Next Article in Journal
Creating a Community Rather Than a Course—Possibilities and Dilemmas in an MOOC
Next Article in Special Issue
A Latin Functionalist Dictionary as a Self-Learning Language Device: Previous Experiences to Digitalization
Previous Article in Journal
A University-Assisted, Place-Based Model for Enhancing Students’ Peer, Family, and Community Ecologies
Previous Article in Special Issue
Putting Order into Our Universe: The Concept of Blended Learning—A Methodology within the Concept-based Terminology Framework
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Education Sciences
Volume 6
Issue 2
10.3390/educsci6020017
education-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

DICONALE: A Novel German-Spanish Onomasiological Lexicographical Model Involving Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Information

by
Paloma Sánchez Hernández
Department of German Philology, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria s/n, Madrid 28040, Spain
Educ. Sci. 2016, 6(2), 17; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6020017
Submission received: 16 March 2016 / Revised: 29 May 2016 / Accepted: 1 June 2016 / Published: 15 June 2016
(This article belongs to the Special Issue e-Vocabularies and e-Learning)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This contribution, based on the DICONALE ON LINE (FFI2012-32658) and COMBIDIGILEX (FFI2015-64476-P) research projects, aims to create an onomasiological bilingual dictionary with online access for German and Spanish verbal lexemes. The objective of this work is to present the most relevant contributions of the dictionary based on two lexemes from the COGNITION conceptual field, the LERNEN/APRENDER subfield. The DICONALE dictionary aims to fill the gap left by the current German–Spanish bilingual lexicography. The novelty is not only the electronic format, but also the inclusion of paradigmatic and syntagmatic information into one dictionary, and the contrastive aspects, subjects that until now have not been found in any onomasiological dictionaries in this area. In addition to the description of the paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships, it also presents certain characteristics related to the contrastive analysis of the two lexemes. On the one hand, it aims to offer a panoramic view of the most relevant features of the dictionary while, on the other hand, attempting to demonstrate the relevance of said criteria in the contrasting German-Spanish lexicography.

1. Introduction

The research projects upon which this article has been based have the objective (DICONALE ON LINE (FFI2012-32658) and COMBIDIGILEX (FFI2015-64476-P)) of creating a bilingual, onomasiological dictionary with online access for the verbal lexemes of German and Spanish [1]. The research projects have been developed by eight members. Each member works within a semantic field. The studied fields, as of the present time, are (1) SINNESEMPFINDUNG/WAHRNEHMUNGSVERBEN; (perception verbs); (2) MEDIALE ELEKTRONISCHE KOMMUNIKATION (media communication); (3) BESITZWECHSEL (RAUBEN/STEHLEN) (property change); (4) MITMENSCHLICHE WILLENSBEZIEHUNG AUTORITÄTSBEKUNDUNG/AUTORITÄTSEMPFANG (authority relations); (5) KONSUMATION NAHRUNGSAUFNAHME, NAHRUNGSZUFÜHRUNG (food); (6) KOGNITION subfield DAS LERNEN (cognition, subfield das Lernen); (7) WIDERSPRUCH (contradiction). The methodology to get the final microstructure was as follows: (1) We studied the current status of the matter concerning conceptual dictionaries in Spanish and German; (2) Each member selected a conceptual field randomly; (3) Each member used the same descriptive model for the analysis. We had to agree on the descriptive model and on the corpora that we used, because we work from the examples of the corpora. This means that we selected one hundred examples (randomly) from each subfield, and then we analyzed the meaning, the paradigmatic and syntagmatic characteristics, the contrastive aspects, the frequency of use, etc. Each member worked on ten entries in each semantic field. The dictionary is intended for users with an advanced knowledge of the foreign language, for bilingual production purposes. The dictionary users are, therefore, Spaniards studying German, as well as Germans studying Spanish. The modality of a German-Spanish dictionary for Germans and a Spanish-German dictionary for Spaniards is not specifically included in the user type. Germans or Spaniards with production needs in their native language would consult other types of paradigmatic or syntagmatic onomasiological dictionaries. This dictionary is basically a pedagogical dictionary for production in a bilingual context for German as a foreign language (DaF) and for Spanish as a foreign language (ELE). Therefore, it is based on production in the foreign language—not on reception of the foreign language. It intends to be challenging, unlike the traditional semasiological-alphabetical concept, and to respond to new challenges in bilingual lexicography in a German-Spanish context, presenting a bilateral bilingual model that is modular and integrative. This work presents two aspects: some considerations regarding the paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships of the dictionary and some characteristics regarding the contrastive structure, both of which can be considered the novelties of the DICONALE dictionary For this, two lexemes from the COGNITION conceptual field, the LERNEN/APRENDER subfield, were used. The examples are supported by corpora in both German and Spanish. For the German language, the DEREKO corpus was used via “COSMAS II” [2], and for Spanish, the corpus “CREA” [3] was used.

