ABSTRACT. There is a plenty of dictionaries for every language which became written about hundred years (or more) ago. As to Eastern Europe, its linguistic landscape is presented quite good  in lexicography of standard and dialect varieties. Soviet epoch was a gold era of dialectology, due to politically motivated attention to everything of the people, especially, “folk language”. Also, because of activation of cultural life and international contacts of nations that were discriminated in the Russian Empire, there was created a number of explanatory and translation dictionaries, which still contain original, unanalyzed data. Nonetheless, most of the stuff is rather hard to use today, because it is still presented only in printed form, often in small amount of copies.

I am going to take a project (currently ongoing) of digitization of BelarusianRussian dictionary by Jan Stankevich (printed much later after its compilation, in 1990, New York, USA) as an example to illustrate typical obstacles in a modern lexicographic workflow, step by step, which include:

1. OCR
2. Data conversion to machine-readable format. 
3. Database design.
4. Development of web interface.
5. Providing maintenance of e-infrastructure.

I don’t accent purely lexicographic tasks (like designing concept of a dictionary, a structure of dictionary entry etc.). Development of data visualization tools, linking data to language corpora and other external projects as well could be mentioned, but that is behind the minimal list of things to be done. There is no hope to find these extras in low profile dictionary project.

I would like to touch on the differences between projects on resource-rich and underresourced languages, with specific attention to “paper-resourced” ones, which is the case of those of Eastern Europe.

In the end of my paper I would like to discuss how this situation could be changed for the better by organizing collaboration, experience exchange and development of toolset/platform to minimize costs of running every single project.

ABSTRACT. In 2018, when the last fascicle of the second edition of the Deutsches Wörterbuch (²DWB) appeared, a great tradition of dictionary making that started with the work of Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm in 1838 came to a preliminary end. With 33 volumes of its first edition (¹DWB), completed in 1960, and 9 volumes of its second edition (²DWB), the dictionary represents the most encompassing account of the German language; in sum, it consists of approximately 360.000 entries, spanning from the 8^th century AD to the present. For the historical lexicography of German, the completion of ²DWB marks a crucial point and gives rise to a number of questions: Is there still a need for a ³DWB, i.e. for a renewed diachronic description of the German vocabulary along the lines of the Grimm tradition? Which is the relationship between DWB and the dictionaries of language periods (Old High German, Middle High German, and Early New High German) that have been compiled during the last decades? Are there insights which can be adopted from other European dictionaries such as the Oxford English Dictionary or the Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal which have already passed the threshold on which the DWB is at the moment?

The paper tries to answer these (and similar) questions and gives a brief outlook at the future of historical lexicography of German. A special emphasis will be laid on innovative ways of digital lexicography, specifically on new entry structures for word history which seem more appropriate to current user expectations.

ABSTRACT. Bacellar’s dictionary is a remarkable piece of Portuguese lexicography. Produced along the second half of the 18century, this dictionary is one of a kind in the Portuguese lexicographic landscape, different from all those that preceded it and also from those that followed. However, being the first to be called Diccionario da Lingua Portugueza, the title became a sort of commonplace for Portuguese dictionaries.

Bacellar’s work has often been criticized, mostly for the sake of his ‘etymological’ insights that are biased by the fact that he is persuaded that Portuguese has a direct ancient Greek lineage. That may explain why this dictionary was ignored until present days and why his truly unique character and contribution were left unnoticed for so long.

In fact, Bacellar’s dictionary obeys to a singular concept that may be briefly described as a double articulation structure: main entries are generally simplex words; secondary entries are complex words, derived from the main entries. The notation that Bacellar has used to list the secondary entries is quite simple: he makes use of a ‘method’ that consists basically in an original proposal of morphological segmentation: he slices the main entry word into two parts: the left-­‐hand sequence remains unchanged and the right-­‐end sequence (the ending), is commuted with the endings of the derivatives. This ‘method’ allows Bacellar to reach a coverage that is far more copious than ever before.

However, decoding all the secondary words is a philological challenge that we will describe in this presentation. Up to the present, the full entry list of Bacellar’s dictionary has never been detailed. We will present the status of the on-­‐going project for the annotated edition that we have in our hands.

References:

Bernardo Lima & Melo Bacellar (1783). Diccionario de Lingua Portugueza. Composto por

Bernardo de Lima, e Melo Bacellar, prior no Alentejo &c. Lisboa: Na Offic. de Jozé de Aquino

Bulhoens

[books.google.pt/books?id=55ICAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA1&hl=pt-­‐PT&source=gbs_toc_r&ca

d=3#v=onepage&q&f=false]

Corpus do Português. Davies, Mark; Ferreira, Michael (Eds.).

[https://www.corpusdoportugues.org/]

ABSTRACT.  The paper analyzes foreign influence in bilingual and multilingual dictionaries which have a Latin and a Croatian column dating from the early modern period to the beginning of 20th century, i.e. dictionaries which give Latin and Croatian equivalents. The analysis begins with the first Croatian dictionary Dictionarium quinque nobilissimarum Europae linguarum, Latinae, Italicae, Germanicae, Dalmaticae et Ungaricae compiled by Faust Vrančić (1595 – Venice) and ends with the Latin-Croatian Dictionary (Latinsko-hrvatski rječnik 1900 – Zagreb) by Mirko Divković. These multilingual dictionaries serve as an important testimony of the linguistic world and offer information for the study of social and cultural history of the languages involved (Verbeke 2015: 29). In them two languages are in explicit and continuous interaction (Demo 2011). These dictionaries are regarded as a place of language contact (Thomason 2010) and contact-induced syntactic change (Sankoff 2008). The influence of Latin and Italian on the syntactic structure is analyzed. In syntax, the analysis will focus on the use of the prepositional phrases od + genitive and za + infinitive as the equivalents of Latin de + ablative and ad + gerundive or noun in the accusative, use of pronouns, use of neutral plural instead of singular, etc. In compiling a dictionary of a non-standard language, as Croatian was at the time, it was necessary for the author to form new words and constructions and the Croatian dictionary column mirrors the Latin column. The influence of spoken and written Italian is also visible. Word-formation was sometimes the only way to fill the otherwise empty space in the Croatian column of a dictionary. The authors have sometimes filled these blanks by loan translations (semantic loans) or by adopting loan words.

ABSTRACT. Croatian is one among the Slavic languages with rich pre-standard grammatical tradition. Parallel with the development of grammatical description, the Croatian grammatical terminology was developed. Croatian grammatical tradition was developed under the influence of Latin grammatical traditon, and the first Croatian grammar written in 1604

(Bartol Kašić, Institutionum linguae Illyricae libri duo) was written in Latin. 

The paper outlines, compares, and analyses grammatical terminology in grammars written in Croatian, i.e. Croatian is their metalanguage, and published in the pre-standard period of the development of the Croatian language. 

The following grammars written in Croatian Štokavian are analyzed: 

Gramatika talijanska ukratko ili kratak nauk za naučiti latinski jezik (1649) by Jakov Mikalja,

Svašta po malo iliti kratko složenje imena i riči u ilirski i njemački jezik (1761) by Blaž Tadijanović, Nova slavonska i nimačka gramatika (1767) by Matija Antun Relković and Nova ričoslovica ilirička (1812) by Šime Starčević. Some of the grammars are grammars of a foreign language with Croatian language examples. They are included in our corpus because the examples are translated into Croatian, some parts are written in Croatian, and/or Croatian is their metalanguage.

Jakov Mikalja's grammar Gramatika talijanska ukratko ili kratak nauk za naučiti latinski jezik (1649), the aim of which was to teach readers Italian, is the first grammar with Croatian terminology.

Considering the influence of Latin on Croatian grammatical descriptions, Latin is observed as the source of Croatian linguistic terminology.

With regard to the origin of terminology, it is possible to distinguish foreign words, loan words and, Croatian terms, and according to the meaning of terms phonological and morphological terminology and to a lesser extent orthographic, word formation and syntactic terminology is distinguished. The analyzed examples will be placed in the context of the creation of Croatian grammatical vocabulary in general.

ABSTRACT. It has been widely noticed that a major issue in English historical lexicology is represented by Anglo-French (or Law French). In England in the late Middle Ages, administrative documents were written in a variety of the French language (alongside with Latin), and probably French was still the main spoken language (as a lingua​ franca​) in certain environments until late. Consequentely the result of this long coexistence between French and English language is the big number of French borrowings in the English lexicon, which are still in use today. 

