Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Kageura, K."
  1. Kageura, K.: ¬The dynamics of terminology : a descriptive theory of term formation and terminological growth (2002) 0.01
    0.012274935 = product of:
      0.02454987 = sum of:
        0.02454987 = sum of:
          0.00894975 = weight(_text_:a in 1787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.00894975 = score(doc=1787,freq=56.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 1787, product of:
                7.483315 = tf(freq=56.0), with freq of:
                  56.0 = termFreq=56.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1787)
          0.01560012 = weight(_text_:22 in 1787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.01560012 = score(doc=1787,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 1787, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1787)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The discovery of rules for the systematicity and dynamics of terminology creations is essential for a sound basis of a theory of terminology. This quest provides the driving force for the dynamics of terminology in which Dr Kageura demonstrates the interaction of these two factors on a specific corpus of Japanese terminology which, beyond the necessary linguistic circumstances, also has a model character for similar studies. His detailed examination of the relationships between terms and their constituent elements, the relationships among the constituent elements and the type of conceptual combinations used in the construction of the terminology permits deep insights into the systematic thought processes underlying term creation. To compensate for the inherent limitation of a purely descriptive analysis of conceptual patterns, Dr. Kageura offers a quantitative analysis of the patterns of the growth of terminology.
    Content
    PART I: Theoretical Background 7 Chapter 1. Terminology: Basic Observations 9 Chapter 2. The Theoretical Framework for the Study of the Dynamics of Terminology 25 PART II: Conceptual Patterns of Term Formation 43 Chapter 3. Conceptual Patterns of Term Formation: The Basic Descriptive Framework 45 Chapter 4. Conceptual Categories for the Description of Formation Patterns of Documentation Terms 61 Chapter 5. Intra-Term Relations and Conceptual Specification Patterns 91 Chapter 6. Conceptual Patterns of the Formation of Documentation Terms 115 PART III: Quantitative Patterns of Terminological Growth 163 Chapter 7. Quantitative Analysis of the Dynamics of Terminology: A Basic Framework 165 Chapter 8. Growth Patterns of Morphemes in the Terminology of Documentation 183 Chapter 9. Quantitative Dynamics in Term Formation 201 PART IV: Conclusions 247 Chapter 10. Towards Modelling Term Formation and Terminological Growth 249 Appendices 273 Appendix A. List of Conceptual Categories 275 Appendix B. Lists of Intra-Term Relations and Conceptual Specification Patterns 279 Appendix C. List of Terms by Conceptual Categories 281 Appendix D. List of Morphemes by Conceptual Categories 295.
    Date
    22. 3.2008 18:18:53
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.2, S.112-113 (L. Bowker): "Terminology is generally understood to be the activity that is concerned with the identification, collection and processing of terms; terms are the lexical items used to describe concepts in specialized subject fields Terminology is not always acknowledged as a discipline in its own right; it is sometimes considered to be a subfield of related disciplines such as lexicography or translation. However, a growing number of researchers are beginning to argue that terminology should be recognized as an autonomous discipline with its own theoretical underpinnings. Kageura's book is a valuable contribution to the formulation of a theory of terminology and will help to establish this discipline as an independent field of research. The general aim of this text is to present a theory of term formation and terminological growth by identifying conceptual regularities in term creation and by laying the foundations for the analysis of terminological growth patterns. The approach used is a descriptive one, which means that it is based an observations taken from a corpus. It is also synchronic in nature and therefore does not attempt to account for the evolution of terms over a given period of time (though it does endeavour to provide a means for predicting possible formation patterns of new terms). The descriptive, corpus-based approach is becoming very popular in terminology circles; however, it does pose certain limitations. To compensate for this, Kageura complements his descriptive analysis of conceptual patterns with a quantitative analysis of the patterns of the growth of terminology. Many existing investigations treat only a limited number of terms, using these for exemplification purposes. Kageura argues strongly (p. 31) that any theory of terms or terminology must be based an the examination of the terminology of a domain (i.e., a specialized subject field) in its entirety since it is only with respect to an individual domain that the concept of "term" can be established. To demonstrate the viability of his theoretical approach, Kageura has chosen to investigate and describe the domain of documentation, using Japanese terminological data. The data in the corpus are derived from a glossary (Wersig and Neveling 1984), and although this glossary is somewhat outdated (a fact acknowledged by the author), the data provided are nonetheless sufficient for demonstrating the viability of the approach, which can later be extended and applied to other languages and domains.
    Unlike some terminology researchers, Kageura has been careful not to overgeneralize the applicability of his work, and he points out the limitations of his study, a number of which are summarized an pages 254-257. For example, Kageura acknowledges that his contribution should properly be viewed as a theory of term formation and terminological growth in the field of documentation Moreover, Kageura notes that this study does not distinguish the general part and the domaindependent part of the conceptual system, nor does it fully explore the multidimensionality of the viewpoints of conceptual categorization. Kageura's honesty with regard to the complexity of terminological issues and the challenges associated with the formation of a theory of terminology is refreshing since too often in the past, the results of terminology research have been somewhat naively presented as being absolutely clearcut and applicable in all situations."
