Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative
Issue 10 | December 2016 - July 2019

Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEIJack Bowers and Laurent Romary

Electronic version
URL: http://journals.openedition.org/jtei/1643
DOI: 10.4000/jtei.1643
ISSN: 2162-5603
Publisher
TEI Consortium
Electronic reference
Jack Bowers and Laurent Romary, « Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI », Journal of the
Text Encoding Initiative [Online], Issue 10 | December 2016 - July 2019, Online since 11 July 2017,
connection on 03 July 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/jtei/1643 ; DOI : 10.4000/jtei.1643

For this publication a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license has been granted by theauthor(s) who retain full copyright.

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Deep Encoding of Etymological Informationin TEI
Jack Bowers and Laurent Romary

1. Introduction
1

This paper aims to provide a comprehensive modeling and representation of etymological data
in digital dictionaries. The purpose is to integrate in one coherent framework both digital
representations of legacy dictionaries and born-digital lexical databases that are constructedmanually or semi-automatically. We propose a systematic and coherent set of modeling principles
for a variety of etymological phenomena that may contribute to the creation of a continuum
between existing and future lexical constructs, so that anyone interested in tracing the history ofwords and their meanings will be able to seamlessly query lexical resources.

2

Instead of designing an ad hoc model and representation language for digital etymological data,
we will focus on identifying all the possibilities oered by the TEI Guidelines for the representationof lexical information. This will lead us to systematize some existing constructs oered by theexisting TEI framework, in particular the use of citation (<cit>) for representing etymons inplace of <mentioned>, and referencing constructs (<pRef> and <oRef>) for linking etymological

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

1Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

information to existing or putative lexical entries. We also suggest some amendments to the TEI
Guidelines that may improve the representation of etymological information as well as lexical
entries at large (for instance, deprecation of <oVar> and <pVar>).1
3

Since its initial design in the 1990s (Ide and Véronis 1994; Ide and Véronis 1995), the TEI“Dictionaries”2 chapter (TEI Consortium 2016, chapter 9) has been the basis for a large numberof dictionary projects. It has shown its capacity to take into account a variety of perspectives on
lexical content, whether one wants to closely follow the original structure of the source material(so-called “editorial view”), or abstract away from it to go closer to a real lexical database (“lexicalview”). This has led to an important body of literature (including Erjavec, Tus, and Varadi
1999; Budin, Majewski, and Moerth 2012; Rennie 2000; Bański and Wójtowicz 2009; Fomin andToner 2006). Most of these papers have been focused on presenting the general architecture of
lexical entries in the corresponding dictionary projects, and on describing the way the various TEI
elements have been set up and used over the course of the editorial workow.

4Concerning etymological description on the theoretical level within the eld of linguistics,
as we shall see, phenomena such as metaphor, metonymy, and grammaticalization are very
well established, particularly within cognitive linguistics. However, we know of no attempts torepresent such processes within any lexical markup system. Additionally, with regard to thetheoretical background, very little has been written on the corresponding digital models whensuch information is being integrated into a lexical database. This is why we will mainly position
our work as an elaboration upon the seminal proposals of Salmon-Alt (2006), which represent aunique set of approaches to data modeling for etymological information.

5

Finally, though they are not the primary focus of our paper, we present herein examples of how
encoders may make use of linked open data URIs3 in dening the semantics (sense and/or domain)of a lexical entry; this issue has been discussed recently by Schopper, Bowers, and Wandl-Vogt(2015). The integration of the burgeoning resources of the semantic web with TEI represents astep toward a model of digital lexicography which enables conceptual semantics to play a more
prominent role in the representation of linguistic content by grounding such information in thegrowing networks of ontological knowledge bases.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference2

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

2. A Quick Overview of the TEI Recommendations for
Dictionaries
6

The representation of lexical information is only one of many types of textual forms that arecovered by the wide scope of the TEI Guidelines. A dictionary represented in TEI follows all thebasic assumptions concerning the general structure of TEI-conformant documents. In particular,
all metadata elements related to the identication of the sources used in the document, thevarious responsibilities in its digital encoding, as well as the possible conditions of publication andreuse can all be described within the TEI header (<teiHeader>) element, which is a mandatorycomponent of all TEI documents. In the same way, the actual lexical content of a dictionary
document expressed in TEI can be further structured at any depth using the generic division(<div>) mechanisms. As a whole, the structural divisions of TEI dictionary entries and theircomponent elements can be seen as analogous to any other type of structured subsection(containing elements such as title, section headers, and paragraph) that may occur in a document
containing prose.4

7Besides generic textual constructs, the TEI Guidelines provide a variety of elements to represent
dictionary entries, including a general-purpose <entry> element for structured content, a
specic <entryFree> element to provide a at representation, for instance in the course of adigitization workow, and a <superEntry> container to group together homonyms. Over thecourse of this paper we will focus on the <entry> element, whose organization reects a standard
semasiological model of lexical content.5 Indeed, the <entry> element is mainly organized aroundtwo subcomponents:•a<form>

element contains the description of the phonetic, orthographic, andmorphological characteristics of the headword as well as its possible inections. Thiselement may, for instance, contain further grammatical constraints (using the <gramGrp>
element);

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference3Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI•

one or more <sense> elements that group together all descriptions related to the various
senses that can be associated with the headword. A variety of further descriptors areavailable in <sense> to provide such information as a denition (<def>), examples ortranslations (<cit>), various grammatical (<gramGrp>) or usage (<usg>) constraints, and ofcourse etymological information (<etym>).

8

The TEI “Dictionaries” chapter also provides various mechanisms for cross-referencing entries toother components of a dictionary. In particular, we will see in this paper how we can make use ofreferences to the orthographic form (<oRef>) or pronunciation (<pRef>) of a headword within an
etymological description.

9

When using the <entry> element, it is particularly important to identify the language information
attached to any descriptive element within such representations; in particular, an encoder needs
to be able to clearly state the object language of the entry as a whole (the language about which
the entry provides a lexical description) and the various working languages (the languages inwhich various descriptive objects such as denitions, notes, and etymons are expressed). To thispurpose, in compliance with ISO standard 166426 for terminological data, we recommend using the@xml:lang attribute as follows: @xml:lang is a mandatory attribute for each <entry> and indicatesthe object language of the whole entry. When not superseded by another indication further downin the entry structure, it also states the working language for all descendant elements within it,
when appropriate (i.e., for textual content). When the working language diers locally from theobject language of the entry (e.g., a denition expressed in another language than the one being
described), a new @xml:lang attribute may be attached to the corresponding element.
10

The representation of etymological information, whether at entry level or for a specic sense,
relies on the <etym> element, which we will elaborate upon as we tackle specic phenomena. So
far, <etym> has been used as a at construct where relevant information concerning language(<lang>), etymon (<mentioned>), or source (<bibl>), for instance, would be simply marked up
in the ow of a textual etymological description. The purpose of this paper is to deepen thepossible usage of <etym> and systematize the way in which specic etymological phenomena canbe represented.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

4Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

3. Past Treatment of Etymological Markup
11

None of the previous attempts either to create a lasting, well-formatted digital corpus of
etymological data, or to establish a widely adopted set of recommendations for encoding suchinformation, have ultimately been very successful. Many of the projects which attempted tocreate such resources have seen the same fate as so many others in the humanities (despite theirstated goals of following best practices for interoperability); such problems include obsolescenceof formatting and/or encoding scheme, abandonment of project, websites that no longer exist,
broken links, and incompatibility with existing software.

