Specialised Dictionaries for Learners 9783110231335, 9783110231328

The need for constructing a lexicographical theory with a particular focus on specialised dictionaries for learners is w

193 70 5MB

English Pages 248 [247] Year 2010

Report DMCA / Copyright


Table of contents :
Table of contents
Enrique Alcaraz Varó – A Short Tribute
Enrique Alcaraz Varó – Selected Bibliography
Introduction: Specialised Dictionaries for Learners
CHAPTER 1. LSP Lexicography or Terminography? The lexicographer’s point of view
CHAPTER 2. Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries
CHAPTER 3. The Monolingual Specialised Dictionary for Learners
CHAPTER 4. Specialised Translation Dictionaries for Learners
CHAPTER 5. The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners
CHAPTER 6. The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners
CHAPTER 7. The Treatment of Figurative Meaning in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners
CHAPTER 8. Designing Terminological Dictionaries for Learners based on Lexical semantics: the Representation of Actants
CHAPTER 9. The Contribution of Corpus Linguistics to the Development of Specialised Dictionaries for Learners
CHAPTER 10. An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese Specialised Dictionaries
CHAPTER 11. Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological Dictionaries for Learners
Recommend Papers

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners
 9783110231335, 9783110231328

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

L E X IC O G R A PH IC A Series Maior Supplementary Volumes to the International Annual for Lexicography Supplments  la Revue Internationale de Lexicographie Supplementbnde zum Internationalen Jahrbuch fr Lexikographie

Edited by Pierre Corbin, Ulrich Heid, Thomas Herbst, Sven-Gçran Malmgren, Oskar Reichmann, Wolfgang Schweickard, Herbert Ernst Wiegand 136

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Edited by Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

De Gruyter

ISBN 978-3-11-023132-8 e-ISBN 978-3-11-023133-5 ISSN 0175-9264 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.  2010 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/New York Printing: Hubert & Co., Gçttingen

¥ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

Table of contents

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Enrique Alcaraz Varó – A Short Tribute Eva Samaniego Fernández . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Enrique Alcaraz Varó – Selected Bibliography Adelina Gómez González-Jover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction: Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 7 11 17

PART 1. THE CONTRIBUTION OF FUNCTION THEORY TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIALISED DICTIONARIES FOR LEARNERS CHAPTER 1. LSP Lexicography or Terminography? The Lexicographer’s Point of View Henning Bergenholtz / Sven Tarp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1. Lexicography vs. Terminography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2. The concept of user needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3. An example: translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4. An example: reception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5. Conclusion: It is not important if the cat is white or black – it must be able to catch the mouse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


CHAPTER 2. Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries Sven Tarp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2. The essence of lexicography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3. The concept of a lexicographic function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4. The learning process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5. Knowledge versus skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6. Mediating elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7. Practical situations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8. Cognitive situations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.9. Functions of specialised dictionaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.10. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

39 39 40 42 43 45 46 49 50 51 52

CHAPTER 3. The Monolingual Specialised Dictionary for Learners Rufus H. Gouws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1. The ambiguity of the term monolingual specialised dictionary for learners . . .

55 55

27 27 29 31 34

VI 3.2.

Table of Contents

Aspects of a few specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.1. A well-defined genuine purpose and clear functions of specialised dictionaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.2. Learners of the subject field – and the language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Looking at the user . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text reception, the macrostructure and outer texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structures in specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.1. The data distribution structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.2. Access structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.3. Microstructural aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Conveying the meanings of words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.4. Data on grammar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Types of specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Culture dependent or culture independent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

56 57 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 65 65 67 68

CHAPTER 4. Specialised Translation Dictionaries for Learners Sandro Nielsen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2. LSP translation: The extra-lexicographical dimension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3. Intended dictionary users: the competence of learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4. Syntactic structures relevant for LSP translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5. Genre conventions relevant for LSP translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6. Presentation of data supporting LSP translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.7. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

69 69 70 72 74 76 78 82

3.3. 3.4. 3.5.

3.6. 3.7. 3.8.

CHAPTER 5. The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners Ildikó Fata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2. The bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes as the object of dictionary research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3. Modelling the translation process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4. The bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes as an object of research in translation studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.1. The place of the bilingual specialised dictionary in the typology of translation auxiliary materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.2. The needs and expectations translation dictionaries for LSP have to meet – translation studies approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5. Project report on a bilingual learner’s dictionary for LSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5.1. A brief overview of Hungarian lexicographical research and dictionary publishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


83 83 84 87 88 89 90 91 91

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners

5.5.2. Project report on a translation oriented bilingual LSP dictionary of pension insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Types of users of an LSP translation dictionary . . . . . . . . . . . Types of user situations of the translation dictionary for LSP . Lexicographical functions of the dictionary and its component parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The pedagogical dimension of the LSP translation dictionary . 5.6. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


92 93 94 96 97 99 100


CHAPTER 6. The Treatment of Cultural and/or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Aquilino Sánchez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1. The Nature of culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2. Culture and language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3. Culture in traditional lexicography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4. Culture, equivalence, and monolingual/bilingual lexicography . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.5. Dictionaries of language and culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.6. Conceptualization, dictionaries, and culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.7. The cultural dimension in lexicographic praxis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.8. New challenges for specialised lexicography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.9. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

107 107 109 111 113 116 117 121 125 128

CHAPTER 7. The treatment of Figurative Meaning in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Geart van der Meer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2. Some Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

131 131 133 139

CHAPTER 8. Designing Terminological Dictionaries for Learners based on Lexical Semantics: The Representation of Actants Marie-Claude L’Homme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2. Representation of actants in existing dictionaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.3. The DiCoInfo: A brief description of the original terminological database . . . . 8.4. Actants in the DiCoInfo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

141 141 142 145 148

VIII 8.5. 8.6.

Table of Contents

“User-friendly” representation of actants in the DiCoInfo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

150 152

CHAPTER 9. The Contribution of Corpus Linguistics to the Development of Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Lynne Bowker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2. Specialised dictionaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3. Learner’s dictionaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4. Specialised dictionaries for learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.5. Corpus linguistics and corpora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.6. Corpus-based lexicography and its contribution to learner’s dictionaries . . . . . 9.7. The potential of corpora for enhancing specialised dictionaries . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

155 155 156 158 158 160 162 166 167


CHAPTER 10. An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese Specialised Dictionaries Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1. Necessity of specialised lexicography for learners in China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1.1. Current status of specialised dictionaries in China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1.2. Analysis of the learner’s needs for specialised dictionaries In China . . 10.1.3. Educational situation for SLDs in China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2. Characteristics of specialised learners’ dictionaries (SLDs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.1. Distinctions between GSDs and SLDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.2. Distinctions between GLDs and SLDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3. Functional characteristics of ECSLDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3.1. Communicative functions of ECSLDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3.2. Cognitive functions of ECSLDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4. Structural Features of SLDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.1. Formal structure of lexical knowledge in SLDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.2. Structure of lexical and semantic relationships in SLDs . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5. Definition and translation principles for SLDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5.1. The multi-dimensional definition principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5.2. Holistic principle of definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5.3. Pertinence principle of definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6. Translation strategies of culture-bound words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6.1. Semantic calque translation in BDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

171 171 171 172 173 174 175 175 176 176 178 179 179 181 182 183 184 185 185 186

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


10.6.2. Morphological calque translation in BDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6.3. Phonological calque translation in BDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6.4. Phono-semantic calque translation in BDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6.5. Morpho-semantic calque translation in BDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6.6. Phono-morphological calque translation in BDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6.7. Referential calque translation in BDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

186 187 188 190 190 190 191 192

CHAPTER 11. Lexicography for the Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological Dictionaries for Learners Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1. Lexicography for the third millennium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.2. Electronic dictionaries typologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3. Institutional internet reference works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.4. Free institutional internet terminological dictionaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.5. Constructing free institutional internet terminological dictionaries for learners . 11.5.1. Lexicographical requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.5.2. Internet requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

193 193 194 196 198 201 202 204 208

BIBLIOGRAPHY Dictionaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

211 213

Notes on Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Name Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subject Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

229 233


When Enrique Alcaraz Varó started his academic career at the University of Alicante in 1970, Spanish universities had not heard of Languages for Specific Purposes (LSPs). At that time, English was taught only in very few degrees outside the Faculty of Arts and was considered an easy subject, similar to physical education, by university teachers and students alike. To make matters worse, the academics responsible for teaching English courses outside the Faculty of Arts (what we now call English for Specific Purposes, or ESP) were not members of the different English Departments that were being set up to accommodate teaching and research activities in the field of English Philology, a new degree that had been introduced into the Spanish university system by that time. It was, therefore, completely in accordance with his contemporary pattern that Professor Alcaraz did not teach ESP nor do research on specialised discourse during his early years in the Department of English at the University of Alicante. At that time he was mostly interested in applying semantics to the study of literary stylistics. Fortunately for the Spanish university system, Enrique Alcaraz was also a sworn translator (he had obtained his degree in 1962), searching for new lines of research in the fields of (Applied) Linguistics, and Translation. He completed his training at the universities of Reading (1968), and Georgetown (1972), where he obtained degrees in Applied Linguistics and General Linguistics, respectively. During those years, he dedicated his mind and soul to research and teaching on applied linguistics, and excelled in bringing theory into the light of reality. As a consequence, time was ripe for a new twist in his academic career: specialised lexicography, ESP, and forensic linguistics. Professor Alcaraz’s work in the field of specialised lexicography was basically dedicated to satisfying the needs of three types of users: ESP students; translators; translation students. In 1993 he published his first dictionary: DICCIONARIO DE TÉRMINOS JURÍDICOS. INGLÉS-ESPAÑOL/SPANISH-ENGLISH, (a Legal Bilingual English-Spanish Dictionary) with Brian Hughes, and some years later the monograph El Inglés Profesional y Académico (Professional and Academic English). Both works illustrate his pioneering work in Spanish universities in two different aspects. First, they showed that the time had come for broadening the scope of analysis typically carried out in Spanish universities at that time, mostly devoted to the analysis of literary works and journalese. Second, assuming the existence of a relationship between teaching ESP / Translation and compiling specialised dictionaries for our ESP and Translation students meant adopting a functional approach to lexicography characterised by considering dictionaries as utility tools whose content and design must be determined by the needs of their users. The development of a functional approach, however, should not make us forget that, first, lexicography has reached a crossroads where it is difficult to develop further without a thorough rethink of lexicography in general and of dictionaries in particular, and, second, that the old-fashioned lexicological approach to lexicography is still widespread and pervasive. In Spain, for example, conferences, symposia, and workshops tend to include



sessions on ‘Lexicology and Lexicography’, mostly containing lexicological analyses characterised by offering a contemplative view of lexicography based on the application of linguistic theories to the analysis of reference works. This book adds to the current state of play regarding the true nature of lexicography in two ways. First, it primarily defends a function-based transformative approach centred on the dictionary and the users, investigating which lexicographical theories and principles are best suited for learners such as those typically enrolled on LSP courses and/or Translation degrees. And second, it honours Enrique Alcaraz’s pioneering visions and daily activities as a teacher, translator of specialised texts, and lexicographer. In order to fulfil both objectives, the authors were not chosen among Enrique’s many, many friends and colleagues, but among scholars who could make a real contribution to the development of pedagogical specialised lexicography, not only because they are at the forefront of lexicography, having compiled more than 70 dictionaries and published hundreds of books and articles on the topic here discussed, but also because they share similar enthusiasm for lexicography and learners with Enrique Alcaraz, whose professional life was mostly devoted to solving the real problems his students faced when they were in the process of learning and translating. In addition, the book has been prepared and edited according to accepted academic standards: all the contributions were subject to a peer-review process. Moreover, the organization adds to the unity of purpose of the book: to open up new lines of research in terms of the construction of pedagogically-oriented specialised dictionaries, exactly what Enrique Alcaraz did during all his life. Consequently, the book is divided into three parts. Part 1, which contains Chapters 1 to 5, is devoted to presenting specific proposals within the tenets of the function theory of lexicography. Part 2 includes chapter 6 to 9 and presents ideas already explored in general learners’ lexicography, its intention being to incorporate them, if possible, into the daily practices of specialised lexicography. Finally, part 3 focuses on new roads to be trodden in the 21st century: China and its appetite for specialised dictionaries for learners; Internet and the proliferation of corporate glossaries, a type of free Internet dictionary that is being produced for satisfying very specific needs; those of the institutions’ customers. Although Enrique died in 2008, he is not dead. For his family, friends, and colleagues, he is like Shelley’s Adonais, and his fate and fame will be with us forever: I WEEP for Adonais – he is dead! O, weep for Adonais! Though our tears Thaw not the frost which binds so dear a head! And thou, sad Hour, selected from all years To mourn our loss, rouse thy obscure compeers, And teach them thine own sorrow! Say: ‘With me Died Adonais; till the Future dares Forget the Past, his fate and fame shall be An echo and a light unto eternity!’

Before introducing the specific contents of the book in terms of their contribution to the development of pedagogically-oriented LSP dictionaries, Eva Samaniego Fernández and Adelina González Gómez-Jover, two of the many brilliant students Enrique Alcaraz nurtured

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


during his life, describe Enrique Alcaraz’s academic achievements, together with some personal anecdotes, and a personal short tribute to his memory. They shared with him his last tall order: to introduce judges of many different European countries to the niceties of legal discourse in different seminars organized in Murcia (Spain) twice a year. In addition, my thanks to: – The authors and reviewers of this book dedicated to two complementary tasks: to add to the current state of play regarding the true nature of pedagogical specialised lexicography; to honour the memory of Professor Enrique Alcaraz Varó, a Spanish scholar who devoted his life to his family, and to his academic teaching and research activities, particularly to the compilation of specialised dictionaries for Spanish students and translators. – My profound thanks to Txurrigurri, Paco, and Carlos. They helped in bringing this project to life by offering advice and resources. – To Enrique’s wife and daughters. – Also to Eva, and Adelina. They did their best to present a balanced view of the scholar and the man who always offered his helping hand. – The Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación and la Junta de Castilla y León. The work reported was supported by funds from projects from these two public institutions (Grants FFI2008– 01703, and VA039A09, respectively). Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

Prof. Dr. Enrique Alcaraz Varó

Enrique Alcaraz Varó – A Short Tribute Eva Samaniego Fernández

When Pedro Fuertes asked me to write a short tribute to Enrique Alcaraz, I had many sleepless nights. It is impossible to write in a couple of pages everything that Enrique Alcaraz was. Pedro Fuertes and Adelina Gómez will deal amply here with his academic career, but in Pedro Fuertes’ words, that does not say much about somebody’s character, so I will take on the arduous task of trying to explain what Enrique Alcaraz was like. And I will do it following the advice he always gave us: “First things first and one thing at a time”. Enrique Alcaraz was simply exceptional and unique in everything he did. He was a selfmade man whose father died when he was young. He had to work very hard to help the family, but he never gave up his studies, choosing distance learning instead. That taught him the true value of effort, discipline and tenaciousness. Enrique had three passions: his family, teaching and conversation. He was a caring and affectionate husband and father who knew very well the immense value of family life. He was also a marvellous teacher, researcher and speaker. No matter where he was, he would invariably talk about his beloved wife, Esperanza, and his daughters, Esperanza, Aurora, Beatriz and Elena. He was a devoted father, who was proud of his “five wonderful women”, as he warmly called them. One of the things that was unique to him is – and I have learned this after his death – that he taught his “disciples” (as he liked to call us) in exactly the same way as he would teach his daughters at home. He was bringing up his daughters very much the same way he was “bringing up” his students. And this, I think, is the key to why he always managed to go straight to your heart – beyond the teacher, beyond the tutor, beyond the friend, he was a kind, understanding and caring father to all of us. He was not really teaching you, he was bringing you up. And that made a world of a difference. Enrique loved what he did, and it showed. Not only that – he had enormous fun with what he did, as he himself admitted quite amusedly. He enjoyed writing books (“that’s the best way to learn about something”, he used to say), he enjoyed teaching and giving talks and speeches, he enjoyed his research and he enjoyed talking to his friends. And he was unsurpassable in all those things. I will talk about each of those facets separately. As a teacher, his students at university, the Spanish and foreign judges he used to teach and also the American lawyers he taught legal English to every year were simply delighted with him. I remember he would invariably start the class by saying that university was not merely a school of knowledge but also a school of life. “You come to class to learn about life”, and he kept his word throughout the course: he would time and time again sing, tell jokes, and tell personal and professional anecdotes. There were long queues in his office because students would go there just to talk to him … and Enrique always found time for everybody. He was probably the most approachable teacher that students had. He always noticed students individually, no matter how many he had in class, and always remembered their name and circumstances. In a word, he made you feel special, and he had a rare skill to make you learn


Eva Samaniego Fernández

with little effort, and what is more, having fun while you did it. Probably that was because Enrique, to the envy of all of us, was able to explain with an astonishing simplicity things that were really complicated. “Facts, facts, facts: a good example is worth a thousand words”, he said, changing the English saying slightly. And with two or three everyday examples he would make you understand what cognitive linguistics, an injunction or an arrangement were. I’ve heard many Spanish judges say at the courses he taught that nobody had ever explained law to them so clearly as Enrique did, not even their professors at the Law Faculty ... and they were shocked to find out later that he did not have a degree in law. “English law is based on two principles: common sense and trust”, Enrique said, and he would proceed to explain the English legal system as if he was an English judge. That was Enrique. As a researcher, Enrique was both tenacious and enterprising. He has left us with an overwhelming list of leading and ground-breaking publications and works. None of us still understand how he could possibly find the time for research. Once I asked him how he managed to do all he did with such a busy life – usually it took a few days to find him, since he could give talks in five different places in just one week –. As usual, the reply was one of his sayings: “Just be systematic. I write three hours every day”. “Obviously”, he would add, “that comes after a good Spanish nap”. Unbelievable as it may seem, even though he was teaching courses and giving talks all over the world (literally), he hardly ever missed his lectures at university unless it was strictly necessary. Enrique told me once that he had a twofold purpose when he wrote books: helping students and learning about things himself. He had an innate curiosity and he could always come up with new views on old theories or with fresh ideas. Surprisingly enough, he was never conceited or vain; proof of it is that he counted on his students for his books: he asked their opinion, as well as other colleagues’, and never forgot to thank them in the prefaces of his books or dictionaries. Enrique, who was an example of wisdom to all of us, was intellectually modest, which is why he was not shy to ask others: “better to ask your way than to go astray”, he said. As a speaker, Enrique Alcaraz was really worth seeing when he gave a talk. People came in droves when they knew he was giving a talk, no matter what it was about. Be it generativism or English civil proceedings, the room was always full. A practical man, he would never bore you with theory: “Theories are like love: they last what they last”, he used to say. Experience and his unique wit, along with his cheerful character, had turned him into a master of audiences, and after five minutes everyone, with no exception, was roaring with laughter. He knew exactly when he had to tell a joke, when he could go a bit further with theory or when he had to give an example. He was audience-wise, and he enjoyed giving talks immensely. As a friend, Enrique had an almost supernatural ability to see your capabilities, and he would believe in you. Quite often he believed in you much more than you believed in yourself. Inevitably, you felt that if Enrique Alcaraz believed in you, you had to be up to the task. “If there’s a will there’s a way”, he would simply say, and by the look on his face you knew that he truly thought so. Once you got where he wanted to take you, he let you “fly alone”, as he said, ready to catch you in his arms if you fell. Just like a father. He was a delightful and enjoyable conversationalist. “Free therapy”, he called it, and you could talk to him for hours and tell him about your problems. He would listen to you with affection and then he would give you priceless advice for life. And one remarkable thing about Enrique is that not only did he listen to everything you said carefully, but he always

Enrique Alcaraz Varó – A Short Tribute


meant what he said, with no exception. That must be why people listened to him with so much attention. Saying that Enrique was a source of inspiration would do little justice to everything he was. To his doubtless exceptional intellectual capacity he added enthusiasm, wit, affection and kindness. Enrique Alcaraz had everything that made him a truly good person, in the widest sense of the word: he was kind, affable, unselfish, friendly, good-natured and goodhearted, generous, gentle, caring, considerate, honest, hard-working, inspiring, thoughtful, sensible and sensitive, open-minded, patient, loyal, hearty, cheerful and a long long list of other positive qualities. His vitality showed in the way he valued life and enjoyed every day of it with peace of mind and serenity. He had an extraordinary skill to tell the things that really matter from the things that do not, and to act accordingly. When Enrique learnt that he had to fight cancer, he phoned me and he never, for a single minute, thought about himself: all he talked about was his wife and his daughters and how sorry he was to give them this trouble and how they would manage if he wasn’t there. The moment he knew the treatment would be long he locked up his family circle and gave up the public sphere completely. Only his closest friends could go beyond the fence he built, not to protect himself or his family, but, as he said, “not to make others suffer for me. This is my battle and I have to fight it with my family. Six people suffering is already more than enough”. I won’t forget one thing Pedro Fuertes said when I told him on the phone that Enrique had died surrounded by his family, after months of suffering without a single complaint: “He lived with humility and died with humility. He didn’t make a fuss about his life and he wasn’t going to make a fuss about his death”. Now I remember Enrique every day both with tears and a smile, recalling the things he used to say, but most of all with immense gratitude that such an extraordinary person entered my life. He was a gift from heaven. We wouldn’t miss him more if he had been our father. Goodbye, Enrique, and thanks for everything you gave us while you were here: Do not stand at my grave and weep; I am not there. I do not sleep. I am a thousand winds that blow. I am the diamond glints on snow. I am the sunlight on ripened grain. I am the gentle autumn rain. When you awaken in the morning’s hush I am the swift uplifting rush Of quiet birds in circled flight. I am the soft stars that shine at night. Do not stand at my grave and cry; I am not there. I did not die.

Mary Frye (attributed)

Enrique Alcaraz Varó – Selected Bibliography

This bibliography, compiled by ADELINA GÓMEZ GONZÁLEZ-JOVER, lists the major works written by Enrique Alcaraz Varó and his collaborators. Book reviews, working papers, lectures and internal research reports are omitted.

Books Dictionaries Alcaraz Varó, E. and B. Hughes (1993): Diccionario de términos jurídicos (inglés-español/SpanishEnglish). Barcelona: Ariel, 2007 (10th updated edition). – (1996): Diccionario de términos económicos, financieros y comerciales (inglés-español/SpanishEnglish). Barcelona: Ariel, 2008 (5th updated edition). Alcaraz Varó, E. and M.A. Martínez Linares (1997): Diccionario de lingüística moderna. Barcelona: Ariel, 2004 (2nd updated edition). Alcaraz Varó, E., Hughes, B.M.A. Campos Pardillos (1999): Diccionario de términos de marketing, publicidad y medios de comunicación (inglés-español/Spanish-English). Barcelona: Ariel. 2005 (2nd updated edition). Alcaraz Varó, E., B. Hughes, M.A. Campos Pardillos, V. Pina Medina and M.ª A. Alesón Carbonell (2000): Diccionario de términos de turismo y ocio (inglés-español/Spanish-English). Barcelona: Ariel. Alcaraz Varó, E. (coord.) and Mateo Martínez, J. (2003): Diccionario de términos de la bolsa. (inglésespañol/Spanish-English). Barcelona: Ariel. Alcaraz Varó, E. (coord.), Castro Calvín, J. (2003): Diccionario de términos de seguros. (inglésespañol/Spanish-English). Barcelona: Ariel. Alcaraz Varó, E. (coord.) and Campos Pardillos, M.A. (2003): Diccionario de términos de la propiedad inmobiliaria (inglés-español/Spanish-English). Barcelona: Ariel. Alcaraz Varó, E., B. Hughes, J. Mateo Martínez, C. Vargas Sierra and A. Gómez González-Jover (2003): Diccionario de términos de la piedra natural e industrias afines (inglés-español/SpanishEnglish). Barcelona: Ariel. Alcaraz Varó, E.B. Hughes, J. Mateo Martínez, A. Gómez González-Jover and C. Vargas Sierra (2004): Diccionario de términos del calzado e industrias afines (inglés-español/Spanish-English). Barcelona: Ariel. Alcaraz Varó, E. (coord.), Castro Calvín, J. (2007): Diccionario de comercio internacional: importación y exportación (inglés-español/Spanish-English). Barcelona: Ariel. Domínguez-Gil Hurlé, A., E. Alcaraz Varó and R. Martínez Motos (2007): Diccionario terminológico de las ciencias farmacéuticas inglés-español / Spanish-English. Barcelona: Ariel.

Textbooks Alcaraz Varó, E. and M. Rico Vercher (1971): English for Children I. Madrid: Editorial Mangold. – (1972): English for Children II. Madrid: Editorial Mangold. – (1973): Boys and Girls I. Madrid: Editorial Mangold, 1973.


Adelina Gómez González-Jover

– (1974): Boys and Girls II. Madrid: Editorial Mangold. – (1975): Boys and Girls III. Madrid: Editorial Mangold. Alcaraz Varó, E. and B. Moody (1975): Small World I Alcoy: Marfil. – (1976): Small World II. Alcoy: Marfil. – (1977): Small World III. Alcoy: Marfil. Alcaraz Varó, E., B. Moody, C.T. Bettwy and A. MacElwee (1981): College English. Alcoy: Marfil Alcaraz Varó, E. (1983): Las Conductas Motivadoras del Profesor de Inglés. Alicante: ICE. – (1986): Accés 8. Barcelona: Vicens Vives. – (1991): Accés 6. Barcelona: Vicens Vives. Alcaraz Varó, E. and B. Moody (1983): Time for English I. Barcelona: Vicens Vives. – (1984): Time for English II Barcelona: Vicens Vives. – (1985): Time for English III. Barcelona: Vicens Vives. – (1990): Channel I. Barcelona: Vicens Vives. Moody, B., E. Alcaraz and M. Rico (1993): Kids 3. Barcelona: Vicens Vives. – (1993): Kids 4. Barcelona: Vicens Vives. – (1994): Kids 5. Barcelona: Vicens Vives. – (1994): Kids 6. Barcelona: Vicens Vives. Alcaraz Varó, B. Moody and M. Rico (1996): English 1. Barcelona: Vicens Vives

Handbooks Alcaraz Varó, E. and B. Moody (1975): Fonética inglesa para españoles. Alcoy: Marfil. Alcaraz Varó, E. and R. Denia (1980): La evaluación del inglés. Madrid: SGEL. Alcaraz Varó, E. (1981): Semántica de la novela inglesa. Alicante: CAPA. Hidalgo Andreu, P. and E. Alcaraz Varó (1982): La literatura inglesa de los textos. Madrid: Alhambra. Alcaraz Varó, E. and B. Moody (1983): Didáctica del inglés: metodología y programación. Madrid: Alhambra. – (1984): Morfosintaxis Inglesa para Hispanohablantes. Alcoy: Marfil. Alcaraz Varó, E. (1990): Tres paradigmas de la investigación lingüística. Alcoy: Marfil. – (1994): El inglés jurídico. Barcelona: Ariel, 2007 (6th updated edition). – (2000): El inglés profesional y académico. Madrid: Alianza. Alcaraz Varó, E., Campos Pardillos, M.A. and C. Mígueles (2001): El inglés jurídico norteamericano. Barcelona: Ariel, 2007 (4th updated edition). Alcaraz Varó, E. and B. Hughes (2002): El español jurídico. Barcelona: Ariel, 2009 (2nd updated and expanded edition by Adelina Gómez). – (2002): Legal Translation Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.

Translations Alcaraz Varó, E. (1980): Breve Historia de la Lingüística. Madrid: Paraninfo, 1980, pp.. 242 [A Short History of Linguistics de R. H. Robins. London: Longman]. – (1998): Introducción al Derecho inglés y norteamericano. Barcelona: Ariel, 1998, pp. 214 [Introduction aux droits anglaisl et américain de Roland Séroussi. Paris: Dunor, 1994].

Articles Teaching languages Alcaraz Varó, E. (1973): “Las cuatro destrezas: Fases de una clase de idiomas”. Vida Escolar. Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia 147/48, pp. 11–16. – (1980): “Aproximación al concepto de contable, incontable y colectivo en inglés”. Cauce 3, pp. 293–306.

Selected Bibliography


– (1982): “Los objetivos de aprendizaje en la programación de un curso de inglés”. En AngloAmerican Studies 2, pp. 31–48. – (1983): “An Approach to the Language of ‘Mrs. Dalloway’”. Cauce, 4, pp. 211–24. – (1985a): “La pragmática y la metodología didáctica del inglés”. Anuari d’anglès 7, pp. 9–19. – (1985b): “Las lenguas extranjeras en el Currículum de las Escuelas del Profesorado”. Almotacín 5–6, pp. 232–42. – (1986a): “La enseñanza de inglés en los niveles superiores”. Anales 3, pp. 111–19. – (1986b): “Lingüística textual y didáctica de la redacción”. AEDEAN 7, pp. 43–50. – (1991): “La comprensión como destreza activa”. Encuentros. Revista de Innovación e investigación didáctica 5, pp. 3–10. – (1993a): “La lingüística y la enseñanza de las lenguas extranjeras”. Enseñanza y aprendizaje de las lenguas extranjeras. Madrid: RIALP, pp. 19–107. – (1993b): “Teaching ‘Comentario de Textos Literarios Ingleses’ to University of Alicante students of English Studies”. Teaching English Literature: a World Perspective. Londres: MacMillan, pp. 125–130. – (1995): “Hacia un concepto más amplio de la filología inglesa”. I Jornadas de lenguas aplicadas a la ciencia y la tecnología. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: University of Las Palmas.

Linguistic research Alcaraz Varó, E. (1983): “De la lingüística oracional a la supraoracional”. Estudios de Lingüística 1, pp. 7–24. – (1987): “La elipsis en el discurso inglés”. Annuari d’Anglès 10, pp. 9–23. – (1990): “Una caracterización del significado discursivo”. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 129–142. – (1994): “La investigación en lingüística”. Jornadas en torno a la investigación. Madrid. – (1995): “La pragmática del texto”. Cursos de verano de Filología. Aranjuez. – (1996): “Translation and Pragmatics”. Translation, Power, Subversion. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 99–115. – (1997a): “Le signifié à la lumière des courants linguistiques modernes européens”. Europa Denken. Tübingen/Basel: Francke Verlag, PP. 145–150. – (1997b): “Stylistics in the Framework of Pragmatics”. Proceedings fo the 21st International Conference AEDEAN. Sevilla: University of Seville. – (1998b): “Claves sintácticas de la estilística lingüística”. Syntaxis. An Internation Journal of Syntactic Research I, pp. 129–142. – (1998): “Lingüística contrastiva y paradigmas lingüísticos”. Proceedings of the I congreso de Lingüística Contrastiva. Santiago de Compostela. – (2006): “La singular fuerza semántica de la sintaxis”. Revista de investigación lingüística 1: 9, pp. 9–24.

Literature Alcaraz Varó, E. (1998a): “Vividness in Literary Discourse”. L. Mora, P.C. Cerrillo, C.J. Martínez (coords.), El fluir del tiempo. Homenaje a María Esther Martínez López. Cuenca: University of Castilla la Mancha, pp. 23–38. – (2000): “Roger Fowler”. The European English Messenger, p. 8.


Adelina Gómez González-Jover

Teaching LSP Alcaraz Varó, E. (2001): “La tercera didáctica. La metodología didáctica e investigadora del inglés profesional y académico”. Proceedings of the XI Congreso Luso-hispano de lenguas para fines específicos. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. – (2002): “La tercera didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras”. G. Appel, J. Díaz-Corraleio, O. Esteve Ruescas, C. Fernández Santás, J. Lantolf, I. Palacios Martínez and M.S. Salaberri Ramiro (eds.), La lengua, vehículo cultural multidisciplinar. Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, pp. 95–120. – (2002): “El inglés profesional y académico en la sociedad del conocimiento”. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference AELFE. Madrid. – (2003): “La tercera didáctica. La metodología didáctica e investigadora del inglés profesional y académico”. Actas del II Congreso Superior de Traducción. Valladolid. – (2004): “La tercera didáctica y el inglés profesional y académico”. Proceedings of 28th International Conference AEDEAN. Valencia. – (2005): “El discurso y el texto en la enseñanza del inglés en la universidad”. P. Salazar, M. J. Esteve and V. Codina (eds), Teaching and learning the English Language from a Discourse Perspective. Castellón: University Jaume I, pp. 15–32.

Lexicography Alcaraz Varó, E. (2004): “Anisomorfismo y lexicografía técnica”. L. González and P. Hernúñez (coords.), Las palabras del traductor. Bruselas: EsLetra, pp. 201–220. – (2005): “El lenguaje de la farmacia: lexicología y lexicografía”. J. Mateo and F. Yus (eds.), Thistles. A Homage to Brian Hughes, pp. 5–18.

LSP and translation Alcaraz Varó, E. (1994): “El inglés jurídico y su traducción al español”. P. Fernández Nistal (ed.) 1994, Aspectos de la traducción inglés/español. Valladolid: Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación, pp. 101–133. – (1996): “La traducción del inglés jurídico al español”. Jornadas sobre diseño curricular del traductor e intérprete. Granada: University of Granada. – (1998): “Usos del inglés jurídico”. I Curso de introducción al inglés jurídico y su traducción al español. Oviedo: University of Oviedo. – (1999): “La investigación en la traducción jurídica. Castellón de la Plana. – (2000): “The translation of specialised English”. Proceedings of the I Congrés Internacional de Traducció Especialitzada de Barcelona. Barcelona. – (2000): “La traducción del inglés jurídico”. Proceedings of the II Congreso Superior de Traducción. Valladolid: University of Valladolid. – (2000): “The problems of translation of legal English into Spanish”. Annual Conference of the California Court Interpreters Association. San Francisco. – (2000): “El léxico de las ciencias de la salud”. Congreso mundial sobre el envasado del medicamento. Alicante. – (2001): “Problemas metodológicos de la traducción del inglés de los negocios”. J. Chabás Bergón et al. (eds.), Proceedings of First International Conference on Specialized Translation, pp. 11–21. – (2001): “La traducción del español jurídico y económico”. Proceedings of the II Congreso internacional de la lengua española. Valladolid: University of Valladolid. – (2003): “El jurista como traductor y el traductor como jurista”. M. A. Vega Cernuda (ed.), Una mirada al taller de San Jerónimo. Bibliografías, técnicas y reflexiones en torno a la traducción. Madrid: Instituto Universitario de Lenguas Modernas y Traductores, pp. 29–44.

Selected Bibliography


– (2003): “La neología en el español y el inglés profesional y académico. A. de Toros Santos, M. Lorenzo Modia (eds.), El inglés como vocación. Homenaje al profesor Miguel Castelo Montero, pp. 43–56. – (2005): “El jurista, el traductor y la traducción”. Hizkera juridikoa eta itzulpengintza: euskararen norabideak. Bilbao: Instituto Vasco de Administración Pública, pp. 47–68. – (2005): “Aspectos lingüísticos de la traducción del inglés jurídico”. J.L. Martínez, C. Pérez, N. McLaren, and L. Quereda (eds.), Towards an understanding of the English Language: Past, Present and Future. Granada: University of Granada, pp. 15–24. – (2005): “La lingüística legal: el uso, el abuso y la manipulación del lenguaje jurídico”. M.T. Turell (ed.), Lingüística forense, lengua y derecho: conceptos, métodos y aplicaciones. Barcelona: IULA, pp. 49–66. – (2006): “Issues in the translation of English Legal Texts into Spanish”. Cross Atlantic Legal Practice in a Time of Global Change, pp. 1–13. – (2006): “Lenguaje, pensamiento y realidad: la influencia de lo anglosajón en el lenguaje y la sociedad española”. M. Carretero, L. Hidalgo Downing, J. Lavid, E. Martínez, J. Neff, S. Pérez de Ayala, E. Sánchez-Pardo (eds.), A Pleasure of Life in Words: A Festschrift for Angela Downing. Madrid: University Complutense, Madrid. – (2006): “La traducción del inglés jurídico en la sociedad del conocimiento”. C. Gonzalo, P. Hernúñez (coords.), CORCILLVM: Estudios de traducción y filología dedicados a Valentín García Yebra. Madrid: Arco Libros, pp. 431–447. – (2006): “Aproximación al lenguaje de la farmacia”. Revista del Instituto de España. Anales de la Real Academia de Farmacia 72, pp. 343–360. – (2006): “Isomorphism and anisomorphism in the translation of legal texts”. Düsseldorf: University of Düsseldorf. – (2007): “La sociedad del conocimiento, marco de las lenguas profesionales y académicas”. E. Alcaraz Varó, J. Mateo Martínez, F. Yus Ramos (eds.), Las lenguas profesionales y académicas. Barcelona: Ariel, pp. 3–12. – (2007): “Forensic Linguistics and the Language of the Administration”. M.T. Turell, M. Spassova, J. Cicres (eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd European IAFL Conference on Forensic Linguistics / Language and the Law. Barcelona: IULA. – (2007): “Problemas metodológicos en la traducción del inglés jurídico”. Pedro A. Fuertes Olivera (ed.), Problemas lingüísticos en la traducción especializada. Valladolid: University of Valladolid, pp. 17–32. – (2008): “Language and Health Care: Food for Thought”. M.A. Campos Pardillos and A. Gómez González-Jover (eds.), The Language of Health Care, Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Language and Health Care. Alicante: IULMA. – (2008): “La huella francesa del ingles jurídico”. De la ciencia a la vida. Homenaje al Profesor Francisco Ramón Trives. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante.

Introduction: Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

The need for constructing a general lexicographical theory with a particular focus on the learner’s lexicography is well documented in recent publications (Fuertes-Olivera/ ArribasBaño, 2008; Tarp, 2008a). This will imply paying attention to, at least, four basic lexicographic categories: learners; the learner’s situation; the learner’s needs; and dictionary assistance. In one or other way, these categories are analysed in this book, whose eleven chapters are grouped into three parts. Part 1 includes Chapter 1 to 5, each of which reflects on some of the main ideas defended by the function theory of lexicography, perhaps the theoretical framework that has paid more attention to specialised lexicography by translating this interest into theoretical seminal works (cf. Bergenholtz / Tarp, 1995), and practical undertakings: members of the Centre for Lexicography (Aarhus School of Business) have produced 33 dictionaries and published around 500 works (monographs, articles, and reviews). In chapter 1, Bergenholtz / Tarp, who are the founding fathers of the function theory (cf. Tarp, 2008a), claim that the dividing line between lexicography and terminology is nonexistent, and their ideas clash with those of some lexicographers and terminologists, who take for granted the existence of a deep difference between them, a difference that Bergenholtz / Tarp explain as outside scientific thinking: it is an artificial distinction promoted for obtaining more research funding, influence and positions at universities. For example, the concept of user’s needs eliminates possible differences between lexicographical and terminological products, considering that users’ needs are related not only to a specific type of users, but also to the specific type of social situations (usually communicative and/or cognitive) where this particular user may have a particular kind of lexicographically relevant needs that may lead to dictionary consultation. They illustrate some of their claims by referring to typical user situations such as translation and reception, with examples taken from two dictionaries: ENGLISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY and SPANISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY, both of which were conceived for users with a particular interest in scientific subjects. During the translation process, for instance, translators need a basic knowledge about the specialised field, together with explanations and equivalents, and grammatical and syntactic information. These needs are catered for in both dictionaries by the inclusion of a 40-odd word systematic introduction in English and Spanish, grammatical data, and many lexical collocations and examples. With reference to reception, they emphasize the relevance of adapting some of the lexicographical structures to the three main user types of specialised dictionaries: laypeople, semi-experts, and experts. For example, the above dictionaries have different definitions, each of which targets the needs of specific users. In chapter 2, Tarp defines a lexicographic function as the “satisfaction of the specific types of lexicographically relevant need that may arise in a specific type of potential user in


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

a specific type of extra-lexicographical situation”, and adds that the concept of learners’ dictionary includes a number of different types of dictionaries with different functions that assist learners (the users) that are engaged in an on-going learning process. He claims that the learning process can be divided into two different types of learning, the acquisition of knowledge, and the learning of skills, which lexicographers subdivide into the learning of communicative (i.e., reception, production, and translation) and practical skills. Tarp emphasises that knowledge and skills must not be mixed, and illustrates his point by indicating that learners can acquire knowledge about a specific subject field easily, but have more difficulties with the learning of skills, because the retrieved information “cannot be directly transformed into skills, but has to be mediated by something else”. And from the point of view of lexicography, this “something else” is communication, i.e., the “mediating element through which the information retrieved from the data contained in dictionaries can be transformed into language knowledge”. Although in principle foreign languages can be learnt ‘spontaneously’, most learners of a foreign language engage in a conscious and systematic process, with foreign-language skills being developed by communication parallel to the conscious study of the vocabulary and grammar structures of the foreign language concerned. In addition, learners of specialised languages also need knowledge in connection with the systematic study of the subject field and information that can be used “to clarify doubts and solve specific problems related to practical exercises and the training process, in terms of observing, evaluating and interpreting the situation and taking the corresponding operative action”. Consequently, he concludes his chapter by indicating that future specialised learners’ dictionaries will not only have to assist the learning of a specialised language, but will also have to assist potential users “in other situations such as the learning of practical skills and the acquisition of knowledge about a specific subject field”. Chapters 3 to 5 focus on specific types of specialised dictionaries by presenting specific lexicographical requirements for monolingual, translation, and bilingual dictionaries. In Chapter 3, Rufus H. Gouws also continues with the concept of dictionary functions, together with users’ needs and dictionary structures, in his discussion of the monolingual specialised dictionary for learners, which is described as a dictionary in which lexical items from a specific specialised language are presented and dealt with. Considering that the concept of a learner could refer either to a learner of the language in which the dictionary is presented or a learner of the subject field treated in the dictionary, he mentions the existence of different possibilities for compiling a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners, mostly based on the language level and knowledge of the subject field of the intended user(s). In particular, he makes suggestions on the formulation and adaptation of access structures, a well-devised microstructure, and a functional addressing structure, for enhancing the comprehensive process being triggered when a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners needs to be activated. In a word, he defends the argument that an “innovative approach to the access process, dictionary functions, structures and typological hybridisation can render products that will satisfy the needs of the intended target users and help to establish and develop a dictionary culture”. Bilingual or translation dictionaries are specifically discussed in chapters 4 and 5 by Sandro Nielsen and Ildikó Fata. Nielsen offers a more general approach in his Specialised

Introduction: Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


Translation Dictionaries for Learners (Chapter 4), where he mentions that these reference tools are in high demand in today’s world, and can be very useful if they offer learners more than factual (i.e., terms) and cultural aspects. Considering that the relevance of terms, their definitions and equivalents, has been extensively discussed by lexicographers and terminographers, his chapter focuses on linguistics structures, and genre conventions, two features that have received little or no attention by lexicographers. As most users of specialised translation dictionaries for learners are not expected to have a high degree of factual knowledge in the target language, nor much knowledge of relevant linguistic structures, cultural aspects and genre conventions, (i.e., people who translate specialised texts predominantly fall within the groups of laypersons, semi-experts, beginners and intermediate learners), Nielsen proposes that specialised translation dictionaries should be designed as augmented reference tools, by including sections or CDROMs with syntactic, translation and similar data as well as exercises and illustrative examples. Such dictionaries will not only help “learners acquire knowledge about new terms and new meanings of known terms, but also help learners acquire knowledge about the correct and appropriate usage, including domain-specific syntactic structures, genre conventions and translation strategies”. Ildikó Fata illustrates some of the above ideas in Chapter 5 by focusing on the bilingual specialised translation dictionary. After presenting both the translation dictionary for LSP and the specialised dictionary for translating purposes, she focuses on the needs of translators, and shows the rationale of some of the decisions taken regarding the MAGYAR-OLASZ / MÜSZAKI-TUDOMÁNYOS SZÓTÁR, a bilingual (Hungarian-German/German-Hungarian) specialised dictionary of pension insurance, which she designed with the aim of satisfying primarily the specific needs of native Hungarian or German translators and interpreters, and secondarily different user groups: LSP students (for example, students enrolled in the Faculties of Economics and Law), would-be translators, social politicians, pension experts, pension advisors, economic advisers, and interested laypersons (for example, pensioners living outside Hungary but entitled to a pension in Hungary). In particular, she comments on the decisions taken for enhancing the pedagogical dimension of the dictionary, opting for a dictionary structure containing both linguistic and professional information, which informs users on relevant factors during the translation process: text, situation, and culture. For example, there are several appendices on different factors regarding the pension system in both countries. Appendices illustrate the validity of operational-oriented user situation in lexicography (Tarp 2008b) by serving as an example of the handbook function of the dictionary, as it shows up-to-date information and statistics from 1998-2005 and contains data relevant for German pension calculations. Part 2 includes Chapter 6 to 9 and presents some interesting proposals that have already being explored in the field of general learners’ lexicography but which have been mostly absent from discussions on specialised lexicography: cultural aspects; figurative meaning; provision of linguistic information; the use of corpora. Aquilino Sánchez analyses the treatment of cultural and/or encyclopaedic items in Chapter 6. He indicates that specialised learners’ dictionaries must be particularly sensitive to the treatment of cultural items since we assume that learning a language also implies learning its culture, and that in a broad sense all words externalize cultural features in some


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

way; this has an impact on pedagogically-oriented lexicography – even in dictionaries dealing with culture-independent knowledge –, considering that there are different ways of approaching reality. For example, an English-Spanish legal dictionary needs to include encyclopaedic explanations for explaining that the Spanish abogado may be a lawyer or a solicitor in Great Britain. Similarly, an Inuit-English dictionary cannot treat the word snow as this will be treated in an English-Spanish dictionary. The importance of the issue discussed may have led to the recent publication of some integrated dictionaries, for example, the LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND CULTURE, which target students of English as a foreign language. Sánchez mentions that from a formal point of view the organization and structure of the dictionary follow the traditional pattern in lexicographical works: cultural information is something added to words. In his view, this organization and structure of the dictionary must be avoided as they help reinforce the assumption that culture and language are two different components; this is based on the lexicographical practice of producing dictionaries from a formal linguistic perspective, “which looks at words as if they were autonomous lexical items, regardless of the context in which they are used”. Instead, he defends a non-dogmatic perspective and suggests some specific proposals regarding the identification of cultural elements (for example, Lado’s notion of Elementary Meaning Units can be used for identifying cultural features) and their treatment in specialised dictionaries, mostly based on including a key element of specialised dictionaries for learners: their degree of specificity. In Chapter 7, Geart van der Meer deals with the treatment of figurative meaning in specialised dictionaries for learners. The proposals he discusses, which are related with possible definitions of metaphorical terms, are largely dependent on the hypothesis that learning “a new language involves having to memorise many facts that are unrelated, and memorising unrelated facts is much harder than facts evincing a certain pattern, or facts that can be shown to be related”. Consequently, he investigates whether it is desirable, feasible and rewarding to make users of specialised learners’ dictionaries aware of the connection between literal and metaphorical senses. His answer is that it is desirable to make the connection but it is not feasible, and therefore not rewarding in most cases. His detailed and insightful discussion of the definitions found in some dictionaries – general and specialised – allows him to finish the chapter by making two interesting proposals. First, he claims that what a specialised learner’s dictionary could do is “to write sense definitions using a vocabulary (e.g. collocations) that at least strongly hints at the field of discourse from which the metaphor was originally taken”, and illustrates this proposal by offering tentative definitions of two terms: bubble and scorched earth policy, each of which pose different problems for the learner that allow him to give a second proposal. Although lengthy explanations of metaphorical terms should be avoided in specialised dictionaries for learners, the more transparent cases could be taken care of, thus “nudging awake the learner’s perhaps dormant awareness of the metaphorical character of the expression”, whereas the more complicated metaphorical terms will have to remain unexplained. In Chapter 8, Marie-Claude L’Homme deals with the task of converting a terminological database into a specialised learner’s dictionary. As the original terminological database was encoded according to the tenets of Explanatory Combinatorial Lexicology, the theoretical model proposed by Mel’čuk and colleagues (see Mel’čuk / Clas / Polguère, 1995) which is

Introduction: Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


considered difficult for the uninitiated, L’Homme initially defends the necessity of exploring different methods for making the description more adequate for users who may not be familiar with the theoretical framework. Consequently, her chapter adds to her current research interest (see L’Homme, 2007) by presenting ways for representing actants in a more user-friendly version than in DiCoInfo, the original terminological database that contains French nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs pertaining to the domains of computing and the Internet. After reviewing the methods lexicographers have devised to represent actants in general and specialised dictionaries, describing DiCoInfo, and justifying the importance of actants in the description of terms, L’Homme explains the different decisions taken “to convert the formal encoding into a more user-friendly dictionary”. In particular, she focuses on the ways for making the presence of actants in definitions and explanations of lexical relationships more transparent to users. The system chosen consists of presenting semantic roles together with typical terms “instantiating actants in the specialised field whose terminology is being described”. The use of typical terms offers some advantages. For example, users can access information on the combinatorial possibilities of the unit being described, can obtain more information in the dictionary about the typical terms chosen, and do not have to refer to the actantial structure to establish a correspondence between the actants in the explanations and those in the actantial structure. Furthermore, the same labels can be kept, even if the syntactic position of the terms differs, thus facilitating for users of the dictionary inference of the correct information related to the actants. Typical terms correspond to generic lexical units that are defined as terms in the field, are frequently found in the corpus used, and are the most natural when explaining lexical relationships or forging definitions. In choosing the ideal typical term, however, she mentions some problems, particularly because sometimes the criteria mentioned cannot be applied simultaneously. For example, in many cases, “generic terms cannot be found to represent one single actant”. In addition, she mentions another series of challenges that are raised by recent additions to DiCoInfo, which will be addressed in future works. In Chapter 9, Lynne Bowker discusses the contribution of corpus linguistics to the development of specialised dictionaries for learners. She claims that prior to the advent of electronic corpora, the making of specialised dictionaries had remained largely unchanged for hundreds of years. For example, Pearson (1998: 71) has noted that the main purpose of monolingual specialised dictionaries was “to clarify meaning rather than to specify usage”. Hence, the entries offered definitions without paying attention to examples, phraseological preferences, usage notes, or grammar. She adds that specialised lexicography scholars have recently advocated that specifying usage must also be a key concern for specialised dictionaries, especially if they aim at satisfying the needs of learners, be they students of an LSP or translation, or even semiexperts or experts. As a result, new types of hybrid learner’s dictionaries (i.e., hybrids because they combine general and specialised knowledge) are beginning to appear (cf. the MACMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY). These new types of learners’ dictionaries are highly dependent on corpus linguistics and corpora and are consequently reproducing the lexicographical practices initiated by Sinclair some 30 years ago. Bowker observes that the application of corpora to the compilation of specialised dictionaries has been slow and defends its use due to the advantages already observed in


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

general learners’ dictionaries. These have greatly improved by explaining meaning in a better and more consistent way, together with giving examples of usage, describing syntactic behaviour, and covering pragmatics, register, and collocations (Rundell / Granger, 2007). Hence, her proposals for using corpora for producing specialised dictionaries for learners concur with the advantages already commented on in general learners’ dictionaries. Corpora will help with the identification of the relative frequency of terms, the construction of definitions, the selection of authentic examples, the identification of phraseology, etc. In addition, she proposes the inclusion of frequently-used general language words in specialised dictionaries for learners, as well as the use of data extracted from learner corpora and spoken corpora, with the aim of making specialised dictionaries that satisfy learners’ new needs related to producing texts, making presentations, and attending lectures. Part 3, which consists of Chapter 10 and 11, focuses on new paths to be trodden in the 21st century: China and its appetite for specialised dictionaries for learners; Internet and the proliferation of corporate glossaries, a type of free Internet dictionary that is being produced to satisfy the very specific need of customers and Internet surfers. In Chapter 10, Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping affirm that pedagogical specialised lexicography will be a hot topic of study in China in the coming years for different reasons, among which they mention the necessity of specialised dictionaries for learners, especially bilingual English-Chinese/Chinese-English, considering that the number of foreign students enrolled in Chinese universities and that of Chinese college students abroad is increasing considerably, and that most published specialised dictionaries are of rather poor lexicographic quality. For example, they cite a survey the authors conducted among 128 undergraduates from 36 colleges and universities across China, which found that students acknowledge the need for specialised dictionaries; however, they do not use them regularly as they consider existing specialised dictionaries unhelpful. Undergraduates expect to find in the specialised dictionaries lexicographical data about pronunciation, examples, collocations, usages, grammatical patterns, semantic discrimination, and synonyms/antonyms. These are the lexicographical items that are typically absent from Chinese specialised dictionaries. Consequently, they devote their chapter to presenting an ideal specialised dictionary for Chinese learners, especially because since 2001 there have been calls from business leaders and authorities to fill this gap; this became more obvious when courses related to technology and WTO affairs started to be offered at the turn of the century. A consequence was that these new courses relied extensively on English textbooks and handbooks, and consequently students showed a specific need for specialised dictionaries that could be used for satisfying such needs. For example, in Tsinghua University 500 core courses (out of a total of 1440 courses) are given with textbooks from prestigious foreign publishing houses. After describing in detail the differences observed between, first, general specialised dictionaries and specialised learners’ dictionaries, and second, between these two subtypes and the general learner’s dictionary, they enumerate the functional characteristics of English-Chinese specialised dictionaries for learners. Regarding communicative functions, they focus on the importance of including language data, and both negative and active vocabulary. Similarly, for cognitive-orientated functions they demand the inclusion of knowledge and its systematicity. Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping also pay attention to the formal features of specialised dictionaries for learners by discussing briefly what the megastructure, microstructure,

Introduction: Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


distribution structure, and access structure of specialised dictionaries for learners should be like. In addition, they focus on the structure of lexical and semantic relationships in specialised dictionaries for learners and illustrate some of their comments with their own examples of definitions and translation principles (English-Chinese): (i) the multidimensional definition principle demands the inclusion of equivalents and appropriate glosses “to indicate specialized senses of the headwords so as to profile the essential cognitive domain and to trigger the conceptual nodes of semantic networks of learner’s mental representation”; (ii) the holistic principle of definition is based on systematicity and refers to the unity of various correlated components involved in definitions; (iii) the pertinence principle of definition requires that “definitions are written in accordance with specific academic fields”; (iv) the use of semantic, morphological, phonological, phonosemantic, morpho-semantic, phono-morphological, and referential calques that are necessary for dealing with the anisomorphism of English and Chinese. In Chapter 11, Fuertes-Olivera envisages the future of specialised dictionaries for learners in connection with Internet reference works. If the Internet is also studied in terms of the three basic types of user situations envisaged by Tarp (2008b), namely, the cognitive, the communicative, and the operational user situation, a typical extra(lexicographical) situation consists of millions of users searching for data from which potential users may retrieve the information needed in specific situations. For example, thousands of “in-house” on-line glossaries or specialised dictionaries are found on the Internet which aim at meeting the needs of workers and/or customers of a particular institution. On many occasions, these are compiled in defiance of lexicographical traditions and practices. The first task for incorporating these Internet reference works into a lexicographical theory is to place them within current electronic dictionary typologies. Fuertes-Olivera follows De Schryver’s (2003) seminal work and introduces three specific questions regarding the classification of Internet dictionaries: who has compiled the dictionary?, is the dictionary free or accessible through subscription?, and for whom has the dictionary been compiled? Answering these three questions allows Fuertes-Olivera to differentiate between institutional Internet reference works and collective free multiple-language Internet reference works, each of which can be further subdivided into more fine-grained categories. For example, institutional Internet reference works can be restricted or free. In this chapter, Fuertes-Olivera discusses specific lexicographical requirements that socalled free institutional Internet reference works must have in order to be of any help for potential learners. For example, lemma selection must be based on the criterion of relevance and not on the frequency, as terms are always essential in specialised communication whatever their frequency. Furthermore, Fuertes-Olivera also offers specific proposals regarding the treatment of indications of meaning that must be adapted to the following factors: (i) the number of languages covered by the dictionary; (ii) the possible existence of cultural similarities or differences between languages; (iii) the inclusion of devices signalling the existence of semantic relationships; (iv) the inclusion of a dictionary grammar and a maximising word list; (v) the elimination of opaque language (for example, abbreviations, codes, etc.); (v) the use of friendly access-structures; (vi) the inclusion of special information about the subject field. Finally, Fuertes-Olivera comments on specific Internet requirements for these reference works by insisting on the idea that access to online lexicographical data must be easy,


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

quick, and cheap. For example, free institutional Internet specialised dictionaries must pay attention to the theoretical considerations discussed by Almind / Bergenholtz (2000) as well as providing friendly search engines, updated data, proper hypertextuality and digitalization functionalities, be integrated in teaching packages (or cross-refer potential users to these packages), and offer smart searches. All in all, the book offers a unity of purpose by insisting on three main ideas. First, there is a need and a market for specialised dictionaries for learners. For example, business English courses around the world are so popular that new teaching materials are coming onto the market year after year (for some publishing houses, they are the hot sales). Second, most of the existing specialised dictionaries are not adequate for learners for very different reasons, some of which are explained in detail in this book. Third, we need a sound theoretical framework for coping with the challenges posed by the advent of pedagogical specialised lexicography (Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas-Baño, 2008). Perhaps a combination of function theory and current practices in general learners’ dictionaries (Tarp, 2008a), as well as recent technological developments (e.g., the Internet), offer possible solutions to known (and unknown) challenges. This was Enrique Alcaraz’s driving force during his life. Hence, his memory deserves this book, although only two of the authors met him in person on a regular basis.


CHAPTER 1. LSP Lexicography or Terminography? The lexicographer’s point of view Henning Bergenholtz / Sven Tarp

Abstract The dividing line between specialised lexicography and terminography is non-existent. The focus of preparing dictionaries for a particular subject-field should be the needs of its user group in specific situations. This is catered for by the modern theory of dictionary functions and includes the introduction of subject-field components (i.e., systematic introductions) in dictionaries. Dictionary functions are communication-orientated or cognition-orientated, and the lexicographers must identify the relevant functions and select and present the data so that the dictionary satisfies the needs of the users. Key Words: TERMINOLOGY; SPECIALISED LEXICOGRAPHY; USER NEEDS; TRANSLATION; RECEPTION; SYSTEMATIC INTRODUCTION.

1.1.  Lexicography vs. terminography The title of this contribution is not our choice but the proposal of the editor. As you will learn from our argumentation there is no real “lexicographical point of view”. On the contrary, in practice the majority of scholars dealing with lexicography fully agree with the majority of terminographers. Most lexicographers understand lexicography as part of linguistics and write scientific contributions about dictionaries (metalexicographers) or prepare concrete dictionaries (practical lexicographers) as work – in their opinion – in the field of applied linguistics or in the part of applied linguistics called practical lexicology: A la hora de distinguir entre terminología y lexicografía, la mayoría de los autores suelen establecer una correspondencia paralela entre, por un lado, lexicología, disciplina que se ocupa del estudio y descripción del lexicón de una lengua y la lexicografía, concebida como la rama aplicada de la lexicología centrada en la elaboración de diccionarios, y por otro, terminología, área de estudio teórico y metodológico y terminografía, vertiente aplicada de la terminología, encargada de la elaboración de diccionarios especializados. De esta forma la lexicología es a la terminología lo que la lexicografía a la terminografía. (Pérez Hernández, 2002, ch. 3.3 Terminografía y lexicografía). [When distinguishing between terminology and lexicography, most scholars tend to establish a correspondence between, on the one hand, lexicology and lexicography, and terminology and terminography on the other hand. Lexicology studies and describes the lexicon of a language whereas lexicography, which is presented as applied lexicology, is concerned with compiling dictionaries. Similarly, terminology describes specialised languages theoretically and methodologically and terminography builds specialised dictionaries]. (editor’s adaptation).


Henning Bergenholtz / Sven Tarp

We find such arguments peculiar when referring to people dealing with special fields like music lexicography or molecular lexicography (like the two authors of this contribution). But we have some understanding for the claims based on the fact that most metalexicographers belong to linguistics departments at universities all over the world. So in reality, most of our linguistics colleagues writing contributions to lexicography do not deal with specialised dictionaries or with encyclopaedias. They see – often without saying this explicitly – specialised dictionaries giving help to reception problems or providing data for a deeper understanding of a part of a specialised field or a certain term; they do not see such tools as the object of lexicography but of terminography. Terminographers, on the other hand, have taken such an approach for granted – also with reference to many general language dictionaries with misleading or wrong data about terms from different specialised fields. Terminographers agree with most lexicographers that terminography is quite distinct from lexicography, employing statements like – Lexicography deals with the description of general-language words, whereas terminography concentrates on the description of LSP terms. – As opposed to lexicographers, who work with an alphabetic macrostructure, terminologists prefer a systematic macrostructure. – Terminology is prescriptive, whereas lexicography is descriptive. – The target group of terminology is the expert, whereas in lexicography it is the layman. – While terminologists aim to help users encode texts, lexicographers aim to help users decode them. – In terminography they only use academic experts as informants, whereas lexicography can use any native speaker. – Terminographers use computers and data bases, their results being mainly presented as electronical dictionaries also called terminological databases. However, lexicographers only present their results as printed dictionaries. – Terminographers prepare tools for text production, lexicographers for text reception and translation. – Terminographers only work with synchronic methods, lexicographers with diachronic ones. – In terminography there is no polysemy, but sometimes more than one term for one concept. In lexicography, on the other hand, you find polysemy. – In terminography they have a systematic field as a starting point for the whole terminographical work, in lexicography they deal with each word unsystematically. – In terminography concept relations are described, whereas lexicographers use linguistic methods. – In terminology they work with concepts and terms and not with language signs. All those arguments can easily be rejected, for instance, Bergenholtz / Tarp (1995: 10–11), Bergenholtz (1995a, 1995b), Bergenholtz / Kaufmann (1997), Bergenholtz (1998), Bergenholtz / Nielsen (2006) and Tarp (2008a: 4–13). Some of them can only be explained historically, e.g., that only terminographers and not lexicographers use computers. There are only two arguments left: (1) Terminographers make tools for experts for text production, lexicographers for laymen for text reception.

LSP Lexicography or Terminography? The lexicographer’s point of view


(2) Lexicographers make dictionaries with an alphabetical macrostructure, terminographers use a systematic one. The first argument is the topic of this contribution (see below). Here we will only say that the real difference between the results of terminography and lexicography is not so clear because lexicographers normally make conceptions for multifunctional dictionaries, not taking their starting point in user needs (Bergenholtz / Tarp, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and Tarp, 2008a). The second argument is valid only for the majority of printed dictionaries made by lexicographers, but not all of them. Nor are we so sure that the majority of terminolographical work has resulted in tools with a systematic macrostructure. In reality, terminographers have taken for granted that they primarily make terminography data bases. Data bases have no macrostructure at all. But both terminographers and lexicographers can offer tools which could present two or more dictionary articles in an alphabetical or a systematic way, depending on the needs of the user and, of course, such a choice is made possible in the user interface. We still see terminography as a synonym of specialised lexicography. Not all colleagues agree, nor the majority of lexicographers, who see lexicography as a part of linguistics, and most terminographers neither, who claim there are large but unclear differences in relation to specialised lexicography. In reality, it is a discussion about something else, about research funding, about influence and positions at universities, and about defending a position concerning two traditions in making tools to solve exactly the same types of problems.

1.2.  The concept of user needs During the last 15 years, an integrated lexicographic theory has been developed by researchers at the Centre for Lexicography at the Aarhus School of Business, Denmark. This theory, known as the function theory, is characterised by a concept of user needs where the needs, by definition, are related not only to a specific type of users, but also to the specific type of social situation where this type of user may have a specific type of lexicographically relevant needs that may lead to dictionary consultation. Following this logic, both general dictionaries and specialised dictionaries are considered utility tools conceived to satisfy specific types of human needs. The function theory is applied not only to what are frequently called general dictionaries, but also to specialised dictionaries. In this respect, scholars at the Centre for Lexicography have on various occasions argued that they see no fundamental difference between specialised dictionaries, in the narrow sense of the word, and the various user-oriented products of terminology, frequently called terminography (see e.g. Bergenholtz / Kaufmann, 1997). Whatever methods and techniques are used in their conception, production and final presentation, they are all utility tools whose quality (i.e. usefulness) can be analysed and evaluated according to the function theory. However, during the last few years scholars coming from both the field of lexicography and terminology have criticised the function theory for doing quite the opposite, i.e.


Henning Bergenholtz / Sven Tarp

producing a gap between the two types of utility tools (see e.g. Humbley, 2002; Wiegand, 2004). In order to refute a criticism, which the authors of this article consider to be unjust, of a theory that, quite the contrary, is the possible common ground of both lexicography and terminography, we will present the basic premises of this theory and argue that “the dividing line between specialised lexicography and terminography is non-existent“ (Bergenholtz / Nielsen, 2006: 281). Humbley (2002) argues that user-orientation is an approach which is increasingly at the core of both lexicography and terminography: Dictionaries, and more particularly specialist dictionaries, are ever increasingly being adapted to correspond more closely to users’ needs. This has been made possible by advances in information technology which open up new possibilities, some of which are reviewed here, along with the responses from lexicographers and terminologists. (Humbley 2002: 95)

In fact, the idea that dictionaries should be based on their users is not new. For instance, at the end of a classic conference on lexicography in 1960, Fred W. Householder made a famous recommendation that has been quoted repeatedly ever since, not least in Englishlanguage lexicography: Dictionaries should be designed with a special set of users in mind and for their specific needs. (Householder 1967: 279)

It is hard to disagree with this recommendation. But it lacks one vital factor that makes it difficult to use in practice, and which therefore allows far too much latitude for subjective interpretations and preferences. The needs of potential users are left in a vacuum. No user has specific needs unless they are related to a specific type of situation. Consequently, it is not enough to define which types of users have which needs, but also the types of social situations in which these needs may arise should be defined. However, not all such situations are relevant for lexicography; only situations in which needs may arise that can be satisfied by consulting dictionaries. This close relation between types of users, types of social situations and types of user needs is the very nucleus of the lexicographic function theory. In this respect, a lexicographical function is defined as the satisfaction of the specific types of lexicographically relevant needs that may arise in a specific type of potential user in a specific type of extralexicographical situation (Tarp, 2008a). According to this definition, each type of user in combination with each type of user situation triggers a separate lexicographic function. A specific dictionary may have one, two or several such functions. In order to produce a high-quality dictionary – but also to review such a dictionary in a qualified way – it is not enough to discuss and look at the dictionary “in itself”, i.e., in terms of the data contained, access routes and overall design. If this discussion is not related to the intended or declared functions of the dictionary, it runs the risk of derailing and turning into some academic exercise relevant to anybody but the users. Many theoretical contributions discussing user needs do not relate these needs to specific types of users with specific types of needs. In most cases, the needs are determined with reference to user research without taking into account the specific characteristics of each type of user. In this way, the specific needs are once more losing the battle to the abstract needs.

