Lexikographie, Wörterbücher
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (56)
- Conference Proceeding (8)
- Part of a Book (6)
- Review (3)
- Report (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (74)
Keywords
- Deutsch (35)
- Wörterbuch (20)
- Online-Wörterbuch (16)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikografie (13)
- Lexikografie (13)
- Lexikographie (11)
- Neologismus (11)
- Kongressbericht (10)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (9)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (9)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (41)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (27)
- Postprint (5)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (74) (remove)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (10)
- Erich Schmidt (9)
- Niemeyer (5)
- Schmidt (5)
- Bibliographisches Institut (3)
- IDS-Verlag (3)
- Lexical Computing CZ s.r.o. (3)
- Winter (3)
- Erich Schmidt Verlag (2)
- Hueber (2)
Any bilingual dictionary is contrastive by nature, as it documents linguistic information between language pairs. However, the design and compilation of most bilingual dictionaries is often no more than mere lists of lexical or semantic equivalents. In internet forums, one can observe a huge interest in acquiring relevant knowledge about specific lexical items or pairs that are prone to comparison in a more comprehensive manner as they may pose lexical semantic challenges. In particular, these often concern easily confused pairs (e.g. false friends or paronyms) and new terms increasingly travelling between languages in news and social media (Šetka-Čilić/Ilić Plauc 2021). With regard to English and German, the fundamental comparative principles upon which contrastive guides should be build are either absent, or specialised contrastive dictionaries simply do not exist, e.g. comprehensive descriptive resources for false friends, paronyms, protologisms or neologisms (see Gouws/Prinsloo/de Schryver 2004). As a result, users turn to electronic resources such as Google translate, blogs and language forums for help. For example, it is English words such as muscular which have two German translations options.
These are two confusables muskulär and muskulös both of which exhibit a different semantic profile. German sensitiv/sensibel and their English formal counterparts sensitive/sensible are false friends. However, these terms are highly polysemous in both languages and have semantic features in common. Their full meaning spectrum is hardly captured in bilingual dictionaries to allow for a full comparison. Translating protologisms such as German Doppelwumms as well as more established new words is one of the most challenging problems. Currently, German neologisms such as Klimakleber are translated as climate glue (instead of climate activist glueing him-/herself onto objects) by online tools, simply causing mistakes and contextual distortion. Most challenges users face today are well-known (e.g. Rets 2016). New terms are often unregistered in dictionaries and it is often impossible to make appropriate choices between two or more (commonly misused) words between two languages (e.g. Benzehra 2007). These are all relevant problems to translators and language learners alike (e.g González Ribao 2019).
This paper calls for the implication of insights from contrastive lexicology into modern bilingual lexicography. To turn dictionaries into valuable resources and in order to create productive strategies in a learning environment, the practice of writing dictionaries requires a critical re-assessment. Furthermore, the full potential of electronic contrastive resources needs to be recognised and put into practice. After all, monolingual German lexicography has started to reflect on how users’ needs can be accounted for in specific comparative linguistic situations. Some of these ideas can be comfortably extended to bilingual reference guides. On the one hand, this paper will deliver a critical account of some English-German/German-English dictionaries and touch on the shortcomings of contemporary bilingual lexicography. On the other hand, with the help of fictitious resources I will demonstrate contrastive structures as focal points of consultations which answer some of the more frequent language questions more reliably. Among others, I will explain how we need to build user-friendly dictionaries to allow for translating false friends or easily confusable words from the source language into its target language efficiently. With regard to neologisms, I will show how discursive descriptions and definitions that are more elaborate can support language learners to learn about necessary extra-linguistic knowledge. Overall, this could improve the role of specialised dictionaries in the teaching or translating process (cf. Miliç/Sadri/Glušac 2019).
