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
In this paper, we will present a first attempt to classify commonly confused words in German by consulting their communicative functions in corpora. Although the use of so-called paronyms causes frequent uncertainties due to similarities in spelling, sound and semantics, up until now the phenomenon has attracted little attention either from the perspective of corpus linguistics or from cognitive linguistics. Existing investigations rely on structuralist models, which do not account for empirical evidence. Still, they have developed an elaborate model based on formal criteria, primarily on word formation (cf. Lăzărescu 1999). Looking from a corpus perspective, such classifications are incompatible with language in use and cognitive elements of misuse.
This article sketches first lexicological insights into a classification model as derived from semantic analyses of written communication. Firstly, a brief description of the project will be provided. Secondly, corpus-assisted paronym detection will be focused. Thirdly, in the main section the paper concerns the description of the datasets for paronym classification and the classification procedures. As a work in progress, new insights will continually be extended once spoken and CMC data are added to the investigations.
This paper discusses changes of lexicographic traditions with respect to approaches to meaning descriptions towards more cognitive perspectives. I will uncover how cognitive aspects can be incorporated into meaning descriptions based on corpus-driven analysis. The new German Online dictionary “Paronyme − Dynamisch im Kontrast” (Storjohann 2014; 2016) is concerned with easily confused words such as effektiv/effizient, sensibel/sensitiv. It is currently in the process of being developed and it aims at adopting a more conceptual and encyclopaedic approach to meaning by incorporating cognitive features. As a corpus-guided reference work it strives to adequately reflect ideas such as conceptual structure, categorisation and knowledge. Contrastive entries emphasise aspects of usage, comparing conceptual categories and indicate the (metonymic) mapping of knowledge. Adaptable access to lexicographic details and variable search options offer different foci and perspectives on linguistic information, and authentic examples reflect prototypical structures. Some of the cognitive features are demonstrated with the help of examples. Firstly, I will outline how patterns of usage imply conceptual categories as central ideas instead of sufficiently logical criteria of semantic distinction. In this way, linguistic findings correlate better with how users conceptualise language. Secondly, it is pointed out how collocates are treated as family members and fillers in contexts. Thirdly, I will demonstrate how contextual structure and functions are included summarising referential information. Details are drawn from corpus data, they are usage-based linguistic patterns illustrating conversational interaction and semantic negotiations in contemporary public discourse. Finally, I will outline consultation routines which activate different facets of structural knowledge, e.g. through changes of the ordering of information or through the visualisation of semantic networks.
This paper discusses how cognitive aspects can be incorporated into lexicographic meaning descriptions based on corpus-driven analysis. The new German Online dictionary “Paronyme − Dynamisch im Kontrast” is concerned with easily confused words such as effektiv/effizient, sensibel/sensitiv. It is currently in the process of being developed and it aims at adopting a more conceptual and encyclopedic approach to meaning. Contrastive entries emphasize usage, comparing conceptual categories and indicating the mapping of knowledge. Adaptable access to lexicographic details offers different perspectives on information, and authentic examples reflect prototypical structures.
Some of the cognitive features are demonstrated with the help of examples. Firstly, I will outline how patterns of usage imply conceptual categories as central ideas instead of sufficiently logical criteria of semantic distinction. In this way, linguistic findings correlate better with how users conceptualize language. Secondly, it is pointed out how collocates are family members and fillers in contexts. Thirdly, I will demonstrate how contextual structure and function are included by summarizing referential information. Details are drawn from corpus data; they are usage-based patterns illustrating conversational interaction and semantic negotiation in contemporary public discourse. Finally, I will show flexible consultation routines where the focus on structural knowledge changes.
This paper shows how corpora and related tools can be used to analyse and present significant colligational patterns lexicographically. In German, patterns such as das nötige Wissen vermitteln and sein Wissen unter Beweis stellen play a vital role when learning the language, as they exhibit relevant idiomatic usage and lexical and syntactic rules of combination. Each item has specific semantic and grammatical functions and particular preferences with respect to position and distribution. An analysis of adjectives, for example, identifies preferences in adverbial, attributive, or predicative functions.
Traditionally, corpus analyses of syntagmatic constructions have not been conducted for lexicographic purposes. This paper shows how to utilise corpora to extract and examine typical syntagms and how the results of such an analysis are documented systematically in ELEXIKO, a large-scale corpus-based Internet reference work of German. It also demonstrates how this dictionary accounts for the lexical and grammatical interplay between units in a syntagm and how authentic corpus material and complementary prose-style usage notes are a useful guide to text production or reception.
This paper discusses changes in lexicographic traditions with respect to contrastive dictionary entries and dynamic, on-demand e-lexicographic descriptions. The new German online dictionary Paronyme - Dyna- misch im Kontrast is concerned with easily confused words (paronyms), such as effektivtefficient and sensibel/ sensitiv. New approaches to the empirical analysis and lexicographic presentation of words such as these are required, and this dictionary is committed to overcoming the discrepancy between traditional practice and insights from language use. As a corpus-guided reference work, it strives to adequately reflect not only authentic use in situations of actual communication, but also cognitive ideas such as conceptual structure, categorization and knowledge. Looking up easily confused lexical items requires contrastive entries where users can instantly compare meaning, contexts and reference. Adaptable access to lexicographic details and variable search options offer different foci and perspectives on linguistic information, and authentic examples reflect prototypical structures. These are essential in order to meet all the different interests of users. This paper will illustrate the contrastive structure of the new e-dictionary and demonstrate which information can be compared. It also focusses on various dynamic modes of dictionary consultation, which enable users to shift perspectives on paronyms accordingly.
