Analyzing verbs’ definitions in learner’s dictionaries based on a schema theory
YU Ping-fang1 ; XU Jing2; DU Jia-li3
(1. Chinese-based Centre for Lexicography Directly under the National Education Ministry, Yantai, 264025,China;
2. School of Foreign Languages, Ludong University, Yantai, 264025)
Abstract: The synthetic defining style, the predominant way used to define verbs in many dictionaries, is the main factor makes dictionary definitions vague and incomplete. The present paper argues that instead of the synthetic defining mode, an analytical meaning-explaining way should be used in dictionaries designed for SLA learners. The analytical meanings of verbs are viewed as mini-narratives and form event schemata comprised of 3 sub-schemata, viz., participant schema, action schema and scenario schema. The 3 sub-schemata should be clearly fore-grounded in verbs’ definitions in learners’ dictionaries.
Key words: verb; definition; schema; narrative; learners’ dictionary
1. Introduction
A well-accepted doctrine in dictionary-making is: words with different parts of speech should abide by different modes of explanation（Bejoint , 2001:199）.FU Huai-qing（1996：73－87）conducts a subtle and penetrating exploration into the verbs’ definitions in Modern Chinese Dictionary, on the basis of which, FU establishes an ideal pattern of verbs’ definitions. FU’s verbs’ definition mode, although being very much thought-provoking, has its own theoretical weakness: Fu’s model turns out to be a linear arrangement of verbs’ semantic elements involved. We argue that verbs’ definition model is not a string of semantic elements which combine with each other on the same level, on the contrary, it should be a hierarchical one. The present paper explores the hierarchical structure of verbs’ definitions, and tries to make clear that a comprehensive verb-defining in dictionaries turn out be a process of describing the event schema of an action from the vantage of schema theory.
2. The self-insufficiency of verbs: Its philosophical underpinning
Self-insufficiency means the dependence on other things; therefore things with the character of being self-insufficiency have to be related to other things to be existing. The research on verbs’ self-insufficiency can be traced back to Aristotle, in whose masterpiece ON Categories, Aristotle argues that “entities”, for example, “horse” and “person”, are the self-supporting category; and the other 9 ones except entity, verbs included, must rely on or exist in the entities. Verbs’ reliance upon entities can be exemplified by the explanation of a verb, say, “to ride”. When we try to explain “to ride” to a foreigner or someone who is assumed not to have understood the word, a horse, a vehicle or something of its kind has to be involved. But if the word “horse” is desired to be explained, “to ride” isn’t the compulsory element to be incorporated. From the standpoint of ontology, verbs’ self-insufficiency is universally valid because the explanation of a predicate must rely on other entities, which form a scenario of event.
As to the language system, the meaning-dependency-on-others of verbs are displayed both from the point of grammar and semantics. Langnacker（1987；1991）categorizes entities into 2 groups: the first is relational and the second non-relational. The relational entity, Langnacker holds, presupposes the existence of other entities, which is in line with Aristotle’s statement. According to Langacker（1987；1991）, Verbs, classified as relational, describe a process which involves an interaction of different entities.
It’s argued here that the explanation-dependency of verbs is the most significant defining characteristic of the category of verbs both from the perspective of ontology and of the language system. The explanation-insufficiency of verbs is demonstrated in two aspects: (1) Grammatically, a verb has to co-occur with other grammatical elements; (2) semantically, its explanation isn’t complete without the participation of other semantic elements, or rather, participant roles. Therefore, the syntactic construction of a verb is :(a) (b) (c)……V1……(x) (y) (z)；while the analytical explanation of a verb is: (a) (b) (c)……V2……(x) (y) (z).
3. Analyzing the event schema of verbs
Considering verbs’ explanation-dependency, the pattern of conceptualization of verbs constitutes a cognitive schema of an event, which is illustrated in Chart 1.
Chart 1: the event schema of verbs
an analytical explanation of verbs
participant schema角色图式
action schema行为图式
scene schema
From Chart 1, we can see clearly that the analytical explanation of verbs constitutes an event schema which shows a kind of hierarchy. Among all the constituents of an event schema, action schema, the nuclear part of the event and being the first rank of the hierarchy, is in the form of another verb and should be always fore-grounded in a narration of the event process; participant schema, including the doer, receiver etc, of a event process, is ranked second, for as to our human being’s cognition, the focus information concerning an event is “ who or what performs what kind of activity on who or what”, and correspondingly, the subjects and objects of event schemata should be involved both in semantic explanation and syntactic expression. What lies in the third hierarchy is the scene schema, which tells the time, location, reason, methods and something else of the event process, and is often serves as the background of the whole action.
