Класифікації електронних словників

Abstract

The article deals with the problem of a typology of electronic dictionaries. The purpose of the article is to analyze modern approaches to determine the criteria for the classification of electronic lexicographic resources. Such methods as an analysis of scientific sources, comparison, generalization and systematization have been applied in the research. Based on the analysis of scientific literature, it was found that among researchers there is no single point on the criteria for classifying electronic dictionaries, which are a relatively new phenomenon on the market of lexicographic products and have evolved from machine-readable lexicons, exact copies of paper editions to complex digital lexicographic systems with a powerful arsenal of functions for several decades. In general, there are two common approaches to the classification of dictionaries among scholars. Some researchers (N. Kameneva, А. Baranov et al. ) believe that the same classification criteria should be applied to electronic dictionaries as to traditional dictionaries, others ( V. Shyrokov, L. Belyaeva, R. Mysak, А . Lehr , І . Sazhenin et al. ) believe that the accepted division of traditional dictionaries is not relevant to computer dictionaries and lexicographic databases. Electronic dictionaries are often classified according to criteria such as form, location, purpose, linguistic characteristics, printed prototype, interactivity, the presence of multimedia objects, and so on. And they are classified according to specific technical criteria: minimum hardware requirements, development environment, software, installation, method of execution and download, the number of dictionary databases, the amount of random access memory, the ability to expand the vocabulary, conversion dictionary databases in text format, etc. It has been established that modern electronic dictionaries tend to hybridize, often combining alphabetical and thematic methods of material organization, lexical and encyclopedic information, which complicates the possibility of distinguishing clear differential features of a particular lexicographic resource and its rigid, strict classification. The multiplicity of criteria for comparing dictionaries complicates the construction of a single general classification of dictionaries of different types, and multifaceted characterization of a particular dictionary can be carried out by the facet method using a basic list of parameters, which remains open and can be supplemented with the development of lexicographic resources system.