Downloaded 10 times
![Etymological Processes: Metaphor
Source Concept: bean
Target Concept: kidney
color shape
Source Domain Profile:
Legumes
Food
Target Domain Profile:
Body
Internal Organs
Lexical
Source Form(s)
[ndù.ʧí]
ntuchi
Polysemous
Lexical Form(s)
Mixtepec-Mixtec
‘ntuchi’ (bean > kidney)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/etymology-in-tei-jbowers-emel-20150317-static-white-150317071028-conversion-gate01/75/Etymology-Markup-in-TEI-XML-14-2048.jpg)
Uploaded byJack Bowers
Etymology Markup in TEI XML
The document presents recommendations for encoding etymological information in TEI XML, aimed at improving digital markup models for lexical dictionaries. It addresses the need for a coherent treatment of linguistic data across various structures and proposes new TEI guidelines for etymological markup, including diverse types of etymological information. Illustrative examples demonstrate etymological processes such as inheritance, borrowing, metaphor, and metonymy, showcasing their representation within the proposed TEI structures.
More Related Content
Similar to Etymology Markup in TEI XML
Etymology Markup in TEI XML
- 1. Recommendations for Encoding EtymologicalInformation Using TEI XML Laurent Romary INRIA France Jack T. Bowers [email protected] COST ENeL WG2 Meeting Vienna 13/02/2015 revision 06/04/2015
- 2. General Overview ofProject We are creating a set of structural recommendations for TEI lexical dictionaries, including information relevant to: • phonetic and orthographic forms; • grammatical information; • semantic and meta-linguistic information; • variation (on all levels); • etymology; • mono-/bi-/multi-/lingual dictionaries; as well as in dictionaries in which encyclopedic and examples are included; Models involve proposing changes to the TEI P5 guidelines itself and defining our constraints on the TEI in an ODD;
- 3. Goals for TEIEtymological Markup Recommendations (i) address the lack of sufficient digital markup models and standards for representing etymological information; (ii) coherence in treatment of the same exact linguistic information between synchronic and diachronic data structures; (iii) LMF and ONTOLEX compatible TEI structures; (iv) make better use of linking mechanisms in TEI for: • connecting cited forms in etymology and their project internal sources (where possible); • making use of existing external resources for lexical and information conceptual not internal to a given project or corpus: e.g. open source lexical & ontological knowledge and linked data resources (v) increase diversity in the types of etymological information that can be treated & make more use of concepts from linguistics:
- 4. 0…n <colloc> <per> <usg> <case> <gram> <pos> <number> <tns> <gen> <mood> Working TEIDictionary Metamodel (elements) TEI 0…n <quote> 0…n 1…n 0…1 <usg> <cit>sense 0…n 0…n0…1 <gramGrp> 1…10…10…1 0…n0…n 1…n <bibl> 0…n<form> <sense> <orth> <pron> 0…n <seg> <seg> <listChange> 1…n <change> 0…1 <bibl> 0…1 <seg> <oRef> <pRef> <gramGrp> 0…n 0…n 0…n <etym>sense 0…n <etym>entry 0…n <ref> <gloss> 1…n <oRef> <pRef> <lang> <lbl> 0…n <ptr> <note> <date> <bibl> <ptr> <entry> 0…n <ref>0…n <spanGrp> <span> <annotationGrp> <annotations> 1…n 0…n 1…n <def> 1…n 0…n <def> <cit>etym <gramGrp> <cit> <num> <cit> <num> <lbl> <num> <lbl> 0…n <c><c>
- 5. Two Potential EtymologyStructures in TEI0…n <quote> 0…n <cit> 0…n0…1 <gramGrp> 1…n <bibl> 0…n <seg> <oRef> <pRef> <ptr> <entry> 0…n <ref>0…n <spanGrp> <span> <annotationGrp> <annotations> 1…n 0…n 1…n <def> 1…n 0…n • if there are semantic implications for the etymological change; • no semantic implications for existing lexical items in language the etymological change; <etym>sense <etym>entry • both may occur in the same entry to account for unrelated changes that occurred at different stages; 0…1 0…n 0…n 0…n 0…n <etym>sense 0…n <gramGrp> <ref> <gloss> 1…n <cit> <oRef> <pRef> <lang> <lbl> 0…n <ptr> <note> <date> <bibl> 1…n <def> <num> <cit> <etym>entry <sense> 0…n <usg>
