English Lexicography: A Global Perspective

26 English Lexicography: A Global Perspective STEFAN DOLLINGER 26.1 English Lexicography and English Linguistics Since the 1970s, the sister disciplines of English linguistics and English lexicography have developed in somewhat different directions. While prior to World War II, the disciplines had close connections, with the latter usually seen as a key constituent of the former, the relationship has since changed. Some reasons lie in the distinct needs of lexicographical projects, their profound upfront financial investments, their long timelines to completion, and their more practical and applied viewpoints rather than theoretical ones. The status of lexicography within English linguistics has consequently—with the notable exception of learner lexicography in applied linguistics—somewhat diminished since its heyday (e.g., McDavid and Duckert 1973). Linguistics is big on methods, while lexicography is a “tradition”, in which “as far as methods are concerned, it is very seldom that they are discussed or explained; sometimes, they are not even described“ (Zgusta 1971: 19). On account of the field’s unprecedented diversification, linguists have taken on fewer English lexicographical projects, while these projects have partnered more and more with the commercial book‐publishing sector. With the demise of paper publishing and the heavy costs of moving print dictionaries to digital environments, many publishers (e.g., Houghton Mifflin, Random House, Merriam‐Webster, Nelson Gage, etc.) have since cut back on lexicographical staff or closed operations entirely. Today, English lexicography, unlike English linguistics, is in a difficult situation. There are some exceptions to this scenario, such as the distinct role of Oxford University Press or Merriam‐Webster in their markets, yet even these large dictionary‐making enterprises have not been unaffected by the big structural changes (see, e.g. Ferrett and Dollinger in press). The lexicographical projects that still have an academic home are more often housed in philological than linguistic contexts (e.g., Dictionary of American Regional English, Dictionary of Old English, and the Anglo‐Norman Dictionary). It is today no easy task to find lexicographical texts that appeal to linguists. There are strong subfields that look at English lexicography from a philological angle (e.g., Durkin 2009; Liberman 2007; Ogilvie 2008) and from corpus‐linguistic and applied angles (e.g., Hanks 2013; Kilgarriff et al. 2014; Rundell 2018). The largest swath of literature today, however, is decidedly lexicographical and of less immediate linguistic interest, whether as articles (e.g., Adams 2019; Hargraves 2015; Hartmann 2011), handbooks (e.g., Durkin 2015; Fuertes Olivera 2017; Mugglestone 2000; Lambert 2020), or monographs (e.g., Brewer 2007; Gilliver 2016; Dollinger 2019). In the context of World Englishes, Görlach (1990) is a study that is—still—outstanding for its linguistic as well as lexicographical appeal. The Handbook of English Linguistics, Second Edition. Edited by Bas Aarts, April McMahon, and Lars Hinrichs. © 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published 2021 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Stefan Dollinger This study serves as a starting point for the present paper, which aims to survey the state of lexicography in the context of varieties around the world—native, nativizing, lingua franca, or learner‐wise. 26.2 English Lexicography: A Rough Model The present article will be dealing with desk dictionaries (general language dictionaries), historical dictionaries, as well as English learner dictionaries. For reasons of space alone, slang dictionaries will be excluded (for the latter, see, e.g., Coleman 2014). There are also areas of specialized lexicography beyond the scope of this chapter, which can be found in, for example, Ogilvie (2020), of which place name dictionaries are perhaps closest and most relevant to English linguistics (see Wright 2020 for a rationale). A minimum of terminology is required. We distinguish after Görlach (1990) on the one hand between “inclusive” dictionaries, meaning all potential words in a variety, and “exclusive” dictionaries, that is, those only capturing words that are distinct in a given variety; on the other hand, we discriminate between “synchronic” and “historical” (diachronic) dictionaries, with the former further divided by primary user groups, that is, L1 user or L2 learner. Learner lexicography for L2 speakers, both ESL and EFL, is an area in which linguistic concerns, often via corpus linguistics, have remained central (e.g., Sinclair 1991; Atkins et al. 2003). Table 26.1 schematizes these basic distinctions, exemplified with examples. While lexicographers today generally consider themselves as advocates of linguistic descriptivism, lexicography is operating at what might be called the interface between description (linguistic facts), prescription (socially preferred forms), and attitudes (what is considered as appropriate). As Curzan (2014) shows, the two areas are more intermingled and more difficult to separate than meets the eye. L1 user‐oriented, inclusive lexicography is where conflict becomes most apparent. Linguistic and popular concepts of what (written) language is and should be, for instance, came to a head in 1961, with the publication of Table 26.1 Basic terminological grid. Synchronic Monolingual Bilingual L1 user L2 learner American Heritage Dictionary (2018) Inclusive Collins Canadian Dictionary (2016) Relatively rare; Casselman (1995), Dolan (2006), Share (2008) Exclusive Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2015) MerriamWebster’s Spanish– English Dictionary (2016) [E–Sp, Sp–E] Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2014) Oxford Chinese Dictionary (2010) [E–Ch, Ch–E] – Rare, for example, word lists of local terminology Historical Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd edition Chambers Dictionary of Etymology (1999) Dictionary of Americanisms on Historical Principles (1951) Dictionary of Canadianisms on Historical Principles www.dchp.ca/dchp2 (2017) 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 526 527 Webster’s Third New International (1961), which was a thorough revision of Webster New International, Second Edition (1934). The inclusion of ain’t as a term that was not condemned aroused great resistance and led the New York Times to reject this dictionary and continue to use the outdated, prescriptive 1934 edition. 26.3 Period Dictionaries A special kind of dictionary is the period dictionary, that is, a dictionary that covers the language of a given historical time period, such as Old English or Early Modern English. With the Dictionary of Old English (now complete in letters A–I) and the (originally) Middle English Dictionary (now completed under the title Middle English Compendium), two such dictionaries exist, while the Early Modern English Dictionary folded in the 1980s. Its citation file, however, is now accessible through the University of Michigan library (https://quod.lib.umich. edu/m/memem/simple.html). 26.3.1 Old and Middle English Devised in the 1970s by Angus Cameron, the Dictionary of Old English (DOE) has been one of the first digital humanities projects, long before the term existed. Building on computation from the start (e.g., Cameron et al. 1981), DOE uses the complete extant corpus of Old English materials in the editing, from about 600 to 1150 ad and has published nine fascicles, from A and Æ to I. Figure 26.1 shows the current online version, which is now newly accessible to everyone for a number of times a year, for the lexeme hlaf “loaf”. Since the mid‐1990s, the DOE has been available in web versions with full‐text links to the sources (e.g., ÆGram, for Ælfric’s grammar, in the first attestation of the meaning “bread, loaf”). Figure 26.1 shows just one part of the first of the 27 meanings and submeanings of half > loaf in the DOE (https://www.doe.utoronto.ca/pages/index.html). The Middle English Dictionary (MED) documents the years 1100–1500. It was edited from 1925 to 2001 and is available in open access at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/middle‐ english‐dictionary/dictionary. A revised edition of MED has been created in 2016–2018, with a focus on correction and improvement rather than full‐scale revision. The MED is by far the most complete dictionary of Middle English, but, unlike the DOE, it is not based on a complete corpus of Middle English, as such corpus is more elusive than the relatively confined extant material of Old English. An MED spin‐off project is the Barnhart Dictionary of Etymology (Barnhart 1998), reprinted as of 1999 as the Chambers Dictionary of Etymology (Barnhart and Steinmetz 1999). 