12

However, it is useful to review a few publications (and data where possible) that have led toour current understanding of a generic way to represent (digital) etymological information, as
it contributes to establishing an understanding of key questions, challenges, and issues that theauthors encountered, as well as to recognize what people may be looking for when undertaking
such projects. To this end, we will review four main references that have either paved the way forthe current status quo in the TEI Guidelines or directly inuenced our own understanding of theguidelines and how they should evolve.

13

A major milestone in the digital dictionary era is the work by Amsler and Tompa (1988), which,
together with the unifying contributions of Ide and Véronis (1994), led to the earlier TEI “Print
Dictionaries” chapter. Focusing here on their contribution to etymology, example 1 shows how
they have introduced a highly structured model based on etymons and links implemented as an
SGML7 DTD.8 The underlying model is based upon a graph of etymons (<etymon>) connected withrelations (<rel>), forming a more global etymological tree (reected by the <es>, etymologicalsegment, element).

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

5Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 1. Etymological representation from Amsler and Tompa (1988).
<E><es><etymonlang=ME>appel</etymon></es><es><rel>fr.</rel><etymonlang=OE>&aelig;ppel</etymon></es><es><rel>akinto</rel><eu><etymonlang=OHG>apful</etymon><deftext>apple</deftext></eu><eu><etymon14

lang=OSlav>abl&breve;ko</etymon></eu></es></E>

The next two examples were early attempts to build corpora capable of representing etymological
data using standards.

15

An early pre-XML application of the TEI Guidelines to the systematic recording of etymologicalinformation can be found in Good and Sprouse (2000). The work was carried out in the context
of the Comparative Bantu Online Dictionary (CBOLD), a complex database for multiple Bantu
languages, and used the SGML P3 edition of the TEI Guidelines.9 The content corresponds to thedigitization of existing print dictionaries and word lists, and the authors marked up these texts
according to the TEI Guidelines, with some tags added to the standard set. Since the project had todeal extensively with etymological information, it used <etym> with a rened recommendation tolink etymons (marked up as <xref>) to a list of reconstructed historical forms.

16

In the same vein, Jacobson and Michailovsky (2002) used an even simpler approach for their
etymological references within a TEI-based encoding of their lexical data. Instead of implementing<etym>, they make a plain use of the generic <ptr> element, typed as "cfetym", to point to otherentries in their dictionary that may be seen as etymological sources.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

6

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

3.1 Crist (2005)
17

Sean Crist provides some analyses of approaches and a correspondingly precise set of principles tobe applied to the Germanic Lexicon Project,10 which digitized a collection of dictionaries of various
Germanic languages whose copyright had expired. The ultimate goal for markup formatting was
TEI, but (for reasons unknown) it was apparently never achieved. Notably, Crist mentions the likely
need to extend the guidelines in the area of etymology because the <etym> element lacks the meansfor precisely encoding etymological relationships between entries and forms. Key components ofthis work were the following:•

XML markup of some of the data, while other portions remain as plain text, or simply image
scans of the originals;•

formal interrelations among all of the words in an etymology; those specied are cognation,
inheritance, and borrowing;•

the use of attribute inheritance for the nodes in the data structure as per Ide, Kilgarri,and Romary (2000);•

a proposal for the system to require no privileged frame of reference, which would allow
data to follow one of three formats.

18

The following excerpt is from the paper, assuming that the structures represent the place in the
XML hierarchy in which each data type would occur.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

7

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 2. Abstracted model of etymological description (Crist 2005, 8–9).
1.

(From

stone

is

the
a

vantagereflexProto-Germanic

point

of

Old

of

ModernEnglishEnglish)st̄an,

ModernwhichisEnglishareflexof*stainaz:

word
form:

stone

language:

ModernEnglishetymon
word
form:

st̄an

language:

Old

Englishetymonword
form:

stainazlanguage:
Proto-Germanic
attested:
2.

(From
an

the

etymonProto-

vantageof

point

ModernGermanicofEnglishOld

English)stone,

and

is

Old

English

also

a

no

st̄an

reflexisof*stainaz:

word
form:

st̄an

language:

Old

Englishreflex
word
form:

stone

language:

ModernEnglishetymon
word
form:

3.

(From
is

ModernanthevantageetymonEnglish

of

point
Old

of

Englishstone:

wordform:

stainazlanguage:

Proto-Germanic

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

stainazlanguage:

Proto-Germanic

attested:noProto-Germanic)

Proto-Germanic*stainazst̄an,

is

of

which

an

etymon8

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

attested:noreflex
word
form:

st̄an

language:form:

Englishstone

language:

19

Old

ModernEnglishCrist outlined a typology of the treatment of etymological markup at the time, while the adoptionof standards and the elds of digital humanities and lexicography have been steadily gaining
momentum since then. With regard to etymological markup, Crist’s typology remains fairly valid.
The classications are as follows:“Type I. Markup schemes which make no provision for etymological data” (the majority oflexical markup systems);“Type II. Markup schemes where etymological data is delimited as such, but is treated as
unstructured prose” (including TEI; Crist points out the need for further structure, possibly
reusing structures from other sections of the TEI specications, especially the dictionary
chapter);“Type III. Markup schemes where the mathematical relationships recognized in historical/
comparative linguistics are somehow embodied in the markup system in (semi-)machinereadable form.” These systems, according to Crist, “make some provision for the formal
encoding of etymological relationships between words” (Crist 2005, 13, 17).

3.2 Salmon-Alt (2006)
20

The most signicant attempt at devising this kind of dynamic system of etymological markup
was that of Susanne Salmon-Alt. While etymology is not addressed in the LMF (ISO 24613:2008)
standard (ISO 2008),11 Salmon-Alt attempted to develop an extension of the model for the encodingof etymological markup. The extension module allows for the integration and linking of the
etymological information of an entry with the synchronic data and any classications of a given
word/entry within the core module of LMF.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

9Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Our model is based on the overall hypothesis that etymological data might be thought of as
a lexical network, i.e., a graph, whose nodes are lexical units (located in space and time) andwhose arcs are typed etymological relations.
(Salmon-Alt 2006, 3)
21

The scope of the model was limited to semasiological organizational principles for single lexical
entries, such as those outlined in the TEI P5 Guidelines, and did not attempt to support theapproaches of many traditional etymological dictionaries in which the structural principles andcontents vary signicantly from one another.