LSP Lexicography or Terminography? The lexicographer’s point of view


In order to draw a lexicographically relevant profile of potential dictionary users, a number of criteria should be taken into account: – – – – – – – – –

What is the mother tongue of the users? To what extent do they master their mother tongue? To what extent do they master a specific foreign language? To what extent do they master a specific LSP in their mother tongue? To what extent do they master a specific LSP in a foreign language? How much experience of translation do they have? How great is their general cultural knowledge? How great is their knowledge of culture in a specific foreign-language area? How much do they know about a specific subject or science?

On the basis of these nine criteria, which are the most important lexicographically relevant criteria, it is possible to draw up a user typology related to a specific dictionary. A similar methodology should be used in order to determine the lexicographically relevant user situations, which are frequently called extra-lexicographic as they should be conceptually separated from dictionary use situations. These use situations are traditionally divided into cognitive and communicative situations (although recently also a third type of situation, the so-called operational situation, has been discovered, cf. Tarp, 2008b). Cognitive situations refer to those where the users need (for one reason or another) to add to their existing knowledge, e.g., about a specific topic or a specific LSP, whereas communicative situations refer to situations where they have doubts or problems. There are various such communicative situations, of which the most important are: – – – – – – –

production of text in the mother tongue, reception of text in the mother tongue, production of text in a foreign language, reception of text in a foreign language, translation of text from the mother tongue into a foreign language, translation of text from a foreign language into the mother tongue, translation of text from one foreign language into another.

In each of these seven types of user situations, a user with specific characteristics may have specific types of needs that can be met by consulting the lexicographic data contained in well-conceived dictionaries with easy access routes. In this way, the user needs, which are no longer defined as an abstractum, are the starting point that determines the data selection, access routes and overall design of a given dictionary.

1.3.  An example: translation Translation, which constitutes three of the seven most important user situations mentioned above, has particular relevance for specialised dictionaries, no matter whether they are


Henning Bergenholtz / Sven Tarp

produced by specialists calling themselves lexicographers or terminologists. This frequent type of user situation may serve as an example in order to illustrate how a specific dictionary is based on the type of needs related to a specific user situation. Humbley (2002) takes a pair of dictionary twins – i.e. the ENGLISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY and the SPANISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY – as the starting point for his reflections on the new relations between dictionaries and users, and Humbley (2003) makes a review of the same dictionaries. Both dictionaries are polyfunctional, as they are designed to meet the needs of a variety of different user types embracing both English and Spanish mother-tongue speakers, both experts and semi-experts, in a number of different social situations where lexicographically relevant needs may occur, among them two cognitive situations: – information on subjects related to molecular biology, – information about Spanish and English molecular biology language usage, as well as the following six communicative situations, which are the most important situations addressed by the two dictionaries: – – – – – –

reception of Spanish molecular biology texts, production of Spanish molecular biology texts, reception of English molecular biology texts, production of English molecular biology texts, translation of Spanish molecular biology texts into English, translation of English molecular biology texts into Spanish.

It is assumed that, up to a certain level, the potential users are familiar with scientific language usage both in English and Spanish and possess a minimum of scientific knowledge. Just like magazines such as Scientific American, the dictionaries have been conceived for users with a particular interest in scientific subjects, i.e., they are not designed for ordinary laypeople. Special knowledge of molecular biology is therefore not presupposed, but some basic knowledge of science and a special interest in the field’s scientific processes and results are. What are the possible user needs during the translation process? This is a complex question with a complex answer because translation requires both cognitive and communicative user skills and is composed of several possible phases and sub-phases. Firstly, the translators need a basic knowledge about the specialised field related to the text in question. If they do not have such knowledge, they frequently prepare themselves by reading about the subject before starting the translation in the narrow sense of the word. For this specific and frequent need of many translators, the two dictionaries mentioned above contain a special encyclopaedic section (both in English and Spanish) of more than 40 pages, which gives a systematic introduction to the field of molecular biology and which the translators can study in whole or in part in order to prepare themselves for the subsequent translation. Of course, this encyclopaedic section can also be used for other user-relevant purposes, but the very decision to include it in the dictionaries was the result of a study of the dictionary functions and the real needs of the anticipated user group.

LSP Lexicography or Terminography? The lexicographer’s point of view


Secondly, from the point of view of lexicography, the translation process consists of various phases that require different kinds of lexicographic solutions in order to satisfy the users’, that is, the translators’ needs. The first phase is the reading and understanding of the text. In this phase the users need a monolingual or bilingual solution based upon the same language as the text and including explanations and / or equivalents in their mother tongue (if the text is written in a foreign language). Such explanations and equivalents may be found in the mentioned pair of dictionaries, whether in English or Spanish. The second phase is the transfer phase, in which the translator may need a bilingual solution, either from one or the other language, containing the terms and collocations in the source language as well as their equivalents in the target language and, in the case of two or more possible equivalents, the necessary meaning differentiation that allows the users to select the appropriate equivalent. All these data can be found in the two dictionaries. The third phase is the production in the target language. In this phase the translator may need grammatical and syntactic information on the terms – including collocations and quotations – in the target language. In this respect, the more grammatical and syntactic data and the more collocations and quotations a translation dictionary contains, the better it can fulfil its function. However, many declared translation dictionaries do not contain such data, a fact that reduces their quality considerably. But the two dictionaries discussed in this article do include such data, which can be seen in the following two English-Spanish and Spanish-English articles, dealing with the same concept in the two languages: (1)  Article from the ENGLISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY gel gel m A gel is an apparently solid, often jellylike material formed on standing or heating and cooling of a colloidal solution of certain macromolecules, i.e. collagen or agarose. A gel offers little resistance to liquid diffusion and may contain as little as 0.5% or less of solid material. Agarose and similar polysaccharides are used for gel electrophoresis of DNA fragments and gel chromatography of proteins, and polyacrylamide gels are widely used for electrophoretic separation of proteins. ▲ the collapse of a ~ el colapso de un ~; a cross-linked ~ of polyacrylamide un ~ entrecruzado de poliacrilamida; the osmotic pressure of the ~ la presión osmótica del ~; ~ pattern patrón del ~; the physical properties of a ~ las propiedades físicas de un ~; silica ~ sílica ~; a swollen ~ un ~ hinchado  gel electrophoresis; gel chromatography

(2)  Article from the SPANISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY gel m gel Un gel es un material aparentemente sólido, a menudo gelatinoso, que se forma al dejar en reposo o al calentar o enfriar una solución coloidal de ciertas macromoléculas, es decir, colágeno o agarosa. Un gel ofrece poca resistencia a la difución de los líquidos y puede contener la exigua cantidad de 0.5% o menos de material sólido. La agarosa y los polisacáridos similares se utilizan en la electroforesis en gel de fragmentos de ADN y la cromatografía en gel de proteínas, y los geles de poliacrilamida tienen amplia utilización para la separación electroforética de proteínas. ▲ el colapso de un ~ the collapse of a ~; un ~ entrecruzado de poliacrilamida a crosslinked ~ of polyacrylamide; la presión osmótica del ~ the osmotic pressure of the ~;


Henning Bergenholtz / Sven Tarp patrón del ~ ~ pattern; las propiedades físicas de un ~ the physical properties of a ~; sílica ~ sílica ~; un ~ hinchado a swollen ~  electroforesis en gel; cromatografía en gel

In the English dictionary the user can also find English quotations (marked with a bullet ●), but not their translation, which are found in the Spanish dictionary. This solution was chosen to save space in the printed dictionary. Today we may say that the solution was not very user-friendly: (3)  Article from the ENGLISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY gene activity actividad f génica Genes show activity, or are expressed, when they are transcribed and, in the case of protein genes, translated. ● The identification and mapping of genes by genetic analysis depends on noting and tracking mutations that interfere with a gene‘s activity without killing the organism. ▲ inhibit ~ inhibir la ~; the switching of ~ el cambio de

As can be seen, the anticipated user group of translators, with a relatively high foreignlanguage proficiency level and certain knowledge of scientific language usage, may find useful information in these articles in the case of problems and doubts during the various phases of the translation process. In fact, the only important data that are not included in the dictionaries are data on countable and uncountable English nouns and this, of course, must be considered a disadvantage for the users. But in comparison with the majority of specialised dictionaries conceived and used to assist translation, the ENGLISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY and the SPANISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY provide a lot of data that are absolutely necessary to the potential user, i.e. the translator of specialised texts. And the reason for this is not that the group of authors and collaborators have more knowledge about the subject than other authors of specialised lexicographic or terminological dictionaries, but that they have been guided by a theory based on the analysis of the real needs that a specific type of potential dictionary user may have in a specific social situation, in this case the translation of specialised texts.

1.4.  An example: reception There is a long tradition of differentiating between laypeople and experts, but a much more detailed classification can also be made (Kalverkämper, 1990). In this context we will adopt a rather rough classification, which distinguishes between laypeople, semi-experts, and experts. By laypeople is meant potential dictionary users who have no knowledge of the basic theories of a specialised field, here biotechnology, or the basic knowledge only, which corresponds to a general understanding on the part of those who have done higher education. We have chosen to make this description rather vague and it covers a wide range of knowledge. The group must be distinguished from the group of semi-experts, who also

LSP Lexicography or Terminography? The lexicographer’s point of view


constitute a heterogeneous group but with a higher level of knowledge. These are experts from other related subject fields, in this case, physicians, biologists, biochemists, veterinary physicians, etc., and those workers in the public and private sector who are confronted daily with biotechnological information. They may be general advisers on science and technology whose daily job is to advise politicians at municipal or county level. They may also be journalists on local or national newspapers who are confronted with this controversial subject on a regular basis. One can also imagine certain politicians and other decision makers who have made themselves so familiar with biotechnology that they may be regarded as semi-experts. Usually, however, these groups – like many journalists – would be regarded as educated laypeople at best. Finally, in terms of biotechnological subfields which are far removed from the specialised knowledge of an expert, biotechnological experts must also be described as semi-experts. A true expert will have no reception problems within his own field. He may have to acquire new knowledge, but he is not likely to find this in any lexicographical dictionary. For the interested layman, i.e., for the user who does not have or does not think he has any basic knowledge of biology and chemistry, we have proposed some entries (Bergenholtz / Kaufmann, 1997). The information has been chosen in such a way that molecular biological functions have been focused upon. If the user has no idea whatsoever of what the abbreviation RNA, means the following dictionary article would give the necessary data: (4)  Excerpts from the ENGLISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY RNA term for a group of molecules belonging to the nucleic acids. RNA is very important in metabolism and reproduction of the cells. It plays a key role in protein synthesis since protein composition depends on a definite code or receipt. Every code is a very little part of the complete genetic material of the cell: DNA. DNA represents a group of nucleic acids different from RNA. RNA is the abbreviation for ribonucleic acid.

Semi-experts are not necessarily given more detailed encyclopaedic information, but the description is of a more technical nature and it uses a terminology which presupposes a certain basic knowledge of molecular biology. The following dictionary article will to some extent only be a reminder for some semi-experts, but it gives the most necessary data if some of the arguments in a specialised text about RNAs are unclear: (5)


RNA RNA is the abbreviation for ribonucleic acid. It is a linear polymer composed of nucleotides. RNA molecules are much smaller in size than DNA because they are copies of limited DNA areas. For example tRNAs contain 70–80 nucleotides and the average length of an mRNA molecule is about 2,500 bases. For comparison the human diploid genome length is about 6 109 basepairs distributed over 46 DNA molecules (chromatine structures) with an average length of about 4.3 cm. The RNA nucleotides contain bases (purines and pyrimidines), as well as carbohydrates in the form of the pentose sugar ribose. In addition to the purines, adenine and guanine,


Henning Bergenholtz / Sven Tarp and pyrimidines, cytosine and uracil, there are other, rare bases occurring with low frequencies. The nucleotides are joined with phosphodiester linkages connecting the 5’C atom in the first nucleotide with the 3’C atom in the second one. In general RNAs are single-stranded but some areas can exhibit a double-stranded structure e.g. in tRNA there are always four double-stranded regions forming hairpin loops. RNA consists of three main classes: transfer RNA, tRNA, messenger RNA, mRNA, and ribosomal RNA, rRNA. In eukaryotic organisms the messenger RNA is processed from its precursor hnRNA. All operative RNAs are modifications of primary transcripts. In translation tRNA is the amino acid carrier forming aminoacyl-tRNA, mRNA contains the genetic code that is translated into the amino acid sequence and rRNAs are building blocks in the two subunits of the ribosomes which bind mRNA and tRNA and catalyses the formation of peptide bonds. RNA is a transcription product of a limited region of DNA, the template sequence. In this area RNA and DNA are complementary and the base pairs are A:U and G:C.

In an electronic dictionary the user could switch between the two versions, defining himself either as a layman or a semi-expert. He may also proceed by the method of trial and error in order to find the level appropriate for the given context on the basis of his own qualifications. In a paper dictionary the easiest way to help the two kinds of user types would be two different molecular dictionaries.

1.5.  Conclusion: It is not important if the cat is white or black – it must be able to catch the mouse For such a multifunctional tool, at the end of the day it is unimportant for the user whether the compilers call themselves terminographers or lexicographers. What is important is the ease and certainty with which the user can find reliable information to fulfil his / her needs. We are not quite sure whether Humbley would support this opinion but we believe he would. But it is also true that he is convinced that terminologists can display better results, also concerning the presentation of data for specific user groups with specific needs. All of his examples are contemplative; they are looking back to finished or ongoing projects: La première, c’est que les approches terminologiques peuvent se compléter – une orientation plutôt lexicographique a été corrigée par l’intervention d’une terminologue qui permet au public plus large d’accéder à la connaissance spécialisée. (Humbley, 2002: 102)

We do indeed know about cooperation between terminologists and experts. But in the end we are not sure that the ability to cooperate is a sufficient condition for a successful result. It is a necessary condition, but the terminographer or the lexicographer should be at least at the knowledge level of a semi-expert in the specialised field – as in the example mentioned with the gene technology dictionary. La seconde, c’est que deux formes d’intervention terminologique ont été nécessaires afin de trouver la solution qui convenait le mieux aux utilisateurs; toutes ne ressemblent pas au dictionnaire classique. (Humbley 2002: 102)

LSP Lexicography or Terminography? The lexicographer’s point of view


That is an argument leaving more questions than answers: Are terminologists or terminographers really interested in the concrete needs of different user groups with different knowledge of the specialised field? The ongoing discussion in terminology journals does not give evidence (with few exceptions, e.g. L’Homme (2006) and Bergenholtz / Nielsen (2006). Most of the metalexicographical contributions do not have such discussions either. In both fields the user is often mentioned, also the promise of userfriendly results, but only seldom is a real discussion of dictionary functions to be found, see Bergenholtz / Tarp (2003). Seen in this light, you could say that the “classical dictionary” is not planned and produced for a specific user group with specific needs, but this is true for lexicographical and for terminographical products too. Le troisième exemple est plutôt une constellation de cas d’utilisation d’une démarche terminologique dans un contexte d’apprentissage. (Humbley 2002: 102)

It is a fact that terminographers have a long tradition of incorporating abstract concept models, but that is not an argument for anything. We find the same types of concept models in specialised dictionaries, not in all of them; but, e.g., in many of those produced at the Centre of Lexicography in Aarhus (e.g. the already mentioned gene technology dictionaries, a music dictionary, an accounting dictionary or in different legal dictionaries). The only interesting question is a different one: For which user situations, for which needs, and for which user types can which abstract concept give valuable help? Dictionaries, terminological databases, lexicons, encyclopaedias – and any other kind of lexicographical handbook – are tools to cover specific needs. In our opinion, terminography and specialised lexicography are synonyms, they have the same object and the same goal. Within terminography and lexicography and between theoreticians and results from these two fields, differences are to be found. The most important difference is this: Is the lexicographical / terminographical product useful for the indented genuine purpose, for the intended dictionary functions? And in which cases do we have metalexicographical / terminographial theories with a superior theory for a tool for specific needs?

CHAPTER 2. Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries Sven Tarp

Abstract The very concept of a specialised learners’ dictionary can only be defined determining the possible lexicographic functions which these dictionaries may have, i.e. the assistance they may provide in order to meet the specific types of lexicographic needs that specific types of users may have in specific types of social situations. Among these four elements that make up the concept of lexicographic functions, the most important and decisive is the user situation which will be analysed in details in the chapter. According to the most recent lexicographic research, there are three basic types of such situations, i.e. the cognitive, communicative and operational user situation where the first is related to the users’ wish or need to add to their existing knowledge whereas the two latter are related to the possible solution of problems caused by the users’ inadequate communicative or operational skills, respectively. Although no learners’ dictionaries providing assistance to the third kind of situation is known, this may change in the future for which reason it will also be discussed and analysed in this chapter. In this respect, it is important to take into account that the specialised learners’ dictionaries are not textbooks designed to be read from one end to another but tools for punctual consultation, and that the essence and common nature of all dictionaries is that they contain quickly and easily accessible data from which the users may retrieve information that can be used for a huge variety of purposes. In this light, it is important to determine how specialised dictionaries can intervene in and assist the learning process of whatever nature it is. For the cognitive functions the answer is relatively simple because it is basically a question of storing the information in the memory as knowledge. However, for the communicative and operational situations the answer is far more complex because information cannot be directly transformed into skills but has to be mediated by means of other processes that will be analysed and related to each other in the chapter. On this basis, the possible functions of specialised learners’ dictionaries will be presented and discussed in detail with the aim of presenting ideas for developing specialised learners’ dictionaries of a new type, designed to assist users in both the learning of practical skills and the acquisition of knowledge about a specific subject field. Key Words: LEXICOGRAPHIC FUNCTION; SITUATIONS; USER NEEDS


2.1.  Introduction The very concept of a specialised learners’ dictionary can only be defined by determining the possible lexicographic functions which these dictionaries may have. Except for a very few cases (cf. Tarp, 2005), most of the relatively modest theoretical literature dedicated to this kind of dictionaries regards them as those conceived to assist the learning of a specialised language and does not consider other possible functions. This is, for instance, the way they are dealt with by Moulin (1983), Frawley (1988), Binon / Verlinde (1999), Bogaards (2002) and Fuertes Olivera (2005).


Sven Tarp

This use of the term specialised learners’ dictionary corresponds to the general use of the broader term learners’ dictionary which, in the lexicographic literature, usually refers to dictionaries conceived for language learners, especially learners of a second or foreign language. This approach may seem surprising inasmuch as the term learner is frequently used in a much broader sense outside lexicography where it refers to learners of a huge variety of practical and theoretical disciplines. In this respect, learners can be subdivided into those learning skills and those acquiring knowledge, although modern educational methods, in most cases, combine the learning of skills with a certain acquisition of related knowledge, and vice versa. This distinction between skills and knowledge is important for modern lexicography because it helps to focus on the different roles dictionaries may play in the learning process, and it will therefore be discussed later in this contribution. Users always consult a dictionary in order to «learn» something, i.e., to get information which can later be used for a number of purposes. In this very broad sense of the word, it could be argued that all dictionaries in one way or another are learners’ dictionaries. However, in order to avoid diluting the very concept of a learners’ dictionary, a distinction should be made between dictionaries conceived to assist an on-going learning process and those conceived to satisfy users’ spontaneous needs with no relation to a specific learning process. Only the former type of dictionary should be considered a learners’ dictionary in the narrow sense of the word. Thus, a learners’ dictionary could be defined as a dictionary compiled with the genuine purpose of assisting users engaged in an on-going learning process. The above definition is a very broad one and needs to be further specified. As already mentioned, there are various types of learning processes. Apart from that, there are also various types of learners who may find themselves in various types of situations related to each of these. For this reason they may be expected to have different types of needs which, for their part, require different types of lexicographic data in order to be satisfied. Consequently, the concept of a learners’ dictionary includes a number of different types of dictionaries with different functions in terms of fulfilling the needs of the various types of users (learners) in the various types of situations, respectively. These functions will be discussed below with focus on specialised dictionaries, i.e., dictionaries related to a specific topic, discipline or science as opposed to general dictionaries, which deal with general encyclopedic knowledge or language. But before doing so, it is convenient to make a short incursion into some basic questions that make up the very essence of lexicography.

2.2.  The essence of lexicography Lexicographic thinking and theory building during the last hundred years or more have increasingly focused on users and their needs. User-orientation and user-friendliness have been at the centre of most of the competing theoretical paradigms developed during this period. As a result, dictionaries have increasingly been regarded as utility products produced with the genuine purpose of meeting the various needs of potential user groups. However, a major problem has been to determine the nature of these needs and, consequently, the real content of the concept of user-friendliness. It goes without saying that the concrete user

Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries


needs will be extremely diverse but, on the other hand, it is also evident that not all human needs can be satisfied by means of dictionaries. The goal is therefore to define the fundamental and common nature of the lexicographically relevant user needs. In this regard, when an abstraction is made from the huge variety of specific user needs, it is found that user needs in terms of lexicography are always information needs. Dictionaries are not the only written sources that provide assistance to people with information needs. Newspapers, journals, magazines, books, and internet-based texts are other such sources. The same holds true for text books. However, dictionaries distinguish themselves in various aspects in comparison with the other text sources. Firstly, almost without exception, dictionaries are not designed to be read from cover to cover, but to be consulted. This means, as a rule, that the needs which they are designed to satisfy are not global information needs, but punctual information needs whether or not these are related to global issues. (This distinction between global and punctual issues was first introduced by Hausmann (1977), who also accepted dictionaries for global issues). Secondly, the user’s information needs in terms of lexicography are never abstract needs, i.e., they are not “just needs”. On the contrary, they are always – or should always be – viewed as concrete needs that are closely related, not just to a concrete user, but to a concrete user finding himself in a concrete situation, e.g., text reception with all its possible problems in terms of understanding and the corresponding needs to obtain assistance to solve these problems. Consequently, user needs in terms of lexicography are always treated as specific types of needs related to specific types of users who find themselves in specific types of extra-lexicographic social situations. As a rule, neither text books nor the other information sources listed above are primarily designed to provide assistance for people with punctual and situation-dependent information needs. Although they are frequently planned to assist a specific type of user, they seldom take into account the various types of social situations where user needs may arise. Besides, they are in most cases conceived to be read right through and this, of course, is reflected in their general structure and accessibility. By analogy, the nature of dictionaries as tools for specific purposes and punctual consultation is also reflected in their overall design and accessibility. In fact, one of the basic characteristics of dictionaries is that they provide – or are expected to provide – quick and easy access to the data from which the required information may be retrieved (Bergenholtz / Gouws, 2007; Nielsen, 2007; Tarp, 2007). The concept of accessibility is a key concept in any lexicographical theory claiming to be user-oriented. However, it could be argued that any data included in any text is accessible to anyone who takes the time to read right through. Other tools, especially browsers connected to the internet, also provide easy access to relevant data but as searching on the internet in most cases produces a lot of redundant material that has to be further processed, it can hardly be considered as quick. In fact, the risk of being suffocated by the overwhelming amount of data and suffering what could be called information death is omnipresent when browsing the internet. Hence, one of the really distinctive features of dictionaries and other lexicographical tools is that they provide quick and easy access to the specific types of data from which a specific type of users can retrieve the information that may cover their specific types of needs in a specific type of extra-lexicographical situation. The differences between text books and lexicographic works conceived to assist a learning process should be viewed in this light.


Sven Tarp

To sum up, the essence of lexicography is its capacity to conceive and produce utility tools that can be consulted by specific types of users in order to acquire the type of information they may need in specific types of situations. By analogy, the essence of learners’ lexicography is its capacity to conceive and produce utility tools that can be consulted by specific types of learners in order to satisfy their punctual information needs related to an on-going global learning process.

2.3.  The concept of a lexicographic function Before proceeding to a discussion of the various types of lexicographically relevant situations related to the learning process, it is convenient to specify what is meant by lexicographic function, a term which has increasingly been used in the theoretical literature on dictionaries in the last fifteen years or so. This step is even more necessary when we consider that function is apparently being used in its daily colloquial sense, i.e., without a clear definition. As Wiegand (2001) rightly points out, it is necessary that lexicographic theory base itself upon clearly defined concepts and terms. Any such definition derives from the fact that a dictionary is an object of use, so answers must be provided to the following questions: what can a dictionary be used for, who can use it, and when can it be used? Along these lines, the modern function theory defines a lexicographic function in the following way: A lexicographical function is the satisfaction of the specific types of lexicographically relevant need that may arise in a specific type of potential user in a specific type of extra-lexicographical situation. (Tarp, 2008a: 81)

This definition includes four basic elements which require the following comments: – The first element – satisfaction – refers to a dictionary’s nature as an object of use, in other words to the assistance it can provide for a potential user. However, it says nothing about how this assistance can be provided. But as already indicated, this assistance involves the selection and presentation of easily and quickly accessible data from which the needed information can be extracted. – The second element – the specific types of lexicographically relevant need that may arise – refers to what a dictionary can be used for: to cover lexicographically relevant needs. So the definition excludes other types of need such as reading glasses, printer cartridges for printing purposes, antivirus programs to ensure that the computer works, etc.; in other words, needs which must be covered in other ways. In addition, this formulation underlines that the relevant needs are not compulsory, but possible needs that may arise in the potential user. – The third element – in a specific type of potential user – refers to who may benefit from using a dictionary. The definition explains that dictionaries are not only viewed in relation to actual users, but in relation to potential users, i.e.; everyone who may have a

Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries


certain type of need that can be resolved lexicographically. And it also explains that these potential users have to be divided into types, because not everyone has the same types of need in the same types of situation. In addition, the definition underlines that lexicographically relevant needs are not abstract but associated with certain types of potential user. – The fourth element – in a specific type of extra-lexicographical situation – refers to when a dictionary can be used, i.e., in a specific situation. The definition explains that this situation is extra-or pre-lexicographical and therefore not necessarily related to an actual dictionary consultation. It also explains that lexicographically relevant needs are not only associated with a specific type of user, but that these users are also characterised by the fact that they are in specific situations, which is why their needs must be seen in relation to these situations. The above four elements do not have the same status. The satisfaction refers to the lexicographic work, and is achieved by means of the accessible and lexicographically selected and prepared types of data which correspond to the specific types of user needs that may lead to a lexicographic consultation. For their part, these needs depend completely on the type of user and the type of situation in which they may occur. Furthermore, experience has indicated that the type of situation is more important than the type of user when determining the needs. In this respect, Tarp (2006) has shown that the criteria, upon which the user typology is made, vary from situation to situation and, consequently, that the relevant user typology is to some extent determined by the type of extra-lexicographical situation. For this reason, the starting point in order to determine the functions of specialised learners’ dictionaries is necessarily an analysis of the various types of situations where lexicographic needs may arise.

2.4.  The learning process At the beginning of this contribution it was indicated that the learning process can be subdivided into two different types of learning, i.e., the learning of skills and the acquisition of knowledge. These two fundamental types of learning can be further subdivided into a number of learning processes in terms of what is learned and how it is learned. For instance, the learning or acquisition of knowledge can take place as a systematic process related to a specific study program or as a sporadic process where the need to add to the existing knowledge only occurs from time to time. However, much more complicated is the learning of skills which may be subdivided into two basic categories, i.e., the learning of communicative or linguistic skills and the learning of practical skills. The first subtype, which is the one that has been most extensively discussed in the lexicographic literature, refers to the learning of a number of skills that enable the person to engage in the different phases of the communication process. The most important of these skills are text reception skills, text production skills and translation skills which can be further subdivided according to the type of text in question and the language, or languages, involved:


Sven Tarp 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

reception of written general texts in the mother tongue, reception of oral general texts in the mother tongue, reception of written specialised texts in the mother tongue, reception of oral specialised texts in the mother tongue, production of written general texts in the mother tongue, production of oral general texts in the mother tongue, production of written specialised texts in the mother tongue, production of oral specialised texts in the mother tongue, reception of written general texts in a foreign language, reception of oral general texts in a foreign language, reception of written specialised texts in a foreign language, reception of oral specialised texts in a foreign language, production of written general texts in a foreign language, production of oral general texts in a foreign language, production of written specialised texts in a foreign language, production of oral specialised texts in a foreign language, translation of written general texts into a foreign language, translation of oral general texts into a foreign language, translation of written specialised texts into a foreign language, translation of oral specialised texts into a foreign language, translation of written general texts into the mother tongue, translation of oral general texts into the mother tongue, translation of written specialised texts into the mother tongue, translation of oral specialised texts into the mother tongue.

As to the practical skills, these refer to the learning of various types of manual or intellectual skills, for example, brick-laying, the operation of a machine, the placement of a dental filling, the preparation of the annual accounts, etc. As can be seen, the skills mentioned are both those which are related to the traditional “manual” and blue-collar jobs, and those related to the practical dimension of various academic disciplines, e.g., stomatology and accounting. They all have two separate and interdependent components, i.e., the ability to interpret the situation by means of observation and the ability to take action when necessary. These two components or subtypes of skills may be called interpretive skills and operative skills, respectively. In this way, the various types and subtypes of learning can be illustrated as follows: learning knowledge systematic

skills sporadic


practical interpretive




Figure 1.  Schematic illustration of various learning types and subtypes.


Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries


2.5.  Knowledge versus skills It is important to avoid mixing the two categories of knowledge and skills, respectively, and confusing them as frequently happens in the lexicographic and other types of theoretical literature. One person may have a perfect theoretical knowledge within a given subject field without possessing the corresponding practical skills, and vice versa. A sports writer may know everything that is worth knowing about a certain discipline, e.g. cycling, without being able to ride a bicycle and, even less, to climb the mountains and participate in one of the big tours, whereas a professional cyclist may not have the necessary historical and theoretical knowledge to say anything constructive about his own profession. The two types of professionals acquire their respective knowledge and skills in different ways; the former by researching, reading, observing and interviewing and the latter by training, training and training (normally combined with some theoretical lessons). The same holds true for the relation between linguistic knowledge and linguistic skills. All normal adults have excellent linguistic skills and are perfectly able to communicate in their mother tongue, but only a minority of them may have theoretical knowledge about this language. On the other hand, it is perfectly possible to have gained knowledge about a given language without being able to speak it. Lingustic knowledge and linguistic skills are not normally two categories that are contrasted with each other. In fact, it is necessary to go all the way back to the Age of Enlightenment to find an explanation that might help to clarify the two concepts and their mutual relationship. In his book Der Junge Gelehrte, the German author Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, described a conversation between the young, well-read and somewhat pompous Damis and his more prosaic but somewhat simple servant Anton. The conversation, which follows a tradition that can be traced back to the relationship between the well-read, starryeyed don Quixote and his faithful, crafty esquire Sancho Panza, is about language: Damis. (…) Latin, Greek, Hebrew, French, English, Italian – – these are six languages that I have all mastered completely, and I am only twenty years old! Anton. Slow down! You have forgotten one: German – – Damis. That is true, my dear Anton; so that is seven languages, and I am only twenty years old! Anton. My God! You must be joking. You wouldn’t count the fact that you know German as part of your scholarly achievement? I wasn’t serious. – – Damis. And so you probably think you know German yourself? Anton. I? I? not German! It would be damned funny if I spoke Kalmuk and didn’t know it. Damis. There is a difference between knowing and knowing. You know German, which means you can express your thoughts with sounds that are understandable to a German; that is, which awaken the same thoughts in him that you have. But you do not know German, which means you do not know what is common or low in this language, crude or agreeable, unclear or understandable, old or typical; you do not know its rules; you have no academic knowledge of it. Anton. The things scholars would have one believe! If it were a matter of your definitions, I believe you would even dispute the fact that I can eat.


Sven Tarp

Damis. Eat? Truthfully, if I consider it exactly, in fact you can’t. Anton. I? I cannot eat? And I probably can’t drink either, right? Damis. You know how to eat, which means you can cut up the food, put it in your mouth, chew, swallow and so on. You do not know how to eat, which means you do not know the mechanical laws according to which eating takes place; you do not know the function of one of the muscles involved; whether the digastric muscle or the masseter, the internal or the external pterygoid, the zygomaticus or the platysma myode or – – Anton. Oh, nonsense! All that matters to me is whether my stomach gets something out of it and whether it agrees with me. (…) (Lessing 1747:8-9, translation by Nick Wrigley) Lessing draws a clear line in the sand between simple language skills (the ability to express yourself in a language) and learned knowledge of a language. Few people who have learned their mother tongue as children have a conscious, systematic knowledge of this language. For instance, many people are unable to explain the precise meaning of individual words or to formulate the grammatical rules which they are unconsciously and automatically able to use correctly. So when Lessing allows Damis to confuse Anton because Anton knows German but does not know anything about German, he is making an important point. With equal justification and based on the same logic, he could also have allowed Anton to tease Damis with the accusation that although Damis might have known something about Latin, Greek, Hebrew, French, English and Italian, he probably did not know all these foreign languages well enough to express his thoughts freely in any of them. However, any such comment would have gone against the prevailing spirit of an age when people firmly believed that knowledge could solve and explain all the mysteries and problems in the world. Even though this is true, the comment still shows that linguistic knowledge and linguistic skills can in principle exist independently of each other in the individual, since one person may possess linguistic knowledge without having any linguistic skills (e.g. in a foreign language), while another may possess linguistic skills without any knowledge of the language concerned.

2.6.  Mediating elements The topic of this article is the functions of specialised learners’ dictionaries. It is therefore crucial to discover the situations during the learning process where dictionaries may have a role to play in providing assistance for the learners. In this respect, the easiest situation is the cognitive one, where the learners want to acquire knowledge about a specific subject field, a goal which can be reached by memorising the information retrieved from the lexicographic data and adding it to the existing knowledge. However, much more complicated are the various situations related to the learning of skills, because in these cases the retrieved information cannot be directly transformed into skills, but has to be mediated by something else. And this “something else” can only be discerned by analysing the relation existing between information and knowledge, on the one hand, and skills on the other.


Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries

If we return to the relation between linguistic knowledge and linguistic skills, it is obvious that knowledge of a language depends on at least some people talking and making themselves understood in this language – in other words, language skills precede language knowledge. But does the reverse apply? Can linguistic knowledge lead to linguistic skills as claimed by Lessing and other great thinkers of the Enlightenment? And if so, how does this process work? To answer this question, we need first to consider the relationship between language skills and communication, since it is well known that the learning of a mother tongue is a spontaneous process for most people, requiring no learned knowledge of the language concerned. However, this process does not take place in isolation from all communication with other people. As mentioned above, the basis of language skills is command of the vocabulary and grammar of the language in question, including command of its phonetics. When a mother tongue is learned “naturally”, language skills develop thanks to the parallel assimilation of the vocabulary and grammar of the language. In the beginning was the word. The child listens to adults talking, and gradually discovers what all the words mean. Thanks to this process of reception, passive language skills are developed, which is the precondition of understanding. These passive skills turn into active language skills as children learn to express themselves in words and sentences. So the development of language skills is both an active and a passive process in which communication with other people in the form of reception and production plays the vital role. Language skills are a precondition of communication, and in turn communication is a precondition of language skills. This complex mutual relationship can be illustrated as follows:


improved communication

mother-tongue skills

greater mother-tongue skills

Figure 2.  Relationship between mother-tongue skills and communication.

From the point of view of lexicography, communication is the mediating element through which the information retrieved from the data contained in dictionaries can be transformed into language knowledge. If a person at a certain language level has difficulty in understanding or formulating a mother-tongue text, the solution may be to consult a reception or production dictionary, since the successful communication resulting from this consultation (which is its direct purpose) can reflect on and increase the mother-tongue skills which are always the basic precondition for any successful communication. However, it is important to underline that this reflection on language skills is a possibility and not a necessity, since “not everything looked up is ‘learnt’ in this full sense” (Scholfield, 1999). This possible relationship between a dictionary consultation and language skills, with communication functioning as the mediating element, can be illustrated as follows:


Sven Tarp


dictionary consultation

linguistic skills Figure 3.  Relationship between dictionary consultation, communication and linguistic skills.

In principle, foreign languages can be learned (and in many cases are learned) in the same way as described above – spontaneously, by “natural” learning. But a dual process may also be involved, with foreign-language skills being developed by communication parallel to the conscious study of the vocabulary and grammatical structures of the foreign language concerned – the latter in particular being learned via a system of rules. Between vocabulary and grammar there is a complex dialectical relationship, with words as the foundation and grammar as the derived factor. Viewed in isolation and without grammar, words are barren – they only come to life through grammar, which is their form of existence. On the other hand, grammar without words is an empty, abstract system because grammar only exists through words. So in a living language vocabulary and grammar do not have their own independent existences – they only exist when they use each other. However, in linguistic theory they can be separated from each other and examined by using abstraction, and the knowledge resulting from this examination can be communicated in connection with the study of a foreign language. This communication can take place by teaching, by the autonomous study of textbooks and grammar books, and by consulting dictionaries. The foreign-language knowledge arising in this way is not foreign-language skills. Foreignlanguage knowledge only becomes foreign-language skills if it is internalised – something which also happens with communication as the mediating element. With existing foreignlanguage skills and conscious thought arising from the foreign-language knowledge acquired, learners in a communication situation can decode or formulate a text and thereby activate new words and grammatical phenomena, which in turn reflect on and increase their foreign-language skills with a view to improving future communication. This complex process can be illustrated as follows: other sources

dictionary consultation

foreign-language knowledge

foreign-language skills

foreign-language communication

dictionary consultation

increase foreign-language skills Figure 4.  The foreign-language learning process in a lexicographical perspective.


Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries

In this lexicographically perceived learning process, dictionaries can provide assistance on two levels: indirectly by transmitting knowledge about the foreign language’s vocabulary and grammar (and cultural setting) in connection with the systematic study of the foreign language in question; and directly by providing information that can be used to solve specific problems in the actual process of communication – in connection with foreignlanguage text reception and production (and translation, when relevant). This specific relationship between lexicography and the development of foreign-language skills can be generalised to all types of languages to be learned, among them the specialised languages relevant to this article.

2.7.  Practical situations Inspired by the role of communication as mediator between linguistic information and knowledge, on the one hand, and increased linguistic skills on the other, an analogous type of situation serving as a mediating element between both specialised knowledge and information, together with practical skills could be sought. This mediating element is practice, i.e., practical exercises and training, although the nature of this practice must be determined for each subject field in question. As was the case with the language-learning process, dictionaries or other lexicographic works can assist the learning of practical skills on two levels: indirectly, by transmitting knowledge in connection with a systematic study of the subject field in question – knowledge which can later be used consciously in practical exercises and training – and directly, by providing information that can be used to clarify doubts and solve specific problems related to practical exercises and the training process, in terms of observing, evaluating and interpreting the situation and taking the corresponding operative action. In this way, the knowledge and information extracted in one way or another from lexicographic data and used to assist the practical exercises and training process can be internalised as improved practical skills. This complex process can be illustrated as follows:

other sources

lexicographic consultation specialised knowledge

practical skills

practical exercises and training

lexicographic consultation

increase practical skills Figure 5.  The learning of practical skills in a lexicographical perspective.


Sven Tarp

It is a matter of course that not all interpretive and operative situations related to the practical exercises and the training process have the same degree of relevance for lexicography. Just as in oral text communication, there are a lot of practical situations where it would be difficult to consult a dictionary or any other kind of reference work in the course of the practical training process, the oral comments and instructions coming from a coach or teacher being much more relevant and helpful. But there are definitely other situations where the consultation of lexicographic works may be relevant. Although no specialised learners’ dictionary providing assistance to practical situations is known of, there are nonetheless a number of other reference or semi-reference works such as handbooks, manuals and how-to’s that have been developed in order to assist learners in these situations (cf. Tarp, 2007, 2008b). Some of these handbooks, manuals and how-to’s are excellent, while others are of less value. The main problem is that generally speaking they have not been initially conceived as reference works that provide quick and easy access to data selected and prepared in such a way that a specific type of user can retrieve exactly the type of information which he or she needs in a specific type of situation. In other words, the problem is that in most cases they are not based upon the most advanced lexicographic principles. This situation may – and ought to – change in the future, which is why the integration of such works as those mentioned in the discussion on specialised learners’ dictionaries is both urgent and highly relevant.

2.8.  Cognitive situations To sum up, there are various cognitive, communicative and practical situations where the learners may benefit from dictionaries or other lexicographic works during the learning process. As to the cognitive situations, only the systematic situation, i.e., the situation related to a conscious, systematic study of the subject field in question, is relevant in terms of specialised learners’ dictionaries because the sporadic situations cannot be considered to make up a learning process in the strict sense of the word. In this respect, it is important to take into account that the specialised learners’ dictionaries are not textbooks designed to be read from cover to cover but tools for punctual consultation, and that the essence and common nature of all lexicographic works are that they contain quickly and easily accessible data from which the users may retrieve the information they need. As such, specialised learners’ dictionaries should not compete with textbooks. However, as the systematic study of a subject field does not only consist of reading the material right trough, but also of carrying out consultations in order to satisfy punctual information needs, e.g., when memorising and preparing for an examination, it is necessary that learners can make such consultations during the learning process. Although most textbooks today contain indices and registers, they are not really conceived to allow for punctual consultation. There are two parallel ways to improve this situation. First of all, future textbooks should be planned according to the most advanced pedagogical and lexicographic principles which allow them to be read right through in order to satisfy global information needs and

Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries


simultaneously to be consulted in order cover punctual information needs. Secondly, dictionaries and other lexicographic works could be conceived as adjuncts to traditional textbooks. This may especially be the case when a group of potential users need a systematic overview or introduction to a specific subject field, for instance, when translators need some background information before engaging in the translation of complex specialised texts, or when journalists need some basic knowledge about the subject field before writing about it. In this case, the potential users may not have the necessary time or interest in reading some of the more complex textbooks about the subject concerned. It is, therefore, of special relevance to conceive multifunctional specialised learners’ dictionaries which incorporate subject-field data and present it in such a way that it can be used to satisfy the cognitive needs of the foreseen user group as well as their communicative or practical needs. This is, for example what has been done in the multifunctional ENGLISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY and SPANISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY which, among other things, contains an encyclopedic section with a systematic introduction to molecular biology, about which the authors themselves write in their introductory note: The encyclopedic section has several functions. First, it brings an overview of the systematics which form the basis of gene technology. This elementary overview, which ends with a subject index, can be read completely independently from the dictionary as a small work in its own right, with the purpose of obtaining basic information on the technical basis of molecular biology and gene technology. In a dictionary context it is intended as an aid for those readers requiring a concise account. The technical terms in bold type list some of the most important terms which are found as entry words. A function which is equally important is the encyclopedic section as a systematic reference basis from the individual dictionary article, where the information provided in the entry would be better understood in a number of cases if seen in a broader context. (Bergenholtz / Kaufmann, 1998: 8)

Apart from containing data providing a systematic introduction to the subject field in question, in the above example molecular biology or gene technology, specialised learners’ dictionaries may also be conceived to cover other types of cognitive needs, e.g., providing a systematic introduction to the specialised language (LSP) concerned or to general problems related to the translation of specialised text in the special subject fields, especially culturebound fields such as the legal system in two different countries. This has for instance been done in UNGARISCH-DEUTSCHES, DEUTSCH-UNGARISCHES FACHWÖRTERBUCH ZUR RENTENVERSICHERUNG and ENGELSK DANSK ERHVERVSORDBOG .

2.9.  Functions of specialised dictionaries To sum up, there are various cognitive, communicative and practical situations where learners may benefit from dictionaries or other lexicographic works during the learning process in order to develop their specialised knowledge or skills. The most important of these are: Cognitive situations: – Systematic study of the subject field.


Sven Tarp – –

Systematic study of the specialised language (LSP). Systematic study of problems related to the translation of specialised texts.

Communicative situations: – Reception of specialised texts in the mother tongue. – Production of specialised texts in the mother tongue. – Reception of specialised texts in a foreign language. – Production of specialised texts in a foreign language. – Translation of specialised texts into a foreign language. – Translation of specialised texts into a foreign language. Practical situations: – Operative situations. – Interpretive situations.

Each of these situations can be further subdivided according to the subject field concerned, the type of text in question and the language or languages involved, as we saw above with the communicative situation. As was said at the beginning of this article, the extra-lexicographic user situations constitute the most important elements of the lexicographic functions, but they are not the only element. In order to determine the information needs that dictionaries should be designed to solve, it is also necessary to draw up a user typology where the relevant criteria depend on each of the above-mentioned types of situation. Without going into details, the typology may be calculated by reference to the following questions, some of which are valid for all of the situations mentioned while others are relevant for only some of them: – – – – – – – –

Which language is their mother tongue? What is their knowledge of the subject field in question (laymen, semi-experts or experts)? What are their practical skills in the discipline in question? To what degree do they master a specific foreign language? To what degree do they master a specific LSP in their mother tongue? To what degree do they master a specific LSP in a specific foreign language? What is their general experience as translators of specialised texts? What is their experience as translators of specialised texts related to a specific subject field?

As already said, by combining the user typology resulting from the answers to these questions with the above mentioned user situations it is possible to determine the corresponding information needs that specialised learners’ dictionaries may be designed to satisfy and, in this way, determine the possible functions of these dictionaries. It goes without saying that there are many such functions which, however, are systematised as cognitive functions, communicative functions and practical functions, respectively.

2.10.  Conclusion The discussion in this article has shown that the cognitive functions mentioned above are the easiest to deal with inasmuch as the information retrieved from the lexicographic data

Functions of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries


can be directly stored as knowledge in the brain and in this way contribute to the learning process. The communicative and practical functions, on the other hand, are far more complex because information cannot be directly transformed into linguistic or practical skills, which is the real goal of the learning process, but has to be mediated indirectly by means of communication or practice. There is little doubt that there is still a lot of research to be done in order to develop the specialised learners’ dictionaries needed in today’s complex and globalised world: This article has shown that it is not only a question of improving the dictionaries that can assist the learning of a specialised language, but also of developing dictionaries of a completely new type, designed to assist their potential users in other situations such as the learning of practical skills and the acquirement of knowledge about a specific subject field.

CHAPTER 3. The Monolingual Specialised Dictionary for Learners Rufus H. Gouws

Abstract LSP dictionaries have to be directed at very specific user groups and when planning such a dictionary the lexicographer has to be well aware of the needs but also the reference skills of the intended target users. In a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners, the concept of a learner could either refer to a learner of the language in which the dictionary is presented or the learner of the subject field treated in the dictionary. When compiling monolingual specialised dictionaries the lexicographer needs to distinguish between different types of users, i.e. experts, semi-experts and lay persons. The lay person and to a lesser extent the semi-expert may be seen as learners in the second sense of the word. In terms of the first sense of the word learner, the lexicographer has to be familiar with the language competence of the intended users, distinguishing between foreign-language speakers consulting the dictionary and mother-tongue speakers still learning the language. An identification of the users of the dictionary will lead to an identification of the functions of the dictionary. The user and functions should then determine the contents to be included in the dictionary. Looking at all these aspects the lexicographer needs to decide on the lexicographic structures to be employed in the dictionary. Structures should be selected and used in such a way that they can enhance the access to the desired data and ensure an optimal retrieval of information by the intended target user. Metalexicography makes provision for a wide range of dictionary structures. However, the discussion of the majority of these structures has been done in a generic way without reference to specific dictionary types. Where a typological reference has been made it has usually been to broad categories like monolingual or bilingual. This chapter focuses on the formulation and adaptation of structures specifically for monolingual specialised dictionaries. Different types of dictionary structures, e.g. the choice of a microstructure and the scope of the data distribution structure will be discussed. However, looking at the learner and especially the reference skills of learners the emphasis will primarily be on access structures. In this regard the comprehensive access process being activated when a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners needs to be consulted, will be discussed. Suggestions will be made to enhance this process. The supporting role of a well-devised microstructure and a functional addressing structure will also receive attention. The chapter will indicate the importance of an interactive relation between the user, the lexicographic functions, the dictionary contents and the dictionary structures. Key Words: MONOLINGUAL


3.1.  The ambiguity of the term monolingual specialised dictionary for learners Specialised dictionaries have to be directed at very specific user groups, and when planning such a dictionary the lexicographer has to be well aware of the needs but also the reference skills of the intended target users. In a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners the concept “a monolingual specialised dictionary” does not pose too many


Rufus H. Gouws

interpretation problems. It refers to a monolingual dictionary in which lexical items from a specific specialised language are presented and treated. The concept of a learner is not unproblematic. It could either refer to a learner of the language in which the dictionary is presented or a learner of the subject field treated in the dictionary. Both these categories of specialised dictionaries for learners do occur. The OXFORD DICTIONARY OF COMPUTING FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH (Pyne / Tuck, 1996) is an example of a specialised dictionary compiled for users learning the English language. This is stated quite clearly in the preface to this dictionary. In dictionaries adhering to this sense of the word learner, the lexicographer has to be familiar with the language competence of the intended users. On the other hand the SASOL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE (Hartmann-Petersen, 2001) is a specialised dictionary for learners being introduced to the relevant specialised fields. The subject field matter, the contents, and the metalanguage employed in the dictionary reflect the knowledge, communication and educational level of the intended target user group. In both these types of dictionaries for learners the lexicographer should realise that the specific dictionary has a pedagogical assignment. The presentation and treatment should be done accordingly. However, there are definite differences in terms of the nature of the pedagogical assistance given to the target users and within each of these types the function(s) of the specific dictionary will determine a variety of aspects. The notion of a typological hybrid in lexicography makes provision for infinite forms of hybridisation. One such a form is a treatment directed at both types of learners referred to in the previous paragraph. Such a dictionary has less value when the hybridisation is coincidental. On the other hand, a well planned and executed hybridisation may lead to a very effective lexicographic product with an expanded pedagogical function.

3.2.  Aspects of a few specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners

3.2.1.  A well-defined genuine purpose and clear functions of specialised dictionaries Too often in the past the compilation of specialised dictionaries did not reflect a sound theoretical basis. The target user group, the genuine purpose and the function(s) had not been indicated. New specialised dictionaries tend to differ from this approach. A very good example in this regard is the UNGARISCH-DEUTSCHES DEUTSCH-UNGARISCHES FACHWÖRTERBUCH ZUR RENTENVERSICHERUNG (Fata, 2005). Besides a dictionary structure and data distribution program that assist the user in the consultation endeavours it is said in the preface that this dictionary had been compiled with cognisance to results from metalexicography, pedagogical lexicography, bilingual specialised lexicography and research into dictionary use. The purpose of this dictionary is clearly stated as to provide translators and interpreters of the language pair Hungarian and German, a well-defined target user group, with a dictionary that is useful for the specific field. It is also presented as a learners’ dictionary for institutes of translation and interpreting and where German is taught as

The Monolingual Specialised Dictionary for Learners


specialised foreign language. According to the preface this dictionary is appropriate for both production and reception. This approach is typical of an environment where specialised dictionaries are regarded as lexicographic tools and not a mere reflection of the work done by terminologists. Consequently the specialised dictionary becomes an efficient multifunctional tool of which the character exceeds that of a word list.

3.2.2.  Learners of the subject field – and the language Another example of a specialised monolingual dictionary for learners but where the notion of “learner” primarily refers to learners of the subject field is the SCHÜLER DUDEN: INFORMATIK (Claus / Schwill, 1997). This dictionary has a subtitle “Ein Sachlexikon für die Schule” (a specialised dictionary for schools) and in the preface it is clearly shown that the dictionary is aimed at learners entering the field of informatics. A similar approach is found in the SCHÜLER DUDEN: DIE MUSIK (Kwiatkowski, 1989), a member of the same series by Duden, with the subtitle “Ein Sachlexikon der Musik” (a specialised dictionary of music). On the back cover it is said that this dictionary has been compiled by experienced educationalists and high school teachers. As in the SCHÜLER DUDEN: INFORMATIK no indication is given of any attempt to assist learners of German. The text on the back cover of the music dictionary explicitly states that the dictionary is directed at students (of different levels), parents and teachers, presenting them with the most important concepts from, among others, the history and theory of music, acoustics and the study of musical instruments. In this regard this dictionary is an extremely helpful instrument. Besides a representative macrostructural selection and a thorough microstructural coverage of the lemmata representing these terms in the central list, the dictionary exhibits a frame structure with a number of outer texts in the back matter that really enhance the extent of the contents on offer. These back matter outer texts include texts on the typical abbreviations used in staff notation, transponing and non-transponing instruments, a bibliography referring the user to references, ordered in thematic categories like encyclopaedia and lexica, the history of music, the study and analysis of music, new music, sociology of music, psychology of music and music therapy, popular music, the study of instruments, and a historical overview of the most important dates in music since the birth of Christ. Contrary to these SCHÜLER DUDEN dictionaries the OXFORD DICTIONARY OF COMPUTING FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH has been compiled for learners of English requiring guidance with regard to the specific field of computing. It is indicated in the preface that the dictionary is “especially for learners of English”. Although the macrostructural selection represents a selection of items from the broad field of computing, the treatment focuses on the language needs of the intended users. The dictionary relies on the British National Corpus, a comprehensive general corpus and not a corpus devoted exclusively to the relevant subject field. The treatment allocated to lemmata is explained as follows in the preface: Clear explanations of the grammar and meaning of words, along with authentic examples showing how words are really used make this dictionary a useful tool for helping to read, write (,) speak and understand the English used in computing today.


Rufus H. Gouws

And in the user’s guide …if more detailed information on grammar or pronunciation is needed or if cross references, collocates, plurals, synonyms, parts of the verb or spelling and American variants are required they have all been convincingly placed together in the separate language column.

This formulation clearly puts the emphasis of this dictionary on the linguistic aspects of the words presented as treatment units. It is also indicated that the dictionary is compiled for learners of English of the intermediate to advanced level. However, the subject field focus has not been underestimated and in the preface it is said that the dictionary relies on the combined expertise of people in the world of computing and those involved in the teaching of English as a foreign language. In the front matter text on the use of the dictionary it is also stated that the dictionary is a valuable reference work “for people who use computers and people who study computing”, bringing this dictionary into the domain of the learner of the relevant subject field. Attention to the linguistic features and its assistance in solving text reception and text production problems clearly adds to the dual nature of this learners’ dictionary.

3.3.  Looking at the user Different target user groups could be distinguished according to combinations of features identifying them as learners of the two types discussed in this article. In terms of both categories of learners, i.e. learners of the language and learners of the subject field, three levels of expertise can be identified. For language learners a distinction can be made between beginners, intermediate and advanced learners. In terms of the subject field the distinction is between lay persons, semi-experts and experts. Various permutations can occur when combining features from both categories, i.e. lay person, beginner learner; lay person, intermediate learner; lay person, advanced learner; semi-expert, beginner learner; semi-expert, intermediate learner; semi-expert, advanced learner; expert, beginner learner; expert, intermediate learner, expert, advanced learner. A dictionary compiled for, e.g., a user who is an expert and an advanced learner will necessarily differ from one compiled for an expert who is a beginner. It is important that in the planning of a dictionary the lexicographers need to take cognisance of these differences. Because it is not realistic to expect a separate dictionary for each one of these permutations lexicographers need to determine the area of most likely combinations that would consult such a dictionary. One can most probably expect representatives from all three types of language learners in the target user group whereas, with regard to the subject field, especially semi-experts and lay persons will consult such a dictionary. The “average” user could be a semi-expert on the intermediate level, constituting the default target user of a specialised learners’ dictionary. Specialised monolingual dictionaries typically adhere to a cognitive and a text reception function. The dictionary needs to display as many terms as possible and the users need to get an explanation of their meaning in order to comprehend these terms in an appropriate

The Monolingual Specialised Dictionary for Learners


way. The functions of general monolingual learners’ dictionaries do not always run parallel to that of specialised monolingual dictionaries. The communication function of text production usually plays a much more dominant role in the general learners’ dictionary. Where the learners’ dictionary has a specific subject field as its subject matter the functions need to be identified in such a way that the lexicographer clearly recognises the emphasis on text reception and the cognitive need, as typically seen in specialised monolingual dictionaries, as well as the text reception and text production need so often prevalent in monolingual learners’ dictionaries.

3.4.  Text reception, the macrostructure and outer texts The type of specialised dictionary will play a determining role in the nature and extent of the macrostructural selection. In this regard the lexicographer has to decide, based on the needs of the intended target user, whether it should be a single field, multifield or subfield dictionary. The further decision, once this typological choice has been made, regards the extent of the macrostructure. Text reception demands a maximising approach with as many terms as possible to be included in the dictionary as lemmata. Text production would most probably lead to a minimising approach with fewer lemmata and a more comprehensive treatment of these items. The classification of a specialised monolingual dictionary as being directed at learners of the language brings another facet into decisions regarding the macrostructural selection. Having to take cognisance of the language proficiency of the target user the lexicographer has to decide whether the level of language competence should influence the type of items to be included as lemmata or only their treatment. The cognitive and text reception functions are not only achieved by means of the presentation and treatment in the central list of the dictionary, albeit the most salient venue for information retrieval in any dictionary. In the planning of a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners lexicographers should also pay attention to the use of outer texts to convey data. The data distribution structure of the dictionary should allow the lexicographer to include data, not typically accommodated in the default article, to be presented in outer texts. A variety of topics of relevance to especially the cognitive needs of the users can be covered in the outer matter of a specialised dictionary, cf. e.g. the back matter texts included in the SCHÜLER DUDEN: DIE MUSIK. One type of outer text, typically presented in the front matter section, that should be negotiated by lexicographers during the planning of any specialised dictionary is the so-called systematic introduction, cf. the use of such a text in the ENGLISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY and SPANISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY (Kaufmann / Bergenholtz, 1998) and the MUSIKORDBOGEN (Bergenholtz, I. 2006). This type of outer text guides the user in a systematic way into the relevant subject field. Crossreferences are made from the articles in the central list in order to offer the user a more comprehensive confrontation with the subject matter of the dictionary. Bergenholtz / Tarp / Wiegand (1999) distinguish between integrated and non-integrated outer texts. This distinction also applies in specialised dictionaries for learners. An integrated outer text is integrated into the genuine purpose of the dictionary and functions


Rufus H. Gouws

interactively with the central list to assist the user in retrieving the required information from the dictionary. When cross-references are given from the articles in the central list to specific sections in the systematic introduction, also referred to as a subject field component, cf. Bergenholtz / Nielsen (2006), this outer text displays an integrated nature.

3.5.  Structures in specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners Once the functions of a dictionary have been determined the lexicographer has to decide on the data to be included and the structures to accommodate the data and help the user to achieve successful dictionary consultation procedures. Lexicographic structures are not important as such; however, they are important as devices to ensure the achievement of the functions of the given dictionary. Consequently it is important that structures should not be imposed on a dictionary but they should result from the functions and the genuine purpose of that dictionary. When planning any dictionary the lexicographers should take a fresh look at the selection and use of structures for that dictionary. The user needs and the functions will necessarily lead to a situation where, although the same types of structures are employed in different dictionaries, no two dictionaries need to have the exact same application of these structures. Just as dictionary typology is not cast in stone, the way in which lexicographic structures are employed gives the lexicographer the opportunity to be innovative, presenting something that will suffice the needs of the target users. Within the general theory of lexicography dictionary structures have mostly been devised as generic structures, without adapting them to the demands made by specific dictionaries and dictionary types. One of the challenges facing all lexicographers is to adapt the general structures to ensure the best possible structures devised specifically for their envisaged dictionaries. Structures should be adapted and used in such a way that they can ensure successful dictionary consultation procedures by enhancing the access to the desired data and ensuring an optimal retrieval of information by the intended target user. 3.5.1.  The data distribution structure Dictionaries display a variety of texts, allocated to the central list but also to the front and back matter sections. The planning of the data distribution should not only be concerned with the data to be presented in the central list but also with data, regarded by the lexicographer as important to the intended target users, which cannot be accommodated in the default articles of the dictionary. The front and back matter sections offer the lexicographer the opportunity to include this data and present it in one or more outer texts of the dictionary. In a general learners’ dictionary the outer texts can play a vital role in the transfer of data, especially to support the user in getting familiar with systematic aspects of the specific language, e.g. its grammar and its pronunciation, but also with cultural values, etc. Specialised dictionaries, on the other hand, can enhance the transfer of data by including outer texts in which a variety of issues relevant to the subject field can be presented. In

The Monolingual Specialised Dictionary for Learners


specialised dictionaries for users getting familiar with the subject matter these outer texts can cover a wide range of topics, cf. the back matter section of the SASOL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE. The typological hybrid nature of a specialised dictionary for learners can also come to the fore in the choice and presentation of outer texts. Lexicographers of future specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners should utilise the outer texts in a much more creative and innovative way. Once again the lexicographic functions of the dictionary should play a determining role in the selection and presentation of the outer texts. They should also contribute to achieving the functions of the dictionary in order to ensure a transtextual approach to lexicographic functions, cf. Gouws (2007).

3.5.2.  Access structures Dictionaries are compiled to be used and they can only be used effectively if the intended target users can have an unimpeded access to the data they need in order to ensure an optimal retrieval of information. Consequently the access structure is of extreme importance in striving towards successful dictionary consultation procedures. With regard to access to data, traditional lexicographic theory focused almost exclusively on the access structure. Important as this structure may be it is only the formal realisation of one aspect of a much more comprehensive component of the dictionary consultation procedure. The access structure needs to be regarded as part of the more comprehensive access process, cf. Bergenholtz / Gouws (2007a). Existing specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners display an access structure that does not differ much from that of other specialised or learners’ dictionaries. The question confronting lexicographers is how to change it to ensure a better access to the data on offer – not only the macrostructural items but also the data within the dictionary articles as well as the data in the outer texts of the dictionary. Bergenholtz / Gouws (2007a) refer to a pre-consultation phase in the access process. This is when the dictionary users realise they need to consult a dictionary and they try to decide how and where they will be able to find a solution to the problem prompting the envisaged dictionary consultation procedure. Lexicographers should be aware of this phase in the access process and should try to pre-empt the questions and the different dictionaryexternal starting points of the access process, cf. Gouws / Leroyer (2009). When planning the access structure of a specialised monolingual dictionary for learners the lexicographer needs to determine the typical consultation route of the intended target user when trying to reach an answer for a typical question that directs him / her to the specific dictionary. An access route, with the necessary route markers, should then be developed to assist the user in the best possible way. Accessibility could be enhanced by employing more than one access route, e.g. by means of an alphabetical equivalent register or by means of other back matter texts, e.g. an index with a thematically ordered presentation of the terms included as lemmata in the central list. Learners using the dictionary for a text production function may be looking for a given term but will not necessarily know where to find it in the central list. They may, however, be familiar with the subfield in which the term occurs, e.g. in a dictionary of chemistry they would know that they are looking for a term representing a specific type of acid. By consulting a thematically ordered outer text they may go to a theme like acids and there they will find,


Rufus H. Gouws

among others, the term nitric acid. For a learner of the first kind, i.e. a language learner, who is not a lay person in the given field, this kind of assistance could be sufficient to ensure a successful dictionary consultation procedure. If additional help is needed it could then be found in the relevant article in the central list and access to that article would then have the outer text as its point of departure; constituting an intra access route and establishing the polyfunctional nature of the given dictionary. In order for such an outer text to be a functional component of the access process the lexicographer needs to know in advance what the level of knowledge as well as the reference skills of the intended target users are. Such an outer text will have less value as part of the access structure if the user cannot link the thematically ordered term to the concept for which he / she needs the proper word. Such a thematically ordered outer text could also be valuable for the cognitive and the text reception function where the user merely needs to confirm a given word. In a less systematised way access to terms falling within a given thematical domain can also be achieved in a central list internal approach by means of synopsis articles which cross-refer the user to the hyponyms of the given superordinate word, functioning as lemma of the synopsis article. As an example: the treatment given in the article of the lemma sign acid in a chemistry dictionary should include various features of general importance and relevance to all different types of acids. Besides having the terms used to identify these acid types as independent lemmata, the treatment in the article of the lemma acid should elevate this to a synopsis article but it should also refer the users to the lemmata representing the different types of acid. In doing so, an additional access route to these terms is introduced, directing the user from the superordinate to the hyponyms. This could also enhance the accessibility of the dictionary and consequently also the information retrieval of a typical user of such a dictionary.

3.5.3.  Microstructural aspects The microstructure of specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners should accommodate those data types that will enable the intended target user to acquire the information needed for the specific level of expertise. Although this type of dictionary will often focus on users at the semi-expert level, the target group might go beyond the limits of this level. Especially lay persons moving towards the semi-expert level, and advanced semi-experts, moving towards the expert level, often still fall within the scope of many dictionaries of this type. The nature and the extent of the treatment on offer in the microstructure have to make provision for this diversity. Utilising a dedicated corpus of the relevant subject field, lexicographers will be able to identify not only the lemma candidates but also possible polysemous senses, albeit that terms more often than not are monosemous lexical items. By employing the keyword in context (KWIC) function of a corpus search programme, frequent collocations in which the term represented by the lemma sign occur, can also be identified. These collocations often tend not only to have a fairly high usage frequency but also represent a specific use of the term. Although they do not qualify to be included as lemmata they do qualify for microstructural status to indicate a typical occurrence of the term represented by the lemma sign. As collocations they are primarily included in the dictionary article as lemmatically addressed items. However, a dictionary

The Monolingual Specialised Dictionary for Learners


aimed at the cognitive and communicative needs of learners could go one step further by elevating these entries to second level treatment units. By introducing procedures of nonlemmatic addressing these frequently used combinations can have, where and when necessary, their own brief paraphrase of meaning. Where the microstructure allows second level treatment by means of non-lemmatic addressing the relation between the treated microstructural item and the relevant sense of the term presented by the lemma sign has to be of an unambiguous nature. This will assist the user to interpret the second level treatment unit either within the context of the relevant sense of the first level treatment unit or as having no relation to the senses of the first level treatment unit. An adapted application of the use of an integrated microstructure may help in this regard. Where the term represented by the lemma sign is polysemous and the article accommodates second level treatment units the extended use of an integrated microstructure would allow the relevant second level treatment unit and its treatment to be integrated into the subcomment on semantics in which the related sense of the lexical item is presented. Where no such a relation exists the second level treatment units can be allocated their own separate article slot, signalling to the user that the semantic relatedness to the term represented by the lemma sign is of a lesser nature.  Conveying the meaning of words Adhering to the cognitive and the text reception function the lexicographers of specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners will do well to pay ample attention to a wide selection of items to be included as lemmata in the dictionary and a thorough presentation of their meaning. The way in which meaning is explained in a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners has to be determined by the language proficiency, needs and reference skills of the intended target users. In this regard the lexicographer needs to rely on research findings from the field of theoretical lexicography and not, in the first instance, only on assistance from experts in the relevant subject field. In any specialised dictionary the contents of the paraphrases of meanings should come from the subject experts. However, their nature, extent and presentation should be determined by lexicographic criteria. Looking at the paraphrase of meaning that is appropriate for the articles in a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners; lexicographers could pay attention to the suggestions made by Bergenholtz / Gouws (2007) that lexicographic definitions should be correct, complete and relevant. For a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners it is a prerequisite that the paraphrases of meaning need to be correct; there is no room for factual mistakes. With regard to completeness the lexicographer has to decide how much data the specific user needs. The extent of the paraphrase of meaning should be determined accordingly. However, the extent should not be determined along the lines of the distinction between semantic and encyclopaedic data. From a lexicographic perspective such a distinction is of little interest. Being a specialised dictionary the paraphrases of meaning will most probably display a stronger encyclopaedic approach compared to the paraphrases of meaning in a general learners’ dictionary. In order to achieve the cognitive function of the dictionary such a focus is necessary.


