L2.

Lexicography and Metalexicography: Basic Concepts

1. Match the following statements with the field they describe: lexicography or
lexicology, by ticking on the appropriate column.

Lexicology Lexicography
a. ... is more theory oriented
b. … is more concerned with the concrete
application of linguistic theories
c. … deals with the lexicon
d. … concentrates more on general
properties and features of words
e. … focuses on each lexical unit
individually
f. … studies the word as part of the
language system
g. … tackles the word as an individual unit
from the point of view of its meaning and
practical use
h. … is at the same time a craft and a
science

2. Choose the correct variant in each case (1-10)

[1] Lexicology/Lexicography is relevant to dictionary-making in a number of respects as it can

clarify how words and phrases are created, combined, modified and defined, and how usage varies
within a language according to such parameters as dialect, formality and technicality. However, the
relationship between the two disciplines cannot be reduced to theory versus practice: [2]
lexicology/lexicography is not merely ‘applied [3] lexicology/lexicography’, but an autonomous
field with its own premises, utilising and adapting the findings of other disciplines to its own ends.
Conversely, [4] lexicology/lexicography has incorporated many of the facts accumulated in
dictionaries throughout their history, such as ‘common core words’ and ‘hard words’,
‘colloquialisms’ and ‘technical terms’, ‘simple words’ and ‘multi-word expressions’, ‘archaic
words’ and ‘neologisms’, ‘regionalisms’ and ‘internationalisms’. (adapted from Hartmann and
James, 1998/2002)

[5] Lexicology/Lexicography is an activity which consists in observing, collecting, selecting,

analyzing and describing, in a dictionary, a number of lexical items (words, word elements and
word combinations) belonging to one or more languages. […] Opinions differ as to the relationship
between lexicology and lexicography. There are those who argue that, on the whole, they are the
same, while others regard [6] lexicology/lexicography as a branch of [7] lexicology/lexicography;
there is also a third opinion maintaining that lexicology is equivalent to metalexicography. We
believe that [8] lexicology/lexicography is a science concerned with the study of vocabulary, its

1
structure and other characteristics. This refers first of all to the study of meanings of words and the
relationships between meanings (semantics), but also to the study of the formation and structure of
individual words, i.e. morphology. […] However, [9] lexicology/lexicography forms an important
basis for work in [10] lexicology/lexicography. (adapted from Svensén, 2009:3)

3. Specify which of the attitudes listed below (A-D) concerning the relationship
between lexicography and linguistics is illustrated in each of the following paragraphs.

A. lexicography is a branch of linguistics

B. lexicography is an autonomous field of study
C. lexicography is influenced by linguistics / linguistic is influenced by lexicography
D. lexicography is not a science

1
“It is a lexicographer’s task to compile associations between word forms and
word meanings and to publish them in a convenient alphabetical list. Although
lexical theory and lexicographic practice are ordinarily close, in addition to
deciding what should be included in a lexical entry and how definitions should ……….
be written, lexicographers must actually write the definitions and at the same
time worry about such practical matters as how to keep their dictionary down to
a manageable size.” (Landau 1984)

2
“[…] linguists usually study small amounts of data in an intensive way, they
study paradigmatic cases, treated subsequently as representatives of whole ……….
classes of facts. […] lexicographers, on the other hand, deal with extensive,
often superficial, descriptions of huge amounts of data” (Piotrowski, 1994: 6)

3
“Although he recognizes the importance of linguistics for lexicography
Wiegand has initiated an approach that lexicography has to be regarded as a ……….
discipline which is influenced among others by linguistics but not to such a
degree that is should be regarded as a subdiscipline of linguistics.” (Gouws and
Prinsloo, 2005: 4)

