400 Sprache, Linguistik
Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (2)
- Article (1)
- Book (1)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Other (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (6)
Keywords
- Paronym (6) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (4)
- Postprint (1)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (3)
- Peer-Review (2)
Publisher
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (2)
- IDS-Verlag (1)
- Karolinum (1)
- Lexical Computing CZ s.r.o. (1)
- Winter (1)
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).
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.
„Paronyme – Dynamisch im Kontrast“ ist ein neues und neuartiges Nachschlagewerk für sprachliche Zweifelsfälle und Unsicherheiten. Erstmals werden lautlich, orthografisch und/oder semantisch ähnliche Wörter (z. B. farbig-farblich, kindlich-kindisch, universal-universell, Mehrheit-Mehrzahl) korpusbasiert in ihrem aktuellen Gebrauch untersucht und dokumentiert. Nutzer*innen können sich über die Bedeutung jedes Ausdrucks in zahlreichen Angaben und Verwendungsbeispielen informieren. Dies erfolgt kontrastiv und dynamisch in selbst wählbaren Ausschnitts- oder Vergleichsansichten, im Überblick oder im Detail.
The project “Paronymwörterbuch” investigates and documents easily confused words (so-called paronyms) in German with respect to their use in public discourse as documented in a large corpus. These are, for example, antik/antiquiert/antiquarisch (antique/antiquated/antiquarian) or sportlich/sportiv (sporty/athletic). The results of this work are explanatory, contrastive entries in a new dynamic e-dictionary called “Paronyme − Dynamisch im Kontrast”. The objective of this paper is twofold. Firstly, essential new usage modalities of the new dictionary will be illustrated. As it is designed for contrastive consultation processes, the comparative structure of the entries will be elucidated and we will show how this dictionary has moved away from static to dynamic presentation by incorporating flexible consultation options. Secondly, as entries contain linguistic details which are consistently paired up with conceptual-encyclopaedic information, it is shown how this reference guide combines corpus-based methods with cognitive semantics. In this way, linguistic findings correlate better with how users conceptualise language by adequately reflecting ideas such as conceptual structure, categorisation and knowledge. Consequently, appropriate contrastive corpus tools and methods are employed. This paper also emphasises the need of semiotic approaches to the analysis of linguistic data in order to provide ostensive and cognitive-oriented lexical explanations. Such approaches are also necessary to guarantee an efficient pairwise investigation of paronyms. Advantages and disadvantages of explorative self-organising feature maps will be explained in more detail.
The German e-dictionary documenting confusables Paronyme – Dynamisch im Kontrast contains lexemes which are similar in sound, spelling and/or meaning, e.g. autoritär/autoritativ, innovativ/innovatorisch. These can cause uncertainty as to their appropriate use. The monolingual guide could be easily expanded to become a multilingual platform for commonly confused items by incorporating language modules. The value of this visionary resource is manifold. Firstly, e-dictionaries of confusables have not yet been compiled for most European languages; consequently, the German resource could serve as a model of practice. Secondly, it would be able to explain the usage of false friends. Thirdly, cognates and loan word equivalents would be offered for simultaneous consultation. Fourthly, users could find out whether, for example, a German pair is semantically equivalent to a pair in another language. Finally, it would inform users about cases where a pair of semantically similar words in one language has only one lexical counterpart in another language. This paper is an appeal for visionary projects and collaborative enterprises. I will outline the dictionary’s layout and contents as shown by its contrastive entries. I will demonstrate potential additions, which would make it possible to build up a large platform for easily misused words in different languages.