Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Part of a Book (2)
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Keywords
- Definition (4) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (2)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (2)
- Ahead of Print (1)
- Postprint (1)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (3)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- Benjamins (1)
- Elsevier (1)
- IDS-Verlag (1)
- Oxford University Press (1)
In social interaction, different kinds of word-meaning can become problematic for participants. This study analyzes two meta-semantic practices, definitions and specifications, which are used in response to clarification requests in German implemented by the format Was heißt X (‘What does X mean?’). In the data studied, definitions are used to convey generalizable lexical meanings of mostly technical terms. These terms are either unknown to requesters, or, in pedagogical contexts, requesters ask in order to check the addressee’s knowledge. Specifications, in contrast, clarify aspects of local speaker meanings of ordinary expressions (e.g., reference, participants in an event, standards applied to scalar expressions). Both definitions and specifications are recipient-designed with respect to the (presumed) knowledge of the addressee and tailored to the topical and practical relevancies of the current interaction. Both practices attest to the flexibility and situatedness of speakers’ semantic understandings and to the systematicity of using meta-semantic practices differentially for different kinds of semantic problems. Data are come from mundane and institutional interaction in German from the public corpus FOLK.
Applying terminological methods to lexicography helps lexicographers deal with the terms occurring in general language dictionaries, especially when it comes to writing the definitions of concepts belonging to special fields. In the context of the lexicographic work of the Dicionário da Língua Portuguesa, an updated digital version of the last Academia das Ciências de Lisboa’ dictionary published in 2001, we have assumed that terminology – in its dual dimension, both linguistic and conceptual – and lexicography are complementary in their methodological approaches. Both disciplines deal with lexical items, which can be lexical units or terms. In this paper, we apply terminological methods to improve the treatment of terms in general language dictionaries and to write definitions as a form of achieving more precision and accuracy, and also to specify the domains to which they belong. Additionally, we highlight the consistent modelling of lexicographic components, namely the hierarchy of domain labels, as they are term identification markers instead of a flat list of domains. The need to create and make available structured, organised and interoperable lexicographic resources has led us to follow a path in which the application of standards and best practices of treating and representing specialised lexicographic content are fundamental requirements.
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.