Shortages of Arabic dictionaries

TITLE PAGE

Shortages of Arabic dictionaries

James Raiher

2 . Haywood

3 . Newmark

4 . Svensen Bo

5 . Zagusta Ladislav

6 . Svejcer A Abstract

The developed a conceptual lexical string model of word relationships which could be used in the writing of a multilingual dictionary

The research reviewed state-of-the-art s dealing particularly with Arabic-English dictionaries and evaluated existing dictionary translations especially Al Mawrid which is considered as the standard English to Arabic translation

Respondents from different but related fields were interviewed and focus group discussions were

held to tackle relevant questions dealing with the practice and theories pertinent to lexicography

Grounded approach and modeling were used in developing the methodology used in the study of the

Important insights and results generated by the study included : the validation of the string model supported by findings of the cases made in the study and based on current thinking in language and translation a dictionary effort is necessarily a multidisciplinary effort there is a need for detailed code of conduct in the translation process there is a need for meta language to handle translations

One innovation of the research is combining philosophical precepts of semiotics with basics of modeling to come up with an approach to translation

Table of Contents

1 .0 . Introduction 6

1 .1 . Background 6

1 .2 . Objectives of the study 7

1 .3 . Statement of the Problem 8

1 .4 . Importance of the Study 9

2 .0 . Review of Related Literature 10

2 .1 . The Role of Linguistics in Lexical 10

Schematization According to Saussure

2 .1 .1 . Language and meaning 10

2 .1 .2 . Phases in study of linguistics 11

2 .2 . The Nature and Structure of Linguistic Entity 13

2 .2 .1 . Language and reality 13

2 .2 .2 . Concept-auditory image 13

2 .2 .3 . Linguistic entity 14

2 .2 .4 . Synchronic analysis 16

2 .3 . On Lexical Meaning and the Valuation of Its Terms 17

2 .3 .1 . Embedding meaning in language 17

2 .3 .2 . Structure of signs 18

2 .3 .3 . Systemic differences 20

2 .3 .4 . The value of a word 20

2 .3 .5 . Associative relation 21

2 .4 . On Sterkenburg , Swanepoel and 22

Geeraerts ' Conception of the Lexicon

2 .4 .1 . Meaning-making in multi-lingual context 22

2 .4 .2 . Critical importance of dictionaries 23

2 .5 . On the Naissance of Dictionary 24

2 .5 .1 . The functional definition of a dictionary 24

2 .5 .2 . Relativism in dictionaries 25

2 .5 .3 . Criteria setting 27

2 .5 .3 .1 . Formal criterion 27

2 .5 .3 .2 . Functional criterion 28

2 .5 .3 .3 . Content-based criterion 29

2 .6 . On the Typological Nature of Dictionary 30

2 .6 .1 . User driven typologies 30

2 .6 .2 . Fundamental attributes of a typology 31

2 .7 . On Geeraerts Meaning and Definition 34

2 .7 .1 . Property attribution 34

2 .7 .2 . Uniqueness factor 34

2 .7 .3 . Handling multiple meanings 36

2 .7 .4 . Meaning in the context of reality 37

2 .7 .5 . Linguistic perspectives 39

2 .8 . The Cognitive Consideration in Translating 40

the Arabic Lexicon to English Lexicon

2 .8 .1 . Domain of translation problems 40

2 .8 .2 . A complex of meaning , language and cognition 42

2 .8 .3 . The principle of equivalence 44

2 .8 .4 . Schools of thought in translation 45

2 .8 .5 . The importance of bilingual dictionary in translation 48

2 .9 . The Intrinsic Nature of Bilingual Dictionary 51

in the Perceptions of the Arabs and the Westerners

2 .10 . Integration 54

3 .0 . Methods of the Study 56

3 .1 . Conceptual framework 56

3 .1 .1 . The importance of frameworking 56

3 .1 .2 . Premises 57

3 .2 . Research design 60

3 .3 . Data collection design 61

3 .3 .1 . Power or relative importance and 61

relevance of an English word

3 .3 .2 . Commonality and uniqueness 61

3 .3 .3 . Degree of difficulty 62

4 .0 . Results 63

4 .1 . Validating the conceptual model used in the 63

4 .1 .1 . Avoiding translation loss 63

4 .1 .2 . Across two languages : trends in 65

bilingual (Arabic-English ) dictionary

4 .1 .3 . Direction of Arabic lexicography 66

vis-a-vis English or American

4 .1 .4 . A search for standard 67

4 .1 .5 . Difficulties in translation 68

4 .2 . Generation of related vocabulary for 69

English words not found in Al Mawrid

4 .2 .1 . Case 1 : The word decapitalized ' 79

4 .2 .2 . Case 2 : The word annual report ' 85

4 .1 .3 . Case 3 : The word bolt hole ' 93

4 .2 .4 . Case 4 : The word bolson ' 99

4 .2 .5 . Case 5 : The word eccrine ' 107

4 .2 .6 . Case 6 : The word echelette ' 112

4 .2 .7 . Case 7 : The word ecocide ' 118

4 .2 .8 . Case 8 : The word annihilator ' 124

4 .2 .9 . Case 9 : The word decidable ' 131

4 .2 .10 . Case 10 : The word easy street ' 137

4 .3 . Arabic words evaluated 141

4 .3 .1 . Samples of Arabic words difficult to translate 141

4 .3 .2 . The challenge ahead 144

4 .4 . Summary of findings 149

5 .0 . Discussion 151

5 .1 . Philosophical context of the string model 151

5 .2 . Handling the problem of indeterminacy in translation 154

5 .3 . Validation of the possibilities for the string model 159

5 .4 . Translation problems 164

5 .5 . Applying the string model of language 164

5 .6 . Insights from the focus group discussion 165

5 .7 . String model expanded to translation problem 165

5 .8 . Evident trends 167

5 .9 . A growing dictionary 169

5 .10 . Implications to bilingual lexicography 169

5 .11 . The online dictionaries 170

6 .0 . Conclusions and recommendations 171

1 .0 . Introduction

1 .1 . Background

A dictionary is no ordinary document . It embedded the culture of from which the language documented . Developed . Words transcends the object referred to into the cognitive realms of the language user

