Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (36)
- Article (34)
- Conference Proceeding (12)
- Book (4)
- Other (3)
- Review (1)
Keywords
- Deutsch (50)
- Wörterbuch (29)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (27)
- Paronym (24)
- Online-Wörterbuch (17)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (14)
- Lexikographie (12)
- Lexikografie (11)
- Paronymie (10)
- Semantik (9)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (40)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (15)
- Postprint (5)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (35)
- Peer-Review (20)
- Peer-Revied (1)
- Peer-review (1)
- Peer-reviewed (1)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (12)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (5)
- Benjamins (4)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (4)
- De Gruyter (3)
- Erich Schmidt (3)
- Hempen (3)
- IDS-Verlag (3)
- Lexical Computing CZ s.r.o. (3)
- Winter (3)
This paper focuses on easily confused items (so-called paronyms) in German in terms of their general, technical or academic contextual uses. It outlines the semantic discrepancies between contextual usages of pairs such as Methode/Methodologie/Methodik and unehelich/nichtehelich/außerehelich depending on their linguistic registers and varieties. While previous studies lack empirical evidence and primarily operate with morphological criteria (cf. Lăzărescu 1999) the descriptions here derive from corpus-based examinations of general written and of technical discourse. It is shown that causes of lexical confusion arise from formal, phonetic resemblances or semantic similarities, regular co-occurrence, incorrect morphological analogies and political governance of language. Context, knowledge, associations and experience determine the choice of lexical terms. Speakers need to apply linguistic and extra-linguistic principles in order to create adequate contexts. With the help of paronym examples and corpus data, these will be elucidated in more detail.
Current working practice of established German dictionaries incorporates large corpora as the basis of most analyses, descriptions and presentations. It is, however, individual lexicological and/or different corpus-methodological approaches that play a crucial role in the process of extracting and documenting lexicographic information in individual reference works. This paper addresses the question of how reliable information is in some electronic German dictionaries. Objects of our investigation are different types of corpus dictionaries, e.g. a digitized dictionary, a reference work that compiles its data fully automatically, a lexicographic system combining different electronic resources, and a corpus-assisted dictionary that examines and interprets its corpus data lexicographically. Critical examinations of such reference works inevitably come up with questions of authenticity and reliability of the given dictionary information. The advantages and disadvantages of various lexicographic or corpus-linguistic methods which are individually implemented will be outlined and critically analyzed with the help of examples. According to an extensive study (cf. Müller-Spitzer 2011) reliability of given information is one of the key criteria assigned to any reference work by users. We will elicit how different corpus methods expose different descriptions of natural discourse and how they answer questions of authenticity, typicality and reliability with regard to phenomena such as meaning spectrum, collocations, antonymy and hyperonymy. Overall, this paper is a critical account of the current German lexicographic developments. It will include discussions on meta-lexicographic demands and focus on whether there are suitable complementary corpus approaches providing authentic dictionary information to a satisfactory extent.
Einleitung
(2018)
Der Beitrag führt in das Sonderheft „Paronymie im deutschen Sprachgebrauch“ ein und bündelt gewonnene Einblicke in die lexikologische, korpusanalytische sowie lexikografische Arbeit des Projektes „Paronymwörterbuch“. Er stellt wichtige Erkenntnisse zu Paronymen, ihrem Vorkommen, ihrer Ermittlung und Darstellung, aber auch zu den Methoden der Bedeutungsanalyse, ihren diskursiven Funktionen und dem Umgang mit Verwechslungspotenzial zusammenfassend dar. Vorgestellt werden Forschungsergebnisse, die sich vor allem auf die Verwendung von Paronymen in der öffentlichen Gebrauchssprache beziehen. Aber auch explorative Korpusverfahren werden erläutert sowie innovative, dynamische e-lexikografische Darstellungen präsentiert. Ausgewählte Probleme, die sowohl im Kontext der theoretischen Auseinandersetzung als auch mit der redaktionellen Erfassung von Paronymen auftreten, werden hier diskutiert. Das Sonderheft verbindet dabei theoretische und praktische lexikografische Herangehensweisen an ein bisher linguistisch wenig dokumentiertes Phänomen, das Muttersprachler/innen und Fremdsprachenlernende gleichermaßen verunsichert. Neben den Rückblicken werden ebenso die Ausblicke auf die kommenden Jahre und die damit verbundenen Fragestellungen des Projektes skizziert.
