Авторская лексикография и история слов: К 50-летию выхода в свет «Словаря языка Пушкина»
This paper sets out to review current approaches to world Englishes from a range of perspectives, from English studies to sociolinguistics, applied linguistics, lexicography, ‘popularizers’ and critical linguistics. It then proceeds to consider current debates on English worldwide and world Englishes, noting the recent criticisms of the world Englishes approach from a rhetoric of a critical linguistics ironically at odds with the realities of many educational settings.
The article is dedicated to the loanword tagash as attested in Russian historical lexicography and etymology, and its paronimical attraction with the Turkic word tugash. The open access to the text cannot be provided due to copyright restrictions.
This paper presents an overview of Russian and foreign existing approaches that have been practiced in relation to the compilation of lexical minima. Special attention is paid to the most influential English-speaking tradition, as well as the German-speaking tradition. The purpose of the review is to follow the development of lexical list science and also to define the criteria list compilers should be oriented in order to compose the best lexical minima for the modern user. The first chapter of the article discusses Russian approaches to the lexical minima compilation, the second chapter discusses the approaches used abroad, the third chapter compares domestic and foreign traditions and summarizes the review. The review given in the article gives grounds for the conclusion that the creation of LM requires a combination of both statistical and communicatively oriented methods. In addition, to compile an up-to-date and reliable corpus it is necessary to have an equal proportion parts of the data analyzed: in addition to the fiction texts corpus, authors should refer to the oral corpus data, as well as sources diverse in style and genre, such as newspaper, art and academic corpses, and internet speech corpus.
The paper continues research into words denoting everyday life objects in the Russian language. This research is conducted for developing a new encyclopedic thesaurus of Russian everyday life terminology. Working on this project brings up linguistic material which leads to discovering new trends and phenomena not covered by the existing dictionaries. We discuss derivation models which gain polularity: clipped forms (komp < komp’juter ‘computer’, nout < noutbuk ‘notebook computer’, vel < velosiped ‘bicycle’, mot<motocikl ‘motorbike’), competing masculine and feminine con- tracted nouns derived from adjectival noun phrases (mobil’nik (m.) / mo- bilka (f.) < mobil’nyj telefon (m.) ‘mobile phone’, zarjadnik (m.) / zarjadka (f.) < zarjadnoe ustrojstvo (n.) ‘AC charger’), hybrid compounds (plat’e- sviter ‘sweater dress’, jubka-brjuki ‘skirt pants’, shapkosharf ‘scarf hat’, vilkolozhka ‘spork, foon’). These words vary in spelling and syntactic behav- iour. We describe a newly formed series of words denoted multifunctional objects: mfushkaZ< MFU < mnogofunkcional’noe ustrojstvo ‘MFD, multi- function device’, mul’titul ‘multitool’, centr ‘unit, set’. Explaining the need to compose frequency lists of word meanings rather than just words, we of- fer a technique for gathering such lists and provide a sample produced from our own data. We also analyze existing dictionaries and perform various experiments to study the changes in word meanings and their comparative importance for speakers. We believe that, apart from the practical usage for our lexicographic project, our results might prove interesting for research in the evolution of the Russian lexical system.
The article presents two addenda to the author’s recent study concerning the manuscript variants πυρρούλας and πυρρὸς ὕλας in Arist. Hist. An. 592b22. In that previous work, an attempt was made to trace back the Latin fortune of the Greek ὕλας. Now, we scrutinize D’Arcy W. Thompson’s assertion πυρρούλας means ‘bullfinch’ in Modern Greek. Thompson mistakenly refers to Theodor von Heldreich – it is apparently Demetrios Bikelas who he is quoting. The latter, in turn, could have taken the "Modern Greek" bird name πυρρούλας from Skarlatos Vyzantios’ 1835 dictionary. Given Vyzantios’ purist and prescriptive approach to lexicography, he must have drawn the word from a learned source based on Aristotle rather than from a vernacular one close to the oral tradition. That is why Thompson’s "Modern Greek" argumentation for identifying Aristotle’s πυρρούλας with the bullfinch most probably results from a vicious circle. This corroborates Carl Jacob Sundevall’s identification of πυρρούλας with the robin and, furthermore, increases the plausibility of the reading πυρρὸς ὕλας. The second part of the article analyzes three testimonies of the rare bird name πυρρίας/πυρρία and of the homonymous denomination of a snake. Although apparently irrelevant for assessing the variant readings in Arist. Hist. An. 592b22, these words deserve examination. Namely, a comparison of manuscript readings and possible emendations in Ath. 2, 69, 3, Dionys. Per. Ixeut. 3, 13, 22 and Hsch. 4461 suggests that Claudius Salmasius’ conjecture in Ath. 2, 69, 3 should be rejected. Another conjecture is ventured instead.
The article presents in chronological order the replenishment of Russian lexicography with the dictionaries of jargon at the end of the 20th century – the beginning of the 21th century. The author analyses the most famous dictionaries of general jargon for the purpose of finding words and word combinations belonging to the youth sociolect. As exemplified by concrete dictionary entries, the article shows the advantages of each lexicographic source described and specifies their role in the analysis of the youth jargon.