Mit diesem Papier sollen LexikografInnen an ein Automatisierungstool der Textanalyse innerhalb der Korpuslinguistik herangeführt werden. Das am IDS entwickelte statistische Recherche- und Analysewerkzeug Cosmas bietet neue Zugänge zur Gewinnung semantischer Informationen über Wörter. Die Nutzungsmöglichkeiten dieses Instrumentariums für die Lesartendisambiguierung von Lexemen und deren Verifizierung mittels Kollokations- und Kontextanalyse werden erläutert, und anhand des Beispiels cool wird gezeigt, inwieweit sich semantische Informationen durch automatische Statistik extrahieren lassen. Dabei wird auf die Vor- und Nachteile der computerbasierten Analyse eingegangen. Darüber hinaus wird dargestellt, wie empirische lexikografische Disambiguierung modellgeleitet validiert werden kann. Um die Unterschiede zwischen herkömmlichen Beschreibungsmöglichkeiten und neuen statistischen Verfahren zu verdeutlichen, werden die Lesarten zu cool, wie sie im Duden GWDS (2000) dargestellt sind, mit den identifizierten Lesarten der Analyse mit Cosmas verglichen.
Contextual lexical relations, such as sense relations, have traditionally played an essential role in disambiguating word senses in lexicography, as they offer insights into the meaning and use of a word. However, the description of paradigmatic relations in particular is often restricted to a few types such as synonymy and antonymy. The limited description of various types of relations and the method of presenting these relations in existing German dictionaries are often problematic.
Elexiko, the first German hypertext dictionary compiled exclusively on the basis of an electronic corpus, offers a new way of presenting sense relations, using a variety of approaches to extract the necessary data. In this paper, I will show how elexiko presents a differentiated system of paradigmatic relations including synonymy, various subtypes of incompatibility (such as antonymy, complementarity, converseness, reversiveness, etc.), and vertical structures (such as hyponymy and meronymy). Primary attention, however, will focus on the question of how data for a paradigmatic description is retrieved from the corpus. Whereas a corpus-driven approach is mainly used for various semantic information and a corpus-based method plays an important part in obtaining data for the grammatical description in elexiko, it will be argued that both the corpus-driven and the corpus-based approach can be complementary methods in gaining insights into sense relations. I will demonstrate which results can be obtained by each approach, and advantages and disadvantages of both procedures will be explored in more detail.
As sense relations are context-dependent, it will also be demonstrated how a sense-bound presentation can be realised in an electronic reference work including a system of cross-referencing that illustrates lexical structures and the interrelatedness of words within the lexicon. Finally, I will show how accompanying examples from the corpus and additional lexicographic information help the user to understand contextual restrictions, so that s/he is able to use dictionary information more effectively.
Ausdrücke wie Globalisierung und Wirtschaftskrise sind Teil unserer öffentlichen Alltagssprache. Sie stehen für politische und soziokulturell brisante Debatten und ihre semantische Analyse zeigt den engen Zusammenhang zwischen Sprache und Gesellschaft. Der alltägliche Gebrauch solcher Ausdrücke etabliert gemeingesellschaftliche Diskurse, die mit korpuslinguistischen Verfahren analysierbar sind. In diesem Beitrag wird der Diskurs der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise in der öffentlichen Sprache von Zeitungstexten betrachtet. Zentrales Diskursobjekt ist der lexikalische Ausdruck Wirtschaftskrise selbst. Die Ermittlung relevanter Kontextbeziehungen, wie sie in Kollokationen vorhanden sind, und regelhafter Verwendungsmuster spielt für seine Beschreibung die wichtigste Rolle, da diese Indikatoren zum einen typische Thematisierungen sind und zum anderen Lexikalisierungen mit Bewertungspotenzial darstellen. Abschließend erfolgt eine kurze kritische Betrachtung der Dokumentation diskurs-relevanter Ausdrücke in deutschen Wörterbüchern der Gegenwartssprache.
Diachrone Angaben
(2005)
Die Ordnung des öffentlichen Diskurses der Wirtschaftskrise und die (Un-)Ordnung des Ausgeblendeten
(2011)
Einleitung
(2018)
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.
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.
Im E-Wörterbuch „Paronyme – Dynamisch im Kontrast“ werden erstmals leicht verwechselbare Ausdrücke, sogenannte Paronyme (z.B. autoritär / autoritativ, speziell / spezial), in kontrastiven und dynamischen Einträgen beschrieben. Auf zwei Beschreibungsebenen verzahnt es lexikalische Angaben mit enzyklopädischen bzw. konzeptuell-orientierten Details. Korpusanalytische Auseinandersetzungen zeigen, wie stark der Gebrauch einiger Paronyme von den Beschreibungen in traditionellen Lehr- und Nachschlagewerken abweicht. Aber Korpusdaten deuten ebenso auf sprachliche Varianz und Wandel hin, die in speziellen Rubriken festgehalten werden. Neben der Vorstellung des Wörterbuches steht die Frage im Vordergrund, wie die Informationen systematisch aus den Daten gewonnen, analysiert und redaktionell ausgewertet werden, um als Bedeutungs-, Kollokations-, Konstruktions-, Referenz- und Domänenangaben jedes Stichwort so genau wie möglich beschreiben zu können.
Paradigmatische Relationen
(2005)
Sense relations
(2016)
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).
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.
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.
Typische Verwendungen
(2005)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.