Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai

DAIVA MURMULAIT YTĖ Institute of the Lithuanian Language THE MICROSTRUCTURE OF AN EXPLANATORY DICTIONARY: PECULIARITIES OF SEMANTIC INFORMATION PRESENTATION KEYWORDS: lexicography, explanatory dictionary, dictionary microstructure, semantics, lexical meaning, working meaning. INTRODUCTION The aim of the article is to examine several cases of presenting semantic data in explanatory dictionaries and, using their examples, among other things, to show that lexicography is not merely a practical, applied activity. The microstructure of general explanatory dictionaries (see the list of sources), which are most commonly used by the general public, was analysed. The study was conducted using comparative, analytical-descriptive, word-formation, and lexical-semantic analysis methods. At first glance, it may be said that dictionary makers merely use the findings of research in semantics, grammar, accentology, terminology, word-formation theory, stylistics, and other disciplines, applying them in their practical work. But perhaps some gaps or blind spots in these theories become apparent precisely when lexicographers seek to achieve their primary goal—the systematic presentation of data? This article attempts to explore several seemingly entirely formal matters concerning the presentation of semantic and working information in an explanatory dictionary and to show that even these may be linked, through feedback, to research in lexical semantics or word formation and its findings. As the quotation shows: “[м]ногие проблемы, исследуемые терминоведами, возникли в практике разработки терминологических словарей, и решение этих проблем влияет на методы составления словарей” (“many of the problems studied by terminologists arose in the practical compilation of terminological dictionaries, and solving these problems influences methods of dictionary compilation”; Гринев–Гриневич 2008: 30), this is evident at least in terminography. One of the tasks set for contemporary lexicographic theory is to develop principles for dictionary microstructure, that is, to define the structure of a dictionary entry, the content, scope, and form of its components (methods of presenting and marking data), supplementary information, and so on (cf. Jakaitienė 2005: 15). BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 2 Electronic dictionaries have probably already become more relevant than printed ones (cf. Granger, Paquot 2012, Fuertes-Olivera, Bergenholtz 2011)1; they also require a different, more precise way of presenting data. If the dictionary compiler were not a scholar, they would not even see problems of this kind; without seeing them, they would not try to solve them or raise questions with themselves and specialists in other fields. In science, identifying a problem and posing a question are no less important, and often even more important, than finding an answer to it. “A good modern dictionary can be written only by a scholar or a professional in another field who understands the principles of lexicography” (Jakaitienė 2005: 10). On the other hand, “[l]exicographic theory undoubtedly not only draws on the practice of dictionary writing (and thus on the experience of dictionary authors), but also grows out of this practice and crystallizes from it” (Jakaitienė 2005: 14). 1. SEMANTIC DATA AND THE MICROSTRUCTURE OF THE EXPLANATORY DICTIONARY Thus, how is semantic information presented in dictionaries, how do derivational and lexical meanings relate to one another, how does the chosen method of data presentation reflect semantic relations, and what does this tell the linguist and the ordinary dictionary user? The cases examined below should show how the structure of a dictionary entry reflects the semantic structure of a word, the hierarchy of its meanings and the relations among them, as well as what additional information dictionary users can obtain simply by studying the arrangement of lexemes in an entry. 1.1. General explanation of lexemes in an entry for a polysemous word Here are a few dictionary entries from the dictionary of international words Interleksis: migrācija [Latin migratio – migration, movement], migration, movement, transition from one place to another: 1. the movement of people from one place to another; 2. the movement of animals from one place to another; 3. chem. the movement of elements in the Earth's crust or on its surface during geochem. processes. Interleksis 1 According to S. Tarp, lexicography is at an interesting, yet also difficult, mid-point in the transition from printed to electronic dictionaries (Tarp 2012: 322). BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 3 metamorphosis [Gr. metamorphosis], the transformation of one form into another, a change in something: 1. in mythology, the magical transformation of people into animals, of one animal into another, etc.; 2. biol. the transition from one stage to another in the postembryonic development of certain animals, e.g., the transformation of a tadpole into a frog, or of an insect larva into a pupa; 3. changes in the form of plant organs associated with a change in function, e.g., stamens becoming petals, or a root becoming a root vegetable. Interleksis From the numbering of the lexemes, it is clear that migration and metamorphosis each have three meanings. Yet in both cases there is also a general explanation, given before the first lexeme. What is this? A general part of the definition, placed before all the lexemes to avoid repetition? Is it necessary, or, for example, without the more general explanation “movement, relocation, moving from one place to another,” would the definition of the first lexeme of migration, “the movement of inhabitants from one place to another,” be inadequate, not sufficiently clear? This general part of the semantic information is more abstract; it seems to recall a direct translation from Greek or Latin—in the case of migration, it evidently repeats what is given in square brackets alongside the etymon. The lexicalized lexemes, terms from different fields, are given below the more abstract explanation. Such a dictionary microstructure—or, more precisely, one way of presenting data in an entry—probably does not bother someone who simply opens a dictionary to find out what these words mean. The more comprehensive the information, the better for them. They may not notice or wonder why, for example, the information in the entries for concentration, condensation or compression is arranged differently, without a general explanatory part: concentration [Eng. concentration < Lat. com – with, together + centrum – centre]: 1. accumulation, gathering, thickening; 2. chem. the ratio of the amount of one component of a physicochemical system (mixture, solution, melt) to the system’s volume, or of the component’s mass to the system’s volume; 3. phys. the ratio of the number of particles in a system to its volume; 4. mining the concentration (enrichment) of a valuable component in a mineral resource, making it technically feasible and economically worthwhile to process the mineral resource further; BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 4 5. physiol. the localization