The problem for the lexicographer comes out once we look deeper at the French which was written in late Medieval England: we found legal and business terms with a particular meaning which is identified only in England and not in France. Perhaps this is hardly reported by English (or French) historical dictionaries and it is easy to understand why: with Anglo-French we are in the awkward situation where the etymological label does not fit the historical situation, i.e. it does account for the etymological matrix but it does not explain the history of the word. 

As a result this problem which is well-known by English lexicographers, it is often overlooked by

Italian linguists. If we look at the major Italian historical dictionary, the TLIO (Tesoro​ della Lingua Italiana delle origini​), we can find words which seem to derive from Anglo-French. This is especially true in particular contexts, i.e. texts written by Italian merchants in medieval England. The aim of this presentation is to look at those texts with the perspective pointed by Trotter (2011:217): «the more important point is that they [i.e. the borrowings] are ultimately Anglo-French in both form and semantics. They bear precise legal senses which evolved in Anglo-French and whilst they are undoubtedly ‘anglicisms’ in the sense of ‘word transported into Italian in England, from a language in use in England’, they do not necessarily come from English». During the presentation I will attempt a review of all those words in the Old Italian TLIO historical dictionary which have been labeled as derived from Middle English and a review of all the words which were labeled as derived from Old French rather than Anglo-French (the corpus is based on Cella 2010, where are listed all the Old Italian mercantile text written in England and France).

ABSTRACT. Yiddish has served English as a fairly minor source language of words over the centuries. Yet, Yiddish has provided English with a number of lexical items which have become established in current usage. The present study will shed light on the impact of Yiddish on the English vocabulary over the centuries. The results are based on the investigation of a collection of 290 Yiddish borrowings found in the Oxford English Dictionary Online and the electronic form of Webster’s Third New International Dictionary. An overview will be given of the subject areas from which Yiddish words have been taken over into English. A perusal of the contemporary and historical corpora (e.g. the Corpus of Contemporary American English and the Corpus of Historical American English) will allow a detailed analysis of the semantics and use of these types of borrowings from their earliest attestation in the receiving language until today. This also raises the question of how far cultural, political, and historical developments and martial conflicts such as the Second World War influenced the usage and spread of Yiddish words in English. Among the words under review we find some Yiddish borrowings which denote objects, ideas and concepts typically associated with Jewish culture and may therefore fall into the category of words building up “ethnolinguistic repertoires” (see Benor 2010). Benor defines the term as “a fluid set of linguistic resources that members of an ethnic group may use variably as they index their ethnic identities” (2010: 160) or “the arsenal of distinctive linguistic features available to members of a given group” (2010: 162). In this paper, much value will be attached to contexts in which Yiddish borrowings are consciously used as cultural clues by (American) Jews, in order to depict an authentic image of Jewish culture and to indicate their ethnic identity.

References:

Benor, S. B. (2010): “Ethnolinguistic repertoire: Shifting the analytic focus in language and ethnicity.”  Journal of Sociolinguistics 14(2), 159-183.

Durkin, P. (2014): Borrowed Words. A History of Loanwords in English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Murray, J. - Bradley, H. - Craigie, W. – Onions, C. T. (eds.) (1884-1933): The Oxford English  Dictionary; Supplement (1972-86), ed. by Burchfield, R.; Second ed. (1989), ed. by Simpson, J. and Weiner, E.; Additions Series (1993-1997), ed. by Simpson, J., Weiner, E. and Proffitt,  M.; Third ed. (in progress) OED Online (March 2000-), ed. by Simpson, J. Oxford.

Online resources:

Corpus of Contemporary American English <http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/>

Corpus of Historical American English <http://corpus.byu.edu/coha/>

OED Online searchable at: <http://www.oed.com/>

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged <https://www.merriam-webster.com/shop-dictionaries/dictionaries/w3-unabridged>

ABSTRACT. In 1708, Dutch Orientalist and cartographer Adriaan Reland (1676-1718) published the last part of his Miscellaneous Dissertations (Dissertationum miscellanearum pars tertia et ultima). Two chapters concerned languages: XI – “languages of certain islands of the east” (De Linguis Insularum Quarundam Orientalium) and XII – “American languages” (De Linguis Americanis). Evidently, Reland, who famously never left  his home country, often used geographical and linguistic information provided by various European travellers. And so, besides a series of short “sailors’ wordlists” in languages of Solomon Islands, Cocos Islands, New Guinea, Moses Island, and Moa Island copied from the Spanish explorer Antonio de Herrera (1549- 1625) he included longer descriptions of Malay, Sinhala and Tamil likely obtained from VOC informants. For access to first-hand material, Reland definitely benefited from his friendship with scientifically-minded Amsterdam burgomaster and VOC governor Nicolaas Witsen (1641-1717), who himself in his opus magnum Noord en oost Tartarye incorporated wordlists in 26 languages of Central Asia.

