Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (17)
- Article (13)
- Conference Proceeding (8)
- Book (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (40)
Keywords
- Deutsch (28)
- Paronym (14)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (13)
- Online-Wörterbuch (12)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (10)
- Wörterbuch (10)
- Lexikographie (8)
- eLexiko (8)
- Semasiologie (5)
- Synonym (5)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (40) (remove)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (26)
- Peer-Review (11)
- Peer-review (1)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
Wort und Wortschatz
(2015)
Das Verständnis darüber, was ein Wort ist, zeigt sich je nach linguistischer Teildisziplin, je nach Untersuchungsinstrument und je nach betrachtetem Medium (Schriftlichkeit, Mündlichkeit) als äußerst wandelbar und kontrovers. Zunächst wird eine Übersicht über die wichtigsten Wortbegriffe in Geschichte und Gegenwart gegeben, um zu zeigen, wie sehr sich ein formaler, am Schriftbild orientierter Wortbegriff von semantisch-kognitiven Wortbegriffen unterscheidet. Anschließend wird dargelegt, wie sich welche sprachwissenschaftlichen Methoden auf die Konstituierung des Phänomens "Wort" auswirken und dass die isolierende Sicht auf das Einzelwort durch die Betrachtung von Relationen zwischen Wörtern abgelöst wurde. Dabei kommt den neueren, computerlinguistisch fundierten Verfahren besondere Relevanz zu. Auf dieser Basis wird gezeigt, welche Aspekte und Ebenen der Wortforschung es aktuell gibt; dabei wird der Interaktion von theoretischen wie anwendungsbezogenen Forschungsperspektiven und dem gesellschaftlichen bzw. Laieninteresse an Wörtern besondere Beachtung geschenkt.
Der Beitrag fasst die Schritte einer Projektvorstellung und aktuelle Reflexionen über ein am Institut für Deutsche Sprache in Mannheim neues, korpusgestütztes Paronymwörterbuch zusammen. Zunächst wird der Begriff der Paronymie in einer Arbeitsdefinition eingegrenzt und es wird gezeigt, welche Lücke mit dem neuen Werk in der Wörterbuchlandschaft geschlossen wird. Im Anschluss werden ausgewählte methodische Aspekte sowie Fragen der Wortartikelinhalte und -präsentation skizziert.
In this paper, general problems with easily confused words among a language community are addressed. Serving as an example, the difficulties of semantic differentiation between the use of German sensibel and sensitiv are discussed. One the one hand, the question is raised as to how a speech community faces challenges of semantic shifts and how monolingual dictionaries document lexical items with similar semantic aspects. On the other hand, I will demonstrate the discrepancies of information on meaning as retrieved and interpreted from large corpus data. It will be shown how the semantics of words change and hence cause confusion among speakers. As a result, empirical evidence opens up several questions concerning the prescriptive vs. descriptive treatment of paronymic items such as sensibel/sensitiv and it demands different approaches to the lexicographic description of such words in future reference works.
The German e-dictionary documenting confusables Paronyme – Dynamisch im Kontrast contains lexemes which are similar in sound, spelling and/or meaning, e.g. autoritär/autoritativ, innovativ/innovatorisch. These can cause uncertainty as to their appropriate use. The monolingual guide could be easily expanded to become a multilingual platform for commonly confused items by incorporating language modules. The value of this visionary resource is manifold. Firstly, e-dictionaries of confusables have not yet been compiled for most European languages; consequently, the German resource could serve as a model of practice. Secondly, it would be able to explain the usage of false friends. Thirdly, cognates and loan word equivalents would be offered for simultaneous consultation. Fourthly, users could find out whether, for example, a German pair is semantically equivalent to a pair in another language. Finally, it would inform users about cases where a pair of semantically similar words in one language has only one lexical counterpart in another language. This paper is an appeal for visionary projects and collaborative enterprises. I will outline the dictionary’s layout and contents as shown by its contrastive entries. I will demonstrate potential additions, which would make it possible to build up a large platform for easily misused words in different languages.
