Keletas tarminių aspektinių žodynų sudarymo problemų

LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI XXXVII (1997) LEKSIKOGRAFIJOS IR LEKSIKOLOGIJOS PROBLEMOS Agris TIMUŠKA A FEW PROBLEMS IN COMPILING DIALECTAL ASPECT DICTIONARIES It is well known that lexicographers particularly need, in their practical work, as comprehensive a set of dictionaries of the standard language and dialects as possible, encompassing explanatory dictionaries as well as thematic or ideographic dictionaries and, of course, aspect dictionaries. In the lexicography of the standard language, as among the various possible dialect dictionaries, aspect dictionaries occupy an important place. Dialect aspect dictionaries present lexicographically the linguistic phenomena characteristic of a particular subdialect, lect, or dialect. From a grammatical perspective, these dictionaries usually cover, for example, individual parts of speech; from a morphological perspective, word-formation methods; from a phonetic perspective, the phonetic form of words; and, in lexicology, dialectal phraseological units, comparisons, the professional vocabulary of certain social groups, and other thematic strata of the dialectal lexicon. Having set specific objectives, the author (or team of authors) of such a dictionary chooses the most suitable dictionary type. Nevertheless, there are several considerations that should be taken into account when compiling, if not all, then at least most dictionaries of this type. When compiling dialectal aspect dictionaries, the choice of their type and lexicographic implementation model is determined mainly by the quantity of data available to and presented by the author (or team of authors). It is undoubtedly difficult to compile, for example, a word-formation or phraseological dictionary if one has access only to a small collection of the lexicon of a particular dialect. Special thematic card files are more valuable for such purposes, i.e. card files of verbs, nouns, compounds, phraseologisms, comparisons, and the like, as well as specialized lexicographic and geolinguistic sources, such as data from dialect atlases. Closely connected with the issue of the volume of material is the question of its completeness when the author has no access to specialized collections of terms. In that case, for lexicographic purposes, data that adequately represent the relevant linguistic phenomenon are undoubtedly more suitable; otherwise, the author’s subjective perspective is especially important in collecting data. At this stage, many different factors must be taken into account—including a linguistic phenomenon not always considered important, such as the material’s intermediate layers (both traditional and occasional), since they can sometimes provide significant information about systematic relations existing: 1) between the linguistic phenomenon being represented and the groups delimiting it; 2) within the language itself, where these linguistic phenomena are interconnected. Thus, dictionaries that are relatively comprehensive must include both various layers of desemanticized phraseologisms— 146 —which are intended to show features characteristic of other lexemes, and special comparative constructions called quasi-comparisons (the author’s term). When compiling new dictionaries, it is no less important to summarize the information presented as optimally as possible. A differential dictionary may also include generalizing cross-references (grammatical, etymological, semantic, areal, etc.), whereas in a comprehensive, non-differential dictionary, the system of cross-references should be highly specific. Only in some cases are more generalizing cross-references perhaps acceptable, if prescribed by the type of the particular section. These principles also underpin the recently compiled Swedish dialect dictionary (OÖSD) and the project for a Danish dialect dictionary (Ejskjær 1993). The lexicographic implementation of a dictionary’s chosen model—that is, the presentation of lexicographic information in the dictionary—can be optimized in various ways: by selecting the most appropriate type of dictionary entry and structural scheme, and by using a range of different cross-references. This thesis can be illustrated by a new work in Latvian dialectal aspect lexicography: M. Putnia and A. Timuška’s “Dictionary of Comparisons in the Sinuole Dialect” (SISV)1, since “any theory of lexicography is questionable if it is not supported by abundant material”2. The dictionary was inspired by works in Lithuanian aspect lexicography—K. Vosylaitė’s “Dictionary of Comparisons in the Lithuanian Language” (LKPŽ) and