MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2079853232 · doi:10.1353/utq.2005.0195

Onondaga-English/English-Onondaga Dictionary (review)

2004· article· en· W2079853232 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Keren Rice

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueLexicography and Language Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHistoryLinguisticsGrammarOrthographyPopulationSociologyDemographyReading (process)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Onondaga-English/English-Onondaga Dictionary Keren Rice (bio) Hanni Woodbury. Onondaga-English/English-Onondaga Dictionary University of Toronto Press. viii, 1564. $175.00 Many years ago now, the Ontario government and the University of Toronto Press entered into an agreement to publish dictionaries and grammars of the major Aboriginal languages of Ontario. The Onondaga dictionary is the fourth Iroquoian dictionary to be published by the Press in recent years. The Press is to be applauded for taking on this commitment. The results have been consistently high quality reference materials that set the standard for work on languages of this family. Onondaga is an Iroquoian spoken at the Six Nations Reserve near Brantford, Ontario and at Onondaga Nation near Syracuse, New York. The language was once spoken by a large population, but now has only a small number of speakers. The dictionary is an extraordinarily rich resource, the product of thirty years of work. It is based both on work with speakers and reference to earlier grammatical resources, with the oldest source dated 1860 (although Woodbury says that this work was completed in the seventeenth century). The older sources provide insight into what Woodbury calls Old Onondaga, or Onondaga before several sound changes took place. Following an introduction highlighting dialects, the organization of the dictionary, and discussion of the orthography, the Onondaga dictionary begins with a basic grammar of nouns and verbs. This is a clearly written discussion that presents many of the intricacies of Onondaga. It is followed by Onondaga-English and then English-Onondaga entries. The dictionary ends with extensive appendices that are, essentially, a topical dictionary within the larger dictionary. Topics include nature, people, household, and community, each with a number of subcategories. Onondaga, like other Iroquoian languages and like many languages of the Americas, poses many challenges to the dictionary maker. This is because the root, or the part of the word that contributes the major meaning, is generally not found at the beginning of the word. As an example, consider the root -ohae- 'wash something, bathe someone.' This root occurs preceded by a prefix and followed by a suffix, as in g-óhae-k 'I wash,' ag-oháe-k 'she washes (it),' ha-oháe-h 'he has washed it.' Another root, -tshahnit- 'be industrious, be driven,' is similar: go-tsháhnit 'she is industrious, she is driven,' age-tsháhnit 'I am industrious,' ho-tsháhnit 'he is ambitious, he is industrious.' Another form of this verb includes an incorporated noun, written -gaæ- 'story, bill, price': o-gaæ-tsháhnit 'it is an unusually high price.' In the Onondaga dictionary and some other [End Page 332] Iroquoian dictionaries, words are listed as what are called 'bases,' or units of meaning. As Woodbury says, 'By this we mean that the unit's meaning or its shape cannot be determined exclusively from a knowledge of the form or the meaning of its elements.' This choice probably accords with intuitions of speakers about what a word is. It is not feasible to list every word of a language like Onondaga, as the number of words would be incredibly large. What is required to use a print dictionary of this type of language is knowledge about the structure of the word so that the base can be accessed. On-line dictionaries may well be able to overcome this limitation at some point; meanwhile, compilers of dictionaries of morphologically complex languages have much to learn from the thought that went into organizing this dictionary. I end this review with a brief discussion of another highlight of the dictionary. There are copious notes on lexical items, notes which are of value both linguistically and culturally. Some are linguistic - the choice of variant of a word is determined by what aspect is present or by particular phonological conditioning. Others are sociological - alternate forms are used by different speakers. Yet others are historical - changes in the language since the early recordings. Finally, the dictionary is rich with cultural notes - a base refers to a ritual of a particular type. I have not done justice to the outstanding quality of this dictionary in this brief review. It and the other recent...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,935
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,995

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,183
Écart entre enseignants0,175 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2004
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlyMême sujetLexicography and Language StudiesTravaux en français237 207