Kaip nereikia rengti žodynų

collaboration, longitudinal study — continuous ar continuing study, succession (antithesis of simultaneity) sequence sequence, — validation ar (experimental ir psychological measurement quality criterion reliability, — jų adequacy) suitability. — Be these observations, one can mention a ir certain lack of consistency. Without į delving into the problems ar jų of consistency of the systematic use of terms, it would be enough to say that the editors of the dictionary cannot decide, USSR ar psychologists still exist, no. ar Same A. Luria onewhere called USSR psychologio st, elsewhere (in one case even on the same page) — Russian psychologist. However, such inequalities are very easily corrected. It is to be assumed that the editors of the dictionary, preparing its new editions, will correct a lot of things, including the above-mentioned inequalities. Perhaps the creation of Lithuanian terminology will be taken more seriously. All the more so because, as can be seen from the examples given, Lithuanian terms are often both clearer and shorter. After all, psychologists obviously want as many people as possible to understand them and read their works. Birutė LENKTYTĖ HOW NOT TO PREPARE DICTIONARIES A lot of different dictionaries, especially dictionaries, are now published. Looking at the figures, one could scream with admiration both for the scale of the work and for such a large group of dictionaries, dictionaries editors and publishers. After all, it has been known since ancient iš times that the most difficult of all language works is to write dictionaries. O tick many working! What a great linguistic flight, just a flight! A real golden age of vocabulary. Let's go, let's go... Using one of ne the new three fruits of our dictionary, it is quite quickly disappointed that many editors publishers too easily hope to enrich — Lithuanian lexicography. ir I am afraid of the urgency of work, the extraordinary preparation of ir collection, just nothing. Ne one editor-pubir lisher seems to have no nė idea how dictionaries are written as permitted. ri ir One of the most iš important, fruitful and ir authoritative fields of Lithuanian language work is being transformed into a lexicographic business, a kind of Gariūnas of linguistics. The first į priority is the enrichment of 106 Lithuanian ne lexicography, the quality of work, but also ne the material enrichment of the editors and publishers themselves. How many people buy nothing and if they learn ko iš tų dictionaries, how many wrongs learn! True, your “business” is primarily concerned with one of ne the general translation dictionaries, phrasebooks, as well as economics, business, etc. ir dictionarar ies dictionarar ies editor translator. Iš other fields of vocabulary are not rich. Ne so strongly attacked ir to prepare and release them. With the disappearance of the ir state-owned, ever-expanding treasure trove of fast and, apparently, highly profitable private book publishing, it will not be long before the time will come when a scientific ar book or a special dictionary can be published only by the iš author himself on his penny salary. Instead of receiving at least some of the fruits of his hard work, he will have to give profits to publishers, printers and sellers, as was already the case before the war for Prof. L. Vailionis, the editor of the Lithuanian Botanical Dictionary. And the old wisdom of the People will be fully confirmed —you will not be a bagot from science, only a humpback. Thus, after getting acquainted with Stasė Janonienė's "Dictionary of Plant Anatomy and Morphology Terms", published by Vilnius State Pedagogical Institute (now Vilnius Pedagogical University), the desire to write about it arose not because the author wanted to make a profit here (this dictionary was not written and published for this purpose), but because she had a considerable desire to help future biology teachers better understand their scientific terms, as she herself writes in the preamble to the dictionary, "to help to become aware of terms, to systematize and give meaning to the concepts of plant anatomy and morphology, to prepare students to use scientific literature, etc. " (p. 1-2). These are very serious and welcome objectives. The Higher School of Pedagogy, that teacher’s school, of course, does not have and cannot have greater goals than to train good, even very good teachers. And a good teacher must first of all be a good, just a great teacher of his subjects. Lack of a firm understanding of what to teach will in no way be replaced by an exemplary understanding of how to teach. The purpose of the vocabulary —to help students *Janonienė S. Dictionary of Plant ir Anatomy and Morphology. Vilnius, 1990. 