Abstract
The contributions in Klosa (2013a) provide information on various aspects of the design of morphological data for (German) language dictionaries. Bergenholtz and Gouws (2013), however, reject most of these contributions as sources lexicographers could use for the design of language dictionaries because they are guided by linguistic theory (cf. their critique of Klosa 2013b), instead of Function Theory, and by a misguided application of methods for user research, (cf. their critique of Topel's 2013 use of the questionnaire as method for user research). The first goal of this article is to provide a critical discussion of Bergenholtz and Gouws's (2013) views on the approach of Function Theory to the theoretical, methodological and practical aspects of the design of morphological/linguistic data in L1/L2 (language) dictionaries. It is argued that the approach of Function Theory provides lexicographers only with a usable overview of the design trends in printed and electronic dictionaries for the selection and presentation of morphological/ linguistic data in dictionaries, but that the theoretical, methodological and practical approach of Function Theory is fraught with difficulties. The strategy Bergenholtz and Gouws (2013) use to debunk the linguistic approach to lexicography is not new; it is a well-known strategy used in the rhetoric of Function Theory. The second goal of this article is therefore to point out some of the general problems with a Function Theory of lexicography for the planning, production and publishing of language dictionaries. Given the problems with the theoretical, methodological and practical aspects of Function Theory, it does not offer a viable alternative to the linguistic approach to the design of morphological/linguistic data in L1/L2 (language) dictionaries. It is argued that linguistic lexicography provides lexicographers with access to a vast body of theoretical, methodological and practical research to support the design of morphological data in L1/L2 (language) dictionaries. Furthermore, it is argued that Function Theory has established the importance of functional variables in the design of (language) dictionaries, but that what lexicography needs now is a truly multidisciplinary approach to lexicography, and not an approach that reduces lexicography to the status of a hand-maiden of another discipline, for example, information science, or of a reductionist Function Theory of lexicography.
Highlights
IntroductionLexicographers tasked with the design (selection and presentation) of the morphological data (abbreviated to: MD) for an explanatory, monolingual first language (abbreviated to: L1) or a second/foreign language (abbreviated to: L2) dictionary usually have a number of recent resources at their disposal for this endeavour: existing dictionaries, grammars, lexicographic manuals, research http://lexikos.journals.ac.za
Lexicographers tasked with the design of the morphological data for an explanatory, monolingual first language or a second/foreign language dictionary usually have a number of recent resources at their disposal for this endeavour: existing dictionaries, grammars, lexicographic manuals, research http://lexikos.journals.ac.zaThe Design of Morphological/Linguistic Data 355 material, corpora etc
The same applies to designers of the MD for a L1/L2 German language dictionary; most articles in Klosa (2013a), for example, focus on various aspects of the lexicographic selection and representation of MD in the planning, compilation and production of such dictionaries
Summary
Lexicographers tasked with the design (selection and presentation) of the morphological data (abbreviated to: MD) for an explanatory, monolingual first language (abbreviated to: L1) or a second/foreign language (abbreviated to: L2) dictionary usually have a number of recent resources at their disposal for this endeavour: existing dictionaries, grammars, lexicographic manuals, research http://lexikos.journals.ac.za. The FT alternative that Bergenholtz and Gouws (2013: 60-61) propose for the theoretical, methodological and practical aspects of what will be called a linguistic approach to lexicography (abbreviated to: LL) can be summarised in the following well-known tenets of the Function Theory of Lexicography (again a term coined for that article, and which is abbreviated to: FTL):. The first goal of this article is to provide a critical discussion of Bergenholtz and Gouws's (2013) critique of LL and to present FTL as alternative approach to the theoretical, methodological and practical aspects of MD design in L1/L2 (language) dictionaries and, in a broader perspective, of the design of linguistic data in these dictionaries. In the conclusion of this article it is argued that lexicographers have, in LL, access to a vast body of theoretical, methodological and practical research to support the design of morphological/linguistic data in L1/L2 dictionaries. The discussion of the topics mentioned above can be organised according to three of the pillars of lexicography: As discussed below, Bergenholtz and Gouws (2013), and Tarp (2004a,b; 2009a,b; 2014), for example, either organise both their presentation and evaluation of LL and its alternative, FTL, according to these three aspects of lexicography, or their discussion can be organised into these three topics
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