- 6. <etym>entry • If thereare no semantic implications for the etymological change, and/or the semantic change occurred in another language or proto-language stage; 0…n 1…n <entry> <quote> 0…n <cit>sense 0…n0…1 <gramGrp> <bibl> 0…n <seg> <oRef> <pRef> <ptr> 0…n <ref>0…n <spanGrp> <span> <annotationGrp> <annotations> 1…n 0…n 1…n <def> 1…n 0…n <sense> • Inheritance ; Phonetic and phonological processes: (non exhaustive) • assimilation (place, manner) ; • epenthesis; • metathasis • erosion/deletion; (apokope, • coalescence; • tone changes; (has own internal categories) • neutralization; • Borrowing*; • lexical item imported from other language; 1…n 0…n 0…n 0…n 0…n 0…n <ref> <gloss> 1…n <cit>etym <oRef> <pRef> <lang> <lbl> 0…n <ptr> <note> <date> <bibl> 1…n <def> <num> <cit> <colloc> <per> <usg> <case> <gram> <number> <gen> <mood> 1…n <num> <gramGrp> <note> <etym>sense <cit> <lbl> <etym>entry <pos> <tns>
- 7. 0…n <quote> 0…n 0…1 <usg> <cit>sense 0…n0…1 <gramGrp> 1…n <bibl> 0…n <seg> <oRef> <pRef> 0…n 0…n <etym>sense 0…n <ref> <gloss> 1…n <cit>etym <oRef> <pRef> <lang> <lbl> 0…n <ptr> <note> <date> <bibl> <ptr> <entry> 0…n <ref>0…n <spanGrp> <span> <annotationGrp> <annotations> 1…n0…n 1…n <def> 1…n 0…n Used when there are semantic implications for the etymological change; • *where there are multiple etymological processes that occur and some are semantic in nature and others phonetic, they may all be included in <etym>sense if the former permitted the latter. 1…n <def> <num> <cit> <etym>sense • Metaphor; • Metonymy • Blending*; • Compounding; • Grammaticalizati on; • several of these processes can co-occur; <gramGrp> 0…n 0…n 0…n <etym>entry <num> <lbl> 0…n 0…n <colloc> <pers> <usg> <case> <gram> <pos> <number> <tns> <gen> <mood> 1…n <sense> <num> <lbl>
- 8. Etymological Processes: Inheritance <entryxml:lang="it" xml:id=“buono"> <form type="lemma"> <orth>buono</orth> <pron notation=“ipa">'bwo.no</pron> <gramGrp> <pos>adj.</pos> <gen>masc.</gen> </gramGrp> </form> <sense> .... </sense> <etym type="inheritance"> <cit type="etymon"> <oRef xml:lang="la">bónŭ</oRef> <gramGrp> <pos>adj.</pos> <gen>masc.</gen <case>nom.</case> </gramGrp> </cit> </etym> </entry> Italian < Vulgar Latin buono < bŏnu synchronic entry diachronic (etymological) entry Note: processes and changes are approximate and meant for demonstrating markup rather than asserting precise etymological diachrony of individual items;
- 9. Etymological Processes: 2) ˈbonu >ˈbon <entry xml:lang="fr" xml:id="bon"> <form type="lemma"> <orth>bon</orth> <pron notation=“ipa">'bɔ̃</pron> <gramGrp> <pos>adj</pos> <gen>masc.</gen> </gramGrp> </form> <sense> .... </sense> <etym type="inheritance"> <cit type=“etymon" xml:id="bónŭ" next="ˈbon"> <oRef xml:lang="la">bónŭ</oRef> <gramGrp> <case>nom.</case> </gramGrp> </cit> <cit type=“etymon” xml:id="ˈbon" prev=“bónŭ” next="ˈbɔ̃"> <pRef xml:lang=“fro">ˈbon</oRef> </cit> <cit type=“etymon” xml:id="ˈbɔ̃" prev=“ˈbon"> <pRef xml:lang="fro">bɔ̃</oRef> </cit> </etym> </entry> bon < bónŭ French < Vulgar Latin (2) Intermediate phonological change (1) Root level etymological process (3) Final phonological change Inheritance & Phonological Changes Note: processes and changes are approximate and meant for demonstrating markup rather than asserting precise etymological diachrony of individual items; 3) ˈbon > ˈbɔ̃
- 10. Etymological Processes: Borrowing* KeyLinguistic concepts: Description of lexical process:• where a language takes a lexical item from different language; • aka: loaning, importing; • often have historical and practical explanation for need • source language; • source form(s); phonetic, orthographic • importing language; • imported or borrowed form; • semantic/meta-linguistic concept; Source Language: Importing Language: Meta- linguistic Concept: Borrowed Form(s): Source Form(s): orth(i..n) pron(i..n) orth(i..n) pron(i..n)