Rufus H. Gouws

Of extreme importance in the specialised monolingual learners’ dictionary is the relevance of the paraphrases of meaning. In this regard criteria need to be developed to determine the appropriate approach for the identified dictionary and the identified target user group. Bergenholtz / Gouws (2007:580) suggest an approach, taking cognisance of both the linguistic competence of users and their competence in the relevant specialised field. They make provision for a scale ranging from a high to a low knowledge in terms of the specialised field, general language competence and competence in the relevant specialised language. They also make provision for a distinction between L1 and L2 users of a dictionary. The target user of a monolingual specialised dictionary for learners typically is an L2 user of the language treated in the dictionary. For this user type a medium high degree of knowledge in the field of expertise should be seen as the intended aim of the dictionary. Bergenholtz / Gouws (2007:581) argue that for the text reception function for L2 paraphrases of meaning three user types can be distinguished. These are experts (with a high degree of knowledge in the specific subject field and either a medium or a high degree of competence in general and mostly a high degree of competence in the specialised language), semi-experts (with a medium high degree of knowledge in the specific subject field, a high degree of competence in their general language but a low, medium or high degree of competence in the specialised language) and lay persons (with a low degree of knowledge in the specialised field, a high degree of competence in general language but a low to medium degree of competence in the specialised language). When looking at the different paraphrases of meaning applicable to these user groups the first two (experts and semi-experts) need a brief lexicographic definition utilising the terms and the language from the relevant specialised field. The last group (lay persons) need a brief lexicographic definition without employing terms from the subject field or, if such terms are included, they have to be made comprehensible for this target user group. Bergenholtz / Gouws (2007:582) also indicate various criteria for a dictionary focusing on the cognitive function. This does not differ too much from that of the text reception function. When deciding on the best possible way to convey the required data in the paraphrase of meaning it is important for the lexicographer to be familiar with the degree of knowledge and competence of the intended target user with regard to the relevant specialised field but also the general language as well as the specialised language. Being a learners’ dictionary, difficult concepts from the specialised field need to be explained in a language adapted to the level of comprehension of the intended target user. This confronts the lexicographer with a real challenge. According to Bergenholtz / Gouws (2007:582) experts and semi-experts reading an L2 text only need a brief definition, but often an equivalent in the L1 of the user may suffice. In conveying the meaning of a given lexical item the lexicographers of specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners may consider adding a bilingual dimension to their dictionary. Where monolingual learners’ dictionaries are usually not aimed at users with a specific language the introduction of a bilingual dimension would limit the target user group of a specialised monolingual learners’ dictionary to users from a specific language. However, this will enhance the success of this user group in their dictionary consultation procedures. The same monolingual dictionary can be used with different bilingual dimensions to provide in the needs of target users from different speech communities. The utilisation of a bilingual dimension should also have an influence on the contents of the back matter of the dictionary. An alphabetical equivalent index containing all the equivalents presented in the central list should

The Monolingual Specialised Dictionary for Learners


be included as outer text in the back matter. The treatment in this text should be limited to a cross-reference entry, indicating the lemma in the central list where the relevant equivalent occurs. Such a text will also elevate the dictionary to a poly-accessible source because users can access a given term in the central list either directly via the macrostructure of the dictionary or indirectly via the equivalent index. This could be especially helpful in dictionaries where the learner is also a learner in the relevant subject field and where his / her mother tongue does not have a learners’ dictionary for the specific subject field. Being confronted with an unknown term in his / her own language the bilingual dimension of a specialised monolingual dictionary for learners will offer the opportunity to achieve a successful retrieval of information. 3.5.4.  Data on grammar The typical needs of users of specialised dictionaries are not directed at grammatical data. However, if the dictionary has text production as one of its functions it is important to include some grammatical data as part of the microstructural presentation. Due to economic reasons specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners are usually not monofunctional products and where two different types of learners are involved the functions of the dictionary will more often than not differ from the functions of both a general monolingual learners’ dictionary and a general specialised monolingual dictionary. Easy access to the required data and a presentation of data where the individual data items will not impede the access to other items in the case of users not interested in all the data types on offer, remain priorities when planning the dictionary. Items giving grammatical data can easily impede the access route of a user only in need of subject specific data. Because the grammatical data is so strongly related to the needs of language learners the lexicographer would do well to accommodate this data in an article slot which does not form part of the hierarchical ordering of data types in the default dictionary article. Data regarding the grammatical patterns of the language can easily be accommodated in an outer text in which a mini-grammar of the language is presented. Cross-references from the articles to this outer text, elevating it to an integrated outer text, can assist users in their systematic text production endeavours. For the data that needs to be included in the individual article the comment on form could be presented in a discontinuous way so that the orthographic data can be obtained from the form of the lemma sign whereas a procedure of phasing out can move the grammatical data to a separate column, as done in the COLLINS COBUILD ENGLISH LANGUAGE DICTIONARY (Sinclair, 1987). Such an approach will lead to a differentiation between a data type almost exclusively relevant to one type of learner using the dictionary and the other data types that are relevant to both types of learners at whom the dictionary is directed.

3.6.  Types of specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners Bergenholtz / Tarp (1995) make provision for the distinction between subfield, single field and multi-field specialised dictionaries. When it comes to the planning of a monolingual


Rufus H. Gouws

specialised dictionary for learners it is important that the dictionary should also be wellconceived in terms of these subtypes. The dictionary culture and the availability of other dictionaries for a given user group will necessarily co-determine the choice of a subtype. Specialised dictionaries have traditionally too often been regarded as reference sources for experienced users of dictionaries. Consequently too little attention has been given to the role these dictionaries can play in the development of a dictionary culture within a given speech community. Introducing young learners not only to general dictionaries but also to specialised dictionaries can actively enhance the creation and development of a dictionary culture. Compilers of specialised dictionaries for learners at an early stage in their learning career should consider the option of integrating the dictionary into other learning material. Specialised dictionaries can be combined with the relevant text book or study material as well as a dictionary workbook. Both types of learners, i.e. the learner of the subject field and of a language, can receive additional support by not only dealing with the dictionary in isolation but as part of a more comprehensive study package. Such a package would typically present a single field dictionary. Although the dictionary will form part of a package it should still be planned in such a way that it can function independently. The interactive relation with a text book or other study material may have an influence on the extent of the systematic introduction but for the independent use of the dictionary it remains important to maintain a systematic introduction as one of the outer texts. Cross-references from the articles in the central list to the systematic introduction constitute its status as integrated outer text. Cross-references from the systematic introduction to the text book or selected study material establish an exit search route as part of the overall access structure and constitute the status of the text book, etc. as an integrated dictionary external text. Not only lexicographic matters but also extra-lexicographic issues can play a determining role in decisions regarding the subtype of specialised dictionary. Due to e.g. economic reasons educational authorities who realise the need for specialised dictionaries for learners may foresee problems in commissioning a dictionary for each one of the subject fields of a given group of learners. Practical situations may make the compilation of a multifield dictionary in which a selection of subject fields relevant to the intended target users prevail more appropriate. Even though such a dictionary will not contain too many subject fields, say between four and eight depending on the specific educational environment, this type of specialised dictionary for learners will confront the lexicographer with many challenges. One of these challenges is to select the best possible way of ordering the lemmata. One possibility would be an amalgamated central list consisting of equal status texts realising a drawer structure, cf. Gouws / Leroyer (2009). The central list will then contain a text for each one of the fields and access to a term in a given field would be possible once the text containing the terms from that field has been accessed. The juxtapositioning of fields in one dictionary may be confusing to the users, especially if each central list text has its own front and back matter texts, constituting a range of secondary frame structures, cf. Gouws 2004. The primary frame of the dictionary could contain those outer texts, e.g. the users’ guidelines that are relevant to all the different central lists. Where a given drawer text requires its own outer text it will lead to a secondary frame structure. In this regard the inclusion of a systematic introduction for each field will best be accounted for in separate outer texts presented within the secondary frame of the specific drawer text, ensuring that each one of these central list texts could have its own systematic introduction positioned in close vicinity.

The Monolingual Specialised Dictionary for Learners


Another way of presenting the terms included in a multifield dictionary could be by means of a single amalgamated macrostructure. Such a macrostructure will include all the terms from all the different fields presented in a single alphabetical ordering. Each term should then be labelled to indicate the relevant field. Users consulting the dictionary to find the treatment for a given term will not have to access the relevant subject field before being able to move on to the lemma sign representing the desired term. The main external access route coincides with the only macrostructure of the dictionary and by merely interpreting the alphabetical order the desired article can be reached in an unproblematic way. However, the dictionary does not have to be mono-accessible. A back matter text could be included with subtexts presenting the various subject fields of the dictionary. For each subject field all the terms occurring in the central list could be given in an alphabetical order. Access to a given term, say from the field of mathematics, could either be directly by following the access route of the macrostructure or it could be indirectly by going to the relevant back matter text and finding the subtext for mathematics. Then the relevant term could be identified and from this back matter text the user can then proceed to the central list. This second way of accessing the desired lemma would be beneficial for users who are looking for a term within a certain subject field without knowing exactly what the term is. By identifying the term in the subject field list they are able to access the macrostructure of the central list. Using an amalgamated macrostructure will have implications for the ordering of the outer texts seeing that it will not be possible to present outer texts in immediate proximity of subject field specific central list texts. The back matter section could then contain two major components. A first component could focus on texts relevant to the language learning needs of the users. The second component could focus on texts relevant to the subject field learning needs of the users. This text could be divided into thematically ordered subsections with each section containing the texts needed for the specific subject field. A systematic introduction to each of the subject fields treated in the dictionary remains an important contribution of a dictionary of this kind. The status of this text should not be underestimated. Consequently it would be better to award a salient position to such a text. Instead of including the systematic introduction texts in the back matter components of the different subject fields, the dictionary can have a front matter text dedicated exclusively to the systematic introductions. In this text there could be a general introduction followed by subtexts presenting a systematic introduction for each one of the subject fields treated in the dictionary. The ordering of these subtexts could be done in an alphabetical way – in accordance with the topic of the subject field. The same ordering should be maintained in the back matter section containing the outer texts of the different subject fields.

3.7.  Culture dependent or culture independent A further aspect that should be taken into consideration when planning a specialised monolingual dictionary for learners is whether it has to be culture dependent or culture independent, cf. Bergenholtz / Tarp (1995). Certain subject fields, e.g. physics, chemistry,


Rufus H. Gouws

gene technology, etc. will have few, if any, culture dependent terms. However, many fields, e.g. sociology, nursing, commerce, jurisprudence, political science, etc., will have many culture dependent items. In the planning of specialised monolingual dictionaries for learners lexicographers need to decide how and where the treatment of these items should be done. One way of dealing with the culture dependent items is by means of a more comprehensive treatment in the dictionary article. Another option would be to give a treatment, similar to that presented in the default article, and to indicate by means of a label that the lemma sign represents a culture dependent term. A special back matter text could then be included in which a more comprehensive treatment of all culture dependent terms are given. Yet again, the functions of the envisaged dictionary should play a determining role in these decisions.

3.8.  Conclusion As practical tools monolingual specialised dictionaries should assist users in enhancing their knowledge of both the subject field and the language. The dictionary has to be planned in accordance with relevant lexicographic criteria, taking cognisance of a well identified user profile and employing subject field and language teaching experts to assist the lexicographers. An innovative approach to the access process, dictionary functions, structures and typological hybridisation can render products that will satisfy the needs of the interned target users and help to establish and develop a dictionary culture.

CHAPTER 4. Specialised Translation Dictionaries for Learners Sandro Nielsen

Abstract Specialised translation dictionaries for learners are reference tools that can help users with domain discourse in a foreign language in connection with translation. The most common type is the business dictionary covering several more or less related subject fields. However, business dictionaries treat one or few fields extensively thereby neglecting the discourse of the other fields. Furthermore, recent research shows that specialised translation is not limited to terms but also concerns domain-specific syntactic structures and genre conventions using various translation strategies. To meet the needs of learners, it is proposed that specialised translation dictionaries should be designed as augmented reference tools. It is argued that electronic and printed dictionaries should include sections or CDROMs with syntactic, translation etc. data as well as exercises and illustrative documents. The result is that the traditional focus on the language system will be extended to usage because the central unit of translation is not the word but the text. Key Words: LSP TRANSLATION; LEARNERS; LAW; GENRE; LINGUISTIC STRUCTURES; TRANSLATION DICTIONARY.

4.1.  Introduction Dictionaries that can help learners translate texts from particular subject fields are in high demand. Not only do learners have to bridge the communicative gap between two cultures, but they also have to transfer specific factual aspects into a foreign language so that the relevant messages are understood by readers. When translating specialised texts from one language into another, translators have the possibility of choosing among various kinds of dictionary. In a traditional scenario, translators consult monolingual, bilingual and multilingual dictionaries; a combination of all these kinds is frequently used. However, a more modern and theoretically more advanced approach uses a functional theory, which shifts the focus from the number of languages to the functions of dictionaries. Dictionaries are utility products that are designed to help specific types of users in specific types of situations to solve specific types of problems. This means that the type of dictionary that is relevant in this context is one whose function is to help learners solve specific types of problems encountered when translating subject-field specific texts into a foreign language. Until recently, the focus of translating within specialised subject fields (LSP translation) was on terms and terminology, i.e., factual aspects. However, research carried out by translation scholars during the last two decades has widened the scope of LSP translation to include translation units other than terms and an increased orientation towards the function of the target texts. This has to a limited extent been taken up by LSP lexicographers, who have realised that dictionaries designed to help learners translate LSP texts need to contain a broad range of data


Sandro Nielsen

types. The relevance of terms, their definitions and equivalents has been extensively discussed by lexicographers and terminographers, so the following discussion will try to identify some of the other important data types the optimal specialised translation dictionary will need to contain. This will involve an examination of two features that have received little or no attention by lexicographers: how dictionaries can help learners translate linguistic structures and genre conventions used in various subject fields with special reference to legal translation. Moreover, the number of subject fields covered by specialised translation dictionaries also affects the quality and value of dictionaries as perceived by learners.

4.2.  LSP translation: the extra-lexicographic dimension Translation dictionaries are essential tools for learners translating specialised texts into a foreign language. Dictionaries of this type are generally defined as dictionaries that facilitate the transfer of a message from one language into another within a particular subject field. This means that the function of specialised translation dictionaries should be to help learners meet their specific needs when translating within specific subject fields. These learner needs are not artificial constructs developed for purely academic exercises but are real needs found in the extra-lexicographic environment, i.e., outside lexicography and the dictionary itself. The value and usefulness of specialised translation dictionaries depend on their capacity to support the translation process as a whole. As indicated by Haensch (1991: 2939–2942), traditional bilingual dictionaries used for the translation of specialised texts are characterised by containing domain-specific terms in the source language and their equivalents in the target language. However, Laurén (1993: 99–100) investigates the occurrence of terms in a number of subject fields and shows that terms generally make up less than 20 percent of any LSP text. Consequently, the traditional specialised dictionary with its focus on terms and terminological equivalence only provides help to translate a small part of LSP texts. It is, therefore, necessary to look closer at the extra-lexicographic translation process in an attempt to identify some of the needs specialised translation dictionaries must fulfil to help users produce acceptable translations of entire LSP texts in a foreign language. One way of examining the translation process and identifying learner needs is to ask the learners themselves. Few of the surveys etc. carried out deal with LSP translation, e.g. Duvå / Laursen (1994), Nielsen (1994: 12–32), Wang (2001: 75–137) and Muráth (2002: 43–79); however, only the first of these exclusively attempts to discover the lexicographic needs of learners translating specialised texts into a foreign language. Nonetheless, this type of user research suffers from a number of general drawbacks. Firstly, the informants are themselves learners and therefore have only limited experience and knowledge of translating specialised texts. Secondly, the findings of each study relate to one particular text genre and consequently do not say anything about translating specialised texts and text genres in general. Thirdly, these studies together examine such a limited number of subject fields that they provide few new insights into general LSP translation. Fourthly, the number of informants in each case is so small that the results are not representative. Finally, the

Specialised Translation Dictionaries for Learners


results reflect the problems, needs etc. of each individual informant and are therefore subjective problems, needs etc. recognised by the informants; unrecognised needs do not show up in such examinations. The findings merely indicate what was happening among few individuals – not found by random selection – who were placed in unusual situations. The results reported in such studies, therefore, at best provide hints for lexicographers and are neither solid proof of actual extra-lexicographic user situations, nor unequivocal guidelines for designing specialised translation dictionaries for learners. Another approach is to consult the research literature published in the field of translation studies. Several translation scholars have looked into the general and special elements of the translation process, and some of their findings are relevant for translating LSP texts and learner lexicography. At a general level, Nord (2005) demonstrates the iterative nature of the translation process with several recursive steps that go beyond the level of terms and words. Bell (2000: 211) explicitly emphasizes this new orientation towards larger translation units by describing syntactic, semantic and pragmatic knowledge as necessary elements in translating texts. Nord takes this further and recognises that translation problems occur at the clause and sentence levels and that this leads to practical problems for translators: The structural differences between two languages, particularly in lexis and sentence structure, give rise to certain translation problems which occur in every translation involving this pair of languages, no matter which of the two serves as source and which serves as target language. (Nord 2005: 175)

Furthermore, the shift of attention from the source text to the target text and its receivers in translation theory also has an impact on LSP lexicography. The source text is no longer sacrosanct and the receivers’ perception of the target text is now in focus. Venuti (1998: 244) observes that the target text should have “the appearance, in other words, that the translation is not in fact a translation, but the ‘original’”. Source-language orientation focuses on the semantic contents of the linguistic material and genre conventions of the source text, with the result that recipients of the target text will instantly notice that the linguistic and textual material in the translation differs from what they would expect to find in texts of the same genre written in the target culture. In contrast to the source-oriented strategy, a targetlanguage oriented strategy borrows linguistic material and genre conventions from relevant, original texts in the target language. The target-language texts must belong to the same genre as the source text and the linguistic and textual material that is borrowed must have the same pragmatic functions as those in the source text. The main advantage of this strategy is that learners will produce translations in which recipients will recognise familiar utterances and genre conventions. Nord explains the importance of this for learners: Within the framework of a translation-relevant ST analysis the translator has to find out which of the non-verbal elements of the ST can be preserved in translation and which have to be adapted to the norms and conventions of the target culture. (Nord 2005: 121)

Compared with the method of asking learners, the use of findings by translation scholars has several benefits for theoretical and practical lexicography. First of all, the findings represent types of general elements of the translation process instead of individual, one-off results. Besides, translation scholars are experts in translating texts and have considerable


Sandro Nielsen

practical as well as theoretical experience of the entire translation process. This may then lead to the inclusion of data types in translation dictionaries that can help learners solve general types of problems for specific types of learners instead of one or a few idiosyncratic problems. Finally, specialised translation dictionaries taking these findings into account will address user needs on an objective basis instead of catering for subjective needs. It is now clear that LSP translation has three focal points: terms, linguistic structures and genre conventions. Lexicographers should pay more attention to the results and development in translation research so that they can produce specialised translation dictionaries that help learners translate as many of the features of LSP texts as possible, including linguistic structures and genre conventions, both of a verbal and non-verbal nature. One reason why lexicographers have been slow to adopt the findings of translation research is that they have asked learners and not translation experts. If lexicographers give more consideration to the advances in translation studies in future, they may be able to make improved dictionaries that help learners make high-quality translations of LSP texts. The present state of affairs is aptly described by Biel (2008: 28): “All in all, it is surprising that despite the general reorientation towards the target text and reception of translation, LSP dictionaries have stayed behind”. Lexicographers owe it to learners to remedy this situation and they can do so by relating the lexicographic needs of users to their relevant competence.

4.3.  Intended dictionary users: the competence of learners

A fundamental aspect of specialised lexicography is that most users of specialised dictionaries are generally laypersons or semi-experts at best. This is because college and university programmes focus on either language, including foreign languages, or a specific subject field. No programme combines the two so that graduates become experts in both (a foreign) language and a subject field. This means that users of specialised dictionaries are likely to be learners when a foreign LSP is involved. Users of specialised translation dictionaries for learners can be described in terms of two general characteristics. Firstly, users may be laypersons, semi-experts or experts in relation to a particular subject field. However, as most subject fields are more or less culturedependent (e.g., law, economics and politics), it is safe to say that even experts are “merely” experts, i.e., have a high degree of factual knowledge within their own culture, the source-language culture, and are not experts within the target-language culture. Secondly, users may be either beginners or intermediate or advanced learners of a foreign language. This means that they have from little to considerable linguistic and textual knowledge, but at the level of language for general purposes. According to, e.g., Fluck (1985: 12), the language of a subject field is characterised by the use of linguistic structures and options that is markedly higher or lower than in the general language. This applies correspondingly to genre conventions. Learners may, therefore, be expected to have limited knowledge of the relevant degrees to which certain linguistic structures and genre conventions are used within subject fields in their native language as well as their foreign language.

Specialised Translation Dictionaries for Learners


The categorisation of users is not as simple as may first appear. Experts within a subject field are likely to have considerable linguistic and textual knowledge in their own language, but little to medium knowledge in the foreign language and are, therefore, beginners or intermediate learners. In comparison, Bergenholtz / Nielsen (2002: 6) suggest that advanced learners such as student translators and professional translators are semi-experts, as they “have acquired substantial factual knowledge as a result of their education, training and work with LSP”. Furthermore, laypersons who are also beginners are unlikely to have any significant factual, linguistic and textual knowledge about the relevant LSP. Finally, experts are experts within one or perhaps two subject fields and will be laypersons and semiexperts in relation to other subject fields; similarly, advanced learners will only be advanced learners within one or perhaps two LSPs and beginners and intermediate learners in relation to other LSPs. In this light, people who translate LSP texts predominantly fall within the groups of laypersons, semi-experts, beginners and intermediate learners, and authors of specialised translation dictionaries should take this into account when they establish the theoretical basis for designing new dictionaries whose functions are to provide assistance in translating LSP texts into a foreign language. One way in which to discover the lexicographic needs of the intended user group is to identify the major characteristics of users in terms of competence. The competence of users of translation dictionaries may be examined by looking at the findings published by translation scholars. In addition to the reorientation of translation theory and strategies towards the target text, the various types of competence learners must have to successfully complete specialised translation tasks have also been included in the studies. Nord (2005: 177) describes the necessary competence as follows: “In order to translate a complete text, the students require not only transfer competence, but also linguistic competence in SL and TL, cultural competence in SC and TC, as well as factual and research competence”. These findings can be extended to specialised translation dictionaries at a general level. First of all, translators need general knowledge about the two cultures involved and secondly, they need knowledge about the subject field. Furthermore, lexicographers should attempt to identify the relevant linguistic elements inherent in translation, because translators do not translate isolated words and terms, rather they translate texts. At a more specific level, user needs are linked to four general types of competence. Factual competence, which concerns the knowledge of a subject field in both cultures, linguistic competence, i.e., the knowledge of native and foreign general language (LGP) as well as native and foreign language for special purposes (LSP), textual competence, which is the knowledge of textual and genre conventions for LGP and LSP texts in the relevant subject fields in both languages, and cultural competence, i.e., knowledge facilitating crosscultural interaction. These types of user competence determine how learners will actually use translation dictionaries in particular types of user situation, because users need dictionaries to help them where their own competence is insufficient for the task at hand. When these types of competence have been identified, lexicographers will have a good indication of the environment in which their translation dictionary will be rooted and which types of data users need in the relevant extra-lexicographic translation situations. It is therefore proposed that lexicographers should include data types in their dictionaries that relate to linguistic competence (particularly LSP competence) and textual competence (particularly genre conventions in LSP texts) in order to improve translation quality.


Sandro Nielsen

4.4.  Syntactic structures relevant for LSP translation When learners translate LSP texts into a foreign language, it is important that they have tools helping them produce texts that conform to the expected style. This style requirement may be met by producing translations that use natural and idiomatic language, and wellcrafted dictionaries may provide the help needed. The significance of style in LSP translation is particularly emphasised by Alcaraz / Hughes (2002: 192): What this means is that the translator must be constantly alert to possible syntactic nuances that shape or frame the original utterance, and that may necessitate substantially different treatment in the target text. (Alcaraz / Hughes 2002: 192)

Beginners and intermediate learners are unlikely to be familiar with the syntactic structures that are used in a particular LSP and which distinguish the language of this subject field from LGP and the languages of other subject fields, especially those structures that are unusual and complex. The optimal specialised translation dictionary for learners should, therefore, contain data about those syntactic structures that cannot be directly transferred from the source language to the target language, e.g., because the structures have different pragmatic functions in the two languages. Those syntactic structures that are part of natural and idiomatic LSP vary from one subject field to another. However, the examples below from legal language will give an indication of which types of syntactic structures lexicographers should take into account. These aspects may be extended to other types of specialised language and are therefore relevant for theoretical as well as practical lexicography. The following discussion will deal with some characteristic and often-used syntactic structures in Danish and German legal language and their translation into English, French and Spanish. Learners generally encounter problems with those structures that cannot be transferred directly into the foreign LSP. According to Nielsen / Sørensen (1998: 134–137), Danish legal language is characterised by the frequent use of syntactic structures that are seldom or never used in Danish LGP. Legal language tends to favour synthetic constructions with front-weight, whereas LGP favours analytical constructions with end-weight. Consequently, learners who have to translate Danish legal texts into a foreign language need to know how to translate such syntactic structures, especially when the target language does not have the same options. Furthermore, these syntactic structures are used across sub-genres within the legal genre, e.g., contracts, statutes, wills, scholarly writings and textbooks; as a result, translators are likely to meet them relatively often and need to know how to translate them. Languages other than Danish, for instance German, allow similar syntactic structures to be used in LSP. Examples of relevant syntactic constructions are pre-modified syntagmas with a noun as the head word, as found in the following sentence parts from Danish and German contracts (example 1): (1)

(Danish) den i artikel 18 omhandlede provision (German) die in Artikel 18 vorgesehene Provision [both literally: the in article 18 mentioned commission]

When translating from one of these two languages into, for instance, English and French, learners need their specialised translation dictionaries to help them with both the legal terms

Specialised Translation Dictionaries for Learners


and the syntactic structures. Neither English nor French allow the use of the above structure, so the dictionaries must contain data that enable learners to make translations that read something like the following (example 2): (2)

(English) the commission provided for in Article 18 (French) la commission prévue à l’Article 18

As can be seen from (2), English and French have the option of using relative clauses to produce utterances with the same pragmatic function as the Danish and German syntagmas. In contrast to general language, English and French legal language usually opts for reduced relative clauses with no relative pronoun, so-called zero relative clauses. This is something beginners and intermediate learners cannot be expected to know and, therefore, specialised translation dictionaries should make this clear to them. English, French and German also offer another option for translating the above complex clause structure, namely, the use of nouns or noun phrases. This may be illustrated by the translation of the following Danish syntagma (example 3): (3)

(Danish) inden for det af kontrakten omfattede område [literally: in the by the contract covered territory]

This would be translated into (example 4): (4)

(German) innerhalb des Vertragsgebiets (English) in the contractual Territory (French) intérieur du Territoire

Beginners and intermediate learners need guidance as to the possible correct translation of the above types of syntactic structure, and dictionaries that have been designed on the basis of the above-mentioned translation functions, user competence and user situations should enable learners to successfully translate domain-specific syntactic structures. The use of inversion in conditional clauses is also a characteristic feature of Danish and German legal language that often requires a different structure when translated into other languages. For instance, English and French do not allow inversion in such cases, but prefer the use of subordinating conjunctions to express the same pragmatic function. Again, such linguistic features are found in many sub-genres within the legal genre and are therefore important for learners as well as lexicographers. Examples from Danish and German contracts with the verb in initial position include: (5)

(Danish) Opfylder agenten ikke denne forpligtelse [har agenturgiveren ret til…] (German) Erfüllt der Handelsverträter diese Verpflichtung nicht [hat der Auftragsgeber das Recht…] [both literally: Does the agent not satisfy this obligation (has the principal the right to...)]

The same phrases in English and French, which require the use of conjunctional clauses introducing conditions, would read:


Sandro Nielsen


(English) If the Agent fails to satisfy this obligation [the Principal shall be entitled to…] (French) Si l’Agent n’exécute pas cette obligation [le Principal sera en droit de…]

The same use of inversion in introductory conditional clauses is also found in Danish and German statutes, for example: (7)

(Danish) Leverer sælger kun en del af varen… (German) Liefert der Verkäufer nur einen Teil der Ware… [both literally: Delivers the seller only a part of the goods…]

Their translation into languages that do not allow these syntactic structures would read: (8)

(English) If the seller delivers only a part of the goods… (French) Si le vendeur ne livre qu’une partie des marchandises… (Spanish) Si el vendedor sólo entrega una parte de las mercaderías…

Examples 1 to 8 are all from the same subject field, but they serve to illustrate the significance of special syntactic structures in LSP texts and their relevance for LSP translation. All subject fields have their own LSP, but in a broader lexicographic context dealing with dictionaries that are designed to help users translate LSP texts, the recognition of such structures by lexicographers is essential. Only few lexicographers have addressed this issue but, in addition to Nielsen / Sørensen (1998) discussing legal language, Schneider (1998: 297–329) also emphasises the importance of being aware of linguistic structures when designing dictionaries whose function is to provide help to translate accounting and financial reporting texts between German and French. As illustrated by the above examples, specialised translation dictionaries should provide help that will enable learners to perform the task of “wresting the original terms and syntax into a shape acceptable to users of the target language” (Alcaraz / Hughes, 2002: 153). In order to achieve this goal, learners should also be introduced to the role played by genre conventions and the ways in which these can be handled by translators.

4.5.  Genre conventions relevant for LSP translation The uses of textual conventions that characterise genres vary considerably. According to Mayoral Asensio (2007: 52), the concept of genre can be described as a class of texts that is recognised as a class by receivers of the texts because they contain recognisable conventions regarding their structure and other linguistic elements, and because they are produced in similar communicative situations. Some of these conventions are found in what may broadly be called the general layout of texts whereas others are part of individual words, and each culture and genre has its own way in which to respect the conventions. Learners, therefore, value highly specialised translation dictionaries that help them produce translations that conform to the

Specialised Translation Dictionaries for Learners


conventions in the target-language culture but do not change the substantive contents of the source text. Such help is important as some genre conventions are shared by several genres, whereas others are only found in one genre. The importance of this type of textual knowledge is also recognised by translation scholars, for instance Eubanks (1998), discussing genres in relation to LSP translation in general terms, and more specifically by Nord (2005: 22): “In order to be able to find out which text features are conventional and which are not, the translator needs comprehensive (intralingual or contrastive) descriptions of genre conventions”. Beginners and laypersons cannot be expected to be familiar with genre-specific LSP conventions in their own language, let alone genre conventions in a foreign language. Even advanced learners and experts can only be expected to know some of the source-language and target-language genre conventions in relation to one or a few subject fields and their LSPs. Lexicographers should therefore design their dictionaries so that they contain such intralingual or contrastive descriptions of the relevant genre conventions. The above Danish, English, French and German examples of linguistic structures also show the use of textual conventions that are relevant when translating LSP texts. The use of capital initial letters in some languages is a means to identify the legal genre from other genres and one legal sub-genre from another. The phrases in (5) and (6) show that the role name given to parties in a contract is written with a capital initial letter in three languages: the Agent, der Handelsvertreter, l’Agent. In contrast, capitalisation is not used in Danish for the same role name: agenten. The use of capital initial letters in such cases marks the texts as LSP texts in their own culture, as they use conventions that differ from everyday, unmarked LGP texts. Nevertheless, as illustrated by (7) and (8), the legal genre of statutes does not use capitalisation in role names: sælger, the seller, le vendeur, el vendedor. It should be noted, however, that this use of genre conventions cannot be directly applied to German, because all nouns are written with capital initial letters according to German orthographic rules. All the same, beginners and intermediate learners cannot be expected to know when to use capital initial letters in native-language LSP texts in general. Similarly, these learner groups will not be familiar with the use of capitalisation in foreignlanguage LSP texts. Advanced learners may know some of these conventions in a limited number of text genres and subject fields but not in all genres and subject fields within LSP translation. Accordingly, lexicographers should consider including data in their specialised translation dictionaries that inform learners of the use of such conventions when usage in the source language and the target language differs in this respect. Whether the best solution is to retain the genre conventions found in the source-language text or to adopt the conventions used in the target language, depends on the translation strategy and the function of the target text. Danish learners who retain the non-use of capital initial letters in role names when they translate contracts into, e.g., English will produce target texts that may be factually correct but which do not conform to the conventions used in contracts in the target language. In such cases the learners have used a source-language oriented translation strategy, and the lack of English conventions in the target texts will be noticed by English readers. If Danish learners use a target-language oriented strategy and adapt their translations to include the relevant English conventions, i.e., writing role names with capital initial letters, English readers will find the expected textual conventions and on that basis be able to classify the target text as belonging to the correct genre or sub-genre. In such cases the translation will be both factually and conventionally correct.


Sandro Nielsen

Target texts may have one of two general functions. The function, or skopos, of a target text may be to have the same function as the source text. In the case of a translation of a contract, the function is to create the same rights and obligations as the source text, and the translation of a business letter has to establish the same relationship between the parties as the source text. In contrast, the target text may have an informative function, i.e., provide readers of the translation with the gist of the source-language text. In such cases, the translation of a contract has the function of informing readers of the rights and obligations mentioned in the source-language text and not of conferring rights nor imposing obligations on readers of the target text. Depending on the function of the target text in a given communicative situation, the source-language or the target-language oriented translation strategy, or a combination of both, will be the appropriate one, and this will in turn determine the use or non-use of target-language genre conventions. It is important for lexicographers not to consider the question of translation strategies trivial, because it determines which equivalents and translations of collocations, phrases, clauses and genre conventions lexicographers select and present in their dictionaries.

4.6.  Presentation of data supporting LSP translation Not only are linguistic structures and textual conventions shared by genres and sub-genres but also by subject fields. Similarly, translation strategies are part of any type of translation irrespective of subject field, genre and LSP. Nielsen / Sørensen (1998) examine 12 specialised translation dictionaries and find that none of them explicitly informs users how to translate complex syntactic structures, while Nielsen (2000) shows that none of the six specialised translation dictionaries examined deals with the translation of genre conventions and translation strategies in a way that is useful to learners and professional translators. Therefore, the next step for lexicographers is to analyse the impact of these three elements on the presentation of the data selected to fulfil the function of LSP translation by learners. Generally, lexicographers have two options for placing the various types of data: either inside or outside dictionary articles. No matter which option is chosen, the lexicographic structure that determines the interplay between data in dictionaries is that of the distribution structure. The above spatial dichotomy is a rather crude distinction, but it is relevant for both printed and electronic dictionaries, and it is possible to make an even finer distinction in respect of the actual placing and presentation of data, as discussed below. If lexicographers elect to place the data on syntactic structures, genre conventions and translation strategies inside articles, users will find the data in close proximity to the lemmas, or entry words. Consequently, users will have direct access to these types of data through the wordlist in printed dictionaries and some electronic dictionaries or through the search for lemmas in electronic dictionaries with simple search options. This solution has one major disadvantage, however. The data types have to be incorporated in each article in addition to other data types (e.g., morphological data, explanatory data, equivalents, collocations, phrases, examples, synonyms and cross-references) and this may result in data overload. There is therefore a real danger that users may overlook the data. Moreover,

Specialised Translation Dictionaries for Learners


lexicographers will have to incorporate identical or near-identical syntactic, genre-related and strategic data in a large number of articles in order to satisfy user needs. The inclusion of these types of data thereby increases the length of articles and takes up valuable space in printed dictionaries. Prima facie spatial constraints are not a problem in electronic dictionaries, but if articles or other search results take up more space than can be shown on a screen, important data may be overlooked and users will be forced to perform multiple activities in order to look for the help they need. By including syntactic, genre-related and strategic data inside articles, lexicographers face a serious practical problem: in which specific articles should the data be placed? These data are unlikely to be included in cross-reference articles, but are they relevant in all full articles? Nor is it likely that data on the use of inversion in conditional clauses are relevant in articles dealing with word classes other than verbs, as this linguistic feature depends on the pragmatic function of utterances. In contrast, the use of translation strategies is likely to be relevant irrespective of word class, as the correct strategy depends on the pragmatic function of utterances as well as the communicative function of target texts. The point is that the fewer the articles that contain these data types the larger the risk is that users will only find the necessary help by pure chance or through prohibitively long search processes. The fact that syntactic structures and genre conventions are used across subject fields and their LSPs allows lexicographers to deal with them at an overall level. Translation strategies also come into play regardless of subject field and LSP, so lexicographers may choose to handle this element at an overall level as well. All three elements of translation have general applicability because they do not depend on individual terms and words but on LSP usage. Accordingly, they are not specifically related to lemmas per se, but the three elements are inherent in any translation situation to various degrees. It is therefore paramount that the data on these elements of LSP translation are as accessible to learners as possible when they consult specialised translation dictionaries. Lexicographers may decide that the best way to help learners is to present the relevant data types outside articles. As suggested by Nielsen / Sørensen (1998: 143–144) data on syntactic structures should be presented together in a separate dictionary section, for instance, in the back matter of printed dictionaries. This section should explain and show examples of those typical syntactic structures that are used in a particular LSP in the source language and which are relevant for translation between the two languages concerned. Lexicographers may here present explicit examples of how learners can translate those structures into the appropriate LSP in the target language. One advantage of this solution is that the syntactic data are available to learners no matter which lemma they are looking for. Another advantage is that a properly written and coherent text showing learners how to solve problems with syntactic structures that are complex and cannot be directly transferred to the target language has a didactic function that is important for learners. Not only are learners introduced to specific pitfalls but they are also alerted to syntactic aspects that are relevant for LSP translation in general, aspects they would otherwise have been unaware of. Data helping learners translate genre conventions can also be presented in separate dictionary sections. As pointed out by Nielsen (2000: 162–165), lexicographers can help users by explaining the possible solutions to problems of translating verbal and non-verbal genre conventions in one single and coherent text containing appropriate examples. For


Sandro Nielsen

instance, a section dealing with genre conventions may show explicit examples of typical LSP conventions in the source-language and target-language cultures and show how source-language conventions can be translated into the foreign language depending on whether learners want to use a source-language or a target-language oriented translation strategy. In addition, lexicographers should consider including illustrative examples of documents from particular genres, e.g., contracts and statutes, in the source language and at least two examples of translations of each document showing the use of both translation strategies. Each illustrative text may contain examples of all the verbal as well as nonverbal genre conventions found in contracts, statutes etc., so that learners can see examples of documents in their entirety. The result of the discussion so far is that specialised translation dictionaries for learners need to contain syntactic, genre-related and strategic data presented in a systematic way. Regardless of whether lexicographers choose to place these data types in one or more sections, the relevant data types for each subject field dealt with by the dictionary in question should include the elements listed in Figure 1, which are all integral parts of LSP translation and highly relevant for learners:

Subject field 1: 1. Syntactic structures. 1.1. Syntactic structures in source-language LSP. 1.1.1. Distinctive structures and their pragmatic functions. 1.2. Syntactic structures in target-language LSP. 1.2.2. Language structures that have the same functions as those identified in 1.1.1. 1.3. Translation strategies. 1.3.1. How to translate the syntactic structures in 1.1.1 using a source-language oriented strategy. 1.3.2. How to translate the syntactic structures in 1.1.1 using a target-language oriented strategy. 2. Genre conventions. 2.1. Genre conventions in source-language LSP genre and sub-genres. 2.1.1. Distinctive conventions in genre and/or sub-genre 1…n. 2.2. Genre conventions in target-language LSP genre and sub-genres. 2.2.1. Distinctive conventions in genre and/or sub-genre 1…n. 2.3. Translation strategies. 2.3.1. How to translate genre conventions in genre and/or subgenres 1…n using a source-language oriented strategy. 2.3.2. How to translate genre conventions in genre and/or subgenres 1…n using a target-language oriented strategy. Figure 1.  Elements of LSP translation to be dealt with in separate dictionary sections.

Specialised Translation Dictionaries for Learners


This detailed treatment of data types that help learners translate LSP texts may be available in electronic form. Sections containing data on syntactic structures, genre conventions and translation strategies are embedded in online dictionaries and dictionaries on CD-ROM. However, printed dictionaries may also be accompanied by CD-ROMs that contain supplementary material, and this is where the separate sections may be placed. This fairly recent trend can be observed in some printed monolingual specialised dictionaries such as LONGMAN BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY and OXFORD BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY. Lexicographers and publishers should consider extending this practice to specialised translation dictionaries, as data contained in CD-ROMs do not take up valuable space in the printed book and are usually easy to access. Furthermore, these types of sections in online dictionaries and on CD-ROM can be interactive, because lexicographers may incorporate exercises in the sections with a view to educating and training learners to translate LSP texts into a foreign language. For instance, specialised translation dictionaries may have separate sections explaining the pragmatic functions of syntactic structures, showing examples of their translation and offering didactically sound translation exercises where, on completion, learners will be shown model answers and solutions. Whether this is feasible, and if so to what extent, must be determined on a case-by-case basis, but the number of subject fields involved plays an important part. The number of subject fields covered by a specialised dictionary directly affects the presentation of data supporting LSP translation. Lexicographers distinguish between two broad groups of dictionaries in this respect. The first one consists of single-field dictionaries, which are dictionaries that deal with the LSP used in communication within one particular subject field, e.g., dictionaries of law and dictionaries of accounting. The other group is made up of dictionaries that handle the LSPs used in communication within two or more subject fields, e.g., business dictionaries and dictionaries of science and technology, and these are referred to as multi-field dictionaries. As pointed out in Nielsen (1990: 133–135) and Nielsen (1994: 40–42), this dichotomy has both practical and theoretical implications. Firstly, multi-field dictionaries generally offer a less comprehensive treatment of the LSP from each subject field than do single-field dictionaries. This is due to the fact that most multi-field dictionaries cover a relatively large number of fields, for instance, LONGMAN BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY covers 14 and OXFORD BUSINESS SPANISH DICTIONARY covers 24 subject fields. It is impossible to give the same thorough treatment of the LSPs used in 24 subject fields as that which can be given to the LSP used in one subject field within the same space. This may be supported by the fact that OXFORD BUSINESS SPANISH DICTIONARY contains a centred section dealing with the writing of business letters and CVs, and the use of the telephone. This section therefore gives help in relation to three out of 24 subject fields covered: business administration, communication and human resource management. However, this supplementary material merely contains phrases, saying nothing about the syntactic structures and genre conventions used in the 24 LSPs. In order to provide optimal help to learners, OXFORD BUSINESS SPANISH DICTIONARY should have contained separate sections dealing with the types of data listed in Figure 1 for each of the 24 subject fields. Secondly, single-field dictionaries are tools that are well suited to providing help to learners who have problems translating LSP texts into a foreign language. These dictionaries focus on one subject field and hence one LSP. Accordingly, single-field dictionaries have the


Sandro Nielsen

potential of offering in-depth coverage of the terminology, collocations, phrases, syntactic structures and genre conventions used within the field in question so that learners may gain maximum benefit from consulting such dictionaries. This includes the possibility of dealing with syntactic structures and genre conventions used in documents in a wide range of subgenres, e.g., statutes, contracts, wills, powers of attorney, bankruptcy petitions and indictments within the legal genre. Furthermore, single-field dictionaries can relatively easily present the relevant options of source-language and target-language oriented translation strategies in connection with LSP translation, as they focus on the usage of one subject field and its related LSP in two cultures, (see Figure 1 above). This applies to both printed and electronic dictionaries.

4.7.  Conclusion LSP translation should not exclusively focus on terminology, important though it is, because terms make up less than a fifth of any LSP text. Therefore, learners should develop skills that enable them to identify the elements surrounding the terms and deal with them appropriately. An acceptable LSP translation is not one in which all the terms have been translated correctly but the rest of the text is grammatically and idiomatically wrong. An acceptable LSP translation is one that contains correctly translated terms, utterances that have been translated correctly according to their pragmatic function, textual conventions that are familiar to readers and conform with the target-language genre conventions, as well as grammatically and idiomatically correct collocations and phrases according to the LSP usage concerned. In order to meet the needs of learners in specific types of user situations involving LSP translation, specialised translation dictionaries should generally be designed as augmented reference tools. Such dictionaries will not only help learners acquire knowledge about new terms and new meanings of known terms, but also help learners acquire knowledge about correct and appropriate usage, including domain-specific syntactic structures, genre conventions and translation strategies. Depending on their lexicographic functions, electronic and printed dictionaries should include separate sections and / or CD-ROMs with grammar, translation etc. data, exercises, and illustrative documentary examples. In order to cater for learners translating LSP texts, lexicographers should consider designing and compiling single-field dictionaries, because they have the potential to give the best treatment of all the elements that are part of the translation process. The result is that the traditional focus on terms and language systems will be partially replaced and supplemented by focus on usage because the central unit of translation is not the word but the text.

CHAPTER 5. The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners Ildikó Fata

Abstract As transpires from the title, this chapter is primarily concerned with (bilingual) specialised dictionaries for a special group of learners, i.e. translators, devised to comply with their wishes and expectations regarding specialised dictionaries, whether existing or assumed, before, during and after the translation process. Undoubtedly, a (bilingual) dictionary for translation purposes is by no means an exclusive aid for the translator, but with their optimum and user oriented design the number of auxiliary materials consulted during the translation process may be considerably reduced from the current eight or ten. The main objective of this chapter is to present both the “translation dictionary for LSP” and the “specialised dictionary for translation purposes” as an interesting, if highly complex, dictionary type which can ideally have many more functions and hence cover many more user situations than demonstrated and realised by research literature. In placing the above dictionary type in a metalexicographic framework, as well as in defining its concept and genuine purpose, all further theoretical and practical considerations will be based on the latest functional studies (Bergenholtz / Tarp, 2002; Tarp, 2002, 2004, 2005b), arising from practical lexicographic needs. The high number of user situations that a translation oriented specialised dictionary may ideally cover, whether cognitive or communicative, presents current modern lexicographic theory with new challenges, while present-day problems point to the limitations of traditional dictionary definitions as to what should be the subject of further research. The chapter concludes with a brief workshop report (as proposed by Bergenholtz, 1992) on the design and making of a bilingual (Hungarian-German, German-Hungarian) specialised dictionary of pension insurance devised for translation purposes, and with the presentation of its diverse applications and uses in subject specific translation training. Key Words: LSP TRANSLATION; BILINGUAL SPECIALISED DICTIONARY; LEARNERS; USER SITUATION; GERMAN; HUNGARIAN

5.1.  Introduction The chapter focuses on the bilingual translation1 dictionary, both as a complex dictionary type in the intersection of several scientific disciplines, and which, therefore, requires an


In this chapter we rely on the German literature when defining the scientific discipline of ’specialised translation’; and by ’Translationswissenschaft’ and ’translation studies’ we mean the field that studies the activities of translators and interpreters alike. Thus, in our interpretation the expressions ’translation’ and ’translator’ are used to refer to both activities. We think, however, that translators and interpreters have taken up new roles during the paradigm change that took place in the past decade. Beside the traditional activities, they transmit language and culture, create texts independently, do terminology work (Sandrini, 2004: 147), and act as information brokers as well (Austermühl / Einhauser / Kornelius, 2003).


Ildikó Fata

interdisciplinary approach, and also as a particular realisation of that dictionary type: a bilingual specialised dictionary of pension insurance (c.f. MAGYAR-NÉMET, NÉMET-MAGYAR NYUGDÍJBIZTOSÍTÁSI SZAKSZÓTÁR) (see Fata, 2005). The translation dictionary has several names in academic literature on dictionary research and on translation studies. The translation dictionary or equivalence dictionary is defined in most dictionary typologies as a bilingual dictionary (see Worbs, 1997), which – unlike a monolingual dictionary – offers source language lemmas on the right and their target language equivalents on the left. However, the above definitions ignore the needs and expectations of the target users. This is why Worbs (1997: 521) recommends the expression translation dictionary (Translationswörterbuch), which seems to spread in the international literature anyway (c.f. Christiansen, 1994; Duvå / Laursen, 1994; Tarp, 2004; Tarp, 2005a). The chapter focuses on the subtype bilingual specialised translation dictionary, which can also be correctly called bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes. When defining this particular dictionary type and distinguishing it from other dictionary types we start out from the working definition offered by Bergenholtz / Tarp (2002), which says the compilation of a bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes requires an integrated approach and an interdisciplinary cooperation with other branches of science. During our work we relied on the modern Danish function theory of lexicography as the appropriate metalexicographic framework. However, we are not going into detail on it here (see Tarp, 2008a, for a review). In the chapter we briefly discuss the position of this new dictionary type in the intersection of several scientific disciplines and subfields of lexicography (section 1); we provide a model for the translation process based on Tarp (2005a), Gerzymisch-Arbogast (1996) and Muráth (2000) (section 2); and we outline the standpoint of applied translation studies on an auxiliary tool considered ideal, and also on a bilingual specialised dictionary (section 3). In section 4 we will discuss a published bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes (see Fata, 2005), situating it in the domain of Hungarian dictionary research and compilation. We will focus on the target users, their needs, the lexicographical functions of the dictionary, the parts of the dictionary, and the pedagogical dimensions of the specialised dictionary. Our preliminary hypothesis is that this bilingual learner’s LSP dictionary – both as a dictionary type and as its particular realisation – is able to satisfy the need for information in any target group interested in the field, even though it considers translators and interpreters its primary target users. Thus, a scientifically based bilingual learner’s LSP dictionary primarily created for translators and interpreters is no less valuable than a traditional bilingual LSP dictionary; quite the opposite, in fact.

5.2.  The bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes as the object of dictionary research The compilation of a bilingual learner’s dictionary (type) for LSP would require the integration of achievements in more fields of science than we can deal with in this chapter.


The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners

However, we took the findings of the following disciplines into consideration (see figure 1) to attain our research goals: dictionary research2, translation studies, corpus linguistics, LSP research, terminology research.

translation studies

corpus linguistics metalexicography

dictionary research

LSP research Terminology

bilingual specialised translation dictionary Figure 1.  Translation dictionary at the intersection of many scientific disciplines.

Tarp (2004: 10) offers a working definition of the translation dictionary as “a dictionary designed to assist the user in solving problems related to the translation process”. As we took this working definition as a starting point when defining the bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes, it also seemed practical to adopt the steps and working processes described in the book during the preparatory work on the project. Thus we set up a metalexicographic framework for the specialised dictionary; we identified the needs and expectations of the target users regarding specialised dictionaries partly by looking at the literature and partly with the help of our empirical research; we compiled a corpus of specialised texts as the basis of the specialised dictionary; we identified the conceptual system of the domain based on the corpus; we carried out a contrastive terminological analysis of this conceptual system; and finally we examined the possibilities of presenting the findings of these conceptual and LSP analyses in a bilingual specialised dictionary. In figure 2 we situate the bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes at the intersection of dictionary research and translation studies as the dictionary type that takes into consideration the findings of the subfields3. 2


In the chapter we rely on the lexicographic theory of Germanics (see Wiegand, 1998, 2001), and the modern Danish function theory (see Bergenholtz / Tarp, 2002). Wiegand refers to the field directly under metalexicography (’Metalexikographie’) as dictionary research (’Wörterbuchforschung’) in his latest works (cf 1998, 2001). Metalexicography – in Wiegand’s interpretation (1998, 2001) – is the scientific study of lexicography with the help of other fields of science. Figure 1 aims to comply with this interpretation. In Wiegand’s interpretation (1998 and 2001), dictionary research includes the following subfields: systematic dictionary research (Systematische Wörterbuchforschung), critical dictionary research (Kritische Wörterbuchforschung), historical dictionary research (Historische Wörterbuchforschung), and dictionary use research (Wörterbuchbenutzungsforschung). Since our specialised dictionary has a synchronic approach and aims to contain the current information on a particular domain, we regarded findings of historical dictionary research irrelevant.


systematic dictionary research critical dictionary research Dictionary use research

Translation studies

Dictionary research

Ildikó Fata

Figure 2.  Subfields of lexicography at the intersection of dictionary research and translation studies.

In line with Schaeder (1994), we can divide the research areas of (meta)lexicography into the following three parts: i) general (meta)lexicography, ii) specialised (meta)lexicography, iii) pedagogical (meta)lexicography. It follows from the introduction that a bilingual learner’s dictionary for LSP should use research findings and practical experience from all three theoretical and practical subfields of lexicography. Taking all research findings into consideration is also important because – as this dictionary type is new and interdisciplinary in nature – there are only few specific and directly applicable research findings that we could use in our project to create the specialised dictionary. Figure 3 shows how the subfields of lexicography and their research findings interacted during the compilation of the bilingual learner’s LSP dictionary. The broken line between the different theoretical and practical subfields of lexicography indicates that in an ideal case theory and practice mutually interact and stimulate each other.

general language metalexicography general language lexicography

bilingual specialised translation dictionary

pedagogical metalexicography

specialised metalexicography specialised lexicography

pedagogical lexicography

Figure 3.  The bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes at the intersection of the different (meta)lexicographic subfields.

The above shows the type of problems that arise from this dictionary type, and how we created this particular bilingual specialised dictionary by integrating the research findings of the above disciplines.


The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners

5.3.  Modelling the translation process In what follows we define the translation process according to Worbs (1997) as (source language and target language) text oriented communication. Translators work primarily with situationally based specialised texts (‘Fachtexte-in-Situation’) under a constant time constraint; therefore, in order to be able to work quickly and efficiently they need auxiliary materials that contain precise and current information and provide an outline of conceptual relations. Such auxiliary materials should also provide – beside source language and target language conceptual equivalents – system-level (‘System-Ebene’) usage-level (‘Verwendungs-Ebene’) (see Muráth, 2000: 159) source language and target language equivalents, explanations of meaning, typical contexts, integration in the conceptual system and country specific details. Our interpretation of the translation process is based on the models of Tarp (2007a) and of Muráth (2002) based on Gerzymisch-Arbogast (1996). Tarp divides the translation process into three phases: preparation, central phase (the translation proper), and final phase. Figure 4 shows the phases of the translation process, and the following explanation shows the functions of a translation dictionary with regard to these phases. In this way we can find out whether or not the existing specialised dictionaries meet the informational requirements of the target users. prephase preparation

central phases reception


final phase production


Figure 4.  Modelling the translation process based on Tarp4 (2007a: 241).

The first phase is preparation. A bilingual specialised dictionary compiled for translators needs to be useful at this early stage, outlining the conceptual system of the domain and showing its conceptual relations. The central phase, the translation proper, begins with a reception phase, during which the translator receives the original source language text that is to be translated. The next step is transfer, which does not mean the actual translation but a system-level interpretation of the linguistic features of the source language text and a comparison with possible target language equivalents. Only after this step comes the production of the target language text. Here we have to note that the above model, although the problem areas have been identified – namely, the comparison of the conceptual systems and of the equivalents of the two texts – is not unproblematic, and Tarp does not manage to clearly differentiate the system- and usage-levels of the translation process. At this point, the model provided by Muráth (2000: 159), based on Gerzymisch-Arbogast (1996: 245) seems to handle the problem better, as seen in figure 5. 4

The model of the translation process has been taken from Tarp (2007a), who kindly sent me the digital version of the article. Here I would like to thank him for that.


Ildikó Fata transfer phase system-level of the source language reception phase usage-level of the source language text

system-level of the target language


production phase usage-level of the target language text


Figure 5.  Modelling the translation process according to Muráth (2000: 159), based on Gerzymisch-Arbogast (1996: 245).

During the translation process – cf. Muráth (2000: 159) – the translator moves between the system-level and the usage-level. The translation process may be divided into three phases: in the reception phase the focus is on understanding the source language text, and on interpreting the specialist vocabulary in the context. Translators need to access information on the terminological system to conceptually interpret the LSP vocabulary. In the transfer phase translators move on to the system-level, where they match source language terms with target language terms. This is followed by the production phase, where the system level terms found in the target language are adapted to the level of the given text and the target language text is created. Let us now return to Tarp’s model. The final phase (c.f. Tarp, 2007a: 245) of the translation process seems to be a little researched area from a lexicographic point of view. However, it plays a very important role in the translation process, so Tarp discusses it in detail and divides it into further steps, namely: i) reception of the original text, ii) reception of the translated text, iii) evaluation of the transfer, iv) proof-reading the transfer, v) evaluation of the translated text, vi) proof-reading the translated text. The aim of our translation oriented specialised dictionary is, therefore, to combine knowledge of specialised language and knowledge of the system, and convey structured knowledge of the given domain, in this way helping the translator through the various phases of translation. The structure of and the information in an ideal translation oriented specialised dictionary must meet the requirements of the communicational process of translation, namely, it must contain cognitive – communicational – and operational knowledge (see Tarp, 2007).

5.4.  The bilingual specialised dictionary for translation purposes as an object of research in translation studies In what follows we will examine the standpoint of applied translation studies in these two approaches: 1) the place a bilingual specialised dictionary occupies among translation


The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners

auxiliary materials and their typology; 2) what experts in translation studies, practising translators and interpreters expect from a bilingual specialised dictionary designed for translation purposes. 5.4.1.  The place of the bilingual specialised dictionary in the typology of translation auxiliary materials When looking at the first approach, we have very few reference points to rely on, as only one typology of translation auxiliary materials exists, that of Nord (2002). Figure 6 shows this typology, revealing that bilingual specialised dictionaries have a rather marginal place in this system. Hilfsmittel









einspr. allgemeine Wb-er







einspr. Spezialwb-er


Atlanten Handbücher Chroniken LW benutzerdefinierte Verzeichnisse

Wörterbücher einsprachige



zweispr. allgemeine Wb-er

allgemeine E.

zweispr. Spezialwb-er

mehrspr. allgemeine Wb-er

spezielle E.

mehrspr. Spezialwb-er

zweisprachige Fachwörterbücher Figure 6.  The typology of translation auxiliary materials by Nord (2002: 160).

Nord (2002: 173) also mentioned that there is disagreement between experts of theoretical translation studies and practicing translators and interpreters. Namely, bilingual specialised dictionaries play a much more important role in the daily work of practicing translators and interpreters than shown in the above typology, and could even play a more important role if they satisfied the needs and expectations of translators.


Ildikó Fata

5.4.2.  The needs and expectations translation dictionaries for LSP have to meet – translation studies approach Worbs (1997) also mentioned that the view translation studies have of bilingual LSP dictionaries is rather controversial. According to Nord (2002) there are two positions: those who reject bilingual LSP dictionaries as appropriate tools in translation, and those who think bilingual LSP dictionaries could be important for translation purposes, provided their data structure is relevant from a translator’s point of view. However, both groups seem to agree that existing bilingual LSP dictionaries are not suitable for translation purposes, as they ignore factors relevant in the translation process, such as text, situation and culture. For our purposes, positive dictionary criticism offered by translation studies is more relevant, which is why we will cite those requirements a bilingual LSP dictionary should meet to make it suitable for translation and interpretation purposes. Vermeer’s claim (1989: 171): „Je weniger ein Wörterbuch nur „Wörter”buch ist, desto hilfreicher ist es für den Translator” – is still relevant after 20 years. A dictionary that is considered ideal for translation purposes has to perform the functions of an equivalence, an explanatory and a defining dictionary all in one. It is also necessary to have active and passive functions in both directions, and consequently provide help with every phase of the translation process (Worbs, 1997). In her PhD thesis (2002: 223) Nord outlines an ideal translation auxiliary tool that unites the strengths and positive aspects of general language bilingual dictionaries, parallel texts and (he did not specify, and most probably, although not specified), monolingual LSP dictionaries. As for the macrostructure of an ideal dictionary for translation purposes: a translation dictionary has to contain both context-free L1 and L2 units on the system-level, and context-dependent L1 and L2 units on the usage – or text-level. In this way the bilingual translation dictionary for LSP is more likely to comply with the model of the translation process as a text centred communicational activity (cf. Worbs, 1997: 506). The microstructure of an ideal specialised dictionary for translation purposes has to integrate many more types of information than a traditional bilingual dictionary does. For example: encyclopaedic information on L1 lemmas and the prototypical text level L2 equivalents of the L1 lemma (see Worbs, 1997). Depending on the LSP, the relevant characteristics and syntactical features of everyday general language nouns and verbs have to be included as well. The preparation of an ideal bilingual LSP dictionary for translation purposes has to include a needs analysis of translators and interpreters as the primary target users, and their opinion on existing LSP dictionaries has to be taken into consideration. In what follows, we will list the main research findings on the use of translation auxiliary tools as a field of applied translation studies, and, where necessary, we will add the findings of our survey among translators (for details see Fata, 2006). The findings of the few surveys conducted among translators and interpreters (c.f. Fluck, 1992; Stepnikowska, 1998; Muráth, 2000, 2002; Nord, 2002; Bergenholtz / Tarp, 1994 and Rossenbeck, 1994) are as follows: – The following information is needed in every entry: the classification of the lemma in the right domain, its style, frequency, spelling, grammatical features, its usual context, explanation, example sentences, foreign language equivalents, the conventions of text

The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners


type. Furthermore, collocations and verbs the nouns usually go with are also needed. Encyclopaedic information on the lemma is needed to discover the occasional conceptual incongruence between L1 and L2 specialist terms. – Experience shows (c.f. Bergenholtz / Tarp, 1994: 102) that dictionary users tend to look for multi-word expressions in an LSP dictionary (and not one word specialist terms). This means that compilers of LSP dictionaries have to solve the lemmatisation of multi-word terms. – A comprehensive presentation of the domain, the institutional system belonging to that domain, its organisational structure, and the jurisdiction involved would be welcome. – Quick and easy access within the list of words and between the parts of the dictionary could be ensured with cross-references. I conducted a survey among Hungarian specialist translators and interpreters (see Fata 2006) and found the following additional points: – Contrary to experts of translation studies, practicing translators and interpreters are / would be happy to work with printed bilingual LSP dictionaries, if they provide accurate and current information on the domain. The same was found by Nord (2002), and Fóris (2006). – A further contradiction between the views of experts in translation studies and lexicographers is that practicing translators and interpreters do not pay much attention to the introduction section of a dictionary, be it a typology of dictionaries or instructions for dictionary use. They also pay little attention to sources used and bibliography5.

5.5.  Project report on a bilingual learner’s dictionary for LSP 5.5.1.  A brief overview of Hungarian lexicographic research and dictionary publishing The state of play in Hungarian lexicography is in state of flux. Some of the main current (meta)lexicographic research and dictionary projects are presented below: – Hungarian metalexicographic research has seen an upsurge in the past 10 years. It is normal for Hungarian lexicographers to take foreign literature as the basis of their research depending on their knowledge of foreign languages and the specialist field they work with. This has a prohibitive effect on the evolution of Hungarian lexicography as a scientific discipline. There have been groundbreaking dissertations that aimed to establish Hungarian metalexicography, such as Fejér, 1995; Muráth, 2000; Fóris, 2001; Hollós, 2004; Szarvas, 2005 and Fata, 2009. It is noteworthy that three of these 5

At this point I agree with experts in translation studies and LSP lexicographers, namely, that we are yet to see the dictionary-friendly education of users together with the creation of user-friendly dictionaries (e.g. dictionaries that take the translator’s needs into consideration) (c.f. Kühn 2000’s concept of ’Wörterbuchfreundlichkeit’).


Ildikó Fata

dissertations were created with the help of a German lexicographer as tutor, and were published in Germany or Austria. – The fact that the Dictionary Working Group of the Research Institute for Linguistics at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences launched a series entitled Lexikográfiai Füzetek in 2004, indicates the newly realised importance of Hungarian theoretical lexicography research. The series so far has three issues. – As Hungary is a small country with a less widely known language, scientific papers on a lexicographic topic enrich Hungarian lexicography with both theoretical and practical research findings. Let us see an example to illustrate the intertwining of theoretical and practical lexicography: in PhD theses (such as Muráth, 2002; Hollós, 2004 and Fata, 2009) the presentation of the dictionary plan (systematic dictionary research and typological classification) is preceded by a criticism of existing dictionaries (critical dictionary research) and a needs analysis of the potential target users (research of dictionary use). – Parallel to metalexicographic research, in the last 10–15 years more and more scientifically based, monolingual or bilingual dictionaries have been published both for general language and for LSP, at times by the same author (see, for example, MAGYAROLASZ MŰSZAKI-TUDOMÁNYOS SZÓTÁR; OLASZ-MAGYAR MŰSZAKI-TUDOMÁNYOS SZÓTÁR; MAGYAR-OLASZ-ANGOL FIZIKAI KISSZÓTÁR; NÉMET-MAGYAR SULISZÓTÁR; WIRTSCHAFT & SOZIALPOLITIK: AKTUELL. DEUTSCH-UNGARISCH; UNGARISCH-DEUTSCH). The last few years has also seen the appearance of new bilingual learner’s dictionaries. Among them, the MAGYAR-NÉMET, NÉMET-MAGYAR NYUGDÍJBIZTOSÍTÁSI SZAKSZÓTÁR is an exception, as it is the only Hungarian bilingual learners’ dictionary for LSP published so far.

