LINGUIST List 4.482

Sat 19 Jun 1993

Qs: German, Tibetan & Chinese, Acronyms

Editor for this issue: <>


Directory

  1. Toni Badia, Query on German Terminological Data-Bases
  2. Janet Upton, Tibetan and Chinese Word Processing?
  3. , acronym definition

Message 1: Query on German Terminological Data-Bases

Date: Thu, 17 Jun 93 11:30:01 MEQuery on German Terminological Data-Bases
From: Toni Badia <tbadiaupf.es>
Subject: Query on German Terminological Data-Bases


A colleague of mine is working in the translation of SPL documents from
German to Catalan. Her work would be much faster if she could access
some terminological database.

Could you inform her of any existing terminological database in German?
And particularly of any such database which can be accessed
eletronically?

Please reply to the address above.

Thanks in advance.

Toni Badia
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Tibetan and Chinese Word Processing?

Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1993 13:59:14 Tibetan and Chinese Word Processing?
From: Janet Upton <juptonu.washington.edu>
Subject: Tibetan and Chinese Word Processing?

I am searching for programs that will allow me to do word processing in
Tibetan and/or Chinese. I am currently using a 486dx/33mhz IBM compatible
laptop computer with a 130mb hard drive and equipped with DOS 6.0 and
Windows 3.1. I'm printing with a IBM portable printer, but I do have
access to HP laser printers as well. I am particularly interested in a
Chinese program that will allow me to enter the pinyin and produce both
complex and simplified characters. I am also interested in a Tibetan
program that will allow me to make entries phonetically. I would
appreciate any information anyone out there has about possible resources.
Thanks!
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 3: acronym definition

Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1993 09:19:25 acronym definition
From: <frantznhg.uleth.ca>
Subject: acronym definition

It has long bothered me that the term <acronym> is used not only for initials
which form a pronounceable string like NATO, GAT, UNESCO, etc., but also for
commonly repeated initials like PTA, TG, GB, etc. Granted, the latter take on
an identity or unity beyond a simple string of initial consonants, there should
be some terminological difference between a string of letters and a word that
is the the result of treating the string of letters as graphemes
representing phonemes.
Am I alone in this opinion? I'd like to hear what others think.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue