Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (6)
- Article (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (9)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (9) (remove)
Keywords
- Wörterbuch (9) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (9) (remove)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (4)
- Peer-Review (4)
- Verlagslektorat (1)
Publisher
- IDS-Verlag (2)
- de Gruyter (2)
- De Gruyter (1)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (1)
- Lang (1)
In many countries of the world, perspectives on gender equality and racism have changed in recent decades. One result has been more attention being devoted to traces of androcentric and racist language in society. This also affects dictionaries. In lexicography there are discussions about whether or to what extent social asymmetries are inscribed in dictionaries and if this is still acceptable. The issue of the nature of description plays an important role in this discussion. If sexist usages are often found in language use, i.e. in the corpus data on which the dictionary is based, does the dictionary also have to show them? How is this, in turn, compatible with the normative power of dictionaries? Do dictionaries contribute to the perpetuation of gender stereotypes by showcasing them under the banner of descriptive principles? And what roles do lexicographers play in this process? The article deals with these questions on the basis of individual lexicographical examples and current discussions in the lexicographic and public community.
Dictionaries are often a reflection of their time; their respective (socio-)historical context influences how the meaning of certain lexical units is described. This also applies to descriptions of personal terms such as man or woman. Lexicographers have a special responsibility to comprehensively investigate current language use before describing it in the dictionary. Accordingly, contemporary academic dictionaries are usually corpus-based. However, it is important to acknowledge that language is always embedded in cultural contexts. Our case study investigates differences in the linguistic contexts of the use of man and woman, drawing from a range of language collections (in our case fiction books, popular magazines and newspapers). We explain how potential differences in corpus construction would therefore influence the “reality” depicted in the dictionary. In doing so, we address the far-reaching consequences that the choice of corpus-linguistic basis for an empirical dictionary has on semantic descriptions in dictionary entries.Furthermore, we situate the case study within the context of gender-linguistic issues and discuss how lexicographic teams can engage with how dictionaries might perpetuate traditional role concepts when describing language use.
Dictionaries are often a reflection of their time; their respective (socio-)historical context influences how the meaning of certain lexical units is described. This also applies to descriptions of personal terms such as man or woman. Lexicographers have a special responsibility to comprehensively investigate current language use before describing it in the dictionary. Accordingly, contemporary academic dictionaries are usually corpus-based. However, it is important to acknowledge that language is always embedded in cultural contexts. Our case study investigates differences in the linguistic contexts of the use of man and woman, drawing from a range of language collections (in our case fiction books, popular magazines and newspapers). We explain how potential differences in corpus construction would therefore influence the “reality”1 depicted in the dictionary. In doing so, we address the far-reaching consequences that the choice of corpus-linguistic basis for an empirical dictionary has on semantic descriptions in dictionary entries.
Furthermore, we situate the case study within the context of gender-linguistic issues and discuss how lexicographic teams can engage with how dictionaries might perpetuate traditional role concepts when describing language use.
Wissenschaftlich basierte allgemeine Wörterbücher des Deutschen werden heute meist korpusbasiert erarbeitet, d. h. die in ihnen beschriebene Sprache wird vor der lexikografischen Beschreibung empirisch erforscht. Diese Korpora sind allerdings, wie die großen linguistischen Textsammlungen zum Deutschen allgemein, durch Zeitungstexte dominiert. Daher beruhen die in Wörterbüchern beschriebenen Kollokationen und typischen Verwendungskontexte zumindest teilweise auf dieser Textsorte. Wir untersuchen in unserem Beitrag anhand einer Fallstudie zu Mann und Frau, wie stark sich die Beschreibung solcher Kollokationssets ändern würde, wenn als Korpusgrundlage nicht Zeitungen, sondern Publikumszeitschriften oder belletristische Texte herangezogen würden und wie unterschiedlich demnach Geschlechterstereotype dargestellt würden. Damit diskutieren wir auch die Frage, ob Zeitungstexte in diesem Fall ein adäquates und vielseitiges Abbild des Gebrauchsstandards zeigen. Auf einer allgemeineren Ebene wird dadurch ein grundlegendes Problem korpuslinguistischer Forschungsarbeiten tangiert, nämlich die Frage, inwieweit durch Korpora überhaupt ein ‚objektives‘ Bild der sprachlichen Wirklichkeit gezeichnet werden kann.
