Print

Print


On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:27:56 -0700, Sai Emrys <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>A related question is: how does one choose how to represent a word in
>an interlinear, whose sense does not exist in the description
>language?
>
>How does one short-gloss those kinds of words in an interlinear?
>a) pick the word in English that is closest to having that sense, generally
>b) do so differently in context for every occurance (even when it's
>being used in the same sense each time)
>c) make up a new controlled-language term à la "PST" for it (this
>would result in a tremendous number of such 'abbreviations')
>d) leave it unglossed and just point to its full definition

I would think (perhaps incorrectly) it would depend on how far the non-English 
(or non-target-language) meaning is from the English (or target language), 
and also what it is the linguist is trying to demonstrate. Take a German 
compound, for instance, like "Schadenfreude." If it's a word that just happens 
to be in a sentence being used to exemplify Noun-Verb relations, it would 
suffice to gloss it as "maliciousness" (as Leo.org does); if the linguist's point is 
to demonstrate how German morphemes combine to create new meanings, 
then I'd think the interlineal ought to look something like this:

Schaden.freude ist die schön.ste Freude.
Misery.pleasure be-3PP-SG the-FEM beautiful.most pleasure.
The greatest joy is the misery of others.

In the case of aoi, I'd either gloss that as blue/green if it just happened to be 
in an example, or follow the lead of those who've written in depth on color 
terms across languages.

I for one generally presume that glosses are "as close as possible" and not 
perfect maps. There are very few cases of words in language A that cover 
exactly the set of concepts as words in language B.

-- Paul