40 p. 107 better learn to teach. ko o It is not for the botanist to decide how much the ne vocabulary is suitable for teaching botany itself, but unfortunir ately it will not help much to develop the teaching of botany language. First of all, it is not clear to the reader of the dictionary why at least half of the preface (more than a page) is devoted, as it is written, “to present basic knowledge of the spelling, pronunciation and pronunciation of Latin words” (p. 2). After all, this dictionary is not made up of Latin words, but of words borrowed and latinized from other languages. It is true that the Lithuanian translations of the origins of the title words are included (for example, dorsal — Latin dorsum — back, p. 12; although in many cases there is a lack of accuracy, even in this case — why was the Latin adjective dorsalis not mentioned), but the original source of a large part of these words or their morphemes is the Greek language (in the origin explanations it is presented in simplified Latin alphabet). Reading the very concise (from a few rules) Latin pronunciation science (p. 3), it became clear that the author of the dictionary considers these borrowed words from our language as Latin words and pronounces them according to the Latin rules - ji writes: “1. In polysyllabic words it is pronounced: 1.1. Penultimate syllable, if long (aleuron). 1.2. The third syllable from the end of the word, if it is short (actinomorphicY" etc. ir That is why, above all, the pronunciation anomalies of this Dictionary surprised me, the only right-hand accent used here, ir a considerable — number of words, assessed by the rules of common language, jargon. The author, apparently, does not know that o the ethnicised loanwords are pronounced according to the Lithuanian language rules! O maybe this is a new accentology word? However, linguists, doubtless, be will not be guided by “ Plant Anatomy Morphology ir Terms Glossary" for ir accentuated syllables (i.e. vartos vien ne dešininį kirčio ženklą), taisys išgirdę radę kur sukirčiuota nemokys ar kirčiuoti aerenchima atmosfėra ir biosféra chalūza chlorenchima 4, chondriosėma 7, chromomėra 8, chromonėma 9, chromosoma 9, citoplazma 10, diafrūgma 10, didstra 10, diktiosoma 10, egzina 11, epiblėma 11, epitė11, 12, 13, 15, ma 15, floéma 17, flora 17, made 18, brown 19 ir t.t. — iš in total over half a dozen such incorrectly spelled nouns of the second syllable belonging to the second accent. All singular jų verbs must be 108 as pronounced at the ending, i.e. Aerent hichlorenchima, diaphragm, diastra... hyaloplasma, intina, caliptra, carioplasma, cholenchima, cholerosis, commission, xylema, leptonema, lysosome, membrane, meristem, etc. ir to the later term zoospora for this type. Unfortunately, in this dictionary only the stupid term (ecosystem) is spelled in the end, so with that slash ir ne (requires left hand). O here are some other spelling errors in the dictionary: phytohormones 17 (=phytohormones), photosynthesis 17 (=photosynthese), periphery 31 (=periphery), polytomy 32 (=polytomy), protoginia 33 (=protogyne), tetrahedral 37 (=tetrahedra), zoophilia 39 (=zoophilia) ir etc. Be of, compound terms somehow twisted only the first point, e.g.: achromatic spindle 4 (=achromatic spindle), amphifloéminé sifonostele 5 (=amfifloéminé sifonostélé) until vegetative reproduction 38 (= vegetative covering). It is therefore clear that the reviewed Dictionary is not suitable for studying. Future teachers are taught to pronounce incorrectly, which is a serious breach of the general requirements of language education in both o higher and secondary schools. Users of dictionaries are doubtless used to assuming that all text in current dictionaries is written in valid spelling be — ir provided terms (not all general jų į dictionaries of the language nė are included, so other special