J. Lipskienė’s “Somatic Expressions in the Lithuanian Language” (LKSP). The main aim, and at the same time the task, of SISV is to reflect the originality, unusual use, and traditional character of the comparative constructions recorded in this dialect of northeastern Vidzeme. The range of comparisons included in the dictionary is quite broad: 1) from specific comparisons characteristic only of this dialect to general ones used throughout the Latvian language; 2) from phraseological comparative constructions to relatively free word combinations. SISV is organized according to a system of entries; headwords—the components of comparisons—are presented in alphabetical order. In some cases, words are grouped into nests: 1) phonetic and morphological variants of words, e.g.: grābeklis; grāblis; grābslis... luōsms, luōsmaks... and so on; 2) masculine and feminine personal designations, e.g.: māiseklis; māisekle... pats; pati... and so forth. In SISV, homonyms are presented as separate headwords, with a numbered index: ikstis1 s ‘thumb’... 1Dictionary of the Sīnole dialect. The dictionary is based on linguistic material from the Sinuole dialect, meticulously collected by the philologist M. Putnia between 1930 and 1980 (a 400-page manuscript, comprising about 2,500 entries); the structural principles, lexicographic arrangement of headwords, and semantic analysis are by A. Timuška. 2 Čia perimta J.Apresjano mintis, taikoma semantikai (Apresjan 1974). 147 ikstis2 s (žio-c.) ‘kidney, iksts’... Comparisons are analyzed lexicologically and lexicographically in a dictionary entry. The entry consists of the following parts: 1) the central component of the comparison, given as the entry headword; 2) grammatical characteristics; 3) an explanation of the headword’s meaning (in dialectal forms); 4) additional information about the meaning and distribution of the word from K. Mühlenbach and J. Endzelin’s “Dictionary of the Latvian Language” (ME) and its supplements (EH), for lexemes that are insufficiently explained or not explained at all in the card index; 5) the comparison (together with its context words); 6) an explanation of the comparison; 7) illustrative material; 8) stylistic, expressive, and genre labels (if necessary). Only one component of the comparison (the headword) is analyzed, explained, and illustrated; it forms the grammatical center of a particular comparison, but is not always considered its semantic core. All other components are accompanied by cross-references to the headword, where information about the use and meaning of the comparison is provided, e.g.: kaza... 3. kā kazas līpa see līpa. There are no cross-references for function words (prepositions, conjunctions); they do not have their own dictionary entries in SISV. The headword is given in the dictionary in an altered form, the so-called morphological and phonemic orthography (elements of literary-language orthography + pitch accents + uo, ę), whereas comparisons and illustrative text in the entry are written in traditional Latvian phonetic transcription. Nominal headwords are given in the singular nominative (pluralia tantum in the plural nominative), verbs in the infinitive, and participles and adjectives in the masculine form; exceptions are indeclinable words, which are presented as recorded in the particular comparison (puskūoka...; septiņjūdžu...). Explanations of meanings. The meanings of comparisons are represented in the dictionary in two ways: 1) the meaning of the comparison is indicated by the headword—the meaning of the comparison component is explained; and 2) the meaning and use of the comparison itself are explained. Only the meanings of dialect words, phonetic and morphological variants of standard-language words, and non-dialectal, non-standard-language words3 are explained when they serve as headwords. The meanings of common headwords shared by the dialect and the standard language are not explained when their semantics in the dialect coincides with that of the corresponding Latvian standard-language word, e.g.: kāudze, kaza, kāzas and others. The meanings of dialect words and other non-standard-language words are explained using the meaning-explanation methods adopted in traditional dialect lexicography: a) by semantically equivalent standard-language words and synonyms; b) by descriptive explanation— 3 The Latvian linguist O. Bušs introduced this term to denote colloquial words, barbarisms, and similar “undesirable” vocabulary. 