But did Reland always mention his sources? And how did he check and edit the information he received? What kind of linguistic analysis was added in the edited work? And what lexical sources did he decide to put aside and why? 

In our presentation, we will attempt to answer these questions on Reland’s lexicographic methodology by using his own writings, information from his network of friendships and connections, as well as the little-known catalogue of manuscripts and books in Reland’s possession at the time of his premature death.

References:
HERRERA, Antonio de. 1622. Novus orbis, sive Descriptio Indiae occidentalis. Amsterdam: Michael Colin[ium].
RELAND, Adriaan. 1708. Dissertationum miscellanearum pars tertia. Trajecti ad Rhenum: ex off. G. Broedelet.
WITSEN, Nicolaas. 1692. Noord en oost Tartarye [...] door Nicolaes Witsen. 2 vols. Amsterdam.

ABSTRACT. In recent years, several Chinese scholars have argued that China has embarked on a path towards becoming a “lexicographical great power” (cishu qiangguo 辞书强国) (Wei 2015; Wang et al. 2014). In the history of the People’s Republic of China, the country’s political leadership has always attached great importance to the lexicographical sector and to the role of dictionaries within politics and society. Since the 1970s, the Chinese leadership has launched three national plans for the compilation and publication of dictionaries (1975-1985; 1988-2000; 2013-2025) (Wei 2015). These plans have been explicitly intended to boost lexicographical activities and publications in the country, as well as to improve the quality of Chinese lexicographical works. 

By also relying on institutional documents, this paper aims to present the evolution of the three national plans, focusing on the relationship between lexicographical activities, politics, and ideology (Wierzbicka 1995). Moreover, the paper discusses the concept of “lexicographical great power” and its characteristics, as conceived by contemporary Chinese scholars.

References:  

Wang, D. 王东海 et al. (2014). Cishu qiangguo meng zheng yuan – tan xin cishu guihua de tuijin

cuoshi 辞书强国梦正圆 - 谈新辞书规划的推进措施. Zhongguo bianji 中国编辑 2014(5): 90-92.

Wei, X. 魏向清 (2015). Guojia cishu bianzuan chuban guihua de zhanlüe dingwei 国家辞书编纂出版规划的战略定位. Cishu yanjiu 辞书研究 2015(1): 1-9.

Wierzbicka, A. (1995). Dictionaries and Ideologies: Three Examples from Eastern Europe. In Kachru, B. B. & Kahane, H. (eds.): Cultures, ideologies, and the dictionary: Studies in honor of Ladislav Zgusta: 181-195. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. 

ABSTRACT. Versified dictionaries are bilingual/multilingual glossaries written in verse form to teach basic words in any foreign language. In the Islamic culture, versified dictionaries were produced in order to teach the Arabic language to the young generations of muslim communities not native in Arabic. In the course of time, many bilingual/multilingual versified dictionaries were written in different languages throughout the Islamic geography.

In this study, bilingual versified dictionaries having Turkish as one of their languages and a Western European language as the other one, will be compared with those dictionaries written in the Balkan languages. In the beginning the needs for such dictionaries will be discussed shortly.

The main focus of the study will then be on the Turkish-German versified dictionary titled Almanca Tuhfe / Deutsches Geschenk (German Gift), published by Dr. Şerefeddin Pasha in 1916. This dictionary is the only dictionary in verse ever written combining these two languages. This section will include characteristics and basic linguistic features of this unique and subjectivised dictionary as well as an evaluation on its literary value in terms of rhyme, meter and basic characteristics of versified dictionaries in Islamic culture. The differences between this work and those in other languages of the non-Muslim communities of the time will be shown and it will be tried to determine the place of this dictionary among the bilingual/​multilingual versified dictionaries having Turkish as one of their languages. At the end of this section some statistic information regarding the numbers of such dictionaries and the years when they were produced will be given and there will be an argument on the work’s success.