Unter Neologismen finden sich bedeutungsgleiche Ausdrücke (im weitesten Sinne Synonyme), die unter bestimmten Bedingungen sprachliche Unsicherheiten hervorrufen. Das liegt u. a. an ihrer semantisch-konzeptuellen Ähnlichkeit, an nicht abgeschlossenen Lexikalisierungsprozessen, aber es treten auch Zweifel auf, weil es Unterschiede zwischen der Allgemein- und der Fachsprache gibt. Für einige Neologismen ist es auch charakteristisch, dass mehrere morphologische Varianten gleichzeitig in den Wortschatz eintreten, sodass nicht immer klar ist, wann welche präferiert werden. Dass all diese Ausdrücke lexikalischem Wettbewerb und situationsgebundenen Gebrauchsbedingungen ausgesetzt sind und dass sie zu Zweifel führen können, wird in Onlineforen sichtbar. Dieser Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit der Frage, wie solche Paare/Gruppen korpusgestützt semantisch analysiert und wie sie in deskriptiven Wörterbüchern angemessen beschrieben werden können, um sowohl Gemeinsamkeiten als auch Unterschiede für Nachschlagende sichtbar zu machen. Dazu werden konkrete Beispiele und ein gegenüberstellendes Wörterbuchdarstellungsformat für neologistische Synonyme vorgeschlagen.
Im Mittelpunkt des Beitrags steht die Frage nach Ursprung und Genese der im geltenden amtlichen Regelwerk niedergelegten Regel, die eine Zusammenschreibung von Adjektiv-Verb-Verbindungen bei Vorliegen einer nicht literalen Bedeutung vorsieht. Ausgangspunkt bilden dabei Sprachtheoretiker und Akteure wie Johann Christoph Adelung, Wilhelm Wilmanns und Konrad Duden, die die Diskussion beherrscht und (dadurch) maßgeblich die erste gesamtdeutsche Rechtschreibregelung im Jahre 1902 mitgestaltet haben. Ein weiterer Schwerpunkt liegt auf der Umsetzung der Rechtschreibregelung in den orthographischen Wörterbüchern. Erst in dieser zeigt sich, inwiefern der gefundene Kompromiss trägt und inwieweit sich die Beteiligten daran gebunden fühlen, in Sonderheit Duden, der mit seinen Wörterbüchern alsbald eine marktführende Position einnahm und über dessen Duden-Rechtschreibung die Regel einer bedeutungsunterscheidenden Zusammenschreibung bei Adjektiv-Verb-Verbindungen letztlich für alle verbindlich wurde.
This paper reports on an ongoing international project of compiling a freely accessible online Dictionary of German Loans in Polish Dialects. The dictionary will be the first comprehensive lexicographic compendium of its kind, serving as a complement to existing resources on German lexical loans in the literary or standard language. The empirical results obtained in the project will shed new light on the distribution of German loanwords among different dialects, also in comparison to the well-documented situation in written Polish. The dictionary will have a strong focus on the dialectal distribution of Polish dialectal variants for a given German etymon, accessible through interactive cartographic representations and corresponding search options. The editorial process is realized with dedicated collaborative web tools. The new resource will be published as an integrated part of an online information system for German lexical borrowings in other languages, the Lehnwortportal Deutsch, and is therefore highly cross-linked with other loanword dictionaries on Polish as well as Slavic and further European languages.
Die lexikografische Behandlung von Neologismen aus der Perspektive hispanophoner DaF-Lernender
(2019)
Anhand von einigen medialen Kommunikationsverben wie mailen oder twittern wird das lexikografische Informationsangebot zu Neologismen auf seine Adäquatheit für die fremdsprachige Produktion untersucht. Die Untersuchung erfolgt aus der Perspektive eines spanischsprachigen DaF-Lernenden. Zur Analyse werden sowohl Neologismenwörterbücher und -datenbanken für das Deutsche als auch gängige, bilinguale Online-Wörterbücher für das Sprachenpaar Spanisch–Deutsch gezogen. Die Ergebnisse der lexikografischen Untersuchung werden exemplarisch mit korpusbasierten Daten aus einer Doktorarbeit verglichen. Die Befunde zeigen den Bedarf und die Notwendigkeit auf, die lexikografische Behandlung von (verbalen) Neologismen im spanisch–deutschen Kontext zu optimieren. Dabei soll — insbesondere — die fremdsprachige Textproduktion berücksichtigt werden.
Since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic, about 2000 new lexical units have entered the German lexicon. These concern a multitude of coinings and word formations (Kuschelkontakt, rumaerosolen, pandemüde) as well as lexical borrowings mainly from English (Lockdown, Hotspot, Superspreader). In a special way, these neologisms function as keywords and lexical indicators sketching the development of the multifaceted corona discourse in Germany. They can be detected systematically by corpus-linguistic investigations of reports and debates in contemporary public communication. Keyword analyses not only exhibit new vocabulary, they also reveal discursive foci, patterns of argumentation and topicalisations within the diverse narratives of the discourse. With the help of quickly established and dominant neologisms, this paper will outline typical contexts and thematic references, but it will also identify speakers' attitudes and evaluations.
