释义的性质、方法与结构—法语主流词典的释义问题探讨

Towards the nature, methods and structures of lexical definition the case of mainstream French dictionaries

释义是建立在语言层面上还是建立在言语层面上?法国的词典学家们对此有独到的见解。有的认为释义是建立在语言或元语言基础上的,有的则说释义是描写语言的言语活动。Buzon(1979)在作了详尽的分析后说,词典中的词条在整体上既不是建立在语言的层面上,也不是建立在言语的层面上,而是一种由实践产生的特殊“人造工具”(Artefact),既要构造简短,又能满足表述语义的需要。释义的结构是自由的,编码符号是简洁的。释义所要遵循的原则是用较少的语言符号全面、准确地揭示词的意义和文化特色。法国的词典学家们充分利用语言的系统关系中的各种内在联系,结合语词的具体特征采用多种方法进行释义。词典学家们对语词意义的分析、分解与表述方法,不但对我国语文词典的释义有借鉴作用,而且对我国学生的法语学习及单词的记忆都有一定的帮助。

Is lexical definition based on language or utterance? There are different answers to this question. One says that it is based on language or metalanguage and the other believes that it is founded on utterance. C. Buzon, after a detailed analysis, declares that lexical definition is situated neither at the level of language nor at the level of utterance when one envisages the link associating the signification of a word integrated in an utterance with condition of socio-historical and socio-cultural production of this utterance. Thus the definition proposed in dictionaries is usually only an empirical cultural stereotype given as if being the norm. The article of dictionary in its entirety is a specific artifact built through practical experience and serves at the same time the economical and cultural purpose. In other words, one should use simple and concise expressions to offer clear-cut, accurate and integrated meaningful information about lexical units in dictionary definition. For this purpose, French lexicographers have taken full advantage of the sense relation and of various connections in the lexical system to define words. As meaning can be decomposed, French linguists divide the semantic constituents into different categories, such as 揷lass鑝e? 揳rchis閙鑝e?搒閙ant鑝e?and 搗irtu鑝e? Such a decomposition of lexical meaning allows lexicographers to establish a hierarchical system of definition, and in this way one word of a certain categorial level may profit from a generic word of a higher level to represent its meaning. Words are usually composed of several semes that are marked by generally definable morphemes. In the definition, the meaning of one morpheme can be represented by the other, and then the semantic constituent defined elsewhere in the same dictionary need not to be redefined because its meaning can be obtained with the help of the 揷lose-loop?system. Thus the morphemes defined as separate entries can be used directly in the defining formulation and only the 搉ew?items should be explained. For this purpose, morpho-semantic definition is adopted. The substantial definition makes use of logical relations among lexical units, such as inclusion, exclusion and negative inclusion to answer the question: 搘hat is XX?? The relational definition consists in referring to the relation between qualifying definition and another qualified words, instead of the mere substance of the defined item. So a number of specific devices are used for the relational transformation. The metalanguage definition provides information about linguistic signs instead of the designatum and the real world; it explains the function of some words. The propositional definition, from a logical point of view, focuses on showing the valency status (actants and circonstants) in the form of a proposition, so as to represent the possible distributional models of the defined word in natural sentences.