The action schema, participant schema and scene schema are not treated equally in verbs’ explanation. Among the three schemata, action schema, stipulating verbs’ defining characteristic, must be presented in verbs’ explanations. And participant schemata, especially those concerning the doer and the receiver, are usually highlighted in definitions, especially in the dictionaries designed for encoding activities. Comparatively speaking, elements in scene schema are not obligatory in spite of the fact that in the definitions of some semantic categorizations, scene schemata work as a distinguishing features. So it’s safe to say that the explanation of verbs are constructing meanings by way of narrating; and the 3 schemata, have different weight value and occurrence frequency.
4. The defining mode of verbs in current dictionaries and its problems
As the present paper has argued, verbs’ explanation-dependency makes their explanations a kind of gestalt, viz., V1= (a)(b)(c)……V2……(x)(y)(z), among which the parts in brackets are desired to be filled with linguistic entities. To put it in another way, verbs, although being simple in orthography, are all abstract linguistic symbols with highly compressed information and are to be expanded to a relatively complete narration. In the process of meaning analyses, verbs are liable to choose a way of narration, which, therefore, will turn out to be a specific kind of story-telling. In dictionaries, the narrations of verbs’ meanings are roughly categorized into two groups: synthetic narrations and analytical ones.
4.1 A general analysis of verb-defining in Chinese learner’s dictionaries
What are chosen here as samples are the following four dictionaries: Modern Chinese Dictionary (2005)(henceforth referred to as MCD)；Modern Chinese Prescribing Dictionary（2004）( hereafter MCPD); HSK 8000 Words (2000) (hereafter HSK8000) and The Commercial Press Learner’s Dictionary (2006) (hereafter LDCP). The first two are general passive dictionaries for native speakers, while the last two are active dictionaries for foreign learners. Considering the fact that there is a marked difference in the coverage of headwords of the four dictionaries, one page is chosen every 100 pages, which began from Page 1 in the former two native-speaker targeted dictionaries; and 1 page is chosen every 50 pages in the latter two foreign-learner targeted ones. The defining methods used in the four dictionaries are shown in the following four tables respectively.
1．Defining methods used in the verb definitions in MCD（2005）
analytical definition
morpheme meaning combination
synonymous definition
negation definition
71
52
43
2
2．Defining methods used in the verb definitions in MCPD（2004）
analytical definition
morpheme meaning combination
synonymous definition
negation definition
99
90
45
1
3. Defining methods used in the verb definitions in HSK 8000（2000）
analytical definition
morpheme meaning combination
synonymous definition
negation definition
30
9
32
4
4.Defining methods used in the verb definitions in LDCP（2006）
analytical definition
morpheme meaning combination
synonymous definition
negation definition
51
9
18
1
The defining way of combining morpheme meaning, together with providing synonyms or negation, in contrast to analytical definition, all come under an umbrella term “synthetic definition”, which is the traditional and typical defining approach adopted by general purpose dictionaries, especially by those designed for decoding activities. According to Martin R (1977:361), Among the12087 verbs’ definitions in Petit Robert , 1815 verbs are explained in the way of synthetic defining, representing as high as 15.02 percentage（ZHANG Yi-hua, 2002:92）of total definitions. It can be seen from the preceding four tables that the percentage of synthetic defining in MCD, MCPD, HSK8000 and LDCP is 57.74%、57.87％、60％ and 35.44％ respectively, all of them are higher than that of Petit Robert, a French dictionary designed for native speakers. In English mainstream learners’ dictionaries designed for second language learners, viz, LDOCE, CALD, OALD, COBUILD and MEDAL, the synthetic defining style is seldom used in meaning explanations. We can safely maintain that almost all modern Chinese dictionaries, irrespective of their dictionary typologies, have overwhelmingly adopted the defining mode predominantly used by traditional dictionaries. To be helpful tools for foreign learners, the first step to be taken by Chinese learners’ dictionaries is to reduce or abandon the synthetic defining pattern and provide more semantic information.
Chi-Square Tests are used in the next part to examine the correlation between the analytical and synthetic defining mode. The results of the chi-square tests concerning HSK 8000 show that the difference is not significant at the level 0 .05( x2＝3); while as to the other 3 dictionaries, viz., MCPD, MCD and LDCP, the results of chi-square show that the difference is significant at the level 0.05(x2＝4.02, x2＝5.82, x2＝ 6.70).
MCD and MCPD, whose target dictionary users are Chinese native speakers with average language proficiency or above, are practically plausible to use synthetic defining mode because native speakers, with pre-embedded language competence, can automatically fill the semantic gaps between the definitions provided by dictionary compilers or complement the incomplete definitions. While HSK 8000, whose target users are foreign learners of Chinese, should try to reveal all the necessary elements included in the three schemata involved in an action, thus to make the learners access to the linguistic information beyond their language awareness. But it can be seen clearly from afore-listed Table 3 that HSK 8000 doesn’t take the analytical defining mode as a predominate definition strategy, which confirms YU Ping-fang’s（2007：186）finding that “ there’s no positive correlation between dictionary and defining mode in HSK 8000”. In marked contrary to HSK 8000, the newly-published learners’ dictionary LDCP has taken analytical defining as a mainstream way of meaning-explaining, which is an innovative endeavor in Chinese learners’ dictionary-making. As the statement made by Hartmann （1983:230 ) which is now generally-acknowledged in the academic circle and widely-quoted in lexicography literature, the learners’ dictionaries should made to be more user-friendly, error-conscious and skill-oriented.