at the site of initial occurrence of excitation or inhibition previously spread (irradiation) in the cerebral cortex; 6. econ. a market situation in which control of economic activity is concentrated in one or several firms; 7. econ. the merging and growth in size of firms. Interleksis condensation [Latin condensatio – thickening]: 1. chem. a reaction in which, when two molecules of the same or different organic compounds combine, water or another low-molecular-weight compound is split off; 2. the conversion of vapour into a liquid or solid; 3. the thickening of something or making something thicker. Interleksis compression [Lat. compressio – compression]: 1. techn. compression of air, gas, or a working mixture in the cylinder of a piston machine (compressor, internal combustion engine); 2. med. compression of a body part or organ. Interleksis Nevertheless, even in the first two of the latter cases, general, more abstract semantic information is present – in the case of concentration, it is presented as a separate first sense (1. “accumulation, gathering, thickening”), while in the case of condensation, as the third sense (3. “the thickening or making thicker of something”) of the lexeme2. When a lexicographer (concerned not only with the completeness of data but also with its systematic presentation) sees information placed before the definitions of lexemes, and knows that it is not grammatical, accentual, stylistic, usage-domain, or similar data, which are usually presented in this part of a dictionary entry, the question should immediately arise: what structural part of the entry is this; does it belong to the definition (of each lexeme), is it supplementary information (an explanation), or is it something else that is not lexical meaning? Could it be the primary meaning, 2 In TŽŽ 2013, the microstructure of the word condensation is essentially different – instead of the aforementioned third, abstractly defined sense, a much more specific second sense is given, “the thickening or making thicker of liquids by evaporation” (specifying semes – “liquids,” “evaporate”), while the first sense (according to Interleksis) is presented as a compound term, a phrase: condensation reaction. BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 5 from which (in the case of metamorphosis) terms from various fields later developed? In that case, it would strongly resemble a situation in which, initially, all lexemes of a derived form are characterized by giving its general derivational meaning, and then the individual lexemes are defined by giving the lexical meaning of each, for example: meridional, related to a meridian: 1. a meridian circle – an instrument for measuring the right ascension and declination of celestial bodies; 2. having a north–south direction. Interleksis This method of presenting information is not described in the printed version of Interleksis (TŽŽ 2001), in the preface or in the introduction explaining the dictionary’s structure. At first glance, the situation in the cases of the words migration, metamorphosis seems analogous to that in the entry for the international word element: micro… [Gr. mikros – small], the first component of a compound word, denoting smallness, minuteness: 1. of small dimensions, very fine; 2. relating to the study or measurement of small dimensions; 3. the first part of the name of a partial physical unit, indicating that this unit is one million (106) times smaller than the corresponding SI unit, e.g., a microsecond (one millionth of a second). Interleksis It also contains 3 lexemes preceded by a general explanatory section. The explanatory lexical unit mikro- is first characterized morphologically (“the first part of compound words...”), then two more specific meanings that it gives to compounds are listed (but not meanings of the prefix itself!), while the third, specialized (physics-related) lexeme is described morphologically and semantically, and illustrated with an explained usage example. The form of this entry seems equivalent to that of the entries for migracija and metamorfozė, but the nature and structure of the data are different—in the case of a word element, alongside lexical-semantic data there are also morphological and morphosemantic data (the only apparent similarity is that more abstract information is placed before the individual lexemes). Cf. the entry for the element micro- in the English dictionary BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 6 is considerably more uniform in terms of the nature and structure of the data: it gives four meanings (the first consists of two subsenses, which are not distinguished in the Lithuanian dictionary but presented as a single, first lexeme), which the element conveys to compounds, along with the compounds that illustrate this formation: micro- 1) a) little, small, minute: microcosm b) exceptionally little, abnormally small: microcephaly 2) enlarging or amplifying: microscope, microphone 3) involving microscopes, microscopic: micrography 4) one millionth part of; the factor 10: symbol?: abbrev. mc: microsecond Webster‟s New World College Dictionary, http://www.yourdictionary.com/micro#yMP22hIdBTP8wrk1.99 In terms of its external structure, the entry for mikro- in TŽŽ 2013 more closely resembles the English version than the Interleksio one (the aforementioned general explanatory section is absent), but it does not match the English entry in the systematic presentation of data: mikro- [Gr. mikros – small] 1 small in dimensions, very tiny 2 μ, the first part of the name of a compound unit of measurement equal to one millionth of the corresponding SI unit, e.g., mikrosekundė (one millionth of a second) TŽŽ 2013 It can be seen that morphological information appears only in the definition of the second lexeme. In this case, even a non-linguist may wonder why the first lexeme is defined as an adjective, as its definition might suggest. Cf. the entry for the adjective mikroskopinis, -ė in the same TŽŽ 2013: microscopic//al 1 performed using a microscope, e.g., ~alysis 2 visible only through a microscope 3 very small, tiny TŽŽ 2013 BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 7 In the entry for signalinis, the general explanatory section discussed here even consists of two parts defining different semantics, which, in terms of presentation, resemble shades of meaning (in dictionaries these are often separated by semicolons): signalinis [⇧ signalas], sign-based, primary; announcing, signaling: 1. A signal specimen is a proof copy of a printed publication, approval of which permits the production of the print run; 2. kalbot. signal meaning is a word meaning indicating that something exists but does not name it specifically, e.g., “he,” “this,” “above.” Interleksis However, compounds—phrases containing the headword—are presented below as two or more lexemes. Thus, in this case, the semantic information given in the first line is common not to different lexemes of a single lexical unit (word), but to different lexical units. 