Interpreting the Differences in Signification among Historically-Based Dictionaries of English
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
When the history of a particular word is under investigation, the first tool to be consulted is the Oxford English Dictionary (hereafter OED). Spelling variants in historical and typological classification, etymology with the appropriate length of additional explanation, significations according to historical principles with minutely subdivided shades of meaning, dates of the first and the last (in the case of obsolete words) quotations, phrases, and compounds — all this information is given under a headword. The Middle English Dictionary (hereafter MED) has a somewhat different presentation of information; some headwords are n t identical with modern forms, and some of the first quotations under each headword or each signification predate those in the OED. Quotations of Middle English documents are, of course, enriched by way of the variety of manuscript variants of the text quoted. The Dictionary of Old English (hereafter DOE) shows quite a different disciplinary approach. Its uniqueness lies in providing significations which emphasize phrasal expressions and glosses on Latin words. Though a comparison among the three dictionaries is feasible only for headwords from A to G at this stage, it seems worth trying, particularly when another historical tool, the Historical Thesaurus of the Oxford English Dictionary (hereafter HTOED), based on the categories proposed by the Thesaurus of Old English(TOE) and the Historical Thesaurus of English (HTE), has been available since autumn 2009.1 The aim of this paper, then, is to make a comparison among the significations of OED, MED, and DOE, in particular using quotations which exemplify the subdivided senses. On the one hand, we may hope to learn to use these dictionaries properly, with a sufficient knowledge of both their individual merits and peculiarities and their shared proclivities. On the other, it may also be possible to suggest some better ways of structuring the significations, particularly for those headwords which undergo significant change in the transition from Old English to Middle English. The examples for this study are mainly taken from among the words of emotion, which I have been working with for some years, in the DOE fascicles for A to G, in order to keep the comparisons clear. The examples will be presented alphabetically, since that seems the most coherent method of organizing the relevant evidence and assessing the differences among the dictionaries for the significations of the relevant headwords. If the ideal is to gain a sense of the whole history of a given word by “simply pushing a button of your PC,” then the three diachronically based dictionaries need to work from a common basis of understanding, especially with respect to signification.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».