Lexikografie
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (97)
- Article (38)
- Book (10)
- Review (2)
Keywords
- Deutsch (83)
- Wörterbuch (48)
- Lexikografie (36)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (24)
- Lexikographie (21)
- Online-Wörterbuch (21)
- COVID-19 (16)
- Neologismus (15)
- Wortschatz (14)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (13)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (103)
- Peer-Review (18)
- Verlags-Lektorat (3)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (147) (remove)
Seit 1996 ist das Amtliche Regelwerk zur deutschen Rechtschreibung (einschließlich Amtlichem Wörterverzeichnis) gültig. Es regelt die Orthografie für Behörden und Schulen in Deutschland sowie in den sechs weiteren Mitgliedsländern des Rats für deutsche Rechtschreibung. Für die Wörterbuchverlage bzw. alle Wörterbuchprojekte gilt es, dieses hoch abstrakte Regelwerk einerseits auf alle Einträge in den A–Z-Teilen der Wörterbücher anzuwenden und andererseits ggf. das Regelwerk selbst zu „übersetzen“ und es damit einer breiten Öffentlichkeit zugänglich zu machen.
Die Anforderungen an gegenwartssprachliche Wörterbücher beinhalten, bei der Aufbereitung der lexikalischen Informationen in Stichwortartikeln die lemmabezogenen Korrektschreibungen adäquat zu berücksichtigen. Die dazugehörigen Arbeitsgänge in der Redaktion des Digitalen Wörterbuchs der deutschen Sprache (DWDS) reichen von der Ansetzung der Nennformen in allen ggf. zulässigen orthographischen Varianten über die Anlage von Verweisen auf die einschlägige Bezugsnorm bis zur Dokumentation ausgewählter Korpusbelege mit gebrauchsfrequenten Abweichungs- und Falschschreibungen. Als besondere Herausforderungen für die lexikographische Praxis erweisen sich regelmäßig Lücken und Interpretationsspielräume in der amtlichen Regelung sowie die bei Belegrecherchen in den DWDS-Textquellen zutage tretenden Diskrepanzen zwischen orthographischer Norm und Schreibusus.
The internationally renowned conference of the European Association for Lexicography (EURALEX) has taken place every two years for the past 39 years. Last year’s conference, held July 12th–16th, 2022, marked EURALEX’s 20th edition, and more than 200 international participants gathered at Mannheim Palace to discuss current developments, learn about new projects, and present their own work — either in lexicography or in one of the many applied or neighboring disciplines such as corpus and computational linguistics.
Dieser Beitrag stellt zwei Korpora vor, die als Datengrundlage für die Bestimmung der Regionalangaben im Digitalen Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache (DWDS) fungieren: das ZDL-Regionalkorpus und das Webmonitor-Korpus. Diese Korpora wurden am Zentrum für digitale Lexikographie der deutschen Sprache (ZDL) erstellt und stehen allen registrierten Nutzern der DWDS-Plattform für Recherchen zur Verfügung. Das ZDL-Regionalkorpus enthält Artikel aus Lokal- und Regionalressorts deutscher Tageszeitungen, die mit arealen Metadaten versehen sind. Es wird ergänzt durch regionale Internet-Quellen im Webmonitor-Korpus, die zusätzliche Areale und Ortspunkte aus dem deutschen Sprachraum einbeziehen. Die Benutzerschnittstelle der linguistisch annotierten Korpora erlaubt nicht nur komplexe sprachliche Abfragen, sondern bietet auch statistische Recherchewerkzeuge zur Bestimmung arealer Verteilungen.