- 11. Etymological Processes: Borrowing* <entryxml:id="taxi" xml:lang="jpn"> <form type="lemma"> <orth type="transliterated" notation="romanji">takushī</orth> <orth notation="katakana">タクシー</orth> <pron notation="ipa">taku'shi:</pron> <gramGrp> <pos>noun</pos> </gramGrp> </form> <sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/page/Taxicab"> <usg type=“dom">transportation</usg> </sense> <etym type="borrowing"> <lbl>source</lbl> <lang>English</lang> <cit type="etymon"> <oRef corresp="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/taxi" xml:lang="en">taxi</oRef> <pRef notation=“ipa" corresp=“http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/taxi#Pronunciation" xml:lang="en-US">'tæksi</pRef> </cit> </etym> </entry> Japanese < English: taxi(cab) Borrowed Form(s): Source Form(s): Meta-linguistic Concept: Importing Language Source Language
- 12. <cit type=“etymon"><orth @type@notation> <pron @notation> <form type=“lemma"> <gramGrp> <pos> <etym type=“borrowing”> <entry @xml:id> <oRef @corresp @xml:lang> <sense @corresp> <lbl> <lang> <usg type=“dom”> TEI Model for Japanese ‘takushī’ Etymological Process: Borrowing Lexical entry: <pRef @notation @corresp @xml:lang> Ontological resource for entry External lexical entry resource for source term External pronunciation resource for source term
- 13. Description of process: Keycomponents • Domain of concept (y): Source Domain; • Domain of concept (x): Target Domain Source Concept: Salient Attributes Target Concept: • Lexical innovation based in human cognition; • Describe/understand one concept (x) in terms of concept (y); • Requires a change in semantic domains; • Mapping between concepts is only limited to certain salient attributes; • Results in lexical Polysemy Etymological Processes: Metaphor Source Domain Profile: Domain (x) Target Domain Profile: Domain (y) Lexical Source Form(s) Polysemous Lexical Form(s) phonetic orthographic
- 14. Etymological Processes: Metaphor SourceConcept: bean Target Concept: kidney color shape Source Domain Profile: Legumes Food Target Domain Profile: Body Internal Organs Lexical Source Form(s) [ndù.ʧí] ntuchi Polysemous Lexical Form(s) Mixtepec-Mixtec ‘ntuchi’ (bean > kidney)
- 15. <entry xml:id="kidney"> <form type=“lemma"> <orth>ntuchi</orth> <pronnotation="ipa">ndù.ʧí</pron> <!— gramGrp cluster—> </form> <sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Kidney"> ….. <usg type="dom">Body</usg> <usg type=“dom">InternalOrgans</usg> <etym type="metaphor"> <cit type=“etymon"> <oRef corresp="#bean">ntuchi</oRef> <pRef corresp="#bean">ndù.ʧí</pRef> <gloss>bean</gloss> </cit> </etym> <entry xml:id="bean"> <form type=“lemma"> <orth>ntuchi</orth> <pron notation="ipa">ndù.ʧí</pron> <!— gramGrp cluster—> </form> ….. <sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Pinto_bean"> <usg type="dom">Legume</usg> <usg type="dom">Food</usg> ……. <!— translation info here—> </sense> </entry> Etymological Processes: Metaphor dbpedia ontology entry for: ‘pinto bean’ dbpedia ontology entry for: ‘kidney’ pointer to entry for ‘bean’
- 16. <usg type=“dom”> <etymtype=“metaphor”> <gloss> <cit type=“etymon”> <lbl> <sense @corresp> <entry @xml:id> <cit type=“translation” @xml:lang> <oRef @corresp> <gramGrp> <pos> <orth> <pron @notation> <form @type=“lemma"> <sense @correp><form type=“lemma”> <usg type=“dom”> <cit @type @xml:lang> <gramGrp> <entry @xml:id> TEI Model for Mixtepec-Mixtec ‘ntuchi’ Etymological process: Metaphor Lexical entry: Source entry: <pRef @corresp @notation> Ontological resource for entry (kidney): Ontological resource for Source entry (bean): <oRef @corresp> <pron @notation> <orth> <pos>
- 17. Etymological Processes: Metonymy Descriptionof lexical process: Key Linguistic concepts: • concept (y) stands for concept (x); • no change in semantic domains; • one “vehicle” entity provides mental access to another, (i.e. a target) within the same domain.; • source concept (cognitive); • target concept (cognitive); • source form (lexical); • target form (lexical): • results in (synchronic) polysemy Vehicle Concept: Target Concept: Domain (X)
