<div dir="ltr">I wasn't referring to that, I was only making fun of the fact that there is little agreement in terminology in most linguistic areas. What an author names X and other will name Y and so on. Even corpus linguistic has its problems, not too long ago we had a looong discussion about what a corpus was. I actually believe we need a more unified terminology, and have nothing against using fancy words.<div>
<br></div><div style>Matías Guzmán Naranjo</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/2/20 Alon Lischinsky <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alischinsky@gmail.com" target="_blank">alischinsky@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On 2013/2/20 Matías Guzmán <<a href="mailto:mortem.dei@gmail.com">mortem.dei@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
>>The question remains why do we need "fancy" expressions at all?<br>
><br>
> Because linguistics can't possibly afford to have a clear and unified<br>
> terminology<br>
<br>
</div>Whatever the value of that argument in general, it's certainly not<br>
applicable to this case: as far as I know, ‘lemma’ is the<br>
universally-used term for canonical (in lexicography), uninflected<br>
forms (in morphology and computational linguistics). You don't get<br>
much more unified than that.<br>
<br>
As for clarity, I've never seen what's wrong with having a term of art<br>
for a concept that doesn't have an unambiguous correlate in everyday<br>
usage. ‘Word’ wouldn't work in this case, since the point of ‘lemma’<br>
is grouping various inflected word-forms under a common heading. In<br>
fact, employing the everyday term can be a source of considerable<br>
confusion between the lay and the specialised meaning (as Arnold<br>
Zwicky has pointed out regarding ‘grammar’<br>
[<a href="http://arnoldzwicky.wordpress.com/2012/02/22/its-all-grammar/" target="_blank">http://arnoldzwicky.wordpress.com/2012/02/22/its-all-grammar/</a>] and<br>
Geoffrey Pullum regarding ‘passive’<br>
[<a href="http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2922]" target="_blank">http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2922]</a>).<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
A.<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>