Treatment Of Polysemy Research Articles

Managing polysemy in terminological resources*

Abstract Polysemy, even when it is considered within specialized domains, is a recurrent phenomenon and the topic is debated from time to time in terminology literature. Part of this literature still advocates ways to prevent polysemy. Another portion recognizes the prevalence of polysemy, especially in specialized corpora, but considers it from the perspective of other phenomena, such as ambiguity, indeterminacy, categorization or variation. Although the number of perspectives on meaning have increased over the years, the treatment of polysemy in terminological resources is still unsatisfactory. This article first shows that polysemy is an integral part of specialized communication and that there are different kinds of domain-specific polysemy. Then, it reviews selected perspectives that have been taken on polysemy in terminology literature. The treatment of 45 polysemous lexical items in four specialized resources is then analysed. Finally, different methods based on lexical semantics are proposed to account for polysemy in terminological resources.

Un nuevo enfoque del tratamiento de la polisemia en ELE para alumnos chinos

El presente artículo tiene como objetivo proponer un nuevo enfoque del tratamiento de la polisemia en ELE para los alumnos chinos, teniendo en cuenta no sólo los múltiples sentidos de un elemento léxico sino también las relaciones existentes entre ellos, según las teorías de la semántica léxica. El artículo parte de un examen de las muestras extraídas del método utilizado en China en la actualidad e ilustra el nuevo enfoque mediante análisis de las asociaciones entre distintos sentidos de cada palabra polisémica estudiada aplicando las teorías de la semántica léxica, sobre todo la teoría del lexicón generativo y la de la lingüística cognitiva.

The Application of the Prototype Theory in Lexicographic Practice: A Proposal of a Model for Lexicographic Treatment of Polysemy

The aim of this paper is to point to fundamental implications of the prototype theory for lexicographic practice using them as a solid foundation for developing and proposing a model for systematic, consistent, precise and, above all, reliable treatment of polysemy in dictionaries. The main requirement of such a model is to make transparent the main features of a polysemous structure including its hierarchical organization, mutual relatedness of senses based on family resemblance and motivated derivation of senses. The proposed model includes three most challenging but key aspects of lexicographic treatment of polysemy: sense discrimination, sense defining and structure and organization of a dictionary entry. The prototype-based view of a polysemous structure is illustrated with a diagram representing a proposed upgrade of the radial set model introduced by Brugman and Lakoff (1988) and providing a pattern for tailoring a dictionary entry for a polysemous word. After practical aspects of the proposed model are explained in detail, an illustration follows setting forth a sample entry for a highly polysemous verb formed according to the proposed model. A solid theoretical foundation of the model is expected to ensure its practical efficiency primarily concerning quick and easy detection and understanding of senses.

ОБРАДА ВИШЕЗНАЧНОГ ГЛАГОЛА <em>ГЛЕДАТИ</em> У ШЕСТОТОМНОМ И ЈЕДНОТОМНОМ РЕЧНИКУ МАТИЦЕ СРПСКЕ

У овом раду разматрају се примењене лексикографске стратегије при обради вишезначних лексема у вишетомном и једнотомном Речнику Матице српске. Обрада полисемије се анализира кроз три аспекта лексикографске праксе: идентификацију и диференцијацију значења, структуру и организацију речничког чланка и илустрацију контекста у којем се посматрана значења јављају. Анализирана је одредница глагола гледати одабраног због своје богате полисемантичке структуре засноване на деловању различитих механизама деривације значења. Циљ овог истраживања јесте утврђивање предности и недостатака система обраде полисемије у посматраним речницима, као и сличности и разлика између два система с обзиром да постоји известан временски јаз између вишетомног и једнотомног издања речника, те се може проверити потенцијални напредак и осавремењивање лексикографске праксе. Резултати анализе омогућавају селекцију лексикографских стратегија које су у складу са лексиколошком теоријом, али и ефикасне у смислу прегледног и систематичног представљања полисемантичке структуре у оквиру речничког чланка, што се може и илустровати формирањем предлога за одредницу посматраног глагола.

The Treatment of Polysemy and Homonymy in Monolingual General-purpose Dictionaries with Special Reference to Isichazamazwi SesiNdebele