5.5.2.  Project report on a translation oriented bilingual LSP dictionary of pension insurance As mentioned above, during our work we took the working definition offered by Bergenholtz / Tarp (2002), and the definition by Tarp (2004) as the starting point. Therefore, it seemed practical to also adopt the steps and work processes described there. We have already presented (see figure 1) the type of dictionary in question as a lexicographic product at the intersection of several scientific disciplines. In this section I will focus on the lexicographic preparation of the dictionary; introduce the target users and give examples (see types of users and their needs); list the possible user situations ( types of social situations, in which these needs may arise); and in discuss dictionary functions and component parts of the dictionary. Finally, as the title of the chapter shows, I discuss how the so-called pedagogical dimension of the specialised dictionary evolved (see  Types of users of an LSP translation dictionary The primary users of the LSP translation dictionary are native Hungarian translators and interpreters. It can be said that in accordance with their profile these users have a very good command of both their mother tongue and a foreign language as well as excellent cultural


The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners

competence, but ”oft über fehlende Kenntnisse über das Fach und fehlende Übersicht über die Begriffsstruktur in der Muttersprache wie in der Fremdsprache” – (Christansen [et al.], 1994: 279). The main user situations during the translation process are: text reception, transfer and text production. With reference to Tarp’s (2004 and 2007) three-fold model of user situations, there are communicative situations and several types of cognitive situations. Given that the LSP dictionary is both bilingual and bidirectional, there are other target users than those previously specified: native German translators and interpreters. They have the same user profile and range of user situations. A further group of users of the LSP dictionary is a heterogeneous group of learners, whose mother tongue competence, command of the foreign language and specific knowledge can be very varied. Students of translation and interpreting belong in this group, as do students of the faculties of economics, law and humanities, as in Hungary the majority of future translators and interpreters come from these universities. They have weaker linguistic and professional competence than translators and interpreters. In their case their main concern is not communicational user situations, but user needs to acquire knowledge about a specific phenomenon. It may not be an exaggeration to claim that – owing to their user profile and competence – journalists also belong in this group. A further group of potential users includes social politicians, pension experts, pension advisors, and experts in economics. They have excellent professional knowledge of both countries, but they lack the necessary LSP knowledge. Another group of users is closely related to the previous one: future economists, social workers, or customer service workers in pension insurance companies, who are undergoing the learning process to acquire the necessary linguistic and professional knowledge. The final target users are (future) pensioners, who live in the other country and are entitled to a pension there. Given that they are lay people, in their case the third user situation of Tarp’s model is valid: operational situations, in which they can use the LSP dictionary as a consultant. How the LSP dictionary meets the latter user situation both in its structure and its design is discussed later. Figure 7 summarises the six different types of users of the translation oriented bilingual LSP dictionary of pension insurance. Groups are organised along the vertical axis according to their professional and LSP knowledge, and along the horizontal axis according to their command of the mother tongue and the foreign language.

native Hungarian translators and interpreters

native German translators and interpreters

students of translator and interpreter trainings / students of various university studies / journalists

Figure 7.  The potential target users of the LSP dictionary.

pension experts, social politicians, experts in economics customer service clerks at pension insurance companies interested lay-people, future pensioners


Ildikó Fata

Given that the target groups have such heterogeneous background knowledge and informational needs, and as there are a large number of user situations in the subject field, the compiler of the LSP dictionary faces a great challenge: to fulfil all these requirements, expectations, and user situations. Some of the factors we have taken into consideration to meet these requirements are: – Given the heterogenity of professional and linguistic competence, we determined the minimal and maximal background knowledge of the above user groups, and accordingly identified their needs. We tried to meet these needs in the macrostructure of the dictionary (the large number of component parts of the dictionary, their functions, the variety of their structure, and lemma selection). – Our aim with this particular LSP dictionary was to provide a comprehensive view of this small, clearly separable, but heterogeneous and dynamically changing subject field. To achieve this aim, and to meet the requirements of the heterogeneous target users, we have built up an extensive macrostructure and an intensive microstructure (see Bergenholtz / Tarp / Wiegand, 1999). – Given that the target users display great linguistic and professional differences, we worded our definitions and conceptual explanations in a way that is easily understandable but at the same time up-to-date, precise and exact. This principle is known in foreign languages teaching as didactical authenticity (‘didaktische Authentizität’) (c.f. Kühn, 2004).  Types of user situations of the translation dictionary for LSP Here we will summarise the user situations of the above dictionary users. The dictionary can be used in the following 18 user situations; we grouped these according to Tarp’s (2007) three-fold segmentation of extra-lexicographic user situations: I.

Communication-orientated user situations: In order to solve communication problems with the dictionary we can distinguish the following communication-orientated user situations:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Reception of text in mother tongue. Production of text in mother tongue. Reception of text in foreign language. Production of text in foreign language. Translation of text from mother tongue into foreign language. Translation of text from foreign language into mother tongue.


Knowledge-orientated user situations: In order to add further information to the user’s existing knowledge, the following main knowledge-orientated user situations exist:


Information about the special subject field in the native language.

The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners

2. 3. 4. 5. 6.


Information about the special subject field in the foreign language. Comparison between the special subject field in the native and foreign culture. Information about the native LSP. Information about the foreign LSP. Comparison between the native and foreign LSP.

III. Operational-orientated user situations: Last but not least, the dictionary, in its function as a so-called how-to dictionary, will belong to the new generation of improved and useful handbooks, because it aims to support the following operational-orientated user situations: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Further information about the L1 and L2 special subject field by referring to the printed and electronic sources in the bibliography. Up-to-date information and statistics (between, 1998–2005) that contain data relevant to pension calculations. Information about L1 and L2 institutions and organisations that provide pensions, their consumer attendance hours and contact information. A detailed description of current pension application processes. Pension application forms.

Of the above user situations, those under I (communication-orientated user situations) match the user situations of traditional translation dictionaries (Übersetzungswörterbücher / Äquivalenzwörterbücher); we do not provide examples for these from our LSP dictionary. However, it is worth seeing examples for points 1 and 2 of II (information about the special subject field in the native tongue and in the foreign language), because although these may seem obvious, they are hardly ever present in translation dictionaries (Appendix 1). Appendix 2 is an example of the handbook function of the dictionary, as show in III. / 2. It shows up-to-date information and statistics from 1998–2005 and contains data relevant to German pension calculations. In addition to the above operational-orientated user situations, there is another user situation of a lexicographic origin, as the introduction of the LSP dictionary and the instructions for dictionary use contain information about the particular dictionary and on how to use it. The introduction of our dictionary does not say anything about its novelty, its classification in dictionary typology, or general information about lexicography and dictionary use, due to the linguistic background knowledge of potential target users, and their scant interest in dictionary introductions.  Lexicographical functions of the dictionary and its component parts Figure 8 summarises the component parts of the bilingual specialised dictionary of pension insurance devised for translation purposes:



Ildikó Fata

Preface (in Hungarian). Preface (in German). Guide to the Use of the Dictionary (in Hungarian). Guide to the Use of the Dictionary (in German). Hungarian-German Dictionary Part (with 330 lemmas). 16 bilingual appendices on Hungarian pension insurance. German-Hungarian Word List. German-Hungarian Dictionary Part (with 382 lemmas). 16 bilingual appendices on German pension insurance. Hungarian-German Word List. List of abbreviations and other reference books (bilingual, in alphabetical order). Literature consulted during the preparation of the dictionary.

Figure 8.  Parts of the LSP dictionary of Pension Insurance.

As seen from the figure, only parts V and VIII match the traditional sense of a dictionary. The LSP dictionary was intended to fulfil a number of other lexicographic functions, and thus other dictionary parts can be used as a handbook, for consulting on how-to, a course book and also a specialised dictionary for learners. An integral part of the dictionary project, and at the same time its novelty lies, in the fact that we aimed to create a bidirectional and bilingual LSP dictionary, in the Tarpian sense (c.f. Tarp, 1995). It can be seen from Figure 8 that every part of the dictionary is bilingual; moreover, the dictionary is bidirectional because the Hungarian-German Dictionary Part (part V) takes the conceptual system of the Hungarian pension system as its basis, while the German-Hungarian Dictionary Part (part VIII) is based on the conceptual system of the German pension system. This difference is apparent in the different number of lemmas in the two parts.  The pedagogical dimension of the LSP translation dictionary We can read about the pedagogical dimensions of LSP dictionaries in Kühn (1989) and Tarp (2005b). Here we refer back to figure 3, which says that during the compilation of a lexicographic product, in our case a bilingual learner’s dictionary for LSP, one has to take into consideration the research findings of general and specialised lexicography and pedagogical lexicography alike. The pedagogical dimension played an important role at three occasions during the compilation of the LSP dictionary of pension insurance. First, when compiling the corpus for the specialised dictionary we aimed to select texts that offer a comprehensive view of the field with its historic and conceptual relations, and provide an accurate, precise and current picture of the specialist field. This is why we selected university course books, monographs, or their relevant chapters. With their help we as compilers could obtain a


The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners

comprehensive view of the subject field, its historic and conceptual relations and their current problems. Second, when writing the entry the compact, straightforward but still understandable metalinguistic wording of the texts of the corpus was a great help, and at times exemplary. Third, the bilingual introductions and tables form an integral part of the LSP dictionary and present the conceptual relations of the domain. Thus they are important tools of knowledge acquisition in the field. When wording these parts of the dictionary, we kept in mind their learning / pedagogical functions (see appendix 1). Above we have already shown examples of the appendices of the LSP dictionary and their pedagogical implications, so below we use an entry to illustrate how the already mentioned principle of didactical authenticity (Kühn, 2004) is applied. Recently we have been hearing more and more of terminology databases specially created for translators and interpreters. Behind this positive initiative lies the realisation that translators and interpreters face specific texts and not conceptual systems in their work. Consequently, these new types of translation-related terminology-databanks do not only contain system level conceptual equivalents in the foreign language, but text level equivalents and minicontexts selected from authentic specialised corpora. I would go a step further and claim that linguistically and professionally checked minicontexts that seem authentic but were written by the compiler of the dictionary with pedagogical aims (this is my interpretation of the principle of “didactical authenticity”) can contain a large amount of professional and LSP information that could help translators and interpreters in producing target language texts. To illustrate the above, let us see an example from MAGYAR-NÉMET, NÉMET-MAGYAR NYUGDÍJBIZTOSÍTÁSI SZAKSZÓTÁR) (example 1). (1)  The entry árvaellátás’ in the Hungarian-German part of the MAGYAR-NÉMET, MAGYAR NYUGDÍJBIZTOSÍTÁSI SZAKSZÓTÁR dictionary 9. árvaellátás ~t kap ~ félárvaság / egyik szülő halála esetén ~ teljes árvaság / mindkét szülő halála esetén ~ra jogosult gyermek baleseti ~ →hozzátartozói nyugellátás →Melléklet 9.: A magyar kötelező nyugdíjbiztosítás folyósított járadékai a nyugdíjra jogosult személyek alapján

Waisenrente eine ~ bekommen / beziehen / empfangen Halbwaisenrente Vollwaisenrente ~nberechtigtes Kind ~ wegen Unfall


Zum Bezug einer ~ sind Kinder be – rechtigt, wenn deren verstorbenes Elternteil bis zu seinem Tod die zur Alters– oder Invaliditätsrente not – wendige Dienstzeit erworben hatte oder zum Zeitpunkt des Todes be – reits Rentner war. Im Allgemeinen verfügt die Waise bis zur Vollen – dung des 16. Lebensjahres über einen Rentenanspruch. Bei Schul – und Berufsausbildung verlängert sich die Bezugsdauer höchstens bis zur Vollendung des 25. Lebensjahres. Die Höhe der ~ beträgt 30%, bei Tod beider Eltern oder bei Tod eines Elternteiles und Invalidität des anderen Elternteiles 60% der dem Verstorbenen zugestandenen Rente. (AA 332; FR 54; MNY–99.doc; HVG 2004)


Ildikó Fata

Within an entry (meaning full entries, and not cross-referring entries) the following types of information are worth differentiating in accordance with Stepnikowska (1998: 185– onwards): I. Linguistic information: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

grammatical information. synonyms. collocations. reference to other entries within the given dictionary part. reference to an appendix. definition.

II. Professional information: (1) (2) (3)

professional / encyclopaedic information in the definition. classification of the source language lemma in a conceptual context in a way that is understandable for the user. embedding further relevant information and collocations, conveying them indirectly in the definition.

The last information type deserves extra attention; an example of this can be seen in the third column of the quoted entry in (1). In line with Wiegand (1995: 467–onwards) our aim was to create a lexicographic narrative (”lexikographische Erzählung”), which can provide potential target users with an easy to understand metalinguistic explanation that conveys compact, up-to-date information on the source language terms in the target language. In the example above, this means that I created a short entry that conveys information on the source language term in German, keeping in mind the textual requirements of the German language (collocations, LSP phraseology) and combining the compact text types of an LSP dictionary entry and dictionary definition (see Schaeder, 1996). Above we have discussed a completed project of an LSP dictionary for learners. We have placed it in the context of Hungarian dictionary research, discussed the potential target users, listed the dictionary functions it undertakes to fulfil, and through examples illustrated its parts and the structure of the entries. We have also considered the pedagogical dimensions of a translation dictionary for LSP.

5.6.  Conclusion This chapter focussed on a bilingual learner’s dictionary for LSP that is on the one hand a dictionary type at the intersection of several scientific disciplines, and on the other hand a particular realisation of this dictionary type: a bilingual specialised dictionary of pension insurance for translation purposes. Based on Tarp’s (1995) typology of dictionary functions,

The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners


the LSP dictionary can fulfil 18 dictionary functions and satisfy the needs of several user groups. We reached the conclusion that traditional dictionary typologies are often unsatisfactory as they only include existing dictionaries and they only include only “pure” dictionary types. This is why we relied on the strengths of the LSP dictionaries model (see section 1) of the modern function theory (Bergenholtz / Tarp, 2002) during our metalexicographic research. This is how we created the theoretical framework for the design of a complex dictionary type. We interpreted the translation process based on the models of Tarp (2007a) and Muráth (2000) based on Gerzymisch-Arbogast (1996) (see section 2). We claimed that a joint application of the two models can clearly show the various phases of the translation process and the need for information in the given phases. A bilingual LSP dictionary created for translation purposes should satisfy these needs. Finally, we have proven that an LSP dictionary that considers translators and interpreters as its primary target users is more valuable than a traditional LSP dictionary. It takes into consideration the research findings of many scientific disciplines, and is a thematic LSP dictionary constructed on a scientific basis that can offer valuable and useful information to any user interested in the specialist field. All of this proves that in the future similar lexicographic products are needed in modern Danish and Hungarian practice.


Ildikó Fata

Appendices Appendix 1.  Appendix 7 of the German-Hungarian part of the dictionary MAGYAR-NÉMET, NÉMET-MAGYAR NYUGDÍJBIZTOSÍTÁSI SZAKSZÓTÁR, entitled “The current problems of the German pension system; pension reforms” in Germany. Die Finanzierungsprobleme der deutschen Rentenversicherung ergeben sich v.a. aus der wirtschaftlichen und demographischen Entwicklung. Während die Leistungserbringer / Beitragszahler immer weniger werden, nimmt die Zahl der Leistungsempfänger / Rentenbezieher (wegen Alterung der Bevölkerung, Anstieg der Zahl der Arbeitslosen, frühzeitiges Ausscheiden aus dem Berufsleben) erheblich zu. Folgende Problembereiche sind zu nennen: – steigende Lebenserwartung, – steigende Rentenlaufzeiten: Insgesamt hat sich zwischen 1960 und 1995 die durchschnittliche Rentenlaufzeit der Frauen von 10,6 Jahren (1960) auf 17,8 Jahre (1995) und die der Männer von 9,6 Jahren (1960) auf 13,9 Jahre (1995) verlängert, über beide Geschlechter hinweg (9,9–15,6 Jahre) nahezu um 60%. (nach SSL). – Sinken des durchschnittlichen Rentenzugangsalters Zur Bewältigung der finanziellen und demographischen Probleme sollte die Rentenreform 1999 dienen. Sie sah die folgenden Änderungen vor: (B 276). – Ergänzung der Rentenformel zur jährlichen Anpassung der Renten um einen demographischen Faktor, um die längere Lebens – und Rentenbezugsdauer zu berücksichtigen, – Eine künftig stärkere Anrechnung der Kindererziehungszeiten in der Rentenversicherung, – Absinken des Beitragssatzes ab dem 1. 4. 1999, kompensiert durch das Inkrafttreten der ersten Stufe der Ökosteuer (TV 17.12. 1998, 4). Seit 1999 sind folgende Neuregelungen in der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung erwähnenswert: Zum 01.01.2002 wurde eine zusätzliche Altersvorsorge eingeführt, die nach dem bei Einführung dieser Förderungsmaβnahmen amtierenden Bundesminister für Arbeit und Sozialordnung Walter Rister als „Riester-Rente” bezeichnet wurde. Im Rahmen dieser Maβnahme wird eine zusätzliche Altersvorsorge (private wie betriebliche) z.T. aus allgemeinen Steuergeldern durch Zulagen, z.T. durch Steuervorteile gefördert. Die Inanspruchnahme der Förderung ist auf Personenkreise beschränkt (v.a. Versicherte in der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung und Beamte), deren Rentenleistungsniveau in Zukunft abgesenkt wird. Bei Eheleuten kann jeder Ehepartner einen eigenen Versorgungsanspruch mit der staatlichen Förderung aufbauen. Wird eine Förderung jedoch in Anspruch genommen, sind die darauf beruhenden späteren Rentenzahlungen (in erster Linie regelmäβige Zahlungen in monatlichen Renten) einkommenssteuerpflichtig. (Quellen: ; ). Folgende Neuregelungen in der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung wurden für das Jahr 2004 beschlossen: – Der gegenwärtige Beitragssatz von 19,5% bleibt auch im Jahr 2004 stabil. – Die zum 01.07.2004 anstehende Anpassung der Renten wird ausgesetzt. – Die Rentenhöhe bleibt also ab dem 01.07.2004 unverändert. Als nächster Anpassungstermin ist der 01.07.2005 vorgesehen.


The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners

– Der Auszahlungszeitpunkt für Neurenten ab dem 01.04.2004 wird auf das Monatsende verschoben. (Quelle: ). → Anhang 3:

Träger der deutschen Rentenversicherung; Finanzierung der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung → Anhang 15: Wichtige Zahlen 1998–2005 (Deutschland)

Appendix 2.  Appendix 15 of the German-Hungarian part of the dictionary MAGYARNÉMET, NÉMET-MAGYAR NYUGDÍJBIZTOSÍTÁSI SZAKSZÓTÁR entitled “Important figures (1998–2005) Germany”. In den Vorschriften der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung gelten für Versicherte in den neuen Bundesländern (die ehemalige DDR) zahlreiche Sonderregelungen (z.B. abweichende Bezugsgrößen, Berechnungsgrundlagen usw). Unter Bezugsgröße* wird das Durchschnittentgelt der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung im vorvergangenen Kalenderjahr verstanden, aufgerundet auf den nächsthöheren durch 480 teilbaren Betrag. Das durchschnittliche Bruttoarbeitsentgelt** wird in den neuen Bundesländern durch Entgeltpunkte ermittelt, die eine andere Berechnungsart für Beitragszeiten erfordern. Der aktuelle Rentenwert*** entspricht der monatlichen Altersrente, die ein Durchschnittsverdiener mit einem Jahr Beitragszahlung erwirbt; er ändert sich wegen der Rentenanpassungen jeweils zum 01.07. eines Jahres. Quellen: (FR. 16–17; Zahlen nach dem Informationsblatt der Bundesversicherungsanstalt für Angestellte (BfA); Internetseiten: www.statistik-bund.de (Statistisches Bundesamt) und (Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Sozialordnung) sowie .

Alte Bundesländer

Neue Bundesländer

Beitragsbemessungsgrenze (jährlich)

100.800 DM (1998) 102.000 DM (1999) 103.200 DM (2000) 104.400 DM (2001) 54.000 € (2002) 61.200 € (2003) 61.800 € (2004) 62.400 € (2005)

84.000 DM (1998) 86.400 DM (1999) 85.200 DM (2000) 87.600 DM (2001) 45.000 € (2002) 51.000 € (2003) 52.200 € (2004) 52.800 € (2005)

Beitragsbemessungsgrenze (monatlich)

8.400 DM (1998) 8.500 DM (1999) 8.600 DM (2000) 8.700 DM (2001) 4.500 € (2002) 5.100 € (2003) 5.150 € (2004) 5.200 € (2005)

7.000 DM (1998) 7.200 DM (1999) 7.100 DM (2000) 7.300 DM (2001) 3.750 € (2002) 4.250 € (2003) 4.350 € (2004) 4.400 € (2005)


Ildikó Fata Alte Bundesländer

Neue Bundesländer

01.01. – 31.12.1998 620 DM 01.01. – 31.03.1999 630 DM 01.04.1999 – 31.12.2001 630 DM 01.01.2002 – 31.03.2003 325 € ab 01.04.2003 400 €

01.01. – 31.12.1998 520 DM 01.01. – 31.03.1999 530 DM 01.04.1999 – 31.12.2001 630 DM 01.01.2002 – 31.03.2003 325 € ab 01.04.2003 400 €

Bezugsgröße* (jährlich)

52.080 DM (1998) 52.080 DM (1998) 52.920 DM (1999) 53.760 DM (2000) 54.684 DM (2001) 28.150 € (2002) 28.560 € (2003) 28.980 € (2004–2005)

43.680 DM (1998) 43.680 DM (1998) 44.520 DM (1999) 43.680 DM (2000) 44.520 DM (2001) 23.5200 € (2002) 23.940 € (2003) 24.360 € (2004–2005)

Bezugsgröße* (monatlich)

4.340 DM (1998) 4.410 DM (1999) 4.480 DM (2000) 4.557 DM (2001) 2.345 € (2002) 2.380 € (2003) 2.415 € (2004–2005)

3.640 DM (1998) 3.700 DM (1999) 3.640 DM (2000) 3.700 DM (2001) 1.960 € (2002) 1.995 € (2003) 2.030 € (2004–2005)

52.925 DM (1998) 53.507 DM (1999) 54.256 DM (2000) 55.216 DM (2001) 28.626 € (2002) 29.230 € (2003) 29.428 € (2004) 29.569 € (2005– vorläufig)

1,2113 (1998) 1,2054 (1999) 1,2030 (2000) 1,2003 (2001) 1,1972 (2002) 1,1949 (2003) 1,1912 (2004) 1,8850 (2005– vorläufig)

Geringfügigkeitsgrenze (monatlich)

durchschnittliches Bruttoarbeitsentgelt** (monatlich)

Beitragssatz (%) in der gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung für Arbeiter u. Angestellte

01.01. – 31.12.1998 01.01. – 31.12.1998 20,3 20,3 01.01–31.03. 01.04.– 31.12.1999 01.01–31.03. 01.04.– 31.12.1999 20,3 19,5 20,3 19,5 01.01. – 31.12. 2000 01.01. – 31.12. 2000 19,3 19,3 01.01. 2001–31.12.2002 01.01. 2001–31.12.2002 19,1 19,1 seit 01.01. 2003 bundeseinheitlich seit 01.01. 2003 bundeseinheitlich 19,5 19,5


The Bilingual Specialised Translation Dictionary for Learners Alte Bundesländer

Neue Bundesländer

Höchstbeitrag zur gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung (monatlich)

01.01. – 31.12.1998 01.01. – 31.12.1998 1.421 DM 1.705,20 DM 01.01–31.03. 01.04. – 31.12.1999 01.01–31.03. 01.04.– 31.12.1999 1.461,60 DM 1.404,00 DM 1.725,50 DM 1.657,50 DM 01.01 – 31.12.2000 01.01. – 31.12.2000 1.370,30 DM 1.659,80 DM 01.01. – 31.12.2001 01.01. – 31.12.2001 1.394,30 DM 1.661,70 DM 01.01. – 31.12.2002 01.01. – 31.12.2002 716,25 € 859,50 € 01.01. – 31.12.2003 01.01. – 31.12.2003 828,75 € 994,50 € 01.01. – 31.12.2004 01.01. – 31.12.2004 848,25 € 1004,25 € 01.01. – 31.12.2004 01.01. – 31.12.2005 858 € 1.014 €

Mindestbeitrag zur gesetzlichen Rentenversicherung (monatlich)

01.01.1998 – 31.12.1998 01.01.1998 – 31.12.1998 105,56 DM 125,86 DM 01.01–31.03.1999 01.01–31.03.1999 107,59 DM 127,89 DM 01.04.–31.12.1999 01.04.1999 – 31.12.1999 122,85 DM 122,85 DM 01.01. –31.12.2000 01.01.2000 – 31.12.2000 121,59 DM 121,59 DM 01.01.–31.12.2001 01.01.2001 – 31.12.2001 120,33 DM 120,33 DM 01.01.2002 – 31.12.2002 01.01.2002 – 31.12.2002 62,075 € 62,075 € 01.01.2003 – 31.03.2003 01.01.2003 – 31.03.2003 63,375 € 63,375 € seit 01.04.2003 bundeseinheitlich seit 01.04.2003 bundeseinheitlich 78,00 € 78,00 €

Aktueller Rentenwert***

01.07. 1998 – 30.06. 1999 47,65 DM 01.07. 1999 – 30.06. 2000 48,29 DM 01.07. 2000 – 30.06. 2001 48,58 DM 01.07. 2001 – 31.03. 2002 49,51 DM 01.04. 2002 – 30.06. 2002 25,31 € 01.07. 2002 – 30.06. 2003 25,86 € 01.07. 2003 – 30.06. 2004 26,13 € 01.07. 2004 – 30.06. 2005 26,13 €

01.07. 1998 – 30.06. 1999 40,87 DM 01.07. 1999 – 30.06. 2000 42,01 DM 01.07. 2000 – 30.06. 2001 42,26 DM 01.07. 2001 – 31.03. 2002 43,15 DM 01.04. 2002 – 30.06. 2002 22,06 € 01.07. 2002 – 30.06. 2003 22,70 € 01.07. 2003 – 30.06. 2004 22,97 € 01.07. 2004 – 30.06. 2005 22,97 €



CHAPTER 6. The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Aquilino Sánchez

Abstract This chapter will include a brief analysis on the nature of culture and particularly its relationship to language. It will stress how language and culture are intertwined with each other and the issue will be illustrated with examples from different cultures and languages. Insofar as language is the best exponent of the culture of a particular group of people the need for including cultural features in the teaching of languages is unquestionable. Language rests upon a formal system, which guarantees a basic and correct communicative process among speakers. But full communicative potential is only reached when the formal linguistic system is adequately contextualised and capable of transmitting and detecting cultural specificities. Specialised learners’ dictionaries are particularly sensitive to this kind of requirement, since students of a foreign language aim to reach full communicative potential in the language they learn. Dictionaries have traditionally been constructed with a strong emphasis on the formal side of language, while other elements and components (e.g. the cultural dimension) have not been taken into consideration. A superficial analysis of dictionary samples for learners illustrates this statement. Multicultural and multilingual societies require better and deeper integration of language and culture. Dictionaries face this challenge, especially when users are learners of foreign languages. Lexicographers should, therefore, engage in adding a new perspective to their work. The inclusion of cultural and encyclopaedic elements involves the addition of a new dimension to lexicography. In this chapter some ideas will be put forward on how to deal with this issue and how to do it in a ‘dictionary format’, as a repertoire of both language and culture. ‘Cultural dictionaries’ are excellent tools for illustrating the cultural elements of a society; in the same way, traditional dictionaries have also been adequate tools for defining the lexical units we call words. The learners’ dictionary we have in mind is inclusive more than exclusive and aims at a suitable integration of culture and language in the same work. To reach that goal we must first identify the cultural elements connected and transmitted through language, so that those ‘cultural units’ may be included and explained in dictionaries in a format similar to the traditional lexical units. Maintaining a similar lexicographical format for culturally relevant elements will facilitate the ancillary nature of dictionaries as reference works. Key Words: CULTURE; ANISOMORPHISM; ELEMENTARY MEANING UNITS; LEARNERS; BILINGUAL LEXICOGRAPHY; SPECIALISED DICTIONARY.

6.1.  The Nature of Culture It is widely accepted among specialists that culture is not genetically transmitted by human beings. Culture could generically be defined as “socially transmitted information” (Alvard, 2003:136). In that case, culture is a component of human knowledge acquired by individuals and constructed in each of the members of a group or society with elements


Aquilino Sánchez

taken from what others believe and do, from what has been transmitted and kept generation after generation. Every member of the group picks up culture from the particular environment within which s/he happens to live. Culture is therefore closely connected to and dependent on the set of beliefs and behaviour which define specific groups of people. Such a set of beliefs and behaviour may even show up within each one of these groups in different ways and formats, contributing to variety and eventually shaping more significant differences, which will probably end up shaping new and different groups. The number of features that define specific cultures runs parallel to the number of human groups inhabiting our planet, which roughly corresponds to the number of cultures recorded in the world. Since human groups are typically surrounded by different environments, live in different situations, face different needs and generate different responses to those needs, culture is bound to appear in many different forms or shapes. That variety involves an additional obstacle for the identification of common elements and the establishment of the common ground on which culture develops and operates. To say that “culture is a set of socially transmitted elements” is a good starting point in the analysis of the issue, but more details are needed to reach a more transparent understanding of what culture really is. As Tomasello, M. (1999a: 511) points out, The most distinctive characteristic of human cultural evolution as a process is the way that modifications to an artefact or a social practice made by one individual or group of individuals often spread within the group, and then stay in place until some future individual or individuals make further modifications and these then stay in place until still further modifications are made.

Following Tomasello, and taking into account what our daily experience confirms, culture is not only varied and complex, but also submitted to a never-ending process of change and remodelling. Variety, evolution and change increase complexity and contribute to a less efficient analysis of the nature of culture, but at the same time culture transmission based on the group allows individuals a better and quicker adaptation to changing situations and patterns. Biologists suggest that a genetic mode of transmission, or transmission through trial and error (the way most animals ‘learn’) would not be as efficient; moreover, the cumulative nature of cultural features as they appear in social groups provides individuals with access to information they had never experienced before and opens their minds to models that may guide them and serve as frames for their own behaviour. Still, we must acknowledge that mobility and globalization in modern society allow minority groups to keep their distinctive cultural features even if they live within the same environment with other groups. This fact can also be considered a positive ingredient of culture as an evolutionary device: it facilitates quick adaptation to new situations and proves a reliable tool for the survival of the human species. The complexity mentioned above accounts for the different meanings of the word culture. Anthropologists take the term as a set of human behaviour patterns, characteristic of each one of the many groups that form human society in general. Tylor (1871) said a long time ago that culture is “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society”. This understanding of the concept is widely accepted nowadays, at least in anthropological and linguistic studies. If the concept were reduced – as it has been in some historical periods – to the “appreciation of good literature, good music and the fine arts”

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


(Culture, with a capital letter), the identification of cultural elements would be easy. But if culture is to be understood as the set of features of a non-genetic nature that differentiate homogeneous groups of human beings living together, we face a highly complex body, with hundreds or thousands of defining features interacting with each other, all of them contributing to the final product we call generically culture. Culture has been a powerful tool for the survival of the human species. You could hardly understand modern society without the cultural knowledge and technology we have today. And the transmission of that knowledge would not be possible without language. Language is, therefore, one of the most important elements of culture, a tool for communication which cannot be separated from it. As I mentioned above, culture is not genetically inherited: it is learned. But children are born genetically predisposed to learn rapidly and efficiently not only the language, but cultural trends as well. So much so that a child will learn whatever he may need from the linguistic and cultural components in any family on earth, regardless of the language they speak and the behaviour they have adopted. Moreover, the cultural skills and knowledge acquired do not stand alone; they are integrated into what has already been learned by previous generations. The acquisition of culture is therefore cumulative. Cumulative but not static: all cultures change over time, even though change is not homogeneous and fully predictable; changes from group to group are usually different in size and rhythm.

6.2.  Culture and Language Language and culture belong to different components, but they are closely related to each other, and interdependent. The most traditional linguistic theory helped to consolidate the idea that language is an autonomous formal system, governed by logic. And logic is certainly a key component in the organization of language as a system. But insofar as language is pervaded by cultural and pragmatic elements, it takes in ingredients that go beyond logic and sometimes may even distort it. Language in fact can also be considered a partial sub-construct of culture, a complex body in itself resulting from the coalition and cooperation of various ingredients. Even if the ingredients are different, all of them cooperate in order to reach the final goal: transmission or reception of information to or from individuals within the group. The interchange of information in the linguistic system is based on a code governed by rules or patterns which must be previously known by the speaker and the recipient. The characteristics of this code tell us that it is also complex in nature: in the process of codification and decodification both speaker and receiver have to take decisions and options in order to avoid ambiguity in the message. The elaboration of messages in communication is complete when the speaker has decided to select specific words, and to structure them in a particular syntactical pattern. This decision-taking process does not only depend on the rules enunciated by formal logic – explicitly or implicitly – but also on other circumstances and elements that have to do with who the receiver is, where the message is transmitted or in what way the words used might be interpreted by the potential recipient.


Aquilino Sánchez

Some scholars (Gardner, 2007; Nagy and Scott, 2000; Sánchez, 2007, among others) emphasize the difficulty we face in defining what it means to know a word. Knowing a word implies multidimensional knowledge. Many words have more than one meaning. When used in discourse, the activated meaning of polysemous words does not always result from an autonomous and word-based process, but rather from the surrounding words, or from the situation within which they are used. By situation we mean elements outside the formal linguistic system, often connected to or dependent on what we generically call culture. The meaning of has in My friend has a new car is not the same as in My friend has tea at Buckingham Palace. If the linguistic form – has – is the same and the syntax of both sentences is similar, the reason for the semantic difference of the word can only derive from co-text and / or con-text, linguistic or extra-linguistic. The nature of car (object with specific functions for moving around and travelling) and tea (a drink) is decisive for defining the meaning of has. Basic knowledge about the nature of car and tea and their function in the language are deeply embedded in modern cultural behaviour, or in the culture of particular countries (i.e. groups of people sharing the same language and used to having tea habitually). In fact, a sentence like My friend has tea at (Buckingham Palace) is most unlikely in Spanish, because Spaniards are more used to having other kinds of drinks when they meet. That is, you cannot separate the meaning of has in these sentences from the cultural setting within which it is used. Lexicologists have thoroughly studied the connotative meaning of words. Connotations are excellent exponents of the degree of dependency and the relationships between language (as a formal system) and culture. The word breakfast and its equivalent (?) in Spanish – desayuno – illustrate the issue. If we just compare the definitions offered by two monolingual dictionaries, both words mean the same in Spanish and English: (1)

breakfast: a meal eaten in the morning as the first meal of the day. (CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY). desayuno: Primera comida del día, que se hace por la mañana, antes de iniciar las actividades. (GRAN DICCIONARIO DE USO DEL ESPAÑOL ACTUAL).

However, if we pay attention to the extension of the word, the situation varies significantly: Spanish desayuno is rather light, while English breakfast is not, as the following table and graphic 1 reveal: Language / country



Great Britain

Toast, marmalade, butter, sausages, bacon, eggs, cereals…

Orange juice, tea, coffee


Pastry, sometimes toast, butter and marmalade; (sometimes) variety of fruits

Coffee with milk, cocoa, chocolate

Breakfast / desayuno: First meal of the day in the morning / Primera comida del día Graphic 1

(Breakfast): abundant

Toast, eggs, marmalade, tea, etc.

(Desayuno): light

Fruit juice / fruits, toast, coffee…

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


The full meaning of both words is rooted in cultural behaviour, which in turn may also be connected to different working schedules in each of the countries. Dictionaries in both languages define the word specifying a basic feature (first meal of the day). Can we really say that breakfast and desayuno are fully understood if we get rid of their extensional meaning? Extensional meaning in each word derives from two cultures with different attitudes and practices regarding the first meal of the day. It is reasonable to conclude that cultural features are necessary ingredients for a complete understanding of the word.

6.3.  Culture in Traditional Lexicography It has been usual in historical linguistics to study the cultural features of a particular society analysing the vocabulary or words they used. This technique has been widely applied to describe, for example, the family relationships in ancient societies, as is the case of Germanic or Indo-European groups. The kind of words we can reconstruct for unknown languages may reveal the kind and amount of knowledge their speakers had or handled in specific fields, or the organization of the world around them. Kinship terms in protoSemitic suggest that the speakers of this language were living in a rather patriarchal society (as revealed by the dependency of the words for daughter and sister regarding son and brother: although the words for father and mother are distinct, the word for daughter is the grammatical feminine of son, and sister is a feminine of the word for brother). Such a conclusion is based on the morphological structure of the words in focus. If we analyse the semantic field covered by each word, the information on the society using those words can be substantially increased. After all, the language we use externalizes our thought and, therefore, our knowledge of the world. From that point of view, each language is an excellent exponent of the culture of their native speakers. Dictionaries, however, have rarely paid direct attention to the cultural dimension of words. The emphasis has been on the linguistic component, disregarding the potential of cultural features for a more complete understanding of the language. It is true that many words, particularly in the technical or scientific fields, are culture-independent (or, more precisely, they reveal culture-independent knowledge (Bergenholtz / Tarp, 1995), that is, their meaning refers to things or facts not subject to change wherever they are or appear. Terms such as currency / currency unit (banking), electronics, telefax (computing), subpoena, martial law (law), lactose (chemistry), etc., would be included in this section. Still, we must be cautious when using the term culture-independent, since all the words of a language, either because they are or they are not used by a specific community of speakers, transmit some kind of information on the way those speakers behave or act, on how they structure reality, or on how they perceive the world around them. In a broad sense all words externalize cultural features in some way. Many of those words and their corresponding cultural features are shared by many languages. Differences among communities of speakers do also exist, however. The evolution of each one of the languages in the world runs parallel to the evolution of the human groups that have created them. Such an evolution is closely dependent on and connected to the environment and the


Aquilino Sánchez

needs for survival. No doubt, the common core of vocabulary is less likely to be different insofar as it is based on common human evolutionary patterns and needs. Differences and peculiarities will most probably emerge in special fields because progress in evolution will be more heavily marked in non basic issues. A superficial analysis of some heavily marked cultural exponents illustrates the content attached to words in different languages and human groups. Religion is a case in point, as well as the legal system established in different societies, or the attitude towards sex, taxation or women, to name just a few examples. Western societies have changed their attitude towards religion in the last millennium, so that words like sin, hell or heaven do not carry today the same semantic load as in the XIth century. For a similar reason, the conceptualization of sin or hell is not the same among Christians as it is among Muslins or Taoists. Those words however belong to the common core of practically all languages in the world. Significant differences do also appear in the words assigned to specific religious functions. Christian Protestants prefer the term minister, while Catholics use priest and Muslins imam. The three terms carry important differences in meaning. What has been written regarding the imam cannot be readily applied to the minister or the priest: The Muslims cannot do without an Imam who shall occupy himself with the enforcing of their decisions, and in implementing their hudud (penal code) and guarding their frontiers, and equipping their armies, and receiving their alms, and putting down robberies and thieving and highwayman, and maintaining the Friday and ‘id prayers, and removing quarrels that fall between people, and receiving evidence bearing on legal claims, and marrying minors who have no guardians and dividing booty. (WIKIPEDIA, quoting the Islamic author an-Nasaf)

Similarly, a priest is assigned much more restrictive functions and his job is centred on strictly religious goals: A priest or priestess is a person having the authority or power to perform and administer religious rites; and in particular, rites of sacrifice to, and propitiation of the deity or deities. (WIKIPEDIA)

While the Protestant Minister is viewed as the leader and guide of a community of believers and the administrator of the worldly affairs related to faith: In Protestant churches, “minister” generally refers to a member of the ordained clergy who leads a congregation as its pastor. (WIKIPEDIA)

This scheme is altogether very different from Buddhism, where the idea of God creator is not explicitly stated and the Buddha is an enlightened guide and teacher who points the way to nirvana. The role played by the priest, the minister, the imam and the Buddha is roughly the same in the four religions regarding the feature of mediator, guide and model to be imitated, but other features derive from the peculiarities of the religion they serve and the beliefs speakers attach themselves to. That is what makes it impossible to equate or give a faithful and complete translation into other languages of priest, minister, imam or Buddha if we do not take into consideration that each one of those terms is culture-dependent. The imam is not exactly a sacerdote in Spanish or a priest in English, nor is a sacerdote in Spanish an imam in Arabic; the Buddha is not a minister in English, and the minister in English is not a prêtre in French. Examples of this nature are endless, in all languages (Baker, 1992).

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


6.4.  Culture, Equivalences and Monolingual / Bilingual Lexicography Culture-dependent lexical features may partially modify or even reshape the meaning of apparently similar words in different languages, affecting their semantic space and building new semantic constructs. These new semantic units may become exclusive to one language and initiate an unpredictable process of differentiation. This is precisely one of the sources of semantic asymmetry. Semantic asymmetry or anisomorphism is probably the most serious problem we detect when comparing or translating languages. A faithful translation relies on the correct and adequate assignment of equivalents of language A in language B, C, D, etc. (providing equivalents is after all the primary goal of bilingual lexicography). Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas-Baño (2008: 84, quoting Rey, 1991) state that ”about 6.5% of articles of a bilingual dictionary are affected in some way by lack of equivalence”. That percentage is probably too optimistic. Equivalences between languages are not always easy to identify: they pervade the whole linguistic system and are variable in intension and extension. Furthermore, equivalences or lack of equivalence cannot be measured as a single value, but as a variable degree on a scale from a minimum to a maximum. Besides the role of culture-dependent lexical features, the lack of equivalence among languages is also due to two other facts: (i) the different conceptualization of reality, and (ii) the presence / absence of some concepts in one language vs. another and the corresponding presence / absence of a word to designate the concept. The three factors interact with each other and this contributes to an increase in the complexity of the issue. Translators and bilingual dictionaries usually solve the problems (whenever they are detected) in different ways, depending on the nature of the word or sentence affected. Most often they take advantage of paraphrases, synonyms and near synonyms, explanations of different kinds or encyclopaedic definitions. One must acknowledge, however, that traditional lexicography has too often ignored the question of equivalences derived from or connected to the cultural component embedded in language. In other words, cultural features have not been taken into consideration for explaining differences in the semantic shaping of lexical meanings. The lack of communication among languages and their speakers – or the absence of globalisation, one could say – has been an obstacle to studying, comparing and contrasting languages and the cultures that lie behind them. Cultural fanaticism, on the other hand, has often been an obstacle for studying and understanding different perspectives and points of view. Monolingual lexicography has faced the issue of culture-dependent features from a perspective which differs substantially from the perspective of bilingual dictionaries or specialised learners’ dictionaries. Attention to users and their needs in lexicography is quite recent (Bejoint, 1994; Hartmann, 2003), and it has mainly centred on monolingual dictionary use. The needs of native or non-native speakers differ notoriously, however. While native speakers live within the cultural environment of the language defined by monolingual dictionaries (until recently monolingual dictionaries have traditionally been elaborated for native speakers), the users of bilingual dictionaries most often belong to a linguistic community with a different language, with a different conceptualization of the world and with a different cultural setting. Native speakers do not feel the need to receive specific and detailed information on the cultural features implied by the words they use:


Aquilino Sánchez

they already have that information from their daily experience, and their concepts of the world match the ones transmitted by the words they have learnt since early childhood. Bilingual speakers and learners of a foreign / second language face a different situation. Their conceptualization of the world matches their native language, but not necessarily their second / foreign language. The gap between both languages must be filled in some way. Here lies the main challenge for lexicographers. As Bergenholtz / Tarp (1995) state, some linguistic elements do not need further cultural information to be correctly understood by the speakers of other languages. These words are typically found in specialised fields, particularly in scientific domains and real world objects (lactose, mitosis, gene, morpheme, lemon, etc.). At the same time however, specialised fields of science and knowledge may also be rooted in special beliefs, in special cognitive processes, in exclusive findings and, consequently, in the unique conceptualization of the world that emerges from all these peculiarities. Specialised language is therefore prone to develop and consolidate in two directions or around two poles: the culture-dependent and the culture-independent. The real world outside us does not change, regardless of our attitude towards it; the atom, the gene, the computer, etc., are what they are for all creatures in this world. Their definition cannot change insofar as it reflects reality and is correctly formulated. But there may be different ways of approaching, perceiving and processing the same reality. As a consequence, the wording of those different approaches, perceptions and processes may be distinctive. The nature of rice, a common food in most parts of the world, cannot be differently defined depending on whether the speaker is Chinese or Spanish. But if we refer to the way it is planted or collected, some variations could be significant. Differences increase when we look at it from a culinary perspective. The Spaniards do not usually cook rice in the same way as the Chinese do. Spanish paella and Chinese chicken in rice are notoriously different in taste and flavour. A basic food generates different dishes and therefore different words. Snow is also the same everywhere in the world. But the way we may perceive this element varies considerably from region to region. The Eskimos live surrounded by snow throughout the year. Snow is the source of life, danger and death for them. They must look at snow very carefully in order to survive. And that is what they do. The special attention paid to snow has made them develop a large variety of words to describe this white substance. It is extremely important for the Eskimos to know in detail what kind of snow they are going to find: soft snow, melted snow, snow for building an igloo, fresh snow or fresh snow without ice, etc. All those varieties are relevant to their survival. Inuit, Aivilik and Igloolik languages have different words for those varieties, such as (example 2): (2)

Akkilokipok: soft snow. Allatla: baked snow. Anijo: snow on the ground. Aniuk: snow for drinking water. Aniuvak: snow remaining in holes. Anniu: falling snow unmodified by the wind. Anyu: snow used for a specific purpose. Aqilluqqaaq: fresh and soggy snow. Auviq: snow brick, to build igloo. Gana: falling snow. Gengaruk: snow bank.

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


Ijaruvak: melted snow, having turned into ice crystals. Kanut: fresh snow without any ice. Kripya: snow that has melted and refrozen. Etc.

Speakers of tropical areas or Mediterranean languages do not have such a linguistic need: they may never have the experience of snow falling! Words like nieve, neige, neve… are enough for their needs. Central and northern Europeans, however, could be interested in more details on the conditions of the snow on the country roads before they decide on a trip because snow is a common winter element in their landscape. Mediterranean speakers use a single word for referring to snow; Eskimos hardly ever use the basic word with no further specifications: they have instead a variety of other words, each one of them focusing specifically on a quality or characteristic of the snow relevant to their lives: gana, anniu, kripya, etc. A bilingual Inuit-English dictionary cannot just give the word snow as the correct translation for gana, anniu or kripya. The Inuit have developed a rich and culturedependent vocabulary for that substance which we can only transmit through additional (cultural? encyclopaedic?) explanations. The legal system applied in different communities or countries is also an excellent example to illustrate culture-dependent words. All human groups apparently strive for an ideal and unique legal system: one based on justice. But real systems of law are quite varied and aim to attain similar goals in different ways. If we compare the English and the Spanish legal system we encounter significant and even striking differences. The English law se asienta fundamentalmente en el common law, formado, en un sentido amplio, por la costumbre, la tradición y las resoluciones judiciales adoptadas por los jueces ingleses al dictar sentencia (Alcaraz, 1994:2). [is based on the common law, i.e., the system of law that has developed from customs and judges’ decisions when giving judgment] (editor’s adaptation).

Even though the statute law (norms and laws passed by parliament) is also applied, common law – based on tradition, use and previously pronounced sentences – has been kept when its norms have not been expressly repealed. The Spanish legal system, however, is more heavily dependent on legislation by Parliament and codified precepts. Germanic legal tradition and Roman law have no doubt something to do with these differences. Legal language will necessarily reveal those differences. Specialised bilingual English-Spanish Spanish-English dictionaries face an important challenge in reinterpreting the real meaning of legal words in the other language. An abogado in Spanish may be a lawyer or a solicitor (in Great Britain); but it must be specifically an attorney-at-law in the United States (as a practitioner in a court of law who is legally qualified), or a barrister in Great Britain (for undertaking the public trial of causes in a superior court). A Spanish magistrado (high in the rank of judges) is not an English magistrate (a judge for minor cases). A Law Report is not un informe legal, but a Legal repertoire. A drafting will is un testamento, and wills are not drafted by a Notary Public (as is the case in Spain), but by a Solicitor. Culture-dependent language is still more evident in idioms and set phrases. They are so tightly connected to particular social features of a community that in most cases it is


Aquilino Sánchez

impossible to grasp the meaning unless you know the situation from which it originated. The Spanish idiom Pasas más hambre que un maestro de escuela (literally: ‘You are as hungry as a school teacher’) gets its full meaning only if you know that school teachers in Spain used to get a very low salary, so much so that they could hardly meet their daily needs. A language spoken by a community where this situation was not the case would not have a similar idiom.

6.5.  Dictionaries of Language and Culture A search on the Internet for ‘language and culture’ will produce several hundred thousand hits. A search for ‘lengua y cultura’, in Spanish, ‘Sprache und Kultur’, in German, or ‘langue et culture’, in French, offers similar results. Not all the pages in the Web are related to the academic setting we are referring to here, but the frequency of the language-culture association may be taken as a sign of what speakers really have in mind. If we look for integrated dictionaries of language and culture, the situation is less optimistic. The LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND CULTURE, published a few years ago, is one of those integrated dictionaries we may welcome. The publication is an important milestone in lexicography: the dictionary tries to face the challenge of approaching culture and language as a whole, following a systematic methodology and including all the English words that the authors consider relevant from the point of view of culture. The work is aimed at students of English as a foreign language. The publishers state explicitly: – No matter how advanced your level of English, it’s difficult to fully understand the language unless you understand the many cultural references that you see when reading books or newspapers. – Covers everything you are likely to need: people, places, history, geography, the arts and popular culture. – Get in-depth understanding on topics such as festivals, special days and key events in British and American history from the colour feature pages.

The dictionary offers about 15,000 cultural notes with additional information on the word defined. One could conclude that this information is often more encyclopaedic than cultural or lexicographical; still, it really illustrates how, when and why English native speakers use particular words and the connotations those words have. From a formal point of view the organization and structure of the dictionary follow the traditional pattern in lexicographical works: cultural information is something added to words, while the essentials for the definition are of a strictly linguistic nature, based on the specification of the genus et differentiae of entry words. Readers perceive they have a usual dictionary when they open the book and look at the pages: words are organized in alphabetical order; each entry appears with details on pronunciation, part of speech, various senses when necessary, etc. And here and there a cultural note reinforces that perception, since it appears as a kind of ‘extra bonus’ to enlarge the meaning of an entry or a sense. For instance, Beer (example [3]) is defined specifying the genus (an alcoholic drink) and some differentiae (made from malt and made bitter with hops):

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners



(a glass of) an alcoholic drink made from malt and made bitter with hops: a pint of beer. Would you like a (glass of) beer? They brew several excellent beers in this district.

And the definition is followed by a CULTURAL NOTE (example 4) which includes more differentiae, a partial description or explanation, regional varieties of the form and some cultural features: (4)

In the UK, people usually say ‘beer’ when they are talking about a brown or dark-brown form of the drink, such as bitter or stout. People in the US usually call this darker type of beer ‘ale’ or ‘dark beer’. The clear pale yellow carbonated (= with gas) form of the drink, which is simply called ‘beer’ in the US and in most other countries, is usually called ‘lager’ in the UK. In the UK, if somebody says ‘do you want a beer’ or ‘do you fancy a beer’, they are asking you if you would like to have either a ‘dark beer’ or a ‘lager’. If you are in a pub and you want a glass of beer or lager, you ask for a ‘pint’ or a ‘half (= half a pint).

Two points must be emphasized: – The book format is fully traditional. The content (definitions and other information) has been elaborated from a linguistic perspective. – The cultural notes – chunks of information attached to some words – help to reinforce the assumption that culture and language are two different components. The LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND CULTURE includes additional cultural features on the platform of a traditional dictionary of language. If, as argued before, language and culture go together, is that the best way to deal with the problem? Are there different solutions to the same issue in general purpose (the case of the LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND CULTURE) and specialised lexicography?

6.6.  Conceptualization, Dictionaries and Culture Specialised monolingual and bilingual dictionaries have become more necessary and popular in the globalized world. World communication and business, industry, science and the need to fully understand what other communities really mean and do when they buy goods, attend a conference, draft international contracts, etc., require precise information on the meaning of the special words used, which are often not included in general purpose dictionaries. The increase in the number of learners of a second language for special purposes has also triggered the need for specialisation in bilingual lexicography. Monolingual dictionaries explain the meaning of words and sometimes their cultural implications from the point of view of the speakers and the culture of a single community. Bilingual dictionaries, however, assume a new responsibility and face a new challenge: they must deal with the language of two communities. In order to attend to the needs of both groups of speakers, they must offer equivalences of words which do not necessarily run parallel in form and content. Different words in different languages may derive from


Aquilino Sánchez

different concepts or conceptualizations of the world, which at the same time may generate or imply different beliefs and behaviour. The matching of those differences is a two – or multi-way process and requires permanent feedback from two or more perspectives. The structuring of the semantic space (Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas-Baño, 2008) is autonomous and often partially or totally different in each language. In that case lexicographers must find out what exactly is shared or not in the languages affected. This fact is a sound reason for not taking monolingual dictionaries (either from the source or the target language) as the only basis for a bilingual dictionary. Spanish bosque is usually translated as wood. Is it the perfect equivalent? Spanish monolingual dictionaries define the word bosque as ‘Terreno con espeso arbolado, arbustos y matas’ (GRAN DICCIONARIO DE USO DEL ESPAÑOL ACTUAL) (= an area of land covered with a thick growth of trees, plants and bushes). Nothing is said about the size. Spanish bosque shares some semantic features with selva and jungla (all include the feature ‘land with trees’), and contrasts with both of them because the selva is a ‘piece of land with trees and plants’ which has not yet been modelled by human beings, while the jungla is a tropical forest (Graphic 2). English dictionaries define wood as ‘an area of land covered with a thick growth of trees’ (CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY) and it contrasts with forest in size (a large area of land covered with trees and plants, usually larger than a wood), with grove in size (a grove is a smaller group of trees’) and with jungle in place (tropical) and thickness of vegetation (a tropical forest in which trees and plants grow very closely together) (Graphic 3). On the basis of the information extracted from monolingual dictionaries, we must conclude that the structure of the semantic space for ‘areas covered with trees’ does not fully coincide in Spanish and English.

Graphic 2.

Graphic 3.

The equivalent for bosque is not exactly wood, but rather woodland, and certainly it is not forest (bosque does not include specifications on size) and it is not grove (a small group of trees planted together); the equivalent for selva (uncultivated woodland) is not exactly forest (which only specifies large size), even if it may be considered closer than wood. Jungla and jungle, however, are perfect equivalents. Differences in the semantic field covered by the English and the Spanish words derive from the peculiar structuring of reality and its conceptualization. If we centre on wood vs. bosque alone, the semantic space covered by each one of the words is again quite different. WEBSTER’S NEW WORLD COLLEGE DICTIONARY specifies three grammatical categories and eleven different senses for wood (example 4):

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners



Wood n. 1 [usually pl.] a thick growth of trees; forest or grove. 2 the hard, fibrous substance beneath the bark in the stems and branches of trees and shrubs; xylem. 3 trees cut and prepared for use in making things; lumber or timber. 4 short for FIREWOOD. 5 something made of wood; specif., a) a cask or other wooden container for alcoholic liquor. b) [pl.] woodwind instruments, collectively. 6 Golf any of a set of numbered clubs, originally with wooden heads, having various lofts: the number 1 wood is usually called a DRIVER (n. 2b); the number 2 wood, number 3 wood, and number 4 wood are used for long, medium, and short fairway shots, respectively. adj. 1 2 3

made of wood; wooden. for cutting, shaping, or holding wood. growing or living in woods.

1 2

to plant or cover thickly with trees. to furnish with wood, esp. for fuel.


vi. to get or take on a supply of wood.

GRAN DICCIONARIO DE USO DEL ESPAÑOL ACTUAL, a Spanish monolingual dictionary, includes only one grammatical category and three senses for bosque (two of them figurative) (example 5): (5)

1. Terreno con espeso arbolado, arbustos y matas. (Eng: terrain with thick trees, bushes and

shrubs). 2. FIGURADO P ext, conjunto tupido o espeso de cosas. (Eng: figurative: dense set of things). 3. FIGURADO Cabello o barba rizados y enmarañados. (Eng: figurative: curly or entangling bear or hair).

The concepts and real world referents for wood and bosque are significantly different and finding the equivalents will require complex cognitive processes, since the semantic spaces affected belong to different domains. The OXFORD BILINGUAL DICTIONARY offers this translation for bosque (example 6): (6)

bosque m a wood; (más grande) forest, woods (pl). b (terreno) woodland; 600 hectáreas de bosque 600 hectares of woodland.

And those are the equivalents for wood (example 7): (7)

wood n 1. (material) madera f; (firewood) leña f; it’s made of wood es de madera; throw some more wood on the fire echa más leña al fuego; to touch wood o (AmE) knock on wood tocar* madera; (before n) wood carver tallista mf.


Aquilino Sánchez 2. (wooded area) (often pl) bosque m; oak wood robledal m, bosque de robles; we went for a walk in the wood(s) fuimos a caminar por el bosque; to be out of the wood(s) estar* fuera de peligro or a salvo. 3. (Sport). a [c] (in golf) palo m de madera. b [c] (in bowls) bola f. 4. (cask, barrel): matured o aged in the wood añejado en barril; beer (drawn) from the wood cerveza f de barril.

Common sense on the part of the user, context, or the frequency of usage of each one of the senses and the linguistic experience of the speaker is often enough to discriminate between the right sense. But a bilingual dictionary could simply avoid ambiguity by specifying that bosque in Spanish means woodland, that is, land covered with trees. On the basis of the equivalent given in the dictionary (the polysemous wood), a Spanish speaker might conclude as well that bosque means madera, or palo de golf, both senses covered by the English form wood. English has no native word for paella. The term is translated as paella. And it may soon become an established loan word in English with the basic meaning of a ‘rice and chicken / rabbit / vegetables / seafood dish’. But paella in Spanish is something more than that: it is a typical and traditional dish to which Spaniards attach special cultural values, as may be the socialization implied in the process of cooking it, which goes far beyond the mere fact of cooking a meal, or the affection triggered by a dish so deeply embedded in the mind and tastes of most Spaniards since early childhood. Something similar could be said about the phrase ‘having a cup of tea’ (‘tomar una taza de té’): the English and the Spaniards, for example, do not share all the features attached to the denotatum. That is, the same sentence does not have exactly the same meaning for the speakers of two different languages. Bilingual dictionaries should, ideally, transmit that kind of information in order to be complete. Users of bilingual dictionaries are typically learners of a second language. And this is also true for users of specialised bilingual dictionaries (SBD). This premise tells us that SBD should take into consideration the special needs of learners of a foreign language. Learners of a second / foreign language aim at ‘reaching full communicative potential in the language learned’. ‘Reaching full communicative potential’ is a complex goal in itself and it presents different challenges and problems depending on the nature of the communicative field you engage in. Specialised fields require knowledge of specialised vocabulary. All the same, different degrees of vocabulary knowledge must be taken into consideration: some SBD users may be experts in the specialised field, others may be just lay people in the subject, and some others may have some knowledge on the topic because they are engaged in related fields (Bergenholtz / Nielsen, 2002). The knowledge any user has in the field will be decisive for his / her needs with respect to the terms looked up in a dictionary, be it monolingual or bilingual. The vocabulary of a special field in a particular language derives from and reveals the structure and organization of knowledge that experts have built up in this precise field. Words will necessarily recall the concepts attached to such a structure. Typically, each one of the concepts delimited will receive a name, i.e., it will be assigned a word. An adequate and complete understanding of any of the specialised fields requires that the speakers are aware of the underlying structure of concepts and ideas transmitted by the words coined.

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


Laypeople usually lack the knowledge necessary to understand the concepts and hence the terms of specialised fields. A full understanding of the words will not be attained unless access is given to this knowledge. Experts, however, may lack only the words for naming the concepts they already have. Learners of second languages may face an additional difficulty: the organization of knowledge in the other language may not match the semantic structure acquired in the mother tongue. This is quite often the case, as the examples mentioned above (snow, lawyer, priest / imam / minister / wood / bosque, etc.) reveal. Users of bilingual dictionaries and learners of other languages share similar problems in accommodating the language they learn to the conceptualization of reality and culture attached to it: in both cases they must acquire and build a new linguistic system; and together with it they must also match the new linguistic structures with the cultural contents they imply, which may be different from those of their own. Putting all the pieces together is undoubtedly a huge challenge, especially when those pieces deviate from the models we are used to.

6.7.  The Cultural Dimension in Lexicographic Praxis We cannot simply affirm that the cultural dimension has always been absent in linguistic studies or lexicographical practice. But it must be admitted that cultural elements found in lexicographical works have been rather incidental, unsystematic and unplanned. Cultural elements, on the other hand, are not the only semantic features which contribute to semantic asymmetry or anisomorphism. As stated above, other more strictly linguistic ingredients play their part in the structuring and differentiation of meaning. The complexity of the issue seems not to be fully illustrated in Svensén’s proposal (Svensén, 1993), when he advances three solutions to cultural lack of equivalence: calques or paraphrases may solve instances of purely linguistic lack of equivalence reasonably well; encyclopaedic explanations are better tools for illustrating cultural differences. The three of them could be needed to render the meaning of a word into another language. An analysis of semantic equivalence needs a fully comprehensive perspective. The WEBSTER’S NEW WORLD COLLEGE DICTIONARY defines lawyer in the following way (example 8): (8)

A person who has been trained in the law, esp. one whose profession is advising others in matters of law or representing them in lawsuits.

The definition matches the one found in the CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY (someone whose job is to give advice to people about the law and speak for them in court); The NEW OXFORD DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH adds some relevant features to this basic definition (A person who practices or studies law, especially (in the UK) a solicitor or a barrister, or (in the US) an attorney). A Spanish monolingual dictionary (GRAN DICCIONARIO DE USO DEL ESPAÑOL ACTUAL) defines abogado – the closest equivalent of lawyer – with the same basic features: Persona licenciada en Derecho, autorizada para aconsejar sobre las cuestiones legales que se le consultan y para intervenir en juicios representando a una de las partes.


Aquilino Sánchez

The WEBSTER’S NEW WORLD COLLEGE DICTIONARY adds the following information, which helps to establish clearer semantic frontiers among the various terms used in the field: lawyer is the general term for a person trained in the law and authorized to advise or represent others in legal matters; counselor and its British equivalent, barrister, refer to a lawyer who conducts cases in court; attorney, usually, and its British equivalent, solicitor, always, refer to a lawyer legally empowered to act for a client, as in drawing up a contract or will, settling property, etc.; counsel, often equivalent to counselor, is frequently used collectively for a group of counsellors.

This paragraph includes more than just additional information on synonyms: the reader is enlightened as to some essential elements of the Anglo-Saxon legal system regarding the organization and the roles of those who administer justice. The definition of the Spanish monolingual dictionary describes the role of the abogado, and it includes letrado, asesor jurídico,and jurista as synonyms, but with no explanations to contrast similarities or differences among the terms. The NEW OXFORD DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH includes in the definition of lawyer some specific information, which the WEBSTER’S NEW WORLD COLLEGE DICTIONARY offers in the ‘note’. Should the definition of lawyer include a reference to solicitor, barrister, counselor and attorney, in order to suitably refine the meaning of all those related terms? In fact, a complete understanding of lawyer requires a correct understanding of solicitor, barrister, counselor and attorney. A correct conceptualization of the legal system in the UK or the US shows us, for example, that a barrister is a lawyer (generic) but with a ‘restricted’ role (‘entitled to practice as an advocate, especially in higher courts’). The DICCIONARIO DE TÉRMINOS JURÍDICOS gives abogado, jurisconculto, procurador, and jurista as the Spanish equivalents for lawyer, while abogado is translated into English as lawyer, solicitor, barrister, advocate (Scot), counsel, attorney, attorney at law (Amer), public attorney, legal practitioner, legal adviser.

The translation cannot be said to be wrong, but is incomplete insofar as it does not specify which of the equivalents should be selected – if they are not identical –, why and in which circumstances. Spanish speakers need the additional information included in the WEBSTER’S NEW WORLD COLLEGE DICTIONARY in order to discriminate among the various options available. Including cultural elements in a dictionary appears to be a never-ending task. Language and culture are so closely intertwined that it is not always easy to identify what is only language and what is only culture, or when and where both appear as inseparable. Moreover, culturally relevant items are sometimes far from obvious for native speakers of a language. Spanish speakers usually invite friends, as most people do all over the world; but the invitation usually becomes real and meaningful only when it is repeated two or three times; otherwise, it is most often a matter of politeness. This culturally distinctive feature is internalized by all the members of the Spanish community and it goes unnoticed…, until you enter other communities with a different code for invitations. This is the case of the Anglo-Saxon community, where invitations are not subject to redundancy: why should you need to invite somebody twice to be taken seriously?, one could say.

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


German marks the difference between colloquial and formal speech by using du and Sie. Spanish has also tú and usted. But English has only one element for both: you. Neither Germans, nor Spaniards, nor the English are fully aware of this fact until they learn a foreign language with a different approach to this problem. That is, cultural items often come to the surface only when contrasted with others. In addition to that, the Spaniards and the Germans are very similar in their use of du / Sie and tú / usted and will therefore easily understand each other’s system for colloquial vs. formal situations or contexts. The English must explicitly learn that other languages have developed this dual lexical system and incorporate those linguistic elements into their organization of human relationships. Of course the English also have a specific conceptualization regarding colloquial vs. formal relationships, but they use different linguistic devices for that purpose, outside the pronominal system. Should this information be included in dictionaries? This is sometimes the case: the Spanish GRAN DICCIONARIO DE USO DEL ESPAÑOL ACTUAL specifies for usted: Se utiliza para dirigirse a la persona con quien se habla, cuando no se la trata de ‘tú’, para expresar distanciamiento o ausencia de familiaridad o porque se le quiere dar un tratamiento especial, por razones de edad, cargo o falta de trato. [It is used for addressing the addressee with distance or for indicating respect]. (editor’s adaptation).