- 18. Etymological Processes: Metonymy Mixtepec-Mixtec:‘kiti’ (horse) <entry xml:id=“animal”> <form type="lemma"> <orth>kiti</orth> <pron notation="ipa">kì.tí</pron> <!—gramGrp here —> </form> <sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Animal"> <usg type=“dom">Living Beings</usg> <usg type=“dom">Animal</usg> <cit type="translation" xml:lang="eng"> <oRef>animal</oRef> </cit> <!—other translations here —> </sense> </entry> <entry xml:id=“animal-horse”> <form type=“lemma"> <orth>kiti</orth> <pron notation="ipa">kì.t̪í</pron> <!—gramGrp here —> </form> <sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Horse"> <usg type=“dom”>Animal</usg> <etym type="metonymy"> <date notBefore="1517"/> <cit type="etymon"> <oRef corresp="#animal">kiti</oRef> <pRef notation="ipa" corresp="#animal">kì.t̪í</pRef> <gloss>animal</gloss> </cit> <note>In this lexical item, the language reflects the history, since there were no horses in Mexico until the arrival of the Spanish, there was no Mixtecan word for 'horse', thus they categorical noun for 'animal' was used to describe the unnamed animal. </note> </etym> <cit type="translation" xml:lang="eng"> <oRef>horse</oRef> </cit> <!—other translations here —> </sense> </entry> Vehicle Concept; entryTarget Concept; entry
- 19. <usg type=“dom”> <form type=“lemma"> <entry@xml:id> <sense @corresp> <cit type=“translation” @xml:lang> <oRef> <gramGrp> <pos><orth> <pron @notation> <sense @corresp><form type=“lemma”> <pron @notation> <usg type=“dom”> <cit type=“translation” @xml:lang> <gramGrp> <entry @xml:id> TEI Model for Mixtepec-Mixtec ‘kiti’ (horse) Etymological process: Metonymy Lexical entry: Source entry: <etym type=“metonymy”> Ontological resource for entry: Ontological resource for Source entry: <orth> <cit type=“etymon”> <note> <gloss> <oRef @corresp> <pRef @corresp @notation> <date @notBefore> <pos> <oRef>
- 20. Etymological Processes: Compounding Description oflexical process: • Combines surface forms of two lexical items to form new one; • Become the sum of its lexical and semantic parts; • Can involve metaphor, metonymy, and/or grammaticalization Etymon(i)*: Etymon(ii)*: grammatical info(i) grammatical info(ii) semantic/meta- linguistic info(ii) semantic/meta- linguistic info(ii) etym. process (0..n) etym. process (0..n)
- 21. Etymological Processes: Compounding (withMetonymy) Salient attribute of location = “the presence of hummingbirds” Mixtepec-Mixtec: Yucha Nchu’u ’Puebla State’ <etym type="metonymy"> <cit type="etymon"> <oRef corresp=“#hummingbird”>Nchu’u</pRef> <gramGrp> <pos>concrete noun</pos> </gramGrp> <gloss>hummingbird</gloss> </cit> </etym> <entry xml:id=“Puebla-state" xml:lang="mix" type="compound"> <form type="lemma"> <orth><seg corresp=“#lake">Yucha</seg> <seg corresp=“#hummingbird”>Nchu’u</seg></orth> <!— <gramGrp> here —>….. </form> Etymon(1): <sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Puebla_State"> <etym type="compounding"> </etym> …. </sense> </entry> <cit type="etymon"> <oRef corresp=“#lake”>Yucha</pRef> <gramGrp> <pos>concreteNoun</pos> </gramGrp> <gloss>hummingbird</gloss> </cit> Etymological process(ii): Metonymy (Primary) Etymological process: Compounding Etymon(2):
- 22. <oRef @corresp> <form type=“lemma"> <gramGrp> <pos> <orth> <seg@corresp> Etymological Processes: Compounding TEI model for Mixtepec-Mixtec “Yucha Nchu’u” <gloss> <cit type=“etymon”> <pos> <gramGrp> <oRef @corresp> <gloss> <cit type=“etymon”> <etym type=“metonymy”> <pos> <gramGrp> Lexical entry: <entry @xml:id type=“compound”> <etym type=“compounding”> <sense @corresp> <seg @corresp> Ontological resource for entry:
- 23. Alt (2006) LMFetymology extension proposal; merged with the LMF Core package Form Representation Lexical Entry Lexical DB Text Representation Lexical Resource Global Information Statement Form Representation 0…n 1…n 0…1 0…n Etymon Etymological Link Etymology 0…n 1…n 1…n 1…n 0…n Sense 0…n 0…n 0…n 0…n 1…1 Definition
- 24. pompel limoes +pamplemousse pompelmoes Synchronic Diachronic DutchModernFrench /etymologicalLink/ /source/=“..”/target/=“…” /etymologicalClass/=/composition/ /biblSource/=“Boulan, König…” /confidenceScore/=“probable” Etymology of French ‘pamplemousse’: from Trésore de la Langue Française (TFL) Etymological stage Composition (eg., Compounding) Etymological stage Loan Word (eg., Borrowing) /etymon/ /orth/=“pompelmoes” /language/=”nl” /pos/=“commonNoun” /gender/=“feminine” /gloss/=“Citrus Maxima” /etymologicalLink/ /source/=“..”/target/=“…” /etymologicalClass/=/loan word/ /biblSource/=“TLF” Alt (2006) LMF Etymology Extension: Borrowing Stage /etymon/ /orth/=“limoes” /language/=“nl” /pos/=“commonNoun” /gloss/=“citron” /etymon/ /orth/=“pompel” /language/=“nl” /pos/=“adjective” /gloss/=“gros, enflé”