ir dictionaries of terms are the only sources in which the normative writing is provided), interpretajų tions, finally ir other kalatitekmir enys agree bų su tų spelling rules of other languages. That should be the case. At least in somewhat better prepared ir and carefully published Ž0dyns this is the case. ir Unfortunat- “ ely, in the Plant ir Anatomy Morphology ny Glossary" various spelling (not just proofreading!) errors are present —wrong spelling of some heading terms, e.g. androceu 5 (=androceus- ), endemai 14 (=endemic), empirical 14 (=empirical), generative 18 (=generative), geneceu 18 (=gyneceus), partenogénézé 31 (=partenogenezé), plasmolizé 32 (=plasmolizé- ), trachéas 38 (=trachéas), spelling errors also occur in translations, e.g. abecelé (=abécélé; art. sigma 35), iSsiskirimas (=iSsiskyrimas; art. gutacija 19), išskyrimas (=iSkirtimas; art. excretion 13), kūnys (=kiirinys; art. reprodukcinis 34), molékulé (=molekulé; art. chromomera 10), netoks dininkas jnaginink ma, atmosfera, biosphere, chalaza, anizotropija žiūželiai žiuželiai; zoospora 39) and others. There are many spelling and transcription errors in ir the Latin and Greek words mentioned in the 109 (=not such; art. hemicellulose 19), orange (=orange; art. carotene rotation rotation; Page 10 23), (= explanations 6), of the origin (= of the terms. Thereforir e, in terms of spelling, be the spoken vocabulary cannot be relied on without ne reservations, there is some non-normative consonant in it. There are insufficiently unusually ar spelled terms in the glossary, e.g.: dichasis (lot. dichasium 11; =dichasis=double inflorescence BŽ 455), funiculus (lot. funiculus 18; = funicular = testis BZ, 374), perpendicular (lot. perpendicularis 31; =perpendicular =status), synese (gr. synezes36, is synizesis BZ. 379; =synesthesia), sora (gr. Soros 36; =soras BŽ 391, TŽŽ 458) and others. The glossary primarily explains terms of foreign origin. Since the existing ne Lithuanian equivalents of borrowed terms are tų presented everywhere, o ir the presented ones are not iš highlighted, other text is not excluded, the user of the dictionary is only taught to understand borrowed terms, but, it can be mų said, is not taught Lithuanian terms. For example: : anaphase 5 (BZ 24 ir androceous phase) 5 (but BŽ 219 for this purpose is provided only a cuckold), assimilation 7 (BŽ 40 ir absorption), basal 8 (basic), bivalent 9 (BZ 87 bivalents see twins), dermatogenic 11 (BG basic 300 term dermis), hypoderm- — is 21 (BŽ 179 ir poodis), meristema 26 (BŽ 275 ir fabric) etc. ir True, the terminology of botany is still too little translated, in this regard too little ką ir 1965 m. published "Dictionary of Botanical Terms". Therefore, at least the usual Lithuanian terms should be very well protected, unless one decides to Lithuanianize more. Because it is to difficult to understand why the į re-reviewed dictionary entered the cell ‘cell’ 9 (seven decades ago was disputed stopped at ir /cells), for į jį adding a tripod not provided by normative works 37 (=stand, stable), why the word inserted in 15 the explanation of the term epicotyl split when BŽ 31 the basic term is the difference between that word and the adverb (this difference is also in TSI 141). By the way, there are more different, unusual variants of terms in the spoken ir vocabulary, e.g.: alkoloid 5 (plg. alkaloids BŽ 20, TŽŽ 23), libriformos 26 (plg. wood fibres, libriform BZ. 328, 262, TŽŽ 288), nitrophils 28 (plg. nitrophites, nitrogen compounds BZ, 298, nitrophil au110 ends, nitrophites UTE VIII 208, nitrophils see nitrophites TZ.7. 341), perisperma 31 (see perisperma BŽ 320, LTE VIII 560, TŽŽ 376) and others. Among the unusualities of the dictionary we should also distinguish the use of the term egg cell 6, 7, 31, 35 (= egg cell BZ 203, DZ, 337 and others). In the dictionary, the term velamina 39 (by the way, BZ 431 provides the term root envelope, Latin: velamen) in the interpretation of another term or just does not spindle (see corpus 24). In the educational Zodynėlis it is appropriate to explain various terms and their variants found in the literature, but at the same time the user of such a publication must be clearly told what is provided for use. And, of course, the glossary author must show the student an example of the