[Lexicog] frequency counts as a lexicographic measure

[jimmymcjim]

When working at COBUILD on the second edition of their learner
dictionary, 30 occurrences per 100 million in the corpus was a
simple guideline for inclusion of a word or sense in the dictionary
(with other provisos such as occurrence in a range of subcorpora). I
don't know how this might compare with 873 occurrences in Google...
Does anyone?

Jim Ronald

be  was --- In lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com, "Christopher
Brewster" <C.Brewster at d...> wrote:
> This raises an interesting issue.
> I feel 873 occurrences in Google is not very great.
>
> Two points:
> 1. How frequent does a term have to be to merit lexicographic
attention?
> Does this make sense in the ever expanding Internet universe?
> 2. Given the extensive discussion on the corpora list about the
> unreliability of Google counts, how do we interpret 873
occurrences in
> Google?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Christopher Brewster
>
>
> *****************************************************
> Natural Language Processing Group,
> Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield
> Tel: +44(0)114-22.21967  Fax: +44 (0)114-22.21810
> Regent Court, 211 Portobello Street
> Sheffield   S1 4DP   UNITED KINGDOM
> Web: http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~kiffer/
> *****************************************************
> A definition is the enclosing a wilderness of an
> idea within a wall of words.---  Samuel Butler
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Roberts
> Sent: 05 June 2005 16:26
> To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Lexicog] opposite of orphan
>
> Wayne,
>
> ... curious that "half-orphan" doesn't appear as either a main
entry or a
> sub-entry in my NODE or CHAMBERS English dictionaries. Are there
any English
> dictionaries which has "half-orphan" as such? Is it a US coinage?
It
> generated 873 hits with Google, so it appears to be a widely used
term. But
> it is not half odd that it is not listed in major English
dictionaries.
>
> John R.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wayne Leman" <wayne_leman at s...>
> To: <lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 2:23 PM
> Subject: [Lexicog] opposite of orphan
>
>
> > And, FWIW, John, a child who has lost one parent through death
is a half
> > orphan.
> > Wayne
> > -----
> > Wayne Leman
> > http://head.to/revision
> >
> >> In most of the English dictionaries I have looked at *orphan*
means 'a
> >> child
> >> who has lost both (biological) parents through death'.
> >
> > <snip>
> >> John Roberts
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/EA3HyD/3MnJAA/79vVAA/HKE4lB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/