A guiding principle for the inclusion of information related to language and culture in lexicographical works should be based on the answer to the question of whether or not it helps , or whether or not it is necessary for a correct and complete understanding of the term defined. In that case a prior step should be assumed: it is necessary to identify all the terms and their meanings with substantial cultural features in their semantic configuration. Such a task appears at first glance to be overwhelming. The situation is still more challenging if we take into account that the nature of language and culture and their mutual relationships are not straightforward or monolithic. Language and culture may relate to each other in complex and intricate ways. Dependency of the one upon the other can be measured along a scale, with a minimum and a maximum, the minimum being null dependency, and the maximum full dependency (from this perspective, the so-called culture-dependent vs. culture-independent terms are not so clear-cut as they may appear). The examples given in the preceding pages illustrate different degrees of dependency. One of the features of desayuno / breakfast (first meal of the day, in the morning) matches perfectly well in English and Spanish. But if you further analyse the extension of each one of the terms, some defining features do not match in both languages. The culture-dependency scale for both words is not significant regarding the time at which the meal takes place and the sequence of meals in the day. Culture-dependency is, however, obvious if we refer to the ingredients habitually eaten during the first meal of the day in the UK and in Spain. The culture dependency scale of snow is null in so far as the nature of this substance is concerned, but it is high if we focus our attention on the multiplicity of perceptions (and consequently concepts and words) the Inuit have coined vs. the single or univocal perception habitual among many other communities of speakers.


Aquilino Sánchez

People eat rice or pasta in different ways and combined with many other ingredients. If we have to associate both substances with specific human groups, rice will be associated with the Chinese (among others) rather than with the Germans, and pasta will immediately call to mind the Italians and not the Australians. A bad rice crop will cause more problems in China than in other parts of the world; shortage of pasta may lead to political turbulence in Italy but probably not in Japan. Rice has, in fact, become a part of Chinese culture and pasta an essential element of Italian identity. Dependency between culture and words or language in general is complex and resistant to a straightforward analysis. Still, if we want to invest dictionaries with a more powerful and complete communicative potential, cultural elements cannot be absent. The problem is how to cope with the issue. From what we have seen, it seems that there are two steps in the process: (i) The identification of semantic inequivalence and its association when this is the case with cultural language-dependent elements; (ii) the association of these cultural language-dependent elements with the right lexical items and their inclusion in dictionaries. Step (i) needs detailed and careful research on equivalence and its dependence on culture. Step (ii) requires the search for lexical equivalents in other languages or the right wording of the explanation, where this is required. Dictionaries are not organized and written as most books are: they are not for reading in a sequential order; they are reference books, used occasionally and organized in order to facilitate the search for specific items or bits of information on language. Their organizational structure involves important restrictions on the inclusion of cultural elements. Culture cannot be itemized as easily as we itemize words. Its nature is non-linguistic and it can hardly be expected to be constrained by the limits imposed by linguistic forms. The traditional structure of dictionaries allows for definitions around decontextualised words or word senses. And this brings with it the need to associate cultural elements with decontextualised words. Certain dictionaries already include pieces of cultural information in some entries or added to the linguistic definition of senses. The DICCIONARIO DE TÉRMINOS ECONÓMICOS, FINANCIEROS Y COMERCIALES illustrates the model in the word cabinet: Cabinet: armario; V. display / filing cabinet; case… cabinet crowd (BOLSA ‘pandilla de los archivadores’; son inversores de la Bolsa de Nueva York especializados en bonos muy poco activos; las instrucciones relativas a la compra y venta de dichos bonos, dentro de unos límites prefijados en una limit order o ‘orden con límite’, se archivan en una zona de taquilla o armarios metálicos a un lado del parqué, de donde se deriva esta expresión propia de la jerga de los habituales de la Bolsa. [Cabinet crowd are New York Stock Exchange members who trade inactive bonds. Because they deal in inactive bonds, the cabinet crowd is responsible for only a small portion of the bond trading volume. Members are called the cabinet crowd because they normally issue limit orders that are kept on steel racks called cabinets until the orders are needed]. (editor’s adaptation).

This encyclopaedic explanation is needed to understand the meaning of cabinet crowd. The equivalent given (pandilla de los archivadores) would most probably be taken as a pejorative denomination by Spanish speakers and it would be wrongly understood. The

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


nature of this ‘definition’, however, is radically different from the one applied in the translation of abogado or lawyer, or from the one given by the same authors in cable ship (buque especializado en el tendido y reparación de cables submarinos de comunicación intercontinental) [Eng: a deep-sea vessel designed and used to lay underwater cables for intercontinental communication]. The latter does not include cultural elements, but it requires a full sentence to transmit the meaning of a two-word phrase. Systematicity and coherence in the choice of the form and model for defining nonequivalent terms is difficult to attain, both among lexicographers and within each of the dictionaries. The DICCIONARIO DE INFORMÁTICA Y TECNOLOGÍAS AFINES translates bus as bus (in the field of computers). One could rightly suggest that a short explanation of the underlying meaning and the origin of the word (bus: vehicle for transportation) would be as convenient here as it was in the case of cabinet crowd or cable ship quoted above. A thorough review of specialised and non-specialised bilingual dictionaries, from this perspective would result in thousands of instances with similar suggestions. In that sense, an explanation of the cultural dimension in lexicographical works must still go much further. Lado (1957) was a pioneer in bringing cultural awareness to the field of language teaching. His method was to identify Elementary Meaning Units (EMU) associated with linguistic units (words or phrases). He gives some examples of EMU: leg in English is pierna in Spanish when referring to human beings, but pata when referring to animals; wine has different connotations in Spain, UK or Iran, etc. Such cases illustrate the way specific communities of speakers organize or perceive reality, with linguistic consequences in the vocabulary of each language. EMUs, once identified, can also be taught. The transformation of cultural items into EMUs is not free from limitations and problems. Among other things, EMUs are taken to be discrete items, while culture appears rather to be a construct or continuum with its pieces heavily intertwined and inter-connected. On the other hand, analysis operates with discrete elements and knowledge is often reached from this platform. Approaching a continuum through the analysis of its parts has proved to be a suitable method in the history of education and learning. We may apply the same procedure to dealing with culture in dictionaries.

6.8.  New challenges for specialised lexicography The situation of lexicographical works from the point of view of integration of language and culture is far from satisfactory. The reason lies in a well established tradition by lexicographers, namely, that of constructing dictionaries from a formal linguistic perspective, which looks at words as if they were autonomous lexical items, regardless of the context in which they are used. Words in fact cannot be taken as containers of meaning which void their semantic load in sentences or discourse with full autonomy, independently of other elements around them. The notion of shared meaning (Bublitz, 1996) describes fittingly the role of semantic features in the building of meaning. Lexical features are not restricted to the boundaries of single words; they are distributed across word boundaries (Almela, 2006). The meaning detected or perceived in sentences or


Aquilino Sánchez

discourse is not the exclusive product of individual words, as if cumulatively added up. Still, individual words must have the potential to activate specific semantic features when in contact with specific words or context. In English, physical collocates with attack (Sinclair, 1991). This fact requires physical to take over part of the potential meaning of attack, and vice versa. A similar situation is illustrated by the collocation scientific research. The dependency of words on other accompanying words parallels the dependency of linguistic elements on specific cultural information. The use of the word breakfast activates a set of semantic features connected to or derived from cultural practices in the English speaking community (first meal of the day, bacon and eggs, etc.). Whenever those cultural practices are not shared by other communities of speakers, the equivalent word – if it exists – for the same denotatum will not include the same semantic features. When that is the case, the cultural component becomes a substantial semantic element of the meaning of the word affected. Dictionaries as they stand today assume, consciously or not, a real divorce between two word dimensions which are never separated in usage: language and culture. It is not necessarily the case that the definitions of words in dictionaries are wrong, but they may be sometimes incomplete. A high degree of systematization has been reached in the definition of lexical items as individual and isolated linguistic forms. A similar goal must still be attained in the definition of words as dependent linguistic forms: their semantic dependency on context and co-text, and on the cultural values of users must be worked out and incorporated in dictionaries. A difficult task lies ahead: cultural specificities are usually detected only when two or more cultures are contrasted with each other. We become aware of the cultural specificities of the Spanish speaking community if they are contrasted with other communities of speakers (Argentina, UK, Russia, etc.). Bilingual or multilingual dictionaries are, therefore, the best candidates for detecting relevant cultural items. Monolingual dictionaries usually lack contrasting references in their compilation. One could, however, think of foreign learners using monolingual dictionaries of the language they learn. In that case, monolingual dictionaries face a new challenge insofar as new users are added who need essential information about unknown cultural specificities. The situation is complex, though: cultural specificities are not the same for all potential users, since they may belong to different linguistic communities, with different cultural backgrounds. The decision regarding which cultural specificities to include requires close attention and analysis. The identification of relevant cultural features in community A vs. community B can be done through a careful process of comparison. Is it possible to draw up a set of representative cultural specificities of a community of speakers against all other communities of speakers? How reliable can a list of the most salient cultural features of a language be if we lack a precise and well refined reference? Could we take Lado’s EMUs as a useful device for drawing up such a list? The question is open and can only be solved if we face the issue from a non-dogmatic perspective: some positive results can be obtained, but exhaustiveness is beyond our reach at the moment. Bilingual dictionaries are better candidates for dealing with cultural specificities: their goal is to offer the semantic equivalents of words from one language into another; both communities of speakers are defined and well identified. It should be possible to make a list of the cultural items in need of an explanation for second language learners. Of course,

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


identifying the EMUs of Spanish useful for or needed by the English native speakers, or vice versa, requires a very good knowledge of Spanish and English language and society. The English contrast with the Spaniards on some aspects of the legal system, on expressions to invite people, on the distribution of meals throughout the day, on the working schedule, or on the organization of a part of the real world, as revealed by the words coined in both linguistic systems (leg / pata, pierna; bone / espina, hueso, etc.), etc. Idioms and expressions are an even better showcase of differences or specificities. Much ado about nothing finds the Spanish equivalent in Mucho ruido y pocas nueces. Spanish speakers would understand the more literal translation ‘Hacer mucho para nada’. But the fact is that the community of Spanish speakers have selected a different source for expressing exactly the same meaning with totally different words. A piece of knowledge taken from the world around us serves the purpose: nuts may produce a lot of noise when cracked, but noise is useless as ‘food’ and misleading if the soft fruit inside has deteriorated or is absent. The wording of a habitual experience for a speaking community becomes the symbol of a denotatum that has nothing to do with nuts as physical elements. Nevertheless, if you don’t happen to know what nuts are, or what you may find when nuts are cracked in search of the fruit inside, it will be impossible to understand the idiom. Some knowledge of the environment, climatic conditions and experience regarding a specific tree and its fruit is necessary to fully understand the meaning of this sentence. Specialised lexicography (SL) faces similar problems regarding the treatment of cultural elements. One may conclude, however, that SL will be better placed to solve the problem since the linguistic field it covers is more restricted and easier to define. You could also argue that SL is in need of a more urgent solution regarding the presence of cultural elements because their presence or absence may affect the correct understanding of a term, a question of decisive importance in a specialised domain. However, differences in cultural features carried by words are not always of a similar seriousness. Spanish speakers never refer to human beings as having two patas [Eng: legs] (reserved for animals, instead of piernas, specific to human beings), but the consequences of wrong usage in this case would be rated as ‘not too serious’; because among other things, the understanding of the message would still be possible, or otherwise it would only affect connotative values. For most native speakers such a ‘mistake’ would simply reveal a ‘deficit’ in the command of the Spanish registers. Specialised dictionaries have been more sensitive than general purpose dictionaries in the inclusion of cultural features as a necessary ingredient for grasping the meaning of the words. When lexicographical works include cultural features, they add information on the knowledge of the world underlying linguistic usage. Spanish estrado is translated in English as bar (DICCIONARIO DE TÉRMINOS JURÍDICOS). The OXFORD BILINGUAL DICTIONARY translates it as platform, dais; and estrados mpl (Der), as law courts (pl). The first translation is found in a specialised law dictionary; the second in a general purpose dictionary. It is difficult – not to say almost impossible – for Spanish speakers to grasp the full meaning of bar in English legal language departing from estrado in Spanish if no more explanations are given. Spanish estrado, in legal language, means the physical place of a law court, but it does not usually include the rest of meanings specified in the legal dictionary quoted above (DICCIONARIO DE TÉRMINOS JURÍDICOS), as ‘…the court sitting in full term’, or ‘the barristers, collectively’, or ‘the legal profession’, or what is implied in compounds such as ‘Bar Council’. A useful and efficient way to understand


Aquilino Sánchez

the full meaning of bar may be to give details on how the space is organized in the English courtroom (encyclopaedic information), the bar being a kind of imaginary line which separates judges, lawyers and the public. Those that have the privilege to go beyond the ‘bar of the court’ are the barristers; judges are also there. From this, the meaning has expanded to cover all the legal profession. Spanish estrado never includes all the abogados collectively. Estrado maintains the meaning of the physical ‘platform’ usually reserved for the authority (in the court, in the classroom, etc.). Even though the courtroom in Spain and the UK may be organized basically in the same way, this ‘imaginary line’ (bar) which is at the root of some senses of the word in English is not found in Spanish.

6.9.  Conclusion

The history of lexicography in the last five hundred years is a good example of a discipline that has grown quantitatively and in quality. From the first glossaries, simple as they were, we have reached quite a sophisticated stage in the design of lexicographical works and now have powerful computational tools for accessing and organizing linguistic resources. Developments in lexicography have been closely connected to and dependent on linguistic science. No wonder, therefore, that a deeper understanding of language will have a direct reflection in lexicographical works. Two more elements must be added to the previous analysis: (i) lexicography is nowadays considered a discipline in academic studies, and (ii) new technologies have exerted a tremendous impact on lexicographic tools and the potential for accessing sources and storing data, a crucial problem in the compilation of dictionaries. Regarding (i), let me just stress the importance of research in the development and improvement of any science. Lexicography is no longer a job for amateurs and occasional ‘brilliant’ minds, but a subject of study that will attract the attention of hundreds of potential specialists. Regarding (ii), the digitizing of linguistic data and computers will be recorded in the history of lexicography as one of the most salient milestones and a decisive turning point. One of the reasons for such a conclusion is related to the physical space required by lexicographical works. Dictionaries, like printed books, have already reached their maximum capacity and it is practically impossible to increase the amount of information included in them, unless you engage in the publication of two – or three – volume works. Moreover, accessing data on usage complying with the conditions of reliability and representativeness is only possible through linguistic corpora, or huge compilations of linguistic output processed by computers. In the digital era the question of space needed for storing and accessing source data or for the compilation of real dictionaries has entered a new dimension. This is not the occasion for analysing the issue, but let me point out that the digital dictionary offers new possibilities for the introduction of the cultural dimension in lexicographical works: space is now available in electronic editions and searches are not significantly affected by size increase.

The Treatment of Cultural and / or Encyclopaedic Items in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


Of course, availability of space does not solve the question of which cultural elements should be included and how those elements should be presented to the user. But one of the requirements that constrain printed books is no longer an obstacle. Without the pressure of space the final product will no doubt increase the potential for improving the content. Dictionaries in the XXIst century must undergo deep changes. Regarding the treatment of cultural elements specifically, it could be stated that: – Once it has been decided that cultural elements must be included, we face the urgent need to identify them for both monolingual and bilingual dictionaries. Work in this field has just started and literature or research on this topic is scarce. – The identification of cultural elements to be included in lexicographical works will be closely related to the culture of the communities of native speakers involved in the process. Bilingual dictionaries pose the lowest challenge on the scale of difficulty: they only require the analysis of relevant cultural elements through the comparison of two cultures. The distinctive cultural features can be limited in size and quantity. If the goal is to include cultural features in monolingual dictionaries, it should first be decided which cultural features of the culture in question will have to be explained. The lack of a specific referent will pose important problems. As an example, features which may not be relevant for languages within western culture may be very relevant for languages in Asia or the Arab world. – The method for identifying cultural features could be inspired in Lado’s EMUs, as explained above. – Specialised lexicography does not imply specific problems regarding the inclusion and treatment of cultural features. The specificity of cultural features selected will be tightly connected to the specificity of the terms defined. – The nature of lexicographical works does not allow for a full and natural contextualization of the elements defined and explained. This is a limitation lexicographers have to assume. Since dictionaries develop around words (lemmas), the context will also build on words, even though quotations can be extended to sentences extracted from usage. – A dictionary with cultural information must not necessarily be different in format from actual dictionaries. Cultural features will necessarily be associated to specific words or lemmas. This is also a restriction that has to be assumed. When necessary, such a restriction must be overcome in appropriate ways, most often by adding information on other words needed to complete the ‘web of knowledge’ as established by the community of speakers. A concluding remark: not many scholars have approached the problem of culture and language in general purpose or specialised dictionaries. There have also been few analyses and proposals and these can only be taken as suggestions for future work. Practical applications in the field are limited and have only been carried out for wide audience languages, as in the case of English. This situation should not discourage research or materials design; it simply helps us to realise that the most important part of the path is still there, waiting to be trodden.

CHAPTER 7. The Treatment of Figurative Meaning in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Geart van der Meer

Abstract If we accept that monolingual dictionaries for learners should not only present knowledge and insight into separate facts, but should also enable and encourage the foreign learner to try and emulate the integrated knowledge ‘from inside’ that the native speaker has of their language, a number of things follow. The most important of these is that the foreign learners should be offered information in such a way that it is made possible for them to detect useful links and patterns that may be assumed to be part and parcel of the average native speaker’s competence. This of course applies to all aspects of knowing a language, but especially to word knowledge and knowing how various senses of a word hang together, the subject of the present chapter, and even more in particular knowing that in the case of many words the derived figurative senses are superimposed on the basic senses. A knowledge and full understanding of such links will provide the learner with an enriched and more profound understanding of the language’s wordstock he is learning. Thus, if a foreign learner of English comes across the word gobsmacked he is told (in the OXFORD ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY), that it is a British informal word meaning ‘so surprised that you do not know what to say’. Though this in a way manages to correctly convey its meaning, it also misses out on quite a lot that the native speaker will normally know in addition, namely that the word consists of the component words gob (a rude word for ‘mouth’) and smacked (meaning ‘to hit with your open hand’), so that the ‘real’ meaning is ‘having been hit forcefully by an open hand over the mouth’ so that you are temporarily speechless. So learning the full meaning of this word also implies an understanding of the constituent words gob and smack, in addition to the fact that the ‘real’ meaning is probably never used, but may nevertheless be assumed to be known to native speakers. In this case we then have a sense that is properly to be called figurative or metaphorical without the basic sense normally being used. A case of the figurative sense as well as the basic sense being used is flak, which in the CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY is given two separate entries, first as ‘strong criticism or opposition’ and next as ‘the firing of guns from the ground at enemy aircraft…’. Though the clever learner may make the connection if he reads both entries, this dictionary does not explicitly give this information, whereas other dictionaries in this and similar cases often start with the (often more frequent) figurative sense, so that at any rate the link may be obscured. Also, the obvious link of flak jacket to flak then may become obscured. The present chapter intends to give a overview of the way English monolingual learner’s dictionaries (MLDs) have often failed to deal with this problem and will subsequently present some proposals as to how to improve MLDs in specialised dictionaries for learners. Key Words: METAPHOR; FIGURATIVE MEANING; LEARNERS; BUSINESS DICTIONARY.

7.1.  Introduction Learning a new language involves having to memorise many facts that are unrelated, and memorising unrelated facts is much harder than facts evincing a certain pattern, or facts that


Geart van der Meer

can be shown to be related. Thus, for the learner a pair of new words like bubble (n.) and spire cannot be shown to enter into a pattern at all, but the literal ‘ball of air or gas’ sense of bubble and the metaphorical1 sense as defined in example (1): (1)

Metaphorical sense of buble in the LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH. unreasonable and excited buying of shares in a company that is financially weak, with the effect of raising the market price of the shares far higher than their value.

This metaphorical sense could perhaps be shown to be not as totally unrelated as the LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH definition seems to suggest. A perhaps not even very vague hint of such a link can be found in HARRAP’S DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE, where bubble is defined as shown in example (2): (2)

Definition of bubble in the HARRAP’S DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE. Industry or trend with no substance to it. A bubble usually bursts with more-or-less disastrous consequences for those financially involved. Probably the most famous bubble was the South Sea Bubble which exploded in 1720’ [emphasis added].

In (2), the underlined collocating words clearly demonstrate that the definer (correctly) associated the ‘ball of air’ sense with the specialised sense used in the business world. The relationship is of course one that we call metaphorical: the business sense is a metaphor, as are of course burst and exploded here. If it is true that understanding such links facilitates learning the precise meaning of such a word, including the knowledge that it combines with e.g. burst and explode, then dictionaries failing to provide such clues miss an opportunity to pattern the learner’s knowledge and to deepen their insight into the full meaning of such words. Note the latter addition of deepen the insight: a more profound understanding of words means greater knowledge, and greater knowledge again makes for seeing even more links and patternings, hence facilitating further vocabulary learning and an ever more flexible and varied use of vocabulary2. Thus, a deeper insight is the consequence as well as the cause of detecting links and of learning a more varied vocabulary. If we, arguing along these lines, accept that monolingual dictionaries for learners (MLDs) should not only present knowledge of separate facts, but should also enable and encourage the foreign learner to try and emulate the integrated knowledge from inside that native speakers have of their language, a number of things follow. The most important of these is that the foreign learners should be offered information in such a way that it is made possible for them to detect useful links and patterns that may be assumed to be part and parcel of the average native speaker’s competence, such as knowing that, and how, various senses of a word hang together and how and why words mean what 1


I will in these pages mainly focus on metaphorically used terms, and consider for the sake of expository simplicity the words metaphorical and figurative to be identical, though many authors consider figurative to also include cases like metonymy. Also see Frank Boers (2000).

The Treatment of Figurative Meaning in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


they mean, and that hence at first seemingly separate words (i.e. homonyms) turn out to be related semantically, the subject of the present chapter, and even more in particular knowing that in the case of many words the derived figurative senses are superimposed on the basic senses. A knowledge and full understanding of such links will provide the learner with an enriched and more profound understanding of the language’s wordstock that he is learning. Thus, if a foreign learner of English comes across the word gobsmacked he is told (in the OXFORD ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY) that it is a British informal word meaning ‘so surprised that you do not know what to say’. Though this in a way manages to correctly convey its meaning in a general sense, it misses out on quite a lot that the native speaker will normally know in addition, namely that the word consists of the component words gob (a rude word for ‘mouth’) and smacked (smack means ‘to hit with your open hand’), so that the real meaning is ‘having been hit forcefully by an open hand over the mouth’, so that you are temporarily speechless. In fact, the OXFORD ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY definition makes gobsmacked synonymous with speechless or even the expressions thunderstruck, bowled over or you could have knocked me down with a feather, even though stylistically as well as semantically there are important differences. So learning the full meaning of gobsmacked also implies and presupposes an understanding of the constituent words gob and smack, in addition to the fact that the real meaning is probably never used, but may nevertheless be assumed to be known to native speakers as a background sense which motivates and explains the metaphorical use. In this case we have a sense that is properly to be called figurative or metaphorical without the basic sense normally being used. A case of the figurative sense as well as the basic sense being used is flak, which in the CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY is given two separate entries, first as ‘strong criticism or opposition’ and next as ‘the firing of guns from the ground at enemy aircraft…’. Though the clever learner may guess the connection if he reads both entries, this dictionary does not explicitly give this information, whereas other dictionaries in this and similar cases often start with the (often more frequent) metaphorical sense, so that at any rate the link may be obscured. Also, the obvious link of flak jacket to flak will then become obscured. In these pages I intend to look at a number of clear metaphorical usages in the only monolingual business English dictionary for learner’s so far, the OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH. The aim will be to draw up a proposal as to whether it is desirable, feasible and rewarding to make users as learners of business English aware of the metaphorical character of words.

7.2.  Some Cases Studies The present chapter is not intended as a discussion per se of the phenomenon of metaphor and related phenomena, so a brief discussion of this concept will have to suffice. The word metaphor itself is based on a Greek verb meaning ‘to carry across’, and is hence itself a metaphor: the underlying idea of metaphor is that something is spoken about as if it were


Geart van der Meer

something else, that is, the idea of x is applied (‘carried across’ from its field of application) to y. Thus, the idea of bubble above is applied to something resembling a bubble, as if it were a bubble in some respects. Therefore, metaphors are implicit comparisons based on perceived partial similarity of concepts. Conventional language is full of metaphors (van der Meer, 1996, 1997, 1999) and it has always been my contention that an awareness of the metaphorical character of words makes for a more profound and clearer comprehension. Thus, to give an example I have often used: if learners were only to know that defuse meant ‘prevent a dangerous situation from getting out of hand’3 (the definition most learner’s dictionaries start with) their semantic understanding of this word would be extremely shallow and anaemic. Knowing that the word has something to do with bombs and fuses and ‘explosive’ situations would greatly enhance and deepen their understanding. Likewise, understanding bubble in its economic sense as a metaphor would also greatly focus the learner’s mind on the extreme weakness and vulnerability of the phenomenon so abstractly defined above. In sum, a metaphor occurs when a word or phrase designating a concept from one domain or semantic field is used to speak about or refer to a concept from another domain or semantic field, to which this unit does not refer in its literal meaning, and when this act of speaking or reference is understood on the basis of similarity or analogy; for the metaphor to be a real (not a “dead”) metaphor it is essential that the literal (basic) meaning of the word or phrase should still be known widely in the language community. (adapted and simplified from van der Meer, 1999 and Goatley, 1998: 108–9). The latter part of this working definition clearly states that, for native speakers, a genuine metaphor is two-faced: they understand the meaning in the context at hand but are in principle also aware that there is another, related, meaning that makes the meaning they are currently confronted with more transparent, detailed and intelligible. Repeating the question I ended the first section with: is it desirable, feasible and rewarding to make learners of business English aware of the double-sidedness of such words? To desirable: a full-blooded yes. But feasible? There’s the rub. And if it is not feasible, it is of course neither desirable nor rewarding. Let us look at some examples. I think there are in general two types of cases in the context of our discussion: monomorphemic business terms like bubble and polymorphemic terms like benchmark4. To the not totally uninitiated learner the former must seem semantically motivated due to the remembered basic sense of ‘soap bubble’ and the meaning of the latter must certainly suggest semantic motivation as well, because it is morphologically clearly analysable into the two constituent parts bench and mark, which to the more linguistically sensitive learner must inevitably suggest compositionality and motivatedness of meaning. Yet, how motivated is bench-mark really? Examples (3) and (4) show the literal and metaphorical sense definitions of the OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY (Online):



Which is not even a very good definition, perhaps because it precedes the literal sense. It should be more active, like: ‘Make a dangerous situation less dangerous by removing the cause(s) of the danger’, which definition would then also create more paralellism with the real sense with the real fuse. Including what are really phrases like scorched earth policy.

The Treatment of Figurative Meaning in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners



Literal sense definition in the OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY (Online). a. A surveyor’s mark cut in some durable material, as a rock, wall, gate-pillar, face of a building, etc., to indicate the starting, closing, or any suitable intermediate, point in a line of levels for the determination of altitudes over the face of a country. It consists of a series of wedge-shaped incisures, in the form of the ‘broad-arrow’ with a horizontal bar through its apex, thus . When the spot is below sea-level, as in mining surveys, the mark is inverted. [The horizontal bar is the essential part, the broad arrow being added (originally by the Ordnance Survey) as an identification. In taking a reading, an angle-iron is held with its upper extremity inserted in the horizontal bar, so as to form a temporary bracket or bench for the support of the levelling-staff, which can thus be placed on absolutely the same base on any subsequent occasion. Hence the name].


Metaphorical sense definition in the OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY (Online). ‘b. transf. and fig. A point of reference; a criterion, touchstone’.

So clearly the word originally did NOT mean ‘a mark on a bench’, which might first suggest itself to the layman5, but ‘mark resembling the form of a bench’, which makes the word in this sense a metaphor, since it is based on perceived similarity. The last OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY quotation is from 1883, which might imply that the sense ‘surveyor’s mark’ is obsolete. In the sixties the modern noun sense arose in the computer sciences (example 5): (5)

benchmark in ‘computing’: ►Computing. A program or set of programs used as a standard against which the performance of other programs (or the computer systems running them) is compared or evaluated. Freq. attrib.

which is a further extension of OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY’s originally transferred / figurative sense. The verb to benchmark also arose in the sixties on this foundation. In other words, when the modern use arose, it is unlikely to have been an overtly metaphorical use. So, the question whether it is feasible to teach this word as a metaphor has to be answered in the negative: it is not really any longer a metaphor, so it is therefore neither desirable nor rewarding. This means that to the linguistically aware the word must remain something of a puzzle, leading to all kinds of popular etymologies. An explanation of the ultimate origin of the term may satisfy their curiosity but does not really seem helpful for their learning task. Curiously enough, the compiler of LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH, perhaps sensing the interpretive problem the term may cause, thought it necessary to start his three definitions of the word with ‘a permanent mark cut on a wall, rock, etc. by a surveyor to record the exact height of that place above sea level’ – thereby in fact only adding to the confusion, since the business sense of the term still really remains unexplained6. 5 6

Which obviously does not really solve the interpretational problem the learning user is confronted with. It is only fair to add that in the case of pie chart (v. chart) he fared better, by pointing out the parallel with ‘a circular pie or cake’.


Geart van der Meer

The conclusion is clear: what we will have to focus on is those cases where knowledge of the metaphorical character of the term provides genuine insight into the semantics of the terms and where the metaphoricity is so clear, that no lengthy explanation is required. This also implies (see the definition above) that the literal basis of the metaphor should be relatively frequent and well-known. This would exclude for example terms like bear (market) and bull (market), no doubt puzzling to the learner (because the constituent words are well-known) but unexplainable, since the associations these animals may trigger is far from unequivocal (even for the native speakers) and moreover culture-bound. The same goes for only seemingly motivated compounds from OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH like backlog, blackleg, bluechip, kickback, whose metaphorical origins (if at all) are nowadays rather obscure. More promising would seem to be cases like big bang, white knight (also black knight?), catch a cold, claw back, clean bill of health, daughter company, front loading, junk bond, leveraged buyout, loan shark, nosedive, pie chart, poison pill, predatory pricing, pyramid selling, saturation campaign, scorched earth policy, slush fund, umbrella fund, umbrella organisation, unbundling. Yet in none of these cases does OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH (a learner’s dictionary, remember!) make use of, or take the trouble to point out or at least hint at, the obvious links with the constituent words, the semantically compositional character of the terms and their metaphoricity . Or does it perhaps consider these links so obvious that they need not be pointed out? To varying extents the ‘intermediate and advanced students’ the dictionary is meant for (p. iii) may be expected to be able to grasp immediately what the metaphorical character of these terms is (because they know the component parts), or otherwise they might be made to understand them with some help from the lexicographer. I assume that such knowledge may be satisfying to those students with at least a modicum of language awareness, and hence one may assume linguistic curiosity, and that – more importantly – they will therefore grasp their full meanings more quickly and memorise them more easily. Clearly, in all these cases such knowledge should lighten the burden on learning and not make it heavier. With this in mind, the question then to be asked is, how metaphorically used words are to be described and defined in a dictionary like OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH. Let me first of all take a clear metaphor like bubble, which inexplicably is not in the OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH. I repeat here the LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH definition (example 6): (6)

Definition of bubble in the LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH unreasonable and excited buying of shares in a company that is financially weak, with the effect of raising the market price of the shares far higher than their value.

What strikes me here is the almost total absence of any suggestion of a link with the literal concept of bubble, and hence of the weakness, ephemeral character and vulnerability of this phenomenon. In this respect the HARRAP’S DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE definition, which I repeat here, is much better (example 7):


The Treatment of Figurative Meaning in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


Definition of bubble in the HARRAP’S DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE. Industry or trend with no substance to it. A bubble usually bursts with more-or-less disastrous consequences for those financially involved. Probably the most famous bubble was the South Sea Bubble7 which exploded in 1720’ [emphasis added].

Yet, even here the link is not made explicit, though clearly implied by means of the highlighted words. Supposing bubble were an entry in OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH, how should it be defined? Keeping in mind we are here dealing with a dictionary describing language for special purposes, and apparently wishing to describe only language for special purposes, a solution in which bubble were somewhere in the entry defined as ‘ball of gas’ would somewhat change the ESP character of the dictionary8. The alternative would be to leave the link implicit, as in HARRAP’S DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE, thereby relying on the general linguistic knowledge of the learner. A definition according to the first method might be (example 8): (8)

Possible definition of bubble in a specialised dictionary for learners. Industry or trend like buying shares that is like a real bubble (made of soap and water) in that it has no substance and is of short duration; like real bubbles, such bubbles are also said to explode or burst.

In such a definition the link is made explicit and the usual collocates are mentioned. If the link is kept implicit, but clearly hinted at, we could adopt a simplified HARRAP’S DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE definition, like (9): (9)

Possible adaptations of the HARRAP’S DICTIONARY definition for bubble:





(a) Industry or trend like buying shares that has no substance and is of short duration; such bubbles are also said to explode or burst’. (b) Industry or trend like buying shares that is like a real bubble in that it has no substance and is of short duration; like real bubbles, such bubbles are also said to explode or burst.

In sum, the definition of literal bubble is omitted, because the user is supposed to know what a ‘real bubble’ is. Let me now consider one or two of the words from OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH referred to above, e.g. umbrella organisation, defined as shown in example (10): 7 8

This is an encyclopaedic addition that might be avoided in a learner’s dictionary, though admittedly it is an interesting piece of information about one of the most famous ‘bubbles’. Though many entries, in my view, are not really so ‘special’ at all and might have been left out as really belonging to a general dictionary. Thus, words like handout and occupant are listed without any field labels and in their ordinary senses.


Geart van der Meer

(10) Definition of umbrella organization in the OXFORD DICTIONARY ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH.



a company, business or institution that includes several smaller ones.

In this case it is perhaps wisest to trust the vocabulary knowledge of the learners and their imagination: it is very likely that most people will see this rather transparent comparison with a real umbrella9. It is a rather different matter with e.g. scorched earth policy or slush fund. The former is defined as: (11) Definition of scorched earth policy in the OXFORD DICTIONARY ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH



an extreme method of putting off an unwanted takeover. A reversible action, such as borrowing money at high interest rates, is used to make the balance sheet or profitability seems less attractive.

This is a rather abstruse definition and learners not familiar with the word scorch will no doubt wonder about the motivation of this phrase, which seems to invite analysis. Explaining it, however, would involve both an explanation – however short – of scorch and the original meaning of the expression as a whole. Evidently, this requires a certain amount of space on the page, and it is not easy to reduce the existing definition itself, for even though the second part is strictly speaking an example (not a very telling one, by the way) and not the definition itself, it is very useful to give at least a hint of what are considered concrete examples of this policy. A halfway solution might be to use some words also suggestive of warfare, as e.g. in a definition like (12): (12) Possible definition of scorched earth policy in a specialised dictionary for learners. a defensive policy in which the target of a hostile takeover makes itself seem less attractive [example of such a tactic]’10.

A full solution would of course involve definitions of the meaning of scorch and scorched earth, which would burst the boundaries of this ESP dictionary and make it partly a general dictionary. The other example mentioned, slush fund, which may also puzzle the learner, causes even more interpretational problems. The commonly known sense of slush, ‘half melted snow’, does not really help solve the problem. The Wikipedia explanation11 (also supported by the OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY Online) is correct (example 13): 9 10 11

Which is, by the way, not so easy to capture in a definition without using words that would only complicate matters. Idea suggested by the definition in HARRAP’S DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE. .

The Treatment of Figurative Meaning in Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


(13) Definition of slush fund in the WIKIPEDIA. The term “slush fund” was originally a nautical term; the slush referred to the fat or grease that was obtained by boiling salted meat, the sale of which could then be used to provide the crew with special luxuries. The money obtained from this sale was placed into the so-called ‘slush-fund’.

I have the impression that most business insiders do not know this, and only assume a vague link with ‘melted and dirty snow’, possibly suggesting dirty or shady dealings. This would make the expression at most somnolent or moribund, and at least a very vague metaphor, probably best left unexplained for learners. All in all, it would so far seem that the desirability of fully explaining metaphors in ESP dictionaries like OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH very frequently does not match its feasibility. And hence is of course not rewarding.

7.3.  Conclusion As already formulated above, these findings should make us pause and ponder the feasibility of a learner’s dictionary for business English providing genuine insight into the terms used. Though it would theoretically be desirable for learners to understand the full meaning of what they are learning, we also see that not even the general monolingual learner’s dictionaries normally bother to explain metaphors or present them as such (van der Meer 1997, 1999) and seem to rely – if at all – on the creative thinking of the user. It would then be even less likely for a dictionary like OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH to cater for learners in this respect. The many often farfetched metaphors in business English12 certainly invite and require explanation, but as we have seen, this is often not so easy to give, without in addition also changing the dictionary’s ESP character (and blowing up its size). What a specialised learner’s dictionary could do, is to write sense definitions using a vocabulary (e.g. collocations) that at least strongly hints at the field of discourse from which the metaphor was originally taken, as suggested in the cases of bubble and scorched earth policy mentioned above. Thus, without having to go into lengthy explanations, the more transparent cases could at least be taken care of, thereby nudging awake the learner’s perhaps dormant awareness of the metaphorical character of the expression. The rest, the more farfetched, fanciful or complicated cases will have to remain unexplained, however unsatisfactory this may seem. If we were speaking of a big business dictionary for native speakers of English, the situation would be very different. There, in many cases the transparent metaphors need no overt explanation, though again definitions with (collocating etc.) words from the field of discourse providing the metaphor would still be helpful. And if there are any really nontransparent ones – hence dead metaphors really – they need no explanation either, being of interest only to the language historian. 12

OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH does e.g. list dead cat bounce, but such really fanciful metaphors are few and far between in this book.

CHAPTER 8. Designing Terminological Dictionaries for Learners based on Lexical semantics: the Representation of Actants Marie-Claude L’Homme

Abstract During the past decades, a number of scholars have underlined the importance of adding information on the linguistic functioning of terms (examples, explanations about subtle semantic distinctions, collocates, syntactic structure, etc.) to specialised dictionaries. Linguistic information is particularly useful for learners but is seldom provided in specialised reference works. This contribution offers a proposal for converting a terminological database encoded according to formal lexical semantics, namely the principles of Explanatory Combinatorial Lexicology, ECL (Mel’čuk et al., 1995) into a specialised learners’ dictionary. We are currently examining different methods for converting the formal encoding into a more accessible description for users who are not familiar with the theoretical framework. In this chapter, we focus on the representation of actants (i.e. arguments). We will first give a short description of the lexical database and of some of the theoretical principles borrowed from ECL on which it is based. Then we will give an overview of the method and criteria we have devised in order to convert our formal encoding of actants into a more user-friendly representation. Finally, we will examine some of the challenges posed by the conversion. Key Words: SPECIALISED DICTIONARY; TERMINOLOGY; ACTANTS; ACTANTIAL ROLES; EXPLANATORY COMBINATORIAL LEXICOLOGY; COMPUTING; INTERNET.


8.1.  Introduction Most available terminological and specialised dictionaries focus on conceptual and encyclopedic information, giving users information on the realities to which terms refer rather than on the functioning of terms as linguistic units. However, there is an increasing number of alternative proposals for compiling specialised dictionaries that take into account specific user needs – such as production in a native or second language, understanding in a native or second language, translation, etc. – leading to more diversified approaches to specialised dictionary compiling (DICCIONARIO DE TÉRMINOS DE LA PIEDRA NATURAL E INDUSTRIAS AFINES; Bergenholtz / Tarp, 1995; L’Homme, 2006). Among these are proposals for compiling dictionaries for learners of specialised languages (e.g., DAFA), the characteristic of which is to include rich linguistic information (examples, explanations about subtle semantic distinctions, collocates, syntactic structure, etc.). This contribution offers a proposal for converting a terminological database containing French terms related to computing and the Internet, encoded according to formal lexical semantics – namely the principles of Explanatory Combinatorial Lexicology, ECL (Mel’čuk et al., 1995) –, into a specialised learners’ dictionary.


Marie-Claude L’Homme

The original database, called the DiCoInfo, takes into account terms that belong to four different parts of speech (nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs) and gives information on: a) fine-grained semantic distinctions; b) the actantial (i.e. argumental) structure of terms; c) terms that can fill a specific actantial position; and, finally, d) terms that are semantically related to the term being described together with an explanation of the relationship. We believe – and this is increasingly recognized in lexicography and terminology circles – that this type of encoding, although rich and complex, can be useful for learners of a specialised language. However, the original encoding implemented in our database requires a thorough knowledge of the lexical framework on which it relies. We are currently examining different methods for converting the formal encoding into a description which is more accessible for users who are not familiar with the theoretical principles of ECL. In this contribution, we focus on the handling and representation of actants (i.e., arguments) in a more user-friendly version of our database. Previous work on specialised learners’ dictionaries and general-language learners’ dictionaries is reviewed in Section 2. In this review, we focus on the methods lexicographers have devised to represent actants in various parts of the articles. Section 3 gives a short description of our own terminological database and of some of the theoretical principles on which it is based. Section 4 is devoted to the representation of actants in our database and its importance in the descriptions of terms. Then (Section 5), we will report on the different decisions taken to convert the formal encoding into a more user-friendly dictionary. Finally, we will conclude by examining some of the challenges posed by the conversion. Many examples used throughout the contribution are in French. Wherever possible, we have supplied English translations, some of which are very literal. This is done on purpose in order to reflect choices made by us in our own work or by other lexicographers or terminologists. Also, we adhere to certain typographical conventions: a) lexical units or terms appear in small capitals; b) actants appear in bold characters; c) semantic labels or typical terms used to represent actants appear in italics.

8.2.  Representation of actants in existing dictionaries An increasing number of dictionaries (general-language or specialised) represent actants explicitly or implicitly in articles. Actants are defined as the obligatory linguistic participants involved in the meaning of predicative lexical units (Mel’čuk, 2004). Typical predicative units are verbs and adjectives, but many nouns (especially deverbal and de-adjectival nouns) can also be defined as such. We have listed below a few examples of predicative units that belong to different parts of speech and the actants needed to account for their meaning: (1)


access to Y(something) by X(someone). X(something) is compatible with Y(something). configuration of Y(something) by X(someone). X(someone) loads Y(something) into Z(something). X(someone) loads Z(something) with Y(something).

Designing Terminological Dictionaries for Learners based on Lexical Semantics:… SEND: START: VIRTUAL:


X(someone) sends Y(something) to Z(someone). Y(something) starts. X(something) virtual.

In dictionaries, actants can appear in different parts of the lexicographical description. Most typically, they are stated in the definition and in the representation of the syntactic structure of lexical units. However, they can also be used in other parts of the article: for example, in dictionaries listing collocations, actants are often stated both in the syntactic structure of collocations and in the explanation of their meaning. The explicit representation of actants is a rather recent addition to dictionaries and this appears to be more common in learners’ dictionary. Lexicographers seem to agree that actants are a very useful means to provide users with information regarding the syntacticsemantic interface of the lexical unit. The main challenge remains, however, to present them in a user-friendly way enabling users to make the most of the information without being overwhelmed by formal explanations. One of the most well-known learners’ dictionaries that represent actantial information is the COLLINS COBUILD ENGLISH LANGUAGE DICTIONARY. Very often, actants appear in the definition in the form of pronouns such as you, something, someone, etc. Examples are given below for lexical units that belong to different parts of speech (our italics): (2)


when you eat something, or when you eat, you put food into your mouth… If you give something to someone, you offer it to them as a present. Something or someone that is quick moves or performs actions with great speed.

In some cases, actants are mentioned using more precise labels, as shown in the definition of the lexical unit FLY below: (3)


If a bird, an insect, or aircraft flies, it moves through the air.

In another learners’ dictionary designed for French, the DICTIONNAIRE DU FRANÇAIS USUEL, actants are represented using a numbering system and very general semantic labels. The examples listed below illustrate how both systems are used (again, our typographical conventions): (4)

1. A1 humain admire A2 humain, concret ou abstrait (Eng. admire. A1 human admires A2 human, concrete or abstract). COLÈRE 1. A1 humain est en colère (contre A2 humain) pour une raison A3 (Eng. anger. A1 human feels anger (towards A2 human) for a reason A3). DONNER 1. A1 humain donne A2 concret à A3 humain (Eng. give. A1 human gives A2 concrete to A3 human). HEUREUX 1. A1 humain est heureux (Eng. happy. A1 human is happy). ADMIRER

Another learners’ dictionary for French, the LEXIQUE ACTIF DU FRANÇAIS (LAF), uses a slightly different system from that implemented by the DICTIONNAIRE DU FRANÇAIS USUEL. In this dictionary, actants are represented with variables (X, Y, Z) and semantic labels which can be general or very specific depending on the predicative unit being described. Some examples appear below (in addition to the structure illustrated here, LEXIQUE ACTIF DU FRANÇAIS (LAF) supplies information on the syntactic realizations of actants that we have not reproduced):

144 (5)

Marie-Claude L’Homme ABDIQUER




Le souverain X abdique sa fonction sociale Y (Eng. abdicate: the monarch abdicates his social status Y). L’individu X est un ami de l’individu Y (Eng. friend: The individual X is a friend of the individual Y). La personne X complimente la personne Y pour le fait Z (Eng. compliment: The person X compliments the person Y for the fact Z). [communication langagière X] élogieuse à propos de la personne Y (Eng. laudatory: laudatory speech act X about person Y).

Another learners’ dictionary under construction, the DAFLES, takes into account actants in the description of lexical units. As shown in the examples below, a combination of very general semantic labels and typical lexical units is used to represent actants1: (6)

MANGER 1a: qqn mange un aliment TRAVAILLER 2: un travailleur travaille TRAITER 1b: qqn, un appareil traite qqch.

In the DAFLES, actants also appear in definitions whose form bears some resemblance to those found in the COLLINS COBUILD ENGLISH LANGUAGE DICTIONARY, as shown below: (7)

1a: lorsqu’une personne ou un animal mangent quelque chose (un repas, un aliment, du pain, de la viande), ils le mettent dans la bouche, ils mâchent pour le rendre plus petit et l’avalent pour se nourrir.


To our knowledge, only one specialised dictionary (other than our own terminological database) takes into account actants in the descriptions. This dictionary, called the DAFA, is a learners’ dictionary of business language. It gives actants in the definition using semantic labels (e.g., agent économique (Eng. economic agent)) and typical terms that instantiate these semantic labels (e.g., un particulier (Eng. an individual)), as shown in the examples below: (8)


1.1 Opération par laquelle un agent économique (un particulier, une entreprise, une administration – X) reçoit un bien, une valeur un ou droit (Y) d’un autre agent économique (un particulier, une entreprise, une administration – Z) ou bénéficie d’un service (Y) contre paiement d’une somme d’argent. CAPITAL: 1.1. Bien(s) ou (importante) somme d’argent qui peuvent procurer un revenu à un agent économique (un particulier, une entreprise, un investisseur, un État – X) ou qui permettent à un agent économique (une entreprise – Y) de produire de nouveaux biens ou services. MONNAYER: Un agent économique (un particulier, une entreprise) convertit qqch. (un terrain, un bien) en argent liquide.

Furthermore, the DAFA refers to actants in the explanations of semantic relationships shared by the term being described with other lexical units: in this information category, actants are represented with variables (X, Y, Z) which also appear in the definition for reference. In some cases, typical terms are added between parentheses. Examples are given below for the term CAPITAL (Eng. capital):


It should be mentioned that circumstants (i.e. non-obligatory participants) are also presented using the same method.


Designing Terminological Dictionaries for Learners based on Lexical Semantics:…


Y (une entreprise) X (un particulier, un investisseur,…) X (un particulier, un investisseur,…) X (un particulier, un investisseur,…)

ouvrir son ~ (à un investisseur) apporter des ~ (à Y) fournir des ~ (à Y) investir des ~ (dans Y) participer dans le ~ / au ~ de Y détient des ~

Table 1 summarizes the different systems to represent actants used by the dictionaries mentioned in this section.


System used to represent actants



Pronouns or typical lexical units



Numbering system General semantic labels


Variables General or specific semantic labels




General semantic labels Typical lexical units



Semantic labels Typical terms


If you give something to someone, … A1 donne A2 à A3 humain donne concret à humain X abdique Y Le souverain abdique sa fonction

qqn mange un aliment qqn mange un aliment

MONNAYER: Un agent économique convertit MONNAYER: Un particulier, une entreprise


convertit un terrain, un bien…

Table 1.  Representation of actants in various dictionaries.

8.3.  The DiCoInfo: A brief description of the original terminological database Our terminological database, called the DiCoInfo, contains French terms related to the fields of computing and the Internet. It aims at providing rich lexico-semantic information on terms and, in this sense, it is quite different from standard terminological dictionaries that usually focus, as we said above, on conceptual and encyclopedic information2. 2

In previous versions of the DiCoInfo, terminologists edited entries using a relational database management system (namely, Access). Recently, the database has been converted into an XML structure. The XML structure has been developed in collaboration with Benoît Alain, Patrick Baril-Robichaud, Guy Lapalme and Vincent St-Amour. It can be converted into an HTML representation (the HTML version can be accessed at the following address: ). The XML formalism can also be used to generate a PDF “printed” version of the dictionary. The work reported in this article took place when the relational database was used.


Marie-Claude L’Homme

The DiCoInfo comprises fundamental terms, i.e., terms that can be found in different texts on computing as opposed to terms related to a very specific subdivision of the field (for example, programming with Java). The terms described are nouns (e.g., INTERNAUTE, OCTET; Eng. Web user, byte), verbs (e.g., POSTER, ZOOMER; Eng. post, zoom), adjectives (e.g., NUMÉRIQUE 1,2, VIRTUEL 1,2; Eng. digital, virtual), or adverbs (e.g., NUMÉRIQUEMENT, DYNAMIQUEMENT; Eng. digitally, dynamically). Multi-word expressions can also appear as headwords if their meaning is non-compositional (e.g., TRAITEMENT DE TEXTE 1,2, EN LIGNE 1,2; Eng. word processor; online). Terms are selected using a combination of two methods: first, single-word terms are extracted from corpora using the TermoStat term extractor (Drouin, 2003); secondly, lists of extracted terms (cf. Table 2) are analyzed by terminologists who apply four different lexico-semantic criteria to select valid candidates. Part of speech




Candidate term





English translation










































































































Table 2.  Top of the list of terms extracted by TermoStat.


In our first experiments, the extractor was applied to all forms regardless of their part of speech. Now, we apply it only to lexical words, i.e., nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs.

Designing Terminological Dictionaries for Learners based on Lexical Semantics:…


Each entry in the dictionary corresponds to a specific sense. Sense distinctions are made using a combination of four new lexico-semantic criteria: 1) compatible and differential cooccurrence (Mel’čuk et al. 1995: 64–65); 2) substitution with a synonym; 3) differential derivation; 4) other paradigmatic relationships. It is important to point out that only senses related to the fields of computing and the Internet are described in the dictionary, even if other senses can be found in specialised corpora. The entries of the DiCoInfo are subdivided into 5 main information categories (further subdivided into sub-categories). In Figure 1, we reproduced the information categories provided for the term INTERNET: a)  the headword and grammatical information; b) the status (this category indicates if the entry is completed or if some information is still missing); c) the actantial structure and linguistic realizations of actants; d) up to three contexts extracted from the corpus used during the preparation of the entries; e) lexical relationships. Some administrative information – the date the entry was last updated and the code of the terminologist who wrote the entry – is also provided. Other information categories are given for specific entries: a) definition (for terms that have been given the status 0); b) synonyms, feminine forms and variants wherever these apply; c) an information category called “Informations complémentaires” (Eng. Additional Information), which contains links to other sites providing additional encyclopaedic information on concepts. As shown in Figure 1, the most complex information category, called “Liens lexicaux” (Eng. Lexical Relationships), lists all lexical units (some of which can be terms of the domains of computing and the Internet) which share a paradigmatic or syntagmatic relationship with the term appearing as a headword. An explanation of the relationship is also provided. Finally, if the related lexical unit appears as a headword in the dictionary, a hyperlink redirects the user to the entry where it is described. INTERNET1, n. m.

Statut : 1

Structure actancielle : (l’) Internet : ~ utilisé par Agent pour intervenir sur Patient Réalisations linguistiques des actants Agent Blogueur1, clavardeur1, internaute1, utilisateur1, visiteur1 Patient Blogue1, forum1, information1, page2, portail1, ressource2, service1, site1

Synonyme(s) : le Net, réseau Internet Contextes C’est en général l’option qui convient lorsque l’on veut se connecter à Internet à l’aide d’un modem classique (Source: LINUX3P3). / Il est important également que soit compris le principe d’Internet: c’est un réseau sur lequel des serveurs décident d’être présents (Source: MESENC). / Internet, c’est le réseau télématique planétaire qui permet de relier tous les ordinateurs de la planète entre eux grâce à des protocoles communs (Source: INTERNET).


Marie-Claude L’Homme

Liens lexicaux Explication – Rôles actanciels Eng. Explanation – Actantial roles

Fonction lexicale Engl. Lexical Function

Lexie reliée Eng. Related Lexical Unit







L’agent commence à utiliser un «mot clé»


se connecter1 à ~

L’agent utilise un «mot clé»


naviguer1 dans ~

L’agent utilise le «mot clé» pour intervenir sur le patient


chercher1 … dans ~

L’agent cesse d’utiliser le «mot clé»


se déconnecter1 d’~

Figure 1.  Entry for Internet1

8.4.  Actants in the DiCoInfo In line with the descriptive principles of Explanatory Combinatorial Lexicology, ECL (Mel’čuk et al., 1995), actants play a central role in the description of the sense of lexical units. In the DiCoInfo, actants are stated in the actantial structure (which appears at the beginning of the entry, as shown in Figure 1) and are labelled in terms of actantial roles. Roles labels are designed to represent the semantic relationship between the predicate and its actants (Fillmore, 1968, 1982; FRAMENET, 2008; VERBNET, 2008), as shown in the following examples: (10)


Patient ~ (Eng. compiled: ~ Patient). Agent ~ Patient (Eng. configure: Agent ~ Patient) . ~ de Patient (Eng. failure: ~ of Patient). Agent ~ Patient avec Instrument (Eng. print: Agent ~ s Patient with Instrument). Agent ~ Patient à Destination (Eng. redirect: Agent ~ s Patient to Destination).

A list of approximately 15 labels has been defined and is used in the actantial structures of terms. We have attempted to use very general labels that can apply to a large number of terms (contrary to labels used in FRAMENET 2008, for example, which are defined within a semantic frame). The most frequent labels used in the DiCoInfo are the following: – Agent: The participant responsible for the action expressed by the predicate or responsible for the creation or use of an entity expressed by the predicate. – Destination: The participant representing the goal of an action undertaken by an agent expressed by the predicate or the goal of the typical function of an entity expressed by the predicate. – Instrument: The participant used by an agent to accomplish an action expressed by the predicate.

Designing Terminological Dictionaries for Learners based on Lexical Semantics:…


– Patient: The participant affected by the action expressed by the predicate or on which an entity expressed by a predicate acts. The representation of actants using roles is an efficient and elegant method for referring to actants that share the same relationship with different predicates but that might occupy a different syntactic position or differ in terms of other surface phenomena4. The examples below show how the actantial structures of different semantically-related terms are represented: (11)


~ utilisé par Agent pour enlever Assailant de Destination (Eng. antivirus: ~ used by Agent to remove Assailant from Destination).


~ de Assailant contre Destination (Eng. attack: ~ of Assailant against Destination).


Assailant s’~ à Destination (Eng. attack: Assailant ~ Destination).


~ de Destination par Assailant (Eng. hacking: ~ of Destination by Assailant).


~ designed by Agent to act on Destination (Eng. virus: ~ designed by Agent to act on Destination).

Explicit reference to the actants in dictionaries (among which we can include the DiCoInfo) is not only a method to specify the actantial structure of predicative units. It is also a means to account for their central contribution to the meaning of such lexical units. In the DiCoInfo, actants are stated in definitions, as shown in the examples below: (12)


Agent ~ Patient (Eng. configure: Agent ~ Destination) Un (Agent) définit les paramètres de fonctionnement du (Patient) pour qu’il fonctionne en conformité avec du matériel ou un logiciel spécifique (Eng. An Agent sets the parameters of a Patient so it can work according to those of specific hardware or software).


Assailant s’~ à Destination (Eng. attack: Assailant ~ Destination) Un (Assailant) tente d’atteindre la (Destination) d’un tiers dans le but de nuire à son fonctionnement (Eng. An Assailant attempts to affect a Destination in such a way that it will prevent it from working properly).

Actants are also necessary to explain most lexical relationships (especially syntagmatic relationships), as shown in the examples below (also, see Figure 1): (13)


~ de Assailant contre Destination (Eng. attack: ~ by Assailant against Destination). L’assailant fait un « mot clé » (Eng. The Assailant does a “key word”. lancer une ~ (Eng. launch an ~).


utilisée par Agent pour intervenir sur Patient (Eng. space bar: ~ used by Agent to act on Patient).


Roles are also viewed as an efficient method to capture semantic similarities across languages (Bae et al., 2008).


Marie-Claude L’Homme L’agent utilise le « mot clé » (Eng. The Agent uses the “key word”. appuyer sur la ~ enfoncer la ~ (Eng. press the ~) L’agent utilise le « mot clé » pour intervenir sur le patient (Eng. The agent uses the “key word” to act on the patient). insérer … avec la ~ (Eng. insert … with the ~) INTERNET:

~ utilisé par Agent pour intervenir sur Patient (Eng. Internet: ~ used by Agent to act on Patient) L’agent utilise le « mot clé » pour intervenir sur le patient (Eng. The agent used the “key word” to act on the patient) chercher … dans ~ (Eng. search … in the ~)

8.5.  “User-friendly” representation of actants in the DiCoInfo As can be seen in the previous section, while some data categories given in the DiCoInfo are familiar to all users of specialised dictionaries (namely, grammatical information, definition or contexts), others present lexical information that is much less common. First, the actantial structure is not a data category commonly added to dictionaries, let alone specialised dictionaries. In addition, the representation of actants in terms of actantial roles may appear rather opaque to most users. The presence of actants in definitions could be made more transparent to users who are not familiar with the concept of “actants” and the methods to state them. Secondly, most explanations of lexical relationships are also rather opaque, since the first level of explanation refers to the actantial roles appearing in the actantial structure. The second level uses lexical functions (LFs) as proposed in Explanatory Combinatorial Lexicology (Mel’čuk et al. 1995). In order to start converting our database into a more user-friendly dictionary (i.e., a dictionary that could be consulted by users who are not familiar with our linguistic terminology), we decided to focus on finding a proper method for representing actants wherever they appear in the article. We defined the following objectives before starting the conversion work per se: 1. Implement a transparent representation system of actants, i.e., a system that would not require a thorough knowledge of the terminology related to semantic roles (such as Agent, Patient, Destination). 2. Define a method that would allow us to keep the same encoding wherever the actants are mentioned; in other words, use the same system in the definition, actantial structure and lexical relationships. 3. Define a method that would allow us to refer to two different encodings of actants whenever necessary (for instance, the printed version of the DiCoInfo would simply contain the “user-friendly” encoding, while still enabling access to the encoding in terms of semantic roles for other applications). 4. Define a method that would allow us to keep the same labels even if actants occupy a different syntactic position; in other words, maintain the advantages of the original encoding with actantial role labels.


Designing Terminological Dictionaries for Learners based on Lexical Semantics:…

5. Ideally, the alternate system should be systematic enough to allow the conversion to be performed automatically5. After studying other encodings found in general and specialised dictionaries (cf. Section 3, Table 1), we opted for a system in which actants would be represented by typical terms instantiating actants in the specialised field whose terminology is being described. This is a solution similar to that implemented in the DAFA with the exception that we also refer to typical terms in the explanations of lexical relationships. In the DiCoInfo, typical terms chosen correspond to terms used in the fields of computing and the Internet and are very often described in the database itself. The result of the addition of typical terms to the article CLIQUER 1 (Engl. to click) is illustrated in Figure 2. CLIQUER

1, v. tr. Statut : 0

Structure actancielle : cliquer : Agent{utilisateur 1} ~ sur Patient{icône 1, fichier 1} avec Instrument{souris 1} Réalisations linguistiques des actants

Agent utilisateur1 Patient archive1, barre1, binette1, boîte de dialoque1, bouton2, fenêtre1, fichier1, icône1, … Instrument Bouton1, mini-souris1, souris1 Définition : Un UTILISATEUR appuie sur le bouton de la SOURIS, puis le relâche, de manière à agir sur une ICÔNE ou un FICHIER. Contextes … Liens lexicaux Explication – Terme typique Eng. Explanation – Typical term

Explication – Rôles actanciels Eng. Explanation – Actantial roles

Fonction lexicale Engl. Lexical Function

Lexie reliée Eng. Related Lexical Unit





Une icône ou un fichier qui peut être c.

Un patient qui peut être «mot clé»



Figure 2.  Entry for cliquer (Eng. to click).


Readers interested in the automatic conversion of actants and its difficulties can refer to Bolle (2005).


Marie-Claude L’Homme

As can be seen in Figure 2, the actantial structure states – in addition to semantic roles (Agent, Patient, Instrument) – typical terms that are most naturally found in this position. The Agent role is illustrated with utilisateur (Eng. user). The Patient role is instantiated with two different terms, namely fichier (Eng. file) and icône (Eng. icon); this is done in cases where no suitable generic term can be found (see below). Finally, the Instrument role is illustrated with souris (Engl. mouse). The typical terms then appear in the definition and the explanations given for lexical relationships. The phrasing used in the explanations of lexical relationships is based on that of Polguère (2003). As can be seen in Figure 2, we maintained the two representation systems in the database. However, since they are clearly separated, different versions of the articles – one containing semantic role labels, another, typical terms – can be extracted. In addition, users, when consulting an article in the database, can simply ignore one representation system or the other. In our opinion, the use of typical terms (rather than variables, a numbering system, or a complex semantic labelling system referring to very general and abstract entities) offers a number of advantages that are listed below: 1. Since typical terms can actually instantiate actants in concrete contexts, users of the dictionary can access information on the combinatorial possibilities of the unit being described and reproduce them whenever applicable. This would not be possible with semantic labels (concrete, human, abstract), which very often do not correspond to real terms used in the fields of computing and the Internet. 2. With our system, when reading the explanation of a lexical relationship, there is no need for users to refer to the actantial structure to establish a correspondence between the actants in the explanations and those in the actantial structure. This is necessary when actants are represented with variables (X, Y, Z), a numbering system (A1, A2), or even actantial role labels. 3. The use of typical terms allows us to keep the same labels in the actantial structures of terms even if their syntactic position is different. This would be very difficult to reproduce with other representation systems (especially a numbering system). 4. We believe that if typical terms are chosen wisely, users of the dictionary will infer the correct information related to the actants. For instance, in the actantial structure given for CLIQUER, it can easily be inferred that humans can play the role of agents and that any kind of icon or file on a desktop can be clicked. 5. Since typical terms correspond to terms in the fields of computing or the Internet, these terms are likely to be described elsewhere in the dictionary. Thus, users can obtain more information about them.

8.6.  Concluding Remarks Although as shown in the previous section, the representation of actants with typical terms has many advantages, the choice of the ideal typical term remains a challenge. Up to now, we have defined the following four criteria, but we are aware that they need to be perfected or that additional criteria must be added:

Designing Terminological Dictionaries for Learners based on Lexical Semantics:…


– Typical terms should correspond to lexical units which have been defined as terms in the fields of computing and the Internet (ideally, they should be described in articles). – Typical terms are those most frequently found in sentences extracted from corpora in which both predicative units and actants appear. – Typical terms correspond to generic terms; this allows us to state only one typical term instead of listing a series of possibilities. – In the explanations of lexical relationships or in the definition, typical terms should be the most “natural” ones to appear in this context. In choosing the ideal typical term, the main problem resides in the fact that sometimes these four criteria cannot be applied simultaneously. Regarding the first criterion, we were able, for most terms described, to choose typical terms that are already present in the dictionary. However, there are a few cases where this was not possible. For example, VIRTUEL 1b (Eng. virtual, as in virtual reality), the ideal typical actant is REALITÉ (Eng. reality). However, REALITÉ would not be defined as a term in the field of the Internet. In addition, the choice of this typical term respects the other three criteria. In many cases, generic terms cannot be found to represent one single actant. For instance, the actants that fill the second position in the actantial structure of CONFIGURER (Eng. configure) are numerous and varied (they can be pieces of hardware or software components). However, no generic term can be defined to include them all. So we decided to state two typical terms, i.e., LOGICIEL 1 (Eng. software) and MATERIEL 1 (Eng. hardware). A similar solution was implemented in the article for CLIQUER 1 (cf. Figure 2). Finally, generic terms are not always the ones that appear most frequently in sentences. Hence, we must sometimes decide which typical term – between the generic term or the most frequently used one – is most useful or sounds more “natural” (criterion 4) in definitions and explanations of lexical relationships. Another series of challenges are raised by recent additions to the DiCoInfo. First, we are currently implementing an information category reflecting the common syntactic structures in which terms can be found. Our assumption is that we should be able to use both representation systems of actants (semantic roles and typical terms) in this new information category. But this assumption still needs to be validated on a large amount of data. Secondly, we are preparing articles in other languages (English, Korean and Spanish). We will evaluate whether the criteria defined above and applied to terms in these languages will lead to similar typical terms or to different ones.

Acknowledgments The work reported in this contribution was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) and the Fonds québécois de recherche sur la société et la culture (FQRSC). The author would like to thank the entire team who have worked on the articles of the DiCoInfo and especially Petronille Bolle, who developed the automatic conversion of actants in the DiCoInfo.