- 25. <entry xml:id="LE1" xml:lang=“fr"> <formtype="lemma"> <orth>pamplemousse</orth> .... </form> <sense> .... </sense> ….. </etym> </entry> <cit type="etymon" xml:id="L2"> <oRef xml:lang="nl">pompelmoes</oRef> <gloss xml:lang="lat">Citrus maxima</gloss> <gramGrp> <pos>commonNoun</pos> <gen>feminine</gen> </gramGrp> <note>probablement de l’origine tamoule, De Vries, Nederl</note> </cit> <etym type=“borrowing"> ….. <ref target=“#TLF”>TLF</ref> ….. Alt (2006) LMF Etymology Extension: Borrowing Stage Converted TEI Markup Note: our TEI structures do not explicitly use an equivalent of /etymologicalLink/ or “ /source/=“..”/target/=“…” ) as this link is implicitly present in the xml data structure Dutch Modern French pompelmoes pamplemousse /etymologicalLink/ /source/=“..”/target/=“…” /etymologicalClass/=/loan word/ /biblSource/=“TLF” /etymon/ /orth/=“pompelmoes” /language/=”nl” /pos/=“commonNoun” /gender/=“feminine” /gloss/=“Citrus Maxima” <!— ‘compounding’ section goes here —> ≈
- 26. pompel limoes +pamplemousse pompelmoes Synchronic Diachronic DutchModernFrench /etymologicalLink/ /source/=“..”/target/=“…” /etymologicalClass/=/composition/ /biblSource/=“Boulan, König…” /confidenceScore/=“probable” Etymological stage Composition (eg., Compounding) Etymological stage Loan Word (eg., Borrowing) /etymon/ /orth/=“limoes” /language/=“nl” /pos/=“commonNoun” /gloss/=“citron” /etymon/ /orth/=“pompel” /language/=“nl” /pos/=“adjective” /gloss/=“gros, enflé” /etymon/ /orth/=“pompelmoes” /language/=”nl” /pos/=“commonNoun” /gender/=“feminine” /gloss/=“Citrus Maxima” Alt (2006) LMF Etymology Extension: Compounding Stage Etymology of French ‘pamplemousse’: from Trésore de la Langue Française (TFL) /etymologicalLink/ /source/=“..”/target/=“…” /etymologicalClass/=/loan word/ /biblSource/=“TLF”
- 27. ation of Alt(2006) LMF Etymology Extension: Compounding Stage <entry xml:id="LE1" xml:lang=“fr"> <form type="lemma"> <orth>pamplemousse</orth> .... </form> <sense> .... </sense> <etym type="borrowing"> …… ….. </etym> </entry> <etym type=“compounding”> <ref target="#Boulan-König">Boulan, König...</ref> </etym> <cit type="etymon"> <oRef xml:lang="nl">pompel</oRef> <gramGrp> <pos>adjective</pos> </gramGrp> <gloss>gros, enflé</gloss> </cit> <cit type=“etymon"> <oRef xml:lang="nl">limoes</oRef> <gramGrp> <pos>commonNoun</pos> </gramGrp> <gloss>citron</gloss> </cit> /etymon/ /orth/=“pompel” /language/=“nl” /pos/=“adjective” /gloss/=“gros, enflé” /etymon/ /orth/=“limoes” /language/=“nl” /pos/=“commonNoun” /gloss/=“citron” pompel limoes + pamplemousse Historical Dutch Modern French /etymologicalLink/ /source/=“..”/target/=“…” /etymologicalClass/=/composition/ /biblSource/=“Boulan, König…” /confidenceScore/=“probable” <!— ‘borrowing’ section goes here —> Note: our TEI structures do not explicitly use an equivalent of /etymologicalLink/ or “ /source/=“..”/target/=“…” ) as this link is implicitly present in the xml data structure ≈ ≈
- 28. <lbl> <lang> <sense> 0…n <oRef @xml:lang> <etymtype=“borrowing”> <ref @target> <form type=“lemma"> <gramGrp> <pos> <c> <orth> <seg @corresp> Etymological Processes: Borrowing & Compounding TEI model for ‘pompelmousse’ as converted from LMF (Alt 2006) <gloss @xml:lang> <cit type=“etymon”> <gen> <note> <pos> <gramGrp> <oRef @xml:lang> <gloss @xml:lang> <cit type=“etymon”> <etym type=“compounding”> <ref @target> <pos> <gramGrp> Lexical entry: <seg @corresp> <entry @xml:id type=“compound”>