ELEXIKO is a relatively new lexicological-lexicographic project based at the Institut fiir Deutsche Sprache (IDS) in Mannheim. The project compiles a reference work that explains and documents contemporary German; it was specifically designed for online publication (www.elexiko.de). The primary and exclusive basis for lexicographic interpretation is an extensive German corpus. If one refers to elexiko as an Internet dictionary, it is purely for practical reasons, elexiko is (far) more than a dictionary in its traditional sense, although, of course, it contains descriptions of the meaning and use of a lexeme just as any traditional dictionary. It is both, a hypertext dictionary and a lexical data information system.
This article provides an introduction to elexiko, the first German hypertext dictionary to be compiled on a corpus basis, which is currently being developed at the Institut für Deutsche Sprache Mannheim (IDS). First, a brief account of the design is given, followed by a demonstration of the methods and tools that are being employed to compile it. elexiko will provide not only an improved quantity of lexical information, but also a new quality of information which will be explained and illustrated at different levels of the microstructure of the dictionary. The description of word meaning and use in elexiko will be presented in detail, with a particular focus on the treatment of collocations, ambiguity, vagueness, and the presentation of senses. The development of a theoretically grounded procedure for lexicographic disambiguation is also described. This is then followed by a brief account of the treatment of grammatical details. Finally, issues of usability, the progress of the project and its future perspectives will be considered.
In diesem Beitrag werden wichtige Neukonzeptionen und umfangreiche Nachbearbeitungen einzelner
Angabebereiche in elexiko erläutert. Die linguistische Konzeption dieser Angaben stellt eine Weiterentwicklung gegenüber der Konzeption dar, wie sie im Band „Grundfragen der elektronischen Lexikographie. elexiko – das Online-Informationssystem zum deutschen Wortschatz“ (2005) vorgelegt wurde. Betroffen sind z.B. die Angabebereiche der typischen Verwendungen, der sinn- und sachverwandten Wörter und der Besonderheiten des Gebrauchs.
German lexical items with similar or related morphological roots and similar meaning potential are easily confused by native speakers and language learners. These include so-called paronyms such as effektiv/effizient , sensitive/sensibel, formell/formal/förmlich . Although these are generally not regarded as synonyms, empirical studies suggest that in some cases items of a paronym set have undergone meaning change and developed synonymous notions. In other cases, they remain similar in meaning, but show subtle differences in definition and restrictions of usage. Whereas the treatment of synonyms has received attention from corpus-linguists (cf. Partington 1998; Taylor 2003), the subject of paronyms has not been revisited with empirical, data-driven methods neither in terms of semantic theory nor in terms of practical lexicography. As a consequence, we also need to search for suitable corpus methods for detailed semantic investigation. Lexicographically, some German paronyms have been documented in printed dictionaries (e.g. Müller 1973; Pollmann & Wolk 2010). However, there is no corpus-assisted reference guide describing paronyms empirically and enabling readers to find the correct contemporary usage. Therefore, solutions to some lexicographic challenges are required.