usage of the terms. The meanings of the glossary terms are explained. It is possible that the explanation was based on the list of lexicographic sources (9 publications in total) at the end of the booklet. It is only strange that the Lithuanian encyclopedia “Botanic Terms Dictionary” (V., 1965) was not included in that list. Perhaps because of this, there are a lot of inaccurate interpretations, and some of them are simply incorrect. Writing an accurate, clear, concise explanation of the meaning of a word or term is a work requiring great knowledge and skill. This requires excellent knowledge not only of the specialty, but also of the basics of lexicography. Just as it is not enough to read a textbook of internal diseases to be able to treat people, it is not enough to browse or read a dictionary to be able to write dictionaries yourself. Unfortunately, the authors of dictionaries and dictionary editors quite often do not even evaluate the latter. ar ir Ne you have to be able to interpret only the meanings. Much this like every work has its ir secrets, has its theory practice. Becoming a lexicographer takes less time than studying ir botany. nė ne ir Unfortunately, these “smilkmenélés” was not clearly understood by the author of the “Dictionary ir of Plant Anatomy Morphology Terms”. Now about the interpretations of the glossary terms themselves. First, almost all the adjectives in the glossary are explained incorrectly. They are usually interpreted here as nouns, often also nouns of a specific ne meaning, i.e. as real names of things (adjectives denote characteristics, made nouns are characteristiš jų ic names), e.g.: achlamidic “ring without tų acyclicity”, acyclic “certain characteristics of the ring”, acropetal 4, “superficial 111 “spiral ring, parts jo attached in a spiral” 4 (these du terms are explained as ring types, o ne growth of a plant. The branching of the top" 4 (explained as the name of the action state), ar autochthonous “starch of local origin formed in the present site” 7 (namely, this Word, according to the author of the dictionary, named starch type!), cyclic “ratic ring, parts arranged jo (= spread out) in circles" 10 (here explains ne the o feature, the concept of "cyclic ring"), edaphic "soil factors affecting plants" 12, mythological “the tale of the gods“ 26, optical “a device which is based on the laws of light propagation" 29 ir t.t. be galo. True, this disease affects ir part of “Dictionary of Botanical Terms" interpretations, but there can be ir found appropriate interpretations, e.g.: acyclic — 1) rec. Zod. p. 4: ‘spiral ring, parts jo attached in a spiral’; 2) BŽ 12: "non-circular, spiral"; 3) TŽŽ 10: ‘having an open (continuous or branched) chain of carbon atoms'. apocarpinis — 1) rec. word. p. 6: ‘flowering foliage made up of iš immature vaislapéliy’; 2) BŽ 35: "composed iš of immature seedlings". Secondly, some interpretations are ambiguous, e.g.: paracarp ‘monocystic mesh border placentation ir (see) vaislapynas’ 30, staminodis “the flower stalk is sterile and — does not produce 36, pollen” zygote “gametes merge to form a cell that gives rise to a new organism” 39 ir kt It is unclear here because descriptive sentences are made. What is the staminodi- — al state, the characteristic? What is ta the zygote — process, when, after the fusion of gametes, a cell is formed giving rise to a new organism? BŽ in the same words states ką another — staminodis “a sterile pollen stalk" be 404 (called a kind of stem), zygote “a o cell formed by the fusion of gametes, usually giving rise to a new organism” 485 (that is, the cell itself). ta Incorrectly expressing the idea, one can attribute great ir strangeness, e.g.: evolution “the development of the world, the change of society” 15 (evolution is the change itself, or development, o ne “the evolution of change"), funiculus 112 “the stem of a seed-plant called scklasaiciu” 18 (here it is explained, what is a seed ladder! True, converted BZ 374,70the user of the tool will find ka out, that thing, lat. Funiculus or funiculus umbilicalis. comm ma, ymucymoc, littuviski tevadinais Ir seklasaicin "Then that funikulu is taken from Latin, or perhaps from Russian"), geneceuus "The whole of a ring of leaflets is called a leaflet" 18 (the same story, such a term is 137 not at