University of Zürich

Methods of Lexicographic Definition in the
Oxford Advanced Learner′s Dictionary

by

Markus Widmer

1. Introduction

2. Aim and Scope

3. Material

3.1 Corpuses

3.1.1 Word Selection
3.1.2 Part of Speech
3.1.3 Word Frequency
3.1.4 Concreteness

3.2 Dictionary

4 Method

4.1 Investigation
4.2 Defining ′Lexicographic Definition′

4.2.1 The Term ′Definition′
4.2.2 Lexicographic Definitions in Dictionary Entries

5 Classification of Lexicographic Definitions

5.1 Synonymous Definitions
5.2 Analytic Definitions
5.3 Synthetic Definitions
5.4 Implicative Definitions
5.5 Denotative Definitions
5.6 Ostensive Definitions
5.7 Regular Definitions

6. Analysis

6.1 Problems of Classification

6.1.1 Distinctiveness
6.1.2 Analytic and Synthetic Definitions
6.1.3. Synonymous Definitions
6.1.4 Remaining Difficulties

6.2 Results

6.2.1 Parts of Speech

6.2.1.1 Nouns
6.2.1.2 Adjectives
6.2.1.3 Verbs
6.2.1.4 Function Words

6.2.2 Concreteness
6.2.3 Word Type Groups

7. Conclusion

References

1. Introduction

In this paper, I will classify and evaluate 80 lexicographic definitions from the Oxford Advanced Learner′s Dictionary (henceforth ALD). There have been several attempts to classify different kinds of lexical definitions, as Weber (1996:19-32) shows. Yet it seems that there is no empirical study on the distribution of different methods of lexicographic definition. There seem to be certain traditional rules and assumptions on which words are to be defined in what way in lexicographers′ manuals such as Landau (1989) or Benson et. al. (1986), for instance: "[s]imilar words should be defined in similar ways, and related words in related ways" (Benson et. al. 1986: 221). However, the manuals do not examine whether real lexicographers follow these rules.

Furthermore, this paper could be a contribution to a typology of lexical paraphrases or definitions.

Eine Untersuchung darüber, welche Lemmata mit welchen Methoden expliziert werden, wäre ein Beitrag zu der von Wiegand 1989:532 geforderten Explikationstypologie. (Weber 1996: 25)

Another starting point for this study was Jorgensen′s (1990) work on "the efficacy of dictionary definitions in marking distinctions in sense" (Jorgensen 1990: 293). This paper discussed whether dictionary users could make sense of definitions by testing their encoding capabilities after reading definitions of nonsense words. It concluded that some of the underlying linguistic theories of dictionaries might not be very helpful or even correct. The idea that there is a linguistic theory inherent in each dictionary, however, is widely acknowledged.

All dictionaries necessarily adopt and transmit some points of view on language, even if the lexicographers are not aware of any. (Béjoint 1994: 173)

In this paper, I will investigate one aspect of the ALD as a theory of the lexicon by studying the interrelatedness of definitions and their headwords.

Günstigstenfalls (...) liegt qualitativ hochstehenden Wörterbüchern eine Beschreibungssemantik zugrunde, die wir rekonstruieren müssen und die, metatheoretisch beschrieben, so etwas wie eine Theorie der Bedeutungsexplikationen in diesen Wörterbüchern darstellen könnte. (Weber 1996: 9)

2. Aim and Scope

When I differentiate between different kinds of words, I will consider three aspects: a grammatical factor, i.e. part of speech, a pragmatic factor, namely word frequency, and concreteness as a cognitive factor. According to these properties I will compile eight groups of ten words each, each group representing a different word type. These word type groups will be the basis for my investigation of their respective definitions, questioning whether the lexicographers have followed Béjoint′s (1994) point of view that

it is reasonable to argue that the techniques used for the explanation of meaning should vary with the type of word to be explained. (Béjoint 1994: 199)

For the purposes of this study, I will use a very narrow definition of the terms ′word meaning′ and of ′lexicographic definition′. Except the pragmatic and cognitive factors my word type groups are based on, I will discuss denotation exclusively. Other aspects of semantics such as connotation, register, regional or social variation, polysemy, homonymy, collocations, idioms, etymology and aspects of syntax and grammar will be as much excluded as is possible.

Furthermore, this study will investigate one dictionary as a representation of one lexicological theory. It will not compare dictionaries, but rather create a basis for such a comparison in another paper.

3. Material

3.1 Corpuses

3.1.1 Word Selection

For my selection of words, I will use the combination of corpuses in the MRC Psycholinguistic Database on the Internet, which is an excellent tool for these purposes. The machine usable dictionary file of the MRC Psycholinguistic Database contains 150′837 words and provides information about 26 different linguistic properties, although it is not the case that information about every property is available for every word. Of this rich selection, I will choose three different properties to be able to specify different types of words and investigate whether their definitions vary according to these types.

3.1.2 Part of Speech

[...]