ABSTRACT. This paper deals with the selection and management of the textual and lexicographical sources required for the lemmatisation in a lexical database of Old English, as well as the defining and sequencing of the steps of the lemmatisation procedure. This analysis assigns a lemma to the attestations of the inflectional forms found in The Dictionary of Old English Corpus by means of the lemmatiser of the lexical database of Old English Nerthus, called Norna. The scope of the analysis includes four classes of Old English verbs (anomalous, preterite-present, contracted and strong VII) and the methodology comprises two steps. Firstly, automatic searches are launched on Norna, and, secondly, the hits are checked with the available lexicographical and textual sources. The results are contrasted with the Dictionary of Old English if they start with the letters A-I, and the rest of the alphabet is revised with the help of the standard dictionaries of Old English (Bosworth-Toller, Sweet and Clark Hall). After that, still some doubtful cases need to be disambiguated and to do so, the York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose, which is parsed syntactically, and glossaries are used of editions of Old English texts. The verification with the textual and lexicographical sources identifies some areas of lemmatisation that need manual revision, such as unpredictable spellings, the disambiguation between different lexical categories, and the disambiguation within the verbal classes. Nevertheless, the gradual improvement of automatic searches maximises automatisation.

References:

Healey, A. diPaolo (ed.) with J. Price Wilkin y X. Xiang. 2004. The Dictionary of Old English Web Corpus. Toronto: Dictionary of Old English Project, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto.

Healey, A. diPaolo (ed.) 2016. The Dictionary of Old English in Electronic Form A-H. Toronto: Dictionary of Old English Project, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto.

Martín Arista, J. (ed.), L. García Fernández, M. Lacalle Palacios, A. Ojanguren López and E. Ruiz Narbona. 2016. NerthusV3. Online Lexical Database of Old English. Nerthus Project. Universidad de La Rioja. [www.nerthusproject.com]

Taylor, A., A. Warner, S. Pintzuk and F. Beths. 2003. The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose. Department of Language and Linguistic Science, University of York

[http://www.helsinki.fi/varieng/CoRD/corpora/YCOE/].

ABSTRACT. The Historical Dictionary of Modern Greek (ILNE), published by the Academy of Athens, is one of the oldest historical lexicographical enterprises in Europe, started in the early 20^th century. The historical lexicography of Modern Greek presents both special difficulties and special interest, due to the extremely long attested history of the language. Although ILNE conforms to all the formal criteria of a historical dictionary (cf. Merkin 1983; Reichmann 1990), it also presents a major difference from such projects: it targets not only the standard language, but also all the local dialectal varieties of Greek. This inclusion, rendered necessary by the centuries-long diglossic situation of the language, is illustrated especially with respect to the problems arising from it (extent of corpus, criteria of lemmatization, presentation etc.). Furthermore, the inclusion of dialectal data leads to another set of problems not usually faced by historical lexicographic enterprises (phonetic transcription of variants, reliability of written and oral sources etc.). 

The proposed paper aims to provide an overall presentation of the above issues, and the solutions adopted, as discussed in the new Manual of Regulations (MR 2012) and applied in the most recent ILNE volume (6, 2016). 

References:

ILNE: Istorikon Lexikon tis Neas Ellinikis [Historical Dictionary of Modern Greek].

Athens: Academy of Athens, 1933-.

Merkin, R.: Historical Dictionaries. In Hartmann R. R. K. (ed.) Lexicography: Principles and Practice. London: Academic Press, 1983, 123-133.

MR: Kanonismos Syntaxeos tou Istorikou Lexikou tis Neas Ellinikis [Manual of Regulations of the Historical Dictionary of Modern Greek]. Athens: Academy of Athens, 2012.

Reichmann, O.: Formen und Probleme der Datenerhebung I: Synchronische und diachronische historische Wörterbücher. In Hausmann, F. J. et al. (eds.):

Wörterbücher. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie. Berlin: De Gruyter, vol. 2, 1990, 1588-1611. 

ABSTRACT. This paper addresses the morphological and semantic characteristics of bahuvrīhi, a pattern of compound word which is very frequent in Old Norse (ON) lexicon. 

Compounding is one of the most productive way to increase ON lexicon and it has long been identified as characteristic of this language, as well as other Old Germanic languages (Carr 1939). Among the compounds, bahuvrīhi is the traditional Sanskrit term for those compounds with no genuine internal semantic head, like the English compounds redskin, hardhat or hammerhead (Austefjord 2003). The bahuvrīhi hammerhead does not denote a special type of head, but rather refers to somebody habitually possessing or characterized by a head, which has something similar to a hammer. Characteristic of these compounds is their “expressiveness”, due to their ability to describe entities through one physical or psychological peculiarity (e.g. mjúk-orðr ‘smooth-speaking’, literally ‘having a smooth word’, opin-eygðr ‘open-eyed’).