Dieser Beitrag zeigt, wie allgemeinsprachige Wörterbücher mit Angaben zur Sinn- und Sachverwandtschaft umgehen sollten, damit sie als geeignetes Hilfsmittel bei der Wortschatzarbeit sowohl im muttersprachlichen als auch im fremdsprachlichen Unterricht eingesetzt werden können. Anhand einiger Beispiele aus dem elexiko-Wörterbuch sollen Möglichkeiten aufgezeigt werden, wie kombinierte lexikalisch-semantische Informationen einen Beitrag zur gezielten Wortschatzerweiterung leisten könnten. Für eine effektive Verankerung sprachlichen und außersprachlichen Wissens sollten Erkenntnisse über das Mentale Lexikon in die Darstellung und Beschreibung von Sprache im Wörterbuch eingebunden werden. Konkrete Vorschläge illustrieren, wie Nachschlagewerke möglicherweise gestaltet werden sollten, um besser als Lehrwerke und Quellen für die Wortschatzarbeit geeignet zu sein. Dafür ist es erforderlich, dass die Dokumentation sprachlicher Zusammenhänge auf unterschiedlichen Ebenen, die angemessene Visualisierung kontextueller Phänomene und explizite Erläuterungen eine entscheidende Rolle spielen
In diesem Beitrag soll der Frage nachgegangen werden, ob sich feministische Indefinitpronomen, insbesondere die Neuschöpfung frau, in ihrem Gebrauch außerhalb der feministischen Sprachbetrachtung und außerhalb frauenspezifischer Diskurse etabliert haben. Auf der Basis der IDS-Korpora wird der öffentliche Sprachgebrauch neuer Pronomen hinsichtlich ihres Vorkommens sowohl quantitativ als auch qualitativ ausgewertet, um Aussagen zur Gebrauchsentwicklung treffen zu können. Mithilfe eines korpusanalytischen Werkzeugs werden linguistische Strukturen aufgedeckt, die Verwendungstypisches im Gebrauch des Lexems frau illustrieren. Besonderes Augenmerk erhält die diachrone Untersuchung der kontextuellen Einbettungen des Lexems frau. Dabei spielt sowohl die Extrahierung syntagmatischer Mitspieler mithilfe der softwaregestützten Kollokationsanalyse als auch die linguistische Analyse der Relationen zwischen Begleitwort und Suchwort eine besondere Rolle. Darüber hinaus sollen auch pragmatische und syntaktische Aspekte eruiert sowie Fragestellungen der allgemeinsprachlichen Bewertung feministischer Indefinitpronomen nachgegangen werden.
This article sketches the development of paronym dictionaries in German. These dictionaries document and describe commonly confused words which cause uncertainties because they are similar in sound, spelling and/or meaning (e.g. effektiv/effizient, sportlich/sportiv). First, an overview of existing reference guides is provided, covering different traditions. Numerous lemma lists have been collected for pedagogical purposes and there has always been an interest in the lexicological treatment of paronyms. However, only a handful of dictionaries covering commonly confused pairs and a small number of genuine paronym dictionaries have ever been compiled. I will focus on lexicographic endeavours, including Wustmann (1891), Müller (1973) and Pollmann and Wolk (2001). Secondly, I will shed light on the differences in descriptions in these dictionaries. This includes how prescriptive approaches have been replaced over time by empirical descriptive accounts and how dictionaries have moved away from restricted, static hardback editions towards dynamic e-dictionaries. Finally, an e-dictionary, “Paronyme — Dynamisch im Kontrast”, is presented with contrastive and flexible two-level consultation views. Its three key elements are its corpus-based foundation, the implementation of meta-lexicographic requirements and a consideration of users’ interests. This dictionary has implemented a user-friendly and dynamic interface and it records conventionalized patterns and preferences in authentic communication.
Globalisierungsdiskurs
(2020)
Incompatibility (or co-hyponymy) is the most general type of semantic relation between lexical items, the meaning of which entails exclusion. Such items fall under a superordinate term or concept and denote sets which have no members in common (e.g. animal: dog-cat-mouse-lion-sheep; example from Cruse 2004). Traditionally, these have been of interest to lexical semanticists for the description of the structure of the lexicon. However, incompatibility is not just a relation that signifies a difference of meaning. This paper is a critical corpus-assisted re-evaluation of the phenomenon of incompatibility which argues that the relation in question sometimes also functions as a discourse marker. Incompatibles indicate recurrent intertextual patterns. This holds particularly true for socially or politically controversial lexical items such as Flexibilität (flexibility), Mobilität (mobility) or Globalisierung (globalisation). Corpus investigations of such words have revealed that among other semantically related terms, incompatibles have a crucial discourse focussing function. For the German lexical item Globalisierung, I will show how its lexical usage can be studied through a corpus-driven analysis of corresponding incompatibles. Incompatible terms are not contingent co-words but often occur in close contextual proximity and participate in regular syntagmatic structures (e.g. Globalisierung und Rationalisierung; Globalisierung und Modernisierung; Neoliberalismus, Globalisierung und Kapitalismus). Hence, these are easily extracted by conducting a computational collocation analysis. Such significant collocates provide a good insight into the discursive and thematic contexts of the search word. Following Teubert (2004), I will demonstrate how the meaning of such lexical items is constituted in discourse and how the examination of these particular collocates reveals their sense-constructing function and their pragmatic-discursive force. I will provide a brief discussion of the methodology used for such analyses, and I will explain why the complex semantic-pragmatic and thematic-communicative patterns implied in sets of incompatibles should be given a stronger emphasis in lexicography.
Introduction
(2010)