To understand is to uncover a meaning not anyway embedded in the object but as a process of learning . Learning meanwhile is a function of internal mental processes and social influences . Translation then becomes an unlocking of meaning based on experience raised to the level of abstract of conceptualization enabling an individual to learn language , furthermore translate one language into another

A bilingual dictionary is two documents rolled into one . One is tThe source language and the target language with itshave their own logic system and meaning sensibility and the other the target language with its ownand hence their own particularityparticularities

There are numerous bilingual dictionary dictionaries and in the case of an English to Arabic , the Al Mawrid is well known . There are several critiques of the weaknesses of such a dictionary . and aAside from its incompleteness , the logical structure of the dictionary is also put into question . Apparently the dictionary just followed a convenient path of translating word for word without an internal guide for selection and prioritization of words for inclusion

Thus the dictionary is tedious to use and some critics claimed that it is of no use to someone who would want to learn a second language , much more learn the culture ofunderstand the source culture from which the language is based . In conventional bilingual dictionaries , each word is treated independently from other words this despite word associations very evident . There is no attempt to identify the strings of words or relationships of words as far as generating meaning is concerned

The study unveiled some of the strings of words and in what manner these words are related as the first step in embarking ina writing of a bilingual dictionary . There is the need to open up a new horizon on lexicographic translations to incorporate concepts which may be relevant but usually excluded in conventional writing of dictionaries

With a string concept the researcher believes that a potent tool is at the disposal of the bilingual dictionary translator and user . In this sense a dictionary is a word book of knowledge on the particular culture using such a language

The endeavor to produce a dictionary under a new set of precepts and understanding is inevitably a pioneering one . There are however positive circumstances which makes such an endeavor feasible . One is the availability of computer system which makes word tracking a lot easier and more important , could make tagging or cross referencing thousands of words manageable

Knowledge and meaning are two intertwined concepts and a dictionary effort could be viewed as knowledge and meaning management . Same way that money could be viewed as a store of value , a word could be viewed as a store of knowledge and a key to unlocking meaning . Inevitably in the conceptual level , epistemological precepts would converge with the cognitive . Here , a middle ground a or a common standard for the store of knowledge and a key to meaning must be accommodated if we want to put life ' into a dictionary

1 .2 . Objectives of the study

This research project aims at highlighting the Arabic bilingual dDictionary shortages and the failure of the parties concerned to address the issue . The objective is to unveil these shortages and emphasize the impact this is having on the language and its users as a whole . An attempt will also be made to find different ways of tackling this problem and producing better dictionaries which provides better help for learners , and professionals translators and academics Specifically , the study aims to

Contribute to improvement in of available dictionaries , or identify areas where more clarifications and additions are needed

Encourage Arab scholars to put more effort and thought when putting new dictionaries , or creating new editions of the old versions

enlightenEnlighten research students and translators as well , of on the most and best ways , to tackle problems arising from shortages in monolingual English-Arabic dictionaries

1 .3 . Statement of the Problem

As early as 1965 , Haywood observed that There is no modern Arabic equivalent to the Oxford English Dictionary ' This observation holds true even today more than four decades later . Haywood poses the challenge that the most fruitful modern Arabic lexicographical work has been done by European Orientalists ' and that it is high time that the Arabs tackled this problem with really modern superstructure on the great foundation of the past (Haywood , 1965 : 110 . The efforts made in creating a modern work that compares to , say , Oxford dictionaries , is still unsatisfactory . Part of that problem , as Al-Kasimi (1978 ) recognizes , is due to the fact that there is no single linguistic or scientific body which is in charge of coining the required technical or scientific terms in Arabic . He argues

Terminology is derived from organizations and scholars such as (a Universities and Ministries of the Education in the Arab World (b Arabic Academies in Cairo , Baghdad , Damscus , and recently in Amman (c lexicographers who are compiling general or specialized monolingual or bilingual dictionaries (d ) and translators engaged in publishing books and articles on various subjects (Al-Kasimi , 1978 : pp 111

Those efforts are not united and therefore , they are not contributing positively in filling the void . There is then a big need to come up with tool which maybe used in a standardized and systematic approach to dictionary development

Specifically the study poses the following problems tackled in the br

How could weak or vague sections of the dictionary be identified and how could these weakness or vagueness be improved

How could Arab scholars be encouraged to put more effort and thought when putting out new dictionaries or revising new editions of old versions

What is the best way to tackle the problems due to these shortages identified

1 .4 . Importance of the Study

Language functions in one level as an ethno-cultural bond between between people and communities . Recording the words and giving its appropriate meanings in the relation to the different level of meanings from simple lexical or dictionary meaning to the more sublime connotative and contextual meaning of the word remains a fundamental task of the dictionary writer . Coming with up with a tool to systematically tackle dictionary writing which could incorporate new and foreign words is important if language development could be directed to fully capture the words including the particular characteristic how meaning is derived in that particular language and culture

The lexical tool and the findings of research could be important to scholars , students and even policy makers

2 .0 . Review of Related Literature

Introduction

There were several key works which the author reviewed which were critical in developing the over-all approach and framework of the study .The emphasis focus on the nature of language and symbols in the review of literature emphasizes the approach the researcher is exploring in the lexical study being conducted . The particular interest of the author to come up with a new approach and understanding of multilingual dictionaries necessitates understanding how to reconcile two major attributes of language - One it is possible to study its organization and how words are related and two , language is arbitrary and this arbitrariness have resulted to different languages and dialects spoken in the world

There has to be a way to handle the common and unique characteristics of languages . Meaning is somehow embedded in the language used and knowing such differences is important in coming up with a model for multilingual dictionary project . And in such efforts , semiotics discourses such as those Saussure and other thinkers could be significant especially in words which may have universality in meaning but different inflection as far as context in a particular system of belief such as for example Arabic and English or American sensibilities . As such the author focused on Saussure and other thinkers who dug deep into the nature of a word or a particular symbol in relation to the cognitive faculties of people

The works of Sausure and other thinkers the author believes is important in the current effort of bridging the gaps in bilingual dictionary writing