2. Theoretical Foundations

The onomasiological perspective implies conceptual units such as tertium comparationis for both languages, which may serve as a basis for contrastive analysis. Thus, the conceptual-onomasiological perspective is justified by the results of more recent studies in the field of cognitive linguistics (Blank, Koch [4] (Prologue)) as well as by the needs of the German as a foreign language class and the translation practice. The creation of a non-semasiological dictionary offers a new perspective, which is hardly followed by the bilingual lexicography community, and presents great novelty in German-Spanish bilingual lexicography. The dictionary aims to offer lexicological information in order to facilitate context, interlingual use, and interlingual nature of semantically related words. Onomasiological access is completed with a semasiological search, in which, in addition to descriptions of meanings, the syntagmatic characteristics of the lexemes are presented. Unlike semasiological dictionaries, directed towards language reception, onomasiological dictionaries tend to be directed towards production. The dictionary of DICONALE is based on concepts, and the user should search for the desired units based on these concepts. Since this dictionary is directed to production, the special syntagmatic characteristics may be looked for from a semasiological perspective. There are three phases: 1. Search; 2. Selection; and 3. Application or usage. The theoretical foundations of the onomasiological perspective may lie in the lexicographical works, for the German language [5,6,7,8] and for the Spanish language [9,10,11]. Classic onomasiological dictionaries of the German language [12,13,14], as well as the ideological dictionary of Casares [15] in Spanish, suffer from a lack of transparency in terms of structuring criteria, and they lack information regarding certain meaning aspects. It does not, therefore, involve criticizing the classic onomasiological dictionaries. The considerable value of such works is considered in all. Even the project team has relied on them for conducting their initial research studies. The idea is to justify the existence of a bilingual onomasiological dictionary, which may offer the user both paradigmatic and syntagmatic information, which, until now, had not existed in the bilingual German–Spanish lexicography. These disadvantages have hindered and decreased the value of user consultations with these works [16]. Furthermore, in both languages, paradigmatic dictionaries exist that offer information on external semantic relationships. These dictionaries lack considerable information to ensure the appropriate use of the lexical units, such as the differences in use between two partial synonyms. Pedagogical dictionaries are not the most suitable for use as text-producing instruments [16,17,18,19,20,21]. Frequently, these dictionaries lack information on construction alternation or typical combinations [22] (p. 114).
Generally speaking, an attempt is being made to fill the voids left by these onomasiological dictionaries through partial studies of the lexicon based on the premises of structuralist semantics [23,24,25], which have been the subject of proposals to link semasiological and onomasiological perspectives. During the 1980s and 1990s, diverse studies were conducted on specific semantic fields and were found to be linked to paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships [26,27].
Over recent decades, special syntagmatic dictionaries have been created due to a greater interest in lexicological aspects. Of special note are the Spanish dictionaries of Cuervo (1953/1998) [28] and Seco/De Andrés/Ramos (1999) [29], and the German ones of Helbig/Schenkel (1969) [30], Engel/Schumacher (1978) [31], Valbu (2004) [32], among others [33]. These proposed models indicate both syntactic aspects as well as information on semantic valence. The application of the valence theory in foreign languages and lexicography has had considerable repercussions, particularly in the area of the teaching of German as a foreign language (DaF). In addition, some onomasiological dictionaries offer systematic descriptions of the lexicon and detailed information on the syntagmatic relations, especially in regards to valence [34,35,36]. In the dictionary by Harras et al., the onomasiological perspective and the semasiological process are combined to offer the necessary information regarding content and form. Recently, lexicographical studies have been conducted in the Spanish language, linking syntagmatic and paradigmatic information (ADESSE) [37] DiCE [38] and Diccionario Coruña [39].
The creation of a bilingual onomasiological dictionary for German and Spanish is a novelty in Spanish–German bilingual lexicography [40,41]. Numerous lexicological studies have been carried out for specific lexical-semantics fields [42,43,44,45,46,47,48], but the novelty lies in the creation of a dictionary in which paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations are of great relevance, so much so that they may be used as a dictionary of collocations. This would assist the user, not only in finding an appropriate lexeme for their expression needs, but also in providing them with syntagmatic information, which is useful for linguistic production. Access to this modular and multilateral perspective has been facilitated by the online digital format. The construction of the digital version of the dictionary is being carried out at the time of writing this paper.
This work presents two of the special characteristics of the German-Spanish DICONALE dictionary: paradigmatic and syntagmatic information and the most relevant contrastive aspects of the COGNITION field. In order to provide an example of the COGNITION field, the pauken1/empollar1 lexemes were used from the LERNEN/APRENDER subfield. They will be subjected to the relevant analyses [49]. Based on this example, the (new and) most relevant characteristics of the dictionary will be presented.

3. Defining the LERNEN/APRENDER Subfield

Each conceptual field of DICONALE consists of distinct subfields which may be defined through reference systems directed towards diverse scenarios. The lexical elements of each subfield can be differentiated from one another based on their distinctive semantic features [50,51]. An example of this is presented with the subfield: LERNEN/APRENDER (cf.: Table 1). The German and Spanish verbal lexemes belonging to this are as follows[12,13,15,52]:
Each subfield element shall be specified through a conceptual reference system that is common to the German and Spanish expressions (Table 1). The conceptual reference framework of the LERNEN/APRENDER subfield is ERWERB (ADQUISICIÓN) (ACQUISITION), MENTAL (MENTAL) (MENTAL) KENNTNISSE (CONOCIMIENTOS) (KNOWLEDGE). This reference framework serves as tertium comparationis for the comparison between the two languages. In this study, the two lexemes are analyzed via examples belonging to this subfield: pauken1/empollar1 (cf. Figure 1 and Figure 2). These variants form a semantic subclass within the LERNEN subfield, that is, a second degree subfield. ANEIGNUNG (APROPIACIÓN) (APPROPIATION), UNI-HOCHSCHULE (UNIVERSITY) and INTENSITÄT (INTENSIDAD) (INTENSITY) are on the same level because they are conceptual units. The lexemes pauken1/empollar1 are referred to the conceptual unit INTENSITÄT/INTENSIDAD.
The whole structure of the dictionary is explained in the Appendix, Table 1, and Figure 1 and Figure 2. These levels, both to a conceptual subclassification of other degrees and to the formulation of the different lexico-semantic subparadigms, will form the conceptual macrostructure of the dictionary (see in the final Appendix the descriptive model of DICONALE with the different levels and modules [1]). The combination potential of the lexemes in each of these lexical-semantic subfields shall be determined via its content and argument structure. In Table 2 and Table 3, some elements of the LERNEN + ANEIGNUNG + INTENSITÄT (APRENDER + APROPIACIÓN + INTENSIDAD) (LEARN + APPROPIATION + INTENSITY) subfields are represented in terms of their semantic structure, with the features ERWERB, MENTAL, and KENNTNISSE (ADQUISICIÓN, MENTAL Y CONOCIMIENTOS). Each lexeme is characterized by the following features: [±Aneignung] [±apropiación] [±appropriation]: the general acquisition of knowledge. This feature distinguishes the variants lernen1/aprender1 from the variants gehen1/andar1 from the semantic field BEWEGUNGSVERB. [±Gedachtnis] [±memoria] [±memory]: for cases in which, in this process, something should be memorized. This feature distinguishes the variants lernen2/aprender2 from the variants lernen 1/aprender1, because memory is not needed in lernen 1/aprender1. [±Intensität] [± intensidad] [± intensity]: This feature distinguishes the variants pauken1/empollar1 from the variants lernen 1/aprender1, because pauken1/empollar1 mean to learn very much, for example, for an exam.