CHAPTER 9. The Contribution of Corpus Linguistics to the Development of Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Lynne Bowker

“The most obvious change of the past 20 years has been the application of corpus data to the dictionary-making process. And the emergence of ‘corpus lexicography’ as a distinct discipline has, to a very significant degree, taken place within the field of … pedagogical lexicography. The impact of these developments on actual dictionary text has been profound, and it has by no means run its course”. (Rundell 1998: 337)

Abstract This chapter examines how corpus linguistics has impacted both the process and product of specialised lexicography, with a particular focus on specialised dictionaries for learners. The chapter opens with an introduction to a number of key concepts: specialised dictionaries and different types of specialised dictionary users; learner’s dictionaries and different types of learners; specialised dictionaries for learners; corpus linguistics, particularly as compared to more traditional methods of gathering lexicographic and lexical evidence; and corpora and their characteristics. This is followed by an exploration of some of the main contributions that corpus-based approaches have made to pedagogical lexicography in general, including discussions about frequency data, corpus-derived examples, grammatical information, phraseology and collocations, style and usage information, pragmatic knowledge, and learner corpora. Although corpus-based methods have been slower to take hold in specialised lexicography than in general lexicography, this chapter ends by suggesting a number of possible ways in which corpora could be used to enhance specialised dictionaries for learners, such as the creation of hybrid dictionaries that combine both specialised and general content, the incorporation of data from learner corpora to better address the production-oriented needs of some users, and the inclusion of spoken-language data. Key Words: CORPUS


9.1.  Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the contribution of corpus linguistics to the development of specialised dictionaries for learners. However, it first makes sense to consider each of these elements – specialised dictionaries, learner’s dictionaries and corpus linguistics – independently because these concepts do not necessarily mean the same thing to all people. Therefore, this chapter will begin by examining these concepts in isolation before moving on to discuss them in a more interrelated fashion. In other words, we will


Lynne Bowker

first explore some of the characteristics of both specialised dictionaries and learner’s dictionaries, before examining the nature of a specialised dictionary for learners. The next section will briefly introduce corpus linguistics and corpora, and this is followed by a more focused exploration of corpus-based lexicography and its contribution to learner’s dictionaries. Finally, given that the overarching theme of this volume is future trends in specialised dictionaries for learners, the chapter will end with some thoughts regarding how corpora and corpus-based approaches might be used in the future to further enhance the content of specialised dictionaries for learners.

9.2.  Specialised dictionaries Specialised dictionaries, as the name suggests, are dictionaries that treat specialised fields of knowledge (e.g. business, chemistry, law)1. Specialised dictionaries typically do not contain information about words that are considered to be part of the general language. Rather, they focus on language for special purposes (LSP), which consists of lexical items that are used to describe concepts in specific subject fields. In LSP, these specialised lexical items are typically referred to as terms, in order to differentiate them from general language words. The coverage of a specialised dictionary can be described as either maximizing, where the dictionary attempts to cover as much of the relevant terminology of a field as possible, or it can be minimizing, where only a limited portion of the specialised vocabulary of a field is covered (e.g. only the most frequently used terms). In addition, like most other types of dictionaries, specialised dictionaries can be monolingual or bilingual2. As with all dictionaries, the content and design of a specialised dictionary are determined by the needs of the intended users. Given their restricted coverage, specialised dictionaries have a more limited audience than do general dictionaries, but there are still different types of specialised dictionary users. As pointed out by Bergenholtz / Tarp (1995: 21), the user type is essentially decided according to the user’s native language, level of encyclopedic knowledge, and native – and foreign-language competence. They identify four main user types of specialised dictionaries: – experts with a high level of encyclopedic and foreign-language competence; – experts with a high level of encyclopedic competence and a low level of foreignlanguage competence; 1


Given that specialised dictionaries are restricted to a particular subject field, they are also called special field dictionaries or special domain dictionaries. Furthermore, because they focus on terms, they are sometimes called terminological dictionaries. In some cases, they may even be known as technical dictionaries. Specialised dictionaries can also be multilingual, though in such cases, these may simply consist of a series of vertical columns with each column assigned to a different language and containing only the equivalents in each of the languages.

The Contribution of Corpus Linguistics to the Development of Specialised Dictionaries…


– laypersons with a low level of encyclopedic and foreign-language competence; and – laypersons with a low level of encyclopedic competence and a high level of foreignlanguage competence. Fuertes-Olivera / Velasco-Sacristán (2001: 33) suggest that there are two additional types who need to be recognized as users of specialised dictionaries, but who have too often been ignored: – semi-experts with a medium level of encyclopedic competence and low level of foreignlanguage competence (e.g. university students taking a specialised course such as Business or Economics); and – semi-experts with a low or medium level of encyclopedic competence and a high level of foreign-language competence (e.g. university students taking a Translation degree). These different user types clearly have different needs, and Bergenholtz / Tarp (1995: 22) go on to note that lexicographers must also consider the purpose or communicative function that the specialised dictionary is intended to fulfill. This could include, for instance, nativelanguage text production, native-language text reception, foreign-language text production, foreign-language text reception, translation from L1 to L2, or translation from L2 to L1. The intended user type and purpose will influence the type and amount of knowledge contained in the specialised dictionary. With regard to encyclopedic knowledge, less information will be provided for expert users and more for semi-experts and laypersons. Regarding linguistic information, non-experts may not be fully versed in the LSP of the subject field (even in their native language3) and are therefore likely to require more information on linguistic issues such as collocations or irregular inflections. Similarly, those who are subject field experts but who have a low level of foreign-language competence will need a greater amount of linguistic information in the foreign language. Researchers such as Pearson (1998: 71) have noted that in the past, the main purpose of monolingual specialised dictionaries tended to be to clarify meaning rather than to specify usage. As a result, the entries were unlikely to contain information such as examples, phraseological preferences, usage notes or even grammatical category. This meant that users were given no advice regarding, for instance, collocational restrictions on technical terms. However, more recently specialised lexicography scholars such as Bergenholtz / Tarp (1995: 111) and Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas-Baño (2008: 138–140) have advocated that this type of information, which would show users how to employ the term correctly, should be included. This is important because, as pointed out by Bowker / Pearson (2002: 26):


As pointed out by Bowker / Pearson (2002: 30), being a native speaker of a particular language does not automatically mean that you are well versed in a given LSP because although an LSP has some features in common with general language, it will also have many unique terms and structures which must be learned.


Lynne Bowker

Although the specialised vocabulary of an LSP is often its most striking feature, it is important to note that LSP is not simply LGP with a few terms thrown in. An LSP may also have special ways of combining terms or of arranging information that differ from LGP.

As noted by Fuertes-Olivera / Velasco-Sacristán (2001: 33), this new approach to specialised lexicography, which recognizes that different types of users want to employ dictionaries for both decoding and encoding purposes, seems to reflect the priorities of learner’s dictionaries, with their strong links to corpus-based lexicography.

9.3.  Learner’s dictionaries The most widely recognized type of learner’s dictionary is a general monolingual dictionary that is specially conceived for non-native speakers of a language (e.g. Bogaards 2003: 27; van Sterkenburg 2003: 403). As pointed out by Varantola (2003: 231), learner’s dictionaries have traditionally been compiled with the decoding learner in mind; however, this tradition has been changing with the growing recognition that users want to employ learner’s dictionaries for both decoding and encoding purposes. Moreover, Varantola (2003: 232), has pointed out that the conventional notion of a learner’s dictionary as being a monolingual dictionary for non-native speakers “is not necessarily an entirely happy one”, observing that very important distinctions need to be made … between the concepts of a learner and a non-native speaker, although these two words are often used synonymously and in a somewhat narrow fashion in the literature. In many contexts, it seems that ‘learner’ has actually begun to mean a non-native speaker of English. This is understandable when we think of the global importance of English but unfortunate in the sense that it has led to some misleading generalizations about learners. (Varantola [2002: 32])

Varantola (2003: 232) goes on to note that the prototypical notion of a learner is an adolescent student at secondary school level. However, this narrow definition does not account for the semi-experts identified by Fuertes Olivera / Velasco Sacristán (2001: 33) above, or other real-world situations, such as those where non-native speakers may be mature users who employ learner’s dictionaries to help them express their ideas in a foreign language that may have become their professional lingua franca. Such users are fluent and competent native speakers of another language, but they need contextualized dictionary information to produce adequate texts in a non-native language.

9.4.  Specialised dictionaries for learners Based on the descriptions given in the preceding sections, a specialised dictionary for learners can be understood to be a dictionary intended to help users learn about the concepts and terms in a specific field of knowledge in one or more languages. Once again, as with

The Contribution of Corpus Linguistics to the Development of Specialised Dictionaries…


any dictionary, the specific contents will be determined in part by the intended user group and purpose of the dictionary. Thus specialised learner’s dictionaries may be monolingual or bilingual, production – or reception-oriented, and they may target, for example subject field experts who are language learners, or language professionals who need to learn about the subject field and its associated LSP. There are certainly a number of specialised dictionaries aimed specifically at learners, which focus solely on the specific vocabulary of the field in question (e.g. the OXFORD BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY). However, it is also interesting to note that, from the point of view of some learners, a dictionary combining general and specialised language would be a valuable resource. For example, Campoy Cubillo (2002: 225) describes her experience working with 85 Spanish-speaking first-year chemistry students who had to read texts in English as part of their course. She notes that although the source texts given to the students all had some degree of specialization, most students did not turn to specialised dictionaries in order to obtain information because a significant number of words which they needed to learn in order to understand the texts were in fact general language words. Therefore, they preferred to search in general language dictionaries, but they felt frustrated when some specialised terms could not be found in such resources. Based on this experience, Campoy Cubillo (2002: 223) suggests “there is a need for a (paper) dictionary which includes both general English and either specialised or semi-technical English”. In recognition of the fact that many learners in specialised fields, especially those falling into the non-prototypical categories described by Varantola (2002; 2003) and FuertesOlivera / Velasco-Sacristán (2001) above, may be non-native speakers who need help with both general and specialised language, new types of hybrid learner’s dictionaries, which combine both general and specialised knowledge, are beginning to appear. For example, the Cambridge University Press website4 describes the newly published CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY BUSINESS PLUS (2009), which is based on the 100-million-word Cambridge Corpus of Business English, as follows: [it] is the first comprehensive dictionary for business students and anyone doing business in English. Covering both general and business English, it offers everything you would find in a general English dictionary PLUS business-specific vocabulary.

Similarly, according to the website of the corpus-based MACMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY (MED)5, a major survey conducted among nearly 2000 users of the first edition of the MED (2002) revealed that a growing number of language-learners are now using English when studying or working in fields such as medicine, business, or information technology. These people need and expect their dictionary to explain the specialist terms they encounter on a regular basis. As a result, when compiling the second edition of the MACMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY (MED)(2007), the lexicographers 4


For more details on the CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY BUSINESS PLUS, please see: (accessed July 21, 2009). For more information about the specialised terms included in the MACMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY, please see (accessed November 21, 2008).


Lynne Bowker

made the dictionary more useful for professional and academic users by adding hundreds of specialist terms. These come from a range of subject-fields, especially business and finance, science, information technology, medicine, and the arts. People studying to be doctors or nurses, for example, can now look up terms like ventricle, lymphocyte, carcinoma, and synovial fluid. Similar technical vocabulary is now included for many other fields as well.

Like the CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY BUSINESS PLUS, the MED (2007) is also a corpus-based dictionary. But what exactly is corpus lexicography, and what does it contribute to the dictionary-making process and to the end product? This will be the focus of the following sections.

9.5.  Corpus linguistics and corpora Corpus linguistics is a methodology or an approach for studying language use. It is an empirical approach that involves studying authentic examples of what people have actually written or said, rather than hypothesizing about what they might or should say. As a means of gathering lexicographic or lexical evidence, corpus linguistics is a relatively new approach that has been in use only since the 1980s. It is often contrasted with other methods of gathering lexicographic and lexical evidence, such as lexical introspection (sometimes referred to as armchair lexicography), where a lexicographer relies on his or her own intuitions and judgment about what constitutes an acceptable definition or usage, or casual citation, where a lexicographer observes and records the lexical behaviour of family, friends or strangers. According to Ooi (1998: 47–48), corpus-based investigations can help to overcome some of the criticisms that are often levelled at the more traditional methods. For instance, with regard to lexical introspection, it is sometimes considered to be too subjective, with the resulting dictionary being only as good as its lexicographer(s). This is because even the most talented and experienced lexicographer cannot deduce from his or her own intuition all the relevant facts about all the words in the language. Meanwhile, in the case of casual citation, the lexical behaviour is often casually noticed, which gives rise to questions such as: Was the particular feature noted out of context? or Does the observer’s circle of people constitute a random sampling which can be seen to represent the behaviour of the society in which he or she lives? In contrast, a corpus is a sample of language that is systematically gathered for a particular purpose and coherently organized for that purpose. As suggested by Ooi (1998: 49), if the corpus is representative, it will indicate the collective intuitions of a relevant group of people using the word or expression that is being studied. In other words, by using a corpus and associated corpus analysis software, lexicographers can sort through vast amounts of information and gain valuable insights into the way words are actually used, their meanings, their typical grammar patterns, and the ways in which they relate to other words. A corpus-based approach makes it possible to be more rigorous when describing language use and to identify language events that are both frequent and well dispersed, occurring in many different texts. It is important to note, however, that using a corpus does not mean that there is no place for other methods of gathering lexicographic and lexical

The Contribution of Corpus Linguistics to the Development of Specialised Dictionaries…


data, nor does it mean that the role of the lexicographer is diminished6. In fact, all of these methods can be considered to be complementary, and it is often desirable and even necessary to combine multiple methods in order to glean adequate evidence. Not surprisingly, corpus linguistics requires the use of a corpus. Strictly speaking, a corpus is simply a body of text, which means that lexicographers have been using corpora for a very long time indeed (e.g. in the form of citation slips)7. However, in the context of modern-day corpus linguistics, the term corpus has taken on a more specialised meaning. Now, the term corpus is typically understood to refer to a relatively large collection of authentic texts that have been gathered in electronic form according to a specific set of criteria. There are four important characteristics to note here: large, authentic, electronic and specific criteria. With regard to the characteristic large, there are no strict rules about how many words a corpus needs to contain. However, it should contain a balanced and representative sample of the language under investigation (Atkins et al., 1992)8. Typically, corpora used to investigate general language must be larger than those used to investigate a specialised subset of a language, such as an LSP. Early general language electronic corpora, such as the Brown Corpus (Kučera and Francis, 1967) and the Lancaster-Oslo / Bergen (LOB) Corpus (Johansson, 1980), were about one million words in size. Nowadays, the corpora used for general lexicography are sometimes referred to as mega-corpora (when they contain hundreds of millions of words), or giga-corpora (when they contain more than one billion words). Examples of large-scale general-language corpora in use in recent times include the British National Corpus (Aston / Burnard, 1998), which is one of the corpora used by lexicographers at Oxford University Press, and the Longman / Lancaster Corpus (Summers, 1993), which is employed as a resource by lexicographers working on the Longman dictionaries. In contrast, the size of the corpus used as a basis for developing the specialised learner’s dictionary known as the DICTIONNAIRE D’APPRENTISSAGE DU FRANÇAIS DES AFFAIRES (DAFA) is somewhat smaller totalling about 25 million words. As for the characteristic authentic, this refers to the fact that the texts must be examples of real live language. In other words, the texts must be naturally occurring and not created for the express purpose of being included in a corpus in order to demonstrate a particular use of a word or a specific point of grammar, etc. An insistence on authenticity marks a departure from some traditional lexicographic practices. For instance, in the pre-corpus days, it was common practice for lexicographers to make up the examples included in dictionary entries in order to make a specific point9. 6 7 8


For an interesting discussion on the important role played by lexicographers in interpreting and synthesizing corpus data, see Rundell (2002). For more information on pre-electronic corpora in lexicography, see Kennedy (1998: 14–15) and Landau (2001: 273–275). This is an extremely important point, because no matter how large a corpus is, it cannot be used to make reliable generalizations about the way a language works unless it also makes a serious attempt to be representative. Note that there is still considerable debate in the literature regarding the relative merits of corpusbased and lexicographer-produced examples, not to mention the practices of editing examples taken from a corpus or producing examples inspired by a corpus. Further exploration of this subject is beyond the scope of this paper; however, interested readers are referred to Rundell (1998: 334–335) and Landau (2001: 305–308) for more information.


Lynne Bowker

If a text is electronic, it means that the text is in a form that can be processed by a computer. Lexicographers can therefore take advantage of a range of software tools for analyzing and manipulating the corpus data, which in turn means that they can consult a much greater volume of text than they could if they were working manually with printed material. In addition, the tools allow lexicographers to access, display and sort the information contained within a corpus in a variety of useful ways that make it possible to spot patterns or identify features of language that would have been much less obvious – or even virtually undetectable – if the lexicographers were working with printed documents10. Finally, it is important to note that a corpus is not simply a random collection of texts. Rather, the texts in a corpus are selected according to specific criteria in order to be used as a representative sample of a particular language or subset of that language (e.g. the language of a particular subject field). Clearly, the specific criteria in question depend on the purpose of the investigation at hand, but they may include whether the texts consist of general or specialised language, whether the texts consist of written or spoken language, whether the texts are from a specific geographic region or a particular time frame, etc. Now that we have a general understanding of corpora and corpus linguistics, let us turn our focus more specifically to corpus-based lexicography and to an exploration of the contribution it has made to dictionaries for learners.

9.6.  Corpus-based lexicography and its contribution to learner’s dictionaries As described in Sinclair (1987), the very first dictionary to be based chiefly on a systematic analysis of a large-scale corpus was actually a monolingual general-language learner’s dictionary – the COLLINS COBUILD ENGLISH LANGUAGE DICTIONARY, which was initially published in 1987. Other monolingual general-language learner’s dictionaries soon followed in the footsteps of the COLLINS COBUILD ENGLISH LANGUAGE DICTIONARY by adopting a corpusbased approach. By the mid 1990s, at least three other corpus-based learner’s dictionaries were available, including the CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH (subsequently published under the title CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY), the OXFORD ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY, and the LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH11. Moreover, new learner’s dictionaries that have since been established, such as the MACMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY, which was first published in 2002, are also corpus-based. A corpus-based approach to lexicography has since been applied more widely12 and is now used in the compilation of other types of dictionaries, including general monolingual

10 11 12

For more information about corpus processing tools and techniques for manipulating corpus data, see, for example, Bowker / Pearson (2002). For an interesting comparison of these four early corpus-based learner’s dictionaries, see Bogaards (1996). At least, this has certainly come to be the case for lexicography work conducted in the English language, where accessing relevant texts in electronic form is relatively easy. For most Englishlanguage dictionaries, it has become more or less general practice to incorporate a corpus-based

The Contribution of Corpus Linguistics to the Development of Specialised Dictionaries…


dictionaries (e.g. the NEW OXFORD DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH) and general bilingual dictionaries (e.g. the OXFORD-HACHETTE FRENCH DICTIONARY (French-English / EnglishFrench)) among others. Note, however, that the use of corpora in specialised lexicography has been somewhat slower to take hold. This will be discussed in more detail in an upcoming section. With this in mind, let us return now to a discussion of the contribution of corpora to the development of learner’s dictionaries in general. In the words of Rundell / Granger (2007: 15): Dictionary-making was revolutionised by the arrival of large language corpora in the 1980s. The use of corpus data transformed not only the process but also the product, and dictionaries designed for learners of English have improved enormously. They perform their traditional functions – explaining meanings, giving examples of usage and describing syntactic behaviour – more effectively than was previously possible. But additionally, the use of corpora has made possible more detailed and systematic coverage of phenomena such as pragmatics, register and collocation.

The use of corpora has clearly influenced many aspects of the learner’s dictionary, and one of the most powerful tools offered by corpora is information about frequency because it allows a lexicographer to make informed decisions about how to frame an entry and analyze lexical patterns associated with a word in a more objective and consistent way. This type of information is difficult to obtain using non-corpus-based methods; however, the availability of frequency data in no way negates the need for editorial judgment on the part of the lexicographer. With regard to dictionary macrostructure, frequency data from a corpus helps to inform the selection of lexical items to be included as headwords. Learners are typically interested in finding out about the words and phrases that are in common use, rather than those which are rare or obscure. Accurate figures about language use based on a large, representative and authentic corpus provide the evidence that lexicographers need in order to decide which lexical items to retain and which to omit. Frequency data also makes other important contributions beyond the selection of the headword list. For instance, certain words in the dictionary can be marked as being very common (e.g. in the top 1000 or in the top 25% of the most frequently used words in a language) to allow learners to identify those words that make up the core vocabulary of a language. This frequency information is also relevant for definition construction since definitions for learners tend to be written in a sort of direct or informal style similar to that used by teachers to explain words. Therefore, definitions tend to be composed using those words that are part of the core vocabulary of a language. approach as a means of gathering lexicographic and lexical evidence. However, this may not necessarily be true in other languages, particularly those that are less widely used. Verlinde / Selva (2001:594), for example, observe that “corpus-based lexicography is certainly not a common practice in contemporary lexicography in France” where they go on to note that with few exceptions (e.g. the OXFORD-HACHETTE FRENCH DICTIONARY and the DAFA), “mainstream lexicography is undoubtedly intuition-based”. Nevertheless, as access to electronic corpora in other languages becomes easier, it is highly likely that corpus-based lexicography will become more common in those languages also (Landau, 2001: 340).


Lynne Bowker

Another role played by frequency data is in helping lexicographers to determine, in cases where a lexical item has multiple meanings, the order in which the senses should be presented. Again, the majority of learners will typically be seeking information about the most common meaning of a word, so these meanings can be listed in an order based on frequency of occurrence in the corpus, with the most frequent meaning coming first. Such an ordering has long been valued and sought after in dictionaries, but prior to the development of large and well-balanced corpora, it was not always easy for lexicographers to accurately identify the most frequent meaning. Beyond frequency, one of the most visible ways in which learner’s dictionaries have been influenced by corpus data is through the arrival of the corpus-derived dictionary example. With regard to examples, learners often look at these in the hopes of finding an example that is similar to one that they have heard or read, or that will confirm the way they want to use the word. Therefore, the examples given in a learner’s dictionary should be characteristic of the ones that users will encounter. By consulting a corpus, lexicographers can access many, many authentic instances of a given lexical item and select those examples that are representative of how the lexical item is actually used (i.e., those that show typical grammatical patterns, selectional restrictions, collocates and context) (Fox, 1987: 137; Landau, 2001: 209). Where appropriate, lexicographers can also incorporate this type of information into definitions. With regard to grammar, a lexicographer can call up concordance lines for a given word and examine these to learn about different aspects of its behaviour (e.g. whether a collective count noun such as “audience” is typically used with a singular or plural verb, whether a count noun is typically preceded by a determiner, or whether a noun is typically used in the plural). This information can then be passed on to the learner in the form of grammatical notes or by being incorporated into examples. Note that many words have more than one part of speech or grammatical word class, and it can be very helpful for a lexicographer to look at only one word class at a time. This task can be facilitated by using corpus analysis tools in conjunction with a corpus that has been part-of-speech tagged. Another significant contribution that the adoption of a corpus-based approach has made to lexicography is in the area of phraseology. The conception of words as individual atoms or independent bearers of meaning has given way to what Sinclair (1991: 110) refers to as “the idiom principle” – a model of language that recognizes that the linguistic choices we make are far from random and that a high proportion of our output consists of semi-preconstructed chunks of language. This model of language has been very influential in the design and content of learner’s dictionaries, and it has been greatly facilitated by the use of corpora. Because combinations of words are much less frequent than the individual words, a large corpus of authentic texts can supply the data necessary to see the phraseology of a language clearly and accurately. While this type of information may seem obvious, it is often so only in hindsight. According to Fox (1987: 146) “once a collocate is given, it is so obvious that no one can imagine not guessing it correctly. Yet, when people are asked to give the collocates of words, they frequently do not do well”. If this is the case for native speakers, imagine how much greater the challenge becomes for language learners. A corpus supplies striking evidence showing the extent to which language users rely on preassembled chunks of language to encode a wide variety of very frequent concepts. Lists of

The Contribution of Corpus Linguistics to the Development of Specialised Dictionaries…


collocations with which a headword most frequently combines are now included in the entries in many learner’s dictionaries. Likewise, information about style or usage – that is, words or meanings that are used mainly by particular groups of people, or in particular contexts – is very helpful for learners. There is nothing new about dictionaries marking words for extralinguistic features of this type, but with access to large and varied corpora, lexicographers can now give more reliable accounts of information concerning regional varieties, register, genre, etc. Pragmatic strategies are the ways in which people use language to achieve a goal (e.g. persuading, criticizing, complaining). Just as people choose a goal, they must also choose the appropriate language that will help them to achieve this goal. This aspect of language use is very important, but it is also easy to miss because the patterns only become apparent when we see many examples gathered together. Because different languages use different pragmatic strategies, learner’s dictionaries must provide users with information about the ways in which speakers of a given language use that language to communicate. When lexicographers are searching for evidence of pragmatic strategies, a corpus-based approach can be especially helpful because such uses are difficult to get from other sources given that they are most easily identified when many examples of them are gathered together. Finally, a relatively recent corpus-based development in lexicography is the use of learner corpora (Granger, 1998; Landau, 2001: 293; Granger et al., 2002). The standard type of corpus consulted by lexicographers (e.g. the British National Corpus, the Bank of English), contains texts that were written by native speakers. As such, they are useful for revealing the conventional and repetitive nature of most linguistic behaviour, as well as understanding the fundamental importance of context and co-text in the way we use and understand words. In contrast, a learner corpus is comprised of texts that were produced by foreign-language learners, and it allows lexicographers to identify frequent and dispersed phenomena such as common linguistic problems faced by language learners or typical errors committed by non-native speakers (e.g., adding “s” to “information” to try to make it plural, or using the preposition “about” after the verb “discuss”). A corrective note can be added to the relevant entry to warn learners about such common mistakes and to provide alternative strategies. As was the case with standard corpora, learner corpora allow lexicographers to move beyond their own intuition about problems that learners may have and to consult authentic evidence based on texts actually produced by such learners. In summary, and to use the words of Landau (2001: 305), “there is scarcely any area of dictionary work where a corpus cannot provide important evidence for the lexicographer”. Some of the types of information described above could possibly be obtained using noncorpus-based methods; however, a corpus allows lexicographers to make statements about meanings, patterns and usage of words with much greater confidence and more accuracy, especially when combined with other methods of gathering lexicographic and lexical evidence. As noted by Rundell / Granger (2007: 15), corpora and corpus-based approaches have indeed revolutionized the dictionary-making process and improved the contents of learner’s dictionaries in particular; however, they go on to note that corpora have the potential to make additional contributions that are as yet unrealized. We will consider some of these in the next section with specific regard to enhancing specialised dictionaries for learners.


Lynne Bowker

9.7.  The potential of corpora for enhancing specialised dictionaries for learners It was noted previously that the use of corpus-based methods has been slower to take hold in specialised lexicography than in general lexicography. This can be exemplified by a recent study conducted by Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas Baño (2008: 129) in which they analyzed eight different English and / or Spanish specialised dictionaries in the field of business. Their findings reveal that, up to this point, the availability of corpora appears to have had relatively little impact on the inclusion of authentic examples in such resources. One major reason why specialised lexicographers made less use of corpora in the past is because it was more difficult to find electronic texts to build well-designed corpora in specialised fields (Bowker, 1996: 30; Meyer / Mackintosh, 1996: 258). In recent years, such practical constraints have become less of an issue, and as publishers begin building up collections of specialised texts in different fields, a corpus-based approach is starting to be applied more often in specialised lexicography also. Indeed there are already some notable examples of specialised dictionaries for learners that have incorporated corpus-based methods, such as DAFA, as well as the newer hybrid learner’s dictionaries discussed above, which combine entries for both general and specialised language in a single resource. So, given the benefits of corpora that have already been identified in the production of general learner’s dictionaries, in what ways can we envisage corpora being used to enhance the content of specialised dictionaries for learners? Firstly, it almost goes without saying that corpus-based approaches could be applied to the creation of specialised learner’s dictionaries in all the same ways that they have already been applied to more general learner’s dictionaries, as described in the previous section (i.e., to help with the identification of the relative frequency of terms, the construction of definitions, the selection of authentic examples, the identification of phraseology, etc.). This may raise the question as to whether this would be attempting to include too much information in specialised learner’s dictionaries, which, as noted above, have traditionally focused on reception – rather than production-oriented needs. However, as observed by Campoy Cubillo (2002: 225), “a learner in a working environment needs as much information as possible, because, in many cases, the reference book [the dictionary] becomes the source of information”. Another way in which corpora could contribute to the enhancement of specialised dictionaries for learners could be in the context of the “hybrid” approach to combining general language words and specialised terms in a learner’s dictionary, as described in a previous section. Currently, this “hybrid” approach is being driven by general lexicography, rather than by specialised lexicography. In other words, at present, it is the general language dictionaries that are seeking to include a greater number of specialised terms, rather than the specialised dictionaries that are seeking to include a selection of relevant general language words. As pointed out by Campoy Cubillo (2002: 118), specialised lexicographers could take advantage of corpus-based approaches to assist with the selection of headwords. Using corpus-based frequency data, specialised lexicographers could identify only those general language words that are used and recur most often in specialised texts to create a dictionary that organizes both general words and specialised terms in accordance with their frequency of use by a given professional community. This type of hybrid dictionary, which combines specialised terms with relevant and frequently-used general language words,

The Contribution of Corpus Linguistics to the Development of Specialised Dictionaries…


would be of great value to many types of LSP learners because it could provide them with a sort of “one-stop shopping”. Specialised dictionaries for learners could also take greater advantage of learner corpora, particularly to provide help for those users with encoding needs. These needs have traditionally received less attention in specialised dictionaries, but in more recent times specialised lexicographers have begun to recognize the importance of addressing the encoding needs of users who must learn how to use LSP. Adopting a corpus-based approach could help with this. As noted above, in addition to being characterized by specialised terms, an LSP has its own syntax and idiomatic structures which may differ from those used in LGP. While texts produced by subject specialists who are native speakers can provide evidence of the characteristics and conventions of the LSP, learner corpora consisting of texts produced by semi-experts or experts working in a foreign language could be used to provide data that shows exactly which aspects of the writing task these different groups of LSP learners are having difficulty with13. To this end, specialised lexicographers may find it beneficial to consider teaming up with LSP researchers who could help to compile such corpora14. Another possible direction for the future is to consider whether spoken-language corpora can make a meaningful contribution to the contents of specialised learner’s dictionaries. As noted by Bergenholtz / Tarp (1995:94), it is both demanding and expensive to compile a corpus of spoken language, and user requirements in connection with most specialised dictionaries usually concern production, reception and translation of written texts. For these reasons, specialised lexicographers have traditionally ruled out the need for spoken language corpora. However, as we continue to identify new types of LSP learners and users (and their growing range of needs), and as techniques for compiling spoken-language corpora become more established, it is possible that it may be worth exploring whether such corpora have the potential to enhancing specialised dictionaries for learners as they have already done for general learner’s dictionaries.

9.8.  Conclusion There can be no doubt that corpora have had a tremendous influence on lexicography, and particularly on the development of general learner’s dictionaries. Indeed, as pointed out by Fuertes-Olivera / Velasco-Sacristán (2001: 38), the impact of corpora has been so beneficial that it is becoming increasingly difficult to argue in favour of compiling a dictionary without the help of a corpus. However, the corpus-based approach that has become the 13


As pointed out, for example, by Fuertes Olivera (2005: 48), “the area of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) has studied what learners say and write, paying special attention to grammatical errors. This area of research has been neglected in ESP [English for Specific Purposes]”. One group that seems to be making strides in this regard is the Indiana Centre for Intercultural Communication, whose members are working on the Indianapolis Business Learner Corpus. Their corpus project plans to build an advanced EFL learner corpus of letters of job applications, with a native English speaker comparison group (Connor et al. 2002: 179).


Lynne Bowker

mainstay for developing general learner’s dictionaries has not yet been fully exploited on a wide scale for specialised learner’s dictionaries, as evidenced, for instance, by the analysis of eight specialised learner’s dictionaries in the field of business that was recently carried out by Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas Baño (2008). Nevertheless, in the opinion of lexicographer Sidney Landau, the advantages of corpora are so manifest, that their use will eventually to spread to all forms of lexicography: I am confident that in the long run genuine use of corpora will become the norm in lexicography throughout the world, in bilingual as well as monolingual lexicography, in dictionaries for children as well as adults, for native speakers as well as foreign learners (Landau 2001: 340).

To Landau’s list, we can surely add specialised dictionaries for learners. Indeed, the adoption of a corpus-based approach in specialised pedagogical lexicography seems to be on the horizon. Based on their analysis, Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas-Baño (2008: 140) make a number of suggestions for the future development of pedagogically-oriented LSP dictionaries, and one of the key lexicographical principles that they recommend adopting in order to improve this type of dictionary is “relying on corpus linguistics, using electronic forms of processing”. This recommendation lends weight to the growing opinion that, in the case of specialised dictionaries for learners, corpus-based lexicography is an approach whose time has come, and one which promises many exciting developments in the future.


CHAPTER 10. An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese Specialised Dictionaries Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

Abstract With the constant increase in the demand for specialised dictionaries, more and more lexicographers have shown an interest in specialised lexicography for learners. Mugdan (1989) paid attention to grammar in dictionaries of Languages for Special Purposes. Nielsen (1994) proposed that the structure and constituents of a learner’s dictionary should be introduced into specialised dictionaries, and he has conducted extensive research in this field. Bergenholtz / Tarp (1995) also highlighted the learning features in their Manuel of Specialised Lexicography. Many other lexicographers (Gouws / Prinsloo 1998; Gouws 1999; Nielsen 1999, 2003, 2006; De Schryver / Prinsloo 2000; Tarp 2000, 2003, 2005b; Leroyer 2002a-b, 2006; Collet 2004; Leroyer / Møller 2004, 2005; Leroyer & Simonsen 2006) have investigated various aspects of specialised dictionaries for comprehension as well as for production. Martin Stark (1999) stated clearly that the learner’s needs should be considered in specialised lexicography. The recent lexicographical work Pedagogical Specialised Lexicography (Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas-Baño 2008) deals with specialised dictionaries especially from the perspective of language teaching and learning. It is predictable that specialised lexicography for learners (SLL) will be a hot topic in lexicographical studies, and that specialised learner’s dictionaries (SLDs) will have a promising perspective in the coming years. However, the SLFL has (as far as the authors know) not yet been given consideration in China, which is not compatible with the needs of current society; so Chinese lexicographers must take action to improve the current situation of SLL. Key Words: SPECIALISED




10.1.  Necessity of specialised lexicography for learners in China Specialised lexicography for learners or pedagogical specialised lexicography is an academic discipline that is dedicated to the study and practice of specialised learner’s dictionary (SLDs). Such dictionaries are urgently needed in China, due to the constantly increasing number of foreign students and Chinese college students; they need specialised dictionaries in their studies on specialised subjects.

10.1.1.  Current Status of Specialised Dictionaries in China Although China is in need of SLDs, the publication of general specialised dictionaries (GSDs) is prosperous. Each year many more specialised dictionaries come off the press than language ones both in variety and in number. As far as bilingual specialised diction-


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

aries are concerned, they can be classified into three categories. The first is terminological type, which is usually a single-field dictionary with encyclopaedic definitions focusing mainly on the referential content (or knowledge) of the technical terms; the second is the comprehensive type, which is usually a multi-field dictionary with linguistic and functional words in the macrostructure and provides comprehensive information about technical and scientific language; the third is the glossary type, which may be a single-field or multi-field dictionary with only translational or explanatory equivalents included in the microstructure. The latter makes up the large majority. It can be seen that almost all these types of dictionaries target professional personnel and translators in relevant fields. Most of them merely include terms, proper nouns and technical items or phrases, excluding ordinary senses of specialised terms without any necessary annotations, glosses or illustrated examples; some of them provide no pronunciation, and none of them offer productive information in a systematic way, such as grammatical patterns, collocations, usages, semantic discriminations and synonyms / opposites. And finally, in bilingual specialised dictionaries, e.g. English-Chinese ones, we can find hardly any illustration, such as pictures, drawings or diagrams for the defined terms or definitions. It should be noted that the first and the second type of specialised dictionaries as stated above may be somewhat useful for advanced learners. The former can be beneficial with respect to rather detailed information about technical and scientific concepts, but such dictionaries are usually small-sized with several thousand or even several hundred so-called difficult words. Besides, there is no information about general encyclopaedic terms, which is necessary for text comprehension. The latter can be beneficial with respect to rather detailed information about technical language, but this is editor centered information, which may be good for certain text decoding rather than encoding tasks. Thus, it can be concluded from the above discussion that the purpose of the existing bilingual specialised dictionaries is simply to help professionals (including translators) comprehend English texts or translate English texts into Chinese, while college students can hardly benefit from them.

10.1.2.  Analysis of the Learner’s Needs for Specialised Dictionaries in China In order to find out whether the existing English-Chinese specialised dictionaries (ECSDs) satisfy the needs of related learners in China, we have undertaken research into the use of specialised dictionaries by circulating questionnaires among 128 undergraduates from 36 colleges and universities across China. The interviewees have been selected among the college students who attend a compulsory English course for their respective specialty, or at least one or more specialised courses taught in English, with each course having approximately 36 hours’ class instruction. The statistics of the survey show that all of them need to use specialised dictionaries either for reception purposes (for comprehension of the unknown specialised English terminology or words, or translating from English to Chinese) or production purposes (writing specialised English papers and abstracts, or translating from Chinese to English). But in reality, only approximately one third of the interviewees often resort to ECSDs, while 68.2% of them do so only on rare occasions.

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


Why has that happened? On the one hand, all the learners ask for specialised dictionaries, but on the other, they rarely use them. The reason is evident: the existing specialised dictionaries cannot meet their real needs, for they cannot find what they need there. So most of the college students complain a great deal about the existing ECSDs they have used. Only 19.4% of the interviewees believed that these dictionaries can partially solve the problems encountered in the learning process of their bilingual or specialised English courses. What are the real problems? Our survey shows that over 66% of the students acknowledge that their ECSDs available have quite an incomplete inclusion of the specialised terms, and over 35% of the interviewees claim that their ECSDs provide them only with a set of Chinese equivalents for the technical terms in question without any example and out of context, with the result that they are at a loss to select the appropriate one. Moreover, 71% of the students report that more than half of the ECSDs concentrate only on the specialised senses in Chinese equivalents, without any general senses or any illustrative examples, let alone the usage of the commonly used nouns, verbs or adjectives in specialised or technical English. Nevertheless, they do need to look up such information as well as technical terms in specialised dictionaries. In order to justify this presupposition, we have enquired of all the interviewees whether they wish to look up the following seven lexicographical items which are normally included in learners’ dictionaries: pronunciation, examples, grammatical patterns, collocations, usages, semantic discrimination, synonyms / opposites. The results of the survey are summarized in Table 1.

Item pronunciation examples Rate



grammatical Semantic synonyms / collocations usages patterns discrimination opposites 48%





Table 1.  Percentage of Chinese students wishing to look up information categories in dictionaries.

As for the question: what items do you prefer to include in an ECSD? About 84.6% of the interviewees hope that the pronunciation, examples, collocations, usages, grammatical patterns, etc., should be provided in the dictionary. Hence, we can safely conclude that Chinese college students do demand a new type of specialised dictionary, that is, an English-Chinese specialised learner’s dictionary (ECSLD) for learners. Furthermore, most of the interviewees have expressed a strong desire to obtain these types of dictionaries as soon as possible. 10.1.3.  Educational Situation for SLDs in China With economic globalisation, the number of transnational enterprises coming to China increases rapidly, and meanwhile more and more Chinese enterprises have their business abroad. Therefore, China needs more and more qualified persons with a good command of one or two foreign languages. Good bilingual skills are a prerequisite for students to further their studies abroad, obtain sophisticated information, go in for scientific research, or even


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

get a well-paid job. To meet the needs of the new situation, preschool children in some Chinese areas have begun to receive bilingual instruction. In middle schools it is closely related with specialised subjects, because so far in China approximately 20 kinds of textbooks have been written in English with Chinese notes, such as those in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology and geography (see Appendix, fig. 7). Chinese higher education attaches special importance to bilingual instruction. In 2001 the Chinese Ministry of Education issued a document stating that basic and specialised courses should be taught in English or in any other foreign language for undergraduates, in particular the courses related to high technology and WTO affairs, such as biology engineering, information technology, finance, law, etc. They should start before the others; 5% to 10% of all the courses in those specialties should be taught in a foreign language within three years. Seven years have passed since then, and bilingual instruction is rather popular in some Chinese key universities and many foreign textbooks have been imported. Tsinghua University has established 1440 courses in total, of which around 500 core courses are given with textbooks from prestigious foreign colleges and universities. Peking University and Sun Yat-sen University have, respectively, offered over 30 and 8 specialised courses with foreign textbooks. Fudan University has imported more than 7600 English textbooks of different varieties from Harvard University, such as economics, management, medicine, computer science, chemistry, mathematics and mechanical engineering. Language is the carrier of scientific knowledge, and it is the most important medium for teaching and a key tool for thinking; but students’ lack of foreign language proficiency is usually an obstacle to bilingual instruction in specialised courses. They should turn to specialised dictionaries to get an idea of unknown technical terms and expressions, but it is a great pity that no specialised learner’s dictionaries (SLDs) are as yet available in our country. At present, glossary type and small-sized encyclopaedic specialised dictionaries do not satisfy the reference needs of students for their bilingual courses. Therefore, it is high time ECSLDs were compiled for the sake of bilingual education. Imagine what a huge potential market this represents, as the total enrolment of students has reached 220 million, including around 80 million middle school students and 27 million college students. Most of them choose English as their second language.

10.2.  Characteristics of Specialised Learners’ Dictionaries (SLDs) SLDs should be dedicated to the service of specialised bilingual education in middle schools, colleges and universities, where the foreign language skills and specialty knowledge of students are rather limited and they hope to find the solution to certain language and comprehension problems related to their specialty learning in a single dictionary. Therefore, the main concern for a bilingual specialised dictionary is to integrate language and specialty knowledge into one single volume. It seems that a learner’s specialised dictionary is a general learner’s dictionary (GLD) plus a specialised one. But in fact, it is not so simple, for the language and knowledge for bilingual teaching in specialised courses are quite different from those in general courses.

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


Dictionary compilers should offer and arrange lexicographic knowledge based upon the analysis of the user’s actual needs and knowledge structure as well as their scope. In addition, the distinction must be made among a specialised learner’s dictionary (SLD), a GLD and a general specialised dictionary (GSD).

10.2.1.  Distinctions between GSDs and SLDs – Different Users. GSDs are oriented to professional personnel and translators in special fields of study, whereas SLDs are aimed at the students who are studying a foreign language for special purposes as well as professional or specialised knowledge. – Different Purposes. GSDs might be completely descriptive; they describe the terminologies and / or their concepts as what they are in reality. The more inclusive the dictionaries, the more powerful they are. As for SLDs, they must describe the terms and their senses in a selective and standard-descriptive way. The more user-oriented the dictionaries, the more useful they are, for the students’ receptive scope is restricted within a limited range. – Different Linguistic Features. GSDs collect all the terms, proper nouns and nominal phrases in relevant academic fields, focusing upon the referents or concepts that the definienda denote by means of encyclopaedic or linguistic description; while the SLDs should include verbs, adjectives, adverbs and prepositions which are necessary to form a systematic specialised foreign language, and they focus upon conceptual meaning, grammatical meaning, collocational meaning, and selectional restriction that the definienda embody as linguistic properties. – Different Functional Features. GSDs fall into two types: communication-oriented and knowledge-oriented. The former is used for comprehension and translation from L2 to L1, while the latter for the acquisition of specialised knowledge that has little to do with social communication, such as the single-field specialised dictionaries that provide encyclopaedic definitions and terminological dictionaries that provide conceptual definitions. SLDs are a combination of these two types. – Different Structural Features. GSDs have a simple macrostructure. Most of them merely include nouns or names, in the form of a glossary, the microstructure consists only of headwords and their translational or explanatory equivalents, and some of them provide pronunciations and parts of speech; their definitions are descriptions of names, referents and concepts. Compared with the above specialised dictionaries, learners’ dictionaries have a complex macrostructure with verbs, adjectives, prepositions and adverbs included. Their microstructure must focus upon the description of linguistic properties and the communicative function of lemmas.

10.2.2.  Distinctions between GLDs and SLDs The above five distinctions between GSDs and SLDs suggest that these two types of dictionaries differ considerably in users, purposes, descriptive features and functional structure; however, there is not a great distinction between GLDs and SLDs in essential


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

structure and characteristics, and the difference may exist in the domain and amount of lexical information, as shown in the following aspects: – Different Users. GLDs and SLDs are both oriented to students (in middle schools and colleges), but the former would be better suited for the learners majoring in or simply studying a foreign language, and the latter chiefly for learners majoring in an academic or special subject area in a foreign language, e.g., ESP (English for special purposes). – Different Linguistic Features. GLDs must include the lexical units that form a systematic language system with the exception of specialised words or technical terms. The definitions should fully describe the linguistic properties of various categories of words, including morphological meaning, collocational meaning, connotational meaning, affective meaning, associative meaning, as well as stylistic and pragmatic rules and abundant relevant information such as synonyms, antonyms, derivatives, phrases, idioms and proverbs should be provided with quite detailed explanations or annotations. SLDs mainly include nouns, terms, proper nouns, adjectives and functional words necessary for technical language or the description of an academic field, and hence the main linguistic features are reflected at conceptual and grammatical levels. – Different Functional Features. GLDs and SLDs are both active dictionaries, but the former mainly provide linguistic and social communicative information and thus have many pragmatic functions, and the latter not only have the communicative function, but also the knowledge function. The definitions may involve descriptions of what the words stand for, and the communicative functions are confined to related academic fields. Therefore, more register information is offered.

10.3.  Functional Characteristics of ECSLDs An English-Chinese learner’s specialised dictionary (ECLSD) is oriented to the special user group – usually intermediate and advanced learners who are instructed in bilingual specialty courses. During the dictionary design stage it should be made clear when these users are expected to consult the dictionary and what they are supposed to look up, so that adequate information can be offered to satisfy their reference needs. This suggests that the most significant task of a dictionary is to meet users’ needs, and all lexicographical functions must be centred on this task. As for the inclusion of words, at first it would be better for the ECSLD to be a comprehensive or at least a multi-field one, instead of being confined to a single discipline, and gradually, with the development of comprehensive dictionaries, the compilation of a single field one would be feasible. As far as the range of functions is concerned, consideration should be given to the comprehension, production, and translation of specialised texts. 10.3.1.  Communicative Functions of ECSLDs Lexicographical communication is distinguished from normal language communication. The latter requires speakers to convey their intentions directly to hearers, but the former is

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


more complicated. So dictionary makers should deliver communicative information under complex assumptions: Who are the users? How are their knowledge structure and receptive vision established? What reference needs do they have? And what is the users’ purpose in consulting the dictionary? Therefore, the main lexicographical communicative functions can be accomplished by means of reference needs: – Comprehension of Specialised Foreign Languages. Psychologically, users hope to have the kind of dictionary that can help them understand both the specialised language and knowledge. Thus SLDs should take into account dictionary consultation for spoken and written language comprehension. Spoken language comprehension involves only active vocabulary, whereas written language understanding involves negative vocabulary. If the comprehension function is included, will the dictionary macrostructure expand a great deal? To answer this question, we must analyse user’s knowledge structure and potential receptive vision. Firstly, specialised knowledge concerning physics, chemistry, electronics, mechanics, etc., in the mental lexicon of middle school and college students is only at the primary and intermediate levels. Their receptive vision of specialised knowledge (i.e., their available reading materials) is predictable. Secondly, specialised English textbooks and reference works do not contain a large vocabulary; moreover, all the words occurring in those materials can be statistically calculated. And finally, most students only read the reference materials or periodicals that are recommended by their schools and teachers. Once they have a good mastery of English that can enable them to read more difficult English materials, they no longer need learners’ dictionaries for comprehension purposes. In the light of the above three points, it is quite possible for an SLD to cover the user’s negative vocabulary. With regard to dictionary definition in an SLD, the following aspects should be considered: a) the division of lexical sense should be more minute, and the inclusion of senses should be more exhaustive than in GLDs. That is, negative senses are to be included together with active ones; b) the explanations of headwords should be made more detailed than those in conventional decoding dictionaries, since the linguistic information such as pronunciation, word class and irregular inflexion of words is essential for learners to comprehend both spoken and written languages. If these items are not included, it would be difficult for users to look up the right headword and fully understand its senses and usages. For example, if a user is not taught that teeth is the plural form of tooth, he would not find out and or comprehend teeth. Another example: a medical teacher speaks of the phrase iodophthalein sodium in class, and if one of his students wants to look it up in a dictionary, they should know the pronunciation rules of pronunciation of the first part (/ai7EudEu5WAli:n/) and then figure out its spelling. It is evident that detailed explanations of headwords would benefit the user’s language comprehension and production in communication. – Production of a Specialised Foreign Language. As for an ECSLD, its language production function involves active vocabulary (including words for scientific English and function words), commonly and less commonly used terminology, all of which should be fully explained. With regard to sense division, both active and negative senses should also be distinguished, but only the former should be explained in detail, and the semantic, grammatical and usage information should be provided as active words so as to help users


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

in the production of specialised foreign language; the latter should be briefly explained and the semantic information should be provided simply to help users understand foreign language texts and solve language problems encountered in reading materials. 10.3.2.  Cognitive Functions of ECSLDs The communicative function will involve providing necessary information for language comprehension and expression, whereas the knowledge function involves the cognitive domains of technical terms, which is to explain the cognitive image schema of referents projected in the brain of scientists. Hence the knowledge provided should be sufficiently scientific and complete in order to help users in their active and systematic learning. It has been universally agreed that it is inadequate for learners to master a foreign language simply by means of class instruction, especially for learners majoring in a specialty area; they are expected not only to broaden their knowledge but to overcome various difficulties in foreign language learning. Therefore, they must devote lots of spare time to learning on their own, e.g., for preparing and reviewing their lessons, as well as for broadening and enriching their knowledge; dictionaries are the most convenient reference tools in their self-studies.

Figure 2.  Tree diagram of a SLD structure.

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


There are two essential factors to ensure this function: the inclusiveness of knowledge and the systematicity of knowledge. Knowledge in this context involves both linguistic and specialty knowledge. An SLD should provide not only linguistic information but also essential specialty knowledge (Fig. 2). The former is commensurate with that in GLDs and the latter deals with brief encyclopaedic definitions. Unlike encyclopaedias, this type of dictionary should focus on the explanation of language properties and the specialty knowledge should be imbedded in the definition or annotation of the terms. In other words, the definition should be constructed on the basis of signifiers of definienda, while the information about the signified is given only in a brief or concise way. For example: (1)

deflationary gap: / differences between the investment available in case of full-employment and the amount of deposit.) escape clause: / a clause that, in a specific condition, allows one party to be free of certain of his duties under the contract)

The above terms have been defined in a much more detailed way in encyclopaedic dictionaries, thus occupying much more space. In the above examples, linguistic information and specialty knowledge are integrated into a succinct definition, which not only saves considerable space but also makes clear the main referential content of the definienda. In dictionary making, the lexical knowledge is represented on the basis of the cognitive domain, and compilers should pay attention to categorisation and describe various properties and rules of what the headword stands for by means of definition and glosses.


Structural Features of SLDs

10.4.1. Formal Structure of Lexical Knowledge in SLDs A number of scholars (Huang, 1987 / 2001, 1993; Bengenholtz 1991; Nielsen 1999; Gouws 1999, 2002; Zhang Yihua 2007) have already dwelt upon the structure of general and specialised dictionaries (Fig. 3). The said structural framework can also be applied to SLDs, which bear the characteristics of GLDs and specialised dictionaries. In this section, a brief discussion will be given only to the specific structural features of SLDs in terms of the theoretical framework: – Megastructure. The megastructure or frame structure is the form of organisation or layout of the knowledge information in an SLD. It is composed of macrostructure and outside matter. The former is the backbone of a dictionary structure, by means of which all the headwords and entries are arranged and accessed in a systematic and ordered way; the latter is designed to provide additional information for lexical entries, in the form of front matter, middle matter and back matter. – Microstructure. The microstructure refers to the internal organization of the information items inside an entry, which is designed to represent all or the main lexical


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

data of headwords in a specific style or format. Normally, an entry begins with a headword followed by various annotations. For technical words and terms, a conceptual definition is sufficient, and for the words with grammatical function in a language system, the information about the syntactic structure, conceptual structure and usages or registers should also be offered. As for function words, the functional properties should be described in terms of scientific language. – Distribution Structure. Scientific language involves a wide range of specialised language and knowledge, and it is rather difficult to harmonise the information from different academic fields. The distribution structure is the mechanism by which the given information about the language included and knowledge included is well balanced and harmoniously organised in a harmonious way. And it involves the distribution of linguistic and encyclopaedic information and technical terminology in the macro- and microstructures, including the distributional location, density and balance of word families, conceptual fields, knowledge domain, collocations, usage, semantic discriminations and encyclopaedic knowledge. – Access structure. The access structure is designed to enable users to locate the desired information items in an SLD, including macrostructure arrangement and index list. Access consists of external and internal access. The former refers to the access system of the macrostructure and the latter to that of the microstructure. This access mechanism is especially important for the dictionary in which the lemmas are arranged in thematic order.

Figure 3.  Formal structure of knowledge in SLD.

Each of the above structures describes a specific aspect of the dictionary information from the angle of dictionary design. It seems that they are independent and self-contained, but in fact they are closely related to each other in terms of content. If there were no means to link these components, they would be only a jumbled collection, incoherent or even opposite to one another. Such a structure can neither reflect the natural language relationships nor

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


benefit users. Therefore, it is necessary to find out a device that can integrate the relevant lexical knowledge, concept, morphology, grammar or pragmatics into one network in a coherent way, so that users can acquire much more associated information about headwords.

10.4.2.  Structure of Lexical and Semantic Relationships in SLDs In conventional dictionaries, macro- and microstructures are given a lot of importance by lexicographers, but there are few studies on the lexical and semantic network. Although Western lexicographers have put forward a notion of mediostructure in recent years, the research is still confined to the pattern of conventional cross-reference. The mediostructure relationship is limited to the concepts or properties that are perceivable by users and have a referential potentiality. (Nielsen, 1999: 91–93) It is mainly aimed at general subject dictionaries rather than learners’ ones. As Hartmann & James (2000: 32) say, “There are different types of cross-references and typographical devices to support them, and a framework for their systematic study (‘mediostructure’) is still to be developed”. Although SLDs are only in their infancy, they are developing quite favourably; research on GLDs has a solid foundation, and cognitive linguistics and theories of second language acquisition can provide theoretical support for them. Therefore, SLDs should enjoy greater prominence and make full use of the most up-to-date achievements in related disciplines so as to create a systematic interrelated structure of lexical knowledge and benefit students in their active self-learning. The linguistic units may constitute a natural semantic network through their interrelations on the basis of their distributional position. Lexicographical definitions select or highlight some specific properties of a certain word in a semantic frame or network, while the mediostructure is engaged in setting up the relationships among frame elements and frames, and between frames and outside matters, so that the linking of related words and senses can be achieved: – Morphological correlation. Morphological structures and links will be represented on the basis of the design purpose of SLD, including homophones, homonyms, word families, or different variants of a lexeme, etc. – Conceptual correlation. The prototypic category of lexical concept and the links among different category members will be represented on the basis of users’ needs, including correlated theme, referent and denotation, etc. – Grammatical correlation. The distributional structure and various links among the thematic roles of headwords will be represented on the basis of the profiling focus of frame elements, including the prototypic, possible or impossible co-occurrence. – Register correlation. The contextual links among lexical units will be represented on the basis of the register or style of headwords, including their selectional constraints of function and situation. These representation devices, centred on meaning, are interrelated and interacted, which enables the SLD to build up a multi-dimensional semantic network from various perspect-


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

ives. These relations can be further decomposed into different operational constituents (see Fig. 4), so as to achieve the lexical and semantic links in dictionaries. This correlational structure is an expressional reflection of the natural configuration of mental lexicon, or a semantic mental representation; it is a description of the human cognitive process and product. It is not an easy job to represent the invisible mental process and product in SLDs by means of visible expressions. How to represent those relations in dictionaries is worthy of further study. For the time being, the construction of the lexical and semantic network in printed SLDs can be based on definition, illustrative examples, cross-reference, annotation, indication and related notes or special columns, which may establish necessary links among relevant information at different places.

Figure 4.  Correlation of Lexical and Semantic Network.

10.5.  Definition and translation principles for SLDs As stated above, SLDs are provided with the language communication function and the knowledge dissemination function. Hence, the definition modes of SLDs may be somewhat similar to those of GLDs and specialised dictionaries, while at the same time differ from them in some specific aspects. SLDs should provide the communicative information for definienda and the knowledge information for their referents by means of definition or translation, which involves the relationships among the lexical items, referents and referential content. So the definition and translation of SLDs should be made in conformity with the specific principles.

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


10.5.1.  The Multi-dimensional definition principle Definition is an abstract description of linguistic meaning. As for a bilingual specialised learner’s dictionary (BSLD), whether it is a foreign-Chinese or Chinese-foreign language dictionary, the focus of definition should always be on the non-mother tongue. For example, in an English-Chinese language dictionary, the emphasis should be laid upon the description of the source language whereas in a Chinese-English language dictionary it should be on the target language. From the viewpoint of cognitive semantics, the semantic meaning is a unity of linguistic properties (grammar) and knowledge properties (concepts), and the semantic representation has multidimensional and encyclopaedic features. At the grammatical level, it integrates with various linguistic properties of the words, represented as formal schemata and rules, i.e., morphology, syntax, lexical function and various selectional restrictions. At its knowledge level, it integrates with the referents and referential content that the linguistic signs denote; this is the outcome of long social experiences concentrated in language and complex human cognitive domains, including the characteristics, structural traits, external features and functional properties, etc., of things, which are reflected as specific image schemata of the referents, such as time, space, possession, attribution, programming, property and quality. In this way, the semantic structure and conceptual specific features of words can be described on the basis of cognitive domains. For instance, some chemicals possess such cognitive domains as form, color, source and function; foods have the cognitive domains of taste and preparing methods; mechanical parts bear the cognitive domains of form, structure and function; verbs assume the cognitive domains of cause, process, manner, space and attribution; English prepositions during and until have only time as the cognitive domain, across and onto only space as the cognitive domain, whereas in and on have both. It should be noted that since SLDs are not encyclopaedias or terminological dictionaries, not all the cognitive domains of the defined words need to be explained, but rather the profiled (or prominent) ones should be indicated so as to make students understand their main scientific senses in a certain linguistic context. For instance: (2)

sodium cyclamate: / a white crystalline powder, easily soluble in water, often used as an artificial sweetening material). barium sulphat: / the white precipitate produced by adding sulfuric acid to a solution of barium salt, used in paint manufacture and in barium meal visualization). comet heat: / head with a swirl chamber for indirect injection diesel engines) earth: / to connect a circuit or some metal components to the earth by means of a wire)

The above examples show that, in addition to the equivalents, appropriate glosses are given to indicate specialised senses of the headwords; these profile the essential cognitive domains and trigger the conceptual semantic network nodes of the learner’s mental representation. The ultimate aim is to optimize users’ cognitive potential and to improve their learning efficiency.


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

10.5.2.  Holistic principle of definition The holistic principle of definition is based on systematicity, referring to the unity of various correlated components involved in definitions, and these components should be harmoniously coherent throughout the dictionary and thus form a complete and organic integrity of language and knowledge. To be specific, the holistic principle suggests that words are not isolated linguistic units, but rather they are systematically correlated. The description of one word involves that of many others in a semantic or conceptual frame or network, which is supported by most modern semantic theories; e.g., according to the Gestalt Theory, a visual image should be perceived as a whole and each part of a thing can be recognized on the basis of its whole schema. Cognitive grammar (Langacker 1987 / 1991) uses the terms trajectory, landmark, base and profile to account for the relationships between the language background and what is needed to be foregrounded. Frame Semantics (Fillmore 1982) centres around the idea that in order to understand the meanings of words in a language one must first have a knowledge of the semantic frames or conceptual structures that underlie the meanings of words or their usage. Semantic frames contain frame elements, which describe the frame’s participants in terms of situational roles. Therefore, in the lexicographical definition the whole category or frame the definiendum belongs to must be taken into consideration, so as to represent the systematic relationships among lexical categories and highlight the semantic features of defined words: – The main features of the hypernymic concept should be indicated as the foundation of a conceptual category. In defining infra-red lamp, visible light lamp and ultraviolet lamp, the features of their common hypernymic concept electric lamp should be included or inherited in each of their definitions. – The specific features of all the members in the same conceptual category should be specified, e.g., those of the above three lamps lie in their different spectral range: infrared range, visible range and ultraviolet range. But in a general dictionary, ordinary language should be used. – As for the definition of a part-concept word, it should be made clear which wholeconcept that particular part belongs to in addition to the description of its basic features; e.g., in defining lighting bulb, not only should its own feature (shape of a bulb) be explained but also that it is a part or component of a lighting lamp be indicated; hence users can have a good understanding of the individuality of the defined word and the category that it belongs to. When a whole concept word is defined, it would be better to indicate what category of individual things it represents as a generic or collective word and then describe its basic features. – The relative or mutual relations among the members of the holistic category should be indicated, e.g., in the category geometric figure, diameter and radius are related with circumference, an included angle is formed on the basis of two diverging lines, while a line is composed of a number of dots. Therefore, when radius, included angle and straight line are to be defined, circle, line and dot need to be mentioned. The above approach can also be adopted with the description of different word classes under the same conceptual category. For example, the definitions of the English words choose,

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


chooser, choice1, chosen, choice2, choosable involve the same categorial concept: to select something or someone from a group, but choose assumes the verb-action, chooser is the person who chooses, choice1 is the noun-action, choice2 is the person or thing one chooses, choosable is able to be chosen. The categorial concept combines them into a whole. 10.5.3.  Pertinence principle of definition The pertinence principle of definition requires that definitions are written in accordance with specific academic fields. In an SLD, definienda are regarded as the objects which possess some linguistic properties or specific cognitive domains. Linguistic properties embody the linguistic functions of words while cognitive domains reflect the nature, components and characteristics of the referents that the words stand for. According to this principle, the definition should not only take into consideration the common attributes of linguistic units but also their specific features in certain registers. The definitions in GLDs lay stress on the revelation of linguistic properties, including morphological, conceptual, and pragmatic aspects, whereas those in ECSLDs the definitions should highlight the referential content (concept) as well as the description of name. But as for different types of SLDs, definitions should differ in cognitive domains that they intend to profile; that is to say, definitions should be written in conformity with the corresponding academic field, including the specific features that can enable users to locate the individual concepts in a conceptual system. Such features or the cognitive domain to be profiled should be selected on the basis of matching conceptual category. For instance, in a general dictionary the word water can be defined as: a natural colourless liquid as it that falls from rain, found in rivers, lakes, seas and oceans. In a dictionary of chemistry the definition should be: a compound of hydrogen and oxygen (H2O), which is widely used as a solvent. And in a dictionary of physics it should be: a transparent, colourless, tasteless liquid in a state of purity, at ordinary temperature, with the freezing point at 0 °C and the boiling point at 100 °C. In a dictionary of biology it can be defined as: a natural fluid necessary for living organisms and especially essential for humans to replace body water lost in the urine and sweat and transport nutrients, remove wastes, and regulate body temperature. In short, definitions should highlight specific conceptual features in the light of different specialised dictionaries.

10.6.  Translation Strategies of Culture-bound Words Due to the considerable differences between Eastern and Western cultures, the anisomorphism of languages does exist and “can be manifested by any component of the lexical meaning, in any degree and dimension” (Zgusta, 1971: 296). Lexicographers are often confronted with the fact that quite a few words in the source language do not have corresponding equivalents or concepts in the Chinese language, especially new words or new senses which express a thing or phenomenon. In this case, the conventional solution


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

resorts to the adoption of transliteration or free translation. However, because of the substantial divergences between English and Chinese pronunciation, the sound of English can hardly be transliterated faithfully into Chinese, while free translation might lose important cultural elements. Hence, calque would be an effective approach to the translation of culture-specific words. In the ECSLD translating (hereafter simply BDT) calque can be used in a different language perspective.

10.6.1.  Semantic calque translation in BDT Semantic calque translation refers to the fact that a new sense or referential content is added to an existing Chinese word by imitating that of the corresponding entry word in the source language. A case in point is that originally refers to Venus, and later it acquires a new meaning: (a famous movie star) based on the sense of its English equivalent star. Lately its new senses have been extended into other fields, such as (football star), (political star). A notebook primarily means a small book with blank pages for writing notes. With the rapid development of computer technology, it has assumed a new sense: a small portable personal computer; and by means of calque the Chinese equivalent has acquired this very English sense. The Chinese term is a calque translation from the English word clone in the sense of asexual propagation. This sense has then developed into (copy) or (duplicate) and furthermore, is used as a verb in the above two senses.

10.6.2.  Morphological calque translation in BDT As the Chinese and English languages differ considerably in the morphological domain, it is very difficult to find any similarity between them in the lexical structure. When a certain English expressional form has to be introduced into the Chinese language, it is often reduced to a transplantation which aims to project the schema of the source lexical form directly into the conceptual blended space (Fauconnier / Tunner, 1996). For example: (3)

Morphological calques in Chinese: – abbreviations of international organizations : WTO, OPEC, ISO, NBA, APEC; – abbreviations of professional titles or academic degrees: CEO, CFO, CAO, CBO, DJ, MA, MAB, MPA Ph.D; – economic and financial terms: GDP, CPI, GNP, CBD, ATM, USD, KHD; – abbreviations referring to new technologies and things: GPS, BBS, SOHO, OEM, MP3, CT, DVD.

These so-called lettered words are widely used in the Chinese mass media, and their corresponding Chinese equivalents are quite unfamiliar to many Chinese readers. With the development of language, these new lettered words in Chinese have acquired new meanings or cultural connotations which differ from their original ones. For example, PK

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


is the initialism of Player Killer, denoting the top gun player who kills other adversaries in playing games. When introduced in China, probably due to misinterpretation, people often use it as a verb, referring to the event or act of two sides competing with or attacking each other. 10.6.3.  Phonological calque translation in BDT This is a product of language schema blending, in which the sound of a source language is directly projected directly into blending space to form a new Chinese word, that is, the pronunciation of the word is imitatively represented in the form of Chinese pinyin with its concept being transplanted totally or mostly to the Chinese language (Fig. 5). In this case, sound is the essential motivation in the calque translation. Due to the restriction of the rules of pinyin, the pronunciation of calques may differ somewhat from that of the source language. For example:


Figure 5.  Conceptual integration of phonological calque translation.


