Lexicography 2022-06-08T19:42:45+00:00 Prof Hai XU and Prof Vincent OOI, Co-Editors-in-Chief Open Journal Systems <p><em>Lexicography</em> aims to serve as a leading-edge forum and powerhouse for all global issues of lexicographic interest, with an emphasis on Asian perspectives and concerns. The journal is open for researchers, lexicographers, students, teachers, translators, and all language lovers from around the globe, who are invited to discuss lexicography and dictionary issues referring to history, typology, use, criticism, structure, IT, components, compilation, application, media, phraseology, corpus linguistics, translation, education, etc. <a href="">Read more about the journal.</a>.</p> Learners’ dictionaries and an English cultural keyword 2021-12-18T04:48:42+00:00 Arleta Adamska-Sałaciak <p>Among culture-bound vocabulary items, we typically find names of realia, but also lexemes not immediately identifiable as such, but which are perhaps even more important as indications of culture specificity: words that reflect the ways of thinking and acting deemed appropriate in a given cultural milieu. This paper deals with one such item, which, according to Anna Wierzbicka (2006, 2014), is an essential component of Anglo values: the adjective fair in its moral sense. The analysis is meant to establish how successful dictionaries for learners of English are in rendering its nuances of meaning.</p> 2022-06-08T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2022 Equinox Publishing Ltd. Adding Chinese to a multilingual terminological resource 2021-05-19T03:12:23+00:00 Zhiwei Han Marie-Claude L'Homme <p>Although there is a general consensus about the importance of providing access to combinatorial information in specialized dictionaries and term banks, few terminological resources actually record collocations. More importantly, since most terminological resources are concept-based, their structures are not adapted to the description of this linguistic phenomenon. This paper presents a methodology and descriptive model designed to include Chinese collocations in a multilingual resource which focuses on environment terminology. The methodology is corpusbased and the descriptive model (based on Explanatory and Combinatorial Lexicology (Mel’?uk et al., 1995)) aims to account for the lexico-semantic properties of collocations. We first comment on the characteristics of Chinese collocations that need to be taken into consideration and that can differ from collocations in other languages. Then, we describe the DiCoEnviro, a multilingual terminological resource on the environment, and the methodology devised to compile it. We then focus on collocations and explain how some parts of the methodology for their collection and lexicographical description need to be adapted to Chinese.</p> 2022-06-08T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2022 Equinox Publishing Ltd. Enriching knowledge representation of terminology 2021-10-15T03:36:49+00:00 Yi Peng Bei Luo Chenxing Xiao <p>Whereas a number of studies have been conducted towards representing knowledge linked with terms, terminological knowledge still demands further exploration due to its diversity and intricacy. Although much recent cognitive terminological research has examined either frames or event structures based on specialized contexts and hence has helped improve the clarification of relevant knowledge representation, other types of knowledge structures tied to terms like metaphoric and metonymic structures as well as conceptual blending processes of terms have not yet been adequately investigated. In view of this gap, we put forward a cognitive integrated model (CIM), attempting to integrate cognitive structures and construction of terms in a holistic manner. In this study, we mainly center on integration of the decontextualized part: the adapted (ECM1), conceptual metaphor (CM1), conceptual metonymy (CM2), and conceptual blending (CB1) in light of terminological definitions without context, acting as offline knowledge of terms. Integration of the contextualized part is briefly discussed, merely about the adjusted ECM within context (ECM2) as online knowledge. The tentative incorporation of both offline and online knowledge of terms derives at least five particular variants of the CIM: ECM1+ECM2, ECM1+CB1+ECM2, ECM1+CM1+CB1+ECM2, ECM1+CM2+CB1+ECM2, ECM1+CM1+CM2+CB1+ECM2. Accordingly, both definition-based and usage-based methods are exploited, respectively backed up by dictionaries or professional works and corpora, etc. We subsequently apply the five variants to representing Event-Domain Cognitive Model knowledge of international trade terms previously seldom explored in terminology. It turns out that the cognitive integrated perspective contributes to enriching knowledge representation of the terms by exposing diverse knowledge structures and conceptual construction.</p> 2022-06-08T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2022 Equinox Publishing Ltd. Japanese neologisms in Chinese 2021-12-08T08:55:31+00:00 Christian Schmidt Chien-shou Chen <p>Japanese loanwords in Chinese are currently not accepted as legitimate loanwords in the general loanword framework (Haspelmath and Tadmor, 2009a), mainly because they are considered to be graphic loans (Masini, 1997; Tranter, 2009) and not sound-meaning borrowings. This paper formulates a counterargument, developed mainly from the perspective of the Chinese scholarship: it focuses on how graphemic borrowing impacts the judgment of loanwordness and the types of resolving strategies that have been developed. The origin of word form, word meaning, and the pathways of historical borrowing particularly stand out as non-linguistic factors of loanwordness. Based on a metaanalysis of 25 studies of Japanese loanwords in Chinese, the authors propose a typology of Japanese loanwords in Chinese that bridges the Western and the Chinese frameworks. To put forward a concrete example, we compile a list of 2,920 Japanese loanwords in Chinese, which are discussed by at least three scholars, ordered by degrees of agreement within the Chinese scholarship. We compare this list against the vocabulary list of the World Loanword Database and demonstrate that Wiebusch and Tadmor (2009), in ignoring Japanese loanwords, also omits numerous loanwords in Chinese. We echo Tranter (2009) in arguing that Japanese loanwords in Chinese can be classified as material borrowing, putting graphemic borrowing on the same footing with phonetic borrowing, since graphemic borrowing is not limited to, though preferred by, the Chinese writing system. We demonstrate this by comparing how writing systems impact borrowing.</p> 2022-06-08T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2022 Equinox Publishing Ltd.