- 29. Étymol. et Hist.1. 1re moitié du xiies. put cel estre (Psautier Oxford, 54, 13 ds T.-L.); ca 1160 puet estre (Eneas, 9003, ibid.); début xves. peut-estre (Quinze joies mariage, éd. J. Rychner, XII, 12); 1824 peut-être bien (Joubert, loc. cit.); 2. 1636 employé elliptiquement pour répondre évasivement à une question (Corneille, Le Cid, I, 2); 3. 1775 détaché en fin de phrase, exprimant le défi, l'ironie (Beaumarchais, Barbier de Séville, II, 2); 4. fin xiies. puet estre que (Flore et Blancheflor, éd. J.-L. Leclanche, 407); 1641 peut-estre que (Corneille, Cinna, III, 1); 5. 1637 subst. un peut-estre (Id., La Place royale, IV, 6). Comp. de peut, 3epers. du sing. de l'ind. prés. de pouvoir* et de être*. <entry xml:id="peut-être" xml:lang="fr" type="compound"> <form type="lemma"> <orth><seg corresp="#pouvoir-3s-pres-ind">peut</seg><c>-</c><seg corresp="#être">être</seg></orth> <gramGrp> <pos>adv.</pos> </gramGrp> </form> … </entry> PEUT-ÊTRE, adv. Encoding from existing sources: synchronic portion of entry Trésor de la Langue Française For “compound” entry types, @corresp can (optionally) be used in the <seg> element to point to the individual sub components of the item within a project or externally;
- 30. PEUT-ÊTRE,adv. Encoding from existingsources: non-linguistic content portion of diachronic entry …. <etym xml:id=“PEUT-ÊTRE-adv-Étym-et-Hist” > <lbl>Étymol. et Hist.</lbl> <num>1.</num> …… <num>2.</num> ….. <num>3.</num> …… <num>4.</num> ….. <num>5.</num> …… <note> Comp. de peut, 3epers. du sing. de l'ind. prés. de pouvoir* et de être*. </note> </etym> … Trésor de la Langue Française Étymol. et Hist. 2. 1636 employé elliptiquement pour répondre évasivement à une question (Corneille, Le Cid, I, 2); 1. 1re moitié du xiies. put cel estre (Psautier Oxford, 54, 13 ds T.-L.); ca 1160 puet estre (Eneas, 9003, ibid.); début xves. peut-estre (Quinze joies mariage, éd. J. Rychner, XII, 12); 1824 peut-être bien (Joubert, loc. cit.); 3. 1775 détaché en fin de phrase, exprimant le défi, l'ironie (Beaumarchais, Barbier de Séville, II, 2); 4. fin xiies. puet estre que (Flore et Blancheflor, éd. J.-L. Leclanche, 407); 1641 peut-estre que (Corneille, Cinna, III, 1); 5. 1637 subst. un peut-estre (Id., La Place royale, IV, 6). Comp. de peut, 3epers. du sing. de l'ind. prés. de pouvoir* et de être*.
- 31. PEUT-ÊTRE, adv. Encoding fromexisting sources: diachronic portion of entry …. <sense> <etym xml:id=“PEUT-ÊTRE-adv-Étym-et-Hist” type="inheritance"> <lbl>Étymol. et Hist.</lbl> <num>1.</num> …… <num>2.</num> ….. <num>3.</num> …… <num>4.</num> ….. <num>5.</num> …… <note> Comp. de peut, 3epers. du sing. de l'ind. prés. de pouvoir* et de être*. </note> </etym> </sense> … Trésor de la Langue Française <cit type="attestation"> <date> </date> <oRef> </oRef> <gramGrp> <!—appropriate element here —> </gramGrp> <bibl> </bibl> <note> </note> </cit> …. template 2. 1636 employé elliptiquement pour répondre évasivement à une question (Corneille, Le Cid, I, 2); 1. 1re moitié du xiies. put cel estre (Psautier Oxford, 54, 13 ds T.-L.); ca 1160 puet estre (Eneas, 9003, ibid.); début xves. peut-estre (Quinze joies mariage, éd. J. Rychner, XII, 12); 1824 peut-être bien (Joubert, loc. cit.); 3. 1775 détaché en fin de phrase, exprimant le défi, l'ironie (Beaumarchais, Barbier de Séville, II, 2); 4. fin xiies. puet estre que (Flore et Blancheflor, éd. J.-L. Leclanche, 407); 1641 peut-estre que (Corneille, Cinna, III, 1); 5. 1637 subst. un peut-estre (Id., La Place royale, IV, 6).
- 32. Encoding from existingsources: diachronic portion of entry <cit type="attestation"> <date notBefore="1200" notAfter="1250">1re moitié du xiies</date> <oRef xml:lang="fro">put cel estre</oRef> <bibl>(Psautier Oxford, 54, 13 ds T.-L.)</bibl> </cit> Trésor de la Langue Française iso 639-3 code Old French (842-ca. 1400) fro iso 639-3 code Middle French (ca. 1400 - 1600) frm <cit type="attestation"> <date notBefore="1400" notAfter="1450">début xves</date> <oRef xml:lang="frm">peut-estre</oRef> <bibl>(Quinze joies mariage, éd. J. Rychner, XII, 12)</bibl> </cit> <cit type="attestation"> <date when="1824">1824</date> <oRef>peut-être bien</oRef> <bibl>(Joubert, loc. cit.)</bibl> </cit> …. 1re moitié du xiies. put cel estre (Psautier Oxford, 54, 13 ds T.-L.); 1824 peut-être bien (Joubert, loc. cit.); début xves. peut-estre (Quinze joies mariage, éd. J. Rychner, XII, 12); 1.