1.2. The relationship between derivational and lexical semantics The relationship between derivational and lexical semantics is clearly revealed by examples from the field of neologisms. Only after carrying out a derivational and semantic analysis of both derivatives with the suffix -iklis already included in dictionaries and new ones, and examining the usage of the latter, did the main points emerge that can be relied upon in attempting to present systematically in an explanatory dictionary the semantic structure and system of meanings of both these neologisms and derivatives of this derivational type in general (for more detail, see Murmulaitytė 2014). It became clear that, perhaps owing to the vagueness of derivational meaning and the many “semantic potentialities whose actualization in usage is difficult to predict” (Urbutis 2009: 203), many derivatives with the suffix -iklis are defined in dictionaries by meanings that are more or less specific but essentially derivational, for example: raižiklis ‘engraving tool’, tirpiklis ‘a substance that dissolves’ (DŽ₇), etc. Such definitions are also suitable for names of new realia until they have become sufficiently lexicalized to be presented as separate lexemes. In this instance, the usage, semantics, and lexicographic treatment of one neologism are examined further. Blizgikliais refers to a wide variety of chemical products intended to polish and give a shiny appearance to many different things (footwear, cars, paint, lips, animal fur, plant leaves, food products, etc.), but Lithuanian Neologisms BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 8 in the dictionary (hereafter ND), the neologism blizgbilis is presented as a single lexeme. At the beginning of 2014, it was defined as “a product for giving an object a shiny appearance” (Murmulaitytė 2014: 17). After usage had been studied more thoroughly, the former, essentially provisional meaning was replaced in May 2015 with a more specific lexical meaning: “a product for shining shoes, furniture, floors, cars, hair, plant leaves, etc.; a substance that gives food products a shiny appearance.” Essentially, these are two shades of one meaning, or subsenses, given that names of food additives are systematically formed with this suffix. A note to users is also provided: “the variant blizgis is becoming established as the term for a cosmetic product that gives lips a glossy appearance.” This seems to indicate that the lip-related seme is receding from the semantics of blizgiklis and that, in this sense, the names for polishing products formed with a suffix (blizgiklis) and with an ending (blizgis) are becoming differentiated by meaning. However, the abundance of other entities called blizgikliai indicates that this word can still readily be used to name any new entity of the same purpose (usually a substance) whose object is not yet mentioned in the lexical definition of blizgiklis. Consequently, it is not yet appropriate to divide the semantics of this neologism by distinguishing separate meanings solely on the grounds that the word names very different things—as such things proliferate, new meanings would continually have to be created. It is also important that in every case the derivative is based on the same meaning of the base verb3. It is most likely that the name of the food additive will be distinguished as a separate lexeme. The systematic formation of names in this lexical group with the suffix under discussion may provide a strong basis for such a distinction4. Recalling what was noted in discussing the structure of the dictionary entries for the words migracija, metamorfozė and the word element mikro-, the question arises whether the neologism blizgiklis and other (new) derivatives in the category of instrument formation could be presented in a similar way, especially those whose lexical semantics have not yet stabilized, which are used to name ever-new entities, whose working meaning is not reflected in the definitions of their lexical meanings, and so on. For example: 3 Cf. the lexemes of the neologisms gaiviklis 1. “a product that refreshes, provides freshness or a fresh scent”; 2. “a product that revitalizes or provides vitality,” puriklis 1. “a natural or synthetic food additive added to dough to make baked goods lighter”; 2. “a cosmetic product for making hair fuller,” and rūgštiklis 1. “a natural or synthetic food or feed additive used to produce a sour taste”; 2. “a substance that increases soil acidity or decreases its alkalinity” are based on different meanings of the base verbs gaivinti, purinti and rūgštinti (for more details, see Murmulaitytė 2014: 8–10). 4 The example of blizgiklis was intended, among other things, to show how promptly dictionary data can be refined nowadays—by continuously studying usage, whose changes, if recorded without understanding word-formation rules, the laws of lexical semantics, and so on, would in themselves be of little value. ND is not a dictionary; its principal aims are different. Nevertheless, it has certain features characteristic of lexicographic work and, most importantly, its data, as a source that responds rapidly to changes in usage, are used in compiling the Dictionary of Standard Lithuanian and other explanatory dictionaries. BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 9 blizgiklis noun (2) a product for shining: 1. a product for shining shoes, furniture, floors, cars, hair, plant leaves, etc.; 2. a substance that gives food products a shiny appearance. spalviklis noun (2) a coloring agent: 1. a tool for highlighting text in a distinctive color; 2. a substance that imparts color to other chemical substances (paints, varnishes, cosmetic products, etc.); 3. slang a food additive—a coloring substance. In this case, a more abstract shared working meaning common to both lexemes would be presented before the definitions of all the lexemes. But this would be working semantics rather than lexical semantics, that is, a different kind of information, so there would be no question of how to link it to lexical meanings in the database. This general information (like other data pertaining to the whole word rather than individual lexemes—part of speech, stress-paradigm labels, etc.) would simply be stored separately in the database, in a designated location. In the microstructure of the dictionary entry, it could be distinguished from lexical-semantic data by smaller type or in another way. Roughly the same idea, implemented in a different form, emerges when examining the entries for adjectives formed with the suffix -inis, -ė presented in DŽ₁. It should be recalled here that adjectives formed by this productive process (Kniūkšta 1976: 3, 7) “far surpass all other adjectives” in the variety of their meanings (Kniūkšta 1976: 56–57, 59, etc.), and that their (specific) working meanings are highly varied (DLKG 2006: 209; LKG 1965: 568–573). In the case of such relational derivatives, not only the semantics of the base word but also the semantic relations between the base and modified words are important (Kniūkšta 1976: 57; see also the literature cited there). In the various editions of DŽ, it has long been much more common to explain not the relational adjective itself, which serves as the headword, but its illustrative collocations with the modified words, simply indicating the base word beforehand. This is especially so when the base words denote things that may have several kinds of relations with other things, so that the derived adjective may also have several meanings and be unclear without the base word (Kniūkšta 1976: 59). For example: aliejin||is, ~ė (1) → o i l: ~ė a cask. A. a dish (with oil). ~ės crops (oil-producing plants). ~iais painted pictures in oils DŽ₆ BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 10 potato||, ~ (2) → p o t a t o: B. sack (for filling with potatoes). ~ mash (made from potatoes). ~ soil (in which potatoes grow well) DŽ6 church, clothing (1) → b a ž n y č i a: 1.: liturgical garments (ceremonial garments worn by a clergyman or festive garments for a churchgoer). 