22

In laying the conceptual and functional foundation for the approach, Salmon-Alt denes
etymology proper as concerning the origin and evolution of a lexeme before its entrance into thelexicon of a given language, as it is materialized by one or more etymons.

23

The metamodel of the LMF etymology extension from the paper is shown in the diagram below.
Figure 1. Etymological extension to LMF (Salmon-Alt 2006).

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

10Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

24This diagram reects the XML representation suggested by Salmon-Alt (2006),12 with two
dedicated elements, <etymon> and <etymologicalLink>, that each contain a specic set of
information. They are dened as follows:
Etymon: <etymon>
The basis for describing and encoding etymons in this model is parallel to that ofsynchronic lexical entries. Specically, they are characterized by: language (@xml:lang);
the linguistic form(s) (<form>)—orthographic (<orth>) and/or phonetic (<pron>); sense(<sense>); gloss (<glose>); grammatical classication (<pos>); and inectional information(if applicable).
Additionally, within the etymon portion of the markup are the optional etymologicalnotes,which serve as a kind of “et cetera” section where one can include otherrelevant information about the etymon, such as discussions and/or bibliographic
references regarding intermediate stages of development, phonetic evolution, concurrent
hypotheses, statements of condence, and secondary etymons. In our system presented
herein, we have rened and given more structure to the markup of these datatypes.
Etymological Link: <etymologicalLink>
The <etymologicalLink> section is intended to be where the relations between thesynchronic and diachronic elements, or possibly between multiple stages, etymologicalrelationships, or alternative hypotheses of diachronic components are specied anddened. The main way in which this is done in the data structure is through the pointermechanisms (@source, @target) in the attributes which link the lexical entry to an
etymological classication specied by means of an <etymologicalClass> element which
can occur within each <etymologicalLink>.
Specied as element values, etymological classes in the model are inheritance, loan word,
and word generation, though in the case of disputed word origins, each alternative may
have dierent classications if need be, and levels of condence can also be specied(@confidenceScore).

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

11

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

25

After reviewing the literature on this topic, we can identify several commonalities, the rst ofwhich is that all authors looked to the TEI, but none found it sucient to adopt without alterations.
Additionally, all works reviewed desire the markup system to have:•a systematic inventory of typed pointers to link between: etymological forms (etymons)and their synchronic descendants; parallel synchronic forms in related languages (e.g.,
cognates); multiple synchronic forms in a single language;•

structures dynamic and consistent enough to enable automatic processing, manipulation,and evaluation with software applications;26•

the ability to classify and assign typological labels to an etymological entry;•

a means of expressing level of certainty of etymological analysis;•a means of decomposing compounds and components of derivational morphology.

In this paper, we elaborate on the sources presented above. We specically focus on building upon
the general model proposed by Salmon-Alt (2006), which is based on a network of etymons andlinks. Moreover, we identify a more precise group of link types between etymons and explore
the consequences in terms of both theoretical implications and possible representations in the
TEI framework. Whereas this was not completely stated in Salmon-Alt (2006), we are describing
etymological links as the expression of specic etymological processes between etymons (forms),
lexical entries, or even senses within entries. The following sections describe the type ontologythat we have devised.

4. Basic Mechanisms for Representing Etymological
Processes
4.1 An Extended TEI-based Representation of Etymons
27

The current content model of the <etym> element and the documentation and examples available
in the TEI Guidelines favor a at annotation of etymological content that does not put forward
either the actual nature of etymons as references to dictionary entries or the central role of

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

12

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

etymological links in the diachronic processes. Starting from the following example expressed incurrent recommendations of the TEI Guidelines, we show in this section a better representationof etymons in etymological description:<entry><form type="headword"><orth>Âbend</orth></form><gramGrp><gen>Mask.</gen></gramGrp><!-- sense, other info here --><etym><lang>Ahd.</lang> <mentioned>âband</mentioned>,<lang>mhd.</lang> <mentioned>âbent</mentioned>;<bibl>zur Etym. s. Kluge Mitzka 18. Aufl. unter ,,Abend'', ferner Schwäb. Wb.
1, 11ff. Schweizdt. Wb. 1,34ff.</bibl></etym></entry>28

As we can see, the TEI Guidelines have thus far favored the use of the <mentioned> element as thebasis for marking up etymons.

29

The rst reason we think this representation is problematic is that it introduces a specicmechanism to refer to lexical items, whereas the TEI “Dictionaries” chapter also provides <oRef>
and <pRef> in examples and <ref> in external references. Therefore we suggest that suchreferences be considered a single process of referring to other lexical entries at large, whether
within the same entry, within the same dictionary, or potentially to a lexical entry from anotherdictionary. In the latter case, the dictionary may or may not exist for the corresponding language,
and thus the reference may be used as a placeholder for a potential construction. This is typicallythe case for etymons that refer to other languages or ancient forms thereof, even if such forms arenot (yet) part of a real lexical description.

30

To this purpose, we make the recommendation to systematically use <oRef> and <pRef> in all threeconstructs (examples, etymology, and external references), and thus supersede both <mentioned>and <ref> for such usages.

31

The schematic structure that we propose for this construct is as sketched below:
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

13

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI<cit

type="etymon"><oRef>|<pRef><date>|<gramGrp>|<usg>|<gloss>|<ref></cit>
32

Here we see that we can have <oRef> or <pRef> (or possibly both) to refer to the form of
the etymon, to which we add further information or constraints related to dating (<date>),grammatical information (<gramGrp>), semantic domain or register (<usgtype="…">), ortranslational equivalence (<gloss>). There could of course be additional constraints depending on
the complexity of the available etymological information, for instance when there is an explicit
reference to an externally dened sense, beyond the shallow capacity of <gloss>,13 as we shall see
later in the paper.
33

Moreover, the use of <oRef> and <pRef> here is quite important in our model, since it reects
the vision that an etymon is a potential reference to a lexical entry in a dictionary for thecorresponding language either synchronically (e.g., in the case of loan words) or, more often,
diachronically.

34

The second aw with the current TEI proposals for etymology is the lack of mechanisms togroup together an etymon with the possible constraints (language, grammar, usage) that may be
associated with it. The at annotation format leaves such pieces of information isolated, as we cansee in the previous example, for even the central language information (coded with <lang>).

35

Here again, we take up a construct that already exists in the TEI “Dictionaries” chapter toencompass this new use case, namely <cit>. By denition, <cit> groups together a linguistic
segment with additional features that document its usage, and it is currently used for examples andtranslations in dictionary entries. We suggest extending its scope to make it the central construct
for the representation of etymons in combination with the use of <oRef> and <pRef> we have justdescribed.

