Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] The spice of lexicography: Human Sacrifice

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: Karl Randolph <kwrandolph AT email.com>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] The spice of lexicography: Human Sacrifice
  • Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:55:39 +0100

On 21/10/2005 18:38, Karl Randolph wrote:

...

I just realized as I write this response, another place where I differ from BDB and other lexicographers: first I mentioned that I look for action, not form, when looking at how words are used. An example of that is where I disagreed with Reinier de Blois as to the meaning of RXB LBB: I ended up agreeing that his definition of "filling the mind" is most likely correct (my original understanding wrong), but he looked at the object, *what* filled the mind, thus his claim that it has different meanings, while I look at the action, the *filling* of the mind, and see the same action despite different contexts. But now, in connection with the presupposition that each word usually has one basic meaning, I realize that as a lexicographer, I look for the unique flavor that a spice adds to all the recipes to which it is added and not the flavors it soaks up from around it, i.e. what slant does each word add to the contexts wherein it is found, not the meanings it receives from its semantic domains. I tend to concentrate on the different flavors, not the recipes. As a diner, I'm trying to reverse engineer the cook's spice rack by sampling the restaurant's total menu, so I try to reverse engineer a lexeme's meaning by all its contexts, recognizing if possible what it adds to each context.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but based on the above, it appears to me that semantic domains are based on form over function. If so, it explains my intuitive discomfort with the concept, as I have already rejected form over function to champion function over form.


Karl, this is a very interesting and potentially useful contribution. I
certainly agree that this is what lexicography should be doing - without
necessarily agreeing that the semantic domains approach is not doing it,
at least in principle. I'm not sure what to do with this immediately,
except to resend the relevant part, as above, with a more suitable
subject line to attract the attention of people interested in
lexicography but not necessarily in human sacrifice.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page