2.: ecclesiastical law. ecclesiastical art, music DŽ6 Cf. the seemingly analogous presentation of adjectives with the suffix -inis, -ė in the dictionary of international words Interleksis: algebraic, math. related to ⇧algebra (1); e.g., algebraic equation (an equation relating polynomials), algebraic expression (an expression consisting of letters and numbers combined by signs of addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, raising to an integer power, and taking a root), algebraic numbers (solutions of algebraic equations with integer coefficients). Interleksis analytic [Gk. analytikos], related to analysis, characteristic of it, analytical, e.g., analytic geometry (studies the properties of geometric objects using methods of mathematical analysis), analytic function (expressed as a power series), analytical chemistry (studies the quantitative and qualitative composition and structure of substances using chemical and physical methods). Interleksis Nevertheless, the identity of the microstructure of these dictionary entries, compared with DŽ₇i, is only apparent, since in the case of the adjectives algebrinis, -ė; analizinis, -ė, Interleksyje, the illustrative examples are not free word combinations (cf. potato sack, oil barrel), but compound terms with a more specific semantics, further removed from the meanings of their individual components. Attention should also be drawn to the variety of forms in which derivational information is presented: in one case, the derivational meaning is defined (analizinis, -ė), while in another (algebrinis, -ė), the definition also contains a direct reference to the base word. Cf. the entry for the adjective akademinis, -ė, where the derivational BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai 11 the meaning is presented in yet another way—as a separate, first lexeme (for this mode of presentation, see also below the articles in BŽ for the adjectives baltyminis, -ė; jūrinis, -ė), whose definition gives the base noun akademija in its second sense: “the name of an institution, society, or higher-education establishment in the fields of science and art, e.g., the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences, the Vilnius Academy of Arts”5: akademinis: 1. related to ⇧ akademija (2); 2. educational, instructional, scientific (usually higher education), e.g., an academic hour, academic youth; 3. strictly adhering to traditions and canons, characteristic of academicism, e.g., academic painting; 4. exemplary, e.g., an academic theatre; 5. purely theoretical, without practical significance, e.g., an academic dispute. Interleksis Compare also cases in Interleksio where the word-formation information is limited to a reference to the base word: laboratory [⇧ laboratory], conducted in a laboratory, e.g., a laboratory test; located in a laboratory, belonging to or intended for a laboratory, e.g., laboratory equipment. Interleksis rocket-powered [⇧ rocket]: 1. operating on the principle of a rocket; 2. intended for rockets; 3. armed with rockets. Interleksis 5 In TŽŽ 2013, the adjective akademinis, -ė is presented in an almost analogous way, except that the fourth and fifth lexemes have switched places. The first lexeme also refers to the second meaning of the base noun akademija. However, in this dictionary akademija has 3 meanings: 1 “philos. a school founded by Plato (around 387 BC) near Athens, in gardens named after the mythical hero Academus; it existed until AD 529; a center of Greek philosophy 2 in the 18th–19th centuries in Italy and other Western European countries, a musical concert—a composer’s or performers’ evening 3 the name of higher scientific and artistic institutions, associations, and institutions of higher education, e.g., Lietuvos mokslų Δ, Vilniaus dailės Δ. Thus, it should be understood that TŽŽ 2013 akademinis, -ė is associated with an ancient concert, rather than with scientific, artistic, and similar institutions. On the basis of the usage of this common word, it is clear that this is a proofreading error, not a deliberate linking of the first lexeme of the derivative to a different meaning of the base word than in Interleksiu, as the presentation seems to suggest. BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 12 The entry for the adjective raketinis, -ė differs from the previously presented examples from Interleksio also in that it has the structure of a polysemous word; that is, the aforementioned different semantic relations between base words and the words being defined are realized here as separate lexemes, while no collocations illustrating usage are provided. Cf. the analogous microstructure of a dictionary entry in the Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos žodyne (hereafter BŽ), where lexemes are defined and illustrated with free word combinations or compound terms that require no further explanation, since the information in the lexeme definition is sufficient to understand their meaning: bahreiniėtiškas, bahreiniėtiška adj. (1) 1. characteristic of Bahrainis, their culture, or Bahrain: Bahraini banking. 2. made or found in Bahrain: Bahraini oil. BŽ baktèrinis, baktèrinė adj. (1) 1. caused by bacteria: Bacterial inflammation of the skin [mucous membranes of the eyes]. Bacterial wilt disease. Intestinal infection of bacterial origin. Bacterial dental plaque. 2. containing bacteria: Bacterial starter culture. Bacterial fertilizer. Bacterial oil-degrading preparation. BŽ zigzãginis, zigzãginė adj. (1) 1. resembling a zigzag (sense 1), zigzag-shaped: Zigzag seam [line]. 2. made or moving in a zigzag (sense 1): Zigzag movement of an excavator. Zigzag connection [turn]. BŽ Returning to neologisms, it should be noted that presenting their derivational meaning can be useful: when a word is still new, little heard, and used less frequently, its derivational semantics can help to better understand its lexical meaning. However, as in other cases, consistency must be observed—once a dictionary microstructure reflecting certain derivational and lexical semantic data has been established, it must be followed strictly. For instance, having decided BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 13 to place information on derivational semantics in a dictionary entry before information on lexical semantics, it should not also be presented as a separate lexeme, for example: baltyminis, baltyminė adj. (2) 1. whose main component is protein: Protein food. Protein plants [supplements]. 