Wordsmyth
English
Dictionary-Thesaurus
The
Participatory Lexipedia Project:
The
Participatory Lexipedia Project:A
Collaborative Lexical
Database.
A
Collaborative Lexical
Database.
byRobert ParksElmira College
I.
The
Dictionary as Cultural Icon or Participatory
Process?
II.
A
Proposal: The Participatory Lexipedia.
III.
Conclusion.
Abstract.
The Participatory Lexipedia is envisioned as a tool for education and literacy. Dictionaries emerged in the industrial era as tools of education and literacy. But the pedagogy behind the dictionary is one of hierarchical authority and social construction "from above". A Participatory Lexipedia is proposed, involving the incorporation of educational participation - of teachers and students - in the purpose and process of lexicography. The Lexipedia is a re-envision of the "dictionary" as an educational tool. Whereas the standard view of dictionaries and lexicography as gatekeepers to an externally determined and authoritative process of establishing meanings that should govern our lives, a Lexipedia puts the dictionary at the center of an open and collaborative process through which teachers (and students also) link "meanings" to the contexts which make these linguistic symbols meaningful - for example, quotations and pictures and other resources that reflect the real contexts of meaning in people's lives.The phases of a participatory process, designed to facilitate collaboration in the development and use of dictionary, thesaurus, encyclopedic and literary resources, are outlined. Phase I focuses first on participatory hypertext linking projects, such as a visual dictionary, a quotations thesaurus, and a reverse dictionary. The second stage of Phase I focuses on selection and development of appropriate collaborative software. Phase II involves extension of the lexical database to include a word relations thesaurus as well as other socio-linguistic, semantic and syntactic resources to assist teachers and learners in the growth of literacy and learning.The Wordsmyth English Dictionary-Thesaurus is being made available free to the educational community on the World Wide Web - at "http://www.lightlink.com/bobp/wedt". The purpose is to foster the creation of collaborative educational processes focused on the creation and interpretation of meanings, and exploration of the knowledge we nurture and reap in these processes. Any school or research group may receive a complete copy of the WEDT, as part of this participatory program.
I.
The Dictionary as Cultural Icon or Participatory
Process?
The
dictionaries now available for word processors and other
educational computer programs are basically reproductions of
their print progenitors, just as most word processors are
most commonly used as typewriters with screens. The
interaction of word processing and looking up a definition
with a computer dictionary is identical to writing on paper
and looking in a print dictionary. However, researchers are
currently involved in development of "intelligent" lexical
database for all facets of text processing - from natural
language interfaces to style analysis, and from questions
about rhyming or pronunciation or usage to auto-tutorials
for vocabulary learning. But it is still an open question
how this "intelligence" is to related to our educational
processes of teaching and learning. It is the thesis of this
project that just as the meanings of the words we speak are
collaborative creations, so the intelligence in our software
is something we must collectively produce and be
collectively responsible for.
When
we read a dictionary, it is our meanings that are marked and
abstracted from the contexts within which they were
produced. But traditional dictionaries present themselves as
the gatekeepers, if not the inheritors, of the authority of
our language. The disputes that arise between normative and
descriptive approaches to dictionary construction are just
the tip of the iceberg. Though descriptive dictionaries are
the norm now, we still feel uncomfortable with the processes
by which dictionaries admit words and meanings into their
structures of presentation. The Wordsmyth Lexipedia project
proposes to open up this process of accepting words and
meanings to the educational community of teachers and
learners, proposing that we should all be part of the
process of expanding and paring the stock of words and
meanings, and that learning the reasons for doing so is the
heart of the educational process.
The
Participatory Lexipedia is envisioned as a tool for
education and literacy. Dictionaries emerged in the
industrial era as tools of education and literacy. But the
pedagogy behind the dictionary is one of hierarchical
authority and social construction "from above". A
Participatory Lexipedia is proposed, involving the
incorporation of educational participation - of teachers and
students - in the purpose and process of
lexicography
The
Participatory Lexipedia is a re-envision of the "dictionary"
as an educational tool. Whereas the standard view of
dictionaries and lexicography as gatekeepers to an
externally determined and authoritative process of
establishing meanings that should govern our lives, a
Lexipedia puts the dictionary at the center of an open and
collaborative process through which teachers (and students
also) link "meanings" to the contexts which make these
linguistic symbols meaningful - for example, quotations and
pictures and other resources that reflect the real contexts
of meaning in people's lives.
The
Wordsmyth English Dictionary-Thesaurus can become the core
of this Lexipedia process. There are several current efforts
to construct artificial intelligence semantic networks FOR
computers - that is, to add "intelligence" to the
information machines we find so useful. But "artificial
intelligence" has a limited role, especially in education.