4. Information Regarding the Paradigmatic Relationships within the Framework of the DICONALE Model

Paradigmatic information is that information related to synonyms, antonyms, hyponyms, and generic names [54] (p. 510). Paradigmatic relations may appear, either within the definition or outside of it, within the lexicographic article [55,56]. The representation of paradigmatic relations within the DICONALE model permits both forms. According to Hausmann [57] (p. 2794), “zweisprachige Wörterbücher sind immer auch Synonymwörterbücher und werden oft ausdrücklich in dieser Funktion benutzt” (bilingual dictionaries are also always dictionaries of synonyms and they will be used expressly for this function). According to Hausmann [57] (p. 2794), there are two types of paradigmatic information: automatic paradigmatic information, when the paradigmatic information is used within the definition, and intentional paradigmatic information, when the paradigmatic information appears outside of the definition. In the DICONALE model, however, the intentional paradigmatic information is of greater interest. According to Hausmann [57] (p. 2794), for a long time, this information has been neglected in lexicographic works. This is the case with not only paradigmatic information existing in the definition, but also with other indications of lexical elements presenting special semantic relations with the headword and that are usually mentioned in a lexicographic entry through a system of referrals or, in digital dictionaries, through a system of links. The inconvenience of this system lies in the fact that it takes up a great deal of space in the dictionary. This issue may be easily resolved in the digital versions [58]. Therefore, the first question to be raised is: what is the sense in offering the user an offer of similar or linked elements (from a lexical point of view)? The paradigmatic information is quite important precisely in order to strengthen the processes of vocabulary expansion and text production.
The paradigmatic information in DICONALE exists not only at the level of each subfield, but also at higher levels, as seen in Table 1. Each field consists of different subfields that arise from the opposition of distinctive semantic features. Paradigmatic information may also be distributed at the level of each sense. In Table 4, the paradigmatic information of each sense is distributed with the help of diverse dictionaries such as that of Dornseiff (1965), Wehrle Eggers (1961), Casares (2007) [12,13,15] and other digital ones such as OWID and DWDS in German and María Moliner (2002) and Corripio (1990) for Spanish. The following structure results from information from ELEXICO [52,59,60,61,62]:
The user requires certain information regarding the use of lexemes in order to use them correctly in the appropriate context, such as the diastratic variations corresponding to colloquial language. According to Table 4, other issues are proposed to which a response is offered in our description model, such as the quantitative limitation: in the first phase of creation, simple basic lexemes are analyzed. Affixed verb forms and complex lexemes have been set aside for subsequent phases of model creation. Along with information related to synonyms, elements such as hyperonyms, co-hyponyms, and antonyms are also included. All of this information shall be offered via a system of links, facilitated by online access. In a third phase, the model shall not be restricted to verbal lexemes, but shall also include grammatical categories. As for the contrastive analysis, this is conducted separately for each language, especially in regards to paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations.

5. Syntagmatic Information in the Framework of the DICONALE Model

Syntagmatic information appears in the descriptive model through the argument structures and through each of the syntactic functions and their possibilities for morphosyntactic realization. In the semantic area, lexemes are described based on their distinctive semantic features so as to offer information about the combination characteristics of each element. The semantic features used are: [+anim]: animate; [+hum]: human; [+zool]: zoological; [−mat]: material; [+materia]: learning subject; [+cogn]: cognitive; [+intens.]: intensity. Examples of each lexeme are provided from the corpus, as previously stated, from COSMAS II and CREA. The corpus of examples has been created based on 100 examples in German and in Spanish. In CREA, oral or written language has not been considered a limitation, given the limited number of examples recorded for the lexeme empollar1. The theoretical foundations of the project are based on the valences theories of Engel [63] (Engel 2009) and Zifonun (Zifonun et al. 1997) [64]. Over recent decades, diverse studies have been edited that refer to the need to create contrastive German–Spanish studies, in connection with the different syntagmatic aspects [65,66,67] (Sánchez 2010, Sánchez 2012 see [44,47]). An interesting aspect includes the act of contrasting the semantic valence in their similarities and differences. Syntactic information comes from different dictionaries: Engel/Schuhmacher (1978), Helbig/Schenkel (1969), and Schuhmacher/Kubczak/Schmidt/de Ruiter (2004) [30,31,32].
Based on the framework of the DICONALE descriptive model, the syntagmatic information related to the lexemes pauken1/empollar1 is presented below. It should be noted that the following tables do not correspond to the definitive layout that shall appear in the dictionary. Therefore, in this case, we proceed from a semasiological perspective. The function of the elements for each language is simplified and unified: S: Subject (A1); DO: DIRECT OBJECT (A2); opt: optional (in this case, it appears between parentheses):
From a contrastive point of view and having analyzed Table 5, the following conclusions may be reached: (i) In terms of the denotative meaning, there are no differences between the definitions pauken1/empollar1. The two lexemes present the same sememe represented by the same semantic features; (ii) There is a specification pertaining to the diastratic marking that corresponds to a usage limitation in colloquial language. In the dictionary created by María Moliner (MM (22002) [61], this specification does not appear, although it is present, for example, in the DRAE, even with a pejorative use [68]; (iii) The major differences in usage are seen in examples in which we see the combination possibilities of the lexemes. In this manner, it is seen that the underlying arguments coincide with the presented semantic features, both in German and in Spanish. However, in German, there is greater use of the passive voice (of the 100 examples recorded, 61 appear in the passive), while in Spanish, the active voice predominates. Another difference is that in German, the direct object is found in two examples through subordinate sentences (w- Clauses or w-Sätze), while in the Spanish corpus, no examples are found for this type of example. On the other hand, in the Spanish corpus, forms corresponding to the infinitive are highlighted (58 examples), something that is not found in the German corpus. This reveals the difference in usage of these lexemes in the two languages.