2. related to protein: Protein medium. Protein adhesives. Cow’s milk is a protein allergen. BŽ jūrinis, jūrinė adj. (1) 1. blowing from the sea: Sea breeze. 2. influenced or determined by the sea or ocean: Maritime climate. 3. located by the sea: Maritime state. 4. related to the sea: Nautical maps. 5. living or growing in the sea or by the sea: Marine perch. BŽ The second lexeme of the word baltyminis, -ė and the fourth lexeme of the word jūrinis, -ė are essentially defined by presenting the general derivational meanings of these words, which are, of course, more abstract than their other lexical meanings, and therefore their definitions apply to and encompass all the others. Indeed, protein food or protein supplements are such that their main component is protein; however, viewed more broadly, food and supplements are protein-related because, in some respect (composition), they are related to protein. And the sea breeze, maritime climate, maritime state, and marine perch, like nautical maps, are in one way or another (in terms of location, influence, etc.) related to the sea. In examining dictionary microstructures according to how derivational and lexical meanings are presented, other patterns were also observed. For example: bankinis, bankinė adj. (1) related to banks, carried out at a bank, and so forth: The financial institution urges its clients to take care of their banking matters earlier. The French automotive group plans banking operations in Lithuania. BŽ BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 14 The preceding examples are taken from BŽ. It should be noted that it would be premature to accuse the author of this dictionary of being inconsistent in presenting data on derivational and lexical semantics. This is primarily because they did not set themselves the task of distinguishing these different types of data and did not create a corresponding microstructure. It is likely that, as the dictionary is expanded and its data refined in the future, ways will be found to correct the ambiguities and logical errors that occur. It might seem that the simplest solution would be, in the case of the words baltyminis, -ė and jūrinis, -ė, to supplement the derivational definitions with the word kitaip—“otherwise related to proteins,” “otherwise related to the sea.” This would avoid the aforementioned overlap between derivational and lexical meanings, in which a more abstract derivational definition essentially also applies to more specific lexical meanings. However, this would violate another lexicographic principle, which is becoming increasingly relevant as electronic dictionaries and lexicographic databases proliferate. 1.3. Cross-referential definitions In discussing the revised general requirements for compiling terminology dictionaries, Alvydas Umbrasas drew attention to cross-referential definitions—where a subsequent “meaning is formulated using substitutive pronouns, i.e. it is written as though it were a continuation of what was stated in the first meaning <...>” (Umbrasas 2008: 222). For example, in BŽ, the definitions of the second meanings of the nouns biblioteka, basutė, butelis are of this kind: bibliotekà, bibliotèkos noun (2) 1. an institution that collects, acquires, and preserves books and other publications and makes them available for readers to use: Public [school, village] library. Mobile library. Equip village libraries with computers. Use the institute’s [university’s] library. 2. the premises of such an institution: An exhibition is taking place in the library. I sat in the library all day. The seminar will be held in the institute’s library. | a room intended for storing books: When Dad would shut himself away in the library, the nanny would take us outside so we wouldn’t disturb him. Good afternoon, I’ve come to see the professor. — Come into the library. <...> BŽ BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 15 basūtė noun (2) 1. a lightweight, open summer shoe: The sandal strap broke. The dog chewed up two sandals—mine and my sister’s. 2. plural: a pair of such shoes: Beach sandals. I bought sandals. I’d like lace-up sandals BŽ būtelis1 noun (1) 1. a glass or plastic container with a narrow neck closed with a cork or screw cap: A beer [juice] bottle. Don’t drink straight from the bottle. Careful, two broken bottles are lying in the stairwell. 2. the quantity that such a container holds: That’s enough of that Coca-Cola for you; you’ve nearly drunk a whole bottle by yourself. Men, you’ve drunk two bottles; that’s enough of that vodka! ◊ išleisti džiną iš būtelio see išleisti. BŽ Sometimes such formulations link not only meanings but also subsenses within a single meaning: váistinė feminine noun (1) <...> an establishment where medicines are made and sold; its premises: Few people go to the police station or pharmacy of their own accord J.Mik. Whoever often goes into the forest rarely visits the pharmacy rš. The pharmacy wouldn’t earn a living from me; I never get sick Krt. <...> LKŽe In terminography, “[t]he computerization of dictionaries and their inclusion in terminology databases encourage defining each meaning as independently as possible. To make it more convenient to indicate relations between concepts and the elements of the entries for the terms that designate them, databases tend to present meanings in separate entries (this is done, for example, in the oldest terminology database of the Institute of Mathematics and Informatics http://www.terminynas.lt and in the Terminology Bank of the Republic of Lithuania); therefore, definitions in terminology dictionaries must be suitable for distinguishing one from another, for structuring, and for transfer to a database” (Umbrasas 2008: 222). In BŽ, as the examples show, cross-referenced definitions are used systematically for pairs (footwear and the like), as well as for the names of premises, quantities that fit in containers, etc. The information in this dictionary was intended to be presented as in printed dictionaries—as a complete dictionary entry, rather than as separate lexemes. In paper dictionaries, such BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 16 definitions are effective because they make it possible to formulate the dictionary entry as a whole more fluently, without repeating what has already been stated (in the case of printing, saving space and compactness are also important). It is assumed that users will have no difficulty examining other meanings of a word after finding a cross-referenced definition. Thus, although in terminology dictionaries “[e]ach meaning of a term must be defined as an independent unit—its definition must be clear when taken separately from the other meanings” (Umbrasas 2008: 222), in BŽ, at least at this stage, cross-referenced definitions are not considered the greatest problem. 