1 Additional material to the theme Lexicography 1. Lexicography as science of compiling dictionaries. 2.

The object and design of dictionaries of various types. 3. Principles of selection of words and arrangement of a vocabulary entry in different kinds of dictionaries. Lexicography is the science of compiling dictionaries (and practice of it). It's an important branch of applied linguistics. It is closely connected with lexicology because it also describes the vocabulary of a language. So lexicography as a term has two meanings. On the one hand it is a theory in accordance with which dictionaries are compiled. On the other hand it is a practical work connected with the compilation of dictionaries. English lexicography has a long and interesting history, though unfortunately it hasn't been as yet profoundly explored. There are many gaps and white spots in the history of English lexicography. But we are more interested in the types and principles of it. The English lexicography begins with the compilation, of glossaries that is lists of foreign words which are explained to the English reader. The first truly English dictionary was compiled by Samuel Johnson. It was a rather great work in the field of lexicography which hasn't entirely lost its value even nowadays. After it the work at compiling different dictionaries didn't stop, but one of the greatest English dictionaries is the so-called the Oxford Dictionary of the English language which is also known as the New English Dictionary: NED. It is a dictionary at which more than 250 people had been working during their lifetime. It consists of 12 great volumes and the 13-th additional explanatory volume. It covers almost half a million words. It gives words, their origin, first usage in printing, phraseology with it and many quotations from various authors. The greatest dictionaries published in the USA are Webster's dictionary one volume, not portable and a two-volume, 20-th century dictionary. These dictionaries may be called explanatory (). Such dictionaries are not published in this country because to reprint English edition would be a luxury. Besides explanatory dictionaries there are special dictionaries such as: pronouncing dictionaries, etymological, phraseological, dictionaries of synonyms and antonyms, spelling dictionaries, historical dictionaries, dictionaries of dialect, of slang, etc. Phraseological dictionaries published abroad are as a rule called idiomatic dictionaries or Dictionaries of English Idioms. There are many such dictionaries, published in England and in the USA. But none of them is entirely satisfactory because they have no scientific principles of compiling such dictionaries (e.g. they place together with true phraseological expressions free combinations and even separate words). On the other hand the principles of compilation are dubious and not clear for understanding. An essential drawback of all these dictionaries for foreigners is that they are not translated, they are explained and somewhat not clearly. In the former USSR there were published several dictionaries of English phraseology. One of the best is "- " by Koonin in 1955. Before that the same author had published 3 editions of the so- called English idioms. The 1-st in I934. That was based on the alphabetical order. All of them were not satisfactory for us because they were limited in the number of the expressions they covered. The last is considered to be one of the best phraseological dictionaries of the English language in the whole world. This dictionary is compiled on the so-called semantic dominant principle. That is the compiler of the dictionary arranges phraseological units not in alphabetical order, but depending on the principal word of the expression. e.g. to be all at sea That's a highly scientific principle, it doesn't raise any objections from theoretical point of view. Practically this principle is not the best one, it has some drawbacks. There are many expressions, which have not one semantic centre, but two or even three ones. And then the author is obliged to mention the same expression 2 or 3 times. It is not economical. Besides in order to make such a

