Fourth WU Symposium On International Business .

4m ago
305.48 KB
15 Pages

Fourth WU Symposium on International Business CommunicationDictionaries and BeyondVienna, 6-8 April 2011ABSTRACTS1

Andrea Abel (EURAC research)Zur Kombination verschiedener Ansätze beim Design lexikographischerRessourcenCombining different approaches for the design of [email protected] contribution concerns the planning and design of lexicographic resources. Two importanttheories will be discussed, both sharing the postulate that dictionaries are utility products made inorder to satisfy certain human needs. The first theory was developed by the German scholar H.E.Wiegand. The focus lies on a phenomenological study of dictionaries and the concept of “usesituation” (i.e. during the dictionary consultation process). The second theory is the modern theoryof lexicographic functions, developed at the Center of Lexicography at the Aarhus School ofBusiness (Denmark). It is strictly user-centered and the “user situation” (i.e. related tocommunication needs) is crucial. Based on these theories we support the idea of combining the twoapproaches and of also taking into account further aspects, which have not been consideredsufficiently in the past (e.g. medium – electronic resources). These considerations may be relevantfor both general and specialized lexicography.Andrea Abel received her PhD at the University of Innsbruck (pedagogical lexicography) in 1993.Since 2005, she has been the coordinator of the Institute for Specialised Communication andMultilingualism at the European Academy Bolzano/Bozen; She‟s a lecturer at the Free University ofBolzano (Faculty of Computer Sciences and Faculty of Education) and at the University of Trento(Faculty of Humanities), and has taught as a freelance second language teacher and trainer inseveral seminars. A member of the EURALEX board since 2010, her research fields includelexicography (pedagogical lexicography, electronic dictionaries), second language acquisition andlanguage assessment (language competences, sociolinguistic and socio-psychological aspects,languages and migration), and corpus linguistics (collocations, analysis of language variants,learner corpora). Website: Beer and Martin Herles (WU Vienna)Creation of a dictionary from the editors' point of [email protected]; [email protected] on a current project, this presentation will illustrate the various stages in developing abilingual dictionary of finance and accounting. We will show how tools and techniques developed incorpus linguistics can assist terminologists and lexicographers in their work – both in the earlystages of a project, when the key issues are to identify term candidates, as well as in the corestages, when the main tasks are to compile definitions and select contextual examples. We will alsodiscuss the genesis of the current project and the initial approach taken.2

One may be tempted to pose the following question: With a plethora of (especially) Internet-baseddictionaries around, does the market really need yet another dictionary for specific purposes? Fromthe presenters' point of view, the answer is clearly in the affirmative, and this talk will show whywe feel that the market still offers enough room for such a publication.Follow us on our journey through the evolution from a few scribbled sheets of paper to acomprehensive opus which will ultimately be published in 2011. Along the way, find out how wetook an existing general business dictionary as our starting point, dissected it, threw out the bad orobsolete bits, updated the good parts, and – using a broad range of sources – extended andenhanced the material. Learn about the challenges and pitfalls we experienced in the dictionarymaking process as well as the decisions we had to deal with on a daily basis. Experience with usthe sometimes mind-numbing and tedious, but in the end rewarding process of poring overthousands of websites, books, and other sources, and see how everything finally started to fall intoplace.Axel Beer was born in Vienna in 1969. He graduated from the Vienna University of Economics andBusiness (WU Vienna), where he currently works as an associate professor of English BusinessCommunication. His main research areas include terminology, corporate communication, corporatelanguage, and U.S. studies.Martin Herles has been assistant professor at the Vienna University of Economics and Business (WUVienna), since 1991. He holds degrees in business from the WU Wien and in English & AmericanStudies from the University of Vienna. He is an active teacher and his main research interestsinclude business English terminology, discourse analysis, academic writing and British culturalstudies.Renate Belentschikow (Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg)Fachwörter in der zweisprachigen Lexikografie – zur Mikrostrukturfachsprachlicher und gemeinsprachlicher Wörterbücher (am Beispiel desSprachenpaars Russisch-Deutsch)Technical terms in bilingual lexicography – problems of microstructure intechnical and common dictionaries (by examples of eburg.deBased on a vertical arrangement of technical vocabulary, we distinguish between nomenclaturedesignations, technical terms and different groups of common words being used in special ways intechnical fields of knowledge. This paper emphasises the technical terms and nomenclaturedesignations.The method by which technical vocabulary is represented in dictionaries depends on its size, theaddressee and the tasks of the dictionary. Dictionaries differ in their number of headwords andprinciples for vocabulary selection, in their microstructure, macrostructure and system ofreferences.3