1.4. Submeanings (shades of meaning) The existence of this phenomenon and its presentation in a dictionary also reveal features of human thought and the formation of its images and conceptual associations. The structures of the quoted dictionary entries vaistinė and biblioteka show that BŽ and LKŽₑ understand an analogous hierarchy of meanings differently: in one case, the meanings ‘institution’ and ‘premises’ are presented as equivalent, independent lexemes; in the other, the ‘premises’ meaning seems not to be sufficiently distinct from the ‘institution’ meaning, so these are treated as shades of a single meaning (submeanings) and presented together as one lexeme. Is this simply a different choice by lexicographers about how to present the same things, or should they nonetheless be presented in the same way? Is this regular polysemy and semantic derivation (cf. Babickienė 1985, 2012)? Are the concepts of institutions and their locations sufficiently distinct for a Lithuanian speaker, or can all usage examples (more precisely, any usage example) be assigned precisely and unambiguously to the ‘institution’ or ‘premises’ meaning? For example, when we say the employees of the pharmacy / library or the pharmacy / library’s working hours have already ended, we understand the pharmacy and library as institutions. The premises are clearly meant when speaking of pharmacies (libraries) being built, repaired, renovated, and so on. However, the same phrase can be ambiguous, depending on the context—cf. I went into the pharmacy / library: if to get medicine / books, the institution is meant; if to wait for the heavy rain to stop, the premises. To present systematically the relations between meanings and submeanings in a dictionary, the system must first be identified by studying usage and how words from a given semantic group are presented in dictionaries of one’s own and other languages—both how words are divided into meanings and how lexemes are illustrated with usage examples. When examining the usage and dictionaries of foreign languages, one must also take the specific characteristics of those languages into account: an English speaker does not necessarily connect the same concepts through semantic relations in the same way as a Lithuanian speaker; consequently, a Lithuanian dictionary is not obliged to copy the microstructure of an English dictionary. BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 17 The same, of course, can be said of other cases of regular polysemy (semantic derivation)—names for a container and the quantity it holds (a plastic bucket – a bucket of potatoes), and for a color and things that have that color (the color red – a red kerchief)6. Cf. the previously presented entry for butelis from BŽ and the entry for buteliukas (in this case, the diminutive seme is not relevant) from LKŽe: buteliùkas sm. (2) 1. half a bottle (of vodka): They set a little bottle on the table and sip Èr. How much did we drink there—three of us, one little bottle Pnd. <…> LKŽe It can be seen that in the latter entry the sememes ‘container’ and ‘quantity it holds’ are not distinguished at all—neither as separate meanings nor as submeanings. For it is obvious that what can be placed on a table is a container, whereas in speaking of three people drinking from a little bottle, the quantity of alcohol consumed was important, not the fact that they drank from one container (and, moreover, not necessarily from just one; the same can be said with drinking from separate shot glasses or the like in mind). To sum up what has been said about word meanings and their submeanings, as well as cross-referenced definitions, the question arises: to what extent does dividing a dictionary entry into separate lexemes and presenting information about them separately affect (a) the perception of a word’s entire semantic structure and (b) the perception of its relations to words with the same root? In printed dictionaries, some (often most) words with the same root are frequently placed next to one another (see Fig. 1): 6J. Apresjan identified 39 types of regular noun polysemy in Russian. Some are “on the borderline of monosemy,” and words belonging to them are not always regarded as polysemous in dictionaries (although for at least one word of each such type, dictionaries recognize either different meanings or shades of meaning) (Апресян 1995: 200–203). Examples include names for a plant and the food product made from it (In tropical forests, black pepper pepper grow on long stems, like hops or lianas—ground black pepper), names for trees and their wood (cedar seedlings – cedar furniture), names for animals and their fur (fox cubs – a fox-fur hat), names for animals and their meat (a laying hen – and again chicken for lunch chicken?), names for materials and products made from them (to mine gypsum – can one drive with a cast (broken finger)?), names for containers and their contents (a spacious auditorium – the audiencestood up and applauded), and so on. BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 18 FIG. 1. DŽ4 fragment These are non-prefixed words belonging to the same word-formation nest (prefixed derivatives with the same root are scattered throughout an alphabetical dictionary and appear alongside other derivatives with the same prefix). With such a word-formation nest before us, even if incomplete, it is easier to relate its members through semantic links, notice shifts in semantic development, and perhaps better understand the definition of one lexeme or another, especially if, for one reason or another, it is not perfect. Of course, this is relevant to general dictionaries. It has been noted that in terminography, especially electronic terminography, presenting meanings in separate entries has proved useful for indicating more conveniently the relations between concepts and the elements of entries for the terms denoting them. 2. PRACTICAL AND THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF LEXICOGRAPHY Since the study of dictionary-entry microstructure sought not only to examine more closely the features of semantic information presentation in an explanatory dictionary, but also to use its example to substantiate the scholarly and theoretical nature of lexicography, in concluding I would like to return to the definition of lexicography. This concept is defined in various ways in dictionaries, for example: “a branch of science encompassing the practice and theory of dictionary making” (Interleksis); “a branch of linguistics concerned with BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai 19 the compilation of dictionaries; the theory and practice of dictionary preparation” (MLVV), 1) dictionary-making, compiling dictionaries; 2) a branch of linguistics that studies the theory and practice of compiling dictionaries (НСИС); “a branch of applied linguistics concerned with the theory and practice of compiling dictionaries” (ISWDJP), etc.7 A considerable number of English dictionaries define lexicography without explicitly mentioning its theoretical dimension, but, in one way or another (e.g., by comparing it with other branches of linguistics or the like), that theoretical nature is nevertheless reflected in their definitions or in the usage examples they provide for the word, for example, lexicography 1. “the editing or making of a dictionary”; 2. “the principles and practices of dictionary making” (MV); “the practice of compiling dictionaries”: Although these two categories – grammar and lexicography – are organically related and interwoven, they will be treated separately for maximal clarity; Winchester is excellent on the theory and practise of lexicography <...