26.3.2 Oxford English Dictionary (OED) The OED is no period dictionary in the strict sense of the word, as it spans a number of periods: Middle English, Early Modern English, Late Modern English, twentieth‐century English and present‐day English. It is listed here because it focuses on the historical developments of terms and only in a more limited way on other kinds of variation. First envisaged in 1857, the OED was edited from 1879 to 1928 in 12 volumes, for the longest stretch by James A. H. Murray. Together with a 1933 supplement, the OED came in 13 volumes, which are termed OED‐1. Its history is well‐researched (see Gilliver 2016, and references therein). The OED has been instrumental in the context of English lexicography, which was lacking in quality compared to other philologies in the first half of the nineteenth century. OED represented this catching up and, in some ways, the surpassing of continental lexicography. As 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger Figure 26.1 Beginning of hlaf, modern reflex loaf, in the DOE (May 17, 2019). Dictionary of Old English Project. OED‐1 has been fully financed by Oxford University Press, the press needed to devise ways to derive revenue from a historical dictionary project that would not return a profit despite good sales. The solution was the formation of a dictionary unit that would base its prestige in the OED, yet would garner revenue from the sales of its smaller, more affordable dictionaries. With the advent of digital delivery methods, however, the delivery format was changing. Prior to the technological change, Oxford University Press (OUP) was reinvesting into OED Supplements and Additions volumes, which appeared in paper from 1972 to 1997. In 1989, a print re‐issue of OED‐1, the extra volumes, and a very modest update of 5000 terms was published in 20 volumes and sold as OED‐2, 2nd edition. OED‐2 was put on CD‐ROM in 1992 and, as of 1995, on Internet beta versions (Simpson 2016, p. 285). In 2000, a complete revision of the OED‐2 text, starting in letter M, was begun. OED‐3 has since been available as a work‐in‐progress for purchase online. OED‐3 is an apt improvement over the fin‐de‐siècle OED‐1 that forms the bulk of OED‐2. The four supplements by Robert Burchfield (1972–1986), together with the addition volumes, represented the continuation of the tried‐and‐tested approach, focusing on written sources alone, with a focus on technical vocabulary and, to a degree, on “inner circle” varieties of English (settler Englishes). This approach is, by and large, still carried on in OED‐3, while some “outer circle” varieties also find consideration; see, for example, mahoe “type of South Pacific, NZ, tree,” oolong “type of Chinese tea,” sulu “type of sarong, used in Fiji.” For a dictionary aiming to be the “definitive record of the English language,” scope of what to include and what not remains a perennial problem (e.g., Dollinger 2013). 26.4 English Lexicography around the Globe With the expansion of English beyond its confined sphere of influence in early modern times, numerous varieties of English have been developed. Since World War II (e.g., Partridge and Clarke 1951 [1968]), a pluricentric approach has become part of the DNA of English linguistics. The idea that English is a language that is structured on the standard level in multiple 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 528 529 centers, hence pluricentric, is uncontested today: English English (London), Scottish English (Edinburgh), and American or Australian English are part of Kachru’s inner circle, which is vastly outnumbered in terms of speakers by both the outer circle (e.g., India, Philippines, Nigeria) and the “expanding circle” (e.g., Austria, Russia, China). With the concomitant rise of English as a lingua franca (see next section), variation is a “design feature” of how we conceptualize English today. But not all varieties of the world’s languages are treated or studied equally, and here English lexicography is no exception. Görlach identifies historical biases in the field as relating to the British (English) lexicographical tradition: The historical development of the lexicography of English, with its strong London/Oxford bias, the user‐oriented decisions of publishing houses, and the lack of international lexicological research in the field of English variation mean that the information that can be drawn from the British‐based dictionaries […] is limited. (Görlach 1990, p. 1478) A similar verdict would need to be offered for American English lexicography, the other dominant school, as Avis (1966) makes clear. In that context, Zgusta’s (1971), UNESOcommissioned volume offers global perspective that is still pertinent for English lexicography today. One way to categorize World Englishes is via its “crossings,” as suggested by Mesthrie and Bhatt (2008). English can periodically and conceptually be divided into four crossings, by which we usually mean crossings of water. The first is the crossing of the North Sea in the fifth century, when Germanic speakers occupied Britain; the second is represented by the first colonies, for which Mesthrie and Bhatt take the twelfth‐century crossing into Ireland as a key point. The third crossing began in the sixteenth century, with the Atlantic crossing of English and further on worldwide, while the fourth crossing is a more figurative crossing via IT technologies, starting with the telegraph. Görlach highlights the special role of American English as “the starting point” (1990, p. 1479) for the description of non‐English English varieties, a role that has since been formalized in Schneider’s (2007) dynamic model, featuring American English as the first variety that has run the complete course to a new national variety trough five phases that are to occur in successive order. 26.4.1 1st Crossing Englishes: England, Wales, and Scotland Covered to the greatest extent in OED, MED, and DOE, the lexis of the English Englishes are further documented in the English Dialect Dictionary (Wright 1898–1905), which is a most important resource for non‐standard English between 1700 and 1900 and Green’s Dictionary of Slang (Green 2010) with its UK focus. Complementary to the MED is the Anglo‐Norman Dictionary (http://www.anglo‐norman.net). Further north, Scots and Scottish English are today characterized by a complex relationship. Scots, the Germanic language that was in the seventeenth century en route to standardization as an independent language (Millar 2005, pp. 73–93), was arrested in its development by the merger of crowns in 1603. John Jamieson’s (1808) Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language (see Rennie 2019, accessible at https://jamiesondictionary.com) is the starting point to Scots and Scottish English lexicography. Since then, Scottish lexicography has been developing quickly. Initiated by William Craigie, one of the OED editors of the early 1900s and one of Murray’s successors, the Dictionary of the Older Scottish Tongue (DOST) documents the height of the Scots language from its earliest beginnings to 1700 in a project begun in 1921 and completed in 2002. The Scottish National Dictionary (SND) covers the later period, from 1700 to the present, its fascicles appearing between 1931 and 1976. Both DOST and SND are today available within the Dictionary of the Scots Leid (Scots language) in open access at https://dsl. ac.uk. The publication of the second edition of the Concise Scots Dictionary (CSD) (2017, 1st ed. 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger 1985) attests to active language monitoring and documentation. CSD includes Ulster Scots terms and shows the shared legacy and connections between Scots and Ulster Scots. 26.4.2 2nd Crossing Englishes: Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland While Scottish English represents “a case of a superabundance of dictionaries.” (Richard W. Bailey, qtd. in Aitken 1989: 235), Ulster Scots—of central relevance in the Scottish diaspora in North America and spoken in the six Northern Irish counties and three counties in the Republic—is characterized by the opposite. Macafee’s (1996) Concise Ulster Dictionary is more comprehensive than the title suggests and perhaps the best place to start. The Ulster‐ Scots Academy has been claiming to prepare a Complete Ulster‐Scots Dictionary, drawing from all sources, synchronic and historical, for a bilingual and bidirectional (English–Ulster Scots and Ulster‐Scots English) dictionary (http://ulsterscotsacademy.com/words/ dictionary/introduction.php). No fascicle has been published to date. Linguistically, work by the late Robert J. Gregg is to this day instrumental for Ulster Scots (he was also a pioneer in the study of Canadian English); Michael M. Montgomery offers important jump‐off points for any Ulster dictionary project (see Corrigan 2010); Montgomery (2006) is important to gauge the Scots influence on US English. Irish English is, paradoxically, one of the under-documented varieties in terms of lexis. While research from grammatical and linguistic identity angles is strong, including historical work (e.g., Hickey 2007; McCafferty and Amador‐Moreno 2014), there exists to date no reasonably comprehensive dictionary. Dolan (2006) Dictionary of Hiberno‐English (Hiberno = Irish) is a first step, as is an exclusive dictionary of Irish Gaelic terms and loanwords in Irish English (Ó Muirithe 1999). Share (2008) is documenting a wide range of Irish English terms in present‐day use and is the most comprehensive title today, while Green (2010) includes also Irish English slang terms. On mere dictionary count, Lambert (2020: 426) considers Irish English as “One of the better recorded varieties”, an assessment that is at least debatable. Kallen (2013) features a substantial section on lexis. Generally, it seems that in Irish English—southern and northern political entities alike—what is needed is someone to compile the plethora of material into one (or two) stand‐alone comprehensive dictionaries. 