4.2 The detailed analysis of verbs’ definition in Chinese learner’s dictionaries
In 4.1, we have examined the whole scene of lexeme-defining used in four Chinese dictionaries. Here we’ll see how the specific cases of verbs are defined. As we have elaborated in the preceding sections, the action schema, participant schema and scene schema comprise a complete event process, which is tightly compressed in a single word form. But in practical definition-defining, different compilers tend to adopt various ways, and the text-narrating forms of verbs vary from dictionary to dictionary, which makes the subtlety and discrimination of verbs’ definitions significantly different. Many verbs’ definitions are not complete because only a part of the elements from the 3 schemata are demonstrated. The Chinese verb “擦”is taken here as an exemplification.
【擦】1用布、手巾等(instrument）擦拭 (meaning nuclear)使乾淨（purpose）（HSK8000）
【擦】2擦拭(meaning nuclear)（Applied Chinese Dictionary, hereafter ACD）
【擦】2用手、布、刷子或別的工具（instrument）清潔（purpose）身體或物體表面（object）（LDCP）
As to the afore-mentioned dictionaries, ACD is the only one to have used the synthetic method to define the verb, which, as we have emphasized in the present paper, is the defining mode the learners’ dictionaries for foreign learners should completely abandon for its vagueness and incompleteness of explanation. Compared with ACD, HSK8000 and LDCP do better in that the semantic element of “instrument” in scene schema is shown in both of them. And LDCP’s treatment of “instrument” is more detailed than HSK 8000. Besides, in the definition of HSK 8000,a regional dialect “毛巾” appears in the definition, which is not an appropriate way of wording. The element “purpose” in scene scheam is appropriately and exactly revealed in both HSK 8000 and LDCP; and LDCP is the only dictionary to have the element “object” from participant schema shown in its definition. But the linguistic data gathered from Chinese corpus tells us that the meaning explanation of “擦”should also involve the element “manner”, that is to say, the action denoting by “擦” must be done in a repeated way such as“擦桌子”;擦車”and“擦黑板”.From the analysis conducted before, we can see that the definition of “擦”should incorporate all the elements of “instrument”, “manner” and “purpose” as well as its meaning nuclear..It can be deduced here that some deficiencies of verb definitions lie in the lack of some participant roles from the 3 different schemata which are a necessity for an exact and exhaustive explanation.
Conclusion
Theoretically, more descriptive information should be incorporated in learners’ dictionaries to make language learners access to what is beyond their language awareness, while practically things are totally different. Based on the afore-mentioned analyses, we can safely draw a conclusion that the treatment of verbs’ definitions in contemporary Chinese learner’s dictionaries are still in an unsystematic way, which is largely due to the relatively arbitrary revealing of the semantic roles participating in verbs’ meaning construction. Therefore, the verbs’ definitions in dictionaries designed for foreigner learners, especially those for advanced learners, should show all the semantic elements included in action, participant and scene schema, and the dictionary compilers should have them appropriately fore-grounded in definitions to provide the learners with as exhaustive and comprehensive explanations as possible and improve the subtlety and accuracy of verbs’ definitions.
References：
Bejoint, H. 2001. Modern lexicography: an introduction. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Fu Huai-qing.1996.Analyzing and Describing the Word Meaings. Bejing:YUwen Press.
Hartmann. R. R. K. 1983. Lexicography: principles and practice . Academic Press INC.
Langacker, R. W. 1987，1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar,: Theoretical prerequisites Volume I & II. New York: Standford University Press.
Martin, R. 1977. “ Essai d’une Typologie des Définitions Verbales Dans le Dictionnaire de Langue” , Travaux de Linguistique et de Littérature, XV, 1. Strasbourg.
Yu Ping-fang. 2007. Analyzing Verbs’ Definitions: A Perspective From Frame Semantics. Beijing: The Social Science Press of China
Zhang Yi-hua 2002. Semantics and Dictionary Definitions. Shanghai: Shanghai Dictionary Press.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This work was supported in part by a grant from the national social foundation (NO.08BYY046).
YU Ping-fang, PhD, lecturer of Chinese-based Centre for Dictionary Research Co-builded by Ludong University and the National Education Ministry; Research field:lexicography.
XU Jing, lecturer of School of Foreign Languages, Ludong University, Research field: German language.
DU Jia-li, M.A., lecturer of School of Foreign Languages, Ludong University, Research field: Applied linguistics