> (EOLD); “the act, process, art, or work of writing, compiling, or editing a dictionary or dictionaries” (WNWCD), etc. Thus, would the issues discussed in this article matter to an unreflective compiler of a lexical collection, or would such a compiler, lacking sufficient knowledge of lexicography and other branches of linguistics, recognize here problems of inconsistency, accuracy and reliability in information presentation, and other disciplinary issues? Is the placement of information in dictionary microstructure and lexicographic technique (fonts, abbreviations, special symbols, the order in which data are presented, etc.) merely a matter of the practical compilation of dictionaries? Drawing on numerous examples from various dictionaries, it has been shown that even these seemingly entirely formal matters concerning the presentation of semantic and derivational information in an explanatory dictionary can be reciprocally related to research in lexical semantics or word formation and its findings. The placement of information in dictionary microstructure, the order in which data are presented, and other matters of lexicographic technique are important not only for the practical work of a lexicographer; lexicography is not merely the practice of compiling dictionaries, but also a certain system of knowledge, a theory—that is, a science8. “It is impossible to draw a strict distinction between lexicographic theory and practice <...>” (Jakaitienė 2005: 7, cf. Tarp 2011: 462). 7 The dictionaries cited also give another meaning of this word, e.g., “the totality of printed dictionaries and dictionary-type works” (Interleksis), “the totality of printed works of the dictionary type, dictionary literature” (НСИС), “the totality of dictionary-type works; dictionary literature” (LKŽₑ), “a collection of dictionaries (for example, in a country or language)” (LLVV, MLVV), “the body of dictionaries of a given language, country, or period” (ISWDJP). 8 This view has been, or is, held by numerous lexicographic traditions (Russian, German, partly Chinese, etc.), as well as by various Danish and South African lexicographers, the Czech-American lexicographer L. Zgusta (1992), and others (Tarp 2012: 322). However, there are also those who do not believe that lexicographic theory exists (Atkins, Rundell 2008: 4), regarding lexicography as a craft, profession, or art, but not a science: “A theory is a system of ideas put forward to explain phenomena that are not otherwise explainable. A science has a theory, a craft does not. All natural phenomena need a theory, but how can there be a theory of the production of artefacts? There are theories of language, there may be theories of lexicology, but there is no theory of lexicography.” BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 20 Only by drawing on lexical semantics, word formation, and logic is it possible to address problems in lexicography as a practical activity. Without knowledge of these and other branches of linguistics, dictionaries may perhaps be, as people often like to say, compiled (cf. telephone books or alphabetical, inventory-like lists of things), but they certainly cannot be written and created, which is essentially what should be done in order to provide scientifically analyzed and systematized information. “<...> lexicography is undoubtedly shaped not only by society’s needs, but also by the study of language” (Jakaitienė 2005: 10). CONCLUSIONS 1. Four aspects of presenting semantic information in explanatory dictionaries were examined: the general interpretation of lexemes in an article for a polysemous word; the relationship between operational and lexical semantics in explaining words; cross-referential definitions; and the differentiation and presentation of submeanings (shades of meaning) in a dictionary entry. Clearly, these aspects are important and should be borne in mind when creating systematic, and hence high-quality, dictionaries of the future, both electronic and traditional print dictionaries. 2. Dictionaries sometimes contain entries for polysemous words in which the general, more abstract part of the semantic information is presented before the explanation of the first lexeme, that is, it applies to all lexemes. However, this is often not done systematically, even within one and the same dictionary. Sometimes, when explaining the meanings of word components, operational information is also presented in this way. 3. Presenting operational semantics can help readers better understand the lexical meanings of headwords (especially neologisms). Perhaps, in the case of polysemous words, this could be done in a similar way, with the operational meaning presented before all the lexical meanings of the polysemous word. 4. Cross-referential definitions, formulated as though they continued what had been said earlier, are fairly common in traditional dictionaries. Such definitions should, however, be avoided; in electronic dictionaries, where each lexeme is often presented separately from the other meanings of the same word, they should not occur at all. 5. The differentiation of submeanings (shades of meaning) is not systematic, whether when comparing different dictionaries or when assessing the microstructure of any one dictionary. It is not always possible, especially when it is impossible Lexicography is about all a craft, the craft of preparing dictionaries, as well as an art, as Landau (2001) says. It may be becoming more scientific, but it has not become a science.“ (Béjoint 2010: 381); „Lexicography has no theoretical foundations, and even the best lexicographers, when pressed, can never explain what they are doing, or why“ (Wierzbicka 1985: 5). BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 21 to rely on usage examples that indisputably illustrate one submeaning or another, to adhere to the principle of systematicity. However, cases of regular polysemy in the same dictionary can, and should, be presented more consistently. 6. Few would question the scientific standing of lexicology, word formation, and lexical semantics. Yet lexicography, which draws on the propositions of these and other branches of linguistics, applies their methods in both theoretical and practical respects, follows developments in research across various fields of linguistics, and (as far as possible) takes its findings into account, for some reason—particularly in the assessments of science administrators—continually hovers on the boundary between being recognized as a science and being denied that status. Nevertheless, the practical and theoretical aspects of lexicography are closely connected, like communicating vessels: they build on one another’s findings and foster progress. Lexicography is not merely a profession or a craft; it is a branch of the science of language that truly “seems to answer for all of linguistics, since dictionaries make it possible to judge the overall level of language science in a given country” (Jakaitienė 2005: 10). ŠALTINIAI BŽ – Bendrinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas. Vyr. red. D. Liutkevičienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Prieiga internete: http://bkz.lki.lt/ (žiūrėta 2017 m. birželio – spalio mėn.). DŽ4 – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas. Vyr. red. S. Keinys. 