The contribution is divided in two parts. First of all, I want to give a first complete morphological description of the subtypes of bahuvrīhi compounds (approximately 400, found both in prose and in poetry), using the traditional classification of Petersen (1914-1915) in pure, extended and reversed bahuvrīhi. Unlike other Old Germanic languages, for example, Old Norse is characterized by the massive presence of the subtype extended with the derivational morpheme –(V)ð-: ON harð-hug-aðr ‘having a hard heart’. The morphology of these compounds is also related to some problems in lexicography; the treatment and the collocation in historical dictionaries is problematic particularly for the pure bahuvrīhis. A compound like sam-hugi is registered in Cleasby / Vígfusson / Craigie (1957: 511) with two distinctive sub-lemmas (which are written in a smaller type) connected to the headword SAMR ‘the same’: the first entry is the adjective sam-hugi ‘of one mind’, ‘agreeing’, the bahuvrīhi compound; the second one is the noun sam-hugi ‘concord’, ‘agreement’, which is instead a compound with a determinative relation between the components. Other dictionaries have a different arrangement for this kind of homonymy.

In the second part, my attention is devoted to a deeper insight in their role inside the ON lexicon (with a focus on their usage in personal naming system), making also a comparison between ON bahuvrīhis and the bahuvrīhis which are present in other Old Germanic languages. 

References:

Austefjord, A. (2003): “Die Bahuvrihi-Komposita im Germanischen”, in NOWELE. North- Western European Language Evolution 42(1), pp. 29-40.

Carr, C.T. (1939): Nominal Compounds in Germanic. London: Humphrey Milford.

Cleasby, R. / Vígfusson, G. / Craigie, W. (1957): An Icelandic-English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 

Petersen, W. (1914-15): “Der Ursprung der Exozentrika“, in Indogermanische Forschungen 34, pp. 254-285. 

ABSTRACT. In the Netherlands, Frisian is nowadays mainly used in Fryslân. This regards so-called Westerlauwers-Frisian, the variant of Frisian spoken at the western side of the river Lauwers. In the Middle Ages however, the Frisian-speaking area in the Netherlands was much larger. At its height it ran along the entire north and west coast of the Netherlands all the way down to Zeeland. In the course of time, in large parts of this area Frisian was replaced by Frankish. Currently, the only region outside Friesland which continues to display Frisian influences, is West-Friesland in the province of Noord-Holland.

For a historical dictionary of Dutch one has to take these language dynamics into account, especially for Old Dutch, which covers a period of about 700 years. In the Oudnederlands Woordenboek (ONW, Dictionary of Old Dutch) not only Old Dutch, but also some Old Frisian material is included. One reason for doing this was that at the time the ONW was compiled, there were no plans for a dictionary of Old Frisian. Another reason was that for some entries word material was available in the form of Old Dutch attestations, Old Frisian attestations and mixed attestations, showing both Old Dutch and Old Frisian characteristics. Presenting this material together gives a better view on the typical characteristics of Old Dutch and Old Frisian. 

This contribution is about the Old Frisian material in the ONW; what sources are used, where did they originate and how is the material presented? It is also about possible follow-up projects. Should there be a separate dictionary for Old Frisian, after which the Old Frisian material can be removed from the ONW? Or does it perhaps add value to combine these two languages so closely interwoven together in one dictionary? Should we include more Old Frisian material and convert the dictionary to a dictionary of continental northwestern West Germanic? Or should one dare to think even bigger and try to work towards a dictionary of all West Germanic languages, with this comparative approach.  