4
“I simply do not believe that there exists a theory of lexicography, and I very
much doubt that there can be one. Those who have proposed a general theory
have not been found convincing by the community, and for good reasons. A
theory is a system of ideas put forward to explain phenomena that are not ……….
otherwise explainable. A science has a theory, a craft does not. All natural
phenomena need a theory, but how can there be a theory of the production of
artefacts? There are theories of language, there may be theories of lexicology,
but there is no theory of lexicography. Lexicography is above all a craft, the
2
 craft of preparing dictionaries, as well as an art, as Landau (2001) says. It may
be becoming more scientific, but it has not become a science.” (Béjoint, 2010:
381)

5
“Our approach is not the only one; many people regard lexicography not as an
independent discipline but as part of linguistics. Other people see parts of what
we regard as lexicography as terminography or encyclopedology. We do not
agree with this approach. […] In particular we do not see lexicography as part ……….
of lexicology – as is the case with some linguists and lexicographers […]. An
approach that sees lexicographic theory as part of lexicology implies that
lexicography puts the questions whereas lexicology provides the answers. We
do not believe that this is the case in real practical situations” (Bergenholtz and
Gouws, 2012: 38).

6
“No modern lexicographer can afford to ignore what linguistics has to offer.
Linguistic research cannot be ignored, even if it certainly does not have all the ……….
answers” (Béjoint, 1994/2000: 177)

7
“[…] lexicography [is] an independent scientific discipline characterised by a
big interdisciplinary vocation. Lexicography is what is left when an abstraction ……….
is made from the specific content of the data taken from other disciplines and
incorporated into its individual products.” (Tarp, 2010: 458)

8
“Linguistic research will and has to influence the making of language
dictionaries is self-evident. What is, however, more astonishing is that linguists
expect lexicography to incorporate their findings, yet they rarely assume that
lexicography might further certain areas of linguistics itself. They use the ……….
wealth of linguistic information that dictionaries provide; they rely on
lexicographical data. They draw heavily upon these data banks to support or
corroborate their theoretical views and therefore regard dictionary information
as useful or necessary but of only secondary importance to their theoretical
assumptions. They underrate the idea-provoking, insight-provoking value of
these data because the underlying theoretical framework may not be as coherent
or stringent as they think it should or could be.” (Stain 2002)

4. Match the following statements with the field they describe: lexicography (L) or
metalexicography (M), by ticking on the appropriate column.

3
 L M
a. ... deals with topics such as the history and typology of dictionaries,
dictionary IT, dictionary pedagogy, dictionary users and their consultation
needs.
b. … is a discipline concerned with the principles and practice of dictionary
making.
c. … examines and develops theories concerning the compilation,
characteristics, purposes and use of dictionaries.
d. … is also called theoretical lexicography.
e. … deals with collecting lexicographic material and writing and producing
lexicographic reference works.
f. … refers to the literature written about dictionaries, especially in the past
decades.
g. … is also called dictionary-making.
h. … is an activity which consists in observing, collecting, selecting,
analyzing and describing, in a dictionary, a number of lexical items.

5. Fill in the following text with the suitable word from the list:

linguistics (x2), lexicography (x3), metalexicography (x3), linguists, lexicographers

‘I believe that it was the inadequacy of traditional [1] as a theoretical

foundation for [2] that has prompted it into developing its own theoretical
discipline: [3] . Apart from linguistic considerations, [4] takes
account of the extralinguistic context of dictionary-making and dictionary use, which theoretical
linguistics resolutely ignores. Thus, the rise of [5] is likely an indication that
traditional linguistic accounts were generally seen as insufficient and limiting. Wierzbicka herself
makes this very point forcefully: “If modern [6] were to be judged by the
contribution it made to [7] , it would be hard to understand why linguistics is said
to have made dramatic advances in recent decades” (Wierzbicka 1993: 45). On the other hand,
Wierzbicka’s own efforts to offer such a contribution are taken to pieces by Hanks (1993), who
systematically demonstrates how very unrealistic and impractical the [8] ’ view of
[9] may be, if they have not themselves extensively engaged in real dictionary-
writing. In fact, as Zgusta nicely puts it, “the best practitioners among us are those [10]
who have the ability to cope with what is, or theoretically should be, intractable.”’ (adapted
from Lew 2007)