Lexicographic meaning descriptions of German lexical items which are formally and semantically similar and therefore easily confused (so-called paronyms) often do not reflect their current usage of lexical items. They can even contradict one’s personal intuition or disagree with lexical usage as observed in public discourse. The reasons are manifold. Language data used for compiling dictionaries is either outdated, or lexicographic practice is rather conventional and does not take advantage of corpus-assisted approaches to semantic analysis. Despite of various modern electronic or online reference works speakers face uncertainties when dealing with easily confusable words. These are for example sensibel/sensitiv (sensitive) or kindisch/kindlich (childish/childlike). Existing dictionaries often do not provide satisfactory answers as to how to use these sets correctly. Numerous questions addressed in online forums show where uncertainties with paronyms are and why users demand further assistance concerning proper contextual usage (cf. Storjohann 2015). There are different reasons why users misuse certain items or mix up words which are similar in form and meaning. As data from written and more spontaneous language resources suggest, some confusions arise due to ongoing semantic change in the current use of some paronyms. This paper identifies shortcomings of contemporary German Dictionaries and discusses innovative ways of empirical lexicographic work that might pave the way for a new data-driven, descriptive reference work of confusable German terms. Currently, such a guide is being developed at the Institute for German Language in Mannheim implementing corpora and diverse corpus-analytical methods. Its objective is to compile a dictionary with contrastive entries which is a useful reference tool in situation of language doubt. At the same time, it aims at sensitizing users of context dependency and language change.
Typische Verwendungen
(2005)
The public as linguistic authority: Why users turn to internet forums to differentiate between words
(2022)
This paper addresses the question of why we face unsatisfactory German dictionary entries when looking up and comparing two similar lexical terms that are loan words, new words, (near) synonyms, or confusables. It explains how users are aware of existing reference works but still search or post on language forums, often after consulting a dictionary and experiencing a range of dictionary based problems. Firstly, these dictionary based difficulties will be scrutinised in more detail with respect to content, function, presentation, and the language of definitions. Entries documenting loan words and commonly confused pairs from different lexical reference resources serve as examples to show the short comings. Secondly, I will explain why learning about your target group involves studying discussion forums. Forums are a valuable source for detailed user studies, enabling the examination of different communicative needs, concrete linguistic questions, speakers’ intuitions, and people’s reactions to posts and comments. Thirdly, with the help of two examples I will describe how the study of chats and forums had a major impact on the development of a recently compiled German dictionary of confusables. Finally, that same problem solving approach is applied to the idea of a future dictionary of neologisms and their synonyms.
The public as linguistic authority: Why users turn to internet forums to differentiate between words
(2022)
This paper addresses the question of why we face unsatisfactory German dictionary entries when looking up and comparing two similar lexical terms that are loan words, new words, (near)-synonyms, or confusables. It explains how users are aware of existing reference works but still search or post on language forums, often after consulting a dictionary and experiencing a range of dictionary-based problems. Firstly, these dictionary-based difficulties will be scrutinised in more detail with respect to content, function, presentation, and the language of definitions. Entries documenting loan words and commonly confused pairs from different lexical reference resources serve as examples to show the shortcomings. Secondly, I will explain why learning about your target group involves studying discussion forums. Forums are a valuable source for detailed user studies, enabling the examination of different communicative needs, concrete linguistic questions, speakers’ intuitions, and people’s reactions to posts and comments. Thirdly, with the help of two examples I will describe how the study of chats and forums had a major impact on the development of a recently compiled German dictionary of confusables. Finally, that same problem-solving approach is applied to the idea of a future dictionary of neologisms and their synonyms.