- 33. Conclusions and Summary OurTEI recommendations can facilitate: • linking and integrating corresponding data structures between the synchronic and diachronic levels; • the use of open source lexical resources and ontological information; • a more principled and consistent set of TEI guidelines for digitally encoding etymological information; • better compatibility between information traditionally kept, and formatted separately in etymological dictionaries, lexical dictionaries and linguistic analyses; • models for encoding ubiquitous processes of linguistic change for multiple levels of language; • theoretically agnostic data structures; • a more diverse set of etymological examples for the TEI guidelines;
Editor's Notes
- #4 > Benefits of consistant and limited set of elements and data organization are that the data can be more easily found and identified, therefore increasing it’s long term reusability and accessibility; (a) (old) synchronic: (<form>) <orth>,<pron>; (old) diachronic: <mentioned>, <gloss>; (new) synchronic: <orth>,<pron>; (new) diachronic: <cit>;<oRef>, <pRef> (allowing text; using @corresp); <gloss>, <gramGrp>.. (b) (old) <xr>, <ref>, <bibl>, (new) ; <ref @target>, <ptr @target>, <bibl> (c) examples from TEI guidelines;
- #5 -transparent element indicates that element is not or that it is less essential to model;
- #7 Involves only phonetic and/or phonological changes; for when the etymology of the entry does not involve any significant semantic changes and is inherited from a ‘parent’ or ‘proto’ language (at least according to sources consulted or researchers/creating dictionary); - These etymologies are occur as direct children of <entry>; - Their top level <etym> element should have the attribute-value pair ‘type=“inheritance”’; - For each individual phonetic/phonological and/or orthographic change documented (they are not necessarily mutually exclusive as orthography is our best clue as to historical phonetics and phonology) it is possible to include embedded <etym> elements with specific phonological changes as the value of the “@type”; Any combination of changes where at least one involves a change in semantics and/or syntax (but not changes to any other form other than itself (thus no chain shifts or analogical leveling…); - - Can also include phonetic/phonological changes;
- #9 Notes: simplified example - only using <oRef> because no recordings (obviously (“misspellings” often help induce info on pronunciation) - (if no iso-639-1/2 code for VL, use date range in attributes;
- #10 Notes: simplified example
- #11 May contain info relevant to: anthropology; semantics; morphosyntax; phonetics/phonology;
- #12 Note: terminology flexible, could call it ‘loanword’, ‘loaning’, ‘importing’ etc.; the main necessity is that it is consistent. Ontologically, we have chosen to make the value of the <etym @type> the etymological process, as opposed to the result, in which case the value of the attribute here would be ‘loanword’; this is inherently implied in the labeling of the process; > the value of @xml:lang should be it the iso language code of the source language; > Loanwords are a good place to keep track <pron> in both the source and target languages because we may gain insight into the (importing) languages’ phonology in how it does or doesn’t change the pronunciation….
- #14 -According to cognitive linguistics, metaphor is a universal cognitive process that takes place first at the cognitive level, then at the lexical level. Lexical innovation based in human cognition; Describe/understand one concept (x) in terms of concept (y); Requires a change in semantic domains; Mapping between concepts is only limited to certain salient attributes; Results in lexical Polysemy Domain of concept (y): Source Domain; Domain of concept (x): Target Domain
- #15 -in the <oRef> and <oRef> elements, the value of @corresp points to the entry (#bean) within the same document, which is of course the lexical source of ‘kidney’ in Mixtepec-Mixtec; Their identical orthographic and phonetic forms (respectively) are the manifestations of synchronic polysemy in the language; -in the <sense> element the value of @corresp points to an external ontological definition of the respective source and target concepts (dbpedia); the mapping of metaphor concepts could to be done using programmed extraction processes on external ontological sources; (mirroring knowledge base of speakers performing these mental operations) ; however such programed processes have yet to be created -this pointing mechanism not only helps us organize the data information, but it also comes closer to integrating the data structure with at least some of the conceptual structure relevant to these etymological links; optionally, it is possible to provide the etymological process classification in a human readable format eg: <lbl>Metaphor</lbl> (however this is not necessary if the process is marked in the attribute values)
- #16 -in the <oRef> and <oRef> elements, the value of @corresp points to the entry (#bean) within the same document, which is of course the lexical source of ‘kidney’ in Mixtepec-Mixtec; Their identical orthographic and phonetic forms (respectively) are the manifestations of synchronic polysemy in the language; -in the <sense> element the value of @corresp points to an external ontological definition of the respective source and target concepts (dbpedia); the mapping of metaphor concepts could to be done using programmed extraction processes on external ontological sources; (mirroring knowledge base of speakers performing these mental operations) ; however such programed processes have yet to be created -this pointing mechanism not only helps us organize the data information, but it also comes closer to integrating the data structure with at least some of the conceptual structure relevant to these etymological links; optionally, it is possible to provide the etymological process classification in a human readable format eg: <lbl>Metaphor</lbl> (however this is not necessary if the process is marked in the attribute values)
