n Lexikos - The inclusion of word formation in OALD8 : the case of undefined run-ons

Volume 24, Issue 1
  • ISSN : 1684-4904



The study presented in this contribution aims to investigate whether the print edition of OALD8 still sticks to the tradition of including many derivatives as run-on entries. For the purpose of the study, a database was compiled consisting of 1,200 lemmata with full entry status, and in this lemma range, 145 run-ons were found. The parts of speech of the lemma under which a run-on could be found were closely studied, and so were the illustrative examples. Nouns are most commonly included as run-ons, followed by adverbs, adjectives and verbs. The problem of polysemous entries at the end of which undefined run-ons can be found is also discussed. When it is difficult to draw parallels between the sense(s) of the lemma and the run-on deriving from it, it would be much better to include the run-on as the lemma and to define all its senses separately or to include undefined run-ons at the end of each individual sense of the lemma. Finally, it should be clear to the user when and why a certain word is included as a run-on and not as a lemma, and how s/he can establish a relation between the meaning of the lemma and the run-on.

Die studie waaroor daar in hierdie artikel berig word, probeer vasstel of die gedrukte weergawe van die OALD8 die tradisie handhaaf om baie afleidings as onverklaarde lemmas op te neem. Vir die doel van hierdie studie is 'n databasis saamgestel van 1,200 lemmata met volle artikels en tussen hierdie lemmata is 145 onverklaarde lemmas gevind. Die woordsoort van die lemmas waaraan onverklaardes geheg is, is noukeurig nagegaan asook die voorbeeldmateriaal. Naamwoorde tree die algemeenste as onverklaardes op, gevolg deur bywoorde, adjektiewe en werkwoorde. Die problem van polisemiese inskrywings waaraan onverklaardes geheg word, word ook bespreek. Wanneer dit moeilik is om die verband tussen die betekenisonderskeidinge van 'n lemma en die voortspruitende onverklaardes te lê, sal dit beter wees om die onverklaardes as volle lemmata op te neem en die onderskeie betekenisonderskeidinge te verklaar, of om die onverklaardes aan die einde van elke verklaring van 'n betekenisonderskeiding te heg. Dit moet vir die gebruiker duidelik wees waar en wanneer 'n woord as onverklaarde opgeneem word en nie as volle lemma nie en ook hoe die verband tussen die betekenis van die lemma en die onverklaarde vasgestel kan word.

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Article metrics loading...


This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error