36

If we take up the preceding example, we can turn it into our suggested representation as follows:14

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

14

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI<etym>…
<cit type="etymon" xml:lang="gmh"><oRef>âbent</oRef><lang>mhd.</lang></cit>…
</etym>37

We will show more examples of this construct in the course of our paper, but we can already see
how it allows us both to precisely localize etymological descriptions and to provide the basic unit
for the creation of a generic lexical network across a variety of dictionaries.

4.2 Generic Representation of an Etymological Structure
38

In this section we describe some examples of common types of etymological processes, their
linguistic features, and their key data points, and we present strategies for encoding each of themusing TEI.

39

At the most basic level, the origin of any lexical item or subform can be described as: a)inheritance from a “parent,” “proto-,” or predecessor form of a language; b) borrowing from aforeign language; c) processes that occurred within a contemporary language or subvarieties ofa language.15 With the exception of a lexical item that was inherited and underwent no change
to its surface form (phonetic or phonological), its grammatical role, or its semantic prole, theetymology of a lexical item originating by any one of these means will be comprised of any numberof processes that occur on one or more levels of language.

40

An important aspect to be mentioned at this stage is that etymological description can actuallyoccur at two dierent levels in the organization of a lexical entry. When one deals with the actual
etymology of the word, in the sense of the occurrence of the whole lexical entry in the repertoireof a given language, the <etym> element will obviously appear as a child of <entry>. It can also
be the case that one has to deal with the emergence of a new sense for a given word, in whichcase <etym> should be attached to the corresponding <sense> element. Clearly, this distinction iscorrelated with etymological types, borrowing being more likely to be related to lexical entries
whereas metaphors would more often correspond to new senses.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

15

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

41

Any change that occurs within a lexicon can be labeled in the @type attribute of the <etym> element
in a TEI dictionary;16 and the fact that a change occurred within the contemporary lexicon (asopposed to its parent language) is indicated by means of @xml:lang on the source form.17

42

In the TEI encoding, the former two can be respectively labeled as:<etym type="borrowing">…</etym>

and<etym type="inheritance">…</etym>

Each of the above would represent the top level <etym> element, and any other subprocesses canbe encoded as embedded <etym> elements with @type attributes.
43

Alternatively, they can be implicitly encoded as the value of the attribute @xml:lang within thesource <oRef> and/or <pRef> form without having to embed one or more <etym> elements where
this information is redundant or implicitly understood, thus simplifying the data structure. For
instance, in an entry denoting changes to the morphological and phonological form of a given
Bavarian word inherited from Middle High German, rather than doing the following for every
instance of inheritance:18<etym type="inheritance"><etym type="phonological-processA">…
<pRef xml:lang="gmh">…</pRef></etym></etym>it may be desirable to simply specify the source etymon form thus:<etym type="phonological-processA">…
<pRef xml:lang="gmh">…</pRef></etym>Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

16Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

44

As long as the parent or source language(s) of an entry form are known, and a project-specic orexternal ontology or schema is declared somewhere, this method allows for a lighter means ofexpressing the source language of a form.

45

The fact that the origin of the form is borrowed from another language or inherited from a “parent”
language can also be implicitly encoded by simply including a language tag distinct from that of
the main (synchronic) portion of the entry.

4.3 Using <cit> for Etymons and More
46

Having covered the proposed usage model for <cittype="etymon"> we now move on to two

further functions for the <cit> element, namely to represent (sub-)components of an etymologicalform (e.g., decomposition) and attestations of their usage.
47

Components are signicant lexical subunits which editors may want to isolate explicitly withinvarious types of etymological formation. They are indeed objects that are very close to etymons
but cover a wider variety of linguistic segments such as morphemes. We will see in the course of
the paper how a <cit type="component"> makes sense for this purpose.

48

Attestations of historical forms of an etymon in source context can be included within a citation
element as <cittype="attestation">. As the contents of the citation are a quotation, thesampled linguistic content of the attestation is contained within the <quote> element. Within<quote>, the referenced form of the attested etymon can be encoded in the <oRef> element tospecify which portion of the text corresponds to the given etymon.
49

Furthermore, where an attestation of an etymological form is in a language other than the entry
itself, it can be necessary to include translations of the attestations, which can simply be encodedwith <cittype="translation"> embedded within the <cit type="attestation"> (they areembedded within the attestation because they pertain specically to the language content of theattestation). Thus, the XML structure mirrors that of attestation, with the only dierences being
the value of @type and @xml:lang.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

17Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

4.4 Encoding Languages and Representational Aspects of Linguistic Forms
50

Over the course of our research we have constantly faced issues related to the actual encodingof language-related information for headwords in dictionary entries as well as for etymons andsimilar references. This covers the whole range of TEI elements we are considering here: <orth>and <pron>, with their referential counterparts <oRef> and <pRef>.

51

As a basis for our representation, we have of course taken up the use of @xml:lang over theseelements together with the constraints applicable to its values and the guidelines of BCP 47 (IETF
2009a). We will not go into detail here about the possible limits of this recommendation; instead,
we need to explain some of the choices that are applied in our paper.

52

First, there is a general issue with the language coverage oered by BCP 47, which is based upon
the IANA registry 19 and only oers language tags for a small number of the historical languages
that are needed even from the reduced perspective of Western European etymology: Latin "la",Old French "fro", and Middle French "frm".20

53

Additionally, we identify a problem with the abstract context of general language markup BCP
47 recommendations, which specify that both the content language and orthographic script belabeled within the @xml:lang attribute (IETF 2009a). This is neither a conceptually accurate(as an orthographic system is of course not a language), nor a functionally pragmatic meansof representing this information. Functionally, there is no dierence between orthography andphonetic notation (with various degrees of nuance and exceptions for logographic, logosyllabic,
and other such systems); they are both representations of the language information at some level.
With regards to phonetic information (at least in the dictionary module), in any linguistic data
there is an obvious need to distinguish between the various phonetic transcription systems, andthe TEI already has a solution in @notation.

54

Similarly, we have observed diculties in relying on the @xml:lang attribute alone to cater forthe various ways orthographic forms can actually occur beyond simple script variations, such as
vocalized/non-vocalized in Arabic, kana/kanji in Japanese, and competing transliteration systems.
Whereas BCP 47 at times introduces ways of dealing with such variations or even allows one todene its private subtags to do so, we found it cumbersome to overload @xml:lang, the main
disadvantage being the loss of systematicity in the way a given language is marked in an encoded
text.21 This is why we have extended the @notation attribute to <orth> in order to allow for better
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

18Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

representation of both language identication and the orthographic content. With this double
mechanism, we intend to describe content expressed in the same language by means of the samelanguage tag, thus allowing more reliable management, access, and search procedures over our
lexical content.
55

We are aware that we open a can of worms here, since such an editorial practice could be easily
extended to all text elements in the TEI Guidelines. We have actually identied several cases in thesole context of lexical representations (e.g., <quote>) where this practice would be of immediateuse.