In the present contribution, I investigate if and how the English and French editions of the Wiktionary collaborative dictionary can be used as a corpus for real time neology watch. This option is envisaged as a stopgap, when no satisfactory corpus is available. Wiktionary can also prove useful in addition to standard corpus analysis, to minimize the risk of overlooking new coinages and new senses. Since the collaborative dictionary’s quest for exhaustiveness makes the manual inspection of the new additions unreasonable (more than 31,000 English lemmas and 11,000 French lemmas entered the nomenclature in 2020), identifying the possibly relevant headwords is an issue. The solution proposed here is to use Wiktionary revision history to detect the (new or existing) entries that received the greatest number of modifications. The underlying hypothesis is that the most heavily edited pages can help identify the vocabulary related to “hot topics”, assuming that, in 2020, the pandemic-related vocabulary ranks high. I used two measures introduced by Lih (2004), whose aim was to estimate the quality of Wikipedia articles: the so-called rigour (number of edits per page) and diversity (number of unique contributors per page). In the present study, I propose to adapt the rigour and diversity metrics to Wiktionary in order to identify the pages that generated a particular stir, rather than to estimate the quality of the articles. I do not subscribe to the idea that – in Wiktionary – more revisions necessarily produce quality articles (more revisions often produce complete articles). I therefore adopt Lih’s notion of diversity to refer to the number of distinct contributors, but leave out the name rigour when it comes to the number of revisions. Wolfer and Müller-Spitzer (2016) used the two metrics to describe the dynamics of the German and English editions of Wiktionary. One of their findings was that the number of edits per page is correlated with corpus word frequencies. The variation in number of page edits should therefore reflect to some extent the variation of corpus word frequencies. Renouf (2013) established a relationship between the fluctuation of word frequencies in a diachronic corpus and various neological processes. In particular, she illustrated how specific events generate sudden frequency spikes for words previously unseen in the corpus. For instance, Eyjafjallajökull, the – existing – name of an Icelandic glacier, appeared in the corpus when the underlying volcano erupted in 2010 and disrupted air traffic in Europe. In order to check if the same phenomenon occurs when using Wiktionary edits instead of corpus frequencies, I manually annotated the most frequently revised entries (according to various ranking scores) with the binary tag: “related to Covid-19” (yes/no). The annotations were then used to test the ability of various configurations to detect relevant headwords from the English and French Wiktionary, namely Covid-19 neologisms and related existing words that deserve updates.
To leverage the Deaf community’s increasing online presence, the web-based platform NZSL Share was launched in March 2020 to crowdsource new and previously undocumented signs, and to encourage community validation of these signs. The platform allows users to upload sign videos, comment on videos and agree or disagree with (often new) signs being proposed. It is managed by the research team that maintains the ODNZSL, which includes the authors. NZSL Share is being used by individuals as well as Deaf community groups to record and share signs of a specialist nature (e.g., school curriculum signs). NZSL Share now has close to 50 actively contributing members. Its launch coincided with the 2020 COVID-19 outbreak in New Zealand and so some of the first signs contributed were COVID-19-related, which are the focus of this paper.
This paper arises within the current communication urgency experienced throughout the pandemic. From its onset, several new lexical units have permeated the overall media discourse, as well as social media and other channels. These units convey information to the public regarding the ‘severe acute respiratory syndrome’ namely COVID-19. In addition to its worldwide impact healthwise, the pandemic generates noteworthy influence in the linguistic landscape, and as a result, a significant number of neologisms have emerged. Within the scope of our ongoing research, we identify the neologisms in European Portuguese that are related to the term COVID-19 via form or meaning. However, not all the new lexical units identified in our corpus containing COVID-19 in its formation can unequivocally be regarded as neoterms (terminological neologisms). Accordingly, this article aims not only to reflect on the distinction between neologism and neoterm but also to explore the determinologisation process that several of these new lexical units experience.
This paper presents the main issues connected with the creation of a trilingual Hungarian-Italian-English dictionary of the COVID-19 pandemic using Lexonomy. My aim is not only to create a coronacorpus (in Hungarian, I propose my own corona-neologism or ‘coroneologism’: koronakorpusz) and a dictionary of equivalents, but also to understand how the different waves and phases of the COVID-19 pandemic are changing the Hungarian language, detect the Corona-, COVID-, pandemic-, virus-, mask-, quarantine-, and vaccine-related neologisms, and offer an overview of the most frequent or linguistically interesting Hungarian neologisms and multiword units related to COVID-19.
This article has a double objective. First, it seeks to offer an initial approach, with critical notes, to the group of pandemic-related neologisms incorporated into the DLE in the year 2020. To that end, the trends in the academic dictionary’s incorporation of neologisms will be reviewed, focusing in particular on specialized language neologisms. Second, the article presents the design of a research study that allows for the examination of any new words beginning with CORONA- added to the DLE and the DHLE. An assessment will be made of the particularities of the DLE and the DHLE regarding the incorporation of the new words, as well as the degree of correspondence or complementarity between the two works in this sense. This will show the complementary roles that the DLE and the DHLE are currently acquiring. In this sense, the new additions open up a debate on the treatment of neologisms in academic lexicography, in a particularly unique scenario.