6. Conclusions

This contribution presents the main features of the DICONALE dictionary through the presentation of examples: paradigmatic and syntagmatic information and some contrastive aspects. Due to space limitations, it was necessary to forego the description of certain dictionary characteristics, such as the frequency of appearance, use of lexemes, and the description of the usage situation in regard to online access. The complete structure of the dictionary can be found in the Appendix.
Since this dictionary is directed to advanced students, paradigmatic information is of great relevance. The possibility of making this type of information available through an electronic dictionary may assist users in resolving doubts about vocabulary or to strengthen their vocabulary with more possibilities than using a traditional bilingual dictionary. The greatest problems regarding the descriptive model, which has been worked on over the last six years, are of a more formal (as opposed to content-based) nature and suppose an agreement with the lexicographic team. These mention the number of lexemes, the categorization of the paradigmatic relations, the grammatical category of the lexemes and the contrastive representation of the paradigmatic relations. User access to information may be simplified thanks to a system of links offered by the online system.
The analyzed lexemes pauken1/empollar1 do not reveal many syntagmatic differences, except for the difference with the subordinate clause in German, which does not appear in Spanish. The representation of semantic valence may assist the user in correctly using the lexemes in context. Through the structural and semantics models, the user may be familiarized with the syntactical structure of a lexeme, that is, how the elements function within the sentence. The fact that these functions are described in a contrastive manner in the two languages and that authentic examples are derived from diverse corpora offers the user the possibility of correctly using the lexemes from a syntactical point of view.
The DICONALE dictionary aims to fill the gap left by the current German–Spanish bilingual lexicography. This is not only justified by the electronic format (which is under construction at this time), but is also due to the challenges arising when attempting to integrate different types of information into one dictionary, something that until now has been found only in very specialized lexicographic works. Users are always the objective of these different types of information. A clear definition of this user type, as well as a clear definition of the corresponding usage situations related to the modular model of description (which includes paradigmatic and syntagmatic structures) allows us to consider DICONALE as the first pedagogical bilateral, bilingual dictionary, directed to production and with a conceptual onomasiological access.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Appendix. Descriptive model of DICONALE: different levels and modules.

Level 1
►MACROSTRUCTURE DIC		Structure: conceptual subfield 1st degree
List of lemmas (LL) for each SCCl		 1.1. LLG1German
1.2. LLG1Spanish
Level 2
►MICROSTRUCTURE		Description in each language of each lemma and of each of the relevant meanings of a lexico-semantic paradigm. 2.1. Description of German lemmas
2.2. Description of Spanish lemmas
M 1General information on each meaning:
► Map of the expression: word class, type of conjugation, suprasegmental features, morphological make-up (separable-no separable).
► Map of the content: the signified: semantic features, verbal character, Aktionsart, aspect.
► Word formation: general for all meanings: relevant forms: (selection)
► Links
M 2Relevant meanings/variants for the semantic field (LAfr) :
► Explanation of the signified with an indication of paradigmatic relations and distinctive features.
► Internal description of the signified: semantic features.
► Paradigmatic relations: within and outside the paradigm
► Structural schema
► Register, illustrative examples, frequency of each meaning with respect to the overall appearance of the lemma:
M 3Combinations of each meaning and correspondence in the contact language
Foundation: tertium comparationis: Semantic structure + ASTM
► Model of the argument structure (ASTM)
► Sentence schema (SBP)
► Specification of the arguments (A): syntactic + semantic frequency
► Contexts, examples, correspondencies, commentaries…
M 4Other grammatical information:
Use and frequency: passive voice, alternatives to the passive, Mode, syntactic conversion, (Deverbal nominalizations)...
Level 3
►MACROSTRUCTURE DIC		Structure: Conceptual subfields: 2nd/3rd degree Classification of lexemes
→ obtaining / setting out the léxico-semantic subparadigms for both languages
Level 4 (for each language)
►Mediostructure DIC		Structure (for each language):
Lexico-semantic subparadigms		 4.1. Léxico-semantic (sub)paradigms: German
4.2. Léxico-semantic (sub)paradigms: Spanish
►Different types of structuring according to different parameters of description
Level 5 (bilingual)
►MEDIOSTRUCTURE DIC
►MICROSTRUCTURE		5.1. Contrast of structures (bilingual):
Lexico-semantic subparadigms
5.2. Contrast of lexemes separately
5.2.1. German -> Spanish
5.2.2. Spanish -> German
5.2.3. bilateral: German ↔ Spanish		 ► Different possibilities of contrast
Type 1: Subparadigms in contrast
Type 2: Paradigms in contrast
Type 3: Contrast of each lexeme: Ger. → Sp. / Sp. → Ger. / Ger. ↔ Sp.