2 .1 . The Role of Linguistics in Lexical Schematization According to Saussure

2 .1 .1 . Language and meaning

In elucidating the mechanism of lexicography it is of necessity to understand first the historical encapsulation of linguistics . According to Ferdinand de Saussure , meaning of a specific word is not solely based on the language it embodies but on the linguistic make up of such word Language is defined as group of words used to convey message or as a means to communicate , in which , it is uniquely and systemically designed by its users , which means that a specific language differs from other languages because each language possesses an authentic characteristic that can only be understand by its users . One factor that contributes in the novelty of certain language is its geographic positioning because particular regions have modified the usage and operation of their respective language . Having defined the language , Saussure demarcated the limitations of language , in terms of meaning . He postulated that language will not suffice in understanding the meaning because it is only the material aspect of language (Saussure , 1998

Full comprehension of lexical entities lies on the one 's indubitable knowledge of linguistics and semantics . The former is defined as the study of language , which includes the structural make-up of a word such as its etymological origin , phonetic pronunciation , and etc . On the other hand , the latter is defined as the study of meaning , symbols and even logic , which necessitate an understanding of usage and interrelationship between words , phrases , symbols and the mechanism of logic

2 .1 .2 . Phases in study of linguistics

According to Saussure , there are three phases that must be discussed in the study of linguistics . First , linguistics espouses the inclusion of grammar in language , which was originally conceptualized by the Greeks and was perpetuated by the French in its primordial essence . In every aspect of grammar , whether traditional or not , it has been established as a normative grammar , which implies a customary usage of certain rules and results to the cleavage between correct language and incorrect language . It must be take into consideration that the first phase may not necessarily create the meaning of a lexical entity but it helps to effectively communicate the meaning of such lexical entity

The second phase of linguistics proper transpired during the arrival of the philological movement or philology . This movement introduces a new light in the study of language through its sponsorship of a rigid a thorough procedure of texts examination . As mentioned earlier , grammar lacks meaning-making and this is the primary concern of philologists who aim to extract meaning from the language of a given texts . In general the philological movement opened up countless sources relevant to linguistic issues , treating them in quite a different spirit from traditional grammar for instance , the study of inscriptions and their language (Saussure ,

.122

The third phase of this enterprise is still in the process of validation because up to this contemporary period it is still not self-evident . The third phase concerns itself in ascertaining itself that there is a connection between languages and that different languages can be juxtapose with each other . The issue of this precept is its incommensurability because as argued above , language of respective regions has its own rules , hence it cannot be compared . But due to language pedigree like the Indo-European family , the appeal on incommensurability seems to be weak because this pedigree extends itself on other geographic boundaries , which means that language belongs to the Indo-European family , whether it is partitioned or not by geographical positioning , has an existing relationship , therefore it can be compared In fact , from then on scholars engaged in a kind of game of comparing different Indo-European languages with one another , and eventually they could not fail to wonder what exactly these connections showed , and how they should be interpreted in concrete terms (ibid .

. 124 . This phase proved to be the most prolific because it serves as a means for more philosophical debates on the validity of such assertion that a specific language is commensurable with other language 2 .2 . The Nature and Structure of Linguistic Entity

2 .2 .1 . Language and reality

Saussure claims that the words or phonemes of a certain language must innately have structure because the absence of such property entails the impossibility of knowing the meaning of a given phenomenon . He argues that ideas do not pre-exist and because of this everything is meaningless and even incomprehensible . But due to language all thoughts had been shaped . From this postulate , we can infer that our conception of our existence and of reality is solely based on language

Consequently , in itself , the purely conceptual mass of our ideas , the mass separated from the language , is like a kind of shapeless nebula , in which it is impossible to distinguish anything initially . The same goes then , for the language : the different ideas represent nothing pre-existing . There are no : a ) ideas already established and quite distinct from one another , b ) signs for these ideas . But there is nothing at all distinct in thought before the linguistic sign . This is the main thing . On the other hand , it is also worth asking if , beside this entirely indistinct realm of ideas , the realm of sound offers in advance quite distinct ideas [taken in itself apart from the idea] (ibid .

. 133

2 .2 .2 . Concept-auditory image

Language is merely deduced to naming system in which we see words as an association of phenomena , by which we create lexical entity . Saussure posits that this linguistic stance is very simple but regardless of its simplicity , this stance is the most operative and appropriate in explicating the importance of language , and in presenting its two significant components . First , the concept is the idea that represents a certain words or something that is communicated by a given stimulus . And the second part is the auditory image that serves as the stimulus for the meaning that must be communicated to the perceiver (Figure 1 . It must be noted that auditory image is not merely the material characteristic of the stimulus rather the psychological element that the stimulus imprints in our mind

Figure 1 . General model of concept formation

(Source : SAUSSURE , F . L (1998 ) Course in General Linguistics , Open Court The model of concept-auditory image works equally the same with the model of signified-signifier relationship . The basic knowledge that must be understood in this model is the role of the linguistic entity (also termed as linguistic sign ) because it is the amalgamation of concept and sound image . The amalgamation helps in outlining clearly the necessary process that must be incorporated in the meaning-making system . In the furtherance of this conjecture Saussure provides the tree example , which states that there are innumerable languages that can be represented by the word and the concept of tree

Having this myriad of languages , an individual must choose and know the language that best represent his concept of tree . An individual who use his /her respective language , he /she automatically conjures the concept of tree from the point he /she created the auditory image of the word tree . Thus , it is through the association of the two components of language that the meaning-making system happens because the psychological sound of tree is tantamount to the phenomenon tree

2 .2 .3 . Linguistic entity

To further the elucidation of linguistic entity , Saussure dichotomizes the role of signified and signifier , in which these terms can be transposed as concept or the representation of a thing , and as auditory image or the word , correspondingly

Saussure defined sign (lexical entity ) as the amalgamation of signifier and signified , which intrinsically embodies two major fundamentals First , the existing relationship between the signifier and signified is definitively arbitrary . The reason for this is simple there is no logical connection between the two if applied in a given word or thing because there are countless languages and also words , for a single concept . For example , tree is tree in English , but in German it is baum in Spanish it is arbol , in Italian it is albero , in French it is arbre and in Dutch it is de boom . This vastness of language to pertain a single concept implies that signifier and signified can be separated which can also result to the alteration of relationship between them or to its meaning . Therefore , a single word or concept can end up in the confinement of ambiguity and vagueness . Second , sign in form of words should be perceived in unison with time because it is linear . A word cannot be spoken simultaneously by a person in a given time , but he can utter it one at a time . Even in writing , an individual cannot write multiple words in a given time but he can write it one by one . Thus word is linear , and essentially signifiers are represented one at a time in a sentence to concretize its signified