WordNet, MindNet (Microsoft) and other semantic networks are
constructed from a specific set of meanings, for specific
purposes. But language and knowledge are more diverse than
can be captured in one dictionary or one database. Instead
of transferring the "knowledge" derived from dictionaries
directly into databases, the educational task is to use
dictionary definitions as starting points in a dialogue
about what we want to mean, or should mean, with our words.
The words can fulfill their true character as open vessels
of meaning and not rigid delimiters of the possibilities in
the construction of knowledge. The meanings and the purposes
to which we put language require constant revision. This is
a participatory process. Dictionaries and Encyclopedias have
provided a way-station of authority in this process. But
they tend to become reified to the extent that we imagine
that these authorities tell us what we can mean with our
language.
There
is no way to capture and contain the diverse and creative
influences on our abilities to construct meanings and
communicate our ideas. The authority of dictionaries is
always in tension with the social processes of creative
social intelligence. The distinction between standard
dictionaries and slang dictionaries (or standard English and
Black English or other varieties) presumes there is a
central authority which must act as gatekeeper for the
possibilities of meaning, opening the gates only after a
word or expression has passed muster and become acceptable
to an establishment. We do know, however, there is order and
not chaos in the language of everyday lives. Slang simply
marks the boundaries of formal and informal contexts of
usage. The educator's task is to help students to sift
through their language capacities and help acquire diverse
resources, and match those resources the their communicative
needs.
a.
Pictures as contexts for meaning.
The
Lexipedia Project involves a process of engaging teachers
and students in linking words with pictures. From one point
of view a picture can be said to be worth 10,000 words,
because the rich subtlety of nuance could never be captured,
even in 10,000 words. On the other hand, a word has 10,000
interpretations in its linkage with the diversity of our
lives, and it can inspire 10,000 visions. Which of these
interpretations or visions should be selected to present as
options in a Wordsmyth dictionary entry? The Lexipedia
concept is that teachers and not lexicographers or artists
should occupy a central role in this selection process. The
process should include the contributions of lexicographers
and artists. But the purposes involved in the selection
process should reflect pedagogical
purposes.
b.
Quotations as contexts for meaning.
When
we recognize that dictionaries are only a starting point in
constructing our own meanings, we find the standard
embodiment of a dictionary lacking in pedagogical plan or
purpose. Its true that we have dictionaries for different
groups and different purposes: children's dictionaries,
school dictionaries, college dictionaries, regional
dictionaries, historical dictionaries, etc. But each of
these makes assumptions that the user is seeking
authoritative information about the meanings of a word. A
Lexipedia, on the other hand, assumes the user wants
suggestions not just about what a word "means" in the
abstract, but what one can do with a word - a suggestion of
the rich terrain of possible embodiments of meaning. This
involves examples of many kinds of use, from ordinary use to
poetic use, and from political use to use in constructing
wisdom.
II.
A Proposal: The Participatory
Lexipedia.
a.
Phase I: Participatory Hypertext Projects.
The
first projects will involve development of the links in
Wordsmyth English Dictionary-Thesaurus, to incorporate
visual and textual resources. These projects should target
lexical resources for a wide range of uses, and offer
opportunities to those interested in the use and teaching of
language - from researchers in linguistics, literature and
other areas interested in the analysis of language, to
teachers of English and English as a Second Language. The
material developed should also be able to be used for
development of glossaries or other language related material
in any area of study.
1.
First Stage The participatory projects outlined at the
WEDT web site indicate that the first phase of the project
will be to create a community of collaborators who will
contribute to the expansion of the WEDT as a knowledge base.
The contributions will become part of the resources
distributed freely to the educational community. The
projects are: (1) visual resources (links to pictures which
contextualize a meaning); (2) textual resources (links to
quotations and other textual contexts for word meanings);
(3) collocational resources (links to phrases, metaphors and
other expressions for a reverse dictionary process); (4)
lesson plans, word lists and glossaries. This community will
at first make use of basic electronic communication
resources, such as e-mail, bulletin boards and web postings.
This stage will culminate in a search for software for more
extensive collaboration.
2.
Second Stage: The first task is to explore the
appropriate collaborative software tools, and social
frameworks for collaboration. There are several software
projects that may facilitate collaborative linguistic
knowledge production. These projects must be evaluated in
terms of their potential for providing resources for a
linguistic "collaboratory" - a software context for
collaborative learning exchanges.
b.
Phase 2: Extension of the Lexical Database.
The
projects in the second phase of development will focus on
extension of the lexical resources in the WEDT. There are
two types of information to be incorporated in this second
stage of development of the database: a semantic
word-relations index, and syntactic/semantic information
useful for language teaching and learning, including E.S.L.,
and natural language processing research. Later phases will
respond to particular needs of different parts of the
educational community.
1.
Word Relations Index. A thesaurus is designed to index
the relation of synonymy. But there are many other word
relations that can add to the intelligence of a dictionary
reference. Relations like part/whole (what are the parts of
a car?) and taxonomy (what kinds of tree are there?) are
being added for convenient reference. For example, if one
looks up "ash" in the dictionary and finds out that it is a
type of tree, "tree" could then be looked up in the index to
find out what "kinds of" tree there are, what the "parts of"
a tree are, etc. Someone can say to herself, "I've forgotten
what the main part of an airplane is called," and look up
"airplane, parts of" to find that it is a "fuselage". The
work becomes a uniquely useful tool when someone can find
out that the central part of an arrow is a "shaft" and the
central part of a spear is a "haft", by looking them up in
the index under "arrow, parts of" and "spear, parts of", and
then find out what the other meanings of "shaft" and "haft"
are. These are only two of the dozens of relations that
exist among words. The instrumental relation would allow the
user to discover what tools are used by a carpenter, or a
surgeon. Other relations include taxonomy, composition,
causation, and agent/action (to give only a few examples).
WordNet provides a convenient starting point, but this
resource, from the Cognitive Science Lab at Princeton, was
developed with artificial intelligence applications in mind.
The sense discriminations are not developed for educational
purposes. Thus, a major task is to coordinate the extensive
information in WordNet with the more educationally
accessible definitions in WEDT.
The
basic idea is that words are our keys for stimulating
creative as well as analytical thinking. We sometimes want
information in order to pin down a meaning or clarify a
point of information; but we also sometimes want to explore
connotations, associations and indirect connections among
words and ideas. With mass electronic storage, it is
possible to store and relate large quantities of
information, for use with computers. But indexing with a
combination of lexical and conceptual analysis is necessary
to take advantage of the potentials of electronic access.
In
choosing types of relations we can view the word relations
for indexing as a continuum. At one end of a continuum is
the set of logical relations that are important for our
basic cognitive processes - such as synonymy, antonomy,
taxonomy and part whole relations. And at the other end of
the continuum are the purely accidental associations between
words - for example, between "dove" and "peace", or "little
house" and "prairie".
2.
Other Semantic, Syntactic and Socio-linguistic
Information. There are many directions that can be
pursued, and the projects will be selected according to the
needs of the community of WEDT users that has developed a
that point. For example, it may be useful to add
socio-llinguistic information, in order to improve
communication in situations where cultural differences may
be important. For ESL, addition of mass-count noun, and
abstract-concrete noun labels for nouns may be important.
and extension of usage notes may also be a desirable
extension of the database.
The
recent discussion of the meanings of offensive words in the
Merriam-Webster's dictionary is a case in point. When
confronted with a widespread protest over their definitions
of offensive words, Merriam-Webster set up panels of experts
to re-consider their definitions. But in the end, these
experts' advice resulted only in minimal changes - placing
the "offensive" label in a more prominent position. The
usage note in the Merriam-Websters Collegiate Dictionary
(10th Edition) notes that the word has a socially acceptable
use only in Black English. And yet the meaning that Black
protesters had felt was unfairly omitted - an ignorant or
lazy person - was not accepted for inclusion. The reasons
may or may not be sound from a lexicographic perspective.
The point is that the process was initiated only by protest.
And though the process may have been quite educative for the
experts who participated, it was concluded without
participation by students and teachers who deal with these
issues every day, or by the population at large. Thus, the
educational process was limited.
The
Lexipedia process proposes to take openness to discussion as
the starting point of the process, rather than as an
exception. The whole point of lexicography then can be seen
as an educative one, rather than an authoritative one. It
doesn't exclude authority. But it restores the challenge of
the education - to encourage reflection and intellectual
growth - to the center of the process of lexicography.
We
will be designing a process for involving teachers in
creating visual and textual resources for surveying the full
range of possibilities for meanings of our words. The point
is not to abstract from the rich contexts of usage, but to
build the resources necessary to illustrate the
possibilities of meaning in the diverse concrete contexts of
our lives.
Dr. Robert ParksAssociate ProfessorElmira CollegeElmira, New York 14901(607) 735-1944 (w)(607) 257-7895 (h)(607) 257-7895 (FAX)bobp@lightlink.com