4.5 Encoding Sequence (Diachronic or Order of Presentation in Source)
4.5.1 Maintaining Source Structure vs. Accurate Representation of Etymological Process
56

When encoding multistage diachronic etymologies from existing sources such as attestations from
etymological dictionaries or academic papers, it may be the case that the source information is
not in chronological order for one reason or another. In such cases it is up to the encoder to decide
whether maintaining the format of the source is of any benet to the data quality.
4.5.2 Sequence

57

Because the etymology being encoded in the example has multiple stages in which the sequence isboth known and theoretically relevant, each <cit> should be given an @xml:id in combination with
one or both of the sequential pointer attributes: @prev, @next. The combination of these within
the data structure encodes relative occurrence of the given etymon within the diachrony of any
example.

5. Inheritance58

While inheritance is not itself an etymological process, it identies lexical items known, or
presumed, to be inherited from predecessor or “parent” languages; these forms are sometimes
referred to as “native.” A simplied view of inheritance is that it is the etymological counterpart toborrowing.22 In the most basic use of an inheritance etymology, an encoder can simply distinguish
the given lexical item as having originated directly from its known parent language, or eventheoretical protolanguage.
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

19Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

59

However, within the historical trajectory of most inherited lexical items, any number of dierent
etymological processes may occur on every level of language, including phonetic/phonological,
phonotactic, morphological, grammatical, and/or semantic.

60

The basic concepts necessary for a minimal encoding of a simple inheritance etymology are:•language of the (synchronic) entry;•

parent/predecessor language;•

the synchronic orthographic and/or phonetic form(s), sense(s), and/or grammaticalinformation;
the diachronic orthographic and/or phonetic form(s), sense(s), and/or grammatical•information.

61

The following is a very simple example from Sardinian semper “always, still,” in which the
etymology shows that, at least as far as the orthographic form of the lexical item is concerned, it
has not changed from its Latin source. This is perhaps noteworthy in its own right, and samplingan entire lexicon in which such information is included could be useful in measuring how much alanguage has changed over a given period of time.
Example 3. TEI modeling: <etym type="inheritance"><entry xml:id="semper" xml:lang="srd"><form type="lemma"><orth>semper</orth><gramGrp><pos>temporalAdverb</pos></gramGrp></form><sense>...
</sense><etym type="inheritance"><cit type="etymon"><oRef xml:lang="la">semper</oRef></cit></etym></entry>
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

20Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

62

Note here that we could have a @corresp attribute on <oRef> if we had a reference Latin dictionaryat hand and wanted to point to the actual entry for semper.

5.1 Inheritance and Phonetic/Phonological Changes
63

For any lexical item—regardless of other types of etymological processes undergone over asucient span of time—it is likely that it will undergo some degree of phonetic change. Suchchanges may occur either over a span of time during which a descendant language has become
distinct from its “parent” (such as Vulgar Latin > French) or within a span of time in which they
are regarded as having occurred within the same language. Phonetic and phonological changes
often occur in stages and have their own set of classications and terminology that require theirown level of encoding separate from those occurring on the higher levels of language such asmorphosyntax and semantics.

64

The basic concepts necessary for a minimal encoding of a phonological etymology within an
inherited entry are:•the language of the synchronic entry;•

the parent/predecessor language at the given stage of etymology;•

the synchronic orthographic and/or phonetic form(s);•the diachronic orthographic and/or phonetic form(s);•the relative order of their usage/occurrence (if multiple stages are shown, and theirsequence is known).

Additionally benecial are:•dates for each of the diachronic forms;•

bibliographic sources for forms, and for the analysis.

5.2 Stages of Phonological Changes in Inherited Forms
65

The following is our proposal to encode an example of the most signicant stages of the phonetic
evolution of the French chef from the Vulgar Latin23 CÁPŬ as per Laborderie and Thomasset (1994).
Each <cit type="etymon"> element cluster contains the historical phonetic forms posited by the

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

21

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

authors in the <pRef> element, as well as other relevant information pertaining to the given stage
in the diachrony of the entry. The etymon clusters begin with the Vulgar Latin form (top) and end
with the Middle French form (bottom).24

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

22Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

25

Example 4. Phonological stages in inherited form
<entry xml:id="chef" xml:lang="fr"><form type="lemma"><orth>chef</orth><pron notation="ipa">ʃɛf</pron><gramGrp><pos>noun</pos><gen>masc</gen></gramGrp></form><sense>...
</sense><etym type="inheritance"><cit type="etymon" xml:id="kápŭ" next="#kábu"><pRef notation="private" xml:lang="la">kápŭ</pRef></cit><cit type="etymon" xml:id="kábu" prev="#kápŭ"><!-- intervocalic voicing --><date notBefore="0350" notAfter="0399"/><pRef notation="private" xml:lang="la">kábu</pRef><!-- gallo-latin or (VLGaul) --></cit><cit type="etymon" xml:id="̯káβ̥o" prev="#kábu" next="#̯táβ̥o"><date notBefore="0400" notAfter="0499"/><pRef notation="private">k̯áβ̥o</pRef><!-- late gallo-latin ?--></cit><cit type="etymon" xml:id="̯táv̥o" prev="#̯káβ̥o" next="t͡sáv̥o"><date notBefore="0400" notAfter="0499"/><pRef notation="private">t̯áβo</pRef><!-- late gallo-latin ?--></cit><cit type="etymon" xml:id="t͡sáv̥o" prev="#̯táv̥o" next="#t͡ší̥ev̥o"><date notBefore="0400" notAfter="0499"/><pRef notation="private">t͡sáv̥o</pRef><!-- late gallo-latin ?-->
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

23

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI</cit><cit type="etymon" xml:id="t͡ší̥ev̥o" prev="#t͡šáv̥o" next="#tší̥ef"><date notBefore="0450" notAfter="0550"/><pRef notation="private">t͡ší̥ev̥o</pRef><!-- late gallo-latin ?/early gallo-romance--></cit><cit type="etymon" xml:id="tší̥ef" prev="#t͡ší̥evo" next="#šy̥ef"><date notBefore="0600" notAfter="0699"/><pRef notation="private">tší̥ef</pRef><!-- early gallo-romance--></cit><cit type="etymon" xml:id="šy̥éf" prev="#tší̥ef" next="#š̥éf"><date notBefore="0700" notAfter="0799"/><pRef notation="private">šy̥éf</pRef><!-- early/Proto Old French (?) --></cit><cit type="etymon" xml:id="š̥éf" prev="#šy̥éf" next="#š́ęf"><date notBefore="1500" notAfter="1650"/><pRef notation="private" xml:lang="frm">š̥éf</pRef></cit><cit type="etymon" xml:id="š́ęf" prev="#š̥éf"><date notBefore="1500" notAfter="1650"/><pRef notation="private" xml:lang="frm">š́ęf</pRef></cit><bibl>Laborderie, N. and Thomasset, C. (1994). Précis de phonétique
historique. Paris: Nathan.</bibl></etym></entry>66