Inspired by GWLN 3, we take a look at the new words, meanings, and expressions that have been created during or promoted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic provides a rare opportunity to follow the rise, spread, and integration of words and expressions in a language that may serve as an illustration of how linguistic innovation in general works. Relevant words were selected from various lists, notably monthly and annual lists of prominent words attested in the corpus of The Danish Dictionary. Analysis of these lists gives an insight into the number of words that stand out month by month and what kinds of words are involved, both in terms of morphological type and of semantic category, with special attention given to neologisms. Finally, we discuss the criteria for selecting which words to include in the dictionary. With this study, Danish is added to the list of languages covered in the GWLN series on
COVID-19 neologisms.
This study examines a list of 3,413 neologisms containing one or more borrowed item, which was compiled using the databases built by the Korean Neologism Investigation Project. Etymological aspects and morphological aspects are taken into consideration to show that, besides the overwhelming prevalence of English-based neologisms, particular loans from particular languages play a significant role in the prolific formation of Korean neologisms. Aspects of the lexicographic inclusion of loan-based neologisms demonstrate the need for Korean neologism and lexicography research to broaden its scopes in terms of methodology and attitudes, while also providing a glimpse of changes.
Between January 2020 and summer 2021, many new words and phrases contributed to the expansion of the German vocabulary in order to enable communication under the new conditions during the corona pandemic. This rapid expansion of vocabulary has most notably affected lexicography as a discipline of applied linguistics. General language dictionaries or terminological dictionaries have quickly reflected on how the German lexicon evolved during the corona pandemic: new entries were added, others were revised. This paper, however, focuses on the ways in which a German (specialized) neologism dictionary project, the "Neologismenwörterbuch" at the "Leibniz Institute for the German Language, Mannheim" published (online, see https://www.owid.de/docs/neo/start.jsp) has chosen to capture and document lexicographic information in a timely manner. Neologisms are (following the definition applied here) lexical units or senses/meanings which emerge in a language community over a specific period of time of language development, which diffuse, are generally accepted as language norms, and which the majority of speakers perceive as new for some time. Thus, the "Neologismenwörterbuch" used to record neologisms only retrospectively, that is after their lexicalization. As a consequence, users of the dictionary were often not able to obtain details on words that were particularly conspicuous at a particular time in a specific discourse, thus raising questions concerning their meaning, correct spelling, etc. This, however, did not imply that the lexicographers of the project had not already collected these words with some preliminary information in a list of candidates for inclusion in an internal database. Therefore, the project started to publish online an index of monitored words including lexical units that had emerged since 2011, for which only time will tell whether they will diffuse and manifest as language norms. This list format was used since April 2020 to also issue a compilation of corona-related neologisms as part of the "Neologismenwörterbuch". In October 2021, this inventory included more than 1.800 Corona-related neologisms, and still, more than 700 candidates in an internal database awaited lexicographic description and inclusion into the online index (see https://www.owid.de/docs/neo/listen/corona.jsp). In this paper many examples are presented to illustrate how new words, new senses and new uses in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic are reflected in the dictionary.
Im E-Wörterbuch „Paronyme – Dynamisch im Kontrast“ werden erstmals leicht verwechselbare Ausdrücke, sogenannte Paronyme (z.B. autoritär / autoritativ, speziell / spezial), in kontrastiven und dynamischen Einträgen beschrieben. Auf zwei Beschreibungsebenen verzahnt es lexikalische Angaben mit enzyklopädischen bzw. konzeptuell-orientierten Details. Korpusanalytische Auseinandersetzungen zeigen, wie stark der Gebrauch einiger Paronyme von den Beschreibungen in traditionellen Lehr- und Nachschlagewerken abweicht. Aber Korpusdaten deuten ebenso auf sprachliche Varianz und Wandel hin, die in speziellen Rubriken festgehalten werden. Neben der Vorstellung des Wörterbuches steht die Frage im Vordergrund, wie die Informationen systematisch aus den Daten gewonnen, analysiert und redaktionell ausgewertet werden, um als Bedeutungs-, Kollokations-, Konstruktions-, Referenz- und Domänenangaben jedes Stichwort so genau wie möglich beschreiben zu können.