References and Notes

  1. See in the final Appendix the descriptive model of DICONALE with the different levels and modules. Meliss, M.; Sánchez Hernández, P. (Eds.) Nuevos retos parala lexicografía pedagógica bilingüe alemán-español; RILE: Tarragona, España, 2015; Volume 4, pp. 123–141. Available online: http://revistes.publicacionsurv.cat/index.php/rile/article/view/700 (accessed on 5 May 2016).
  2. COSMAS II: DEREKO: Deutsche Referenzkorpus. COSMAS II: Corpus Search Management and Analysis System. Available online: http://www.ids-mannheim.de/kl/projekte/korpora/ (accessed on 12 January 2016).
  3. CREA: ROYAL SPANISH ACADEMY: Database (CREA). Current Spanish reference corpus. Available online: http://www.rae.es (accessed on 12 January 2016).
  4. Blank, A.; Koch, P. Kognitive Romanische Onomasiologie und Semasiologie; Niemeyer: Tübingen, Germany, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  5. Reichmann, O. Das onomasiologische Wörterbuch: Ein Überblick. In Wörterbücher: Ein Internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie; Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft; Hausmann, F.J., Reichmann, O., Wiegand, H.E., Zgusta, L., Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1990; Volume 2, pp. 1057–1067. [Google Scholar]
  6. Engelberg, S.; Lemnitzer, L. (Eds.) Lexikographie und Wörterbuchbenutzung, 4th ed.; Stauffenburg: Tübingen, Germany, 2009.
  7. Schlaefer, M. Lexikologie und Lexikographie. Eine Einführung am Beispiel deutscher Wörterbücher, 2nd ed.; E. Schmidt: Berlin, Germany, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  8. Hass-Zumkehr, U. Deutsche Wörterbücher; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  9. Martín Mingorance, L. La lexicografía onomasiológica. In Aspectos de Lexicografía Contemporánea; Hernández, H., Mederos, H., Eds.; Biblograf: Barcelona, Spain, 1994; pp. 15–27. [Google Scholar]
  10. Porto Dapena, J.Á. Manual de técnica lexicográfica; Arco: Madrid, Spain, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  11. Haensch, G.; Omeñaca, C. Los diccionarios del español en el siglo XXI; Ediciones Universidad: Salamanca, Spain, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  12. Wehrle, H.; Eggers, H. Deutscher Wortschatz; Klett: Stuttgart, Germany, 1961. [Google Scholar]
  13. Dornseiff, F. Der deutsche Wortschatz nach Sachgruppen, 1st ed.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 1934. [Google Scholar]
  14. Dornseiff, F.; Quasthoff, U. Der Deutsche Wortschatz nach Sachgruppen, 8th ed.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  15. Casares, J. Diccionario ideológico de la lengua española, 1st ed.; Gustavo Gili: Barcelona, Spain, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  16. In the area of DaF, the following dictionaries, among others, exist. For German: Kempcke, G. Wörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; NewYork, NY, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  17. PONS. Großwörterbuch DaF; Pons: Stuttgart, Germany, 2004; (print+digital). [Google Scholar]
  18. DUDEN. Deutsch als Fremdsprache—Standardwörterbuch, 2nd ed.; Mannheim: Duden, Germany, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  19. Wahrig Burfeind, R. Großwörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache; Cornelsen: Berlin, Germany, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  20. LGWB-DaF: Götz, D.; Haensch, G.; Wellmann, H. Langenscheidts Großwörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache. Neubearbeitung, 3rd ed.; Langenscheidt: Berlin, München, Germany, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  21. For Spanish: Diccionario Salamanca—español para extranjeros; Santillana: Madrid, Spain, 2007.
  22. Meliss, M. (Vor)überlegungen zu einem zweisprachigen Produktionslernerwörterbuch für das Sprachenpaar DaF und ELE. In Kontrastive Linguistik und Fremdsprachendidaktik Iberoromanisch Deutsch. Studien zu Morphosyntax, nonverbaler Kommunikation, Mediensprache, Lexikographie und Mehrsprachigkeitsdidaktik (Spanisch/Portugiesisch/Deutsch); Reimann, D., Ed.; Narr: Tübingen, Germany, 2013; pp. 113–138. [Google Scholar]
  23. Coseriu, E. Principios de Semántica Estructural; Gredos: Madrid, Spain, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  24. Coseriu, E. Lexikalische Solidaritäten. Poetica 1967, Jg.1, Nr. 3, 293–303. [Google Scholar]
  25. Geckeler, H. Strukturelle Semantik und Wortfeldtheorie; Fink: München, Germany; Madrid, Spain, 1971. [Google Scholar]
  26. Schlaefer, M. Studien zur Ermittlung und Beschreibung des Lexikalischen Paradigmas‚ Lachen‘ im Deutschen; Winter: Heidelberg, Germany, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  27. Vliegen, M. Verben der Auditiven Wahrnehmung im Deutschen: eine Semantische-syntaktische Analyse; Narr: Tübingen, Germany, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  28. Cuervo, R.J. Diccionario de Construcción y régimen de la Lengua Castellana; Herder: Barcelona, Spain, 1953 (1998). [Google Scholar]
  29. Seco, M.; De Andrés, O.; Ramos, G. Diccionario del Español Actual; Aguilar: Madrid, Spain, 1999; The dictionary by Seco/De Andrés/Ramos 1999 is one of the few dictionaries in Spanish that offers syntagmatic information. However, it is a general dictionary. [Google Scholar]
  30. Helbig, G.; Schenkel, W. Wörterbuch zur Valenz und Distribution deutscher Verben; VEB: Leipzig, Germany, 1969. [Google Scholar]
  31. Engel, U.; Schumacher, H. Kleines Valenzlexikon deutscher Verben; Gunter Narr: Tübingen, Germany, 1978. [Google Scholar]
