Environmental terminology in general dictionaries

Abstract

Partly as a consequence of the popularization of science, terms that are used and defined in relation to many specific domains eventually migrate into general language. Each time a great number of specific lexical units used in scientific texts become part of the main vocabulary of a language, and viceversa. Therefore, these units must be introduced into monolingual dictionaries first, and hence in learner�s and bilingual dictionaries. However, due to a missing common trend towards the treatment of terminology in general dictionaries, a remarkable diversity in lexicographers. behaviour in lexicographic practice has been brought about. One of the problems lexicography must have dealt with is determining which of these units are relevant to a general dictionary and the way in which they should be represented. Many lexicographical studies have considered these issues, but mainly in relation to classical specialized domains, such as Medicine, Physics, etc. However, descriptive studies on vocabulary considering new areas of knowledge with a great social impact and popularization whose characteristics differ from other areas, as it is the case of Environment, are needed. Previous studies determine that there is a lack of delimitation in this domain, which is reflected in the way vocabulary is used. In this paper, we analyse a part of a broader research on characterization of environmental lexical units: how some specific environmental terms commonly used in general discourse have been treated in Spanish monolingual dictionaries and in learner�s and bilingual dictionaries. We also compare briefly the information provided in Spanish dictionaries with that found in other lexicographical traditions-for instance, in the English and in the French tradition-to determine the lack of precision in lexicographic practice in relation to environmental terms and outline a proposal for a better representation of these units.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 23 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.