align diatopical (etc.) labels with literature

[chiarcos]

Observation: Classical dictionaries use a set of conventionalized abbreviations ("labels", "markers") to indicate that “a certain lexical item deviates in a certain respect from the main bulk of items described in a dictionary and that its use is subject to some kind of restriction” (Svensén 2009). Computational lexicography provides some relatively advanced taxonomies, but these are partially supported by LexInfo, at best. It might be worth to compare these with current lexinfo categories to check for gaps and classification.

Suggestion: Compare with LexInfo to spot gaps and possible extensions. Complement lexinfo definitions with literature references.

Motivation: Observed as a possible gap by linguists asked to analyze existing monolingual dictionaries from various Romance language.

Complementary information: Summary of Svensén (S) and Hausmann (H), alignment with Atkins and Rundell (AR), Jackson (J), Milroy and Milroy (MM) and Landau (L).

1. diachronic marking: archaic, old-use, obsolete, old-fashioned, old use, dated, contemporary [S,H] ~ [AR: "time"] ~ [J: "history"] ~ [J: "currency or temporality"]
   • cf. MM "temporal": indicate the first/last occurence of the lexical item
2. diatopic marking (geography, places, regional dialects, e.g., regional, dialect, dialect XY) [S,H] ~ [AR: "region (dialect)", J: "dialect", MM: "geographical labels", L: "regional or geographic variation"]
3. diaintegrative marking (origin or words): e.g., foreign, Latin, etc. [S,H] (missing in J and AR)
4. distratic marking [S] style ~ [MM: "register", i.e., to "guide individual language users in their choice of the right words in the right contexts"] ~ [L: "style, functional variety, or register"], incl.
   • spoken, written [H: diamedial marking]
   • slang, vulgar, taboo [H: diastratic marking] ~ [AR: "register", J: "status"] ~ [L: "restricted or taboo", "slang"]
   • formal, informal [H: diaphasic] ~ [AR: "style", J: "formality"]
   • poetic, literature [H: diatextual]
5. diatechnical marking: subject field, e.g., medical, law [S,H] ~ [AR: "domain", J: "topic or field", MM: "field", L: "technical or specialized terminology"]
6. diafreqential marking: frequency of occurrence (often, less frequent, rare) [S,H] ~ [MM, L: "frequency"] ~ [AR: "usage"?]
7. diaevaluative marking: attitude, e.g., derogatory, humorous, ironic, derogatory, offensive, euphemistic [S,H] ~ [AR: "attitude", J: "effect"]
8. dianormative marking: words whose acceptability is/can be questioned, e.g., substandard, non-standard, disputed [S,H] ~ [J: "usage label", L: "status or cultural label"] ~ [AR: "meaning type"?]

(Compiled from Hausmann 1989, p. 651, Landau 1989, p. 175, Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. 1990, Jackson 2002, p. 109 -115, Atkins and Rundell 2008, p.227-230, Svensén 2009, p. 326-331, p. 227-230; partially based on a survey by Stachurska 2018 and the alignment by Salgado and Costa 2019.)

References:

• Atkins, S. & Rundell, M. (2008). The Oxford Guide to Practical Lexicography. Oxford University Press.
• Hausmann, F. J. et al. (Eds.. 1989), Wörterbücher. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie. de Gruyter.
• Landau, S. (1989). Dictionaries. The Art and Craft of Lexicography. Cambridge University Press.
• Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1990). Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English. Routledge.
• Salgado, A., & Costa, R. (2019). Marcas temáticas en los diccionarios académicos ibéricos. RILEX. Revista sobre investigaciones léxicas, 2(2), 37-63.
• Stachurska, A. (2018), On the Codification of Usage by Labels, Journal of Language and Cultural Education, 2018, 6(1) ISSN 1339-4584, https://doi.org/10.2478/jolace-2018-0006
• Svensén, B. (2009). A Handbook of Lexicography. Cambridge University Press.