4-as leidimas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2000. DŽ6 – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas. Vyr. red. S. Keinys. 6-as (3-ias elektroninis) leidimas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2006. DŽ7i – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas. Vyr. red. S. Keinys. 7-as pataisytas ir papildytas leidimas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2012; elektroninis variantas, 2015 (atnaujinta versija, 2017). Prieiga internete: http://lkis.lki.lt/dabartinis. EOLD – English Oxford Living Dictionaries. Prieiga internete: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/ (žiūrėta 2017 08 15). Interleksis – Kompiuterinis tarptautinių žodžių žodynas „Interleksis“, Vilnius: Alma littera, Fotonija, 2008. ISWDJP – Internetowy słownik wyrazów i definicji języka polskiego online Definicja.NET. Prieiga internete: http://definicja.net (žiūrėta 2017 08 18). BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 22 LKŽe 2008 – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 1–20 (elektroninis variantas). Vyr. red. G. Naktinienė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas. Prieiga internete: www.lkz.lt (žiūrėta 2017 m. balandžio–spalio mėn.). LLVV – Latviešu literārās valodas vārdnīca, 1–8. Rīga: Zinātne, 1972–1996. Prieiga internete: http://tezaurs.lv/llvv/ (žiūrėta 2017 09 23). MW – Merriam-Webster.com. Prieiga internete: https://www.merriam-webster.com/ (žiūrėta 2017 06 15). MLVV – Mūsdienu latviešu valodas vārdnīca. Prieiga internete: http://www.tezaurs.lv/mlvv (žiūrėta 2017 09 23). TŽŽ 2001: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Ats. red. A. Kinderys, Vilnius: Alma Littera. TŽŽ 2013: Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas. Red. D. Svetikienė, Vilnius: Alma Littera. WNWCD – Webster’s New World College Dictionary, 4th edition. Prieiga internete: http://www.yourdictionary.com/ (žiūrėta 2017 06 15). НСИС – Захаренко Е. Н., Комарова Л. Н., Нечаева И. В. Новый словарь иностранных слов: 25 000 слов и словосочетаний. Москва: Азбуковник, 2003. Prieiga internete: http://slovari.ru/default.aspx?s=0&p=232 (žiūrėta 2017 09 30). LITERATŪRA Atkins B. T. S., Rundell M. 2008: The Oxford Guide to Practical Lexicography, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Babickienė Z. 1985: Reguliariųjų išvestinių reikšmių pateikimas aiškinamuosiuose lietuvių ir rusų kalbų žodynuose. – Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 24, 223–235. Babickienė Z. 2012: Veiksmažodžių abstraktų semantiniai pokyčiai. – Santalka: Filologija, Edukologija 20(1), 18–25. Béjoint H. 2010: The Lexicography of English, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DLKG 2006: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika. Red. V. Ambrazas. 4-ta pataisyta laida, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. Fuertes-Olivera P., Bergenholtz H. (Eds.) 2011: e-Lexicography: The Internet, Digital Initiatives and Lexicography, London, New York: Continuum. Granger S., Paquot M. (Eds.) 2012: Electronic Lexicography, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jakaitienė E. 2005: Leksikografija, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 23 Kniūkšta P. 1976: Priesagos -inis būdvardžiai (Daryba, reikšmės, gramatiniai sinonimai), Vilnius: Mokslas. LKG 1965: Lietuvių kalbos gramatika 1. Vyr. red. K. Ulvydas, Vilnius: Mintis. Murmulaitytė D. 2014: Priesagos -iklis naujadarų apibrėžčių sistemiškumas. – Bendrinė kalba 87, 1–17. Prieiga internete: http://www.bendrinekalba.lt/Straipsniai/87/Murmulaityte_BK_87_straipsnis.pdf. Tarp S. 2011: Reflections on the Academic Status of Lexicography. – Lexikos 20 (AFRILEX-reeks/series 20: 2010), 450–465. Prieiga internete: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271292019_Reflections_on_the_Academic_Status_of_Lexicography (žiūrėta 2017 10 27). Tarp S. 2012: Do We Need a (New) Theory of Lexicography? – Lexikos 22 (AFRILEX-reeks/series 22: 2012), 321–332. Prieiga internete: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271292019_Reflections_on_the_Academic_Status_of_Lexicography (žiūrėta 2017 10 27). Umbrasas A. 2008: Atnaujinti „Terminų žodynų rengimo bendrieji reikalavimai“. – Terminologija 15, 216–225. Urbutis V. 2009: Žodžių darybos teorija, 2-as leidimas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. Wierzbicka A. 1985: Lexicography and conceptual analysis, Ann Arbor: Karoma. Zgusta L. 1992: The Czech–Chinese Dictionary and the Theory of Lexicography. – International Journal of Lexicography 5(2), 85–128. Апресян Ю. 1995: Лексическая семантика: Синонимические средства языка. Второе исправленное и дополненное издание. – Ю. Д. Апресян. Избранные труды 1, Москва: Школа „Языки русской культуры“. Гринев-Гриневич С. 2008: Лексикография и терминоведение. – Terminologija 15, 30–42. Įteikta 2017 10 30 Priimta 2017 12 20 BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204 DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ. Aiškinamojo žodyno mikrostruktūra: semantinės informacijos pateikimo ypatumai | 24 MICROSTRUCTURE OF EXPLANATORY DICTIONARY: THE PECULIARITIES OF PRESENTING SEMANTIC INFORMATION Summary The goal of this article is to analyse several cases of semantic data presentation in explanatory dictionaries in order to show that lexicography is not just a practical and applied discipline. The article also aims at explaining how semantic information in dictionaries is provided, how derivational and lexical meanings are correlating with each other, how the semantic relationships are reflected by the manner of presenting the chosen data, what it says to the linguist and to an ordinary dictionary user. Several aspects are reviewed in the article: the general explanation of lexemes in a polysemic word entry, the relationship between derivational and lexical semantics of words, bound definitions, submeaning (shades of meaning) distinctions and their presentation in a dictionary entry. It also analyses how the structure of a dictionary entry reflects the semantic structure of a word, the hierarchy of its meanings, their relationship, what additional information a dictionary user can get by only studying lexeme arrangement in the entry. On the basis of extensive examples from various dictionaries, it is shown that even the formal aspects on semantic and derivational information presentation in the explanatory dictionary could be related to feedback on lexical semantics or word formation research and their results. The place of information in the microstructure of a dictionary entry, data presentation order, and etc., aspects of lexicographic technique are important not only for the practical work of a lexicographer; and lexicography is not only dictionary-making practice, but also a certain system of result recognition, i.e. a science. Vertė L. Inčiuraitė-Noreikienė KEYWORDS: lexicography, explanatory dictionary, microstructure of a dictionary, semantics, lexical meaning, derivational meaning. DAIVA MURMULAITYTĖ Lietuvių kalbos institutas Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius [email protected] BENDRINĖ KALBA 90 (2017) www.bendrinekalba.lt ISSN 2351-7204