Sprachliche Zweifelsfälle kommen auf allen linguistischen Ebenen vor. Ihre Einordnung erfolgt zumeist nach Systemebene, nach Entstehungsursache oder nach lexematischer Struktur. Sprachlicher Zweifel kann auch nach intra- und interlingualen Aspekten unterschieden werden. Stehen zwei oder mehrere lexikalische Varianten zur Verfügung, kann es zu Unsicherheiten bezüglich des angemessenen Gebrauchs kommen. Nicht nur Muttersprachler*innen sind mit Schwierigkeiten konfrontiert, Zweifelsfälle stellen auch ein Problem bei der Fremdsprachenproduktion dar.
Dieser Band beschränkt sich auf lexikalisch-semantische, flexivische und wortbildungsbedingte Zweifelsfälle und führt interessierte Leser*innen in Fachliteratur und Nachschlagewerke ein. Er streift Fragen der Sprachdidaktik, der Fehler- und Variationslinguistik, denn die Auseinandersetzung mit typischen Zweifelsfällen zeigt auch das Spannungsfeld zwischen allgemeinem Usus und kodifizierter Norm, zwischen Gegenwart und Wandel, zwischen Dynamik, sprachlichem Reichtum und erlernter Bildungstradition.
Any bilingual dictionary is contrastive by nature, as it documents linguistic information between language pairs. However, the design and compilation of most bilingual dictionaries is often no more than mere lists of lexical or semantic equivalents. In internet forums, one can observe a huge interest in acquiring relevant knowledge about specific lexical items or pairs that are prone to comparison in a more comprehensive manner as they may pose lexical semantic challenges. In particular, these often concern easily confused pairs (e.g. false friends or paronyms) and new terms increasingly travelling between languages in news and social media (Šetka-Čilić/Ilić Plauc 2021). With regard to English and German, the fundamental comparative principles upon which contrastive guides should be build are either absent, or specialised contrastive dictionaries simply do not exist, e.g. comprehensive descriptive resources for false friends, paronyms, protologisms or neologisms (see Gouws/Prinsloo/de Schryver 2004). As a result, users turn to electronic resources such as Google translate, blogs and language forums for help. For example, it is English words such as muscular which have two German translations options.
These are two confusables muskulär and muskulös both of which exhibit a different semantic profile. German sensitiv/sensibel and their English formal counterparts sensitive/sensible are false friends. However, these terms are highly polysemous in both languages and have semantic features in common. Their full meaning spectrum is hardly captured in bilingual dictionaries to allow for a full comparison. Translating protologisms such as German Doppelwumms as well as more established new words is one of the most challenging problems. Currently, German neologisms such as Klimakleber are translated as climate glue (instead of climate activist glueing him-/herself onto objects) by online tools, simply causing mistakes and contextual distortion. Most challenges users face today are well-known (e.g. Rets 2016). New terms are often unregistered in dictionaries and it is often impossible to make appropriate choices between two or more (commonly misused) words between two languages (e.g. Benzehra 2007). These are all relevant problems to translators and language learners alike (e.g González Ribao 2019).
This paper calls for the implication of insights from contrastive lexicology into modern bilingual lexicography. To turn dictionaries into valuable resources and in order to create productive strategies in a learning environment, the practice of writing dictionaries requires a critical re-assessment. Furthermore, the full potential of electronic contrastive resources needs to be recognised and put into practice. After all, monolingual German lexicography has started to reflect on how users’ needs can be accounted for in specific comparative linguistic situations. Some of these ideas can be comfortably extended to bilingual reference guides. On the one hand, this paper will deliver a critical account of some English-German/German-English dictionaries and touch on the shortcomings of contemporary bilingual lexicography. On the other hand, with the help of fictitious resources I will demonstrate contrastive structures as focal points of consultations which answer some of the more frequent language questions more reliably. Among others, I will explain how we need to build user-friendly dictionaries to allow for translating false friends or easily confusable words from the source language into its target language efficiently. With regard to neologisms, I will show how discursive descriptions and definitions that are more elaborate can support language learners to learn about necessary extra-linguistic knowledge. Overall, this could improve the role of specialised dictionaries in the teaching or translating process (cf. Miliç/Sadri/Glušac 2019).
Sense relations
(2016)
Paradigmatische Relationen
(2005)