Technical bilingual dictionaries have to give equivalents in the target language, but they also reflectthe term in the concept system and codify terminological standards of the special field.The differences between several types of common dictionaries in terms of their representation oftechnical vocabulary will be shown using one compact dictionary (Langenscheidt HandwörterbuchRussisch, 2009) and two full-size dictionaries (Russisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch, ed. by R.Belentschikow, vol. 1-7: A-O, Wiebaden, 250,000 headwords; Neues deutsch-russischesGrosswörterbuch in drei Bänden, ed. by D.O. Dobrovol'skij, Moskau, 500,000 "lexical units").Special problems are emphasized: definition, labels, polysemy of a word in technical and commonlanguage, ambiguity in coding of the linguistic form (e.g. word accent, characteristics ofpronunciation, grammatical number form). Many technical dictionaries don't give sufficientinformation about the linguistic forms of the terms, although speakers and lexicographers need thisinformation for communicating and involving terms in common dictionaries (at least this is aconcern for Russian as target language).In my opinion lexicography has to consider the increasing influence of technical languages on thecommon communication. New electronic dictionaries involve "common" and technical words. That'swhy specialists of "technical" and "common" lexicography should find points of contact andcooperate.Renate Belentschikow completed her post-doctorate in 1990 at Humboldt University in Berlin andbecame an adjunct professor at the University of Trier before becoming a full professor for Slaviclinguistics at the Otto-von-Guericke University in Magdeburg. She has led the long-term project,“Russian-German Dictionary,” at the Academy of Sciences and Literature in Mainz, of which shebecame a corresponding member in 2002.Henning Bergenholtz (Aarhus School of Business)Concepts for monofunctional accounting [email protected] scholars – and here there is no significant difference between a lexicographer for specialisedpurposes or a terminographer – would not agree with the thesis for this paper:A dictionary is a tool. A good tool is a tool conceived for a certain function and for acertain user group for certain needs.Having this as the main thesis, it is not important to discuss if it is better, e.g., to have analphabetical or a systematical macrostructure of a dictionary. The real question is: How can youprepare a tool for a certain user group with a certain type of information need in such a way thatthe user can quickly access the data which provides the user the needed help. Such a tool can atbest - like for all kinds of tools - be given by a monofunctional tool. That is, in the case oflexicography, a monofunctional dictionary. Such a dictionary differs from most general languageand specialized language dictionaries thus far. They are normally constructed as polyfunctionaltools trying to assist with different kind of cognitive and communicative problems.Based on one database I will discuss the concept for this database and for 14 different DanishEnglish accounting dictionaries.4

Henning Bergenholtz was born in 1944 in Copenhagen, received his dr.phil. (Universität Essen,Germany) in 1975, his dr.phil.habil. (Universität Essen, Germany) in 1978, and a doctor honoriscausa (la Universidad de Valladolid) in 2009.Since 1992 professor for bilingual specialized lexicography at the School of Business, AarhusUniversity and since 1996 director of the Centre for Lexicography at the School of Business, AarhusUniversity. Since 1997 corresponding member of the Norwegian Academy of Science; Since 1999member of the international board for the Institute of German Language in Mannheim, Germany.Publications and editions on grammar, language policy and lexicography. Chief editor or co-editorof several dictionaries, e.g. Malagasy-German Dictionary (1991), Danish-English Gene TechnologyDictionary (1992), Nordic Dictionary of Lexicography (1997), Ingeniería Genética. Dicciononarioenciclopédico (1998), the Danish Dictionary (1999), The Danish Internet Dictionary (2002),Dictionary of Accounting, Danish-English (2004), Knowledge about Fixed Expressions (2009). Coeditor of the international journals Hermes (1988-2007) and LexicoNordica (1984-2009).Gerhard Budin (University of Vienna, Austrian Academy of Sciences)The multilingual glossary on risk management (MGRM) – between andbeyond dictionaries, glossaries, terminology databases, and vocabularies– an explorative case [email protected] the digital age, traditional definitional and typological distinctions between the concepts of“dictionary”, “glossary”, “terminology database”, and “vocabulary” have become so blurred that bynow it is almost futile to use these terms and expect consensus in their use in the researchcommunities that are interested in lexicography. The case study presented in this paper deals witha project we have been carrying out for several years in the field of risk management and itsvocabulary in different languages. Results of the project include a Multilingual Glossary on RiskManagement (MGRM) that at the same time has also been modeled and encoded as a terminologydatabase that is publicly accessible on the web. Multi-functional data modeling is the key to theapproach we developed for multilingual content to be explored and (re-)used, both for researchpurposes from different perspectives (computational linguistics, terminology studies, translationstudies, lexicography, etc.) and for practical use of such lexical resources by different user groupssuch as domain experts (risk research in sociology, ecology, biology, geology, urban planning,medicine, economics, etc.) as well as language professionals (translators, journalists, technicalwriters, etc.) and other user groups. The development of a methodology of terminological datamodeling has been supported and fuelled by experiments in cognitive ergonomy, exploration ofuser needs and expectations, as well as modeling approaches in computational corpus linguistics,cognitive lexicography, and terminology studies, that have also resulted in several internationalISO standards. What is currently emerging is a dynamic and integrative environment allowing allusers to navigate between text corpora and lexical corpora that can be accessed in multiple waysand according to specific use scenarios.5

František Čermák (Charles University Prague)Dictionary compilation: Problems and principles, questions and answersNotes on some basic questions of dictionary [email protected] dictionary-making process will be followed in its major steps starting from basic decisionsabout the type of the dictionary one has in mind, its resources and other features. Presupposingthat a corpus-based dictionary project is chosen, aspects of the data and their treatment are thenexamined followed by major steps of the compilation proper, which should be based on function,primarily. In summary, prominence is given here, next to the traditional paradigmatics, tosyntagmatics and function.František Čermák studied the Czech, English and Dutch languages at the Charles University in Prague.Post-graduate orientation towards teaching Czech as second language. PhD in philosophy, linguisticsand phonetics in 1976, Doctor of Sciences degree (DrSc) in Czech, degree of Dozent in generallinguistics in 1991 and Professor's degree in Czech language in 1994. From 1991 to 1993 head of theLexicography Department at the Czech Academy of Sciences. Since 1994 head of the interdisciplinaryInstitute of the Czech National Corpus, Faculty of Philosophy, Charles University, oriented towards thedevelopment of the Czech National Corpus, the largest universal databank of the Czech language. Hostlecturer at a large number of foreign universities. Broad interest in different languages, includingDutch and Scandinavian languages, Finnish and Slavonic languages. Research interests includelexicology and lexicography, phraseology and idiomatics, semantics, word formation, morphology,typology, theory of language, linguistic methodology and corpus linguistics.Dmitrij Dobrovol‟skij and Artem Šarandin(Russian Academy of Sciences / Austrian Academy of Sciences)Ec