical changes in the meaning of the words is concerned, the lexicographical revision is based on the just slightly modified concept of the last working phase of the DWB (=Grimms' German Dictionary) between 1930 and 1960. The macro- and micro-structural differences between the revised edition and its predecessor are outlined. Section 3, analyzing selected articles on the basis of the common lexicographical denominator sketched in Section 2, details the differences in lexicographical treatment between the two groups. In Section 4 the most important results of this selective analysis are summarized and evaluated. Some more general problems of historical lexicography are shortly mentioned in the process.},
  language  = {de}
}