ABSTRACT. As neighboring countries, China and Japan have been influencing each other one way or another in various aspects. Jianzhen (aka Ganjin)’s arduous journey to Japan in the eighth century signals the start of the religious exchange between the two nations while the later adoption of kanji in Japan is a clear indication of their close linguistic interaction. Such interaction can also be found through bilingual dictionaries published in the 19^th century and the early part of the 20^th century. Coincidentally, the tradition of compiling bilingual dictionaries involving the local language and major European languages in both China and Japan was started by Jesuits, namely The PortugueseChinese Dictionary (1588) by Michele Ruggieri and Matteo Ricci and The Nippo Jisho (Japanese-Portuguese) in 1603. Bilingual dictionaries involving the English language did not appear until the first few decades of the 19^th century. From the outset, bilingual dictionaries in China seemed to have exerted considerable influence on Japanese bilingual lexicography, as is witnessed by the translations of several English-Chinese dictionaries in Japan, while after the Meiji Restoration the Chinese language began to borrow extensively from the Japanese language. This paper is a tentative attempt made with the aim of discussing the influence China’s bilingual lexicography had upon that of Japan through the scrutiny of several dictionary compilers in the 19^th century and their lexicographical works.

ABSTRACT. We aim at exploring, through the search and scrutiny of a set of lexical units in diachronic corpora, the history of a group of demonymic denominations that characterise individuals as ‘native of’ or ‘belonging to’ some specific territories within the Spanish Colonial Americas, in order to give an account of both the history of lexical forms and semantic changes regarding this set of words. In this sense, by examining the appearance, the eventual decline of use and the different meanings acquired by Spanish demonyms related to a set of colonial possessions of the Spanish Empire in the Americas from the 16^th to the half of the 19^th centuries, not only is it intended to describe the life and journey of those relational denominations but also to find, through diachronic lexical-semantics research, concrete correlations to specific historical phenomena and social identities regarding the history of Spanish-speaking Americas and its inhabitants, addressing the study of demonyms from a diachronic perspective.

It is thus pretended to report concrete findings retrieved from the Diachronic Corpus of Spanish (Corpus Diacrónico del Español - CORDE) and the Diachronic and Diatopic Corpus of American Spanish (Corpus Diacrónico y Diatópico del Español de América - CORDIAM) for a subset of words (for instance, among others, peruano -basically meaning ‘native or related to Peru’-, mexicano -‘native or related to Mexico’-, neogranadino ‘native or related to the Viceroyalty of Nueva Granada’). The corpora findings will be classified according to different historical periods, regions of production of texts where demonyms appear, etc., in order to give an account of the chronological and geographical distribution of lexical forms, references and meanings, and polysemous developments of the words. Special attention will be given to the way in which demonyms start to be used during the first century of the colonial settlement (basically in the 16^th century) and, as well, the American independence claims from the 19^th century.

ABSTRACT. The names of the Andean languages of South America have not always been incorporated into the dictionaries of the Real Academia Española (RAE) despite being general languages. However, when they have been considered, definitions about languages have responded to ways of thinking about ethnicity. The lexicographical practice has not always been the same. Therefore, from a historical and anthropological perspective, we believe that it is necessary to study how the languages nomination have been incorporated and defined underlying the academic corporation related to racial and linguistic ideologies. To do this, we examine the lexicographical treatment of the Quechua, Aymara and Puquina entries. In this exhibition, it is concluded that the lexicographical narrative sometimes incurs in evaluative aspects of racialization, exoticism and hierarchy.

ABSTRACT. The Cambridge World History of Lexicography (CWHL) will be published around the date of ICHLL-10. As the first truly global history of lexicography, it will show us not only how much we know about our subject, but also where there is important work to be done. I would like to sketch six ways in which the history of lexicography might build on the achievement of CWHL in the coming years. 

Two of the possibilities I have in mind are reference-oriented. First, we need a new historical bibliography of lexicography to replace Zaunmüller’s fine old Bibliographisches Handbuch der Sprachwörterbücher, and the bibliographical infrastructure of CWHL gives us some sense of what that might look like. Second, the prosopographical appendix of CWHL offers, in effect, a sketch of what a biographical dictionary of lexicographers might look like. 

Two others are for the making of anthologies. Repeated references in CWHL to a very wide variety of dictionary prefaces suggest the potential value and interest of a global anthology of dictionary prefaces in translation. And the absence of illustrations from CWHL suggests the idea of an anthology, not of extracts from dictionaries, but of images of the dictionary page, accompanied with commentary and, where appropriate, translation.

The last two are for monographic work. CWHL is rich in information about the origins and connections of dictionary traditions, but its chapters are on individual traditions, so their main focus tends not to be on connections: there is much work to be done on the movement of lexicographical ideas and practices from one culture to another. And there is much comparative work to be done on themes which appear here and there in the global picture without evident connection, for instance that of recitation and memorization of dictionaries in verse.