all, there is no only vaislapynas lot. — gynacceum, pinaecium, gynoe ceum, rus. eunenen, so here the Russian is already raised by the title word, and instead of the explanation the definition of the fern is inserted) etc. ir The student will not be ar clear, the ar 137 teacher, must believe when the interpretations of the term differ, cf. acrogamia “dust mites į get inside the blade through the micropiles (Zr.)" 4 ir “infiltration of the pollen by the į seedhead through the tip, breaking the jo tissue, when the micropile is closed due to full covering growthTM acrotonia BZ 16-17; “develops apex branches closer to the apex mother shoot” — 4 ir “such arrangement ir of the side shoots of the buds on the main axis, when the bud shoots gradually increase in the direction ir of the top in such a way that the largest buds strongest ir developed shoots are in the upper part of the main axis. ar iš jų <...>"BZ 17; aneurysm “wind plant pollination intermediary” 6 ir “Pollination of flowers su by wind” BZ 26 ir kt There are many examples that clearly show this. that the author of the dictionary St. Janonienė cannot explain the terms. The examples vo already iš given show this, and many others would ir confirm it. e.g. : commensalism “growing plants do not harm each other“ 24 (plg. “one form of interspecies coexistence of organisms: individuals of one species (commoners) permanently or temporarily reside in, etc. at the expense of the species, without harming it" “Cells relax in 254); the tissue after the intercellular plaques are dissolved” 26 (plg. “relaxation of individual cells in the tissue, dissolving the interstitial plates. <...>" BZ 267): polyploidy “nuclear division (-division) megabates the number of chromosomes” tu 92 (plg. “an increase in the number of chromosomes in the nuclei of plant cells by more than a factor of du the single chromosome su number typical of that species” zoochoria BŽ 334); “animals distribute fruit" 39 (plg. “distribution of 113 seeds by su birds or animals” BŽ 485) ir kt There are cases when general biology terms in the glossary are interpreted only as botanical terms, e.g.: biocenosis “plant community“ 8 (plg. “a community of organisms comprising plants and ir animals in a particular mą habitat” BZ, In 86). educational publications, ir ne only in them, it is still necessary to give the full scope of the meaning of the term. Better more convenient terms users once, ir iš o ne introduce the true meaning of the term su several times. Well, ir language stuff. Clearly too little attention to language paid The author of the dictionary. Be already mentioned spelling ir anomalies, a lot of things are not harmonized, as if one place would be taken the term, iš elsewhere interpretation, e.g.: astrosklereidė iš “stone cells jo (=stone cell) radial growths" extrafloraliné nektarinė “nectarine su 7, (see), which are arranged in ne a ring, but e.g. on the peduncles (=nectar, located in a ring, but e.g. on the ne peduncle)", geophyte “terrestrial plants (=plant) with (=whose) buds of renewal are hidden (=are hidden) in the 18, ground" velaminas "the outer shell of the roots, made up of dead cells. iš <...>" 39 ir kt In the explanations there are incorrect words used, e.g.: unstructured (=unstructured) in the explanation of 25 the term cuticle, beazotic (=beazote) in the explanation of the term 37 tannin, there are incorrect statements, e.g.: fixation “cells, tissue organs treatment with various ar substances that keep them unchanged for a certain time (=unchanged)” 16, punctuation errors. When the glossary contains various other ir terms inserted alphabetically due to lack of physiographic preparation, — ne e.g.: basipetalic heterogeneous oxylophytes 8, 20, 29 ir etc., unexplained terms, e.g.: dominance heterotypic 12, coagulate 20, object etc., 24, lack of 29 ir considerable fiber in explanations reference see. su inserted terms, e.g. kernel (p. homogeneo21), us geographical (p. endemic 14), microbe (p. phytonci17), des nectarine (p. extrafloral nectar 13), polysaccharide (p. hemicellulose 19), protoplast (p. ergastic 15), vegetation (p. ephemeras, 12) ir etc., it can be doubted that the reviewed dictionary will iš be of little benefit to the users, the harm can be great. o He won't do it “educational aids biology special114