多义词义项划分与排列存在的问题及对策( 七 ) _小知识

3.原先的指称义素消失的情况下，以新产生的指称义素和原先保留下的区别性义素为核心义分别设立义项。词义在演变过程中，原先的指称义素会出现消亡、失落的现象，进而产生新的指称义素，并且将原先的区别性义素保留下来。对于这种情况，除了产生新的指称义素外，原先的区别性义素也有可能变为指称义素。(注：这种情况，也可能是同形异义词的产生原因之一，尚待继续从词源角度研究)
4.原先的区别性义素消失时，可将遗留下来的指称义素作为核心义，将原先的整个义项作为次要义放在该核心义后，方便用户了解其中的逻辑联系，查阅相关的词源义。
文章主要探讨了如何在有机融合原型语义思想的基础上利用“区别性义素+指称义素”来精确划分义项，但依然存在不足之处，比如如何确定相关义项是否属于同一个语义场还需要进一步探讨，尤其是涉及到语义场的划分和确定还需要继续研究。如何运用原型理论指导义项排列方面成果有目共睹，并且已经在指导实践了，使用户可以在全面把握义项群内在逻辑联系的基础上以较小的认知努力学习整个词条义项，希冀达到增效和指数增长的学习效度。但是如何进一步优化并应用上述的义项分立模式指导词典释义则还需要包括词典编纂者在内语言研究者的不懈努力。
备注：文中提到的词典缩略语：
AHD: The American Heritage Dictionary (4th ed, 2001)
AHSD: The American Heritage Students’ Dictionary(1986)
CALD: Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2005/2008)
CCD: Chambers 20th Century Dictionary (1983)
CIDE: The Cambridge International Dictionary of English (1995)
LDELC: Longman Dictionary of the English Language and Culture(1992)
OEDs: Oxford English Dictionary
MWCD11: Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (11th ed, 2007)
WBD: The World Book Dictionary (1981)
WNWD4: Webster’s New World Dictionary (4th ed, 1999)
参考文献
[1]Heine, Bernd. Cognitive Foundations of Grammar[M]. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1997:8
[2]Byrd, R.J., Calzolary, N., Chodorow, M.S., Klavans, J.L., Neff, M.S. ＆ Rizk, O.A. (1987). “Tools and methods for computational lexicography”. Computational Linguistics, 13.3-4: 219-240.
[3]Robins, R. H. (1987), Polysemy and the Lexicographer. In Studies in Lexicography, ed. Robert Burchfield, Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press 1987：52
[4]Ullmann. Semantics：An introduction to the science of meaning [S]. Oxford University Press, 1962:159
[5]Moon, R. (1987), ‘Monosemous words and the dictionary’, in Cowie （ed.）, 173-82
Heine, Bernd. Cognitive Foundations of Grammar[M]. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1997:8
[6]Zgusta, Ladislav. Manual of Lexicography. Academia Publishing House of the Czecholovak of Sciences Prague, Mouton: The Hague. Paris. 1971:273
[7]源可乐. 英语词典义项的排列策略 [J]. 现代外语，2002 （3）：276
[8]利奇. 《语义学》[M]. 上海：上海外语教育出版社，1987：14, 126
[9]张联荣. 《古汉语词义论》[M]. 北京：北京大学出版社，2007：188
[10]房德里耶斯. 《语言》[M]. 北京：商务印书馆，1980：224
[11]Rosch, E. Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: 1975, General 104: 92-223
[12]Wittgenstein，Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations, translated by G.E.M.
Anscombe, Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1953：48
[13]Taylor, J.R. Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory[M]. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995:59.
[14]Langacker, R.W. Foundations of Cognitive GrammarⅠ: Theoretical Prerequisites[M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987: 371.
[15], [16]赵彦春. 认知词典学探索[M]. 上海：上海外语教育出版社，2003：22; 202
On Demarcation and Arrangement of Polysemous Senses
Abstract
Polysemy is an essential part of every language, how to arrange the polysemous senses in a dictionary is a thorny problem facing related researchers including lexicographers. This article, starting from an in-depth analysis of three traditional principles governing sense ordering as well as a couple of innovative approaches employed by some megastar dictionaries, makes a detailed discussion about how to make an accurate sense demarcation by exploiting a meaning expression, “propositional sememe+differentiating sememe”, often used in the study of etymology of ancient Chinese. Furthermore, this article also tries to optimize the sense arrangement by a prototype-based method.
【多义词义项划分与排列存在的问题及对策】Keywords: sense demarcation; propositional sememe; differentiating sememe; prototype