Open Access

Terminological resources play a central role in the organization and retrieval of scientific texts. Both simple keyword lists and advanced modelings of relationships between terminological concepts can make a most valuable contribution to the analysis, classification, and finding of appropriate digital documents, either on the web or within local repositories. This seems especially true for long-established scientific fields with elusive theoretical and historical branches, where the use of terminology within documents from different origins is often far from being consistent. In this paper, we report on the progress of a linguistically motivated project on the onomasiological re-modeling of the terminological resources for the grammatical information system grammis. We present the design principles and the results of their application. In particular, we focus on new features for the authoring backend and discuss how these innovations help to evaluate existing, loosely structured terminological content, as well as to efficiently deal with automatic term extraction. Furthermore, we introduce a transformation to a future SKOS representation. We conclude with a positioning of our resources with regard to the Knowledge Organization discourse and discuss how a highly complex information environment like grammis benefits from the re-designed terminological KOS.

When collecting linguistic data using translation tasks, stimuli can be presented in written or in oral form. In doing so, there is a possibility that a systematic source of error can occur that can be traced back to the selected survey method and which can influence the results of the translation tasks. This contribution investigates whether and to what extent both of the aforementioned survey methods result in divergent results when using translation tasks. For this investigation, 128 informants provided linguistic data; each informant had to translate 25 Wenker sentences from Standard German into either East Swabian, Lechrain or West Central Bavarian dialect, as the case may be. The results show two tendencies. First, written stimuli lead to a slightly higher number of dialectal translation in segmental variables. Second, when oral stimuli are used, syntactic and lexical variables are translated significantly more often in such a manner that they diverge from the template. The results can be explained in terms of varying cognitive processing operations and the constraints of human working memory. When collecting data in the future, these tendencies should be taken into account.

When collecting linguistic data using translation tasks, stimuli can be presented in written or in oral form. In doing so, there is a possibility that a systematic source of error can occur that can be traced back to the selected survey method and which can influence the results of the translation tasks. This contribution investigates whether and to what extent both of the aforementioned survey methods result in divergent results when using translation tasks. For this investigation, 128 informants provided linguistic data; each informant had to translate 25 Wenker sentences from Standard German into either East Swabian, Lechrain or West Central Bavarian dialect, as the case may be. The results show two tendencies. First, written stimuli lead to a slightly higher number of dialectal translation in segmental variables. Second, when oral stimuli are used, syntactic and lexical variables are translated significantly more often in such a manner that they diverge from the template. The results can be explained in terms of varying cognitive processing operations and the constraints of human working memory. When collecting data in the future, these tendencies should be taken into account.

This article examines a recurrent format that speakers use for defining ordinary expressions or technical terms. Drawing on data from four different languages - Flemish, French, German, and Italian - it focuses on definitions in which a definiendum is first followed by a negative definitional component (‘definiendum is not X’), and then by a positive definitional component (‘definiendum is Y’). The analysis shows that by employing this format, speakers display sensitivity towards a potential meaning of the definiendum that recipients could have taken to be valid. By negating this meaning, speakers discard this possible, yet unintended understanding. The format serves three distinct interactional purposes: (a) it is used for argumentation, e.g. in discussions and political debates, (b) it works as a resource for imparting knowledge, e.g. in expert talk and instructions, and (c) it is employed, in ordinary conversation, for securing the addressee's correct understanding of a possibly problematic expression. The findings contribute to our understanding of how epistemic claims and displays relate to the turn-constructional and sequential organization of talk. They also show that the much quoted ‘problem of meaning’ is, first and foremost, a participant's problem.

Since the late 18th century the notion of an "organism of language" has been dominating the views of the essence of language in Germany. It was a crucial aspect of this notion that languages were something living and had to be described as living beings. It was this aspect in particular that was severely criticized in the second half of the 19th century as no longer meeting the standards of a more sophisticated biological concept of life. It must be borne in mind, though, that the notion of organism developed in the intellectual context of German natural philosophy, where one basic assumption was that all three kingdoms of nature—plants, animals, and minerals as well— breathe life, and are manifestations of a living earth in a living cosmos. Corresponding to the assumed unity of life processes was the aspiration after uniform philosophical and scientific principles of their investigation; and there accordingly was little hesitation to exchange terminologies, conceptions, metaphors, methods, and speculations between disciplines. This provides the backdrop also for the rapprochement of linguistics and the geosciences among adherents of natural philosophy, mediated by Carl Ritter's anthropological geography and Alexander von Humboldt’s Kosmos. The notion of life could be applied in classification and periodization in relatively concrete ways (as for example, when speaking of the youth, adulthood, and old age of both languages and the earth), or could be made use of in more abstract speculative schemes (evident for example, in Jacob Grimm's preference for triads), whose impact has so far been little investigated. In the 19th century, advances in the geosciences lead to entirely new insights into the course of the history of the earth. What was emerging more slowly was a realistic picture of the time spans to be taken into account in anthropology and linguistics. Authors such as Adelung and Grimm still saw it as their task in principle to account for linguistic developments throughout the entire history of mankind, subject to certain geographical limitations. Such ambition was premature, though, since serious anthropologically orientated research into tens of thousands of years of linguistic and cultural prehistory, reaching well beyond the limits of traditional reconstructions, is only beginning today.