Eine europaweite Umfrage zu Wörterbuchbenutzung und -kultur. Ergebnisse der deutschen Teilnehmenden
(2018)
Gebrauchsgegenstand, Streitschlichter, Spielzeug, Nationalsymbol, Arbeitshilfe oder doch nur etwas, für das sich hauptsächlich Akademikerinnen und Akademiker interessieren? Welche Rolle spielen einsprachige Wörterbücher heute? Um unter anderen diesen Fragen nachzugehen, koordinierten wir gemeinsam mit Iztok Kosem (Universität Ljubljana) und Robert Lew (Adam-Mickiewicz Universität Poznań) die bis dato größte europaweite Umfrage zur Wörterbuchbenutzung und -kultur. Gemeinsam mit 26 ‚lokalen‘ Partnerinnen und Partnern aus ganz Europa führten wir im Rahmen des European Network of e-Lexicography (ENeL) diese Umfrage durch. Die Ergebnisse der Studie versprechen neue Einsichten in den gesellschaftlichen Status von Wörterbüchern in vielen europäischen Ländern. Durch die möglichst parallele Erhebung der Daten in den teilnehmenden Ländern werden außerdem interessante Vergleiche der lokalen ‚Wörterbuchkulturen‘ möglich sein. Im Fokus der Befragung standen allgemeine einsprachige Wörterbücher in der oder den jeweiligen Landessprache(n).
Dictionary usage research is a topic of increasing importance within the field of lexicography. At the beginning of the new millennium, the dictionary user was still relatively unknown. However, in the last ten years, more and more user studies have been published. Consequently, methods, data and the conclusions which can be drawn were successively refined. Also, new possibilities of web-based data collection, e.g., the analysis of log files, enriched this field of research. This contribution aims to describe the state of the art in dictionary usage research in the digital era. I begin by providing a short overview of methodological and terminological basics and then place a special focus on three different methods of collecting empirical data on dictionary use: online questionnaires, eye tracking and the analysis of log-files. All these methods are illustrated on user studies conducted at the Institute for the German Language in Mannheim.
We present studies using the 2013 log files from the German version of Wiktionary. We investigate several lexicographically relevant variables and their effect on look-up frequency: Corpus frequency of the headword seems to have a strong effect on the number of visits to a Wiktionary entry. We then consider the question of whether polysemic words are looked up more often than monosemic ones. Here, we also have to take into account that polysemic words are more frequent in most languages. Finally, we present a technique to investigate the time-course of look-up behaviour for specific entries. We exemplify the method by investigating influences of (temporary) social relevance of specific headwords.
This article presents empirical findings about what criteria make for a good online dictionary, using data on expectations and demands collected in an online questionnaire (N~684), complemented by additional results from a second questionnaire (N-390) which looked more closely at whether 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 (such as reliability and clarity) were rated highest by our participants, whereas the unique characteristics of online dictionaries (such as multimedia and adaptability) were rated and ranked as (partly) unimportant. To verify whether or not the poor ratings of these innovative features were a result of the fact that our subjects are unfamiliar with online dictionaries incorporating such features, we incorporated 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 were not given that information. Thus, our data point to the conclusion that developing innovative features is worthwhile but that it should be borne in mind that users can only be persuaded of their benefits gradually. In addition, we present data about questions relating to the design of online dictionaries.
The first international study (N=684) we conducted within our research project on online dictionary use included very general questions on that topic. In this chapter, we present the corresponding results on questions like the use of both printed and online dictionaries as well as on the types of dictionaries used, devices used to access online dictionaries and some information regarding the willingness to pay for premium content. The data collected by us, show that our respondents both use printed and online dictionaries and, according to their self-report, many different kinds of dictionaries. In this context, our results revealed some clear cultural differences: in German-speaking areas spelling dictionaries are more common than in other linguistic areas, where thesauruses are widespread. Only a minority of our respondents is willing to pay for premium content, but most of the respondents are prepared to accept advertising. Our results also demonstrate that our respondents mainly tend to use dictionaries on big-screen devices, e.g. desktop computers or laptops.