  32. Schumacher, H.; Kubczak, J.; Schmidt, R.; De Ruiter, V. Valbu-Valenzwörterbuch deutscher Verben; Gunter Narr: Tübingen, Germany, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  33. Also see Hausmann, F.J. Weitere syntagmatische Spezialwörterbücher. In Wörterbücher: Ein Internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie; Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft; Hausmann, F.J., Reichmann, O., Wiegand, H.E., Zgusta, L., Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1989; Volume 1, pp. 1054–1056. [Google Scholar]
  34. Schumacher, H. (Ed.) Verben in Feldern. Valenzwörterbuch zur Syntax und Semantik deutscher Verben; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 1986.
  35. Harras, G.; Winkler, E.; Erb, S.; Proost, K. Handbuch deutscher Kommunikationsverben. Teil 1: Wörterbuch; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  36. Harras, G.; Proost, K.; Winkler, E. Handbuch deutscher Kommunikationsverben. Teil 2: Lexikalische Strukturen; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  37. ADESSE: Base de datos de Verbos, Alternancias de Diátesis y Esquemas Sintáctico-Semánticos del Español. Available online: http://adesse.uvigo.es/data/verbos.php (accessed on 17 January 2016).
  38. Alonso Ramos, M. Elaboración del Diccionario de colocaciones del español y sus aplicaciones. In De Lexicografía (Actes del I Simposium Internacional de Lexicografía); Battaner Arias, P., de Cesaris, J., Eds.; IULA y Edicions Petició: Barcelona, Spain, 2004; pp. 149–162. [Google Scholar]
  39. Porto Dapena, J.Á.; Conde Noguerol, M.E.; Córdoba Rodríguez, F.; Muriano Rodríguez, M.M. Presentación del diccionario ‘Coruña’ de la lengua española actual. In Proceedings of the Xiii Euralex International Congress; Série Activitats, 20; Bernal, E., DeCesaris, J., Eds.; Documenta Universitaria Institut Universitari de Lingüística aplicada, Universitat Pompeu Fabra: Barcelona, Spain, 2008; pp. 753–762. [Google Scholar]
  40. Until now, there was only one visual onomasiological German- Spanish dictionary created by Alvar Ezquerra, M. (Ed.) Duden/Oxford Bildwörterbuch Deutsch und Spanisch; Duden: Mannheim, Germany, 1993.
  41. PONS. Das große Bildwörterbuch; Ernst Klett Sprachen: Stuttgart, Germany, 2008; for German and for Spanish. [Google Scholar]
  42. Geck, S. Actividad intelectual y emociones: dos modelos cognitivos metafóricos en alemán y en español; Secretariado de Publicaciones e Intercambio Editorial, Universidad de Valladolid: Valladolid, Spain, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  43. Meliss, M. Recursos lingüísticos alemanes relativos a “GERÄUSCH” y sus posibles correspondencias en español. Un estudio lexicológico modular-integrativo; Peter Lang: Frankfurt, Germany, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  44. Sánchez Hernández, P. Análisis contrastivo alemán español de los verbos fragen-antworten/lehren-lernen. Revista de Filologia Alemana 2010, 18, 261–283. [Google Scholar]
  45. Buján Otero, P. Onomasiologisch angeordnete Idiomlexika und ihr Nutzwert für die Translatologie. In Proceedings of the XIV EURALEX International Congress, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands, 6–10 July 2010; Dykstra, A., Schoonheim, T., Eds.; FryskeAkademy: Leeuwarden/Ljouwert, The Netherlands, 2010; pp. 1171–1182. [Google Scholar]
  46. Mellado, C.; Herrero, C.; Iglesias, N.; Mansilla, A. Elaboración de un diccionario onomasiológico alemán-español. In La fraseografía del S. XXI. Nuevas perspectivas para el español y el alemán; Mellado, C., Buján, P., Herrero, C., Iglesias, N., Mansilla, A., Eds.; Frank & Timme: Berlin, Germany, 2010; pp. 15–54. [Google Scholar]
  47. Sánchez Hernández, P. Lernen-aprender: una aproximación contrastiva dentro del campo semántico Kognition en torno a diversas peculiaridades semánticas y sintácticas. Revista de Filologia Alemana 2012, 20, 139–158. [Google Scholar]
  48. Eberwein, P.; Torrent, A.; Uría Fernández, L. Kontrastive Emotionsforschung Spanisch-Deutsch; Shaker Verlag: Aachen, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  49. On the subfield LERNEN, it is possible to consult with studies on the inverse or converse verbs LEHREN-LERNEN Sánchez Hernández (2010) and Sánchez Hernández (2012) (see [44] and [47]), in which certain specific features of this semantic field are described.
  50. Sánchez Hernández, P. Zur Konzipierung eines deutsch-spanischen kombiniert onomasiologisch-semasiologisch ausgerichteten Verbwörterbuchs mit online-Zugriff—ausgewählte Aspekte. Aussiger Beiträge 2013, 7, 135–155. [Google Scholar]
  51. Sánchez Hernández, P. Überlegungen zu der syntagmatischen Information einiger Verben des Teilparadigmas LERNEN im deutsch-spanischen Vergleich. In Argumentstruktur zwischen Valenz und Konstruktion; Engelberg, S., Meliss, M., Proost, K., Winkler, E., Eds.; Narr Francke: Tübingen, Germany, 2015; pp. 365–377. [Google Scholar]
  52. Corripio, F. Gran diccionario de sinónimos, voces afines e incorreciones; Ediciones B: Barcelona, Spain, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  53. Duden. Deutsches Universalwörterbuch, 6th ed.; Duden: Mannheim, Germany, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  54. Haensch, G.; Wolf, L.; Ettinger, S.; Werner, R. La Lexicografía. De la Lingüística teórica a la Lexicografía práctica; Gredos: Madrid, Spain, 1982. [Google Scholar]
  55. Müller, W. Die Antonyme im allgemeinen einsprachigen Wörterbuch. In Wörterbücher. Ein Internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie; Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft; Hausmann, F.J., Reichmann, O., Wiegand, H.E., Zgusta, L., Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1989; Volume 1, pp. 628–635. [Google Scholar]