The diachronic sequence of the forms is encoded in our markup as follows: the @xml:id attributeis included for each <cit> for which the given language information is available; the ordering ofeach is encoded in the data structure by the use of the pointing attributes @prev and @next, thevalues of which are the unique identiers of the previous and next <cit> block respectively.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

24Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

67

The <date>26 element is listed within each etymon block; the values of attributes @notBefore and@notAfter specify the range of time corresponding to the period of time that the given form

was in use according to the authors.27 The attribute values encode the date according to W3C
recommendations28 and must have a four-digit representation of the year.29 Finally, we have the<pRef> element, which, as always, contains the language of the given etymon as the value of@xml:lang and the notation attribute @notation.

5.3 Morphological and Morphosyntactic Changes in Inherited Forms
68

Changes in morphological inection paradigms in which there is no dierence need not be
explicitly represented in a dictionary but instead can be done implicitly.

69

Because an entry in a TEI or other semasiological dictionary represents the etymology of anindividual etymon as pertaining to an individual lexical item, diachronic changes in morphologicalinection patterning are manifested in the dierences in the phonetic and often orthographic
forms. These dierences are evident when contrasting a large sample of synchronic anddiachronic phonological and phonotactic forms with respect to a given historical or contemporary
morphological or morphosyntactic feature.

70

When attempting to extract any global information about changes to the grammatical feature
inventory of a language from a dictionary, such information can also be inferred through thecontrast between the contents of <gramGrp> in the source etymon (in the <cit type="etymon">cluster) and the resulting (synchronic) form. For example, where the source form has a speciccase and the entry in question does not have any case information, the general phenomenon thatis the loss of grammatical case is implicitly present.

71

The following Sicilian entry shows an example of such a scenario in combination with a change ingrammatical gender. Whereas in Latin, the etymon had the neuter gender, the inherited form inSicilian is of the masculine gender. Additionally, Sicilian no longer has a neuter gender.30 Both ofthese changes are implicit in the data structure we propose:

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference25

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 5. Implicit morphosyntactic changes: Latin > Sicilian.
<entry xml:id="mare" xml:lang="scn"><form type="lemma"><orth>mari</orth><gramGrp><pos>noun</pos><gen>masc</gen></gramGrp></form><sense>...
</sense><etym type="inheritance"><cit type="etymon"><oRef xml:lang="la">mare</oRef><gramGrp><pos>noun</pos><gen>neut</gen><case>nom</case><iType>-i stem</iType></gramGrp><gloss>sea</gloss></cit></etym></entry>72

As with morphology and phonology, grammatical etymological can be globally inferred. Thismeans that, in a Sicilian TEI dictionary (of sucient size) containing such synchronic anddiachronic information, a search for all entries containing all of the following facets would enable
the conclusion that there is no more neuter gender:•<pos>noun</pos>, or <pos>adjective</pos>;•<etym type="inheritance"> in which value of @xml:lang in <oRef> and/or <pRef> is31"la");•<cit type="etymon"> in whose <gramGrp> there is <gen>neut</gen>;•Get synchronic gender: value of <gramGrp>, <gen> within <form type="lemma">.32

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

26

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

5.4 Morphological Inheritance: Inﬂected Forms
73

Individual morphologically inected forms of entries may have dierent etymological histories
than the lemma forms with which they are associated. This could be for reasons connectedwith a separate origin from the lemma, or, more commonly, with the fact that the phonologicalcomposition of the lemma and inected forms were and are distinct and they each underwent
unique changes.

74

To encode the etymology of any individual form (when the entry contains more than one thatmust be distinguished):75•

a unique identier @xml:id should be included in the given form;•

the corresponding <etym> should point to the form as the value of the attribute @corresp.

In the following example from Italian, phonotactic changes are reected in the orthographic
form (e.g., perdidi > persí), and the aspect of an inherited inected form persí has also changed. In
particular, it shows that the etymon originates from the Latin past tense, perfective aspect: perdidi.
In Standard Italian and many (mainly northern) dialects, descendants of the Latin perfective past
have come to be used as the remote past tense (i.e., remote aspect).

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

27

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 6. Italian—etymological change in aspect (perdere).
<entry xml:id="perdere" xml:lang="it"><form type="lemma"><orth>perdere</orth><gramGrp><pos>verb</pos></gramGrp><!-- rest of inflected forms here --><form type="inflected" xml:id="perdere-1s-rem-pt-indic"><orth>persí</orth><gramGrp><per>1</per><number>sg</number><tns>past</tns><mood>indic</mood><gram type="aspect">remote</gram><gram type="voice">active</gram></gramGrp></form></form><sense><!-- sense info here --></sense><etym type="inheritance"><cit type="etymon"><oRef xml:lang="la">perdere</oRef></cit>…
<etym type="inheritance" corresp="#perdere-1s-rem-pt-indic"><cit type="etymon"><oRef xml:lang="la">perdidi</oRef><gramGrp><per>1</per><number>sg</number><tns>past</tns><mood>indic</mood><gram type="aspect">perfective</gram><gram type="voice">active</gram>
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

28

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI</gramGrp></cit></etym></etym></entry>

6. Borrowing
76

Borrowing (a.k.a. loaning, importing, transferring, copying) can generally be described as theprocess in which a lexical item, phrase, or other linguistic feature from a foreign language or dialect
is conventionalized into another language or dialect.

77

Matras and Sakel (2007) distinguish between two primary types of borrowing: material borrowing
and structural borrowing. Material borrowing pertains to the borrowing of sound–meaning pairs(e.g., loanwords, phrases and/or axes); structural borrowing pertains to the copying of syntactic,
morphological, or semantic patterns.

78

A major factor in borrowing is contact between a foreign culture and a given language (Haugen1950). There are often historical, sociological, and practical explanations for how and why theprocess occurred and thus such information encoded by a linguist or lexicographer may be
relevant to those studying other elds such as history, anthropology, and sociology.33

79

Along these lines, distinctions have been made between cultural borrowings and core borrowings(Myers-Scotton 2002). Cultural borrowings are when a lexical item is borrowed for a new concept;
these can appear over a very short period of time. Core borrowings duplicate existing items andare introduced over a longer period of time by bilinguals (Myers-Scotton 2002; Haspelmath 2003).