148 m), c) cross-references and footnotes directing readers to other headwords, d) information about a particular word obtained from other lexicographic sources. The meanings of polysemous headwords are separated from one another by semicolons; however, sometimes not all the meanings of a dialect word with multiple meanings are given, but only those that occur in the comparison (comparisons), together with their figurative meanings, which are associated with the comparison as a whole. Moreover, in many cases it is impossible to determine precisely which meaning or shade of meaning underlies a given comparison, e.g., in the article kladz̃ens... A word that appears in the headword of a dictionary entry in some other grammatical form is usually referred to its basic form (or to an explanation of its meaning, if necessary), e.g.: kaũnams divd from kaũt... In some cases, information from other dictionaries (primarily ME and EH) is also used to explain a headword. Explanations (or translations into Latvian of explanations given in German) and geographical references from ME and EH are provided for words for which the card index contains no explanation or whose explanations are inadequate and fail to properly reveal the comparison’s meaning and usage characteristics, e.g.: klamasts, klāmsteris... Personal names, nicknames, animal names, and place names used in the structure of comparisons are also presented in separate dictionary entries. When explaining these words, the relevant reference (personal name or place name) is provided, and the geographical feature mentioned is described, e.g.: Kėncis personv ‘character in the Kaudzytis brothers’ novel “Matininkų laikai” [The Surveyors’ Times]...’ Piļava vietv ‘lake in Sinuole parish’ and others. Explanations of the meanings of comparisons. The meanings of comparisons are not explained separately in cases where the explanation of the headword provides sufficient information to reveal the meaning and usage characteristics of the comparison, e.g.: kàuka; kàuk̄iōna..., klakšis... Nevertheless, in many cases the meanings of comparisons are explained independently of whether the headword is a common word or a dialect word. The dictionary uses three types of meaning explanation: a) attributive—for example, in the articles kāts, klabata, klàjps; b) situational—for example, in the article liẽts s ‘rain’ ◊ 1. pėriens kā liẽts—said when someone is threatened with a beating or punishment, or trouble is expected...; c) semantic equivalent—for example, in the articles kàudze, kàzas, klàjiens. The context of comparisons. The meaning of a comparison is usually realized in a phrase with words from the corresponding semantic microgroup. Therefore, words that can vary within a particular semantic group are not included among the obligatory components of a comparison. They are written in parentheses as context words indicating the sphere of use of the relevant comparison, e.g.: kaũnams..., klabāns... Quasi-comparisons. One of the characteristics of the Sinuole dialect is the fairly frequent use of quasi-comparisons—comparative constructions whose use in a particular situation and linguistic context is not only unnecessary, but may even create a seman- 149 … contrast, if the meaning of the comparison as a whole does not essentially differ from the meaning of the headword (the phraseological unit in its entry). In such cases, the structure of the dictionary entry is nevertheless formally retained, particularly without distinguishing the optional use of the comparison particle ką, e.g.: lėčėjs s ◊ ką puškuoka lėčėjs niev. – saka par cilvėku, kas neveic vai nespēj veikt to, ko uzņemies, gribėjis, ari par cilvėku, kurš nav gluži tas, kas viņš vēlėtos būt... However, quasi-comparisons are usually regarded as a special type of comparison in which the properties underpinning the comparison or the gradation of the intensity of an action are expressed, e.g.: lillāts adj ‘violets’ □ ką lillāts... References. The following labels are most commonly used in the dictionary: 1) grammatical—parts-of-speech labels are placed after the headword (s – noun, adj – adjective, adv – adverb, pron – pronoun, v – verb...), form labels (demin. – diminutive, dsk – plural, nelok – indeclinable...); 2) stylistic and expressive labels (poėt. – poetically, iron. – ironically, niev. – pejoratively, vienk. – colloquial, vulg. – vulgarism, lamuv. – swearword...); moreover, the expressiveness recorded in the speech of dialect speakers may differ substantially from that of corresponding comparisons in standard language; 3) the label folkl. is used to indicate all folklore genres—proverbs, sayings, song and poem fragments, and the like—if they contain comparisons, e.g.: ābėle s ‘ābėle’ ◊ folkl.: k’ā ābėle nūoziėdėju tāutu golđa galiņā. krāss s (i-c.) ‘krāsns’ ◊ folkl.: skāista siėviete esuot k’ā korsta kr’ās ziemas lāikā, piė kuras kotris lop· pr’āt gribūot pakavėtiės. Graphic presentation. Almost everything in this area depends on the current dictionary-layout technology; however, to make the headwords and illustrative text in dictionary entries easier to grasp visually, the dictionary indicates only the merger of Latvian term lexicography’s customary pitch accents (sustained and falling), without the numeral 2 after a word marked with a grave accent (\). M. Putninia, A. Timuška. A Dictionary of Comparisons in the Sinuole Dialect (Manuscript fragment) stalk ◊ 1. diminutivea broom (|| brush) handle (also stalk) – said of a very thin, gaunt, emaciated person: [old man] just like a broom handle. / that [person] walks like a stick, like a broom handle. / the boy is just like a broom handle. / that [person] is now just like a brush handle – small, thin, thin. / thin as a brush handle. 2. as thick as an axe handle – said of something rather bulky, thick: The dry firs are dark, their branches are as thick as axe handles. 3. (stooped, bending, etc.) bent like a pipe – said of a very stooped, hunched person: Why are you bending over like a pipe? 150 kàudze s ◊ 1. (grab, take, etc.) quickly, deftly (grab, take; also accomplish something): Can you really grab all that [larger job] at once, as quickly as haymaking? 2. as a dog by a pile of straw see dog. kàuka; kàukùoņa s ‘one who howls; a tearful person; EH I 593: kaùka ‘a dissatisfied person who often cries and complains’ in Vecpiebalga; ME II 174: kaukùoņa ‘a bawler, a blubberer’ in Dzērbene’ like a howler || whiner: Why are you howling like a howler? You can’t be listened to anymore – that’s what she says to her daughter and to the children. Children have that habit too – they howl and howl. / Why are you howling like a whiner? kàuls s 1. (hard) as hard as (a) bone – said of something very hard, firm, also completely dry: The peas have dried hard as bones. / Sheep fat is hard as a bone. / How else can you scrub [wash out by rubbing] dirty clothes! My hands will break before you cut it off like a bone. 2. as if without bones ‘very supple, flexible’: They call someone supple if they are as if without bones, able to bend in all sorts of ways. 3. ◊ like a bone chamber || compartment see chamber; compartment. 4. ◊ like a dog’s bone; like a dog with a bone see dog. kaùnàms divd from kaùt (scream, yell, etc.) as a screaming (animal) ‘very loudly, in a frightened, shrill voice (scream, yell)’: He screams like a screaming animal. / He screams like a screaming animal. kàupmanis s ‘merchant’ ◊ like a flea trader ironic: Our father used to call mother a flea trader because mother killed fleas: ‘Like a flea trader, get to work! Not a single flea has been caught.’ kaùslis s as stubborn as a ram disapproving: Please, why do you keep hitting that horse like a brute? / Why do you always hit one like a ram, like a battering ram? / He goes around fighting like a ram, beating everyone up and bashing them. kaza s 1. dative (face, mouth, etc.) like a goat – said of a stained, dirty face: Why have you wiped your mouth so carelessly? Now [your face] is streaked like a goat’s. 2. ◊ (greedy) k’â kaza uz mizelèm ‘very, excessively (greedy)’: 3ârâji tik k’âri uz brànda-viņa k’â koza uz mizelèm. 3. k’â kazas lìpa see lìpa. 4. k’â kazu vàlgs see vàlgs. kàzas s dsk ◊ 1. (live) k’â pa kàzàm ‘very well, prosperously (live)’: 3ìvuo k’â pa k’âzàm. k’âzàs tok ir labi: pienas gotavu, ùn tik çēd ùn 3er. / tie 3ìvuo k’â pa k’âzàm: vis labi ièt, visa diezgon. 2. k’â uz kàzàm ‘a great deal; in great abundance’: piēcàpç màizes k’â uz k’âzàm. 3. loc. (eat, eat one’s fill, etc.) k’â kàlpa kàzàs ‘well, heartily (eat, eat one’s fill)’: nu gòn pa-âsc k’â kòlpa k’âzàs. kazmiērs s ‘wool, half-wool or cotton fabric; cashmere’ (thick) k’â kazmiērs: viņa [sagsà] bija t’âda biēza k’â kazmiērs. kazmiera drèbes t’âdas biēzas, zaļa kr’àsà bija. / tas [audums] ir biēs k’â kazmiērs – žīdi sacija. kažìoks s ◊ loc. k’â uts kažùokà see uts. 151 klabāns noun ‘worn-out, rattling object, tool; ME II 206: klabas ‘something that rattles (e.g., said of old threshing machines, mills)’ in Lubēja’ (rattles, clatters, etc.) like a klabāns: the loom rattles like a klabāns. / The window is like a klabāns; it cannot be opened. klabata noun (clatters, rattles, etc.) like a klabata – said of a very talkative, loquacious person: [a chatterbox] talks like a klobata. klobata – a contemptuous term meaning someone who talks incessantly, chattering over others. kladzeņs noun ‘one who clucks; a talkative person; ME II 208: kladzeņe ‘brooding hen; clucking