- #17 Polysemy (first click) highlights the connection between the entry and their lexical source;
- #18 Note: target form is the same as source unless process took place in past and target and source forms have since undergone grammaticalization and phonetic/phonological changes
- #19 Metonymy: This is not a metaphor because since a horse is an animal, there is no change in conceptual domain as in the previous example; instead this is an example of (whole for part) metonymy; (eg., meronymy); -the use of <date> and <note> here; the former is used to represent the absolute earliest that this lexical innovation could have taken place given that the entity of ‘horse’ was not known to the native peoples of the America’s until the arrival of the Spanish. This date could be further refined with some research as to the year/dates of the first contact between Europeans and Mixtec peoples (present day Oaxaca, Puebla, and Guerrero states, Mexico);
- #21 *information included in ‘eytmon’ diagram non-exhaustive; Note: this model’s concepts are also relevant to decomposition of forms derived from multiple morphemes;
- #22 *information included in ‘eytmon’ diagram non-exhaustive; Note: this model’s concepts are also relevant to decomposition of forms derived from multiple morphemes;
- #24 Etymology is not addressed in the core LMF; Alt (2005) provided an attempt to create an LMF etymology extension; (however it was never finalized and integrated into the LMF) -note: LMF is about to go through a revision and we are working with someone within that community who will be making decisions in that process to make the revisions more compatible with the TEI… thus this LMF Diagram will not be valid for long and will of course be revised once their new standards are published;
- #25 NOTE: the diagram is taken from Alt (2005) the following changes and additions were made: -added parent elements /etymologocalLink/ and /etymon/ at the top of lists to reflect the way the XML structure was implemented; - also added were “/orth/“ and the corresponding value also to reflect XML implementation in Alt (2005;) indications of language (modern French - Dutch); specification of ‘stage’ and ‘process’ below diagram; ‘synchronic’ - ‘diachronic’ span below the ‘stage’-‘process’ spelling of */gloss/ was changed from the original */glose/ (LMF) & TEI <form> and <orth> correspond; since the entry ‘pamplemousse’ is an import word the <etym> goes in sense (although in the Alt version it is always outside of sense; LMF element <etymon> is represented in our TEI as the value of the @type attribute in the <cit> element; the second <form> within <etymon> is represented by <oRef> element (which we have proposed to revamp within the TEI); the @xml:lang is used the same way in our <oRef> as it is in Alt’s LMF <orth>; however we use the ISO 693 language code for Dutch, which is “nl”; whereas Alt embeds a separate <sense> element within the <etymon>, we use the native TEI <gloss> with the @xml:lang added and it’s value being “lat” for Latin; we use the TEI <note> in the same manner as the LMF does; we point to the source of the etymological portion that we assume would be in a bibliography entry within the document using the TEI <ref @target> (this was referred to in the Alt (2005) paper as the source but not explicitly referred to in the sample xml entry; we do not use an element to correspond to the <etymologicalLink>, as the relationship of the source etymon and the French entry are implied. Finally, instead of <etymologicalClass>, we use the @type with the value “borrowing” in the <etym> element; in choosing this value we decided to consistently refer to the etymological process rather than the result of that process; (eg. “borrowing” instead of “loanword”); in the original diagram the gloss of ‘pompelmoes (the dutch form) was given in French “gros citron” but in the actual source and in the XML implementation of the entry, the gloss was given in Latin, thus I changed it to the following: /gloss/=“Citrus Maxima”
- #26 (LMF) & TEI <form> and <orth> correspond; since the entry ‘pampelmousse’ is an import word the <etym> goes in sense (although in the Alt version it is always outside of sense; LMF element <etymon> is represented in our TEI as the value of the @type attribute in the <cit> element; the second <form> within <etymon> is represented by <oRef> element (which we have proposed to revamp within the TEI); the @xml:lang is used the same way in our <oRef> as it is in Alt’s LMF <orth>; however we use the ISO 693 language code for Dutch, which is “nl”; whereas Alt embeds a separate <sense> element within the <etymon>, we use the native TEI <gloss> with the @xml:lang added and it’s value being “lat” for Latin; we use the TEI <note> in the same manner as the LMF does; we point to the source of the etymological portion that we assume would be in a bibliography entry within the document using the TEI <ref @target> (this was referred to in the Alt (2005) paper as the source but not explicitly referred to in the sample xml entry; we do not use an element to correspond to the <etymologicalLink>, as the relationship of the source etymon and the French entry are implied. Finally, instead of <etymologicalClass>, we use the @type with the value “borrowing” in the <etym> element; in choosing this value we decided to consistently refer to the etymological process rather than the result of that process; (eg. “borrowing” instead of “loanword”);