Válts MeRSZ+ -ra!

MeRSZ online
okoskönyvtár

Több száz tankönyv egy helyen.
Online. Bárhol. Bármikor.

Judit Muráth (szerk.)

Hungarian Lexicography III

LSP Lexicography

4.1. Dictionaries of crop production

In the last 25 years, two dictionaries of crop production have been published. The material of the first specialized dictionary (published in 1992, at the time of Hungary’s democratic transition) was developed and augmented in the volume published by Mezőgazda Kiadó in 2006.
 
 
Background: Petrikás Árpádné (ed.): Angol–magyar / francia–magyar / német–magyar / orosz–magyar / spanyol–magyar növénytermesztési szakszótár [English–Hungarian / French–Hungarian / German–Hungarian / Russian–Hungarian / Spanish–Hungarian Dictionary of Crop Production]. Mezőgazda Kiadó, Budapest, 1992, 542 p.
 
The material of the bilingual dictionary series of 1992 was closed in 1987. The series consists of five volumes, each representing a language combination (English–Hungarian, French–Hungarian, German–Hungarian, Russian–Hungarian and Spanish–Hungarian). The volumes were created in the cooperation of the Foreign Language Department of the Debrecen University of Agriculture and Mezőgazda Kiadó. The authors relied on the specialized books and studies published in the previous 10–15 years and on the dictionaries published before. Basically, it contains the vocabulary of field crop production, related professional fields and related fields of science. The content and structure of the five dictionaries are principally the same. The description below depicts the English–Hungarian dictionary.
The cover of the sewn paperback volume is coated with plastic film. Due to its small size, the volume is easy to handle. The page numbers are at the bottom, on the inner page margin; as they are not highlighted, they are difficult to find. On the lower outer margin, the headword is indicated.
The four-page Preface gives a very general Hungarian overview of the sources, structure and content of the dictionary, along with the applications and symbols used. Albeit the abbreviations of some areas are listed here, rarely are they used in the dictionary. The group of targeted readers is not defined. The source of the words themselves is not indicated in any manner. In most cases, the volumes do not contain appendices.
The dictionary has 10,884 entries. The arrangement of entries is as follows: the English glossary is organized in alphabetical order. The terms are not organized on the basis of topics. The English equivalents are set in boldface; only the word or expression is given, along with, if required, the information on the part of speech and plural form/usage set in italics. Pronunciation is not indicated. The Hungarian equivalent is next to the English term; if needed, the Latin name and explanation are also given (in brackets). The full forms of acronyms are also given in both languages. The volume does not contain any illustration. Search cannot be performed in Hungarian–English direction.
Unfortunately, the volume contains several types of mistakes, ranging from mistakes related to the area of specialization to spelling mistakes. It is questionable why the dictionary contains – sometimes obsolete – Latin terms. Moreover, it is incomprehensible why it contains the names of exotic plants unknown or hardly known in Hungary while some species produced here – such as buckwheat or flax varieties (fiber flax and oil flax) – are missing.
The section below deals with some mistake types from sections “o” and “s”.
Incorrect Latin term; professionally misleading, incorrect Hungarian spelling:
oat
false ~
1. francia perje, Arrhenatherum elatius
2. zabfű, Avenastrum Pratenses
Description of the mistake:
The term “franciaperje” (“tall oatgrass”), being a term denoting a genus as well, needs to be spelled as one word. That is, the species denoted belongs to the genus “franciaperje” instead of “perje”.
 
The term Avenastrum Pratenses is correctly spelled as Avenastrum pratense; still, it is only a synonym for, rather than an established scientific name of, the species Avenula pratensis (English meadow oat-grass).
Correctly:
oat
false ~
1. franciaperje, Arrhenatherum elatius
 
Incorrect Hungarian and Latin terms; non-professional language usage:
oleaster
1. ezüstfa, Elaeagnus angustifolia
2. olajfa, Oliea
Description of the mistake:
The term Elaeagnus angustifolia is the Latin equivalent of “keskenylevelű ezüstfa”. The English word for this species is “oleaster”. Nonprofessional language users, being unaware of this difference, often denote two species with the same word. However, specialized language must not refer to species belonging to two genera with the same word – and a specialized dictionary is expected to contain the proper scientific terms instead of mistakes made by non-professionals. The established English word for “olajfa” is “olive tree”; its Latin equivalent is Olea instead of Oliea
Correctly:
oleaster
keskenylevelű ezüstfa, Elaeagnus angustifolia
 
Incorrect spelling of Hungarian phrases:
O.M. (organic matter)
szervesanyag
Description of the mistake:
The expression “szerves anyag” is spelled as two words.
Correctly:
O.M. (organic matter)
szerves anyag
O.M.D. (organic matter digestibility)
szervesanyag emészthetőség
O.M.I. (organic matter intake)
szervesanyag felvétel
Description of the mistake:
According to the relevant Hungarian spelling rule, hyphens are used in both terms.
Correctly:
O.M.D. (organic matter digestibility)
szervesanyag-emészthetőség
O.M.I. (organic matter intake)
szervesanyag-felvétel
 
Incorrect taxonomy and Hungarian spelling:
ophrys
orchidea-féle
Description of the mistake:
The Hungarian term for the genus Ophrys is “bangó”. “Bangó” does belong to the Orchidaceae family. The correctly spelled Hungarian word for “Orchidaceae” is “orchideafélék” (spelled as one word).
Correctly:
Ophrys
bangó
 
Incorrect Hungarian meaning:
species
1. faj 2. fajta
Description of the mistake:
The concepts of “faj” (“species”) and “fajta” (“cultivar”) are very basic terms of biology. It is a serious mistake not to differentiate between the two. The equivalent of “species” is “faj”. In English “cultivar”, a word of Latin origin, is the equivalent of Hungarian “fajta”.
Correctly:
species
faj
 
The entry “cultivar” is also incorrect:
cultivar
nemesített forma, kultivár
For the description of the mistake, see the section above.
Correctly:
cultivar
fajta, kultivár
Inaccurate target-language term:
stele
központi szövetoszlop
Description of the mistake:
The established Hungarian equivalent of “stele” (a term of plant histology) is “központi henger”; “Központi szövetoszlop” is an example of incorrect word usage.
Correctly:
stele
központi henger
 
Incorrect Latin and Hungarian spelling; missing Hungarian equivalents:
sugar-apple
pikkelyes anóna, Anona squamosa
Description of the mistake:
Szaniszló Priszter’s work cited above contains the word “annóna” (Latin: Annona) with the Hungarian equivalent “gyömbéralma” (“custard apple”) or “cukoralma” (“sugar apple”). The volume contains the words “anóna” and Anona as well; however, these entries redirect the reader to the words “annóna” and Annona.
Correctly:
sugar-apple
pikkelyes annóna, Annona squamosa
 
 
Gallyas Csaba–Petrikás Árpádné (eds): Növénytermesztési szótár (Magyar–angol–német–spanyol–francia–orosz) [Dictionary of Crop Production]. Mezőgazda Kiadó, Budapest, 2006, 810 p.
 
This six-language collection of words is a volume of the new series of Mezőgazda Kiadó; it contains 9,394 entries. In the Introduction, the authors cite two sources: (1) the dictionary of crop production discussed above and (2) the source of Latin terms. Latin terms are also added (Latin being the seventh language) yet only in case it is necessary.
In general, the terms used in the dictionary are accurate, albeit some further proofreading is needed. Certain Hungarian terms of crop production used in the entries are obsolete. In spite of the relatively large vocabulary, some terms of crop production are missing (for example kukoricabogár [corn rootworm], parlagfű [ragweed]). Neither does it contain most of the new terms of the organization, public administration and policies of crop production. Translators of specialized texts on crop production and horticulture written in American English also may fail to find some terms (for example cold-stored, deadheading, seed head, self-clinging, shallow-rooted, softwood cutting, sucker, and some meanings of heel and vine).
With regard to English vocabulary, two main types of mistakes occur. The first is the use of incorrect or inaccurate words in the foreign language. The other problem has to do with the fact that in the two languages certain related words and phrases do not denote exactly the same content and, in many cases, it is not possible to give accurate translation with a single word. It would be preferable for the dictionary to use symbols and abbreviations to indicate the context in which a synonym is used, or at least give some information thereof with the order of the synonyms.
Out of the incorrect expressions cited from the 1992 edition, the spelling of the expressions franciaperje and szerves anyag was corrected. The translation of species is partially incorrect and its Hungarian equivalent is incomplete. The other expressions are omitted in the 2006 edition. Some problematic entries:
Incorrect foreign-language equivalents:
fajta
EN: variety
DE: Art
ES: variedad
FR: variété, cultivar
Description of the mistake:
The English “variety”, Spanish “variedad” and French “variété” denote “változat” instead of “fajta”.
Correctly:
fajta
EN: breed (állatok), cultivar (növények)
DE: Art
ES: cultivar
FR: cultivar
 
Incorrect foreign language equivalent and written
form: mohaláp
EN: highmoor
 
Description of the mistake:
The term “high moor”, spelled as two words, is the English equivalent of the Hungarian “felláp” instead of “mohaláp”.
Correctly:
mohaláp
EN: moss bog, moss mire
 
Incorrect English equivalent:
túlérés
EN: over-ripeness
Description of the mistake:
“Ripeness” denotes “érettség” instead of “érés”, the English equivalent of the latter is “ripening”.
Correctly:
túlérés
EN: over-ripening
 
Incorrect English equivalent:
kétkalászú
EN: with double head
Description of the mistake:
To our knowledge, the English equivalent of “kétkalászú” is “double eared”.
Correctly:
kétkalászú
EN: double eared
 
Incorrect spelling (in terms of specialized language usage):
rhizobium-baktérium
Description of the mistake:
The term “Rhizobium” refers to a genus; for this reason, it is to be written with a capital letter.
Correctly:
Rhizobium-baktérium
 
Incorrect spelling of a Hungarian compound word:
morzsoló gép
Description of the mistake:
The word “morzsológép” needs to be spelled as one word.
Correctly:
morzsológép
Hungarian Lexicography III

Tartalomjegyzék

Kiadó: Akadémiai Kiadó

Online megjelenés éve: 2021

ISBN: 978 963 454 696 2

NyelvészetIdegen nyelvű

The present volume introduces us in the history of Hungarian mono-, bi-, and multilingual LSP lexicography, its theoretical evolution, outlines its broader and narrower fields of research and the tasks ahead. Moreover, the studies have undertaken to investigate and give an account of the history of lexicography covering various special fields and providing a critical analysis of the dictionaries involved. Last but not least, the new technology extending the concept of LSP lexicography is presented.

A kötet bevezet bennünket a magyar egy-, két- és többnyelvű szaklexikográfia történetébe, elméletének kibontakozásába, vázolja szűkebb és tágabb kutatási területeit és megvalósítandó feladatait. A tanulmányok ezen túlmenően felvállalták néhány kiemelt szakterület szótártörténetének kikutatását, bemutatását, a felkutatott szótárak kritikai elemzését, de sor kerül az új technológia bemutatására és ezáltal a szaklexikográfia fogalmának kitágítására is.

Hivatkozás: https://mersz.hu/murath-hungarian-lexicography-3//

BibTeXEndNoteMendeleyZotero
Kivonat
fullscreenclose
printsave