2 dictionary handy one should supply it with an index (alphabetical index). And this index so far as it covers all the expressions in alphabetical order constitutes approximately one fifth part of the whole dictionary. It is not always economical not only from the financial point of view, but from the point of view of the time wasted while searching a phraseological unit. Koonin gives English expression, its translation into Russian, example and translation of the example. In his article in the magazine 2 1948, " 40 , he writes that his principle of compiling that dictionary is the only scientific principle. But it's too strong of course (rigoristic). Sometimes we should take into consideration material expenses for publishing a book and find some more economical way. And therefore in 1956 (in Ukraine) there had been edited (Barantser) an English-Ukrainian phraseological dictionary, built on alphabetical principle, which doesn't require any indexes and in which a phraseological unit may be found very easily. In Georgia there was published an EnglishGeorgian phraseological dictionary which is not a bad one, but very small. Besides this a great difficulty is faced by a compiler in the way of translating phraseological expressions of one language into another. It is impossible to give any definite rules here, but as a rule we must avoid a word-for-word translation, though sometimes it's the only way out. Dictionaries of synonyms. During the last 150 years there were published about 250 different dictionaries of synonyms in England and America. Some of them are very small, others big. And nevertheless all of them shouldn't be taken by us as something most authoritative. 1) Some of them are reprinted for many times without any corrections, changes though they were compiled long ago. At the time of their compilation the explanations might be correct, but since that time the language made a progress, while the dictionary remained as it had been 50 or 70 years before. Therefore it doesn't reflect the real, true application (use) of some synonyms in Modern English. 2) Many dictionaries of synonyms group thew either incorrectly from scientific points of view or with a certain tendency: e.g. bad, dirty, bolshevistic pupe, good, religious Sometimes in the groups of synonyms we find lexical synonyms and phraseological synonyms which also violates the principle of compiling such a dictionary. There are three types of dictionaries of synonyms: 1) In the 1-st type they gather synonyms in 2 groups, don't give any explanations, any differences in the application of the words, any examples. Such dictionaries are useful only for those who know the language perfectly well, know the difference between synonyms but find difficulty sometimes in remembering that or this synonym at a definite moment. 2) (type). In these dictionaries not only words are grouped as synonyms but they give definite explanations, showing stylistical idiographic or territorial peculiarity of every word. These dictionaries may be of use to those who know the language to some extent but want to improve their knowledge, to be able to differentiate words so as to make their speech more exact and expressive. Such dictionaries may be useful also to the people who begin to study a foreign language, but only in case the explanations are given in their mother-tongue. 3) The 3 type. In these dictionaries besides the things mentioned in the previous types of dictionaries compilers give illustrations as a rule taken from literature or invented by themselves. This is the best type of such dictionaries and it may be recommended to any reader may cater for any taste. As yet we know 2 dictionaries of synonyms published in the former USSR: a) in 1957. " " by Potapova, a very good dictionary, belongs to the 3d type. Its explanations are a bit detalized, but there are many examples, which come handy. But it is a very short dictionary. It covers less than 200 synonyms. b) in 1964. Handelsman's dictionary of synonyms was published. It's also of the 3rd type. It covers about a thousand synonyms. But while Potapova gives explanations in Russian, Handelsman

3 does that in English, so it may be used only by those who know the language. Etymological dictionaries As a rule E.D. are used by philologists and sometimes by people who take interest in the origin of words and their primary meanings. Such dictionaries are the most difficult for compilation, because there are so many doubtful etymologies of English words that a compiler either should take a great responsibility to oneself or to be on the safe side should put a question mark after a word instead of its etymology. The best etymological dictionary of the English language is considered to be the one by professor Skeets, published in 2 volumes. There's a shortened copy of the dictionary in one volume but it gives the origins not of the words of the English vocabulary, but of the roots. Prof. Skeet has added a list of English homonyms to his etymological dictionary and this list is the worst part of it. If Skeet is good at etymologies, he is a poor hand at homonyms. His list of homonyms has many deficiencies and shouldn't be taken seriously in a scientific research. Pronouncing dictionaries. So far as the English language writing is based on historical principles and in many cases does not serve as a guide of pronunciation there is the necessity in compiling pronouncing dictionaries. The most authoritative pronouncing dictionary of the English language is the one compiled by Daniel Jones. In the USA the same Webster's dictionary serves as a pronouncing one. Dictionaries of Slang and Unconventional English. Owing to the fact that in England and USA there are many different slangs and that many words belonging to slang are short-lived there appeared a necessity to publish dictionaries of slang. They are not numerous as yet and haven't gained popularity. We can name one of such dictionaries which is entitled "Eric Patridges Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English", which is one of the earliest dictionaries of this t. Bilingual dictionaries are of great value especially for those for whom English is a foreign language. We use bi-lingual dictionaries published in this country and in the former USSR. They are of different size. The best English-Russian dictionary of large size is Muller's one. The best Russian-English dictionary is that edited by prof. Smirnitsky. After World War II there were published for the 1st time English-Ukrainian and Ukrainian-English. They were both compiled by M.L.Podvesko. They are all compiled on scientific principles. Lexical problem in them is settled quite satisfactorily but phraseological problems are not always done up to the mark. The greatest problem here lies in the fact where to give phraseological units under the initial word or under the semantic centre of unit. The sizes of dictionaries range from very small (lilliputions) which cover one or five thousand words up to dictionaries covering half a million words. Practically, if a bi-lingual dictionary covers 60 or 70 thousand words it's a good one. If a phraseological dictionary includes 25 or 30 thousand phraseological units it's a satisfactory number. As for the dictionary of synonyms it should include some 3-5 thousand synonyms.

Additional literature: . II.