Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (4)
- Book (4)
- Part of a Book (4)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Review (1)
Keywords
- Synonym (16) (remove)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (8)
- Peer-Review (3)
Publisher
- Narr (2)
- Winter (2)
- de Gruyter (2)
- Arhus University (1)
- Buske (1)
- EURALEX (1)
- Edizioni dell'Orso Alessandria (1)
- IDS-Verlag (1)
- Reader's Digest (1)
- University of Birmingham (1)
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 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.
Perhaps the biggest challenge in derivational morphology is to reconcile morphological idiosyncrasy with semantic regularity. How can it be explained that words with dead affixes and irregulär allomorphy can nonetheless exhibit straightforward and stable semantic relations to their etymological bases (cf. strength ‘property of being strong’, obedience ‘act of obeying’, ‘property of being obedient’)? Theories based on the idea of capturing regularity in terms of synthetic rules for building up complex words out of morphemes along with rules for interpreting such structures in a compositional fashion have not made - and arguably cannot make - sense of this phenomenon. Taking the perspective of the learner in acquisition, I propose an alternative approach to meaning assignment based, not on syntagmatic relations among their constituent morphemes, but on paradigmatic relations between whole words. This approach not only explains the conditions under which meaning relations between words are expected to be stable but also accounts for another notorious mystery in derivational morphology, the frequent occurrence of total synonymy among affixes, as opposed to words.
Novel formats of construction-based description hold great potential for phenomena that fall through the cracks in traditional kinds of linguistic reference works. On the example of German verb argument structure constructions with a prepositional object, we demonstrate that a construction-based description of such phenomena is superior to existing lexicographic and grammaticographic treatments, but that it also poses a number of new problems. The most fundamental of these relates to the fact that construction-based analyses can be proposed on different levels of abstraction. We illustrate pertinent problems relating to the precise identification of constructional form and meaning and suggest a multi-layered descriptive format for web-based electronic reference constructica that can accommodate these challenges. Semantically, the proposed solution integrates both lumping and splitting perspectives on constructional grain size and permits users to flexibly zoom in and out on individual elements in the resource. Formally, it can capture variation in the number and marking of realised arguments as found in e.g. passives and transitivity alternations. Aspects of the theoretical controversy between Construction Grammar and Valency Theory are addressed where relevant, but our focus is on questions of description and the practical implementation of construction-based analyses in a suitable type of linguistic reference work.
By the example of synonymy the author shows requirements, possibilities and limits of representing macrostructural semantic relations of the vocabulary in a universal monolingual dictionary. The basis of the investigation are 10 common German-language dictionaries; the examples are all synonyms of the words Weltall and Weltraum. After showing the problem and the latest state of scientific research the author proposes to refer consequently to synonyms in the dictionary. Such a theoretically based method would enable the user of the dictionary to discover the synonymic relations which are concealed by the alphabetically arranged entries.
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.
Bedeuten zwei Synonyme immer das Gleiche? Wie erkennt man, wann das eine oder das andere Wort angebracht ist? Inwieweit sind Synonyme situations- und kontext - gebunden? Sind wir bei der Wahl eines Synonyms frei oder an ein - gefahrene Muster gebunden? Genügen Synonymwörterbücher bei der Wahl eines treffenden Wortes? Das vorliegende Buch versucht, auf diese und andere Fragen Antworten zu geben. Untersuchungen zur Synonymie auf Basis des Deutschen Referenzkorpus rücken dabei Sprachwissenschaft durch eine korpusgeleitete Methodik in die Nähe naturwissenschaftlicher Empirie.