Phonological calques in Chinese; a) words used for new material sciences: mosaic→ (mǎsàikè), Teflon → (tèfúlóng), celluloid→ (sàilùlù), nylon → (nílóng); b) words used for new things: cartoon → (kǎtōng), radar→ (léidá), clone → (kèlóng); c) words used for meteorology: El Niño→ ( è’ěrnínuò), La Nina → (lānínà); d) words used for unit of measurement: carat → (kèlā), pint → (pǐntuō), newton → (niúdùn), hertz → (hèzī), bit → (bǐtè), lux → (lēikèsī), joule → (jiāoěr).


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

10.6.4.  Phono-semantic calque translation in BDT This refers to the cross language mapping between expressional and conceptual schemas. Not only does the pronunciation of the source language get mapped, but also the concept is conveyed. Phono-semantic calque can fall into the following types according to its formation structure (Fig. 6): 1. In the typical phono-semantic calque translation, each morpheme in the target language is engaged in the mapping or transference of the pronunciation and meaning of the source language. This can be subdivided into two types: – the source language is the name of a foreign product; the target language, based on sound imitation, will use Chinese morphemes to represent both the property and function of the product. In this way, not only is the euphony of the source language retained, but also the meaning is conveyed. Let’s take the medical expressions, for example (mián’ěrtōng) ← Milton, (dài’ěrmián) ← Dakmane, (hānlèxīn) ← Halcion. From the pronunciation of these Chinese terms, it can be easily inferred that they are sleeping tablets. This is also true with calques for some pesticides, such as (sùmièshādīng) ← Sumissadin, (wěnshādě) ← onecide, (hédàzhuàng) ← Ordran, (miècǎotè)←Machette. Their Chinese translation equivalents clearly show the functions of these products. – the source language words are nouns; their calques in the target language can tactfully reconstruct their sounds and meanings, e.g. the word gene is rendered as ( jīyīn), shock as (xiūkè), lumen as (liúmíng), hacker as (hēikè), Euro as (ōu yuán), shampoo as (xiāngbō). So both the pronunciation and the meaning of the source words are vividly portrayed through conceptual mapping and blending. Such translated expressions are an excellent combination of paraphrase and transliteration. They are the top-grade of calque translation.


Figure 6.  Conceptual integration of phono-semantic calque translation.

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


2. The source language usually occurs as a single word, and the target language has to generalize its conceptual meaning based on sound imitation, e.g., (bālěi wǔ) is derived from the word ballet. In this expression, carries the pronunciation of its source word, and only (wǔ: dance) expresses its concept. Here are more similar examples: jeep → (jípǔ chē), beer → (píjiǔ), carbine → (kǎbīn qiāng), card → (kǎpiàn), Coran → (kělán jīng), flannel → (fǎlán róng), golf → (gāo’ěrfū qiú), neon → (níhóng dēng), rally → (lālì sài), sauna → (sāngná yù), curry → (gālí fěn), valse → (huá’ěrzī wu), etc. Some words like ballet can be briefly called (bālěi). In this case, it would fall into phonological calque. 3. The source language is a compound word (root + affix or affix + root) or a multi-word term; the target language is to use one morpheme to imitate the pronunciation and another to convey the essential semantic features of the source expression. Let’s take miniskirt for instance. It is calqued as (mínǐ qún). The first two Chinese characters (mínǐ) )1 communicate both the sound and an emergent meaning and the third character just describes the referential content of miniskirt. According to the rules of phono-semantic calque, we can readily translate the following terms: romantism → (làngmàn zhǔyì), Marxism → (mǎkèsī zhǔyì), Olympism → (àolínpǐkè zhǔyì), Internet → (yīngtè wǎng), talk show → (tuōkǒuxiù), minidisk → (mínǐ guāngpán), break dance → (pīlì wǔ), bungee jumping → (bèngjí tiào), milkshake→ (nǎi xī), pizza-pie → ( ) (bǐsà bǐng), etc.; they are all remarkably vivid and expressive. 4. The source language occurs as a compound composed of a proper name and a general noun, i.e., material, law, measurement, etc., denominated after the name of the inventor; the translation strategy is similar to that discussed under item (3). For example, Brinell 2 Doppler effect → (duōpǔlēi effect), Brinell hardness → (bùshì hardness), Rockwell hardness → (luòshì hardness), Reynolds number → (léinuò number), Morse code → (mòěrsī code), Mossbauer effect → (mùsībǎoěr effect), Helmholtz wave → (hèmǔhuò wave). Naturally, there exist some common compounds like Mickey Mouse (mǐ Mouse) and Duck Donald → (tánglǎo Duck), and they may be decomposed and translated in the same way. 5. The source word originates from a proper name or brand name; the translation first imitates its sound and then conveys its meaning. For example, Benz (bēnchí car), Boeing (bōyīn plane), Sony (suǒní TV set), Dell (dàiěr computer), Nikon (níkāng camera), Kodak (kēdá film), Nippon (lìbāng paint)), Pierre Cardin (píěrkǎdān fashion), Kentucky (kěndéjī fastfood), munich (mùníhēi beer), bordeaux (bōěrduō wine), livarot (lìwàluó cheese), and son on.

1 2

(mínǐ) originally means charming and attractive in Chinese. (bùshì) means surname in Chinese.


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

10.6.5.  Morpho-semantic calque translation in BDT Some foreign terms may use a certain letter or a shaping word, together with another content word, to designate an object based on its external structure. Since the mere reproduction of its concept is quite insufficient to convey its meaning, it is preferable to adopt an image mapping to calque a word representing the similar shape, so as to make up for the inadequacy of 3, H-beam → , I-steel → paraphrases. For example, double-V groove → K , O-ring → , U-iron → , T-square → , T-junction → , U-shaped bolt → , V-belt → , X-brace → , Y-curve → , claw-foot → , coronary artery → , cross-shaped image → , diamond sign → , horn antenna → , Zigzag incision → . All the above examples demonstrate that the words in bold (both in English and Chinese) are similar in shape. The only difference lies in the fact that in English a word or letter is used to describe the shape of the object while in Chinese characters are adopted to describe the shapes corresponding to the form of the English letters.

10.6.6.  Phono-morphological calque translation in BDT In Western languages, special codes or hieroglyphs are used to compose terms. When translated into Chinese, those codes or hieroglyphs should be mapped into the target language to convey the specific information. This is phono-morphological calque translation. In this way, not only are the (part or whole) pronunciation and written form of the source language retained but also the specific conceptual features are transmitted. For example, X-ray → X (àikèsī ray), Y-ray → γ (gāmǎ ray), V-shaped tube → V (wēi-shaped tube), IP phone → IP (āipǐ phone), V-packing → V (wēi-shaped packing), E bend → E (yī-type bend), H-network → H (āiqì-type network), X support → X (àikèsī-shaped support), Y-graft → Y (wai-shaped graft).

10.6.7.  Referential calque translation in BDT If neither the referents nor expressional forms of source words are available in Chinese, the only solution is to map the referential content into the Chinese expression; as a result it is called referential calque. In this case, the mere reason for calque lies in referent and reference. According to the structural features of the source language, referential calque can be classified into two types. – Simple referential calque: This type of words are mainly culture-bound terms or those resulting from new discoveries, new things or phenomena in the source culture. For example, baba → ( chaat → , charlotte → , harissa → ( , blini → , holography → 3

The Chinese character

(xíng) means the form or shape in English.

An Ideal Specialised Lexicography for Learners in China based on English-Chinese…


, homepage → , moonwalk → , multimedia → , online → . All the examples show that the referents are initially totally absent in the Chinese language, and the reason for calque translation lies mainly in what the source terms stand for. – Compound referential calque: The expressional forms or the whole referents of source compound terms are missing in Chinese, yet the similar signifier and signified of individual constituents or at least one of them of the compound words can be found in the Chinese language; and then the calque translation can be made on the referents of their constituent parts. For example, acid rain → , post-graduate → , gene therapy → , genetic engineering → , greenhouse effect → , greenhouse gas → , noise pollution → , pay and display → , pay-as-you-go → , post-doctorate → , power user → , and so forth. From the perspective of dictionary compilation, the calque is an effective approach to the translation of culture-bound words or technological terms. Apart from the techniques mentioned, there are summarized calque and syntactic calque. A typical example of the former is that Ku Klux Klan is translated as “ K ” (sān kei dǎng). “ K” originates from the initial letter K used in the source term and “ ” indicates that Ku Klux Klan is a name for a party. As for the latter, we simple mention Time is money, which is calqued as “ ”. The Chinese sentence exactly equals its English counterpart in syntactic pattern. Calque translation has strong language vitality; it can remain faithful to the source language and conform to the word formation rules of Chinese in describing new things and phenomena. Thus, lots of words derived from calque translation are included in Chinese contemporary dictionaries.

10.7.  Conclusion Although research on SLDs has just begun in China, the situation is a favourable one. First, there is a great demand for SLDs; second, there are numerous GSDs; third, there are welldeveloped theories and compiling experiences for GLDs. We are now at a crossroads for pedagogical lexicography, and effective second language acquisition demands a new generation of learners’ dictionaries; the inclusion of encyclopaedic information and specialization of lexical knowledge will be important trends for future development in pedagogical lexicography. Bilingual SLDs will become very beneficial tools for the bilingual teaching of specialties in Chinese middle schools, colleges and universities, and give a strong impetus to the promotion of exchange in science, economy and trade between different countries with different languages and cultures. In compiling dictionaries for cross-cultural communication, special attention should be paid to the building of the environment for foreign language acquisition in the same way as


Zhang Yihua / Guo Qiping

its mother tongue. This involves the relevance of lexicographical information to the actual communication pattern of defined words, including discourse participants and prepositional content. As Sperber & Wilson (1986:158) state “Every act of ostensive communication communicates the presumption of its own optimal relevance”. The degree of relevance can be judged by the scene effect and the effort made to understand related information. The maximal communication relevance can be achieved if that presupposed scene effect can be maximized, while cognitive effort can be minimized in an effective way. Evidently, the efficiency of communication depends on the speaker who delivers the information. As far as SLDs are concerned, it lies with the compilers, who provide lexical knowledge or information by means of dictionaries, and as long as the information provided is highly relevant to the users’ specialised learning area, the users’ needs will be effectively satisfied. APPENDIX

Figure 7.  Text books.

CHAPTER 11. Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological Dictionaries for Learners Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

Abstract According to the most recent lexicographic research, there are three basic types of user situation: the cognitive, the communicative, and the operational user situation (Tarp 2008b). The development of the Internet has contributed to enhancing the lexicographical value of these three user situations as the Internet provides quick and easy access to data from which the potential users may retrieve the information needed in specific situations. For example, thousands of “in-house” on-line glossaries or terminological dictionaries are found in the Internet aiming at meeting the needs of workers and / or customers of a particular institution. In many occasions, these are compiled in defiance of lexicographical traditions and practices. The present chapter intends to, firstly, give an overview of the way on-line terminological dictionaries agree with the theoretical frameworks, and secondly, adds specific proposals with the aim of developing a pedagogical specialised lexicographical theory that pays attention to potential users, user situations, user needs, and dictionary assistance (Tarp 2008a). Key Words: INTERNET; SPECIALISED DICTIONARIES; LEARNERS; FUNCTIONS; GLOSSARIES.

11.1.  Lexicography for the third millennium Since the late 1980s, the amount of dictionary research has increased considerably, paving the way for the advent of lexicography as an area of social practice and independent science of academic study, with its own theoretical foundations, adaptation to new discoveries, and relationship with other sciences (Tarp, 2008a). For example, Hartman / James’ (1998: 41) traditional definition of a dictionary as a reference work that illustrates the vocabulary of a language, either in onomasiological or semasiological order, with definitions of meaning in the same language or with equivalents in another language, is totally dependent on linguistically inspired points of view of lexicography and, therefore, does not do justice to lexicography as an independent academic science. Instead, from a lexicographical stance, dictionaries must be defined in terms of lexicographic functions, data and structures. Nielsen / Mourier (2007: 121), for example, define a dictionary as “a lexicographic reference work that has been designed to fulfil one or more functions, contains lexicographic data supporting the function(s), and contains lexicographic structures that combine and link the data in order to fulfil the function(s)”. This definition applies to all types of existing, planned and imaginary dictionaries alike. Emphasis on the functional approach has brought about a change in lexicographical research and practice, already visible in the advent of pedagogical specialised lexicography,


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

which is gaining momentum for two main reasons (Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas-Baño, 2008). First, the often-quoted distinction between lexicography and terminology is of no practical use (Bergenholtz / Nielsen, 2006). Rather, there is a theoretical and methodological confluence which has helped the LSP lexicography concept gain ground with the idea of developing better reference works for specific users in specific user situations. This confluence is based on the existence of shared key features between terminology and LSP lexicography (Bergenholtz / Tarp, 1995: 10–11) (cf. this volume, chapter 1): – – – –

both are related to linguistics and have an eminently applied vocation; in both cases it is a question of essentially descriptive practices; both describe lexical units, although these are pragmatically and functionally separated; technical and social evolution have to a considerable extent eliminated the difference between the two with reference to the physical characteristics of the product, the social purposes, and the presence or absence of economic motivation at the moment of finalising the product; – both share a methodological interest in the linguistic characteristics of the term as a consequence of the incorporation of corpus approaches to terminology and the quantitative relevance of students and translators as users of terminological reference works (Temmerman, 2000). Second, students enrolled in LSP courses, notably English for Specific Purposes (ESP), demand pedagogically-oriented reference works. Consequently, lexicographers and publishing houses have started to pay attention to the specific needs of ESP students. For example, Longman, Collins, and Oxford have published different types of business English dictionaries or have upgraded older editions in connection with the development of international exams such as the Cambridge Business English Certificate (BEC): COLLINS BUSINESS; LONGMAN BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY; OXFORD BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY; OXFORD BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT. These dictionaries are distinctive from each other, and recent analyses have shown that there is a lot of room for improving their pedagogical characteristics in connection with cognitive and communicative situations (Andersen / Fuertes-Olivera, 2009). Within the above framework, this paper adds to the current state of play. Section 2 refines the concept of Internet dictionaries presented in the literature (De Schryver, 2003), and Sections 3 and 4 describe the main characteristics of the Internet dictionary, here known as free institutional Internet terminological dictionary, with the final aim of formulating some requirements for making these reference works more pedagogicallyoriented (Section 5). The chapter concludes by summarising the main findings and ideas.

11.2.  Electronic dictionaries typologies The concept for electronic dictionary (ED) includes not only CD-ROM, DVD and Internet dictionaries but also dictionaries “conceived to support the spelling, hyphenation and other

Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological…


functions integrated in text processing programs such as Word” (Bergenholtz / Tarp, 2005b: 7). In general, electronic dictionaries are reference tools that have been designed to fulfil one or more functions, that are presented as collections of electronic structured data “that can be accessed with multiple tools, enhanced with a wide range of functionalities, and used in various environments”. (De Schryver, 2003: 146) Among them, scholars such as Nesi (2000: 839) include devices that scan and translate printed words, glossaries for online teaching / translating materials, or electronic versions of printed dictionaries. De Schryver (2003: 146–147) reviews different attempts at proposing electronic dictionary typologies by scholars such as Martin (1992), Lehr (1996), and Nesi (2000). De Schryver comments on some of the main drawbacks he observes in these typologies. For example, he claims that Martin’s distinction does not differentiate between computational and non-computational reference works, and claims that Lehr’s typology is more convincing as electronic dictionaries are classified on both technical grounds (for example, online vs, offline dictionary) and metalexicographical criteria, with the aim of deciding, for example, whether an ED is based on a paper dictionary or is a new development. Finally, he refers to Nesi’s typology and argues that her four types – Internet dictionaries, glossary for online courseware, learners’ dictionary on CD-ROM, and pocket electronic dictionaries – are presently blurred. De Schryver (2003: 147–151) suggests a three-step typology based on the way in which dictionaries are accessed. The first step is concerned with the person who accesses the dictionary, with three types of dictionaries distinguished: NLP lexicons designed for machines; lexicons designed for NLP and humans; and machine-readable dictionaries for humans. The second step is connected with the dictionary medium, a distinction being made between physical-object dictionaries, human-oriented electronic dictionaries, and pure NLP systems. Both the physical-object dictionary and the human-oriented electronic dictionary can be further divided into handheld devices vs. robust-machine dictionaries. The third step differentiates according to the type of storage, also distinguishing between handheld devices vs. robust machines (usually desktop or laptop computers), further subdivided along the lines of stand-alone vs. networked storage. Examples of handheld stand-alone dictionaries are pocket electronic dictionaries (PEDs), whereas examples of stand-alone dictionaries in robust electronic machines are stored on various types of disks (for example, DVD). Networked dictionaries can be stored on an intranet system (for example, in universities), and are accessible on a local area network or on the Internet, available worldwide. By combining these three steps, he (2003: 150–151) is able to develop a typology in terms of the average current situation of the paper and electronic-dictionary, answering the question “WHO accesses WHAT WHERE?”: (i) traditional paper dictionary; (ii) handheld dictionary (e.g. PED); (iii) robust-machine dictionary (e.g. CD-ROM); (iv) intranet dictionary; (v) Internet dictionary. In my view, the above classification should be refined by making room for three more questions related with Internet dictionaries: who has compiled the dictionary, is it free or accessible through subscription?, and for whom has the dictionary been compiled? Answering these questions leads me to propose a distinction between two main types of Internet dictionaries: institutional Internet reference works and collective free multiplelanguage Internet reference works. Below, I will comment on the main characteristics of the former (see Fuertes-Olivera (2009) for a discussion of the latter).


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

11.3.  Institutional internet reference works Institutional Internet reference works are dictionaries compiled by lexicographers working in an identifiable institution and can be further subdivided into free or restricted Internet dictionaries according to whether they can be accessed by paying a subscription fee or not. Restricted institutional Internet dictionaries are usually commercially-oriented, are compiled by trained lexicographers (usually academics), working for publishing houses and / or academic institutions, and aim at satisfying the needs of a specific type of user with specific types of problems related to a specific type of user situation (Bergenholtz / Tarp, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005a). The prototypical example corresponds to the electronic dictionary in its own right, conceived afresh for the electronic environment, and containing many of the ‘dreams’ referred to by De Schiver (2003). For instance, the ACCOUNTING DICTIONARIES, compiled at the Centre for Lexicography: – they consist of a network of five on-line accounting dictionaries for learning accounting and its specialised language: one Danish; one English; one English-Danish; and one Danish-English; one English-Spanish (Nielsen / Mourier, 2005, 2007; Fuertes-Olivera et al., in press). They are linked to each other so that users can move easily from one dictionary to another; – they primarily target semi-experts; – they include both factual and linguistic information, adequate for performing knowledge-oriented and communicative-oriented functions; – they give in-depth treatment of terms, together with synonyms and antonyms where relevant; – they give factual data fields with specific information about changes in accounting standards or legislations; – they include grammar, spelling data, collocations and phrases; also British, American and international varieties of English; – the definition delimits the lemma in particular contexts, enabling one equivalent only to be offered, besides including semi-technical terms and general terms; – the definition also provides users with problem-solving and additional information. This is very helpful for translators who are not accounting experts and for accounting experts who are given useful information about changes in rules and new terminology; – the definition also provides the specific meaning of a polysemous lemma by combining it with its equivalent; – the collocations contain sentences relevant to both knowledge- and communicationrelated functions. They provide syntagmatic information together with grammar differences in both languages; – they include lexicographic notes. Free institutional Internet reference works are usually compiled by “amateur lexicographers” either as part of promotional campaigns or as a way of helping co-staff or possible customers to understand texts. A typical example consists of terminological dictionaries explaining terms connected with the products and / or services offered by the organization, usually

Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological…


accessed through the homepage of the institution, through dictionary portals, and through the homepage of academics who offer different contents for their on-campus and off-campus students. The number of these reference works is vast and seems to increase daily in today’s cyberspace. For example, a ‘google search’ on the term accruals retrieved 3,300,000 searches (accessed on June, 4, 2009). The ten initial hits were dictionary entries such as example (1), presented in this chapter as examples of free institutional Internet terminological dictionary. It contains equivalents in Spanish, meaning discriminators, sentence examples, part of speech, and related terms: (1)

The entry accruals in the BABYLON ENGLISH SPANISH DICTIONARY: accruals devengado, valores devengados, derecho adquirido de obligación contraída, acumulaciones (tiempo). accrual provisión | aumento | acumulación. accrued liabilities deudas acumuladas o pasivo acumulado. accrual1 (n.) = acumulación, suma, retención Ex: Calcium and possibly vitamin D intake throughout childhood and adolescence may enhance bone mineral accrual. accrual2 (n.) = devengo, cantidad devengada, cantidad comprometida, total devengado, total comprometido Ex: This has allowed us to move towards an accrual system of accounting whereby estimates are prepared in which expenditure is tied to specified outputs. * accrual accounting = contabilidad de valores devengados

In addition, we are also witnesses to the inclusion of these free institutional Internet reference works in teaching packages with many different functionalities. Verlinde / Binon (2009), for example, comments on the BASE LEXICALE DU FRANÇAIS , which has become a powerful language teaching / learning tool combining: – a learner’s dictionary or lexical database (DICTIONNAIRE D’APPRENTISSAGE LANGUE ÉTRANGÈRE OU SECONDE – DAFLES); – a corpus of newspaper texts; – a CALL application (Alfalex); – direct access to other freely accessible lexical resources on the web;


The next section provides a detailed analysis of free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries found in dictionary portals such as “YourDictionary.com. This will reveal possible different potential uses as pedagogical reference tools.


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

11.4.  Free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries In users can access “free online English dictionaries and much more” (Last accessed: June, 5, 2009). The promotional initial text also adds that “[t]he free dictionary search gives you definitions, thesaurus entries, spelling, pronunciation, and etymology results for your word. Alternatively, you can browse the dictionary alphabetically or by related terms to find meanings and synonyms”. By clicking ‘other dictionaries’ in the menu we retrieve a host of dictionaries, grouped by family languages, further subdivided according to different criteria. For instance, a search in the menu ‘English speciality dictionaries’ retrieves 133 subject-fields, each with a different number of dictionaries . One of the subject fields covered is finance which contains 19 Internet dictionaries together with a cross-reference to multilingual dictionaries. An analysis of the outer texts (mainly the homepage), lemmata, and the articles grouped under the letter e, has allowed me to classify them into three relevant groups. The first type comprises glossaries compiled by consultancies or private companies that include a reference work in their homepages with the stated aim of helping potential customers understand the services and / or products they offer. The COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL GLOSSARY is a prototypical example. It is published by Barkley International Inc, an American consultancy whose stated mission is “to provide its clients with high quality solutions to financial problems”. It is integrated in the homepage of the company with other reference materials and different promotional and interactive functionalities. The last update was in 2000 and it is accessed by clicking on the corresponding letter of the English alphabet, or on the symbol # – this groups 14 terms starting with a figure (for example 12b1-fees) –. The analysis found the following lexicographical characteristics: – the lemmata contain over 1307 alphabetically arranged terms, distributed in an analytical macrostructure where acronyms, abbreviations (for example, EBIT), and complex terms are prominent; – the access structure is deficient, as it does not have the ‘search’ function and consequently the glossary displays all the terms under the letter searched for, obliging users to scroll down screens and check if the term is present; – hypertexts and cross-references are rare; – the articles contain only definitions targeting prospective customers (laypeople), usually without cross-referencing to related terms; Example (2) shows a typical article in the COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL GLOSSARY: The entry ESOP: (2)

ESOP – Is the Employee Stock Ownership Plan. It is similar to a profit sharing plan but, here, only the stock of the employer is purchased with the contributions.

The second type consists of reference works published by national or international organizations. They emphasise the normalising character of the term described, and are

Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological…


electronic versions of previous paper reference works. The analysis found two different types of reference works. On the one hand, glossaries such as the FANNIE MAE GLOSSARY OF MORTGAGE TERMS, compiled by Fannie Mae (the largest source of housing finance in the United States before the burst of the house bubble in 2008), which offers a search engine with links to 108 specific glossaries, identified by sub-fields and targeting users interested in mortgages. They are updated regularly and indicate the prospective meaning in the United States housing market. The access structure is not very useful, considering that there are no cross-references between glossaries, thus forcing users to search always through the search engine, which retrieves much more data than needed. For example, a search of calloption (example 3) retrieved 817 results. One of these glossaries is the DEBT SECURITIES GLOSSARY, which consists of 72 alphabetically-arranged terms. Users are obliged to scroll down each glossary until, perhaps, they find what they are looking for. If they are lucky, they will retrieve the term with a definition for laypeople, no language data, and no crossreference to related terms, or texts of interest (example 3): (3)

the entry European-style call feature in the DEBT SECURITIES GLOSSARY. The call-option may be exercised on a single date at the conclusion of an initial lockout period.

In addition, international agencies controlled by the United Nations have uploaded their paper glossaries onto the Internet without either adapting them to the new source nor updating them regularly. As a consequence, they are not proper Internet dictionaries but paper dictionaries uploaded on the Internet. One of them is the MULTILINGUAL IMF MONETARY TERMINOLOGY, which has not been updated since September 15, 2000. It is described as a “terminological database containing 4,500 terms, useful to translators working with IMF material, and providing terms in different languages without definitions”. The homepage also adds that some of the terms “include a usage field within square brackets, denoting the origin of the term – e.g., [OECD] – or a context – e.g., [trade]; others contain a cross reference to related records. Acronyms and currency units are also included”. The terms are accessed alphabetically or by a search engine and are not very useful for students, considering that they do not offer cognitive or communicative data (example 4). (4)

the entry early drawing [CCFF] in the MULTILINGUAL IMF MONETARY TERMINOLOGY. French: tirage anticipé. German: vorzeitige Ziehung. Portuguese: saque anticipado. Spanish: giro anticipado.

In some of these reference works users are cross-referred to very specific glossaries, where they have a definition of some terms. For example, in the homepage of the MULTILINGUAL IMF MONETARY TERMINOLOGY, the horizontal menu includes a glossary of terms (updated on October 31, 2006), which contains 125 financial terms with definitions for experts or semiexperts, as example 5 shows:

200 (5)

Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

the entry Early Repurchase Expectation in . The expectation of repurchase (repayment) in advance of its originally scheduled due date. According to the Articles of Agreement, a member is normally expected to repurchase its currency (make repayment of usable currencies) as its balance of payments and reserve positions improve. The current early repurchase policy has been in effect since June 1979 and establishes amounts expected to be repurchased taking into account the level of a member’s reserves and their growth, as well as other parameters. A separate repurchase expectation applies to purchases made under the Supplemental Reserve Facility and the Contingent Credit Line. Such repurchases are expected one year before they become obligatory, except that at the request of the member the IMF may decide to extend the expectation period by up to one year, though not beyond the due date.

The third type comprises reference works compiled by amateur trained lexicographers working in the language industry. They are different from the first sub-type because they pay much more attention to functions and user’s needs. One of them is the FINANCIAL GLOSSARY, published by InvestorWords.com, and advertised as the “premier financial glossary on the web”. It contains 6,000 terms, is updated on a regular basis, and is offered with interactive functionalities. For example, in its homepage, users can access “recently added terms”, “most popular terms”, and “recently improved terms”, can join discussions, contact editors, and retrieve terms either by clicking on the letters of the alphabet or browsing in a search engine. In addition, there is a link to a business dictionary containing more than 20,000 words grouped into more than 30 sub-fields, each displaying all the terms included in the sub-field, arranged alphabetically (for example, accounting in example (6), below). Both reference works have analytical macrostructures, hyperlinks to related terms, definitions for students, meaning discriminator devices, and cross-references to texts where the term is used in context. They also use semasiological and onomasiological approaches to the description of the terms by including a pop-down menu displaying alphabeticallyarranged terms together with the function “the term appears in the definition of the following terms” which connects the term to conceptually-related terms (example 6). (6)

The entry accounting in the FINANCIAL GLOSSARY Definition Practice and body of knowledge concerned primarily with (1) methods for recording transactions, (2) keeping financial records, (3) performing internal audits, (4) reporting and analyzing financial information to the management, and (5) advising on taxation matters. It is a systematic process of identifying, recording, measuring, classifying, verifying, summarizing, interpreting and communicating financial information. It reveals profit or loss for a given period, and the value and nature of a firm’s assets, liabilities and owners’

Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological…


equity. Accounting provides information on the (1) resources available to a firm, (2) the means employed to finance those resources, and (3) the results achieved through their use. accounting is in the Accounting & Auditing subject. accounting appears in the definitions of the following terms: balance of payments (BOP), Remote Authentication Dial In Service (RADIUS), audit, International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC), comparative financial statement, capture, generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), market price, cost accounting, application program and

The above analysis shows two main conclusions. On the one hand, the lexicographic quality of glossaries compiled by consultancies and international organizations (here identified as sub-types one and two) is poor, and of not much help for students, barring the conceptual data they sometimes offer, although this may or may not be regularly updated. On the other hand, glossaries and dictionaries such as those compiled by InvestorWords are, on the right track, especially if they pay more attention to users’ communicative needs, and to some Internet requirements, as the next section shows.

11.5.  Constructing free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries for learners The concept of pedagogical specialised lexicography is related with the social dimension of Language for Specific Purposes (LSPs), foreign language teaching and / or learning, and the functional approach to lexicography (Fuertes-Olivera / Arribas-Baño, 2008; Tarp, 2008a). The concept of LSP has a socio-linguistic dimension, characterised by the existence of different language varieties aiming at satisfying the needs of a restricted number of users, who employ them in connection with specific topic areas for utilitarian purposes. Teaching / learning a foreign language is a process influenced by external and internal factors such as extroversion, intelligence, aptitude, personality, motivation, attitude, learner’s preferences, learner’s beliefs, age, L1 transfers, circumstances under which language learning takes place, and instruction. Finally, functional approaches to lexicography have emphasized the key role played by fulfilling the learner’s needs – usually, cognitive or communicative needs – connected with the following lexicographically relevant characteristics: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

What is the mother tongue of the learner? To what extent does the learner master their mother tongue? To what extent does the learner master the foreign language in question? How great is the learner’s general cultural knowledge? How great is the learner’s knowledge of culture in the foreign-language area in question? Why does the learner wish to learn the foreign language in question? Does the foreign-language learning process take place spontaneously or consciously? Is the foreign language being learned within or outside the foreign-language area concerned?

202 9. 10. 11. 12.

Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera Is the learner exposed to their mother tongue during the learning process? Does the learner use a specific textbook or didactic system? Does the learner use a specific didactic method? Is the learning process related to a specific subject? (Tarp 2008a: 137)

The construction of pedagogically-oriented, free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries must cope with lexicographic issues such as lemma selection, indications of meaning, semantic relationships, inflection morphology, complex words, syntactic data, word combinations, knowledge of the subject field(s), access routes, and with Internet characteristics. Below, I will now analyse these in turn.

11.5.1.  Lexicographic requirements For paper dictionaries, most of the above issues have recently been discussed in connection with dictionary functions (Tarp, 2008a), or in a specific extra-lexicographical social situation: teaching / learning business English by Spanish university students (FuertesOlivera / Arribas-Baño, 2008). Another extra-lexicographical social situation corresponds to the potential user of free institutional Internet reference works for teaching / learning purposes. These potential users have very different backgrounds in terms of their L1 and L2 competence, culture knowledge, subject field competence, and teaching traditions. The question (meta)lexicographers must answer, therefore, is how we can reconcile theoretical demands related to different users and their specific needs in different social situations with the reality of free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries which have usually been compiled for all users, regardless of their needs and use situations. A possible answer is to establish a list of obligatory lexicographic requirements for free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries for learners. First, lemma selection must be based on the criterion of relevance, which demands the inclusion of all relevant terms in the subject field. This criterion goes hand in hand with the treatment of complex words and word combinations, as different research has shown that we learn words in chunks (for example, Sinclair’s idiom principle, 1991). The lemmata of the glossaries described in Section 4 cover relevant and frequent terms in the sub-field in question. For example, the DEBT SECURITIES GLOSSARY includes terms such as benchmark automated syndication system (BASS), benchmark bills, benchmark bonds, and benchmark notes. All of them are connected with the mortgage market and are relevant in this sub-field. Second, the treatment of indications of meaning is dependent on both the number of languages covered by the dictionary and the existence of cultural similarities or differences between languages: definitions for semi-experts, sentence examples, and illustrations must be essential components in all terminological dictionaries, together with equivalents and cultural notes or explanations for culture-dependent terms in bilingual or multilingual dictionaries. If possible, lexicographers must implement a semantic and pragmatic concept of equivalence, resulting in the contextualisation of equivalents by an indication of the

Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological…


degree of semantic and / or pragmatic equivalence. The reference works analysed tend to include definitions for laypeople, or naked equivalents, and have, therefore, a lot of room for pedagogical improvement. On the other hand, the terms included in the glossaries compiled by Fannie Mae are adequate regarding their cognitive functions and useful for understanding the cultural peculiarities of the American house market. Third, indications of meaning are also connected with the inclusion of devices signalling the existence of semantic relationships. Among them, lexicographers usually refer to derivatives, synonyms, antonyms, hyponyms, hyperonyms, semantic fields, and topic or domain fields. Free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries for learners must also include meaning discriminators for signalling the domain and / or sub-domain of the term in question in view of the fact that sub-technical vocabulary is always a real challenge for learners. In addition, I concur with Tarp (2008a: 200–211) that learner’s dictionaries must provide data on semantic relationships, and that a possible solution would be to cross-refer users to synopsis articles, outside matter texts, or entries where notes explain what, in terms of meaning, unites and divides synonyms, antonyms, hyponyms, etc. with regard to the lemma in question. The reference works analysed have a lot of room for improvement – especially sub-types 1 and 2 –, considering that they do not pay attention to the communicative needs of their potential users. Fourth, grammatical information is usually associated with providing three types of data: inflectional morphology, word formation, and syntactic properties. Free institutional Internet specialised dictionaries for learners should include a separate dictionary grammar, syntactic data in individual dictionary articles (both explicitly, and implicitly), and a maximising word list where all relevant forms – inflected forms, irregular forms, composites, derivatives, collocations, idioms, prefixes, suffixes, etc. – are listed as entries and cross-referred to related entries (for example, the base form of a verb). In addition, there should be the corresponding section in the dictionary grammar where explanations should be written in the easiest possible language in order to eliminate opaque abbreviations, codes, and obscure grammatical terminology, but rather to provide general knowledge about a language syntactic and grammatical system (Tarp, 2008a: 242–245). Only the reference works identified as sub-type 3 make some reference to grammar data, and cross-refer users to grammar books or usages, although they cannot be considered very adequate for two main reasons. Firstly, they do not attach grammar data to the entries; and secondly, the grammar book is not systematic: it only contains articles in simple language explaining some issues, with the criterion for selecting the issues covered going unexplained. Briefly, the treatment of grammar data is mostly non-existent in free institutional Internet reference works. Fifth, the access structure of free Internet terminological dictionaries for learners must benefit from rapid access to different types of information (e.g., typing the lemma or part of it in a ‘search window’), with no space constraints other than avoiding swamping the user with huge quantities of data, links with other language teaching / learning tools, and hypertext and hyperlink functionalities. All the reference works use an analytical macrostructure and users can access the terms covered either by a search engine or by scrolling down the glossary. There is also a lot of room for improving access structure, especially in connection with Internet requirements, discussed in 5.2 (below). Finally, in relation with cognitive situations, pedagogical specialised dictionaries must offer data for learning more about the area of knowledge in question: this can be achieved


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

by presenting special information about the subject field(s), probably by including an extended aided integrated subject field component or systematic introduction (Bergenholtz / Nielsen, 2006), or some or other lexicographical mechanism to supplement and complement the data included in the dictionary articles and in different outside matter texts. None of the dictionaries includes systematic introductions and only the reference works classified as sub-type 3 cross-refer users to related texts where they can learn more about the field in question.

11.5.2.  Internet requirements As previously indicated, the philosophical nature of free institutional Internet reference works varies a great deal in terms of basic issues of learner’s lexicography: proficiency level, age, cultural background, motivation, L1, and knowledge of the LSP of the expected user. For example, Sobkowiak’s (2007) discussion on phonolexicographic issues such as the choice of phonetic transcription to represent the pronunciation of headwords, the scope of phonetic transcriptions, the choice of default accent and phonostylistic level, etc., is not very relevant for free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries. Of little pertinence also are aspects of user-related factors that have to do with the general circumstances in which the language-learning process takes place. Access to lexicographical online data must be easy, quick and cheap. Products such as free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries can be upgraded if the compilers of these products follow some general theoretical considerations and carry out some easy-toimplement measures which can assist learners in assimilating the grammatical, conceptual, and lexical systems of the foreign language. Regarding theoretical considerations, compilers of these products must pay attention to the following issues: – Both coverage and the speed and precision with which the user retrieves data determine dictionary quality. – An Internet dictionary is not a digital version of a printed one together with a search engine; it is a proper reference work in its own right. – The display of formal features such as colour, font, background, or page size, depends on the user’s screen, and hence the idea that the form of a given dictionary corresponds with its function (Almind / Bergenholtz 2000: 259) does not apply to an Internet dictionary. – Internet dictionaries do not have solid independence; they require a computer to be switched on. – Pronunciation is audible in an Internet dictionary. – The record-yourself facility allows comparison of one’s own pronunciation against the stored one(s). – Interactivity is easily achieved in an Internet dictionary. – They have many alternative ways of presenting data. – They must allow optimisation of cross-references. – As they do not have space constraints, they must allow rapid access to large and up-dodate amounts of lexicographical evidence in corpora. – All searches are logged on with information provided on what and how users consult.

Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological…


Translating the above theoretical considerations into Internet requirements means adopting different decisions, initially dependent on demands and solutions related with their functionalities, as Table 1 shows (Almind, 2005: 39–40).



An Internet dictionary must be easy to find

Make sure your dictionary has a simple Internet-address. If you have more than one dictionary acquire more Internet-addresses and create multiple home pages.

The search field is the centre of attention

Let the search field be visually centred near the top of your home page.

Readable articles

Use colours sparingly and keep the “good” colours for important data. Black on white is good. Red on blue is not. Contrast is your friend. Put each piece of information on its own line and use headings prudently.

Instant results

Keep your database and web pages small and your servers large.

Simple results

Show only a limited amount of results 5 to 10 per page depending on the overall size of the dictionary’s articles. This reduces clutter and lets the user know that he should refine his search.

Reduce the number of results

Sometimes users test a dictionary by searching for all words containing an “e” or similar. These requests are hardly based on a genuine wish to solve a given linguistic problem. If a search results in a ridiculously large number of returns let the user re-define the search.

Advanced searches

If possible let the user refine his search by searching both lemma and specific elements such as collocations or by searching within the found set of articles.

Display the results logically

Is an alphabetical sorting really informative? How about sorting by word length or by relevance? Consider giving alternatives to the default sort especially when displaying the results of advanced searches.

Is a search field really necessary?

Sometimes in small specialised dictionaries it would be better to give the user a list of all articles instead of a search mechanism. This simplifies the web page and improves caching of often used articles.

Table 1.  Demands and solutions required by Internet Dictionaries (Almind 2005: 39–40).

The dictionaries analysed have not paid much attention to the above demands and consequently their solutions are usually either absent or wrong from a pedagogical point of view. First, some of the free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries analysed do not provide clear and simple lexicographical information together with user-friendly search engines. In particular, two specific practices are of no use for students: – integrating the dictionary in a different menu, which obliges users to “imagine” where the dictionary is. For example, the FANNIE MAE GLOSSARY OF MORTGAGE TERMS is integrated in the menu ‘resources’ and is not visible on Fannie Mae homepage;


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

– using hypertext instead of search engines for dictionaries with large lemmata. This forces users to scroll down screens searching for the term. This practice is inadequate not only because it takes more time but also because it hinders interconnectivity, a key element of any Internet dictionary. For example, in the COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL GLOSSARY, users are obliged to click on the letter o if they want to consult the term option which is used in Abandon: (7)

the entry abandon in the COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL GLOSSARY Abandon – Refers to the decision not to exercise an option or, sometimes, a clause. It may also refer to the intentional or unintentional lack of use, maintenance or affirmation process about assets. These assets may include securities, bank accounts, refunds, trademarks and so on. In such cases the property can go to a jurisdiction such a state or federal government.

Second, only some of the free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries analysed are updated on a regular basis. Updating terminological dictionaries – and informing users on the date of the revision even if no change has been introduced – is very important for pedagogically-oriented terminological dictionaries, because users must be sure that the included term(s) are still in operation and have been adapted to possible modifications. For example, the MULTILINGUAL IMF MONETARY TERMINOLOGY compiled by the International Monetary Fund has not been updated since the year 2000. This is very disappointing and potentially dangerous for translators and students consulting such a reference work, especially because they may assume that international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund really do update their terminological products. A search for ‘Basle 2’ retrieves no results, although the final draft of Basel 2 was published in June 2004; it is scheduled to be implemented at the beginning of 2008, and makes great strides towards limiting excessive risk taking by internationally active banking institutions. Supposing that a user must find out what this term (Basle 2) really means, he or she will be left in the dark as the terms retrieved from searching for Basle gives no information on the changes made, although these are fully operational on the day of the search (example 8): (8)

Basel in the MULTILINGUAL IMF MONETARY TERMINOLOGY Basle Capital Accord. French: Accord de Bále sur les fonds propres. German: Basler Eigenkapitalvereinbarung. Spanish: Acuerdo de Basilea sobre capital. Basle Committee onBanking Supervisión [BIS]. English: BCBS. French: Comitè de Bàle sur le contrôle bancaire. German: Basler Ausschuß für Bankenaufsicht {[BIS]. Spanish: Comité de Basiliea de Supervisión Bancaria.

Third, some of the free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries analysed do not use proper hypertextuality and digitalization devices. They are not Internet dictionaries in their own right but paper dictionaries which were uploaded on the web. For example, ERM is

Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological…


cross-referred by a hypertext whereas ERISA is not, although they are similar and require the same lexicographical solution, as example (9) shows: (9)

Entries in the COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL GLOSSARY ERISA – Is the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. It was enacted into law in 1974. ERM – Refers to Enterprise Risk Management. See Risk Management and Analysis Software.

Four, Internet terminological dictionaries for learners must be integrated in teaching packages. This means that they must cross-refer users to texts, web-pages, audio and video files, and translation-memory systems targeting students. For example, in the entry for ESOP, the FINANCIAL GLOSSARY cross-refers users to texts where they can learn more about the conceptual realm associated to the term (example 10). (10) the entry ESOP in the FINANCIAL GLOSSARY Definition Employee Stock Ownership Plan. A trust established by a corporate which acts as a tax-qualified, defined-contribution retirement plan by making the corporation’s employees partial owners. Contributions are made by the sponsoring employer, and can grow tax-deferred, just as with an IRA or 401(k). But unlike other retirement plans, the contributions must be invested in the company’s stock. The benefits for the company include increased cash flow, tax savings, and increased productivity from highly motivated workers. The main benefit for the employees is the ability to share in the company’s success. Due to the tax benefits, the administration of ESOPs is regulated, and numerous restrictions apply. also called stock purchase plan. Related Research Articles from the InvestorGuide.com University Principles of Investing Here are the seven fundamental principles of investing that every investor should know. Topics include knowing your current situation, goals and risk tolerance; getting your finances in order; thinking long term and focusing on stocks; researching and monitoring your investments; and knowing when and how to get financial help. Buying and Selling Learn the best time to buy or sell an investment. Also suggests templates for investment analysis and transaction records. Options Learn about call and put options, the components of an options contract, how to value and price options, and what the advantages and disadvantages of options to help you decide if they are the right investment for you.


Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera

If adequately implemented, the integration of free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries into language teaching packages will allow users to consult grammar issues, pedagogical instructions, sentence examples, collocations, and similar language data. For example, in users have access to the homepage of a translation agency (TECTRAD) with three key sub-menus: Online Dictionaries, English and French Language and Grammar, and a Language Newsletter. The menu Online Dictionaries include reference works similar to those described as Type 1 and Type 3 in Section 4: Ultimate Financial Glossary, Our financial Dictionary, InvestWord Financial Dictionary, IFCI Dictionary of Financial Risks, and Braudo’s French Private Law Dictionary. The menu English and French Language Grammar comprises articles published in clear and simple French, targeting students and translators with rules and indications on some grammar and discourse issues: the use of may, the pronunciation and plural of euro and cent, different apostrophes in English, etc. Finally, the menu Language Newsletter lists websites on the English language, the French language, dictionary reviews, and articles on English to French translations. For example, in the sub-menu Review of Web Sites on the English Language, the homepage of TECTRAD links potential users to different grammar sites where users access easy-to-implement rules, mostly based on usage books and students’ grammars. One of them is , which contains formal rules and easy explanations of grammar issues, devoid of grammar terminology. For the simple present, for instance, users are explained the following: – – – –

it is used for indicating present facts and repeated actions; a special rule is the use of ‘s’ with he, she, and it; the first form of the verb is used to make the simple present; for questions and negatives, the helping verb do / does is used with the first form of the verb; – a complete conjugation of work, including abbreviations, is given; – examples of short answers. Finally, none of the free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries analysed offer smart searches, considered good examples of “new routes to the data” and “bringing together of related items” (Prinsloo 2005: 13). Smart searches are now being included in learners’ dictionaries, such as the MACMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY. A smart search is very adequate for queries regarding unspecified terms (for example, because they have been forgotten, or users are not sure about which is adequate, etc.), and for finding out relevant information about a particular concept.

11.6.  Conclusion Since the late 1980s, different researchers have focused on developing the foundations of lexicography as an independent area of study, suitable for compiling reference works for satisfying the needs of a specific type of user with specific types of problems related to a

Lexicography for The Third Millennium: Free Institutional Internet Terminological…


specific type of user situation. Within this framework the problems related to the categorization of user profiles, user situations and user needs are the same for electronic and paper dictionaries. The differences between them are due to the method(s) they can use in order to assist users in solving their specific problems. Regarding Internet dictionaries, this paper makes current categorizations of electronic dictionaries more precise by incorporating a distinction based on three related questions: who has compiled the dictionary?, is it free or restricted?, and for whom has it been compiled? Answering these questions has enabled me to differentiate between collective dictionary projects (for example, WIKTIONARY; see Fuertes-Olivera, 2009), and institutional dictionaries further subdivided into commercially-oriented, restricted, institutional Internet dictionaries and free institutional Internet terminological dictionaries. The latter are characterised as dictionaries compiled by amateur lexicographers working in an identifiable organization who are producing reference works either as promotional instruments or as a way of helping co-staff and customers understand texts. They are subdivided into three main sub-types, and described according to the information gathered in their outside texts, lemmata, and analysis of the term under the letter e. The analysis reveals some strengths and weaknesses regarding their pedagogical orientation. Consequently, the paper makes some specific proposals for making them more pedagogically-oriented reference works. The proposals made coincide with a transformative view of lexicography (Tarp, 2008a) and the philosophy underlying the construction of free Internet products. They start by reviewing requirements discussed in the literature on pedagogical specialised lexicography, and making them more precise, as they focus analysis on the specific characteristics of a number of polyfunctional Internet dictionaries, accessible in many teaching portals, despite not targeting students. In particular, the proposals specify their lexicographical and Internet requirements, and justify my argument for incorporating them into these reference works at no extra cost. The proposals commented on, each illustrated with examples taken from the reference works analysed, are concerned with providing clear and easy access to the terms, and carrying out measures such as the following: updating the dictionary and informing users on the process followed; incorporating hypertextuality and proper digitalization; and constructing them as integrated products with links to Internet searches, and other language resources.


Dictionaries ACCOUNTING DICTIONARIES = Danish Accounting Dictionary = Nielsen, S. / L. Mourier / H. Bergenholtz (2003–2007). Danish Accounting Dictionary. URL: [12/1/2009]. – Danish-English Accounting Dictionary = Nielsen, S. / L. Mourier / H. Bergenholtz (2003–2007). Danish-English Accounting Dictionary. URL: [12/1/2009]. – English Accounting Dictionary = Nielsen, S. / L. Mourier / H. Bergenholtz (2005–2007). English Accounting Dictionary. URL: [12/1/2009]. – English-Danish Accounting Dictionary = Nielsen, S. / L. Mourier / H. Bergenholtz (2005–2007). English-Danish Accounting Dictionary. URL: [12/1/2009]. BABYLON ENGLISH SPANISH DICTIONARY = [10/02/2009]. CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY (2006): Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 3rd edition. CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY BUSINESS PLUS = (2009) Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary Business Plus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH = Procter, Paul (ed.) (1995): Cambridge International Dictionary of English. Cambridge / New York: Cambridge University Press. 1st Edition. COLLINS BUSINESS = Pass, C. / B. Lowes / A. Pendleton / L. Chadwick / D. O’Reilly / M. Afferson (2005): Collins Dictionary of Business, Glasgow: Collins, 3rd ed. COLLINS COBUILD ENGLISH LANGUAGE DICTIONARY = Sinclair, John (ed.) (1987): Collins COBUILD English Language Dictionary. London / Glasgow: Collins. 1st Edition. COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL GLOSSARY = [11/02/09]. DAFA = Binon, Jean / Serge Verlinde / Jan van Dyck / Ana Bertels (2000): Dictionnaire d’apprentissage du français des affaires. Dictionnaire de compréhension et de production de la langue des affaires. Paris: Didier. DAFLES = Verlinde, S. et al. (2003). Dictionnaire d’apprentissage du français langue étrangère ou seconde [01/02/2009]. DEBT SECURITIES GLOSSARY = [12/01/2009]. DICCIONARIO DE TÉRMINOS DE LA PIEDRA NATURAL E INDUSTRIAS AFINES = Alcaraz Varó, E. / Hughes, B. / Mateo Martínez, J. / Vargas Sierra, C. / Gómez González-Jover, A. (2005): Diccionario de Términos de la Piedra Natural e Industrias Afines. Inglés-Español. Español-Inglés. Barcelona: Ariel. DICCIONARIO DE TÉRMINOS ECONÓMICOS, FINANCIEROS Y COMERCIALES = Alcaraz, Enrique / Hughes, Brian (2008): Diccionario de Términos Económicos, Financieros y Comerciales. Barcelona: Ariel. 5th Edition. DICCIONARIO DE TÉRMINOS JURÍDICOS = Alcaraz, Enrique / Hughes, B. (2007): Diccionario de Términos Jurídicos. A Dictionary of Legal Terms. Barcelona: Ariel. 10th edition. DICTIONNAIRE DU FRANÇAIS USUEL = Picoche, J. / Rolland, J.C. (2002): Dictionnaire du français usuel. 15 000 mots utiles et 442 articles. Bruxelles: De Boeck / Duculot. ENGELSK DANSK ERHVERVSORDBOG: Andersen, Birger / Balsgart, Katin / Tarp, Sven (2006): Engelsk Dansk Erhvervsordbog. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. ENGLISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY = Kaufmann, Uwe / Bergenholtz, Henning in cooperation with B. Stumman, S. Tarp, L. de la Rosa Marabet, N. la Serna Torres and G. la Serna Miranda (1998b): Encyclopedic Dictionary of Gene Technology. English (with Spanish equivalents). Toronto: Lugus.



FANNIE MAE GLOSSARY OF MORTGAGE TERMS = [10/01/2009]. FINANCIAL GLOSSARY = [06/02/2009]. FRAMENET = [06/02/2009]. GRAN DICCIONARIO DE USO DEL ESPAÑOL ACTUAL = Sánchez, A. (ed.) (2001): Gran diccionario de uso del español actual. Madrid: SGEL. HARRAP’S DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE = (1988): Harrap’s Dictionary of Business & Finance. London: Harrap. INVESTORWORDS = [03/02/2009]. LEXIQUE ACTIF DU FRANÇAIS = Mel’čuk, I. / Polguère, A. (2007): Lexique actif du français. L’apprentissage du vocabulaire fondé sur 20 000 dérivations sémantiques et collocations du français. Bruxelles: De Boeck. LONGMAN BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY = Bullon, Stephen / Murphy, Michael (eds.) (2007): Longman Business English Dictionary. Harlow: Longman. LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH = Adam, J.H. (1989): Longman Dictionary of Business English, New Edition. Harlow: Longman, York Press. 2nd edition. LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH = Summers, Della (ed.) (1995): Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Harlow: Longman. 3rd Edition. LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND CULTURE = (2000): Longman Dictionary of English Language and Culture. London: Pearson ESL. 3rd edition. MCMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY = Rundell, Michael (ed.) (2002): Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. Oxford: Macmillan Education. 1st Edition. MCMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY = Rundell, Michael (ed.) (2007): Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. Oxford: Macmillan Education. 2nd Edition. MAGYAR-NÉMET, NÉMET-MAGYAR NYUGDÍJBIZTOSÍTÁSI SZAKSZÓTÁR = Fata, Ildikó (2005): Magyarnémet, német-magyar nyugdíjbiztosítási szakszótár. Szeged: Grimm. MAGYAR-OLASZ-ANGOL FIZIKAI KISSZÓTÁR = Fóris, Ágota / Kozma, Ida Zsuzsanna (1994): Magyarolasz-angol fizikai kisszótár. Pécs: KL-négyzet Bt. MAGYAR-OLASZ MŰSZAKI-TUDOMÁNYOS SZÓTÁR = Fóris, Ágota (ed.) (2002): Magyar-olasz műszakitudományos szótár. Budapest / Pécs: Dialóg Campus Kiadó. MULTILINGUAL IMF MONETARY TERMINOLOGY = [02/02/2009]. MUSIKORDBOGEN. = Bergenholtz, Inger / Bergenholtz, H. (2006): Musikordbogen. [03/02/2009]. NÉMET-MAGYAR SULISZÓTÁR = Hollós, Zita (1999): Német-magyar suliszótár. 1. Aufl. Szeged: Grimm. NEW OXFORD DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH = Pearsall, Judith (ed.) (2001): New Oxford Dictionary of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 4th edition. OLASZ-MAGYAR MŰSZAKI-TUDOMÁNYOS SZÓTÁR = Fóris, Ágota (ed.) (2005): Olasz-magyar műszaki – tudományos szótár. Budapest / Pécs: Dialóg Campus Kiadó. OXFORD ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY = Wehmeier (ed.) (2005): Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 7th edition. OXFORD BILINGUAL DICTIONARY = Galimberti Jarman, Beatriz / Russell, Roy / Styles, Carol / Parker, Stephanie / Hülskamp, Cristina (ed.) (1998): Diccionario Oxford. Español-Inglés / Inglés-Español. Oxford / New York / Madrid: Oxford University Press. OXFORD BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT = Law, J. (ed.) (2006): A Dictionary of Business and Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 4th edition. OXFORD BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY = Parkinson, Dylis / Noble, Joseph (eds.) 2005: Oxford Business English Dictionary for Learners of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2nd edition. OXFORD BUSINESS SPANISH DICTIONARY = López, Sinda / Watt, Donald (eds.) 2002: Oxford Business Spanish Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH = Tuck, Allene (ed.) (1993): Oxford Dictionary of Business English for Learners of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


OXFORD DICTIONARY OF COMPUTING FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH = Pyne, Sandra / Tuck, Allene (1996): Oxford Dictionary of Computing for Learners of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY = Pearsall, Judy (ed.) (1998): The New Oxford Dictionary of English. Oxford: Clarendom Press. OXFORD-HACHETTE FRENCH DICTIONARY = Corréard, Marie-Hélène (ed.) (1994): Oxford-Hachette French Dictionary: French-English / English-French. Paris-Oxford: Hachette-Oxford University Press. 1st. edition. SASOL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE = Hartmann-Petersen, Preben et al. (2001): SASOL Science and Technology Resource. Claremont: New Africa Education Publishing. SCHÜLER DUDEN: DIE MUSIK = Kwiatkowski, Gerhard (ed.) (1989): Schüler Duden: Die Musik. Mannheim: Dudenverlag. SCHÜLER DUDEN: INFORMATIK = Claus, Volker / Schwill, Andreas. (1997): Schüler Duden: Informatik. Mannheim: Dudenverlag. SPANISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY = Kaufmann, Uwe / Bergenholtz, Henning in cooperation with B. Stumman, S. Tarp, L. de la Rosa Marabet, N. la Serna Torres and G. la Serna Miranda (1998): Diccionario Enciclopédico de Ingeniería Genética. Español (con equivalente en inglés). Toronto: Lugus. UNGARISCH-DEUTSCHES, DEUTSCH-UNGARISCHES FACHWÖRTERBUCH ZUR RENTENVERSICHERUNG = Fata, Ildikó (2005): Ungarisch-Deutsches, Deutsch-Ungarisches Fachwörterbuch zur Rentenversicherung. Szeged: Grimm Kiadó. VERBNET [07/02/2008]. WEBSTER’S NEW WORLD COLLEGE DICTIONARY = Agnes, Michael E./ Guralnik, David B. (eds.) (2000): Webster’s New World College Dictionary. New York: Wiley. 4th edition. WIKIPEDIA: . WIRTSCHAFT & SOZIALPOLITIK: AKTUELL: WÖRTERBUCH DEUTSCH-UNGARISCH; UNGARISCH-DEUTSCH = Muráth, Ferencné (ed.) (1998): Wirtschaft & Sozialpolitik: aktuell. Deutsch-Ungarisch; Ungarisch-Deutsch. Bd. I-II. Pécs / Graz: Janus-Pannonius-Universität / Karl-Franzens-Universität.

Other Literature Abaitua, Joseba (2002): Tratamiento de corpora bilingües. In Martí, Maria Antònia / Llisterri, Joaquim (eds.), Tratamiento del lenguaje natural: tecnología de la lengua oral y escrita, 61–90. Barcelona: Fundación Duques de Soria e Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona. Agirre, E. / Edmonds, P. (eds.) (2006): Word Sense Disambiguation. Algorithms and Applications. Dordrecht: Springer. Alcaraz, Enrique (1994): El inglés jurídico. Textos y documentos. Barcelona: Ariel. Alcaraz, Enrique / Hughes, Brian (2002): Legal Translation Explained. Manchester, UK and Northampton, MA: St. Jerome Publishing. Almela, M. (2006): From Words to Lexical Units: A Corpus-Driven Account of Collocation and Idiomatic Patterning in English and Spanish. Frankfurt am Main / Berlin / Bern / Bruxelles / New York / Oxford / Wien: Peter Lang. Almind, Richard (2005): Designing Internet Dictionaries. Hermes. Journal of Linguistics 34: 37–54. Almind, Richard / Bergenholtz, Henning (2000): Die ästhetische Dimension der Lexicogrphie. In: Ulla Fix / Hand Wellmann (eds.): Bild im Text – Text und Bild, 259–288. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winther. Alvard, Michael S. (2003): The Adaptive Nature of Culture, Evolutionary Anthropology, 12:136–149. . Andersen, Birger / Fuertes-Olivera, Pedro A. (2009): The Application of Function Theory to the Classification of English Monolingual Dictionaries. Lexicographica. International Annual for Lexicography, 25 (to appear).



Aston, Guy / Lou, Burnard (1998):The BNC Handbook: Exploring the British National Corpus with SARA. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Atkins, B.T.S. / Clear, Jeremy / Ostler, Nicholas (1992): Corpus Design Criteria. Literary and Linguistic Computing 7(1): 1–16. Austermühl, F. / Einhauser, E. / Kornelius, J. (2003): Vom Übersetzer zum Informationsbroker. Die elektronischen Hilfsmittel des Übersetzers. (In Accesed: October, 1, 2003). Bae, H.S. / L’Homme, M.C. / Lapalme, G. (2008): Semantic Roles in Multilingual Terminological Descriptions: Application to French and Korean Contexts. In Multilingual and Comparative Perspectives in Specialised Language Resources. Proceedings of the Workshop Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2008, Marrakech, Morrocco. Baker, M. (1992): In other Words. A Course book on Translation. Abingdon, New York: Routledge. – (1993): Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications. In Baker M., Francis G. and Tognini-Bonelli, E. (eds.) (1993), Text and Technology. In Honour of John Sinclair, 233–250. Amsterdam: Benjamins. – (1995): Corpora in Translation Studies. An Overview and Some Suggestions for Future Research. Target 7 (2): 223–243. – (1996): Corpus-based Translation Studies: the Challenges that Lie Ahead. In Harold Somers (ed.) Terminology, LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering in Honour of Juan C. Sager. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Baker, M. / Francis, G. / Tognini-Bonelli, E. (eds.) (1993): Text and Technology. In Honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Béjoint, H. (1994): Tradition and innovation in Modern English Dictionaries. Oxford: OUP. Bell, Roger T. (2000): Translation and Translating. Theory and Practice. London and New York: Longman. Bergenholtz, Henning (1992): Lemmaselektion in zweisprachigen Wörterbüchern. In: Meder, Gregor / Dörner, Andreas (eds.): Worte, Wörter, Wörterbücher: Lexikographische Beiträge zum Essener Linguistischen Kolloquium, 49–67. Tübingen: Niemeyer. (Lexicographica, Series Maior 42). – (1995a): Wodurch unterscheidet sich Fachlexikographie von Terminographie? Lexicographica. International Journal of Lexicography 11: 37–46. – (1995b): Leksikografi. Hvad er det? In: Åsta Svararsdóttir / Gu∂run Kvaran / Jón Hilmar Jónsson (eds.): Nordiske studier i leksikografi 3. Rapport fra Konference om leksikografi i Norden. Reykjavik 7–10. juni 1995, 37–49. Reykjavik: Nordisk forening for leksikografi. – (1998): Das Schlaue Buch. Vermittlung von Informationen für textbezogene und textunabhängige Fragestellungen. In: Arne Zettersten / Jens Erik Mogensen / Viggo Hjørnager Pedersen (eds.) Symposium on Lexicography VIII. Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Lexicography May 2–5, 1996 at the University of Copenhagen, 93–110. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Bergenholtz, Henning / Gouws, Rufus H. (2007): Korrek, volledig, relevant. Dít is die vraag aan leksikografiese definisies. Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe 47 (4): 568–586. – (2007a): The access process in dictionaries for fixed expressions. Lexicographica. International Annual for Lexicography 23: 237–260. Bergenholtz, Henning / Kaufmann, Uwe (1997): Terminography and Lexicography. A Critical Survey of Dictionaries from a Single Specialised Field. In: Hermes, Journal of Linguistics, 18: 91–125. Bergenholtz, Henning / Nielsen, Sandro (2002): Terms in the Language of Culture-Dependent LSP Dictionaries. In: Lexicographica. International Journal of Lexicography 18: 5–18. – (2006): Subject-field components as integrated parts of LSP dictionaries. In: Terminology, 12:2: 281–303. Bergenholtz, Henning / Tarp, Sven (1994): Mehrworttermini und Kollokationen in Fachwörterbüchern. In: Schaeder, Burkhard / Bergenholtz, Henning (eds.): Fachlexikographie. Fachwissen und seine Repräsentation in Wörterbüchern, 385–420. Tübingen: Narr (= Forum für Fachsprachen – Forschung 23). – (eds.) (1995): Manual of Specialised Lexicography. The Preparation of Specialised Dictionaries. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. (= Benjamins Translation Library 12).

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners –


(2002): Die moderne lexikographische Funktionslehre. Diskussionsbeitrag zu neuen und alten Paradigmen, die Wörterbücher als Gebrauchsgegenstände verstehen. In: Lexicographica. International Annual of Lexicography 18: 253–263. – (2003): Two opposing theories: On H.E. Wiegand’s Recent Discovery of Lexicographic Functions. In: Hermes. Journal of Linguistics, 31: 171–196. – (2004): The concept of dictionary usage. In: Worlds of Words. A tribute to Arne Zettersten, ed. by Cay Dollerup. Oslo, 23–36 (= Nordic Journal of English Studies Special Issue 3, No. 1). – (2005a): Wörterbuchfunktionen. In: Schreiben, Verstehen, Übersetzen und Lernen: Zu ein- und zweisprachigen Wörterbüchern mit Deutsch, hrsg. von Irmhild Barz / Henning Bergenholtz / Jarmo Korhonen: 11–25. Frankfurt a.M. / Bern / New York / Paris: Peter Lang. – (2005b): Electronic Dictionaries: Old and New Lexicographic Solutions. Hermes. Journal of Linguistics 34: 7–9. Bergenholtz, Henning / Tarp, Sven / Wiegand, Herbert Ernst (1999): Datendistributionsstrukturen, Makro- und Mikrostrukturen in neueren Fachwörterbüchern. In: Hoffmann, L. / Kalverkämper, Hartwig / Wiegand, Herbert Ernst (eds.). Fachsprachen. Languages for Special Purposes. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Fachsprachenforschung und Terminologiewissenschaft. / An International Handbook of Special-Language and Terminology-Research. Berlin / New York: De Gruyter: 1762–1832 (= Handbücher zur Sprach– und Kommunikationswissenschaft. 14.2). Biel, Łucja (2008): Legal Terminology in Translation Practice: Dictionaries, Googling or Discussion Forums? In: SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation. 2008, vol. 3, no. 1. Available at: . Accessed 23 June 2008. Binon, Jean / Verlinde, Serge (1999): La contribution de la lexicographie pédagogique à l’apprentissage et à l’enseignement d’une langue étrangère ou seconde. Etudes de linguistique appliquée 116: 453–468. Boers, Frank (2000): Metaphor Awareness and Vocabulary Retention. Applied Linguistics 21 / 4: 553–571. Bogaards, Paul (1996): Dictionaries for Learners of English. International Journal of Lexicography 9(4), 277–320. – (2002): DAFA: An Innovative Learners’ Dictionary for Business French. International Journal of Lexicography,15 (1): 105–116. Bogaards, Paul (2003): Uses and Users of Dictionaries, in P. van Sterkenburg (ed.) A Practical Guide to Lexicography, 26–33. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Bolle, P. (2006): Projet actants et dictionnaires d’apprentissage: proposition d’un modèle de représentation adapté au grand public. Report, Département de linguistique et de traduction, Université de Montréal. Bowker, Lynne (1996): Towards a Corpus-based Approach to Terminography. Terminology 3(1): 27–52. Bowker, L. / Pearson, J. (2002): Working with Specialised Language. A Practical Guide to Using Corpora. London: Routledge. Brataniæ, Marija (1991) : Dictionaries and Culture, Biblioteka SOL Filozofskoga fakulteta. Bublitz, W. (1996): Semantic Prosody and Cohesive Company: ‘Somewhat Predictable’. Leuvense Bijdragen / Leuven Contributions in Linguistics and Philology, 851 / 2: 1–32. Campoy Cubillo, Mari Carmen (2002): Dictionary Use and Dictionary Needs of ESP Students: An Experimental Approach. International Journal of Lexicography 15(3): 206–228. Cantos, P. / Sánchez, A. (2001): Lexical Constellations: What Collocates Fail to Tell. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, vol. 6 / 2 (2001): 199–228. Christiansen, Lisbet Maidahl / Duvå, Grete / Laursen, Anna-Lise (1994): Das Translationswörterbuch für Fachsprachen: Ein integriertes Konzept. In: Schaeder, Burkhard / Bergenholtz, Henning (eds.): Fachlexikographie: Fachwissen und seine Repräsentation in Wörterbüchern, 269–282. Tübingen: Narr. (= Forum für Fachsprachen – Forschung 23). Chuquet, H. / Paillard, M. (1989): Approche linguistique des problèmes de traduction anglais– français. Paris: Gap / Ophrys. Collet, T. (2004): Lexical Cohesion in Texts for Specific Purposes and the Technical Dictionaries. In: Williams, G. / Vessier, S. (eds.), A speech in the Eleventh EURALEX International Congress, Lorient, France, July 6–10, 2004. Collison, R.L. (1982): A History of Foreign-language Dictionaries. London: André Deutsch.