In addition , Saussure concretizes his claim of arbitrary relation between signifier and signified because everything that we transcribe as objective is just a fatal mistake of our understanding . Objectivity only takes place in the meaning-making process because a certain convention agreed upon several things in for them to have a common ground Take the following example as proof

The peace sign is considered by the hippie as the representation of peace , which they proliferated in the seventies . Everyone who advocated this sign knows exactly what it means , but it does not necessarily follow that it has an intrinsic value in it the point here is that a specific community or group of people (hippies ) agreed upon its usage Little did these people realize that the peace sign is also the Cross of Nero , which exemplifies the abomination of Christ in early days

Onomatopoeia or the sounds that corresponds to a certain meaning such the sound produced by the rooster is transliterated as cock-a-doodle-do in English , but it has a corresponding auditory image in Spanish which is cocorico

Expressions and cursing words are also arbitrary even if it is unique to different regions . Ouch ' in English and Aie ' in French

2 .2 .4 . Synchronic analysis

Saussure believes on the importance of knowing the etymological origin of a word and its history , but he asserts that these things are irrelevant in the meaning-making system because of the arbitrary nature of language . For him the most essential concept that must be applied in this enterprise is the synchronic analysis because this concept focuses on the contained meaning within a word in its present time . The irrelevancy of past and of future times in the synchronic analysis is warranted because language and arbitrary , therefore , what counts is the present meaning of the word

In the meaning-making process , there are three requirements that must be fulfilled to derive a formal definition . First , the structure or the lexical entity must have wholeness , which means that the language system must operate wholly and not as independent of each other . Second , the language system must be flexible because it is innately arbitrary Saussure named this as transformation , in which he further explains that language system must always be susceptible to change because language is itself is not static . But it must be noted that transformation of a word must embody the governing rules of language system accordingly . And third , language system must be self-regulating . Whether how many times transformation takes place , the novel elements must still operate according to the basic structure of the system because it is infallible and universal

2 .3 . On Lexical Meaning and the Valuation of Its Terms

2 .3 .1 . Embedding meaning in language

As stipulated earlier , language forms all our concepts and ideas because these things have never pre-existed . The warrant of such claim lies on the structuralists conjecture that any concepts cannot be expressed without language , and without language all concepts are indiscernible . Saussure furthers that in to come up with an impeccable comprehension of ideas in terms of its lexical content one must take a closer look on the materiality and immateriality of sign . It has been established that auditory image is the signifier of an idea and the idea of the sound produced is the signified . Sign is material because of the corporal characteristic that it produced such as its sounds , visuals , and etc . On the other hand , sign becomes immaterial because of the thought it summons in our brain or it is the mental image that is produced in our mind every time we encounter a stimulus . The materiality and immateriality of sign is not independent of each other though we can decipher the dichotomy between the two , still they cannot be partitioned because both of them work hand in hand

The point on the dichotomization of sign 's materiality and immateriality is the fact that Saussure wants to stress his point that language is not in any case a thing or even a substance . For Saussure language is nothing but a system , a form , and a structure . He posits that system of language taken as a whole is langue and all the entities subsist within the language system is parole . The arbitrariness of the language is system is best explained in terms of langue and parole First , any valuation of terms will not happen within the langue if there are no social affairs . Second , the possibility of meaning in a specific parole (term or context ) depends on the prerogative and perusal of the community to adopt a relationship that will be encapsulated to an existing signifier and signified . Valuation of terms is schematized by the people who will use it . An individual can even create or designate a meaning to a specific term but it can never be communicated . In to communicate meaning , two or more people have to convene and to be in agreement on what signifier and what signified a word should embody Hence , value is the collective meaning designated to signs , which will operate within the confinement of its signifiers and signifieds relationships

2 .3 .2 . Structure of signs

It must be noted that sign 's value is not determined by a specific signifier that has a corresponding signified rather it is by the entire structure of signs that is adopted by the community . Most people are confused in the differentiation between value and signification , because in most cases they are both taken as anonymous to each other . But Saussure points out that signification is not value because the former is generally thought of as the meaning ' of the word , which means that it is the established affiliation between a signifier and a signified Conversely , the latter concerns itself on the connection between innumerable signs that are existent within a signifying system . Saussure (1910-1911 ) expresses that Language is a system of interdependent terms in which the value of each term results solely from the simultaneous presence of the others (p . 129

There are two fundaments incorporated in value , first , similar things are comparable , interchangeable and changeable , and second , dissimilar things are also comparable , interchangeable and changeable . The comparability , interchangeability and changeability of similar things are self-explanatory since there are few differences that may occur between similar things and they still possess a common ground . But on the case of dissimilar things , the task of comprehending its comparability , interchangeability and changeability seems to be challenging and difficult . The truth is that dissimilar things operate in the same way as similar things operate in terms of the given aspects The difference is that the former undergo a more rigid process of connecting two dissimilar ideas . Take for example the peace sign that is associated with peace but can be interchanged with sacrilege connotation . The point is language is arbitrary and because of this fact , meaning can only be derived depending on its surrounding

Remember , value in words cannot only be conceptualized because two things are similar it is also due to opposition or difference . You can never find the meaning of a word by considering only the exchangeable item , but you have to compare the similar series of comparable words You cannot take words in isolation . This is how the system to which the term belongs is one of the sources of value . It is the sum of comparable terms set against the idea exchanged (p .136 . The meaning represented by a signifier is realizable because it stands alone with other signifiers Being stand alone is not being isolated because if this is the case then Saussure will commit contradictory and contrary premises . When he say stand alone , he means that a signifier is meaningful because it is not like any other established signifier i .e . the signifier dog has a meaning , not because of its association with animal taxonomy , but for the reason that the signifier is not jog , hog , clog or Doug . Isolation on the one hand , is the existence of a signifier independent of the whole system