  56. Wolski, W. Die Synonymie im allgemeinen einsprachigen Wörterbuch. In Wörterbücher: Ein Internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie; Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft; Hausmann, F.J., Reichmann, O., Wiegand, H.E., Zgusta, L., Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1989; Volume 1, pp. 614–627. [Google Scholar]
  57. Hausmann, F.J. Die Paradigmatik im zweisprachigen Wörterbuch. In Wörterbücher: Ein Internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie; Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft; Hausmann, F.J., Reichmann, O., Wiegand, H.E., Zgusta, L., Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1991; Volume 3, pp. 2794–2796. [Google Scholar]
  58. Hausmann, F.J. Paradigmatische Spezialwörterbücher. In Wörterbücher: Ein Internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie; Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft; Hausmann, F.J., Reichmann, O., Wiegand, H.E., Zgusta, L., Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1991; Volume 3, pp. 2879–2881, Hausmann also mentioned the so-called contrastive dictionaries of synonyms in which, in authentic contexts, they explain differences in use of each of the synonyms and the existence of total synonyms that may be interchanged in the same context. This type of dictionary presents a very complex task due to the frequent difficulty in differentiating between total and partial synonyms. [Google Scholar]
  59. OWID IDS-MANNHEIM. Available online: http://www.owid.de (accessed on 17 January 2016).
  60. Berlin-Branderburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (2008–2011): Digitales Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache (DWDS) Projekt. Available online: http://www.dwds.de (accessed on 15 January 2016).
  61. Moliner, M. Diccionario de uso del español, 2nd ed.; Gredos: Madrid, Spain, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  62. ELEXICO. Available online: http://www.owid.de/wb/elexiko/start.html (accessed on 17 January 2016).
  63. Engel, U. Deutsche Grammatik, 2nd ed.; Neubearbeitung; Iudicium: München, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  64. Zifonun, G.; Hoffmann, L.; Strecker, B. Grammatik der deutschen Sprache; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  65. Cop, M. Collocations in the Bilingual Dictionary. In Wörterbücher: Ein Internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie. Wörterbücher; Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft; Hausmann, F.J., Reichmann, O., Wiegand, H.E., Zgusta, L., Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1991; Volume 3, pp. 2775–2779. [Google Scholar]
  66. Cowie, A.P. Information on Syntactic Constructions in the General Monolingual Dictionary. In Wörterbücher: Ein Internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie; Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft; Hausmann, F.J., Reichmann, O., Wiegand, H.E., Zgusta, L., Eds.; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1989; Volume 1, pp. 588–593. [Google Scholar]
  67. Model, B.A. Sintagmática y diccionario bilingüe. EFA 2006, 12, 247–256. [Google Scholar]
  68. DRAE 3. tr. coloq. Estudiar mucho algo como una lección o una materia educativa. U. t. c. intr. U. t. en sent. despect. Available online: http://dle.rae.es/?id=ErzaslK|Es1CK1Y (accessed on 12 January 2016).
Education 06 00017 g001 1024
Figure 1. The subfields (2nd degree) and the semantic variants in German.
Figure 1. The subfields (2nd degree) and the semantic variants in German.
Education 06 00017 g001
Education 06 00017 g002 1024
Figure 2. The subfields (2nd degree) and the semantic variants in Spanish.
Figure 2. The subfields (2nd degree) and the semantic variants in Spanish.
Education 06 00017 g002
Table
Table 1. The subfield: LERNEN/APRENDER (1st. degree) and possibilities of lexicalization in German and Spanish.
Table 1. The subfield: LERNEN/APRENDER (1st. degree) and possibilities of lexicalization in German and Spanish.
Field: CognitionSubfield: Lernen/Aprender
Conceptual reference system: Erwerb Mental Kenntnisse
Germananlernen, sich anlesen, auffassen, auslernen, sich beibringen, bimsen, pauken, einlernen, erlernen, memorieren, lernen…
Spanishadiestrarse, aplicarse, aprender, comprender, cursar, cultivarse, educarse, empollar, estudiar, ilustrarse, memorizar, repasar…
Table
Table 2. LERNEN + ANEIGNUNG + INTENSITÄT subfield: elements of the LERNEN + ANEIGNUNG + INTENSITÄT subfields with their semantic structure in German.
Table 2. LERNEN + ANEIGNUNG + INTENSITÄT subfield: elements of the LERNEN + ANEIGNUNG + INTENSITÄT subfields with their semantic structure in German.
LERNEN + ANEIGNUNG + INTENSITÄT SUBFIELDLERNEN + ANEIGNUNG + INTENSITÄT SUBFIELD
ERWERB + MENTAL + KENNTNISSE (ACQUISITION + MENTAL + KNOWLEDGE)ERWERB + MENTAL + KENNTNISSE (ACQUISITION + MENTAL + KNOWLEDGE)
German ➔MeaningPotential Spanish equivalent
lernen1‘sich ein spezielles Wissen aneignen’ (E-VALBU)aprender1 (MM 22002)
Semantic distinctive features[+Aneignung][+Aneignung]
lernen2‘sich, seinem Gedächtnis einprägen’ (DUW 62007) [53]aprender2 (MM 22002)
Semantic distinctive features[+Gedächtnis] [+Gedächtnis]
Pauken1‘(ugs.) sich einen bestimmten Wissensstoff durch intensives, häufig mechanisches Lernen oder Auswendiglernen anzueignen suchen’(DUW 62007)Empollar1 ‘Estudiar mucho, por ejemplo, en vísperas de exámenes’ (MM 22002)