80

When in some manner a borrowed item is not compatible with that of the recipient language,
loanwords undergo one or more adaptations to their orthographic, phonological, and/or
morphological forms (Haugen 1950). Our examples will demonstrate encodings for each of thesedierent types of adaptation.

81

The basic concepts necessary for a minimal encoding of a “borrowing” etymology are:•borrowing language (a.k.a. recipient language);•source language (a.k.a. donor language);•source form (orthographic and/or phonetic);

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

29

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI•

borrowed form (orthographic and/or phonetic);•

semantic prole/metalinguistic concept or grammatical function of borrowed form (in thecase of grammatical borrowing).

82

The combination of these elements in a TEI-based model naturally leads to the overall model
depicted in gure 2.
Figure 2. Basic components of the model for etymological borrowing.

83

Borrowing-typed etymologies should be direct children of <entry>, as the process of borrowing
does not aect the sense of a pre-existing lexical item within the target language. The source
language should be labeled with the @xml:lang attribute within the <pRef> and/or <oRef>, andcan optionally be labeled explicitly for human readability as the value of the element <lang> (seefollowing example). If desired, in addition to the <lang> element, other key terms can be includedin the <lbl> element to modify the language (e.g., <lbl>source</lbl>, <lbl>from</lbl>, etc.). If
the semantics of the item in the source language dier from that of the borrowing language, theoriginal can be included in the element <gloss>.

84

Example 7 shows our TEI adaptation from LMF (Salmon-Alt 2006) of the French pamplemousse,
which is a borrowing from Dutch. The bibliographic source of this entry is the Trésor de la Langue
Française, which is cited in the <ref> element both in the value of the attribute @target="#TLF",
and as the content of the <ref> element. The former points to a bibliographic entry for the Trésorde la Langue Française that is necessarily located within the given document or project; the latteris included for human readability.
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

30

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 7. Simple borrowing pamplemousse from Salmon-Alt 2006; converted from LMF.
<entry xml:id="LE1" xml:lang="fr"><form type="lemma"><orth>pamplemousse</orth><gramGrp><pos>commonNoun</pos><gen>masculine</gen></gramGrp></form><sense>....
</sense><etym type="borrowing"><lang>Dutch</lang><cit type="etymon"><oRef xml:lang="nl">pompelmoes</oRef><gloss xml:lang="lat">Citrus maxima</gloss><gramGrp><pos>commonNoun</pos><gen>feminine</gen></gramGrp><note>probablement d'origine tamoule, De Vries, Nedrl</note><ref target="#TLF">TLF</ref></cit></etym></entry>

6.1 Orthographic Adaptation in Borrowed Forms
85

The following example is a revised version of an entry from the TEI Guidelines of the word biryani(or biriani), which was borrowed into English from Urdu. Herein we observe that in English there
is variation in the orthographic adaptation of the borrowed item, which is most commonly spelled“biryani,” but also sometimes “biriani.” This relative frequency between the two variant forms is
encoded in the entry by embedding the less frequent <orth> form within a second <form> element,labeled @type="variant", which is a direct child of the <form type="lemma">.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

31Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

86

This orthographic variation stems from the fact that there is not a standard 1 for 1 system oftransliterating between the Arabic script of Urdu and the Latin script of English. This informationis recorded within the <note> element in the etymological section as the origin of this issue liesin the item’s etymology.
Example 8. Borrowing and transliteration: biryani.
<entry xml:id="biryani" xml:lang="en"><form type="lemma"><form type="preferred"><orth>biryani</orth><pron notation="xsampa">%bIrI"A:nI</pron></form><form type="variant"><orth>biriani</orth></form><gramGrp><pos>noun</pos></gramGrp></form><sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Biryani"><def>any variety of Indian dishes…</def></sense><etym type="borrowing"><lbl>from</lbl> <lang>Urdu</lang><oRef xml:lang="ur">‫<ﺑﺮﯾﺎﻧﯽ‬/oRef><note>The variation in the English orthographic form of this entry is due tothe fact that there is no standard transliteration between English (Latin) and
Urdu’s (Arabic) scripts </note></etym></entry>

6.2 Phonological Adaptation in Borrowed Forms
87

Example 9 also contains transliteration between the orthographies of the source (in this caseEnglish) and borrowing (Japanese) languages. Additionally, Japanese has multiple orthographic
systems into which the borrowed form is integrated; each of these systems is identied in the

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

32Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI<orth> element as the value of the @notation attribute. In contrast to the previous example(biryani), the presence of a phonetic form in both the source and borrowing languages implicitly
shows the dierence in the pronunciation between the English source:
Example 9. Borrowing—phonological and orthographical adaptation: takushī.
<entry xml:id="taxi" xml:lang="ja"><form type="lemma"><orth type="transliterated" notation="rōmaji">takushī</orth><orth notation="katakana">タクシー</orth><pron notation="ipa">takushi:</pron><gramGrp><pos>noun</pos></gramGrp></form><sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Taxicab"><usg type="dom">Transportation</usg></sense><etym type="borrowing"><lbl>source</lbl> <lang>English</lang><cit type="etymon" xml:lang="en"><oRef corresp="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/taxi#English">taxi</oRef><pRef notation="ipa" corresp="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/
taxi#Pronunciation">ˈtæksi</pRef></cit></etym></entry>

6.3 Morphological Adaptation in Borrowed Forms
88

In the case that a language whose grammatical system has a feature such as gender borrows a(nominal) item from a language that has no grammatical gender, the borrowing language will
generally need to assign a gender to the loanword. In the example below showing the Frenchborrowing of the English weekend, the lack of gender is implicitly encoded by the absence of a <gen>element within the <gramGrp> element cluster within the <cit type="etymon">.34 The adaptation

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

33

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

made in assimilating this item into the French language is visible in the inverse manner (e.g., in
the inclusion of the <gen>masc</gen>) within the <gramGrp> element cluster within the <form
type="lemma">).
89

In modeling this for French, it is especially important to include the gender information because of
the implications for the specic forms that will occur in context of and in reference to weekend in
the context of natural language (e.g., articles, pronouns, determiners, demonstratives, and gender
forms of adjectives).
Example 10. Borrowing—morphological adaptation: weekend.
<entry xml:id="weekend" xml:lang="fr"><form type="lemma"><orth>week-end</orth><gramGrp><pos>nom</pos><gen>masc</gen></gramGrp></form><sense corresp="http://fr.dbpedia.org/page/Week-end"><def>Le week-end (variante weekend, comme en anglais), issu de l’anglais
weekend; ou la fin de semaine est une période hebdomadaire d’un ou deux jours,
généralement le samedi et le dimanche, pendant laquelle la plupart des gens sontau repos.</def></sense><etym type="borrowing"><cit type="etymon"><oRef>weekend</oRef><gramGrp><pos>nom</pos></gramGrp></cit></etym></entry>

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

34

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

7. Metaphor
90

Metaphor is undeniably one of the primary motors of lexical innovation as well as of (synchronic)
polysemy in languages. On the cognitive level, metaphor can be roughly dened as the process ofunderstanding one concept from one domain of experience in terms of another concept from aseparate domain of experience. This is mirrored lexically, where one concept in a given domain is
described or referred to using lexical items (and/or vocabulary) from another (Lako and Johnson
1980; Lako 1987; Lako 1993).

