[Lexicog] one practical question re. weak verbs
List Facilitator
lexicography2004 at YAHOO.COM
Fri Jan 16 01:31:30 UTC 2004
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Moe" <ron_moe at sil.org>
To: <lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 9:07 PM
Subject: RE: [Lexicog] one practical question re. weak verbs
> You are absolutely right. We strive for the ideal, but too often reality
> dictates our choices. Electronic dictionaries don't have the size problems
> of printed dictionaries. With printed dictionaries the general rule is
> abbreviate, shorten, minimize. So minor entries are good. Better to find a
> minor entry than nothing at all. But if size is everthing, even the minor
> entries must go. Gilles-Maurice De Schryver sent me (off list) a recent
> article of his:
>
> De Schryver, Gilles-Maurice. 2003. Lexicographers' Dreams in the
> Electronic-Dictionary Age. International Journal of Lexicography 16/2:
> 143-199.
>
> This is a fascinating read for those of us who dream. The bottom line is
> that our craft is constrained by multiple needs and issues. I want full
> entries instead of minor entries, but cost constrains us. I want all
> derivatives and phrases as subentries, but the article becomes too long
and
> complex. I want to find things quickly, but who will be my guide? I want
to
> display data along multiple dimensions, but who will bend my computer
> screen? I want standardization, but need an army to enforce it. I want. I
> wish. I dream.
>
> Ideally I would sit at my computer terminal and type "f r o" and a soft
> woman's voice would reply, "Are you looking for the idiom 'to and fro'
> meaning 'back and forth', the archaic Scottish 'fro' meaning 'from', or
did
> you mistype and want the preposition 'for'? In the real world my
conscience
> would feel guilty about the woman's voice and a dialog box would appear on
> my screen, "Program has produced a fatal error and will shut down. To
> correct the problem please increase your budget by $1,000,000."
>
> Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Roberts [mailto:dr_john_roberts at sil.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 2:26 PM
> To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Lexicog] one practical question re. weak verbs
>
>
> Ron,
>
> Note that Collins COBUILD has
>
> fro /see/ to and fro
>
> while Chambers has 'to and fro' as a subentry under the preposition
'to',
> with no entry for 'fro' (at least not the 'fro' in 'to and fro').
>
> Your recommendation to give definitions, usage etc. in every place an
item
> from a compound or phrase occurs is only practical where there are a few
> instances. If you have a language with hundreds of compounds or phrases
> based on a single weak verb, for example, and you gave definitions, usage
> etc. under subentries, you would end up with a very large complex entry -
a
> dictionary within a dictionary. This might be more difficult to negotiate
> than just referring the user to the main entry where the compound or
phrase
> is listed according to the first item. In practise you are only giving the
> user one more search to do.
>
> John
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ron Moe
> To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 8:05 PM
> Subject: RE: [Lexicog] one practical question re. weak verbs
>
>
> I believe the needs of the user are paramount in this discussion.
Where
> will he look to find what he is looking for? If he looks for the first
word
> and the phrase is listed under the first word, all is well. But if he
looks
> for the second word and the phrase is not there either as a head word or a
> subentry, then he either is disappointed or has to go looking again. I
> suspect most languages have phrases in which the second item is not a free
> standing word. An English example is the (slightly archaic) 'to and fro'.
To
> handle the need of the user to find 'fro' we need two entries:
>
> fro /only used in the phrase/ to and fro /adv./ Back and forth;
first
> in one direction then the opposite direction. /He paced to and fro./
>
> to and fro /adv./ Back and forth. /He paced to and fro./
>
> In this way the user finds the information he needs where he is most
> likely to look, assuming he already knows the words 'to' and 'and', and is
> puzzled by the unfamiliar 'fro'. In order to save space, we could use a
> minor entry:
>
> fro /see/ to and fro
>
> But this does not give the user the information he needs in the first
> place he looks. So we may have to make a difficult decision--whether to
save
> space or be maximally helpful. If you include lots of phrases, listing
them
> all under each word in the phrase will radically increase the size of the
> book. So we have to decide if the user wants a maximally helpful book or
an
> inexpensive book.
>
> We need to decide for each phrase where the user might look to find
it.
> I don't think we would want to list 'to and fro' under 'and'. With each of
> the following phrases I would expect the user to look first under the
> starred member:
>
> come into *view, make *eyes at, see something with your own *eyes, get
> an *eyeful
>
> I don't think anyone would look under the functors:
>
> come *into view, make eyes *at, see *something *with *your *own eyes,
> get *an eyeful
>
> Some people might look under the verb in each of these cases, which
also
> happen to be the first word and where the phrase would be alphabetized:
>
> *come into view, *make eyes at, *see something with your own eyes,
*get
> an eyeful
>
> But each of the verbs is common and their meaning would most likely be
> known, either as a strong verb or a weak verb. So we need to ask if the
user
> would identify these phrases as idioms, if they would be able to identify
> which words make up the idiom, if they would be able to give the citation
> form of the idiom (i.e. extract 'see something with your own eyes' from "I
> wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes"), and if
> they would know where to look to find the idiom in the dictionary.
>
> So the procedure for phrases is:
> (1) Identify the citation form.
> (2) Determine which word the user is likely to look under to find the
> phrase (usually the contentives).
> (3) Enter the phrase as a main entry under the first word of the
phrase.
> (4) Enter the phrase under each other word the user is likely to look
> under, either as a main entry, minor entry, or subentry.
>
> Ron Moe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Roberts [mailto:dr_john_roberts at sil.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:11 AM
> To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Lexicog] one practical question re. weak verbs
>
>
> David,
>
> It depends on what type of dictionary you are producing. If it is to
> be form-based, then you would have a main entry for the weak verb with the
> compounds listed as sub-entries, i.e.
>
> \lx jang
> \ps n.
> \de bell
> \se jang etmek
> \de to telephone, ring
>
> This is the way traditional English dictionaries, such as Chambers,
do
> it. But if the dictionary is to be semantic-based then the compound with
the
> weak verb gets its own main entry - since it is a lexeme, i.e.
>
> \lx jang etmek
> \ps v.
> \de to telephone, ring
>
> and the weak verb only gets a main entry if it can occur alone. This
> is the way modern English dictionaries, such as Collins COBUILD, do
things,
> and it is my preference for a dictionary layout. There is nothing to stop
> you doing it both ways. Give all the compounds based on weak verbs as main
> entries with definitions of meaning, etc. but have a cross-reference in
the
> entry for the weak verb itself to all its formatives.
>
> John Roberts
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
> SMS 8
>
>
More information about the Lexicography
mailing list