Semantic distinctive features[+Intensität][+Intensität]
Table
Table 3. APRENDER + APROPIACIÓN + INTENSIDAD subfield: elements of the APRENDER + APROPIACIÓN + INTENSIDAD subfield with their semantic structure in Spanish.
Table 3. APRENDER + APROPIACIÓN + INTENSIDAD subfield: elements of the APRENDER + APROPIACIÓN + INTENSIDAD subfield with their semantic structure in Spanish.
APRENDER + APROPIACIÓN + INTENSIDAD SUBFIELDAPRENDER + APROPIACIÓN + INTENSIDAD SUBFIELD
ERWERB + MENTAL + KENNTNISSE (ACQUISITION + MENTAL + KNOWLEDGE)ERWERB + MENTAL + KENNTNISSE (ACQUISITION + MENTAL + KNOWLEDGE)
SPANISCH ➔MeaningPotential German equivalent
aprender1‘adquirir conocimientos o el conocimiento de cierta cosa’ (MM 22002)lernen1‘ (E-VALBU)
Semantic distinctive features[+Aneignung][+Aneignung]
aprender2‘fijar algo en la memoria’ (MM 22002)lernen2 (DUW 62007)
Semantic distinctive features[+Gedächtnis][+Gedächtnis]
Empollar1‘Estudiar mucho, por ejemplo, en vísperas de exámenes’ (MM 22002)Pauken1 ‘sich einen bestimmten Wissensstoff durch intensives, häufig mechanisches Lernen oder Auswendiglernen anzueignen suchen’(DUW 62007)
Semantic distinctive features[+Intensität] [+Intensität]
Table
Table 4. Paradigmatic information within the COGNITION field.
Table 4. Paradigmatic information within the COGNITION field.
FieldSubfieldGerman LexemesParadigmatic Relations in GermanSpanish LexemesParadigmatic Relations in Spanish
CognitionLERNENlernen1
intellectual
perception		Hyperonym: sich Inhalte aneignen, erwerben
Hyponym: memorieren
Antonym: verlernen		aprender1Hyperonym: adquirir conocimiento
Hyponym: aprender de memoria
Antonym: desaprender
CognitionLERNENaprender2
memorize		Hyperonym: sich Inhalte aneignen, erwerben
Antonym: verlernen		aprender2Hyperonym: adquirir conocimiento
Synonym: memorizar
Co-hyponym: estudiar
CognitionLERNENpauken1
to swot (colloquial)		Hyperonym: sich ausbilden,
Synonym:
büffeln, bimsen (colloquial)		empollar1
(colloquial)		Hyperonym: cultivarse
Synonym: chapar (colloquial)
Table
Table 5. Syntagmatic information of the lexemes pauken1/empollar1.
Table 5. Syntagmatic information of the lexemes pauken1/empollar1.
GermanSpanish
Meaning(ugs.) ‘sich einen bestimmten Wissensstoff durch intensives, häufig mechanisches Lernen oder Auswendiglernen anzueignen suchen’ (DUW 2007)‘Estudiar mucho, por ejemplo, en vísperas de exámenes’ (MM 22002)
Scenariojmd (A1) paukt (etwas)(A2)alg. (A1) empolla (algo) (A2)
Syntactic plan
Argument structures		<S (DO)>
A1: S
A2: opt.: DO		<S (DO)>
A1: S
A2: opt.: DO
Syntactic plan
Clause realizations		<s (DO)>
A2: w-clause (w- Satz)		<s (DO)>
Semantic valence
Semantic features		A1: S:[+anim] [+hum][−zool]
A2: DO: opt.[-anim][ −mat][+ mat][+cogn][+intens]		A1: S: [+anim] [+hum] [−zool]
A2: DO: opt. [−anim] [−mat][+mat]
[+cogn][+ intens]
Semantic preferences
Examples		A2: Zu Hause muss gepaukt werden: Spieltheorie, die Motorik und welche Zahlen im Kessel nebeneinanderliegen.HAZ07/AUG.01178 Hannoversche Allgemeine, 24.08.2007, S. 24;)
A1: Ihre Weiterbildung fand sie anspruchsvoll und umfangreich. Ich musste richtig paukenHAZ08/JAN.04219 Hannoversche Allgemeine, 23.01.2008, S. 18;
A1, A2: Die Schüler pauken Mathe, bevor auch ihr Arbeitstag endlich vorbei ist HAZ09/MAR.03096 Hannoversche Allgemeine, 18.03.2009, S. 6; Pauken für den Aufstieg).
A2: er paukt, was er fürs Ingenieurstudium braucht. (HAZ09/MAI.00045 Hannoversche Allgemeine, 02.05.2009, S. 6;).
Früher mussten die Kinder pauken, wie man ein Eichenblatt von einem Buchenblatt unterscheidet, (M01/FEB.11028 Mannheimer Morgen, 16.02.2001		A1, A2: ¿Y qué? no has visto el Barroco, nada, te lo tienes que empollar tú por tu cuenta, una cantidad de folios así y bueno, ¿me entiendes? CREA Canal cara a cara. Testimonio oral.
A1: En Filosofía, existe, quizás, un mayor porcentaje de personas que tengan intereses culturales, pero también existe una gran cantidad de gente que va a empollar solamente, ¿no?, y que se sabe todo de memoria. CREA CANAL=cara a cara. Testimonio oral.
A1, A2: Galdós escribiría en una de sus novelas que un estudiante viejo contaba en los últimos años de Isabel II cómo don Lorenzo empollaba las lecciones hasta en los portales de las casas, de noche; CREA Ortiz-Armengol, Pedro
Aviraneta o la intriga
Espasa-Calpe (Madrid), 1994
A1: En el fondo de nuestra conciencia reconocíamos que el primero de la clase podía ser repelente-niño-vicente pero era inteligente y empollaba como un poseso, y que el último nos parecía listo y divertidísimo pero no pegaba sello. CREA Tusquets Blanca, Óscar
Todo es comparable
Anagrama (Barcelona), 1998

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sánchez Hernández, P. DICONALE: A Novel German-Spanish Onomasiological Lexicographical Model Involving Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Information. Educ. Sci. 2016, 6, 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6020017

AMA Style

Sánchez Hernández P. DICONALE: A Novel German-Spanish Onomasiological Lexicographical Model Involving Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Information. Education Sciences. 2016; 6(2):17. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6020017

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sánchez Hernández, Paloma. 2016. "DICONALE: A Novel German-Spanish Onomasiological Lexicographical Model Involving Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Information" Education Sciences 6, no. 2: 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6020017

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop