Editor for this issue: Brett Churchill <brett
linguistlist.org>
>From: Helge Gundersen <helge.gundersenMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueinl.uio.no> >Subject: The New Oxford Dictionary of English I just bought the New Oxford Dictionary of English without knowing anything about it (I went for the size). It happened that this work is organized on the basis of some new ideas that might be interesting to hear about in this forum. The editors are apparently trying to take the real knowledge of speakers of English as their point of departure. I assume some of you are well aware of this work from 1998 (and can provide any inside-like information?), but I'm sure many of you are as ignorant as I was. So I thought I could provide some glimpses from the Introduction: Instead of listing the different senses of a word on the same typographical level, they distinguish between "core sense" and "subsense". "Core meanings represent typical, central uses of the word in question in modern standard English [...] It is the meaning accepted by native speakers as the one that is most established as literal and central." As they say, it's not necessarily the most frequent sense, so "central" here has directly something to do with literal, which, I assume, doesn't quite equal "prototypical". But in cognitive-linguistic writings, too, one can be uncertain of the relationship between the typical and the literal..., and it's evident that the editors are inspired by recent lexicology in a way that subscribers to this list will find encouraging. "There is a logical relationship between each subsense and the core sense under which it appears. The organization of senses according to this logical relationship is designed to help the user, not only in being able to navigate the entry more easily and find relevant senses more readily, but also in building up an understanding of how senses in the language relate to one another and how the language is constructed on this model." The acceptance of figurative extension, specialization, etc, is thankfully not revolutionary for the discipline of lexicography, but it's interesting that they have linguistic description based on polysemy as an important goal for their dictionary entries. A primary aim has been to give comprehensible, relevant, and readable information of specialist terms, while maintaining the high level of technical information and accuracy suitable for the specialist reader. Thus, chemical formulas and Latin plant names have been added at the end of the entries in small print, while the actual definitions are of the type "a compound which is the major carcinogen present in cigarette smoke, and also occurs in coal tar". Along the same lines, they are not afraid of giving additional information of an encyclopedic nature. "As elsewhere, the purpose is to give information which is relevant and interesting, aiming not just to define the word but also to describe and explain its context in the real word." Justification is given for the inclusion of proper names, which some dictionaries exclude, the Oxford editors say, on the basis of the distinction between 'words' and 'facts'. But "names such as *Shakespeare* and *England* are as much part of the language as words such as *drama* or *language*, and belong in a large dictionary." Examples are authentic, because "it is now generally recognized that the 'naturalness' provided by authentic examples is of the utmost importance in giving an accurate picture of language in use". Unfounded, but widely held, etymologies are presented in addition to the good ones. Usage notes are meant to "give guidance that accords with observed facts about present-day usage". I don't know how good the actual content of the dictionary is. But here are a couple of sample entries: cognitive grammar >noun [mass noun] a theory of grammar that seeks to characterize, in a psychologically realistic way, those structures and abilities that constitute a speaker's grasp of linguistic convention, and to relate them to other cognitive processes. cognitivist >noun a person who believes or works in cognitive grammar. >adjective of or relating to cognitive grammar. - DERIVATIVES cognitivism noun. - -- Helge Gundersen Oslo, Norway =============================================================== Alan C. Harris, Ph. D. TELNOS: main off: 818-677-2853 Professor, Communication/Linguistics direct off: 818-677-2874 Department of Communication Studies California State University, Northridge home: 818-366-3165 COMMS-8257 CSUN FAX: 818-677-2663 Northridge, CA 91330-8257 INTERNET email: ALAN.HARRIS
CSUN.EDU WWW homepage: http://www.csun.edu/~vcspc005 ===============================================================