26.4.3 USA and Canada In 2013, the landmark Dictionary of American Regional English (DARE, Cassidy and Hall 1985– 2013) was completed. Taking over 120 years from first plans to completion, DARE can be considered as paradigm‐setting in its uncompromisingly empirical approach and execution. DARE does not guess, as authoritative data stand behind all labels, so when “esp.” is used, as in “esp. Northwest,” it says much more than the use of such qualifier in any other dictionary. Complete historical coverage of extant material, nationwide fieldwork, and computational innovations mark DARE as a uniquely precise resource among the large family of English dictionaries. With about 60 000 lexemes DARE is about a tenth the size of the OED, though its entries are much more detailed. Figure 26.2 (left) shows the example of pail “bucket.” As a fully digital approach that allows the download of the results from the field survey (see Figure 26.2, right), DARE is a unique tool for American English. That DARE is more specialized in scope, which is reflected by “regional” in the title, is because DARE is not the first historical dictionary of American English. The first such work was the Dictionary of American English on Historical Principles (DAE), which was begun in 1924 at the University of Chicago by William Craigie, who was also one of the chief editors 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 530 531 Figure 26.2 Instances of pail on map, meaning 2b, from DARE (left); excerpt of data download for pail (right). Dictionary of American Regional English. of the OED. Published as Craigie and Hulbert (1938–1944), this four‐volume work was documenting the more obvious Americanisms, such as campus “university grounds” or store “shop.” An editor with the DAE, Mitford Mathews, went on to publish a hefty one‐volume supplement under the name of Dictionary of Americanisms on Historical Principles (DA), assisted by Charles Lovell (Mathews 1951). Regional dictionaries of American English are plentiful, while some stand out for quality. Among the latter is the Dictionary of Smoky Mountain English (Montgomery and Hall 2004). The orphaned, high‐school‐only Lovell who was instrumental for DA started to notice Canadian evidence while editing American English and began to collect terms that might have a claim to Canadian‐ness in his own files (Dollinger 2019, p. 40). This file amounted to half the collection of quotations behind what would be developed over the next 20 years into a historical dictionary of Canadianisms. The lexicography of Canadian English had a first stand‐alone publication in Sandilands (1912), harnessed for nation building (Doherty 2020). The publication of the “Dictionary of Canadian English” series in the form of three graded school dictionaries (Gregg et al. 1962; Avis et al. 1963, 1967a) and A Dictionary of Canadianisms on Historical Principles (DCHP‐1, Avis et al. 1967b), however, was instrumental for awareness building about the variety. These dictionaries offered the groundwork for the identification of Canadian English that has given rise to a drawn‐out process of linguistic identity creation and acceptance of the variety. DCHP‐1 is now available in open access (www.dchp.ca/ dchp1). A second, updated and reconceptualized edition was published in 2017 at www. dchp.ca/dchp2 (Dollinger and Fee 2017). Beyond DCHP‐2, lexicography in Canada can also boast three scholarly historical dictionaries. There is the ground‐breaking Dictionary of Newfoundland English (DNE 1982, 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger 1990, 1999, online https://www.heritage.nf.ca/dictionary/). The DNE is half the size (ca. 5000 lexemes) of the national DCHP‐2 (ca. 11 000 lexemes), thus a powerful testament to the linguistic distinction of the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. In the 1980s, another Atlantic province was bestowed with the nicely made Dictionary of Prince Edward Island English (DPEIE, Pratt 1988), which lists some 900 lexemes, combining both historical material with fieldwork interview data, much like DARE. Recently, the historical variety of a part of the province of Nova Scotia was documented in the Dictionary of Cape Breton English (Davey and MacKinnon 2016), which is about the size of DPEIE. The 1990s saw an unprecedented fight for market‐share among three dictionary publishers in Canada. Termed the Great Canadian Dictionary War (Dollinger 2019, pp. 177–178), it reflected increased market demand yet in the end knew only losers, as by 2008, the Canadian Oxford Dictionary was shut down after two editions. As the school market leaders Gage Canadian Dictionary (1997) and the undervalued ITP Nelson Dictionary (1997) have not been maintained, for the first time since 1967 Canadian English is left without a full‐sized (100 000 lexemes or more) dictionary. Today, the Collins Canadian Dictionary (2019) is the only current title of about half the size of a full‐size desk dictionary. 26.4.4 Caribbean Lexicographical knowledge of Caribbean English is generally the outcome of older projects. The Dictionary of Jamaican English on Historical Principles (Cassidy and Le Page 1967, 1980) was begun in the 1950s and compiled in both Jamaica and the United States, as Fred Cassidy was based at the University of Wisconsin‐Madison. It is not the case, however, that any big Caribbean island with substantial populations is served with a dictionary of English and/or Creole. There is, for instance, no dictionary of the English/Creole of Barbados (Bajan and Barbadian English), though there is a dictionary of Bahamian English (Bahamas) (Holm 1982). Trinidad and Tobago is the third Caribbean state that is today well‐served with Winer’s (2009) most comprehensive historical dictionary of Trinidad and Tobago English and Creole. Occasionally, small islands, such as (Dutch) Saba, measuring a mere six square miles and counting just above 2000 inhabitants, can boast lexical documentation of considerable quality (Johnson 2016), including outer “eraser/rubber,” zamba “locally made bed, stuffed with banana leaves as a mattress,” and pronoun variants such as you all and all you, the latter two including regional variation information. Overall though, the varieties of the Caribbean, with their Creole/English continuum, are spottily documented. While the cross‐linguistic Dictionary of Caribbean English Usage (DCEU, R. Allsopp 1996) with about 6500 lexemes is an important resource, it can only be a first step toward a more complete coverage of English varieties in the Caribbean. Examples show an interesting range, such as folly (Turks and Caicos) “road/path between salt ponds,” foodin (Guyana) “a child who eats heartily,” or foodist “adult glutton” in Barbados and Guyana. The quadrilingual domain dictionary by J. Allsopp (2003) documents flora, fauna, and foods in English, French, French Creole, and Spanish for 3000 words. Large social sections of the linguistically complex, multilingual Caribbean, with its long pedigree of English since the early 1600s, remain obscure. For instance, Williams (2010, pp. 139–140) lists more than 20 L1 varieties alone of what he calls “Euro‐Caribbean English varieties,” many of which spoken in communities of fewer than 100 members today (p. 136), including the locations in the Bahamas (island of Abaco), Anguilla, Barbados, Bequia, Bermuda, Montserrat, Saba, St. Kitts, St. Lucia, or Sint Maarten, in which non‐creolized and/ or creolized varieties of English are spoken. Studies of these Euro‐based communities tend to focus on phonology and grammar and not on lexicology/lexicography (e.g., Schreier et al. 2010; Williams et al. 2015). 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 532 26.4.5 533 Latin America English in Latin America has seen rapid spread in the past 20 years. Among the older English settlements in the region, few have developed sustainable communities. Places such as Costa Rica, Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Colombia have English-speaking communities of various sorts, though neither of them is much described. An example of a settlement that did not achieve their original, English‐dominant plans is New Australia in the hinterland of Paraguay. Perez‐Inofuentes (2015, pp. 232–233) reports of lexical items in Anglo‐Paraguayan English spoken by the descendants of Australian immigrants to New Australia, a settlement that, as of the 1890s, was meant to remain ethnically non‐mixed, English‐speaking, and “white.” After having failed as a settlement, 600 workers shifted over time from English to Guarani (not Spanish), making the settlement “stand [] out as the first known case where a well‐organized English‐speaking immigrant community [that] shifted from English to an indigenous language” (ibid. 227–228). Accordingly, the English of those maintaining the language is spiked with loan phenomena, such as montie “bush, scrub” < Sp. monte, camp “settlement” (as in Falkland Island English) < Sp. campo “field,” or mate cocido “morning tea” < Guarani (ibid. 232–233). For these small varieties no dictionaries exist. 26.4.6 Isolated Atlantic Locales There are a handful of inhabited islands in the Atlantic, of which Tristan da Cunha’s 250 residents live some 2500 km from any continent in what is called the “most remote” settlement on earth. Tristan was linguistically studied (Schreier 2003), as was St. Helena (Schreier 2008), which is a 1000 km to the northeast of Tristan, and as a UK military base with 4500 inhabitants much bigger. In both studies, though, the lexical element is largely ignored for the benefit of phonology and morphosyntax. English in Latin America has seen rapid spread in the past 20 years. Among the older English settlements in the region, few have developed sustainable communities. The Falkland Islands off the coast of Argentina have remained an English‐speaking foothold since the early nineteenth century, renewed in commitment by the 1982 war between the United Kingdom and Argentina. Falkland Island English has British military support, literally, in the sense of Max Weinreich’s purported bon mot that a language—here in the sense of language variety—is “a dialect with an army and a navy” (Bright 1997). Dictionaries for these varieties are missing and even word lists and glossaries are a desideratum. 