  2. Kageura, K.: Theories of terminology : a quest for a framework for the study of term formation (1999) 0.00
    0.004101291 = product of:
      0.008202582 = sum of:
        0.008202582 = product of:
          0.016405163 = sum of:
            0.016405163 = weight(_text_:a in 6290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.016405163 = score(doc=6290,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.3089162 = fieldWeight in 6290, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6290)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  3. Kageura, K.; Tsuji, K.; Takusa, A.: Some statistical characterizations of terminological and non-terminological elements : evaluation and examination in Japanese technical abstracts (1996) 0.00
    0.0028703054 = product of:
      0.005740611 = sum of:
        0.005740611 = product of:
          0.011481222 = sum of:
            0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 6332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.011481222 = score(doc=6332,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 6332, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6332)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  4. Yoshikane, F.; Kageura, K.; Tsuji, K.: ¬A method for the comparative analysis of concentration of author productivity, giving consideration to the effect of sample size dependency of statistical measures (2003) 0.00
    0.0023919214 = product of:
      0.0047838427 = sum of:
        0.0047838427 = product of:
          0.009567685 = sum of:
            0.009567685 = weight(_text_:a in 5123) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009567685 = score(doc=5123,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 5123, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5123)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Studies of the concentration of author productivity based upon counts of papers by individual authors will produce measures that change systematically with sample size. Yoshikane, Kageura, and Tsuji seek a statistical framework which will avoid this scale effect problem. Using the number of authors in a field as an absolute concentration measure, and Gini's index as a relative concentration measure, they describe four literatures form both viewpoints with measures insensitive to one another. Both measures will increase with sample size. They then plot profiles of the two measures on the basis of a Monte-Carlo simulation of 1000 trials for 20 equally spaced intervals and compare the characteristics of the literatures. Using data from conferences hosted by four academic societies between 1992 and 1997, they find a coefficient of loss exceeding 0.15 indicating measures will depend highly on sample size. The simulation shows that a larger sample size leads to lower absolute concentration and higher relative concentration. Comparisons made at the same sample size present quite different results than the original data and allow direct comparison of population characteristics.
    Type
    a
  5. Fukuda, M.; Kageura, K.: Research into 'see also' references in the dictionary of terminology : using semantic relations between entries (1993) 0.00
    0.0023435948 = product of:
      0.0046871896 = sum of:
        0.0046871896 = product of:
          0.009374379 = sum of:
            0.009374379 = weight(_text_:a in 1050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009374379 = score(doc=1050,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 1050, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1050)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Reports a study to clarify the nature and functions of 'see also' references in the dictionaly of terminology by surveying 3 such dictionaries, using semantic relations between referring entries and referred entries as a key. The following points were clarified: major types of semantic relations between referring and referred entries and their quantitative tendencies; correlations between the general nature of dictionaries and overall tendencies of 'see also' references; some tendencies concerning the directions of references under some semantic relations; and correlations between the nature of dictionaries and the directions of 'see also' references
    Type
    a
  6. Tsuji, K.; Kageura, K.: Automatic generation of Japanese-English bilingual thesauri based on bilingual corpora (2006) 0.00
    0.0020714647 = product of:
      0.0041429293 = sum of:
        0.0041429293 = product of:
          0.008285859 = sum of:
            0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 5061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008285859 = score(doc=5061,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 5061, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5061)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The authors propose a method for automatically generating Japanese-English bilingual thesauri based on bilingual corpora. The term bilingual thesaurus refers to a set of bilingual equivalent words and their synonyms. Most of the methods proposed so far for extracting bilingual equivalent word clusters from bilingual corpora depend heavily on word frequency and are not effective for dealing with low-frequency clusters. These low-frequency bilingual clusters are worth extracting because they contain many newly coined terms that are in demand but are not listed in existing bilingual thesauri. Assuming that single language-pair-independent methods such as frequency-based ones have reached their limitations and that a language-pair-dependent method used in combination with other methods shows promise, the authors propose the following approach: (a) Extract translation pairs based on transliteration patterns; (b) remove the pairs from among the candidate words; (c) extract translation pairs based on word frequency from the remaining candidate words; and (d) generate bilingual clusters based on the extracted pairs using a graph-theoretic method. The proposed method has been found to be significantly more effective than other methods.
    Type
    a
  7. Tsuji, K.; Kageura, K.: Analysis of word structure of medical synonyms (1996) 0.00
    0.0020296127 = product of:
      0.0040592253 = sum of:
        0.0040592253 = product of:
          0.008118451 = sum of:
            0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 6338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008118451 = score(doc=6338,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6338, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6338)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  8. Kageura, K.: Terminological semantics : an examination of 'concept' and 'meaning' in the study of terms (1995) 0.00
    0.001913537 = product of:
      0.003827074 = sum of:
        0.003827074 = product of:
          0.007654148 = sum of:
            0.007654148 = weight(_text_:a in 4561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007654148 = score(doc=4561,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 4561, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4561)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The importance of 'concept' in the study of terms is recognized by most researchers in the field of terminological research. However, the theoretical status of 'concept' in the study of terms has not been clarified so far. Against this background, the status of 'concept' in the study of terms is theoretically examined in comparison with the status of 'meaning' in the semantic study of general languages. Sketches a possible scheme by which 'concept' and 'meaning' are properly plyced in the theoretical study of terms
    Type
    a