2 .3 .3 . Systemic differences

The system of linguistic units depends thus on the idea of difference one unit has value within the system because it is not some other unit within the system . As the computer example shows , this idea of difference depends upon the idea of binary opposites . To find out what a word or sign is not , you compare it to some other word or sign (And because language exists in time and space , you can only do this comparison one word at a time , hence always forming binary pairs , pairs of two ) A binary pair shows the idea of difference as what gives any word value : in the pair cat /cats , the difference is the s what makes each word distinct is its difference from the other word (p . 141 And due to this difference , value in words is only applicable within the context of the community who ascribe certain conventions on their language system . Thus , a word in German language will have not have equal value to Arabic language , and this will be the case in all language system . It can be the case that a word in two different languages can have the same meaning but it will certainly have different value . For example , in English language the word sheep is the referent of a hoof animal , and in French language it is termed as mutton though it can never be translated as food in English language . Another good example provided by Saussure is the usage of the term decrepit that own two dissimilar meanings , one is old man , and the other is a wall . These dissimilar meanings transpired because of the coexistence of two neighbouring word that influenced each other

2 .3 .4 . The value of a word

The value of a word can never be determined except by the contribution of coexisting terms which delimit it : or , to insist on the paradox already mentioned : what is in the word is only ever determined by the contribution of what exists around it (What is in the word is the value ) Saussure (1910-1911 ) asks Around it syntagmatically or around it associatively (p . 144 . Saussure puts more stress on syntagmatic relation because it emanates a linear relation both in verbal and non-verbal attitude . An example of this is the fact that , in English word governs meaning . Consider the following sentence , The cat sat on the mat ' means something different than The mat sat on the cat ' because word---the position of a word in a chain of signification contributes to meaning . [The sentences also differ in meaning because mat ' and cat ' are not the same words within the system] (p .146 . In English language system , the word- has a particular structure that must be followed to communicate the meaning and to satisfy the rules of grammar , and in this case the sentence must be in a subject-verb-object . But this word- will be completely different to other language systems . In German , that sentence might be The adjective noun auxiliary verbed the direct object adverbially main verb . In French it might be The noun adjective verbed adverbially the direct object . In Latin , word doesn 't matter , since the meaning of the word is determined , not by its place in the sentence , but by its cases [nominative , ablative , etc .] (p . 149

Syntagm is the juxtaposition of two or more words in linear form such as phrases , sentences , quotations , and et al . The value within the syntagm is only probable if and only if a term is in opposition with other terms , in which this specific term encountered in a group of words like phrase . The term is defined as something because the other terms before and after it is not term being defined . Syntagmatic relation is essential in a rational discourse because the latter requires time linearity and syntactical meaning inside any communication process

2 .3 .5 . Associative relation

Another relation concern itself on the mental by-product necessitated by a specific word , which is called as associative relation . Every individual are capable of storing data and memories inside their brain and all of these are in a form of signs . When one hears the word dog he /she can connect this word to other words , which may have a direct or indirect link to each other

Henceforth , syntagmatic relation is more significant than associative relation because the former can result to the fabrication of new words that will be incorporated in a language system and used by its community . Syntagmatic relations perpetuate such production because it is the result of a linguistic structure . In lieu to this , associative relations are only formed inside the head , in which no other word can be concocted because it thrives only on linking itself to other words to clarify its meaning . The importance of this kind relation is that it can result to idiomatic expressions and metaphors and its ability to dissolve all kinds of patterns prescribed by rigorous grammatical rules and syntagmatic relation

2 .4 . On Sterkenburg , Swanepoel and Geeraerts ' Conception of the Lexicon

2 .4 .1 . Meaning-making in multi-lingual context

Individuals are very much accustomed in consulting dictionaries in for them to define a single word , especially those words that they have never encountered . Knowing the exact definition of specific terms is necessary because it warrants our usage of the words we utter and that we can express effectively the message we want to communicate . The meaning-making process is a system that is unknown to men since time immemorial . Our communication back then is limited to noise and body language , in which words are alien concept for us . But evolution takes its own course , man and his language evolves . Biblical history narrates that in ancient epoch men uses only one language to communicate with each other but due to one misfortunate event , language multiplied itself into innumerable quantity

Multiplicity of language becomes a barrier in understanding , which results to the necessitation of a common ground between two speakers who embody different languages . Lingua franca is the first solution in bridging the gap between two distinctly language , in which the two speakers combine their native language and uses another mixture of language that is proximally equal to their first language . But usage of lingua franca failed to completely address the problem in multiple languages because most often than not , meaning of certain words are being misconstrued since its understanding lies on the perception of the receiver . Miscomprehension of meaning propagates two prominent issues in effective communication , first is ambiguity , and second is vagueness

2 .4 .2 . Critical importance of dictionaries

Dictionary counterattacks the element of ambiguity and vagueness in a given discourse incorporated in the multiplicities of language Dictionary provides accurate and concise definitions to the building blocks of language , which is the unit or word that is used in all forms of communication . Dictionary outlines the arbitrary nature of language as well as , answers its arbitrariness by enumerating numerous meanings integrated in a single unit . A dictionary has several types such as illustrating dictionaries , biographical dictionaries , and most importantly translation dictionaries

It has been established that a dictionary gives an accurate and concise definition to words . And if this is the case , what are the factors that justify this claim . Does the definition that is commonly attributed to dictionary sufficient enough ? A dictionary is a noun which means 1 ) book of word meanings : a reference book that contains alphabetically ed words , with explanations of their meanings , often with information about grammar , pronunciation , and etymology [http /encarta .msn .com /dictionary_ /dictionary .html] , 2 foreign-language reference book of words : a reference book that alphabetically arranges and translates words and phrases in two or more languages [ibid .] , or 3 ) it is book that is composed of definitions for specific words . Are these definitions enough to understand the nature of dictionary or even exemplify its importance

The task of this is to establish clear cut definition of dictionary and to sketch out the mechanism of dictionary . In to profoundly elucidate the anatomy of dictionary it is of necessity to discuss its history , and in doing so I will used Piet van Sterkenburg 's treatise entitled The `dictionary : Definition and History . The furtherance of this elucidation will focus on the discussion of Piet Swanepoel 's philosophical construct entitled Dictionary typologies : A Pragmatic Approach . With regards to the meaning-making process that is incorporated in dictionaries , Dirk Geeraerts ' Meaning and Definition will be utilized

2 .5 . On the Naissance of Dictionary

2 .5 .1 . The functional definition of a dictionary

According to Sterkenburg , the above inferences on dictionary does not encapsulate its genuine meaning , rather it only defines the prototypical dictionary , which is defined as the alphabetical monolingual general-purpose dictionary (Sterkenburg ,

. 3 . This definition is the common connotation that laymen knows of dictionary , which only caters to a single word of a specified language in relation to its prescribed usage , structure and meaning . The problem with this prototypical definition of dictionary is that it only define the characteristic and properties of a certain dictionary and not the entirety of dictionary 's anatomy , i .e . biological dictionary concerns itself with the technical and scientific terms used in biology , thus defining it will emanate a meaning that exclusive and limited only to the prominent features of the biological dictionary . Does it require for us to define all prototypes of dictionary in for us to exhaust a definitive definition of the at hand ? The schematization of dictionary is indeed a difficult challenge but it does not demand of us to accumulate all definitions of its entire prototypes to come up with a single meaning . Sterkenburg suggests that the initial step to put dictionary in a nutshell is to know and understand its history

Ladislav Zagusta (2003 ) [considered as the father of lexicography of the twentieth century] circumscribes dictionary as a systematically arranged list of socialised linguistic forms compiled from speech-habits of a given speech community and commented on by the author in such a way that the qualified reader understands the meaning . of each separate form , and is informed of the relevant facts concerning the function of that form in its community (p . 4 . Zagusta also stresses that a dictionary is exclusive to a given speech community that uses specific system based on social norms and functions . Conversely , Sterkenburg points out a discriminating loophole in Zagusta 's definition because it denotes an elitist stance , and it presents a mechanism that can only be understood exclusively by a specific group , especially those who attained higher education

2 .5 .2 . Relativism in dictionaries

On the other hand , Bo Svensen demarcates dictionary as compilation of meanings for a specific term used in a certain community . This compilation also includes all necessary information about the structure of the given word such as its etymology , synonyms , antonyms pronunciation , proper usage , etc . More importantly , Svensen definition of dictionary is more focused on its physical aspect , or the components that make up the compilation . Dictionary is distinctly different form other informational compilation because of its presentation . A dictionary is always presented in an alphabetical based on the how the headwords are being spelled out . But in the case of encyclopedia information may be presented in two ways , either alphabetical or chronological , and it is always released in volumes

Furthermore , Svensen posits that a dictionary presents information in arbitrary way and not on al manner , which means that a definition of terms can be draw out easily based on its alphabetical and not on the or definition the term has . There are two elements that must be noted in this definition , its formal feature and its referential usage . Dictionary for Svensen must provide the formal feature of the words to be defined such as its pronunciation , material form (the spelling of the word , inflection , etc . With regards to it referential usage , dictionary must serve as consulting reference to clear confusions to a specific unit such as misspelling , mispronunciation , perplexity on the meaning of unheard word , and the likes

According to Sterkenburg , Zgusta and Svensen 's definitions are not problematic at all , but it is undeniably debatable because of the precept of modernity , which only means that their definitions are applicable only during their period but it is not appropriate for the contemporary period . Dictionary is perpetually evolving along with the progression of time . Dictionary is taking new forms from a simple book to an electronic book . Sterkenburg postulates that given this fact there is a necessity to answer some prevailing debates regarding the definition of dictionary provided by Zgusta and Svensen . One important debate that must be addressed is Zgusta 's elitist stance on dictionary Second is Svensen 's structural account of dictionary . And third , the debate on its timeliness

2 .5 .3 . Criteria setting

Sterkenburg suggests that the answering these debates will eventually lead to a definitive definition of dictionary , if and only if a warranted criteria will be realized . The criteria that he is sponsoring are as follows : formal , functional and substance

2 .5 .3 .1 . Formal criterion

This concerns itself primarily on the electronic form of dictionary though it can be argued that a normal book of dictionary and an electronic book has no difference at all since both of these forms operate as they are , in fact , the slight difference is only its form James Raiher as cited by Sterkenburg (2003 ) conjectures that an electronic dictionary is exactly the same as a hard-copy dictionary except that the information is held in a text (p . 5 . He even added that functions e-dictionary was only actualized when software deems its possibility . So if there is no big disparity between the two then why espouse the used of e-dictionary ? The answer is simple e-dictionary has more advantageous features than the primitive hard-copy dictionary

In an old fashioned dictionary there is only one route you can choose to locate the information of a specific word , and that would be through the alphabetical method . Conversely , e-dictionary will not only save up your time for searching a given term but there are several routes you can select other than the alphabetical way . You can insert directly the word you want to locate , or if you don 't know the word that you want to find you can utilize its antonyms and synonyms . Referring to the analytical definition will also lead you to the right path . Another beneficial characteristic of e-dictionary is that it can meet the standard of timeliness because you can manipulate its own database , in which you can perform some changes inside the program or create new words (neologism to its memory . Hard-copy dictionary provides a guide on to pronounce specific words , but e-dictionary is more sophisticated because it gives you the opportunity to listen how it should be correctly pronounce

2 .5 .3 .2 . Functional criterion

This deals primarily on the beneficial functions of dictionary to its users , whether it is an e-dictionary or the general-purpose dictionary The most obvious function of a dictionary is to take account of lexicon Dictionary is storage of customary , conventional , rare , new and highly scientific and technical words . Dictionary is the authority when it comes to word information , even if it cannot capture the whole lexical system . Remember , there are words that are still not known to humanity and there are words that are utilize on limited communities , which entails that words on dictionary is only conceptualized on representative basis . A word cannot be represented if it is only understood on a certain language-game . A word must have a universal appeal . The point is , a user uses a dictionary to gather necessary information on a specific words , and he /she wants to acquire these information right away , and if he /she does not find the word and its meaning , then he /she can straightforwardly conclude that the word does not exist

The second function of dictionary stresses the xistence of words which can be translated as non-inclusion of a word in the lexicon is equals to its xistence . Dictionary should not be viewed as a mere reference but it must be perceived as a tenet for the entire lexicon Some words are not included in the wordbook because these lexemes are too regional , profane and ersatz . A word is considered regional when it is only understood within a restricted community , therefore it lacks universal appeal or it can be comprehended universally . Profane words are strictly prohibited in the dictionary because they are too vulgar and inappropriate , especially for young users . Neologism is an important aspect in the lexicon because it broadens the horizon of a dictionary but artificial words that neologists create are expostulated because these words are unfamiliar and bizarre in nature . Dictionary is a law that aims to ascertain the unmistakable purity of language (ibid .