26.4.7 South Pacific With Tok Pisin, one of the three official languages of Papua New Guinea, we have a former pidgin that has achieved accepted status as a national language. A full dictionary of Tok Pisin, considered an “urgent desideratum” an academic lifetime ago (Görlach 1990, p. 1495), is still missing. However, a bilingual learner dictionary was published (Baing et al. 2008), and crowd‐sourced lexicography has filled the void to a degree, as with https://www. tokpisin.info and https://www.tok‐pisin.com two dictionaries of Tok Pisin are available. While not following lexicographic standards, as with many less‐widely used languages, these dictionaries seem to work in practical terms. Solomon Pidgin English, also called Pijin, is an English‐based creole language that is spoken by about 25 000 native speakers and 300 000 L2 speakers on the Solomon Islands; it is related to Tok Pisin. Jourdan (2001) is a dictionary offering usage information and, fitting with the multilingual tradition, translations into both English and French. Similarly, Bislama—an English‐based creole language spoken in the islands state of Vanuatu—is today 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger an official language. Crowley (1995) is a dictionary of the variety, yet there does not seem to be a full‐size print dictionary. There is a bilingual English–Bislama and Bislama–English online dictionary with 6500 lexemes (http://www.bislama.org/bislama‐dictionary). It lists words such as antap “above,” gato “cake,” or switblad “diabetes,” and covers quite a range, yet could be lexicographically improved. The kingdom of Tonga does not have dictionaries of Tongan English, yet Besnier (2003) identifies isolated Tongan loanwords and semantic changes in English words in Tongan transsexuals (e.g., respect, with a wider semantic range than in the inner circle), who play an important role in the small island nation in regard to English, with English taking on the indexical meanings of “urban,” “modern,” and also “feminine.” In small island contexts, dictionaries are unobtainable, of which Pitcairn, with a declining population of 50 descendants of the 1789 mutineers of the Bounty and their Tahitian mates, is no exception. By contrast, exciting developments can be seen in the study of Fiji English, which since the 1930s has been used as a language of school instruction and in the 1990s acquired official status in the new constitution (Zipp 2014, p. 115). Since 2006, an 18 000‐lexeme Macquarie Dictionary of English for the Fiji Islands (Geraghty et al. 2006), which is an inclusive dictionary of medium size, gives lexicographic recognition to the variety, but leaves the number of items marked as “Fiji English” undefined (Schneider 2013, p. 359). Beyond the Fiji context, Biewer (2015) suggests based on comparative data from Samoan English and Cook Island Englishes that New Zealand might have acquired a sphere of linguistic influence in the formation of these standard varieties, though lexical developments remain to be considered. 26.4.8 Australia and New Zealand A true lexicographical pioneer, Edward Morris wrote the first non‐dominant (non‐British and non‐American) dictionary of English. Morris (1898) was half a century ahead of the trend, beginning with a dictionary of Australian slang Baker (1941) and Baker (1945), which uses in analogy to Mencken (1936) not the word variety in the title, but language, in this case, the Australian language. The success of the Macquarie Dictionary (2017), an inclusive synchronic desk dictionary, which once and for all solidified the concept of Australian English as a standard variety, did therefore not come overnight. The Australian National Dictionary (1988) is a historical dictionary in one volume, which was expanded into two volumes recently (Moore et al. 2016). Australian English has its own language history account (Moore 2008) and has started to look into inner‐Australian variation. Malcolm (2018) is on Aboriginal English, with titles focusing on the indigenous lexical contributions to Australian English are considerably older (see, e.g., Dixon et al. 1990). Quite uncharacteristically for a smaller variety next to a bigger one (Australian English), New Zealand English is well‐documented. The Dictionary of New Zealand English (Orsman 1997) is a one‐volume historical dictionary going back to 1951. The first synchronic dictionary of New Zealand English appeared in 1979 and was a mid‐sized 400‐page title that has over the years been expanded to 1300 pages (Wattie and Orsman 2001). By that time, the variety saw publishing competition on the desk dictionary market (Deverson and Kennedy 2005). 26.4.9 Asia English in Asia is a highly dynamic field, with considerable differences depending on the region, for example, Singapore versus North Korea (e.g., Hickey 2004). There is India, whose English lexis shows “substantial creativity” (Sailaja 2009, p. 66). The most populous country in the world, China, is a developing English‐using country and is expected to influence the functions and uses of Englishes in decisive ways once its population has been sufficiently exposed to the variety. At least 400 million or more Chinese are reported as active learners of 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 534 535 English (e.g., Jenkins 2015, p. 170), which are as many learners in that country alone than there are native speakers of English globally. A long time ago, Görlach summarized that “As regards to South Asia, no exclusive dictionary appears to be in the planning phase” (Görlach 1990, p. 1490). The situation for India and Pakistan has not improved. This is baffling, as in most outer and expanding circle societies, especially in those that are multilingually diverse, English plays many roles in the daily lives of some of its speakers. With research activity increasing since the 1960s, Indian English has become increasingly viewed not just as external, but as something Indian. Krishnaswamy and Krishnaswamy (2006, p. 168) speak of the “complex multiverse” that India is, a multiverse in which English “has to be used in certain areas” (Krishnaswamy and Krishnaswamy 2006, p. 169). However, no standard‐size dictionary of the variety of some 300 million speakers of Indian English is available today. There are, often outdated, exclusive glossaries of Indian English, for example, the “quite unsatisfactory word‐list[s]” (Görlach 1990, p. 1490). Rao (1954) is a monograph‐length study of Indian words in English, with a focus on cultural influences. This leaves Hobson‐Jobson, first edition 1886, by Yule and Burnell (1903), which was written from a colonial‐British perspective (Nagle 2010) and smaller 300–400‐page titles based on it (e.g., Kurian et al. 2006). The Hobson‐Jobson is on the English of British soldiers in India and is available in open access at https://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/ hobsonjobson/; reprints are confusingly referred to as a Dictionary of Indian English. Online dictionaries can fill that void to a degree with interesting items, such as, for example, half ticket “children’s ticket,” miscreant “troublemaker, petty criminal,” regional aspirations “local political demands” (see http://www.vsubhash.com/dictionary‐of‐indian‐ english.html). Corpus‐based studies show clear register tendencies for given features, for example, the use of “Indian words” is highest in conversational English, where “Indian English is a vehicle for Indian culture” (Balasubramanian 2009, p. 126). Similar effects can be expected in Pakistan. In fact, Baumgardner et al. (1993) point to semantic and lexical processes from Urdu, for example, chamcha “literally spoon,” but used for “sycophant” or chittar “literally worn‐out footwear” but used to as different entities, from “whip to punish criminals” (pp. 123–124) to “hashish” (p. 126) in Pakistani English. Southeast Asia is a growth area for English. In the Singaporean English lexicon, the substrate influences of Malay, Hokkien, and other languages are easily noticeable, leading to terms such as makan “food, to eat,” bodoh “stupid,” or ang moh “Westerner < lit. red hair” (Leimgruber 2013, p. 67). Today it is widely accepted that Singapore Colloquial English (SCE), often referred to as Singlish, and Standard Singapore English (SSE) “are the two main varieties of English spoken in Singapore” (Cavallaro and Ng, quoted in Wong 2014, p. 8). An online dictionary of “Singlish” and Singaporean English is available with some 1900 lexemes in Lee (2004). The example below shows that “can, can” is used for a more emphatic positive response (“thanks”), using reduplication for a wide range of functions (Wee 2003, pp. 106–113): A: B: B: Do you want root beer? Can, can. (A brings B a root beer.) Thanks, thanks. (Wong 2014, p. 178) The concept is that Singlish speakers (A) see themselves as collaboratively solving the “problem” of providing the B with a drink. It is clear that such pragmatic phenomena would need to be entered into SCE and SSE dictionaries, respectively. For some linguists, the Philippines counts as a country that was on the cusp of codifying its variety of English just two generations ago; the OED lists a number of Filipino English terms, for example, batchmate “member of the same cohort.” There are to date bilingual 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger Tagalog–English dictionaries, but no dictionary of Filipino English. Such dictionary is more unlikely to come about, with Tagalog having taken on identity‐marking functions more recently and some are excessively pessimistic about the role of English in that country: The future of English in the Philippines does not look good. It no longer is viewed as a useful tool for socioeconomic advancement except for finding work overseas. All that is keeping English alive in the Philippines is literacy for the professions. (Thompson 2003, p. 365) The assessment above may seem harsh. Borlongan et al. (2012, p. 70) continue to consider the typical Filipino a trilingual speaker, with Tagalog serving as a national identity marker, and they still see functions for English in intranational communication in the Philippines. In Korea, the status of Korean English, an EFL variety, or Konglish—often viewed as an intermediate learner form (Hadikin 2014, pp. 8–9)—is to date unclear, with few or no lexical resources available. There are indicators, however, that speakers of Korean English view English for a Korean audience as very different from international English (p. 9). What will be interesting to see is if and to what degree negative perceptions about foreign educators in South Korea and other parts of Northeast Asia—stereotypically being perceived as “inconsiderate” or “ignorant and disrespectful of [Northeast Asian] culture and students” (Hadzantonis 2013, p. 119)—might have an effect of the development of English in