Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (211)
- Book (206)
- Article (130)
- Review (27)
- Conference Proceeding (18)
- Other (9)
- Part of Periodical (2)
- Contribution to a Periodical (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Keywords
- Wörterbuch (605) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (176)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (64)
- Postprint (13)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (152)
- Peer-Review (76)
- Verlags-Lektorat (11)
- Peer-review (3)
- Peer-Revied (1)
- Qualifikationsarbeit (Dissertation, Habilitationsschrift) (1)
- Review-Status-unbekannt (1)
- Verlagslektorat (1)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (62)
- de Gruyter (62)
- Weidmann (45)
- Narr (29)
- Schwann (25)
- IDS-Verlag (24)
- Niemeyer (19)
- R. Oldenbourg (12)
- Akademie-Verlag (10)
- Lang (9)
Pogled u e-leksikografiju
(2015)
U radu se daje pregled temeljnih pojmova i klasifikacija u području e-leksikografije. Donosi se klasifikacija e-rječnika, prikazuje se leksikografski proces izrade e-rječnika te pregled najraširenijih sustava za izradu rječnika (DWS) i sustava za pretragu korpusa (CQS). Kao primjer dobre prakse detaljnije se opisuje mrežni rječnik elexiko (Institut za njemački jezik u Mannheimu): prikazuju se njegovi ciljevi i namjena, teorijske i metodološke postavke, moduli te mogućnosti uporabe. Kao moguća osnova za izradu korpusno utemeljenoga e-rječnika hrvatskoga jezika koji bi bio u skladu s najrecentnijim leksikografskim (i uopće lingvističkim) teorijama i praksama prikazuje se rad na mrežnome leksičko-semantičkome repozitoriju hrvatskoga jezika (baza semantičkih okvira, predodžbenih shema, kognitivnih primitiva i leksičkih jedinica) u okviru projekta Repozitorij metafora hrvatskoga jezika.
Wir stellen eine empirische Studie vor, die der Frage nachgeht, ob und in welchem Ausmaß Wörterbücher und andere lexikographische Ressourcen die Ergebnisse von Textüberarbeitungen verbessern. Studierende wurden in unserer Studie gebeten, zwei Texte zu optimieren und waren dabei zufällig in drei unterschiedliche Versuchsbedingungen eingeteilt: 1. ein Ausgangstext ohne Hinweise auf potenzielle Fehler im Text, 2. ein Ausgangstext, bei dem problematische Stellen im Text hervorgehoben waren und 3. ein Ausgangstext mit hervorgehobenen Problemstellen zusammen mit lexikographischen Ressourcen, die zur Lösung der spezifischen Probleme verwendet werden konnten. Wir fanden heraus, dass die Teilnehmer*innen der dritten Gruppe die meisten Probleme korrigierten und die wenigsten semantischen Verzerrungen während der Überarbeitung einführten. Außerdem waren sie am effizientesten (gemessen in verbesserten Textabschnitten pro Zeit). Wir berichten in dieser Fallstudie ausführlich vom Versuchsaufbau, der methodischen Durchführung der Studie und eventuellen Limitationen unserer Ergebnisse.
Wiktionary is increasingly gaining influence in a wide variety of linguistic fields such as NLP and lexicography, and has great potential to become a serious competitor for publisher-based and academic dictionaries. However, little is known about the "crowd" that is responsible for the content of Wiktionary. In this article, we want to shed some light on selected questions concerning large-scale cooperative work in online dictionaries. To this end, we use quantitative analyses of the complete edit history files of the English and German Wiktionary language editions. Concerning the distribution of revisions over users, we show that — compared to the overall user base — only very few authors are responsible for the vast majority of revisions in the two Wiktionary editions. In the next step, we compare this distribution to the distribution of revisions over all the articles. The articles are subsequently analysed in terms of rigour and diversity, typical revision patterns through time, and novelty (the time since the last revision). We close with an examination of the relationship between corpus frequencies of headwords in articles, the number of article visits, and the number of revisions made to articles.
Dictionary usage research views dictionaries primarily as tools for solving linguistic problems. A large proportion of dictionary use now takes place online and can thus be easily monitored using tracking technologies. Using the data gathered through tracking usage data, we hope to optimize user experiences of dictionaries and other linguistic resources. Usage statistics are also used for external evaluation of linguistic resources. In this paper, we pursue the following three questions from a quantitative perspective: (1) What new insights can we gain from collecting and analysing usage data? (2) What limitations of the data and/or the collection process do we need to be aware of? (3) How can these insights and limitations inform the development and evaluation of linguistic resources?
Dictionaries have been part and parcel of literate societies for many centuries. They assist in communication, particularly across different languages, to aid in understanding, creating, and translating texts. Communication problems arise whenever a native speaker of one language comes into contact with a speaker of another language. At the same time, English has established itself as a lingua franca of international communication. This marked tendency gives lexicography of English a particular significance, as English dictionaries are used intensively and extensively by huge numbers of people worldwide.
We start by trying to answer a question that has already been asked by de Schryver et al. (2006): Do dictionary users (frequently) look up words that are frequent in a corpus. Contrary to their results, our results that are based on the analysis of log files from two different online dictionaries indicate that users indeed look up frequent words frequently. When combining frequency information from the Mannheim German Reference Corpus and information about the number of visits in the Digital Dictionary of the German Language as well as the German language edition of Wiktionary, a clear connection between corpus and look-up frequencies can be observed. In a follow-up study, we show that another important factor for the look-up frequency of a word is its temporal social relevance. To make this effect visible, we propose a de-trending method where we control both frequency effects and overall look-up trends.