. 7

In relation to the second function , dictionary is considered as preserver of morality because words that are too obscene , sacrilegious and mundane are eliminated such as curses , labels , and et al . A lexeme that connotes bias and prejudice is explained academically if not omitted because this kind of words has an underlying negative meaning All dictionaries are very cautious and meticulous in the usage of such words because inappropriate usage of the words will lead to sexism and racism . For example , the word nigga /nigger is not included in the dictionary because it is too offensive on the Afro-American community and because of the belief that this word should only be used by this community since it is them who exclusively grasped the meaning of this word

2 .5 .3 .3 . Content-based criterion

This provides a justification on the usage of words , in which a lexeme cannot be considered as part of the lexicon if it is void of any lexical information . As discussed earlier , a dictionary contains necessary facts of the desired word such as meanings , diction , part of speech syllabication and all lexicographical data . The basic premise that must be fulfilled in this criterion is the adherence on the law of dictionary and the proper representation of lexical information 's intrinsic value Disagreement is a possibility on the intrinsic value of lexical information since the lexicon or the language in particular is arbitrary and perpetually evolving , which is a valid reason to exclude words that are regional , profane and artificial

The content-based criterion guarantees the existence of abstract words because meaning in this criterion is not referent-based , but rather meaning is derived on linguistic signs . Meanings within a lexeme have the tendency to overlap if the lexeme is not identified properly , i .e if the word is either a noun or verb . Dictionary outlines numerous meaning of a single word in a concise manner , in to prevent any confusion on how to apply a single in a rational discourse

Therefore , definition of dictionary , as circumscribed by Sterkenburg is a prototypical dictionary that is dichotomized into a general-purpose type and electronic type , in which the former is commonly held in alphabetical organization , and the latter is established on the linkages that it has with the substantial elements that surround it . In addition a dictionary maintains the purity of language and helps in understanding one 's native language

2 .6 . On the Typological Nature of Dictionary

2 .6 .1 . User driven typologies

Dictionary has numerous specifications from ordinary portfolio of lexemes to the technical volumes of scientific vocabularies that are definitive of its purpose and its usage . Different people use different typologies of dictionaries depending on the subject matter . If a reader wants to find the meaning of a highfaluting word , he /she must consult an ordinary dictionary to substantiate the word at hand , i .e . highfaluting is an adjective which means something is grandiose or pretentious , but in everyday language highfaluting refers to being pompous or self-important . Conversely , if a word seeker wants to know the meaning of a scientific term , he /she must confer with technical dictionaries that specialize on a specific subject matter like biology , engineering computer , etc , i .e . iron oxide is a noun that is usually causes corrosion on metal , but this word will simply mean rust in the ordinary world

The point is simple according to Swanepoel dictionaries have several typologies because of the users ' pragmatic nature . New types of dictionaries are being created because of the new demands are radiating from the users . Pragmatism is the machinery that keeps dictionary to its perpetual evolution . Lexicon users utilize dictionary ancillary on the practical antecedent of its utilization . A person will not use an ordinary lexicon if he /she wants to define the terms used in physics and this is also works vice-versa . And if all dictionaries fail to define a certain word because it cannot be categorized in any given typologies , then a creation of new typology is needed . As Swanepoel (2003 ) puts it , the success of solving lexical problems of this kind is partly determined by the language user 's knowledge of what dictionary (lexical resource ) to consult (p . 44 . The key hereof is the incorporation of pragmatism in the utilization of a dictionary , and how this pragmatism will help in schematization of new typologies

It goes without saying that enumerating or naming all lexical typologies is utterly unimaginable but this does not serves as a quandary to dictionary users because of one simple fact : users do not necessarily have to know all typologies that they can choose from since all they need is to figure out what kind of dictionary they must used . Swanepoel (2003 ) defines typology as a system for the classification and clarification of items (p . 45 . A typology concerns itself in determining themes and is made of several subcategories

2 .6 .2 . Fundamental attributes of a typology

draws the parallelism of each major and minor categories within the lexical system Figure 2 . A sample of a lexical system

(Source : Swanepoel , 2003

Zgusta , Geeraerts and Janssens ' typologies are the most commonly used types of dictionaries . For Zgusta , a typology should have the following elements : first , it must be discernible from encyclopedias in such a way that both of their axioms have irrefutable properties that are solely definitive of their nature , i .e . a dictionary is a dictionary because it gives all significant information with regards to words , and an encyclopedia is an encyclopedia because it discuss all vital information about a certain entity or event . Second , the monolingualism or multilingualism of dictionary must be delineated on the basis of language quantity integrated in each typology . Third , diachronicity and synchronicity in all lexicons must be demarcated on the footing of time opposition . And fourth , generalness , limitedness , comprehensiveness and standardness of dictionaries must give emphasis on the echelon and /or amplitude of the vocabulary that will eventually be integrated within the mechanism of a specific typology of dictionary

In this milieu , Geeraerts and Janssen purport that dictionary typologies are base on macro and micro-structural anatomy of the lexicon . When we speak of macro-structure of dictionaries it pertains on the echelon and amplitude of the vocabulary of all language wherein headwords are selected or included ancillary to the theme or type of lexicon . And most importantly , a typology on this structure are envisage in accordance to the principles that encapsulates how the lemmas should be presented , either in alphabetical (general-purpose dictionary ) or ideological (electronic dictionary ) arrangement . On the other hand , the micro-structural make-up of dictionary deals with the precepts of grammatical and syntactical laws that all lexemes included in the lexicon must embody (see the figure belowFigure 3 . In addition , the ing of data to the respective categories or typologies is essential part of this structure because it affirms the rules that must be observed in the making of dictionary . In toto , typological differences in the macro and micro-structural anatomy lie on the full understanding of its echelon and amplitude Figure 3 . Grammatical and syntactical concerns of a dictionary

(Source : GEERAERTS , D (2003 ) Meaning and Definition IN STERKENBURG ,

br V (Ed ) A Practical Guide to Lexicography (Terminology and Lexicography Research and Practice , 6 ) John Benjamins Publishing Co

Swanepoel (2003 ) borrows Murray stance to reify Geeraerts and Janssen 's constructs in a nutshell , which states that the center is occupied by (common ) words , in which literary and colloquial usage meet (p . 47 The echelon of the lexis are divided into scientific , foreign and archaic words are byproducts of literature , in which it leaps from uncommon to common because of its everyday usage in the community

