EN
TR
A Comparative View at the Definition of Natural Species in Romanian and Turkish General Dictionaries: The Example of “Sea”
Abstract
In terms of lexicography, defining a natural category requires determining the meanings of a word, establishing its boundaries (deciphering), and distinguishing it from other closely related natural categories (encoding). The aim of this study is to evaluate the definitions of the natural category “sea” in Romanian and Turkish words using semantic methods and criteria, classify the core and sub-meanings of the lexical unit “sea,” compare the definitions, sub-meanings, and examples in both languages, and identify the differences and similarities in general monolingual Turkish and Romanian dictionaries. At the end of the study, a definition proposal for a general monolingual Turkish dictionary is presented.
In this context, for the Turkish dictionary, Türk Dil Kurumu Güncel Türkçe Sözlük (the Turkish Language Association Current Turkish Dictionary), Dil Derneği Türkçe Sözlük (the Turkish Language Association Turkish Dictionary), Kubbealtı Lugatı (the Kubbealtı Dictionary), Ötüken Türkçe Sözlük (the Ötüken Turkish Dictionary); for the Romanian dictionary, the following dictionaries were selected: Dicționarul explicativ al limbii române (Annotated Dictionary of Romanian-DexOnline), Dicționarul etimologic român (Etymologi-cal Dictionary of Romanian) and Dicționarul limbii romîne literare contemporane (Contemporary Literary Romanian Language Dictionary).
It has been observed that in the determined dictionaries, differences have been adopted in including technical features of the lexeme such as word category, etymology, inflected form, and examples. Whereas there are similarities in the basic definition, some dictionaries are insufficient in determining the boundaries or distinguishing it from other lexemes with similar meanings. It has been determined that in both language dictionaries, the metaphorical meanings of the word “sea” are generally included and that there have been parallels in these figurative meanings. In the conclusion of the study, a lexeme model that has been deemed appropriate to be included in Güncel Türkçe Sözlük was created.
Keywords
Destekleyen Kurum
Araştırma herhangi bir kurum veya kuruluş tarafından desteklenmemiştir.
Etik Beyan
Bu makale için etik kurul izni alınmasına gerek yoktur. Araştırma ve yayın etiğine uygun hareket edilmiştir.
Kaynakça
- Boz, Erdoğan (2009). “Sözlükbirimlerin Tanımlamasına Anlambilimsel Bir Bakış”, Turkish Studies, C. 4 (4), s. 172-183.
- Boz, Erdoğan (2020). Çevrimiçi Genel Sözlüklerde Tanım. Dilbilim Dergisi - Journal of Linguistics, 34, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.26650/jol.2020.001
- Fillmore, Charles J. (1982). Frame Semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the Morning Calm (pp. 111–137). Seoul: Hanshin.
- Fillmore, Charles J. (1985). Frames and the Semantics of Understanding. Qu-aderni di Semantica, 6(2), 222–254.
- Fillmore, Charles J., & Atkins, B. T. S. (1992). Toward a Frame-Based Lexi-con: The Semantics of RISK and its Neighbors. In A. Lehrer & E. Kittay (Eds.), Frames, Fields, and Contrasts (pp. 75–102). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Gökter Gençer, Bilge (2018). Tek Dilli Genel Sözlüklerde Tanım, Yayımlan-mamış doktora tezi. Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
- Heller, K. A. (1987). Einführung in die Pädagogische Psychologie. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
- Kaynak, Mehmet (2021). Ana Çizgileriyle Sözlük Bilimi ve Türk Sözlükçülüğü. Kafdağı, Cilt:6, Sayı:1, Haziran 2021, 79-101, DOI: 10.51469/kafdagi.755708. Manual on Codes International Codes (1995), Secretariat of the World Meteo-rological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Ayrıntılar
Birincil Dil
Türkçe
Konular
Sözlükbilim ve Anlambilim
Bölüm
İnceleme Makalesi
Yazarlar
Berrin Özcan
*
0000-0002-9513-1323
Türkiye
Erken Görünüm Tarihi
21 Ekim 2025
Yayımlanma Tarihi
25 Ekim 2025
Gönderilme Tarihi
20 Temmuz 2025
Kabul Tarihi
18 Ekim 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı
Yıl 1970 Cilt: 11 Sayı: 11