Reflections on the Academic Status of Lexicography

Abstract

Abstract:Two main camps have been formed with regard to the philosophical and academic status of lexicography: one considering lexicography an independent scientific discipline, and the other opposing such a scientific status. This article discusses some of the arguments from the second camp and argues that lexicography should be considered an independent scientific discipline.The argumentation is based on the fact that the subject field of lexicography is different from the subject fields of any other discipline, including linguistics. In this sense, the concept of a lexicographical work is broader than the more reduced concept of a dictionary. Lexicographical works, including dictionaries, are considered cultural artefacts and utility tools produced in order to meet punctual information needs detected in society. In this way, they have during the millenniums covered almost all spheres of human activity and knowledge. The theory and science of lexicography should not focus on the differences regarding the specific content of all these works, but on aspects that unite them and are common to all of them. In this regard, some of the core characteristics of lexicography as an independent discipline are discussed together with its complex relation to other disciplines. Lexicographical theory is understood as a systematic set of statements about its subject field. Finally, the article argues that the fact that this theory may seem too abstract and difficult to some working lexicographers does not in itself invalidate its independent scientific status, although a close relation between theory and practice is recommended. Keywords: LEXICOGRAPHY, LEXICOGRAPHICAL THEORY, FUNCTION THEORY, ACADEMIC STATUS OF LEXICOGRAPHY, INDEPENDENT STATUS OF LEXICOGRAPHY, INTERDISCIPLINARY VOCATION OF LEXICOGRAPHY, DICTIONARIES, LEXICOGRAPHI-CAL WORKS, UTILITY TOOLSOpsomming: Gedagtes oor die akademiese status van die leksikografie.Twee hoofkampe het ontwikkel met betrekking tot die filosofiese en akademiese status van die leksikografie: een wat die leksikografie beskou as 'n onafhanklike wetenskaplike dissipline, en die ander wat so 'n wetenskaplike status teenstaan. Hierdie artikel bespreek sommige van die argumente van die tweede kamp en redeneer dat die leksikografie as 'n onafhanklike wetenskaplike dissipline beskou behoort te word. Die redenasie is gebaseer op die feit dat die onderwerpsveld van die leksikografie verskillend is van onderwerpsvelde van enige ander dissipline, insluitende die linguistiek. Hiervolgens is die konsep van 'n leksikografiese werk breër as die meer beperkte konsep van 'n woordeboek. Leksikografiese werke, insluitende woordeboeke, word beskou as kulturele artefakte en nutsgereedskap geskep om aan die onmiddellike inligtingsbehoeftes te voldoen wat in die gemeenskap vasgestel is. Op hierdie manier het hulle gedurende die millenniums byna alle sfere van menslike bedrywigheid en kennis gedek. Die teorie en wetenskap van die leksi-

H.A. Welker and Pedagogical Lexicography

“…Welker starts with a brief overview of the different positions regarding the academic status of lexicography (see Welker 2004: 11 andTarp 2010), making it clear that he himself, contrary to Wiegand (1984), uses the terms theoretical lexicography (or metalexicography) and practical lexicography to denote the theoretical and practical aspects of lexicography, a term which he accepts as a hyperonym of the two other terms. In this respect Welker reveals a point of view which may not be surprising for those who are well-acquainted with lexicographical literature, but which is nevertheless averse to a discipline trying to gain academic status, i.e.…”

Theoretical Underpinnings of Metaterminography

“…H. Béjoint 2010: 381, P.A. Fuertes-Olivera/ S. Tarp 2014: 34-43, T. Piotrowski 2013, S. Tarp 2010. A. Adamska-Sałaciak neatly summarises the ongoing deliberations:…”

Affirming a Role for Specialised Dictionaries in Indigenous African Languages

“…This aspect, which falls under what Wiegand (1984: 15) calls the general section, becomes relevant in the consideration of lexicography and its interdisciplinary contacts, also discussed by scholars like Tarp (2000Tarp ( , 2002Tarp ( , 2010 and Hartmann (2005). Theories in fields such as terminology, translation, language teaching and applied linguistics, among others, should be mentioned.…”

“…It assumes that in the context of English dominance, the second and third language speakers of English do not rely on their native languages to conceptualise, develop and/or communicate specialised knowledge. Drawing insights from the theory of lexicographic functions (Bergenholtz andTarp 1995, 2003;Tarp 2000Tarp , 2002Tarp , 2005Tarp , 2008Tarp , 2010, this article seeks to demonstrate that LSP dictionaries in indigenous African languages can play a very significant role in the teaching and practice of various subject fields in which English is currently the main medium of communication. However, role should not be confused with function as defined in the theory of lexicographic functions.…”