the region. Starting with Bolton (2002), Hong Kong English (HKE) has been explored as an emerging variety. For the past few years, a synchronic Dictionary of Hong Kong English has been available (Cumming and Wolf 2011). Wong (2017, p. 112) calculates that about a third of distinct words in HKE derive from Hong Kong/Cantonese customs (e.g., lei ho ma “how are you” in Cantonese), another third from colloquial formulaic sequences (e.g., pragmatic markers ha or la), and a bit more than 15% from “miscellaneous” Cantonese vocabulary items. English in Japan plays a different role than in other Southeast Asian countries, yet it has a role nonetheless (Stanlaw 2004, p. 286). “Japanese English is English for Japanese purposes” (p. 287), which highlights grammatical correctness much more so than communicative competence; it is not considered a “stable variety” (Schneider 2011, p. 182), and there is no dictionary of Japanese English. The situation in China may not be utterly unlike the one in Japan, though with a time lag of a few decades. Bolton (2003) is a sociohistorical account on Chinese Englishes, which has since been followed up with a number of studies (e.g., Xu et al. 2017). As in Japan, there is a complex array of attitudes toward learning English, which has drastically increased as a result of China joining the WTA or hosting the 2008 Beijing Olympics. In “China today, English is a means to perform the modern, bilingual, and global identity” (Fong 2017, p. 230). It may not be long before English will be ubiquitous and dominant in a range of roles in China, which would call for a dictionary of its own. 26.4.10 Africa English has played a role in Africa since colonial times, yet it is perhaps one of the lexicographically most unknown areas with the exception of South Africa. Dictionaries of South African English have existed from the Apartheid era (e.g., Branford 1978), but no exclusive historical dictionary (Silva 1996) was available before the 1990s. The Dictionary of South African English on Historical Principles took great care at including loanwords from all 11 official South African languages and beyond, including the Indian, Khoisan, Nguni, Sotho, Malayo‐Indonesian languages, as well as Dutch/Afrikaans. Mesthrie (2010) is more recent a more comprehensive inclusive mid‐size dictionary edited by a variationist linguist (a rarity). The Dictionary of West African English was considered “dormant for a few years” in the 1980s (Görlach 1990, p. 1491); today it is still somehow in the works (Wolf 2017), but it has 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 536 537 been outpaced by online dictionaries resembling glossaries in select West African nations. There is a Ghanaian English dictionary of exemplary quality (https://rogerblench.info/ Language/English/Ghana%20English%20dictionary.pdf), as is A Dictionary for Nigerian English by Roger Blench in a 2005 “draft for circulation” (https://rogerblench.info/ Language/English/Nigerian%20English%20Dictionary.pdf), focusing more on acrolectal Nigerian English, leaving aside Nigerian Pidgin English. It includes terms such as heavy “pregnant,” join “to get on board a vehicle [taxi, etc.],” for example, Where will you join taxi?, or moto “car.” The situation in East Africa is much less‐documented, although a number of empirical foundational studies exist. For Kenya, Skandera (2003) is perhaps one of the most readily available studies of lexis, with special emphasis of Kenyan English idioms. Atichi (2004) is interesting student work in empirical semantics in Kenyan English. A problem is that linguistic awareness of local features and nativization in English is still negligible, though it seems to have been changing recently. In Tanzania, the generation of the 14–18‐year‐olds see English much more as a unifying factor in their country than those in their 30s and 40s (Hillberg 2016, Figure 13). 26.4.11 Europe Today we have studies of English as used in the expanding circle in Europe, such as Edwards (2016) on English in the Netherlands or Smit (2010) for Austria. These studies, however, generally focus on non‐lexical phenomena and are conducted in the framework of English as a lingua franca. Special mention should be made of English loanwords in European languages, a phenomenon that has been studied—often with an exhortative or worrisome slant—for more than a century. Görlach (2003) offers unique quantitative data, an assessment methodology, and a comparative approach of English loanwords in Germanic, Romance, Slavic, and non‐Indo‐European languages. A Dictionary of English in Europe (Görlach 2001) documents 3800 English loanwords in European languages before 1995, listing, among others, words that look English but are not, for example, handy (German for mobile telephone), dressman (German for a male fashion model), tennisman (French for a tennis player), or dress (German for soccer uniform). 26.5 Learner Englishes: Dictionary Innovations The most profound innovation in learner dictionaries of English came from a non‐L1‐ speaking context of Japan. A. S. Hornby revolutionized the field when working at the Tokyo Institute for Research in English Teaching from 1924. Until then, dictionaries for learners were modeled closely on L1 lexicography that was toned down in scope but much less so in content. For Hornby and his associates, learner needs were central, not just an afterthought. Together with Michael West and others, Hornby established the General Service List first in 1936, the most important 2000 words for the learner of English (see West 1953), with the goal of maximum comprehension. 26.5.1 MELDs and BELDs A key distinction in learner circles concerns the use of monolingual and bilingual dictionaries. There are monolingual English learner dictionaries (MELDs) and bilingual English learner dictionaries (BELDs), the latter of English and another language, either in one direction, the other direction, or bidirectionally. 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger While BELDs provide synonyms and near‐synonyms in another language, for example, for bank account in an English—German BELD: Bankkonto (f.), Finnish: pankkitili, or Welsh: cyfrif banc—MELDs offer explanations in English only. MELDs limit themselves to a core vocabulary between 2000 and 3500 words to define all lexemes. The examples in Figure 26.3 illustrate the difference between an inclusive synchronic monolingual dictionary, such as the Merriam‐Webster Abridged (bottom), and MELDs, in this case the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (OALD, top). As can be seen, Merriam‐Webster uses a term from the headword to explain the concept (account) and more complicated terms such as deposit, equivalent or subject to, and withdrawal, which often cause the learner to look up one or more words to decipher the original definition, a frustrating enterprise that does not always lead to success. MELDs, Figure 26.3 above, use restricted vocabularies, such as the General Service List (West 1953) or the New General Service List (2800 words, based on the idea that these terms are needed to render and received “general services,” e.g., shopping, greetings, etc. See https://www.newgeneralservicelist.org). 26.5.2 Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary [of Current English] The OALD was first published in 1948 by A. S. Hornby, E. V. Gatenby, and H. Wakefield under the title Idiomatic and Syntactic English Dictionary. OALD established the current model of learner dictionaries (today available in 9th edition from 2015). A new edition, substantially revised, has been published every 5 years since 1995, which shows the increased need for updated learner dictionaries and market demand. 26.5.3 The Six Mighty MELDs Today, there are six major MELDs, which are “often referred to as the Big Six: Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (CALD), Collins COBUILD (COBUILD), Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (LDOCE), Macmillan English Dictionary (MED), Merriam‐Webster Figure 26.3 Entry for bank account in merriam‐webster.com (above) and OALD (below), May 25, 2019. Dictionary.com, LLC. 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 538 539 Learner’s Dictionary (MWLD), and Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (OALD)” (Miller 2017, p. 354). While these dictionaries all began as hardcopy‐only titles, around the year 2000 they were sold with a complementary CD‐ROMs and have since transitioned to online delivery. Recently, all Big Six learner dictionaries “are now freely available online” (ibid) and one “major publisher (Macmillan) is now publishing its learner’s dictionary only online, with no further paper copies” (ibid). In practice, OALD and LDOCE have probably had the biggest market shares, from which COBUILD and CALD could take away from, with MWLD and MED being relative newcomers. As this list of six shows, the learner market is economically a heavily contested area, an area that has on the lexicographical and linguistic levels been the main driving force in a field that has otherwise not been known for its bold innovations. 26.5.4 American Innovations Partly a result of the hiatus of the OED between 1933 and 1957 (Brewer 2007), American dictionaries were drivers of innovation in the immediate post‐WWII period. The American publishing houses perfected the method of citation collection and documentation in the paper file format and experimented with the design and layout of book publishing in the pre‐digital age. With a large population eager to buy dictionaries, growing revenues allowed American publishing houses to invest in lexicography. One conceptual American innovation was the “grading” of dictionaries, by which we understand the adaptation in scope and defining style to different school grades. Graded dictionaries have been a landmark feature since the late nineteenth century, for example, the Winston dictionaries (Brown and Alexander 1937). Thorndike and Barnhart (1952a, 1952b) were published in a series designed along pedagogical principles that were based on a mathematical approach to the sizes of fascicles in each dictionary. These dictionaries sold well in the United States and they became the base for the series entitled “Dictionary of Canadian English,” published by Gage Ltd. as of 1962 (Gregg 1993). The developments of the “abridged” dictionary, that is, a concise dictionary based on a “very large” one, and the related American College Dictionaries, which became bestsellers in their own right from the 1950s to the 1990s, year after year, in tens of thousands of copies, were the cash cows of the industry. 