Advanced

Antonyms in dictionary entries: Methodological aspects

Paradis, Carita LU and Willners, Caroline LU (2007) In Studia Linguistica 61(3). p.261-277
Abstract
This paper takes the treatment of antonymy in Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary (2003) as the point of departure for a discussion about the principles of antonym inclusion in dictionaries and corpus methodologies in lexicology. CCALED includes canonical antonyms such as good/ bad and dead/alive, as well as more contextually restricted pairings such as hot/ mild and flat/fizzy. The vast majority of the antonymic pairings in the dictionary are adjectives. Most of the antonyms are morphologically different from the headwords they define and typically do not involve antonymic affixes such as non-, un- or -less. Only just over one-third of the total number of pairs is given in both directions. The principles for when... (More)
This paper takes the treatment of antonymy in Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary (2003) as the point of departure for a discussion about the principles of antonym inclusion in dictionaries and corpus methodologies in lexicology. CCALED includes canonical antonyms such as good/ bad and dead/alive, as well as more contextually restricted pairings such as hot/ mild and flat/fizzy. The vast majority of the antonymic pairings in the dictionary are adjectives. Most of the antonyms are morphologically different from the headwords they define and typically do not involve antonymic affixes such as non-, un- or -less. Only just over one-third of the total number of pairs is given in both directions. The principles for when antonyms are included in CCALED are not transparent. We propose an initial top-down corpus-driven method to support decisions about antonym selection and inclusion. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Studia Linguistica
volume
61
issue
3
pages
261 - 277
publisher
Wiley-Blackwell
external identifiers
  • wos:000251315400004
  • scopus:36148977656
ISSN
1467-9582
DOI
10.1111/j.1467-9582.2007.00136.x
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
400f7c75-aa94-4c92-b501-6d333c32bf11 (old id 966470)
date added to LUP
2008-01-30 07:54:37
date last changed
2017-02-05 04:27:01
@article{400f7c75-aa94-4c92-b501-6d333c32bf11,
  abstract     = {This paper takes the treatment of antonymy in Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary (2003) as the point of departure for a discussion about the principles of antonym inclusion in dictionaries and corpus methodologies in lexicology. CCALED includes canonical antonyms such as good/ bad and dead/alive, as well as more contextually restricted pairings such as hot/ mild and flat/fizzy. The vast majority of the antonymic pairings in the dictionary are adjectives. Most of the antonyms are morphologically different from the headwords they define and typically do not involve antonymic affixes such as non-, un- or -less. Only just over one-third of the total number of pairs is given in both directions. The principles for when antonyms are included in CCALED are not transparent. We propose an initial top-down corpus-driven method to support decisions about antonym selection and inclusion.},
  author       = {Paradis, Carita and Willners, Caroline},
  issn         = {1467-9582},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {3},
  pages        = {261--277},
  publisher    = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  series       = {Studia Linguistica},
  title        = {Antonyms in dictionary entries: Methodological aspects},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9582.2007.00136.x},
  volume       = {61},
  year         = {2007},
}