ABSTRACT: This article focuses on the treatment of polysemy and homonymy in general-purpose monolingual dictionaries with special reference to Isichazamazwi SesiNdebele. It was found that there are some inconsistencies in the treatment of polysemous and homonymous entries in this dictionary. The article shows that an overreliance on one criterion, particularly etymology, to distinguish polysemy and homonymy is often misleading and unreliable. Polysemy itself has its own inherent complexities, among these being the problem of determining the exact number of meanings of a polysemous lemma. When the meanings of a polysemous lemma are listed, the central or primary meaning, which is not always easily ascertainable, should come first. A holistic approach is proposed to distinguish polysemy and homonymy, which entails the use of the following criteria: etymology, relatedness vs unrelatedness of meaning, componential analysis, the identification of the central or core meaning and the test of ambiguity. Whatever results are obtained from a particular criterion, these findings must be compared with those of other criteria, and verified against native speakers' intuitive knowledge and introspective judgements. OPSOMMING: Die behandeling van polisemie en homonimie in eentalige algemene woordeboeke met spesiale verwysing na Isichazamazwi SesiNdebele. Hierdie artikel fokus op die behandeling van polisemie en homonimie in algemene eentalige woordeboeke met spesiale verwysing na Isichazamazwi SesiNdebele. Daar is vasgestel dat daar 'n aantal inkonsekwensies in die behandeling van poliseme en homonieme inskrywings in hierdie woordeboek is. Die artikel toon dat 'n te groot steun op een kriterium, veral etimologie, om polisemie en homonimie te onderskei, dikwels misleidend en onbetroubaar is. Polisemie self het sy eie inherente gekompliseerdhede waarvan sommige die probleem is om die presiese aantal betekenisse van 'n poliseme lemma te bepaal. Wanneer die betekenisse van 'n poliseme inskrywing gelys word, behoort die sentrale of primere betekenis wat nie altyd maklik bepaalbaar is nie, eerste te kom. 'n Holistiese benadering word voorgestel om polisemie en homonimie te onderskei wat die gebruik van die volgende kriteria behels: etimologie, verwantskap teenoor nieverwantskap van betekenis, die identifikasie van die sentrale of kernbetekenis en die toets van dubbelsinnigheid. Watter resultate van 'n bepaalde kriterium ookal verkry word, hierdie bevindinge moet vergelyk word met daardie van ander kriteria, en uiteindelik geverifieer word met moedertaalsprekers se intuitiewe kennis en introspektiewe oordeel. Sleutelwoorde: POLISEMIE, HOMONIMIE, METAFOOR, KONSEPTUELE BETEKENIS, ETIMOLOGIE, HOMOFONE, HOMOGRAWE, LEMMA, BETEKENIS, INTUISIE, INTROSPEKSIE

The Treatment of Polysemy and Homonymy in Monolingual General-purpose Dictionaries with Special Reference to "Isichazamazwi SesiNdebele"

This article focuses on the treatment of polysemy and homonymy in general-purpose monolingual dictionaries with special reference to "Isichazamazwi SesiNdebele". It was found that there are some inconsistencies in the treatment of polysemous and homonymous entries in this dictionary. The article shows that an overreliance on one criterion, particularly etymology, to distinguish polysemy and homonymy is often misleading and unreliable. Polysemy itself has its own inherent complexities, among these being the problem of determining the exact number of meanings of a polysemous lemma. When the meanings of a polysemous lemma are listed, the central or primary meaning, which is not always easily ascertainable, should come first. A holistic approach is proposed to distinguish polysemy and homonymy, which entails the use of the following criteria: etymology, relatedness vs unrelatedness of meaning, componential analysis, the identification of the central or core meaning and the test of ambiguity. Whatever results are obtained from a particular criterion, these findings must be compared with those of other criteria, and verified against native speakers' intuitive knowledge and introspective judgements. Keywords: Polysemy, Homonymy, Metaphor, Conceptual Meaning, Etymology, Homophones, Homographs, Lemma, Sense, Intuition, Introspection

The definitional practice of dictionaries and the Cognitive Semantic conception of polysemy

Cognitive Semantics has had a major impact on lexical studies: more than any other recent theory, it has in the last fifteen years led to a renewed interest in lexical research. But what about lexicography ? What is the relationship between Cognitive Semantics and lexicography ? And specifically, in the context of the present issue of this journal, what is the impact of Cognitive Semantics on the lexicographical treatment of polysemy ? In what follows, I will try to answer that question succinctly and perhaps a bit sketchily, but also as fair as possible to both the theoretical, lexicological and the practical, lexicographical part of the comparison. I emphasize my attempt at fairness, because I deliberately want to avoid any form of theoretical imperialism. It is definitely not an assumption of this paper that theoreticians in principle have the answers, and that lexicographers simply have to follow. I have pointed out earlier (GEERAERTS 1997, 5) that there should be a relationship of mutual inspiration between both disciplines, and even though the present paper looks from lexicological theory to lexicographical practice rather than the other way round, I still hold the reverse perspective to be equally important.

Polysemy

Summary 40 years ago Stephen Ullmann wrote that polysemy was the pivot of semantics. He was referring then to traditional synchronic and diachronic semantics. Nowadays, some 40 years later, polysemy has again become a central topic in cognitive semantics. This article traces the history of this important concept, from Antiquity to the first half of the 20th century. Bréal’s treatment of polysemy is the pivot around which the article itself turns, as it was Bréal who invented the term ‘polysemy’ a century ago.

The Treatment of Polysemy in the Design of a Learner’s Dictionary

Preview this article: The Treatment of Polysemy in the Design of a Learner’s Dictionary, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/itl.45-46.12cow-1.gif