hen’ in Smiltene, ‘talkative woman; chatterbox’ (clucks) like a kladzeņs derogatory:where are you going, clucking away and spreading everything around the parish, like a kladzeņs? klāiga noun ‘shouting; a shouter, bawler’ (shouts, yells, etc.) like a klāiga derogatory:I’ll shout at you once like a klāiga! klāips noun ◊ like a loaf of bread – said of something fairly large and rounded: the loaches are like loaves of bread. klaists; kleists noun ‘wanderer, vagabond’ like a klaists // kleists derogatory:like a drifter, like a vagabond; neither a proper place to live nor proper work. / That fellow is such a drifter, a real kleists! He wanders around like a kleists. / He really is like a kleists, just roaming around; he barely ever gets down to work. klājiens noun like (one) klājiens ‘in great quantity; continuously, in a spread-out layer’: [the bedding sack] it spilled out wonderfully, wherever it was scattered, rolled around as it fell, and straw accumulated by the bed in a layer like a klājiens. / Why do you need to put so much straw in front of the animals? Now it is underfoot like a klājiens. / Geese, ducks, and chickens leave the grain field as if it had been rolled flat. Now it is on the ground like a klājiens. / The sheep trample the hay, pull it down onto the ground and roll around [themselves]; it lies there like a klājiens. / The animals fell down after the frost, lying in one klājiens beneath the tree. / [The mown] rye must be gathered. Or will you really leave it lying on the ground like a klājiens? klakšāns noun ‘EH I 608: ‘primitive sledge’ in Vecpiebalga’ (clicks, rattles, etc.) like a klakšāns – said of a very talkative, loquacious person: why are you chattering like a klakšāns? / He chatters like a klakšāns, talking nonsense. klakšis noun ‘bang, clatter; a talkative person’ like a klakšis derogatory:he goes everywhere clattering like a klakšis – such a chatterbox. klamasts; klāmsteris noun ‘meaning of the abusive term: “a lazy, careless person”; EH I 609: klamasteris ‘idler, loafer’, klamesteris ‘wanderer’ in Saikava’ like a klamasts // klāmsteris: you really are like a klomasc; why don’t you work properly? / You’re already like a klōmsters, doing no decent work, just making a mess. LITERATŪRA A p r e s j a n Ju. 1974: Lekסičeskaja semantika (sinonimičeskije sredstva jazyka), Moskva: Nauka. EH I-II – E n d z e l ī n s J., H a u z e n b e r g a E. Papildinājumi un labojumi K.Mīlenbacha Latviešu valodas vārdnīcai 1–2, Rīgā: Kultūras fonda izdevums, 1934 – 1946. E j s k j æ r I. 1993: Danish Dialect Research, København. 152 LKSP – Lipskienė J. Lietuvių kalbos somatiniai posakiai (su galvos dalių pavadinimais), Vilnius: Mokslas, 1979. ME I–IV – Mūlenbachs K. Latviešu valodas vārdnīca. Rediģējis, papildinājis, turpinājis J. Endzelīns 1–4, Rīgā: Kultūras fonda izdevums, 1923 – 1932. OÖSD – Ordbok över Sveriges dialekter 1 (1), Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1991. SISV – Putniņa M., Timuška A. Sinoles izlokšņu salīdzinājumu vārdnīca (400 psl. rankrastis, 1991 m. įteiktas Rygos "Zinātnes" leidyklai). LKPŽ – Lietuvių kalbos palyginimų žodynas. Sudarė K. B. Vosylytė, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1985. EINIGE PROBLEME DER ERSTELLUNG VON DIALEKTALEN ASPEKTWÖRTERBÜCHERN Zusammenfassung Im theoretischen Teil des Beitrages werden einige allgemeine Probleme der Erstellung von solchen Mundartwörterbüchern umrissen, die einen bestimmten sprachlichen Aspekt resp. eine sprachliche Erscheinung auf lexikographische Weise reflektieren. Die Hauptaufmerksamkeit gilt dabei folgenden Problemkreisen: 1) der Wahl des lexikographischen Realisierungsmodells für das künftige Wörterbuch, in hohem Maße durch den Materialumfang bedingt; 2) dem Sättigungsgrad des zu reflektierenden Materials, d.h., der Vorkommensfrequenz von sprachlichen Erscheinungen; 3) der Verallgemeinerungsstufe der im Wörterbuch zu bietenden Information. Die erwähnten Probleme lassen sich zumeist durch die Wahl sowohl des optimalen Artikeltyps als auch des nach Erachten des Autors / Autorenkollektivs meistgeeigneten Aufbauschemas für jedes konkrete Wörterbuchartikel lösen; außerdem kann ein überlegtes System verschiedener Angaben und Verweise die Aufgabe des Lexikographen wesentlich erleichtern. Dies wird im theoretisch-praktischen Teil des Beitrages anhand eines exemplarischen Beispieles der lettischen dialektalen Aspektlexikographie – des unlängst erstellten “Wörterbuchs der Vergleiche aus der Mundart Sinole” von M.Putnina / A.Timuška – veranschaulicht. Als Stichprobe werden im Anhang einige Musterartikel aus dem “Wörterbuch der Vergleiche aus der Mundart Sinole” geboten. 153