26.6 English as a Lingua Franca: Lexicographical Challenges English as a lingua franca (ELF) has been researched extensively since the late 1990s. ELF is defined as conversations and exchanges between users who do not share a first language and for whom English is the medium of choice and often the only shared language (Seidlhofer 2011). With a ratio of non‐native speakers of reasonable competence and native speakers of about 6:1 today (extrapolated from David Crystal, Dollinger 2019, p. 247, fn21), this variety represents one of the most dynamic fields in English linguistics today. In terms of lexicography, ELF is confronted with additional challenges. ELF questions a number of key concepts in linguistics and applied linguistics today. First, the idea of the speech community, originally conceived as a locally and territorially defined one, becomes adapted in a global ELF community that is not defined by any territory. Second, the idea of competence is in need of revision, as the concept of the native speaker is rejected as an unnecessary black box that buries a lot of variation and variability in competence behind a label, which, ultimately, has a deterministic outlook (see Jenkins 2000). 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger 26.6.1 Word‐Formation and ELF A lot of work has focused on the pragmatics, the negotiation of meaning in the moment in ELF encounters. This work has led to the conclusion that ELF cannot be defined by the feature‐driven approach that is typical in World Englishes, as more variability is inherent in the notion of ELF than in any of Kachru’s circle Englishes. The concept of ELF is more process‐ oriented than feature‐oriented, while tendencies for feature principles exist. In terms of lexis, some work has focused on word‐formation, other on loanwords, loan‐renditions, and loan translations (calques), which are key ingredients in ELF conversations. In terms of word‐ formation, Pitzl et al. (2008) have shown that the same processes apply in ELF as in L1 Englishes, yet their distribution varies (cf. Plag 2003, for L1). Words such as pronunciate, emaninate, financiate, all attested in ELF conversations, are not treated as errors, but as “overt/ emphatic” forms in ELF that L1 Englishes are devoid of (Seidlhofer 2011, Kindle edition, section 5.2). Use such as this would, with rules rooted in pragmatics rather than in grammar, need to be documented in ELF dictionaries as productive verb markers of emphasis. 26.6.2 Real‐Time Processing and Dictionaries ELF offers important lessons to linguists taking pride in studying the language as it is spoken by a particular group or speech community. Seidlhofer (2007) points out that if the descriptive axiom is taken seriously, ELF, as the most widely spoken variety in the world, would need to be given precedence. In terms of open class lexis, ELF uses a lot of ad‐hoc loanwords and creations that are not arbitrary, but rule‐governed and nonetheless variable. These include, on various levels of competence and depending on the L1 backgrounds of a given speaker or speaker pairing, handy (“cell phone,” German L1 speaker), decreet (“decree” Dutch L1 speaker), pre‐thesis (“qualifying paper before M.A. thesis,” Dutch L1 speaker), or zivildienst (“non‐ violent service in lieu of mandatory military service,” Austrian German L1 speaker). Which of these should be entered in an ELF dictionary for, say, the European context? Following Searle, Seidlhofer takes recourse to a distinction between constitutive rules and regulative conventions. Constitutive rules are rules that make a language. So, if ELF uses a word‐formation pattern of ‐ate to mark some verbs in L1 Englishes, for example, dominate, but not others, for example, pronounce, we may say that ‐ate is part of the regulative rule set of Englishes. The application and blocking of ‐ate in some verbs are regulative conventions that are solved differently in various varieties, African American Vernacular English (AAVE), Canadian English, and ELF. In other words, inner circle L1 pronounce and dominate, but ELF pronunciate and dominate alike are a matter of merely flavor, not systemic substance. This principle would allow for the documentation of constitutive and regulative rules alike in dictionaries, which would imply, however, that any ELF lexicographer would have to have a clear principle to tell one from the other, as native‐speaker intuition would not be a suitable tool for editorial decisions. 26.7 State of the Art and Avenues Forward Görlach charted the constraints and problems of documenting English globally, concluding a generation ago that his account “will have made clear that a great amount of research needs to be done before the lexical evidence is available that could satisfy the linguist” (Görlach 1990, p. 1479). In some areas, we have moved along the desired path, for example, OED‐3, DARE, DCHP‐2, the Scottish dictionaries, and some projects in Southeast Asia (Hong Kong) and, above all, New Zealand. In other areas, we have stalled, for example, there still is no sizeable Indian English dictionary and no large Irish English dictionary, let alone dictionaries of some early postcolonial varieties, such as Barbadian English, yet there is now Winer (2009). 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 540 541 With the noticeable dissociation of lexicography from the linguistics of English, both disciplines stand to lose. This is because without linguistics input, the discipline of lexicography can easily drift off into the compilation of lists; conversely, without an appreciation and consideration of the rich lexical components in language, any description of language will be, if not outright misleading, incomplete and unbalanced. A state of separation from lexicography is discernible in writings on World Englishes and lesser‐ known Englishes today, which are invested in phonology, morphosyntax, and pragmatics, usually without mentioning lexis, relegating dictionary making often to the hobbyist not the language professional. With new domains such as ELF or learner lexicography posing their own challenging questions, we stand at a crossroads today: how can lexicography—beyond any lighthouse projects—be made more central for the study of English varieties? ACKNOWLEDGMENT I am indebted to the contributors of the online discussion at https://www.academia. edu/s/3915928885/, especially Laura Wright, Joan Beal, Marina Dossena, James Lambert, Kevin McCafferty, Jeffrey L. Kallen, Fredric Dolezal, and Rachel Fletcher. I would also like to thank an anonymous referee, whose incisive critique had a much greater impact than is immediately apparent. FURTHER READINGS Atkins, B. T. S., & Rundell, M. (2008). The Oxford guide to practical lexicography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Béjoint, H. (2010). The lexicography of English: From origins to present. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Considine, J. (2008). Dictionaries in early modern Europe: Lexicography and the making of heritage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dollinger, S. (2019). Creating Canadian English: The professor, the mountaineer, and a national variety of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gilliver, P. (2016). The making of the Oxford English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Landau, S. I. (2001). Dictionaries: The art and craft of lexicography (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McDavid, R. I., & Duckert, A. R. (Eds.) (1973). Lexicography in English. Special issue of Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 211, 1–342. Müller‐Spitzer, C. (Ed.) (2014). Using online dictionaries. Berlin: de Gruyter. Ogilvie, S. (Ed.) (2020). Cambridge companion to English dictionaries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. REFERENCES Adams, M. (2019). The dictionary society of North America: A history of the early years (Part III). Dictionaries, 40(1), 1–54. Aitken, A. J. (1989). The lexicography of Scots tow hundred years since: Ruddiman and his successors. In J. L. Mackenzie, & R. Todd (Eds.), In Other Words (pp. 235–246). Dordrecht: Foris. Allsopp, J. (Ed.) (2003). The Caribbean multilingual dictionary of flora, fauna and foods in English, French, French Creole and Spanish. Kingston, Jamaica: Arawak Publications 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger Allsopp, R. (Ed.) (1996). Dictionary of Caribbean English usage. With a French and Spanish supplement edited by Jeannette Allsopp. Oxford: Oxford University Press. American heritage dictionary of the English language (5th ed.). (2018). 50th Anniversary Printing. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Atichi, R. A. (2004). The semantic distinctiveness of Kenyan English. Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Nairobi: Department of Linguistics and African Languages. http://erepository. uonbi.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/11295/18152/ Atichi_The%20semantic%20distinctiveness%20 of%20Kenyan%20English.pdf?sequence= 2&isAllowed=y Atkins, S., Fillmore, C. J., & Johnson, C. R. (2003). Lexicographic relevance: Selecting information from corpus evidence. International Journal of Lexicography, 16(3), 251–280. Avis, W. S., Drysdale, P. D., Gregg, R. J., & Scargill, M. H. (Eds.). (1967a). Gage dictionary of Canadian English: The senior dictionary. Toronto: W. J. Gage. Avis, W. S. (Ed.‐in‐chief), Crate, C., Drysdale, P., Leechman, D., Scargill, M. H., & Lovell, C. J. (Eds.) (1967b). A dictionary of Canadianisms on historical principles. Toronto: W. J. Gage. Avis, W. S. (1966). Canadian spoken here. In M. H. Scargill, & P. G. Penner (Eds.), Looking at language (pp. 17–39). Gage: Toronto. Avis, W. S., Gregg, R. J., & Scargill, M. H. (Eds.) (1963). The intermediate dictionary. Toronto: W. J. Gage. Baing, S., Deutrom, B., & Jackson, R. (Eds.) (2008). Papua New Guinea study dictionary Tok Pisin. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Baker, S. J. (1945). The Australian language. Sydney: Angus & Robertson. Baker, S. J. (1941). A popular dictionary of Australian slang. Melbourne: Robertson & Mullens. Balasubramanian, C. (2009). Register variation in Indian English. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Barnhart, R. K. (Ed.) (1998). Barnhart dictionary of etymology. New York: H. W. Wilson. Barnhart, R. K., & Steinmetz, S. (1999). Chambers dictionary of etymology. Chambers. Baumgardner, R. J., Kennedy, A. E. H., & Shamim, F. (1993). The Urduization of English in Pakistian. In R. J. Baumgardner (Ed.), The English language in Pakistan (pp. 83–203). Karachi: Oxford University Press. Besnier, N. (2003). Crossing genders, mixing languages: The linguistic construction of transgenderism in Tonga. In J. Holmes, & M. Meyerhoff (Eds.) The handbook of language and gender (pp. 279–301). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Biewer, C. (2015). South Pacific Englishes: A sociolinguistic and morphosyntactic profile of Fiji English, Samoan English and Cook Islands English. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Bolton, K. (2003). Chinese Englishes: A sociolinguistic history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bolton, K. (Ed.) (2002). Hong Kong English: Autonomy and creativity. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Borlongan, A., Lim, J., & Roxas, R. (2012). University students’ attitudes towards English‐Tagalog code‐switching in classroom instruction. TESOL Journal, 7, 70–77. Branford, J. (Ed.) (1978). A dictionary of South African English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brewer, C. (2007). Treasure‐house of the language: The living OED. Yale: Yale University Press. Bright, W. (1997). Editorial note. Language in Society, 26, 469. Brown, T. K., & Alexander, H. (Eds.) (1937). The Winston simplified dictionary: For home, school and office. 1100 pictorial illustrations. Toronto: John C. Winston Co. Limited. Cameron, A., Amos, A. C., Butler, S., & Healey, A. D. (Eds.) (1981). The dictionary of Old English corpus in electronic form. Toronto. Canadian Oxford Dictionary (2nd ed.). (2004). Toronto: Oxford University Press. Casselman, B. (1995). Casselman’s Canadian words: A comic browse through words and folk saying invented by Canadians. Toronto: Copp, Clark. Cassidy, F. G., & Hall, J. H. (Eds.) (1985–2013). Dictionary of American regional English. Volumes I ‐ VI. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cassidy, F. G., & Le Page, R. (Eds.) (1980 [1967]). Dictionary of Jamaican English (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Coleman, J. (Ed.) (2014). Global English slang: Methods and perspectives. London: Routledge. Collins Canadian dictionary (2nd ed.). (2016). Glasgow: HarperCollins. Craigie, W., & Hulbert, J. R. (Eds.) (1968 [1938– 1944]). A dictionary of American English on historical principles. 4 volumes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Crowley, T. (1995). An illustrated Bislama‐English and English‐Bislama Dictionary. Port Vila: Pacific Languages Unit and Vanuatu Extension Centre, University of the South Pacific. Corrigan, K. P. (2010). Irish English. Vol. 1: Northern Ireland. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 542 Curzan, A. (2014). Fixing English: Prescriptivism and language history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Davey, W. J., & MacKinnon, R. P. (Eds.) (2016). Dictionary of Cape Breton English. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Deverson, T., & Kennedy, G. (Eds.) (2005). The New Zealand Oxford dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dictionary of Newfoundland English. (1999 [1990, 1982]). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Dixon, R. M. W., Ramson, W. S., & Thomas, M. (Eds.) (1990). Australian Aboriginal words in English: Their origins and meanings. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Doherty, A. (2020). The Western Canadian Dictionary and the making of the Canadian West. M.A. thesis, UBC, Department of English Language and Literatures. Dolan, T. P. (2006). A dictionary of Hiberno‐English: The Irish Use of English (2nd ed.). Dublin: Gill & Macmillan. Dollinger, S. (2019). Creating Canadian English: The professor, the mountaineer, and a national variety of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dollinger, S. (2013). “What should the limits of OED’s [Oxford English Dictionary’s] coverage be?” Official Panel Respondent, Symposium on the Future of the Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. 1 August 2013. Available at: https://www.academia. edu/13052737/ Dollinger, S., & Fee, M. (Eds.) (2017). DCHP‐2: The dictionary of Canadianisms on historical principles (2nd ed.). With the assistance of B. Ford, A. Gaylie, & G. Lim. Vancouver: University of British Columbia. http://www. dchp.ca/dchp2/ (1 Oct. 2019). Durkin, P. (Ed.) (2015). The Oxford handbook of lexicography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Durkin, P. (2009). The Oxford guide to etymology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Edwards, A. (2016). English in the Netherlands: Functions, forms and attitudes. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Ferrett, E. & Dollinger, S. (in press). Is digital always better? Comparing two English print dictionaries with their current digital counterparts. International Journal of Lexicography. Proofs submitted April 2020. Fong, T. Y. E. (2017). Through English as a window: Defining ‘being Chinese’ in the 21st century. In Z. Xu, D. He, & D. Deterding (Eds.), Researching Chinese English: The state of the art (Vol. 22, pp. 219–234). New York: Springer. 543 Fuertes Olivera, P. A. (Ed.) (2017). The Routledge handbook of lexicography. London: Routledge. Geraghty, P., Mugler, F., & Tent, J. (2006). Macquarie dictionary of English for the Fiji Islands. Macquarie University: The Macquarie Library. Gilliver, P. (2016). The making of the Oxford English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Görlach, M. (2003). English words abroad. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Görlach, M. (2001). A dictionary of European Anglicisms. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Görlach, M. (1990). The dictionary of transplanted varieties of languages: English. In F. J. Hausmann, O. Reichmann, H. E. Wiegand, & L. Zgusta (Eds.), Wörterbücher: An international encyclopedia of lexicography (vol. 2, pp. 1475–1500). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Green, J. (2010). Green’s Dictionary of Slang. 3 vols. London: Chambers Harrap Publishers (Online, 2016–present: greensdictofslang.com). Gregg, R. J. (1993). Canadian English lexicography. In S. Clarke (Ed.), Focus on Canada (pp. 27–44). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Gregg, R. J., Lovell, C. J., & Scargill, M. H. (Eds.) (1962). The beginning dictionary. Toronto: Gage. Hadikin, G. (2014). Korean English: A corpus‐driven study of a New English. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Hadzantonis, D. M. (2013). English‐Language pedagogies for a northeast Asian context. London: Routledge. Hanks, P. (2013). Lexical analysis: Norms and exploitations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hargraves, O. (2015). Trademarks and the lexicographer in the digital age. Dictionaries, 36, 88–99. Hartmann, R. R. K. (2011). Linking up: The role of networking in disciplinary contacts within and around lexicography, with special reference to four European countries. Dictionaries, 32, 33–65. Hickey, R. (Ed.) (2004). Legacies of Colonial English: Studies in transported dialects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hillberg, E. (2016). Language attitudes towards English in Tanzania: A sociolinguistic study on the state of nativization in Tanzanian English. MA thesis: Gotenburg University. Holm, J. A. (1982). Dictionary of Bahamian English. Cold Spring, NY: Lexik House Publications. Kilgarriff, A, Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Jakubíček, M., Kovář, V., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2014). The sketch engine: Ten years on. Lexicography, 1(1), 7–36. Lee, J. T. (2004). Dictionary of Singlish and Singaporean English. Online dictionary http://www.mysmu. edu/faculty/jacklee/Information/singlish_ expnotes.htm (27 May 2019). 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language: New models, new norms, new goals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Johnson, T. R. (Ed.) (2016). A Lee chip: A dictionary & study of Saban English with grammar and pronunciation section by Caroline Myrick. Self‐published. https:// sabadictionary.weebly.com/buy‐the‐ book.html Jourdan, C. (2001). A dictionary of the Pidgin of the Solomon Islands. Pacific Linguistics. Kallen, J. L. (2013). Irish English: Volume 2: The Republic of Ireland. Berlin: de Gruyter. Krishnaswamy, N., & Krishnaswamy, L. (2006). The story of English in India. New Delhi: Foundation Books. Kurian, G. B. T., Yule, H., Burnell, A. C. (Eds.) (2006). Indigo Dictionary of Indian English. Madras: Indigo Books. Lambert, J. (2020). Lexicography and World Englishes. In D. Schreier, M. Hundt, & E. Schneider (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of World Englishes (pp. 408–435). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leimgruber, J. R. E. (2013). Singapore English: Structure, variation, and usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Liberman, A. (2007). An analytic dictionary of English etymology: An introduction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Longman dictionary of contemporary English (6th ed.) (2014). Harlow: Pearson Education. Macafee, C. (Ed.) (1996). Concise Ulster Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Macquarie dictionary (7th ed.). (2017). Sydney: Macquarie Dictionary Publishers. Malcolm, I. G. (2018). Australian Aboriginal English: Change and continuity in an adopted language. De Gruyter Mouton. Mathews, M. M. [& Lovell, C. J.] (Eds.) (1951). Dictionary of Americanisms. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. McCafferty, K., & Amador‐Moreno, C. P. (2014). ‘[The Irish] find much difficulty in these auxiliaries . . . putting will for shall with the first person’: The decline of first‐person shall in Ireland, 1760–1890. English Language & Linguistics, 18(3), 407–429. McDavid, R. I., & Duckert, A. R. (Eds.) (1973). Lexicography in English. Special issue of Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 211, 1–342. Mencken, H. L. (1936). The American language: An inquiry into the development of English in the United States (4th ed.). New York: Knopf. Merriam‐Webster’s Spanish‐English dictionary (2016). Springfield, MA: Merriam‐Webster. Meshtrie, R. (Ed.) (2010). A dictionary of South African Indian English. Cape Town: UCT Press. Mesthrie, R., & Bhatt, R. M. (2008). World Englishes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Millar, R. M. (2005). Language, nation and power. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Miller, J. (2017). Learners’ dictionaries of English. In P. A. Fuertes Olivera (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of lexicography (pp. 353–366). London: Routledge. Montgomery, M. B. (2006). From Ulster to America. The Scotch‐Irish Heritage of American English. Belfast: Ulster Historical Foundation. Montgomery, M. B., & Hall, J. S. (Eds.) (2004). Dictionary of Smoky Mountain English. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press. Moore, B., Laugesen, A., Gwynn, M., & Robinson, J. (Eds.) (2016). The Australian national dictionary: Australian words and their origins (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Moore, B. (2008). Speaking our language: The story of Australian English. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Morris, E. E. (1898). Austral English: A dictionary of Australasian words, phrases and usages. London: MacMillan. Mugglestone, L. (Ed.) (2000). Lexicography and the OED: Pioneers in the untroddeen forest. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nagle, T. (2010). ‘There is much, very much, in the name of a book’ or, the famous title of Hobson‐Jobson and how it got that way. In M. Adams (Ed.), Cunning passages, contrived corridors (pp. 111–127). Monza: Polimetrica. Ó Muirithe, D. (1999). A dictionary of Anglo‐Irish: Words and phrases from Gaelic in the English of Ireland. Dublin: Four Courts. Ogilvie, S. (2008). The mysterious case of the vanishing tramlines: James Murray’s legacy and the 1933 OED Supplement. Dictionaries, 29, 1–22. Ogilvie, S. (2020). The Cambridge companion to English lexicography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Orsman, H. W. (Ed.) (1997). The dictionary of New Zealand English: A dictionary of New Zealandisms on historical principles. Auckland: Oxford University Press. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (9th ed.) (2015). Oxford University Press. 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 544 Oxford Chinese Dictionary (2010). New York: Oxford University Press. Partridge, E., & Clark, J. W. (1968 [1951]). British and American English since 1900. With contributions on English in Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and India. New York: Greenwood Press. Perez‐Inofuentes, D. M. (2015). Anglo‐Paraguayan English. In J. P. Williams, E. W. Schneider, P. Trudgill, & D. Schreier (Eds.), Further studies on the lesser‐known varieties of English (pp. 219–235). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pitzl, M.‐L., Breiteneder, A., & Klimpfinger, T. (2008). A world of words: Processes of lexical innovation in VOICE. Vienna English Working Papers, 17(2), 21– 46. Plag, I. (2003). Word‐formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pratt, T. K. (Ed.) (1988). Dictionary of Prince Edward Island English. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Rao, G. S. (1954). Indian words in English: A study in Indo‐British and cultural relations. Oxford: Clarendon. Rennie, S. (Ed.) (2019). The annotated Jamieson. https://jamiesondictionary.com/annotated‐ jamieson/ Rundell, M. (2018). Searching for extended units of meaning—and what to do when you find them. Lexicography, March 2018, 1–17. Sailaja, P. (2009). Indian English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Sandilands, J. (1912 [1977]). Western Canadian dictionary and phrasebook. Facsimile edition of the 1913 [2nd] edition, with an introduction by John Orrell. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press. Skandera, P. (2003). Drawing a map of Africa: Idiom in Kenyan English. Tübingen: Narr. Simpson, J. (2016). The word detective: Searching for the meaning of it all at the Oxford English Dictionary: A Memoir. New York: Basic Books. Schneider, E. W. (2007). Postcolonial English: Varieties around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schneider, E. W. (2011). English around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schneider, E. W. (2013). Book reviews. English World‐Wide, 33(3), 358–362. Schreier, D. (2003). Isolation and language change: Contemporary and sociohistorical evidence from Tristan da Cunha English. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Schreier, D. (2008). St Helenian English: Origins, evolution and variation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Schreier, D., Trudgill, P., Schneider, E. W., & Williams, J. P. (Eds.) (2010). The lesser‐known 545 varieties of English: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seidlhofer, B. (2007). English as a lingua franca and communities of practice. In S. Volk‐Birke, & J. Lippert (Ed.), Anglistentag 2006 Halle: Proceedings (pp. 307–318). Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag. Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press Silva, P. (Ed.) (1996). A dictionary of South African English on historical principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Smit, U. (2010). English as a lingua franca in higher education: A longitudinal study of classroom discourse. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Stanlaw, J. (2004). Japanese English: Language and culture contact. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Share, B. (2008). Slanguage: A dictionary of slang and colloquial English in Ireland (3rd ed.). Gill & MacMillan. Thompson, R. M. (2003). Filipino English and Taglish. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Thorndike, E. L., & Barnhart, C. L. (1952a). Thorndike‐Barnhart beginning dictionary. Chicago: Scott, Foresman. Thorndike, E. L., & Barnhart, C. L. (1952b). Thorndike‐Barnhart advanced junior dictionary. Chicago: Scott, Foresman. Wattie, N., & Orsman, H. W. (Eds.) (2001). The Reed dictionary of New Zealand English: The first dictionary of New Zealand English and New Zealand pronunciation (3rd rev. ed.). Auckland: Reed. Webster’s New International Dictionary of the English Language (2nd ed.). (1934). Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam. Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (3rd ed.). (1961). Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam. Wee, L. (2003). Reduplication and discourse particles. In L. Lim (Ed.), Singapore English: A grammatical description (pp. 105–126). Amsterdam: Benjamins. West, M. (1953). A general service list of English words. London: Longman, Green and Co. Williams, J. P. (2010). Euro‐Caribbean English varieties. In D. Schreier, P. Trudgill, E. W. Schneider, & J. P. Williams (Eds.), The lesser‐known varieties of English: An introduction (pp. 136–157). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Williams, J. P., Schneider, E. W., Trudgill, P., & Schreier, D. (Eds.) (2015). Further studies on the lesser‐known varieties of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License English Lexicography: A Global Perspective Stefan Dollinger Winer, L. (Ed.) (2009). Dictionary of the English/ Creole of Trinidad & Tobago. Montreal: McGill‐ Queen’s University Press. Wolf, H. ‐G. (2017). “The dictionary of West African English project” (keynote address). A. Simo Bobda Symposium. Trends in English Language/Linguistics and Literature in a Global Perspective. University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé, Cameroon, April 5‐7, 2017. Wong, J. O. (2014). The culture of Singapore English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wong, M. (2017). Hong Kong English: Exploring lexicogrammar and discourse from a corpus‐linguistic perspective. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Wright, J. (Ed.) (1898–1905). The English dialect dictionary. London: Henry Frowde. Wright, L. (2020). Sunnyside: A Sociolinguistic History of British House Names. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Xu, Z., He, D., & Deterding, D. (Eds.) (2017). Researching Chinese English: The state of the art. Cham: Springer. Yule, H., & Burnell, A. C. (Eds.) (1903). Hobson‐ Jobson: A glossary of colloquial Anglo‐Indian words and phrases (William Crooke ed.). London: Murray. Zgusta, Ladislav et al. (1971). Manual of Lexicography. Prague/The Hague: Academia/ Mouton Zipp, L. (2014). Educated Fiji English: Lexico‐ grammar and variety status. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1002/9781119540618.ch26, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119540618.ch26 by University Of British Columbia, Wiley Online Library on [01/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 546