Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (3)
- Article (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4) (remove)
Keywords
- clarity (4) (remove)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)Lektorat (1)
- Peer-Review (1)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
- Verlagslektorat (1)
Publisher
In der deutschsprachigen Gender-Mainstreaming-Debatte treten sprachpolitische Positionen in Konflikt mit grammatischen Regularitäten und orthografischen Normen – nicht selten ohne wesentliche Annäherung. Der Beitrag beleuchtet die Debatte aus der Perspektive des Rats für deutsche Rechtschreibung und argumentiert anhand paradigmatischer Textbeispiele aus dem aktuellen Schreibgebrauch für eine textsorten- und zielgruppenspezifische Realisierung geschlechtergerechter Schreibung. Ausgehend vom breiten Spektrum entsprechender Strategien in bisherigen Leitfäden, Richtlinien und Empfehlungen werden Möglichkeiten einer orthografisch korrekten und sprachlich angemessenen Umsetzung aufgezeigt – in einem multiperspektivischen Ausgleichsversuch beider Diskurspole: Gendergerechte Texte sollen sachlich korrekt, verständlich, lesbar und vorlesbar sein, Rechtssicherheit und Eindeutigkeit gewährleisten sowie die Konzentration auf wesentliche Sachverhalte und Kerninformationen sicherstellen. Abschließend wird diskutiert, welche Rolle der Rat vor dem Hintergrund seines Auftrags der Bewahrung der Einheitlichkeit der Orthografie im gesamten deutschen Sprachraum in der Debatte einnehmen könnte und sollte.
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.
Questions of design
(2014)
All lexicographers working on online dictionary projects that do not wish to use an established form of design for their online dictionary, or simply have new kinds of lexicographic data to present, face the problem of what kind of arrangement is best suited for the intended users of the dictionary. In this chapter, we present data about questions relating to the design of online dictionaries. This will provide projects that use these or similar ways of presenting their lexicographic data with valuable information about how potential dictionary users assess and evaluate them. In addition, the answers to corresponding open-ended questions show, detached from concrete design models, which criteria potential users value in a good online representation. Clarity and an uncluttered look seem to dominate in many answers, as well as the possibility of customization, if the latter is not connected with a too complex usability model.
This chapter presents empirical findings on the question which criteria are making a good online dictionary using data on expectations and demands collected in the first study (N=684), completed with additional results from the second study (N=390) which examined more closely whether the 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 (e.g. reliability, clarity) were rated highest by our participants, whereas the unique characteristics of online dictionaries (e.g. multimedia, adaptability) were rated and ranked as (partly) unimportant. To verify whether or not the poor rating of these innovative features was a result of the fact that the subjects are not used to online dictionaries incorporating those features, we integrated 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 did not have this information. Thus, our data point to the conclusion that developing innovative features is worthwhile but that it is necessary to be aware of the fact that users can only be convinced of its benefits gradually.