In summary , the lexical system needs the varying dictionary typologies because it provides a higher probability that the users ' need will be satisfied , and since human satisfaction is in flux , the system will always find ways to devise new typologies to meet the new demands of the lexicon users . Typology is buffet wherein consumers have a myriad of choices to choose from . Choices that will certainly satiate the consumers ' needs and will accustom them of what typologies are available to them to tackle an existing lexical dilemma . The continuing needs of the consumer are the impetus for the production of more typologies in the present time and for the future

2 .7 . On Geeraerts Meaning and Definition

2 .7 .1 . Property attribution

One of the most crucial tasks in the making of dictionary is the attribution of properties in a given word in for it to be considered meaningful . Geeraerts posits that the epicenter of dictionary is the meaning and definition that embodies , thus five considerations must be noted in the making of lexicon . First , lexicographer should necessarily understand the identity of each word that he will incorporate in the dictionary . He must know exactly the senses that typifies a single word , and lay bare what makes a lexeme independent of other lexemes . Second , the lexicographer has to demarcate what insights must be integrated in the understanding of the lexis , and that insight must be precisely relevant . Third , a word possesses several meanings but the lexicographer needs to know what and which definition is appropriate in a given word , to ensure that vagueness and ambiguity will be prevented . Fourth , this consideration is critical because it needs to ascertain what linguistic perspective to be followed and not . And lastly , the lexicographer has to draw out which definitional format to be executed in the making of a lexicon

2 .7 .2 . Uniqueness factor

A single term should be able to stand alone so that its identity will not be mistaken with other words . According to Geeraerts , establishing the identity of a term is a Herculean task because words do not exist in isolation (ibid .

, 84 , in fact similarity and opposition helps in defining the what and whatnot of the word . Geeraerts postulates that in for the lexicographers to circumstantiate the identity of a word which is independent of another word , they need to delineate the semasiological and onamasiological cleavage within two words Semasiology focuses on the polysemical [defined as diversity of meaning] perspective of words . Finding the identity of a single lexeme starts in its association with other words , through this a semantic data can be draw out and eventually will lead to proper categorization , of which meaning belongs to what word . Onamasiology , on the other hand , does not refer its semantic information on polysemy but rather on the prominent concept inherent in a word

Figure 4 . A summary of polysemes

(Source : Geeraerts , 2003

As Geeraerts puts it , where in the world does a word can be considered synonymous with other words , and the answer is in the association of similar and opposing concepts

Between the cleavages , lexicographers must take an in-depth outlook on the semasiological perspective because it is concern on the semantic origin and definition of words in fact it deals greatly on the identity of individual words in the backdrop of semantic information . Whereas onamasiology has a tendency to create another lexical typology rather than establishing the senses which epitomize a word , its mechanism focuses on the explication of how concepts are being synonymous and antonymous to individual words . Onamasiology outlines the identical relationship between words but not its identity . In summary , semasiology operates on the basis of word to concept pattern , while onamasiology works on incongruous fashion

2 .7 .3 . Handling multiple meanings

As concluded above , lexicographer needs to appeal on semasiology because of its intrinsic feature to identify the identity of individual words . This conclusion necessitates the application of polysemical perspective , which entails that lexicographer must figure out which appropriate definition he must choose to incorporate in a given term to prevent any confusion [see the table for examples ( HYPERLINK "http /encarta .msn .com /dictionary " http /encarta .msn .com /dictionary .html )]

Because of multiplicity of meaning , the lexicographer must figure out which meaning is appropriate to individual words . The lexicographer chooses which words should be included in the lexicon , and in doing so he also choose which definitions are relevant in the validation of words ' identity or sense . He may restrict his efforts to general vocabulary , or he may include marked words or readings (Sterkenburg ,

br 85 , it is his prerogative to do so , for as long as definitions will be definitive to individual words . Definitiveness in words creates their own identity in such a way that emanates how these words should be perceived both in their denotative and connotative value . Definitiveness highlights the nuances of individual words , thus making its definition complete and precise

The task of appropriating which meaning to which word should not be misconstrued as an exclusive and subjective enterprise of the lexicographer in fact his prerogative in this appropriation should operate in the context of universality , which makes his task highly objective

2 .7 .4 . Meaning in the context of reality

The next task that lexicographers must fulfill in the meaning-making process within the dictionary is to apprehend what type of meaning they need to define . The world is vast and because of this , the concept of reality is still contingent . Words are impression of the world , they help in the deciphering the context of reality . It has been conjectured that what we know of the world and of reality is relational to what we know of our language . Humanity perceives words as mere referent of what we derived from the images of the world . A word becomes meaningful because of its referent , and even if abstract concepts do not have tangible properties , we can still explain them through our correlation to abstract words . For example , we associate a cat as a four-legged mammal that has whiskers and under the family of feline , thus when we see a cat , we refer to it as to what animal we know of it

But in the case of words that do have any referent , we conceive it rather we perceive it . The difference is that in conceiving we apprehend thing mentally , while in perceiving we comprehend things on the materiality of objects . For example , the interjectional words like Ouch does not have any referent , but the auditory image it infuses to our mind gives us what an idea about sudden pain . In general , abstract words may not have a direct representation in the world , but they still exemplify a meaning that is their own

Geeraerts recapitulates three non-denotational types of meaning . One emotive meaning is incorporated in words that expresses an emotive value that can be either complimentary or derogatory . The word nigga /nigger is considered as offensive word because of its historical content , but it can be complimentary if the user , who utilizes it , is a part of its historical content , meaning using this word is pejorative if outsiders used it but it is flattering if an African-American used it . Same goes for the word faggot , which is very much derogatory to the homosexual community . Words have emotive meaning if they can provoke specific emotion . Second , grammatical meaning focuses on words that have specific morphological operation . As Geeraerts explains , its primary function is to overtly mark an aspect of the syntactic structure of the sentence , in this case , to introduce a subordinate clause (ibid .

. 87 . Example of this is words that are used to emphasize a certain meaning but are excluded in the extralinguistic consequences such as Redeemer , whatness universalizability , etc . And third , pragmatic meaning are discursive in nature , words included in this category are commonly express in speech act . Words under this category are Ouch , Hello , Hey , etc . that do no describe any concept regarding greetings , rather it articulate what it is

These types of meaning necessitate another formula for their meaning-making other than the ordinary formula that is applied to denotational meaning . Geerae...