Connor, Ulla / Precht, Kristen / Upton, Thomas A. (2002): Business English: Learner Data from Belgium, Finland and the U.S. In S. Granger / Hung, J. / Petch-Tyson, S. (eds). Computer Learner Corpora, Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching, 175–194. Amsterdam / Philadephia: John Benjamins. De Schryver, Gilles-Maurice (2003): Lexicographers’ Dreams in the Electronic-Dictionary Age. International Journal of Lexicography 16(2): 143–199. Drouin, P. (2003): Term Extraction Using Non-technical Corpora as a Point of Leverage. Terminology 9(1): 99–117. Duvå, Grete / Laursen, Anne Lise (1994): Translation and LSP Lexicography: A User Survey. In: Schaeder, Burkhard / Bergenholtz, Henning (eds.), Fachlexikographie: Fachwissen und seine Repräsentation in Wörterbüchern, 247–267. Tübingen: Gunther Narr Verlag. (Forum für Fachsprachen – Forschung 23). Eubanks, Philip (1998): Genre and Technical Translation: Social, Textual and Educational Exigencies. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 12: 50–70. Fata, Ildikó (2005): Hilfsmittelgebrauch beim Übersetzen fachsprachlicher Texte – Ein Seminarkonzept in der Übersetzerausbildung. In: Brenner, Koloman / Rada, Roberta (eds.): Praktische Aspekte der Lexikographie. Beiträge des Lexikographischen Workshops, 16–17. October 2003 at ther LorándEötvös-Universität Budapest. Budapest: ELTE Germanistisches Institut, 197–208. (Budapester Beiträge zur Germanistik 48). – (2006): Egy szakfordítók körében végzett felmérés eredményei és tanulságai. In: Klaudy, Kinga / Dobos, Csilla (eds.): A világ nyelvei és a nyelvek világa. Soknyelvűség a gazdaságban, a tudományban és az oktatásban. A XV. Magyar Alkalmazott Nyelvészeti Kongresszus előadásai. Miskolc, 2005. április 7–9. Pécs / Miskolc: MANYE / Miskolci Egyetem. Vol. 2 / 1, 393–398. – (2009): Das zweisprachige Translationswörterbuch für Fachsprachen in der wissenschaftlichen Theorie und Praxis. Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó. (Segédkönyvek a nyelvészet tanulmányozásához 93). Fauconnier, Gilles / Turner, Mark (1996): Blending as a Central Process in Grammar. In: A.E. Goldberg (ed.), Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Language, 113–130. Standford: CSLI Publications. Fejér, Rita (1995): Zur Geschichte der deutsch-ungarischen und ungarisch-deutschen Lexikographie. Von der Jahrhundertwende bis zum Ende des Zweiten Weltkrieges. Tübingen: Niemeyer. (Lexicographica Series Maior 60). Fillmore, C.J. (1968): The Case for Case, In: Bach, E. / Harms, R.T. (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory, 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehard and Winston. – (1982): Frame Semantics. In: The Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), Linguistics in the Morning Calm, 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin. Fluck, Hans-Rüdiger (1985): Fachsprachen. Einführung und Bibliographie. Dritte, aktualisierte und erweiterte Auflage. Tübingen: Francke Verlag. – (1992): Didaktik der Fachsprachen. Aufgaben und Arbeitsfelder, Konzepte und Perspektiven im Sprachbereich Deutsch. Einführung und Bibliographie. Tübingen: Narr. (Forum für Fachsprachen – Forschung 16). Fóris, Ágota (2001): A lexikográfia alkalmazott nyelvészeti vonatkozásai, különös tekintettel a magyar-olasz területre. Pécs. [PhD–Dissertation]. – (2006): Hitelesség, pontosság, aktualitás: a szaklexika szótári rögzítésének néhány kérdése. In: Magay, Tamás (ed.): Szótárak és használóik. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 35–55. (Lexikográfiai füzetek 2). Fox, G. (1987): The Case of Examples. In J. Sinclair (ed.), Looking Up, an Account of the Cobuild Project in Lexical Computing, 137–149. London: Collins. Frawley, William (1988): New Forms of Specialized Dictionaries. International Journal of Lexicography 1 (3): 189–213. Fuertes Olivera, Pedro A. (2005): Specialized Communication and English Studies: Research Proposals on Specialized Lexicography and English for Specific Purposes. Atlantis 27 (2): 41–55. (accessed December 6, 2008).

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners –


(2009): The Function Theory of Lexicography and Electronic Dictionaries: Wiktionary as Prototype of Collective Multiple-Language Internet Dictionary. In: H. Bergenholtz / S. Nielsen / S. Tarp (eds.), Lexicography at a Crossroads. Dictionaries and Encyclopedias Today, Lexicographic Tools Tomorrow, 99–134. Bern: Peter Lang. (= Linguistics Insights: Studies in Language and Communication 90). Fuertes Olivera, Pedro A. / Arribas Baño, Ascensión (2008): Specialised Pedagogical Lexicography. The Representation of Meaning in English and Spanish Business Dictionaries. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (= Terminology and Lexicography in Research and Practice 11]. Fuertes-Olivera, Pedro A. / Velasco Sacristán, Marisol (2001): A Critical Comparison of the Macrostructure and Microstructure of Two Bilingual English-Spanish Dictionaries of Economics, International Journal of Lexicography 14(1): 31–55. Fuertes-Olivera, Pedro A. / Gordo-Gómez, Pablo / Niño-Amo, Marta / Ríos-Rodicio, Ángel (in press): Expert knowledge and Translation Equivalents in the English-Spanish Accounting Dictionary. In Caballero-Rodriguez, R. (ed.), Ways and Modes of Human Communication. University of Castilla-La Mancha. Gardner, Dee (2007): Validating the Construct of Word in Applied Corpus-based Vocabulary Research: A Critical Survey, Applied Linguistics 28 / 2: 241–265. Gelbukh, A. (ed.) (2007): Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing, 8th International Conference, CICLing 2007, Mexico City. Berlin: Springer Verlag. Gellerstam, M. (1996): Translations as a Source for Cross-linguistic Studies. In Aijmer, K. / Altenberg, B. / Johansson, M. (eds.) (1996), Languages in Contrast. Papers from a Symposium on Text-based Cross-linguistic Studies. Lund 4–5 March 1994, 53–62. Lund: Lund University Press (Lund Studies in English 88). Gerzymisch-Arbogast, Heidrun (1996): Termini im Kontext. Verfahren zur Erschlieβung und Übersetzung der textspezifischen Bedeutung von fachsprachlichen Ausdrücken. Tübingen: Narr. Gillard, Patrick / Gadsby, Adam (1998): Using a learners’ corpus in compiling ELT dictionaries, in: S. Granger (ed.), Learner English on Computer, 159–171. London / New York: Addison Wesley Longman. Goatley, Andrew (1997): The Language of Metaphors. London and New York: Routledge. Gómez González-Jover, Adelina (2006): Meaning and Anisomorphism in Modern Lexicography. In: Marie-Claude L’Homme (ed.), Processing of Terms in Specialized Dictionaries. Terminology 12(2): 215–234. Gouws, R.H. (1999): Mediostructural Representation, Textual Condensation and User-orientation in the WATX. Lexicographica. International Annual of Lexicography 15: 4–37. – (2002): Niching as a Mediostructural Procedures. Lexikos 12:133–158. – (2004): Outer texts in bilingual dictionaries. Lexikos 14: 67–88. – (2007): A transtextual approach to lexicographic functions. Lexikos 17: 77–87. Gouws, Rufus H. / Leroyer, Patrick (2009): Verhoogde leksikografiese toeganklikheid in die oorgang van ‘n toeristewoordeboek na ’n toeristegids as naslaanbron. Tydskrif vir Geesteswetens-Kappe 49 (1): 145–159. Gouws, R.H. / Prinsloo, D.J. (1998): Cross-referencing as a Lexicographic Device. Lexikos 8: 17–36. Granger, Sylviane (ed.) (1998): Learner English on Computer. London / New York: Addison Wesley Longman. Granger, Sylviane / Hung, Joseph / Petch-Tyson, Stephanie (eds.) (2002): Computer Learner Corpora, Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Haensch, Günther (1991): Die zweisprachige Fachlexikographie und ihre Probleme. In: Franz Josef Hausmann / Oskar Reichmann / Herbert Ernst Wiegand / Ladislav Zgusta (eds.), Dictionaries. An International Encyclopedia of Lexicography, vol. 3., 2937–2948. Berlin / New York: Walter de Gruyter. Hartmann, R.R.K. (ed.) (1986): The History of Lexicography. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. – (ed.) (2003): Lexicography: Critical Concepts. London: Routledge. Hartmann, R.R.K. / James, Gregory (1998): Dictionary of Lexicography. London: Routledge.



Hausmann, Franz Josef (1977): Einführung in die Benutzung der neufranzösischen Wörterbücher. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Hoey, M. (1991): Patterns of Lexis in Text, Oxford: Oxford University Press. – (2005): Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. London: Routledge. Hollós, Zita (2004): Lernerlexikographie: Syntagmatisch. Konzeption für ein deutsch-ungarisches Lernerwörterbuch. Tübingen: Niemeyer. (Lexicographica: Series Maior, 116). Householder, Fred W. (1967): Summary Report. Fred W. Householder / Saporta, Sol (ed.): Problems in Lexicography. Bloomington: Indiana University, 279–282. Huang Jianhua (1987 / 2001): On Dictionaries. Shanghai: Lexicographical Publishing House. – (1993): Macrostructure of Bilingual Dictionary. Modern Foreign Language 1,2. Humbley, John (2002): Nouveaux dictionnaires, nouveaux rapports avec les utilisateurs. In: Meta, 47:1, 95–104. – (2003): [review of] “Kaufmann / Bergenholtz et al): Encyclopedic Dictionary of Gene Technology, vol. 1, English (with Spanish equivalents), 385 pp., vol. 2, Spanish (with English equivalents). Toronto, Lugus Libros, 411. p.” In: Meta, 48 (4): 593–595. Jackson, H. (1988): Words and their Meaning, London: Longman. Johansson, Stig (1980): The LOB Corpus of British English Texts: Presentation and Comments. Association of Literary and Linguistic Computing Journal 1(1): 25–36. Kalverkämper, Hartwig (1990): Der Begriff der “Fachlichkeit im modernen Italienischen. Lexikalische Systematik und textuelle Integration. In: Quardini di Semantica. Rivista internazionale di semantica teorica e applicata 11: 79–115. Kennedy, Graeme (1998): An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. London / New York: Longman. Kučera, H. and Francis, W.N. (1967): Computational Analysis of Present-Day American English. Providence, R.I.: Brown University Press. Kramsch, Claire (1998): Language and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kühn, Peter (1989): Typologie der Wörterbücher nach Benutzungsmöglichkeiten. In: Hausmann, Franz Josef / Reichmann, Oskar / Wiegand, Herbert Ernst / Zgusta, Ladislav (eds.): Wörterbücher. Dictionaries. Dictionnaries. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie, 111–127. Berlin / New York: de Gruyter (= Handbücher zur Sprach– und Kommunikationswissenschaft, 5.1). – (2000): Vorlesungsreihe Wörterbücher im Fremdsprachenunterricht und Seminarreihe Fachsprachen im Deutsch als Fremdsprachenunterricht. Universität Trier: Sommersemester 2000. – (2004): Übungsgrammatiken: Konzepte, Typen, Beispiele. In: Kühn, Peter (ed.): Übungsgrammatiken Deutsch als Fremdsprache. Linguistische Analysen und didaktische Konzepte. Regensburg: Fachverband Deutsch als Fremdsprache. 10–40. (Materialien Deutsch als Fremdsprache Heft 66). Lado, R. (1957): Linguistics Across Cultures. Michigan: Ann Arbor. – (1964): Language Teaching. A Scientific Approach. Michigan: Ann Arbor. Landau, S.I. ([1984] 2001): Dictionaries. The Art and Craft of Lexicography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2nd edition. Langacker, R.W. (1987 / 1991): Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 1, 2. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Laurén, Christer (1993): Fackspråk. Form, innhåll, function [Specialised Language. Form, content, function]. Lund: Studenterlitteratur. Laviosa, S. (2002): Corpus-based Translation Studies. Theory, Findings, Applications. Amsterdam / New York: Rodopi. Lehr, A. (1996): Zur neuen Lexicographica-Rubrik Electronic Dictionaries. Lexicographica. International Annual for Lexicography 12: 310–7. Leroyer, P. / B. Møller (2004) : Les nouveaux habits de la lexicographie spécialisée: intégration de la métaphorique dans le dictionnaire du football. In Williams, G. & S.Vessier (eds.) Proceedings of the Eleventh EURALEX International Congress, 571–582. Lorient, France, July 6–10, 2004. – (2005): Le cas des case stories – Intégration du genre dans le dictionnaire d’entreprise. In M. Gotti (ed.) Proceedings from The 15th European Symposium on Language for Special Purposes, New Trends in Specialized Discourse, University of Bergamo (Italy), 29th August – 2nd September 2005. Bern etc.: Peter Lang.

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


Leroyer, P. / Henrik K. Simonsen (2006): Contexte d’utilisation, contexte de communication – la double identité du dictionnaire d’entreprise. In: Mots, termes et contextes. Actes des septièmes Journées scientifiques du réseau de chercheurs Lexicologie Terminologie Traduction. Paris: Editions des archives contemporaines, en partenariat avec l’Agence Uuniversitaire de la Francophonie (AUF) 2006: 283–298. Leroyer, P. (2002a): Les exemples textuels unificateurs – fondements et applications pour le dictionnaire de traduction technique. Thèse de doctorat. Århus: Handelshøjskolen i Århus: 2002. – (2002b): Intégration de l’Information Stylistique dans le Dictionnaire Bilingue Spécialisé. In: Braasch, A. / C. Povlsen (eds.) Proceedings of the Tenth Euralex International Congress, 707– 716. Copenhagen: Center for Sprogteknologi. – (2006): Dealing with Phraseology in Business Dictionaries: Focus on Functions – not Phrases. Linguistik online 2006–27: 183–194. Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim 1747. (1965): Der Junge Gelehrte. Stuttgart: Reclam. L’Homme, Marie-Clause (ed.) (2006): Processing of Terms in Specialized Dictionaries. New Models and Techniques. Special issue of Terminology, 12:2. – (2007): Using Explanatory and Combinatorial Lexicology to Describe Terms, In: Wanner. L. (ed.). Selected Lexical and Grammatical Topics in the Meaning-Text Theory. In Honour of Igor Mel’cuk. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. See: (last accessed: January, 24, 2009). Macià, Elisabet / Cervera, Antonia / Ramos, Carmen (2006): Information Technology in Languages for Specific Purposes. NY: Springer. Martin, W. (1992): On the Organization of the Semantic Data in Passive Bilingual Dictionaries. In: M. Alvar Ezquerra (ed.), EURALEX’ 90 Proceedings / Actas del IV Congreso Internacional / IV International Congreso, 193–201. Barcelona: Bibliograf. Mayoral Asensio, Roberto (2007): Specialised Translation. A Concept in Need of Revision. Babel 53(1): 48–55. McArthur, T. (1983): Worlds of Reference. Lexicography, Learning and Language from the Clay Tablet to the Computer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McEnery, Tony / Wilson, A. (1996): Corpus Linguistics, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Meer, Geart van der (1996): The Treatment of Figurative Meanings in the English Learner’s Dictionaries (OALD, LDOCE, CC AND CIDE); in: Gellerstam, M. et al. (eds.), Euralex ’96 Proceedings I–II, Papers submitted to the Seventh EURALEX International Congress on Lexicography in Göteborg, Sweden, 423–429. Part II. Göteborg. – (1997): Four English learner’s Dictionaries and their Treatment of Figurative Meanings. English Studies, vol. 78: 556–571. – (1999): Metaphors and Dictionaries: The Morass of Meaning, or how to get two Ideas for one. International Journal of Lexicography, 12 (3): 195–208. Mel’čuk, I. (2004): Actants in Semantics and Syntax. I: Actants in Semantics. Linguistics 42(1): 1–66. Mel’čuk I. et al., (1984–1999): Dictionnaire explicatif et combinatoire du français contemporain. Montréal: Presses de l’Université de Montréal. Mel’čuk, I. / Clas, A. / Polguère, A. (1995): Introduction à la lexicologie explicative et combinatoire, Louvain-la-Neuve (Belgique): Duculot / Aupelf – UREF. Meyer, Ingrid / Mackintosh, Kristen (1996): The Corpus from a Terminographer’s Viewpoint. In: International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 1(2): 257–285. Moulin, A. (1983): LSP Dictionaries for EFL Learners. In: R.R.K. Hartmann (ed.): Lexicography: Principles and Practice, 144–152. London: Academic Pres. Mugdan, J. (1989): Grammar in Dictionaries of Languages for Special Purposes (LSP). Hermes 3: 125–142. Muráth, Judit (2000): Zweisprachige Fachlexikographie – dargestellt am Beispiel der ungarischdeutschen, deutsch-ungarischen Wirtschaftskommunikation. Budapest: ELTE BTK Germanistisches Institut. [PhD–Dissertation]. – (2002): Zweisprachige Fachlexikographie. Budapest: Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó Rt. (Pécser Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft; 5).



Nagy, W.E. / J.A. Scott (2000): Vocabulary Processes. In: M.L. Kamil / P. Mosenthal / P.D. Pearson / R. Barr (eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. III), 269–284. Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum. Nesi, Hilary (2000): Electronic Dictionaries in Second Language Vocabulary Comprehension and Acquisition: The State of the Art. In: U. Heid / Evert, S. / Lehmann, E. / Rohrer, C. (eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Euralex International Conference, EURALEX 2000, Stuttgart, Germany, August 8th-12-th, 2000, 839–847. Stuttgart: Institut für Maschinelle Sprachverarbeitung, Universität Stuttgart. Nielsen, Sandro (1990): Contrastive Description of Dictionaries Covering LSP Communication. In: Fachsprache / International Journal of LSP 3–4: 129–136. – (1994): The Bilingual LSP Dictionary. Principles and Practice for Legal Language. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. – (1999): Mediostructures in bilingual LSP dictionaries. Lexicographica. International Annual for Lexicography 15: 90–113. – (2000): Translation Strategies for Culture-Specific Textual Conventions in Bilingual Dictionaries. In: Lexicographica. International Annual for Lexicography 16: 152–168. – (2003): Towards a General Theory of Bilingual Legal Lexicography. In: Kastberg, P. (ed.) LSP Translation in the New Millennium: A Cross-Baltic Symposium on Didactics and Research, 165– 188. Aarhus: Hermes Skriftserie. – (2006): Monolingual Accounting Dictionaries for EFL Text Production. Ibèrica 12: 43–64. . Accessed: December, 2008. – (2007): Lexicographical Information Costs. In: J.E. Mogensen and H. Gottlieb (eds.): Symposium on Lexicography XIII. Proceedings of the Thirtheenth International Symposium on Lexicography May 3–5, 2007, at the University of Copenhagen. Amsterdam: Benjamins. (To appear). Nielsen, Sandro / Mourier, Lise (2005): Internet Accounting Dictionaries: Present Solutions and Future Opportunities. Hermes. Journal of Linguistics 34: 83–116. – (2007): Design of a Function-based Internet Accounting Dictionary. In: Henrik Gottlieb / Jens Erik Mogensen (eds.): Dictionary Visions, Research and Practice, 119–135. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. (Terminology and Lexicography Research and Practice 10). Nielsen, Sandro / Sørensen, Rita (1998): Juridiske oversættelsesordbøger [Legal Translation Dictionaries]. LexicoNordica 5: 129–148. Nord, Britta (2002): Hilfsmittel beim Übersetzen: Eine empirische Studie zum Rechercheverhalten professioneller Übersetzer. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. (= FASK / Johannes-GutenbergUniversität: Reihe A, Abhandlungen und Sammelbände 32). – (2004): Wer nicht fragt, bleibt dumm – Recherchekompetenz als Teil der Translationskompetenz. In: Fleischmann, Eberhard / Schmitt, Peter A. / Wotjak, Gerd (eds.): Translationskompetenz. Tagungsberichte der Lictra (Leipzig International Conference on Translation Studies 4–6. 10. 2001.) Tübingen: Stauffenburg, 173–181. Nord, Christiane (2005): Text Analysis in Translation. Theory, Methodology, and Didactic Application of a Model for Translation-Oriented Text Analysis. Amsterdam / New York: Rodopi. Ooi, Vincent B.Y. (1998): Computer Corpus Lexicography. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Pearson, J. (1998): Terms in context, Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Pérez Hernández, C. (2002): Exploración de los córpora textuales informatizados para la creación de bases de datos terminológicas basadas en el conocimiento. Madrid: Edificio Beronce (= Estudios de Lingüística Española (ELiEs) 18) [Accessed June 2008]. Polguère, A. (2003): Collocations et fonctions lexicales : pour un modèle d’apprentissage. In: Grossmann, F. / Tutin, A. (eds.). Les Collocations. Analyse et traitement. 117–133. Amsterdam: De Werelt. Prinsloo, Daniel J. (2005): Electronic Dictionaries Viewed from South Africa. Hermes. Journal of Linguistics 34: 11–35. Pustejovski, J. / Boguraev, B. (1996). Lexical Semantics: The Problem of Polysemy. Oxford: Clarendon. Rey, A. (1991). Divergences culturelles et dictionnaire bilingue. In Hartmann, F.J., O. Reichmann, E.H. Wiegand / Zgusta, L. (eds.). Wörterbücher / Dictionaries / Dictionnaires. An International Encyclopedia of Lexicography (Vol. III). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Rossenbeck, Klaus (1994): Enzyklopädische Information im zweisprachigen Fachwörterbuch. In: Schaeder, Burkhard / Bergenholtz, Henning (eds.): Fachlexikographie: Fachwissen und seine

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


Repräsentation in Wörterbüchern, 133–160. Tübingen: Narr. (= Forum für Fachsprachen – Forschung 23). Rundell, Michael (1998): Recent Trends in English Pedagogical Lexicography. In: International Journal of Lexicography 11(4): 315–412. – (2002): Good Old-fashioned Lexicography: Human Judgment and the Limits of Automation. In: M.-H. Corréard (ed.) Lexicography and Natural Language Processing: Festschrift in Honour of B.T.S. Atkins, 138–155. Grenoble: Euralex. Rundell, Michael / Granger, Sylviane (2007): From corpora to confidence. In: English Teaching Professional, Issue 50 (May 2007), 15–18. (accessed December 6, 2008). Sánchez A. & P. Cantos (1997): Predictability of Word Forms (Types), and Lemmas in Linguistic Corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 2(2): 251–272. – (2001): Lexical Constellations. What Collocates Fail to Tell. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 6(2): 199–228. Sánchez, A. (2007): Y qué significa conocer una palabra. In Martínez Cabeza, M., Neil McLaren y Luis Quereda (eds.), Estudios en honor de Rafael Fente Gómez 179–195. Granada: Universidad de Granada. Sánchez, A. / Almela, M. / Cantos, P. (2006): Lexico-Semantic Mapping of Meanings in English and Spanish: A Model of Analysis. In J.M. Bravo (ed.), Aspects of Translation, 11–43. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid. – (2007): Lexical Constellations and the Structure of Meaning: A Prototype Application to WSD. In: Gelbukh, A. (ed.) (2007), Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing, 8th International Conference, CICLing 2007, Mexico City, 275–278. Berlin: Springer Verlag. Sandrini, Peter (2004): Transnationale interlinguale Rechtskommunikation: Translation als Wissenstransfer. In: Burr, I. / Christensen, R. / Müller, F. (eds.): Rechtssprache Europas. Reflexion der Praxis von Sprache und Mehrsprachigkeit im supranationalen Recht, 139–156. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. 139–156. (= Schriften zur Rechtstheorie Heft 224). Schaeder, Burkhard (1994): Zu einer Theorie der Fachlexikographie. In: Schaeder, Burkhard / Bergenholtz, Henning (eds.): Fachlexikographie: Fachwissen und seine Repräsentation in Wörterbüchern, 11–41. Tübingen: Narr. (= Forum für Fachsprachen – Forschung 23). – (1996): Wörterbuchartikel als Fachtexte. In: Kalverkämper, Hartwig / Baumann, Klaus-Dieter (eds.): Fachliche Textsorten: Komponenten – Relationen – Strategien, 100–124. Tübingen: Narr. (= Forum für Fachsprachen – Forschung 25). Schneider, Franz (1998): Studien zur kontextuellen Fachlexikographie. Das deutsch-französische Wörterbuch der Rechnungslegung. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Scholfield, Phil (1999): Dictionary Use in Reception. International Journal of Lexicography 12 (1): 13–34. Sharpe, P.A. (1995): Electronic Dictionaries with Particular Reference to the Design of an Electronic Bilingual Dictionary for English-speaking Learners of Japanese. International Journal of Lexicography 8(1): 39–54. Sinclair, J.M. (ed.) (1987): Looking Up: An Account of the COBUILD Project in Lexical Computing. London: Collins. – (1991) : Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. – (2004): Trust the Text: Language Corpus and Discourse. London: Routledge. – (2004a) (ed.): How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Sobkowiak, Wlodzimiers (2007): E-dictionaries and Phonolexicographic Needs of EFL Users. Lexikos 17: 134–151. Sperber, D. / Wilson, D. (1986): Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Stark, Martin (1999): Encyclopedic Learners’ Dictionaries. A Study of their Design Features from the User Perspective. Tribingen: Niemeyer (= Lexicographica Series Maior 92). Stepnikowska, Agnieszka (1998): Stand, Probleme und Perspektiven der zweisprachigen juristischen Fachlexikographie: Konzeption eines Fachwörterbuchs des Rechts Deutsch-Polnisch. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. (Europäische Hochschulschriften: Reihe 21, Linguistik; 199).



Sterkenburg, van Piet (ed.) (2003): “Glossary”, in: A Practical Guide to Lexicography. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Summers, Della (1993): Longman / Lancaster English Language Corpus: Criteria and Design. In: International Journal of Lexicography, 6(3): 181–208. Svensen, B. (1993): Practical Lexicography. Principles and Methods of Dictionary Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Szarvas, Katalin (2005): Zwei– und mehrsprachige, in Ungarn zwischen 1945 und 1998 erschienene Fachwörterbücher der Technik mit Deutsch: eine metalexikographische Analyse. [Universitätsdissertation; Siegen] Tarp, Sven (1995): Wörterbuchfunktionen: Utopische und realistische Vorschläge für die bilinguale Lexikographie. In: Wiegand, Herbert Ernst (ed.): Studien zur zweisprachigen Lexikographie mit Deutsch II, 17–61. Hildesheim / Zürich / New York: Olms. (= Germanistische Linguistik 127– 128). – (2000): Theoretical Challenges to Practical Specialized Lexicography. Lexikos 10: 189–208. – (2002): Translation Dictionaries and Bilingual Dictionaries. Two Different Concepts. In: Journal of Translation Studies, vol. 7.: 59–84. – (2003): Lexicographic Problems and Solutions in Different Types of Specialized Dictionaries. In: Hartmann, R. (ed.) Lexicography: Critical Concepts. Volume 1: Dictionaries, Compilers, Critics and Users, 109–123. London: Routledge / Taylor & Francis. – (2004): How Can Dictionaries Assist Translators? In: Chan Sin-wai (ed.): Translation and Bilingual Dictionaries, 23–39. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. (= Lexicographica Series Maior 122) – (2005a): Desafíos para la lexicografía especializada. In: Pedro A. Fuertes Olivera (ed.): Lengua y Sociedad: Investigaciones Recientes en Lingüística Aplicada, 205–232. Valladolid: Servicio de Publicaciones e Intercambio Editorial de la Universidad de Valladolid. (= Lingüística y Filología, núm. 61). – (2005b): The Pedagogical Dimension of the Well-conceived Specialised Dictionary. Ibérica. Journal of the European Association of Languages for Specific Purposes 10: 7–21. – (2006): Lexicografía de aprendizaje. In: Claudia Xatara / Philippe Humblé (eds.): Tradução e lexicografia pedagógica, 295–317. Florianópolis: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. (= Cadernos de tradução XVIII). – (2007): Lexicography in the Information Age. Lexikos 17: 170–179. – (2007a): ¿Qué requisitos debe cumplir un diccionario de traducción del siglo XXI? In: Pedro A. Fuertes Olivera (ed.), Problemas lingüísticos en la Traducción Especializada, 227–256. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid. – (2008a): Lexicography in the Borderland between Knowledge and Non-knowledge. General Lexicographical Theory with particular Focus on Learner’s Lexicography. Niemeyer: Tübingen. (= Lexicographica Series Maior 134). – (2008b): The Third Leg of Two-legged Lexicography. Hermes, Journal of Language and Communication Studies, 40: 117–131. Temmerman, Rita (2000): Towards New Ways of Terminology Description. The Sociocognitive Approach. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Tomasello, M. (1999a): The Human Adaptation for Culture. Annual Review of Anthropology, 28: 509–529. – (1999b): The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. Harvard: Harvard University Press. Tylor, Edward B. (1909) [orig. 1881]: Anthropology: An Introduction to the Study of Man and Civilization. New York: D. Appleton. – (1964) [orig. 1871]. Primitive Culture. Paul Bohannan (ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Varantola, K., (1997): Translators, Dictionaries and Text Corpora, Available Online, . – (2002): Use and Usability in Dictionaries: Common Sense and Context Sensibility? In: M.-H. Corréard (ed.), Lexicography and Natural Language Processing: Festschrift in Honour of B.T.S. Atkins. 30–44. Grenoble: Euralex. – (2003): Linguistic Corpora (Databases) and the Compilation of Dictionaries. In: P. van Sterkenburg (ed.) A Practical Guide to Lexicography, 228–239. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


Venuti, Lawrence (1998): Strategies of Translation. In: Mona Baker (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 240–244. London / New York: Routledge. Verlinde, Sege / Binon, Jean (2009): Pedagogical Lexicography Revisited. In: H. Bergenholtz / S. Nielsen / S. Tarp (eds.), Lexicography at a Crossroads. Dictionaries and Encyclopedias Today, Lexicographic Tools Tomorrow. Bern: Peter Lang, 69–89 (= Linguistics Insights: Studies in Language and Communication 90). Verlinde, Serge / Selva, Thierry (2001): Corpus-based Versus Intuition-based Lexicography: Defining a Word List for a French Learners’ Dictionary. In: Proceedings of the 2001 Corpus Linguistics conference. Lancaster University, 594–598. In: (accessed December 6, 2008). Vermeer, Hans J. (1989): Wörterbücher als Hilfsmittel für unterschiedliche Typen der Translation. In: Hausmann, Franz Josef / Reichmann, Oskar / Wiegand, Herbert Ernst / Zgusta, Ladislav (eds.): Wörterbücher. Dictionaries. Dictionnaries. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie, 171– 174. Berlin / New York: de Gruyter (=Handbücher zur Sprach– und Kommunikationswissenschaft; 5.1). Wang, Weiwei (2001): Zweisprachige Fachlexikographie. Benutzungsforschung, Typologie und mikrostrukturelle Konzeption. Frankfurt am Main [etc.]: Peter Lang. Wiegand, Herbert Ernst (1988): Was eigentlich ist Fachlexikographie? Mit Hinweisen zum Verhältnis von sprachlichem und enzyklopädischem Wissen. In: Munske, Horst Haider (ed.): Deutscher Wortschatz. Lexikologische Studien. Ludwig Erich Schmitt zum 80. Geburtstag von seinen Marburger Schülern, 729–790. Berlin / New York: de Gruyter. – (1995): Lexikographische Texte in einsprachigen Lernerwörterbüchern. Kritische Überlegungen anläβlich des Erscheinens von Langenscheidts Groβwörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache. In: Popp, Heidrun (ed.): Deutsch als Fremdsprache. An den Quellen eines Faches. Festschrift für Gerhard Helbig zum 65. Geburtstag, 463–499. München: iudicium. – (1998): Wörterbuchforschung. Untersuchungen zur Wörterbuchbenutzung, zur Theorie, Geschichte, Kritik und Automatisierung der Lexikographie. 1. Teilbd. Berlin / New York: de Gruyter. – (1999): Semantics and lexicography, Tübingen: Niemeyer. – (2001): Was eigentlich sind Wörterbuchfunktionen? Kritische Anmerkungen zur neueren und neuesten Wörterbuchforschung. Lexicographica. International Annual for Lexicography 17: 217– 248. – (2004): Über die Unterschiede von Fachlexikographie und Terminographie. Am Beispiel des Wörterbuchs zur Lexikographie und Wörterbuchforschung. Germanistische Linguistik 178: 135– 152. Worbs, Erika (1997): Plädoyer für das zweisprachige Wörterbuch als Hilfsmittel des Translators. In: Drescher, Horst W. (ed.): Transfer: Übersetzen – Dolmetschen – Interkulturalität. 50 Jahre Fachbereich Angewandte Sprach– und Kulturwissenschaft der Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität Mainz in Germersheim, 497–510. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. (= Publikationen des Fachbereichs Angewandte Sprach– und Kulturwissenschaft der Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität Mainz in Germersheim 23). Yang, W.X. (2007): “On Pragmatic Information in Learners’ Dictionaries, with Particular Reference to LDOCE. “ International Journal of Lexicography 20: 147–173. Zgusta, L. (1971): Manual of Lexicography. The Hague: Mouton. Zhang Yihua / Yong Heming (2007): Contemporary Lexicography. Beijing: Commercial Press.

Notes on Contributors

HENNING BERGENHOLTZ is Professor of Lexicography at the Aarhus School of Business, University of Aarhus (Denmark), where he is also director of the Centre for LexicographyResearch into Needs-Adapted Information and Data Access and head of the Lexicography Research Group. Since 2005, he has been Extraordinary Professor at the University of Stellenbosch (South Africa). He has published widely on grammar, lexicography and language policy and is editor of linguistic and lexicographical journals, as well as editor of monolingual and bilingual dictionaries. He has published extensively within the field of lexicography and is the author and co-author of more than 200 papers and several books on general and specialised lexicography, such as Manual of Specialised Lexicography (John Benjamins), and Lexicography at a Crossroads. Dictionaries and Encyclopedias Today, Lexicographical Tools Tomorrow (Peter Lang), and more than 30 printed and electronic dictionaries. He can be contacted at . LYNNE BOWKER holds a BA and MA in Translation and a PhD in Language Engineering. She is currently an Associate Professor at the School of Translation and Interpretation at the University of Ottawa in Canada, where she teaches and conducts research in the areas of translation technologies, corpus linguistics, terminology and language for special purposes. She is the author of Computer-Aided Translation Technologies: A Practical Introduction (University of Ottawa Press, 2002) and co-author of Working with Specialized Language: A Practical Guide to Using Corpora (Routledge, 2002). She is the editor of Lexicography, Terminology and Translation: Text-based Studies in Honour of Ingrid Meyer (University of Ottawa Press, 2006). She is also a member of the editorial board for the International Journal of Lexicography (Oxford Journals) and the International Journal of Corpus Linguistics (John Benjamins Publishing Co.). She can be contacted at . ILDIKÓ FATA (b. 1973) is a Hungarian lexicographer. She is Associate Professor in the Department of German Studies at the Pázmány Péter Catholic University in Piliscsaba, Hungary. She received her Ph. D. in 2008. Her doctoral dissertation titled The Bilingual Translation LSP Dictionary in Research Theory and Practice has been published in 2009. In her book, drawing on modern Danish functional theory, she illustrates the theoretical and practical aspects of LSP lexicography. She has authored numerous publications on lexicography, terminology research and translation studies. In addition to her theoretical publications, Ildikó Fata published a printed bilingual LSP dictionary titled GermanHungarian LSP Dictionary of Pension Insurance in 2005. Her dictionary draws on the modern theory of lexicographical functions put forth by the “Aarhus School”. She can be contacted at . PEDRO A. FUERTES-OLIVERA is Associate Professor at the University of Valladolid (Spain), where he was Vicerrector de Economía (2003-2006). He teaches specialised discourse, especially ESP. He has also taught at the Aarhus School of Business as Guest Professor. His


Notes on Contributors

research interest lies in specialized lexicography, translation, and language teaching. He has published several books, the most recent of which is Pedagogical Specialised Lexicography. The Representation of Meaning in English and Spanish Business Dictionaries (John Benjamins, co-authored with Ascensión Arribas-Baño), and more than 70 papers, some of which have appeared in international leading journals. He is currently working in the English-Spanish Accounting Dictionary, and is the main researcher of several research projects dealing with lexicography. He can be contacted at . ADELINA GÓMEZ GONZÁLEZ-JOVER received her Degree in Translation and Interpreting from the University of Alicante in 1999 and gained her Doctorate in Translation in 2005 at the same University. Her research interests are focused on specialised translation, English for Specific Purposes, terminology, lexicolography / terminography, new technologies and corpus studies. She has participated in several research projects in the aforesaid areas, and is currently working as Associate Professor at the Department of Translation and Interpreting Studies at the University of Alicante, where she teaches both in graduate and postgraduate programmes. She has taken part in the preparation of several dictionaries, the most recent of which is Diccionarios de Términos de Calzado e Industrias Afines. She can be contacted at . RUFUS H. GOUWS is Professor in Afrikaans Linguistics and Chair of the Department of Afrikaans and Dutch at the University of Stellenbosch in South Africa where he also coordinates the Postgraduate Programme for Lexicography. His research focuses primarily on theoretical lexicography and he complements his theoretical work with contributions in the lexicographic practice as editor and co-editor of various Afrikaans dictionaries. He is a member of the editorial board of the Fachwörterbuch zur Lexikographie und Wörterbuchforschung / Dictionary of Lexicography and Dictionary Research. He has published extensively in the field of lexicography and is a regular participant in international conferences and symposia. He is President of AFRILEX, the African Association for Lexicography. He can be contacted at . MARIE-CLAUDE L’HOMME is Full Professor at the Department of Linguistics and Translation at the University of Montreal where she teaches terminology and computer-assisted translation. She is also the Director of the research group “Observatoire de linguistique SensTexte, OLST”. Her main research interests are lexical semantics and corpus linguistics applied to terminology. She is editor (in collaboration with Kyo Kageura, University of Tokyo) of the journal Terminology. She can be contacted at . GEART VAN DER MEER (b. 1944) studied English and Frisian language and literature at the University of Groningen (The Netherlands), where he taught English language and (commercial and literary) translation from 1970 till 2009, with a five-year interlude (19851990), when he taught Frisian at the same university. Frisian, spoken in the north of his country, is his native language. He has published on morphology, phonology and syntax, Frisian literature, and – since 1993 – especially on bilingual and monolingual English lexicography. He is also a poet in Frisian and has recently (2009) published a metrical Frisian translation of John Milton’s famous biblical epic PARADISE LOST (1674). His

Specialised Dictionaries for Learners


current project is a translation of Alfred Tennyson’s THE IDYLLS OF THE KING. He can be contacted at . GUO QIPING is now working on his PhD degree in the Centre for Lexicographic Studies, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. He is Associate Professor at the School of Foreign Languages & Cultures, Southwest University of Science and Technology. He graduated from the Department of English Language & Culture, Sichuan International Studies University (SISU), Chongqing, China in 1990; was awarded an MA diploma in Linguistics and Applied Linguistics by Guangdong University of Foreign Studies (GDUFS) in 2008. His main research interests focuses on linguistics and lexicography. SANDRO NIELSEN is Associate Professor in Centre for Lexicography - Research into NeedsAdapted Information and Data Access, Aarhus School of Business, Aarhus University, Denmark. He is the author and co-author of numerous publications on theoretical and practical lexicography, including The Bilingual LSP Dictionary. Principles and Practice for Legal Language, a printed and an online bilingual law dictionary, two printed and four online accounting dictionaries, and a major contributor to the Manual of Specialised Lexicography. He is also co-editor of Lexicography at a Crossroads. Dictionaries and Encyclopedias Today, Lexicographical Tools Tomorrow. His main research areas are principles for online LSP dictionaries, user guides in dictionaries, lexicographical information costs and academic dictionary reviewing. He teaches English legal language and translation on an MA programme for translators and interpreters as well as lexicography. He can be contacted at . EVA SAMANIEGO FERNÁNDEZ is Associate Professor at UNED (Spanish Distance University), where she teaches mainly English for Specific Purposes. She is also a sworn translator and holds an MA in specialised translation. Her research interests are translation, ESP, text linguistics and metaphor. She has published within the fields of metaphor translation, legal discourse and translation, translation-applied text analysis, translation and genre, etc. She also teaches English language courses for European Union judges and prosecutors within the framework of the Spanish Council of the Judiciary. She can be contacted at . AQUILINO SÁNCHEZ graduated in Modern Languages (English and German) and obtained a PhD at the University of Barcelona. He also studied Germanistics at the University of Munich and took the MS courses in Applied Linguistics at the University of Georgetown, Washington D.C. He was the Head of the Official School of Languages in Barcelona, a lecturer at the University of Barcelona and associate professor at the Universidad Autónoma of Barcelona. He later became a Full Professor at the English Department at the University of Murcia, where he is still teaching. He has spent several research stays in England, USA and Canada, and has also lectured in various countries and universities. His research, publications and teaching have centred on lexicology, monolingual and bilingual (English-Spanish) lexicography, cognitive processes in language learning, and corpus linguistics (corpus design and compilation and automatic disambiguation of meanings). He is the main editor of Gran Diccionario de Uso del Español Actual and can be contacted at .


Notes on Contributors

SVEN TARP is Professor of Lexicography at the Centre for Lexicography-Research into Needs-Adapted Information and Data Access, Aarhus School of Business, Aarhus University, Denmark and Extraordinary Professor at the University of Stellenbosch, South Africa. He is the author and co-author of several publications on lexicography. He is the author of Lexicography in the Borderland between Knowledge and Non-knowledge: General Lexicographical Theory with Particular Focus on Learner’s Lexicography and coauthor of several printed dictionaries as well as co-author of the Manual of Specialised Lexicography, and Lexicography at a Crossroads. Dictionaries and Encyclopedias Today, Lexicographical Tools Tomorrow. He can be contacted at . ZHANG YIHUA is Professor of linguistics and applied linguistics, and the director of the Center for lexicographical Studies in Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, and concurrently, the vice-president of China Lexicography Association, chairman of Chinalex Bilingual Committee. Since 1998 he has authored numerous publications in lexicography, including more than 70 academic papers, 6 academic works, 2 translation works, 7 dictionaries. Among them, English-Chinese Medical Dictionary won the First Prize of the Fifth National Dictionary Award and Illustrated English-Chinese Dictionary for Primary School Learners won the Second Prize of the Fifth National Dictionary Award; and his monographs entitled “Semantics and Lexicographical Definition”, “Computational Lexicography and New-type Dictionaries”, “Contemporary Lexicography”, “Meaning, Cognition and Definition”, as well as a number of published papers have exercised great influence upon lexicography in teaching and researches in China. He can be contacted at .

Name Index

A Aarhus School of Business 29 ACCOUNTING DICTIONARIES 196 Alcaraz (Varó), E. 24, 74, 76, 115 Almela, M. 125 Almind, R. 24, 204–205 Andersen, B. 194 Atkins, B.T.S. 161 Alvard, M. S. 107 Arribas-Baño, A. 17, 24, 113, 118, 157, 166, 168, 171, 194, 201–202 Aston, G. 161 Austermühl, F. 84

CAMBRIDGE ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY BUSINESS PLUS 159–160 Cambridge Corpus of Business English 159 Campoy Cubillo, M.C. 159, 166 Centre for Lexicography 17, 29, 37, 196 China 22 Christiansen, L.M. 84, 93 Clas, A. 20 Claus, V. 57 Collet, T. 171 COLLINS BUSINESS 194 COLLINS COBUILD ENGLISH LANGUAGE DICTIONARY 65, 143, 144–145, 162 COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL GLOSSARY 198, 206, 207 Connor, U. 167

B BABYLON ENGLISH SPANISH DICTIONARY 197 Bae, H.S. 149 Baker, M. 112 Bank of English 165 Base Lexicale du Français 197 Béjoint, H. 113 Bell, R. T. 71 Bergenholtz, H. 17, 24, 27–29, 30, 32, 35, 37, 41, 51, 59–61, 63–65, 67, 73, 83–85, 90–92, 94, 99, 111, 114, 120, 141, 156–157, 167, 171, 179, 194–196, 204 Bergenholtz, I. 59 Biel, L. 72 Binon, J. 39, 197 Boers, F. 132 Bogaards, P. 39, 158, 162 Bolle, P. 151 Bowker, L. 21, 155, 157, 162, 166 British National Corpus 57, 161, 165 Brown Corpus 161 Bublitz, W. 125 Burnard, L. 161





Name Index F

FANNIE MAE GLOSSARY OF MORTGAGE TERMS 199, 205 Fata, I. 18–19, 56, 83–84, 90–92 Fauconnier, G. 186 Féjer, R. 91 Fillmore, C. J. 148, 184 FINANCIAL GLOSSARY 200, 207 Fóris, A. 91–92 Fox, G. 164 Fluck, H. R. 72, 90 FRAMENET 148 Francis, W.N. 161 Frawley, W. 39 Fuertes-Olivera, P.A. 17, 23–24, 39, 113, 118, 157– 159, 166–168, 171, 193–196, 201–202, 209 G Gardner, D. 110 Gerzymisch-Arbogast, H. 84, 87–88, 99 Goatley, A. 134 Gouws, R.H. 18, 41, 55, 61, 63–64, 66, 171, 179 GRAN DICCIONARIO DE USO DEL ESPAÑOL ACTUAL 110, 118–119, 121, 123 Granger, S. 22, 163, 165 Guo Qiping, 22, 171 H Haensch,G. 70 HARRAP’S DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE 132, 136–137 Hartmann, R.P.K. 113, 181, 193 Hartmann-Petersen, P. 56 Hausmann, F.J. 41 Hollós, Z. 91 Householder, F.W. 30 Huang, J. 179 Hughes, B. 74, 76 Humbley, J. 30, 32, 36– 37 I Indiana Business Learner Corpus, 167 J James, G. 181, 193 Johansson, S. 161

K Kalverkämper, H. 34 Kaufmann, U. 28–29, 32, 35, 51, 59 Kennedy, G. 161 Kornelius, J. 84 Kučera, H. 161 Kühn, P. 91, 94, 96 Kwiatkowski, G. 57 L Lado, R. 20, 125–126, 129 Lancaster-Oslo / Bergen (Lob) Corpus 161 Landau, S. 161, 163–165, 168 Langacker, R.W. 184 Laurén, C. 70 Laursen, A.L. 70, 84 Lehr, A. 195 Leroyer, P. 61, 66, 171 Lessing, G.E. 45–46 LEXIQUE ACTIF DU FRANÇAIS (LAF) 143, 145 L’Homme, M.C. 20–21, 37, 141 LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH 162 LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND CULTURE 20, 116–117 LONGMAN BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY 81, 194 LONGMAN DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH 132, 135–136 Longman / Lancaster Corpus 161 M Mackintosh, K. 166 MACMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY Also MED 21, 159–160, 162, 208 MAGYAR-NÉMET, NÉMET-MAGYAR NYUGDÍJBIZTOSÍTÁSI SZAKSZÓTÁR 84, 92, 97, 100–101 MAGYAR-OLASZ-ANGOL FIZIKAI KISSZÓTÁR 92 MAGYAR-OLASZ MÜSZAKI-TUDOMÁNYOS SZÓTÁR 19 Martin, W. 195 Mayoral Asensio, R. 76 Meer van der, G. 20, 131, 134, 139 Mel’čuk, I. 20, 141–142, 147–148, 150 Meyer, I. 166 Møller, B. 171 MONOLINGUAL SPECIALISED DICTIONARY 18, 21 Moulin, A. 39 Mourier, L. 193, 196


Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Mugdan, J. 171 MULTILINGUAL IMF MONETARY TERMINOLOGY 199, 206 Muráth, J. 70, 84, 87–88, 90, 91, 99 MUSIKORDBOGEN 59 N Nagy, W.E. 110 Nesi, H. 195 NEW OXFORD DICTIONARY OF ENGLISH 121–122, 163 NÉMET-MAGYAR SULISZÓTÁR 92 Nielsen, S. 18–19, 28, 30, 37, 41, 60, 69, 70, 73–74, 76, 78–79, 81, 120, 171, 179, 181, 193–194, 196, 204 Nord, B. 83, 89–91 Nord, C. 71, 73, 77 O OLASZ-MAGYAR MŰSZAKI-TUDOMÁNYOS SZÓTÁR 92 Ooi, V.B.Y. 160 OXFORD ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY 133, 162 OXFORD BILINGUAL DICTIONARY 119, 127 OXFORD BUSINESS ENGLISH DICTIONARY 81, 159, 194 OXFORD BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT 194 OXFORD DICTIONARY OF BUSINESS ENGLISH FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH 133, 136–137, 139 OXFORD DICTIONARY OF COMPUTING FOR LEARNERS OF ENGLISH 56–57 OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY 134–135, 138 OXFORD-HACHETTE FRENCH DICTIONARY 163 P Pearson, J. 21, 157, 162 Pérez Hernández, C. 27 Polguère, A. 20, 152 Prinsloo, D. 171, 208 Pyne, S. 56

S Sánchez, A. 19–20, 107, 110 Sandrini, P. 84 SASOL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE 56, 61 Schaeder, B. 86, 98 Schneider, F. 76 Scholfield, P. 47 SCHÜLER DUDEN: INFORMATIK 57 SCHÜLER DUDEN: DIE MUSIK 57, 59 Schwill, A. 57 Scott, J.A. 110 Selva, T. 163 Simønsen, H.K. 171 Sinclair, J.M. 21, 65, 126, 162, 164, 202 Sobkowiak, W. 204 Sørensen, R. 74, 76–79 SPANISH GENE TECHNOLOGY DICTIONARY 17, 32– 35, 51, 59 Sperber, D. 192 Stark, M. 171 Stepnikowska, A. 90, 98 Sterkenburg van, P. 158 Summers, D. 161 Svensén, B. 121 Szarvas, K. 91 T Tarp, S. 17, 19, 23–24, 27, 30–31, 37, 39, 41, 43, 50, 59, 65, 67, 68, 83–85, 87–88, 90–94, 96–97, 99, 111, 114, 141, 156–157, 167, 171, 193–196, 201–203, 209 Temmerman, R. 194 TERMOSTAT 146 Tomasello, M. 108 Tuck, A. 56 Turner, M. 186 Tylor, E.B. 108 U UNGARISCH-DEUTSCHES, DEUTSCH-UNGARISCHES FACHWÖRTERBUCH ZUR RENTENVERSICHERUNG 51, 56

R Rey, A. 113 Rossenbeck, K. 90 Rundell, M. 22, 155, 161, 163, 165

V Varantola, K. 158–159 Velasco-Sacristán, M. 157–159, 167


Name Index

Venuti, L. 71 VERBNET 148 Verlinde, S. 39, 163, 197 Vermeer, H.J. 90 W Wang, W. 70 WEBSTER’S NEW WORLD COLLEGE DICTIONARY 118, 121–122 Wiegand, H.E. 30, 42, 59, 85, 94, 98 WIKIPEDIA 112, 138–139 WIKTIONARY 209 Wilson, D. 192


Subject Index

A Abbreviation(s) 198, 203 Access Also access structure Also access route) Also accessibility 41–42, 50, 61–62, 65–67, 91, 128, 150, 180, 195, 198–199, 203–204 Acronym(s), 198 Actant(s) Also actantial 21, 141–153 Alphabetical ordering 67 Amalgamated central list 66 Anisomorphism 107, 113, 121, 185 See also semantic inequivalence Antonym(s) 172–176, 196, 203 See also opposite(s) Assistance 42, 49 B Background sense 133 Bilingual (specialised) dictionary 83–103, 113– 121, 126–129, 159, 171–172, 174, 183–191, 202 Bilingual solution 33 Bilingual dimension 64–65 Business 69, 135, 144 C Calque(s) 23, 121, 186–191 Casual citation 160 Chinese 114, 124, 171–192 Citation slip(s) 161 Cognition Also cognitive 31, 32, 46, 50–52, 58–65, 88, 93, 178–179, 181, 199, 203 See also concept(s) See also function See also knowledge Collocation(s) Also collocate(s) 33, 62, 91, 98, 99, 126, 139, 143, 164–165, 172–173, 196, 208 Conceptual information 141 Communication 18, 47–50, 59, 94, 175, 182

Also communicative 23, 31, 32, 51–53, 76, 88, 93, 120, 176–178, 196, 199 See also function Comparison 126, 129 Concept(s) 141, 158–169, 172, 175, 180, 184– 185, 208 See cognition See knowledge Concordance 164 Connotation(s) 110, 116 Contemplative 36 Cooccurrence 147 Corpus (linguistics) 21–22, 62, 85, 97, 147, 155–168 Also corpora, 128, 146, 153 Cross-reference 65–66, 181–182, 198–200, 203, 207 See also mediostructure Culture 19–20, 31, 49, 60, 67–68, 71–73, 76–77, 80, 107–129, 136, 185–187, 191, 202 D Danish 74–77, 99, 196 Database(s) 29, 37, 141, 145, 199 Distribution structure 59–61, 78–82 Decoding 158 See also reception Definition, 20–21, 23, 63–64, 98–99, 113, 116– 117, 124, 126, 136–139, 143–144, 147, 149– 150, 153, 163–164, 166, 172, 175, 177, 179–180, 182–185, 196, 198–200, 202–203 Also definition principles 183–185 Derivation, Also derivative(s), 147, 203 Dictionary 17, 61, 64, 85–86, 92, 94, 97–98, 180, 193–196 See also utility tools Domain 85–86, 90–91, 97, 127, 183, 185, 203 See also subject field E Electronic dictionary Also ED 194–195 Elementary Meaning Units Also EMU 20, 125–126, 129


Subject Index

Encoding 158, 167, 172, 176–178 See also production Encyclopaedia Also encyclopaedic 32, 37, 51, 63, 90–91, 98, 107, 113, 121, 124, 137, 141, 145, 147, 157, 172, 179, 180, 183 English 32–36, 56–58, 74–77, 110, 112, 115– 116, 118, 120–123, 125–127, 129, 133–134, 139, 153, 158–159, 162–163, 166, 171–173, 176, 183–191, 196, 198 English for Specific Purposes Also ESP 1, 137–139, 176, 194 See also LSP Entry 98–99, 116, 137, 147, 157, 179–180, 198 Equivalent(s) Also equivalence(s) 33, 64–65, 70, 84, 87, 90– 91, 97, 110–111, 113, 117–122, 124, 172– 173, 183, 185–190, 196–197, 202–203 Eskimo 114–115 Example(s) 90, 157, 160, 164, 166, 172–173, 182, 197, 202, 208 See also explanation See also illustration Expert(s) 17, 21, 28, 32, 34–35, 55, 58, 63–64, 72–73, 94, 120, 156–157, 159, 167, 199 Explanation, 21, 33, 90, 117, 177, 179 See also example(s) Explanatory Combinatorial Lexicology Also ECL 141–142, 148, 150 Extra-lexicographic 31, 43, 70–73, 202 See also situation F Figurative meaning 20, 131–139 See also metaphor Foreign tongue Also foreign language 31, 34, 46–49, 72–73, 77, 80, 94–95, 114, 156–158, 165, 167, 173–174, 177–178, 204 See also L2 user French 74–77, 116, 141, 143, 145, 163 Frequency 23, 90, 163–166 Function(s) 17–18, 30, 39–53, 42–43, 51–52, 56–57, 60–61, 65, 70, 75–76, 78–79, 90, 95, 176–179, 182, 193, 196, 200 Function theory 17, 24, 29–30, 42, 69, 84, 201–202 G General (learners’) dictionary Also GLD 29–30, 37, 40–42, 50–51, 58–61,

63, 65–66, 127, 131, 142–145, 151, 158– 159, 162–166, 174–176, 179, 181–182, 185 Genre (conventions) 19, 70–82, 91, 165 See also text type Genuine purpose Also purpose 37, 40, 56–57, 59– 60, 175 Genus 116–117 German 56–57, 74–77, 96–99, 116, 123–124 Glossary (ies) 172, 174, 198–200, 203 Glosse(s) 183 Grammar Also grammatical information Also grammatical category Also grammatical pattern(s) Also word class Also part of speech 33, 47–49, 60, 65, 90, 98, 147, 150, 157, 164, 172–173, 177–178, 181, 183, 197, 203, 208 See also syntactic structure(s)

H Headword(s) 163, 177, 179–180 Homophone(s) 181 Homonym(s) 133, 181, Hybrid (dictionary) Also hybridisation 21, 56, 61, 159, 166 Hyperonym(s) 203 Hyperlink(s) 200, 203 Hypertext Also hypertextuality 198, 203, 206 Hyponym(s) 203 Hungarian 56, 84, 91–94, 96–99

I Idiom(s) Also idiom principle 115–116, 164–165, 175–176, 202 Illustration(s) 202 See also example(s) Image schema 178 Information 18, 41, 49, 53, 132 Also punctual information needs Inuit 115, 123 Integrated dictionary Also integrated reference work(s) 20, 116, 193–209 Internet dictionary 22–23, 81, 128, 193–209 Also digital dictionary


Specialised Dictionaries for Learners Also online dictionaries Also dictionaries on CD-ROM Interpretive 52 K Knowledge 18, 22, 31, 34–35, 40, 43–49, 51, 64, 73, 88, 94–95, 97, 110, 120, 129, 132, 136, 157, 172, 175, 178–179, 182, 196 See also cognition See also concept(s) See also function Korean 153 L L1 user 64, 90, 157, 175, 202 See also mother tongue See also native L2 user 64, 90, 141, 157, 175, 202 See also foreign tongue Language 1, 56–61, 63–64, 66, 72, 109–111, 113, 122, 126, 134, 137, 156, 159, 174, 200, 202 Laypeople Also layman Also laypersons 17, 19, 28, 32, 34–35, 55, 58, 64, 72, 77, 94, 121, 157, 203 Learner(s) 17–18, 21, 39–40, 42, 48, 51–52, 56– 62, 65, 70, 72–78, 81, 83–99, 114, 120– 121, 126, 131–134, 136–139, 141–142, 158–160, 163–167, 171–173, 176, 198–199, 203 See also student See also pedagogical Learning 43–44, 47–49, 51–53, 132–133, 135, 139, 174, 178, 181, 183, 197, 201, 204 Lemma selection 202 Lexical introspection 160 Lexical relationship(s) 21, 147, 150, 152–153, 181–182 Lexical semantic(s) 141, 147 Lexicographic narrative 98–99 Lexicography 27–29, 40–42, 47, 111–116, 128– 129, 193–194 Lexicology 27 Lexicon, 37 Linguistic structures Also linguistic elements, 70, 72, 73 LGP texts 73–74, 77, 158, 167 LSP (or specialised) dictionaries 55, 92, 166–168, 172–173 See also specialised dictionary

LSP (or specialised) lexicography 71–73, 117, 125–129, 158, 163, 166, 171–173, 194 See also specialised dictionary LSP texts 156–160, 167, 201 Also specialised texts Language for special / specific purposes (LSP) 175 See also ESP M Macrostructure 28–29, 59, 67, 90, 94, 163, 175, 177–182, 198, 200, 203 Maximizing 156 Meaning 63–65, 87, 110–116, 125, 157, 164–165, 175–176, 183–190, 197, 198–200, 202–203 See also sense Mediostructure 181–182 See also cross-reference Megastructure Also Frame structure, 57, 66, 178–180 Metalexicographer(s) 27–28 Metalexicography 85–86, 91–92, 99 Metaphor 20, 131–139 See also figurative meaning Microstructure 62–63, 65, 90, 94, 178–182 Minimizing 156 Monolingual dictionary 55–68, 113–121, 126, 129, 132–133, 159 Mother tongue 31, 45–47, 65 See also L1 user See also native speaker Multi-field dictionary 59, 65–67, 81, 172, 176 N Native speaker 72–73, 77, 95, 112–114, 122, 129, 131–134, 139, 157–159, 164–165 See also mother tongue Need(s) 42, 50–52, 62–63, 65, 67, 70–71, 77, 89–91, 203 See also user(s) O Operational 23, 31, 88, 95 Opposites 172–176, 196, 203 See also antonym(s) Outer texts Also outside matter(s) 59–62, 65, 66–67, 178–180, 198, 203–204


Subject Index P

Paradigmatic 147 Paraphrase 64, 113, 121 Pattern(s) 165 Pedagogical Also pedagogically-oriented 56, 96–99, 193– 194, 197, 201– 203, 205, 208 See also learner(s) Phonolexicographic 204 Phraseology 157, 164, 166, 175–176 See also collocation(s) Practical lexicography 27 Practice 49–50, 52 Production 28, 31–32, 43–44, 47, 52, 57, 59, 61, 65, 93–95, 141, 157, 159, 166, 172 See also encoding Pronunciation 60, 172–173, 177, 187–188, 198, 204 Proto-Semitic 111 Punctual information needs 41–42, 50–51 See also information Q Questionnaire 172–173 Quotation 33–34, 129 R Reception 28, 31–32, 34–36, 43–44, 47, 52, 57, 58–65, 93–95, 141, 157, 159, 166, 172, 174–179 Also comprehension Also understanding See also decoding Relevance 23, 202 Restriction(s) 164 S Satisfaction 42 Second language acquisition 181 Semantic discrimination 173 Semantic inequivalence 124 See also anisomorphism Semantic information 178 Semantic relationship(s) Also semantic structure 142–144, 148, 181– 183, 203

Semantic role(s) 150–152 Semantic space 118–119 Semi-expert, 17, 19, 21, 32, 34–35, 55, 58, 62, 64, 72, 157–158, 167, 196, 199, 202 Sense(s), 132–135, 138–139, 147, 164, 172, 177–178, 183, 186–190 See also meaning Single-field dictionary 59, 65–66, 81–82, 172, 175–176 Situation 29–31, 34, 41–43, 50–52, 110 See also extra-lexicographic Skills 18, 40, 43–49, 63 Spanish Also Spaniard(s) 32–36, 74–76, 110, 112, 114–116, 118, 120–123, 125–127, 153, 159, 166, 196–197 Specialised (learners’) dictionary Also SLD, 28, 30–31, 34, 40, 50–52, 56–61, 64, 65–66, 86, 113, 127, 137, 139, 141– 145, 150–151, 156–160, 174–182, 185 See also LSP (or specialised) dictionaries See also terminological dictionaries Specialised texts 1, 19, 21, 31, 51, 69–70, 73, 74, 76–81, 85, 90 See also LSP texts Spelling 90, 198 Smart search(es) 208 Subfield dictionary 59, 65 Subject field 51, 56–57, 60, 63–64, 66–68, 72– 74, 76, 78–79, 81, 95, 97, 111, 156, 160, 202–203 Also Subject matter 59 Also special(ised) field(s) 112, 114, 120–121, 151, 156 Also specialty 172, 178–179 See also domain Student 116, 136, 157–159, 172–173, 175–177, 183, 200, 206, 208 See also learner Style 74, 90, 165, 181 Synonym 98, 113, 122, 147, 172–173, 175– 176, 196, 198, 203 Syntactic structures 74–76, 78, 80–82, 180 See also grammar Syntagmatic 147, 149 Sypnosis article 62, 203 Systematic introduction 17, 27, 32, 51, 57, 59– 60, 66–67, 204 T Teaching package 197, 207–208 Term(s) 19–21, 28, 33, 61–62, 67, 70, 72, 76,


Specialised Dictionaries for Learners 91, 123, 134, 141–142, 145–147, 152, 156, 158–160, 172, 175–176, 179–180, 191, 196– 200, 207 Terminology Also terminography 27–37, 57, 70, 82, 85, 87, 97, 141, 151, 177, 194, 196 Text type 91, 99 See also genre conventions Translation 21, 28, 31–34, 43–44, 51–52, 71, 83–85, 87–92, 94, 97–99, 113, 141, 157, 176, 180, 185–190, 206 Translation dictionary 69–82, 83–86, 88–91, 93–94, 97–99 Terminological dictionaries 34, 141–153, 183, 193–209 See also specialised (learners’) dictionary Transliteration 186 Transplantation 186

U Usage 157, 165, 172–173, 178, 180, 199, 203 User(s) 17, 19, 23, 29–34, 36, 39–43, 52, 55, 57–60, 63–64, 70, 73, 75, 78–79, 84, 90, 92– 97, 113, 139, 141, 150, 152–153, 156–157, 159–160, 172–179, 181, 200–202 See also learner Utility tool(s) 29–30, 37, 42, 57 See also dictionary

V Vocabulary, 47-49, 88, 112, 120, 132, 138, 158, 159, 163, 177