91

While this process is not commonly mentioned as a primary category for linguistic change inlexicographical sources such as etymological dictionaries, it is an essential component of linguistic
analysis and is relevant to cognitive sciences and anthropology as well.

92

Metaphorical mappings often follow patterns in directionality; most commonly, the source is amore concrete or primitive domain and the target is a more abstract, less conceptually primitive
domain (Lako and Johnson 1980; Lako 1987; Lako 1993). Examples of conceptual primitive
domains are space, temperature, olfaction, location, motion, quantity, body, food, and water.

93

The driving forces for this process are ontological correspondences between the attributes orinternal structures of entities in the source domain with those of the target domain (Lako 1993).
Where this is true, the potential for mapping is activated, or is rendered salient on the conceptual
level, which in turn enables the linguistic encoding of these structures for communicative
purposes. Thus, metaphor in language is a surface level reection or by-product of operations
that occur at the cognitive level. Given the fundamental implication of such ideas, not paying
attention to metaphor when documenting language change is missing out on an enormous sourceof incredibly fascinating information.

94

95

The basic concepts necessary for a minimal encoding of a “metaphor” etymology are:•Source form (the same as target form at time of process);•

Target form (the same as source form at time of process);•

Domain of concept (y): source domain;•

Domain of concept (x): target domain.

The model below shows an abstract representation of the essential structures for such an entry.
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

35Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Figure 3. TEI modeling: <etym type="metaphor">.

96

Example 11 shows an instance of an encoding of the lexical item for “kidney” in Mixtepec-Mixtec
language, which was derived metaphorically from “bean.” This metaphorical mapping is clearly
due to the physical similarity (color and shape) between a bean and a kidney. While both terms
refer to concrete (physical) concepts, the source, which is a primary food source for the speakersof the language, is more conceptually primitive than its target, which is an internal organ and thus
seen much less frequently, if at all, by most speakers.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

36Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

35

Example 11. Metaphor: Mixtepec-Mixtec “kidney”<entry xml:id="kidney" xml:lang="mix"><form type="lemma"><orth>ntuchi</orth><pron notation="ipa">ndú.ʧì</pron><gramGrp><pos>noun</pos></gramGrp></form><sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Kidney"><usg type="dom" corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Human_body">Body</usg><usg type="dom" corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/
Human_organs">InternalOrgans</usg><etym type="metaphor"><cit type="etymon"><oRef corresp="#bean">ntuchi</oRef><pRef notation="ipa" corresp="#bean">ndú.ʧì</pRef><ref type="sense" corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Bean"/><usg type="dom" corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/
Category:Edible_legumes">Legume</usg><gloss>bean</gloss></cit></etym><cit type="translation" xml:lang="en"><oRef>kidney</oRef></cit></sense></entry>

97

Metaphor-typed etymologies should always be direct children of <sense> as the lexical changeaects the sense of an existing lexical item. In order to know that it is a metaphor, it is of course
necessary to know a) the original meaning of the source (encoded in <gloss>, or <def>), and b)
the domains of the source and target items, such as source domain (semantic domain of etymon)
and target domain (semantic domain of entry). In pursuit of the latter, the TEI <usg> element canbe used with the attribute–value pair @type="dom", in which the element value represents thedomain. Given that the semantic proles of concepts are not always limited to a single domain, it
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

37Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

may be necessary to include multiple <usg type="dom"> element–value pairs, as in the example. In
our model, <usg type="dom"> is used in both the synchronic (<sense>) and the diachronic (<cit>)
portions of the entry.
98

However, although such structures, if used consistently, do have the capacity to greatly enhance
any data that do not include this information, they inevitably fall short of the extent of knowledge
that is truly necessary to create an accurate model of metaphorical processes. In order to do this, itis necessary to make use of one or more ontologies, which could be locally dened within a project,and of external linked open data sources such as DBpedia and Wikidata, or some combination
thereof. Within TEI dictionary markup, URIs for existing ontological entries can be referenced in
the <sense>, <usg>, and <ref> elements as the value of the attribute @corresp.

99

Within the etymon, the <oRef> and/or <pRef> can be included with a pointer to the source
form using the @corresp attribute, the value of which is a reference to the source entry’s unique
identier (if such an entry exists within the dataset). In such cases, the etymon pointing to thesource entry can be assumed to inherit the source’s domain and sense information, and thisinformation can be automatically extracted with a fairly simple XSLT program; thus the encoders
may choose to leave some or all of this information out of the etymon section. However, inthe case that the dataset does not actually have entries for the source terms, or the encoder
wants to be explicit in all aspects of the etymology, as mentioned above, the source domain andthe ontologically based sense of an etymon can be encoded within <cit> as <ref> and <usg>respectively.

8. Metonymy
100

Like metaphor, metonymy is another process based in human cognition which is reected inlanguage and leads to synchronic lexical polysemy. Again like metaphor, metonymy is often central
to linguistic etymological analyses, but is also not commonly mentioned as a primary category for
language change in lexicographical sources such as etymological dictionaries.

101

In metonymy, one vehicle entity provides mental access to a target entity within a single domain
by highlighting dierent aspects of part–whole relationships (meronymy) (Kövecses and Radden
1998). There are two primary types of relationships that commonly provide the motivation, orJournal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

38

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

what Vandeloise (2006) refers to as “logical impetus,” for the occurrence of metonymy: a) wherea part of an entity’s prole stands for the whole; b) when a domain’s subpart stands for its whole(ibid.).
102

103

The basic concepts necessary for a minimal encoding of a “metonymy” etymology are:•synchronic (polysemous) form(s) of item;•

source form(s) (orthographic and/or phonetic);•

semantic prole/metalinguistic concept or entity of borrowed form.36

The TEI modeling of metonymy is very similar to that of metaphor with the exception thatthe semantic domain between source and target is the same. Thus the model is as follows:metonymy-typed etymologies should be embedded in the <sense> element, which can also
contain the @corresp with a URI to the conceptual entry in an external ontology; within the<cit type="etymon"> element block, the source orthographic and/or phonetic forms should be

included in <oRef> and/or <pRef> elements; within these elements, the value of the attribute@corresp species the unique identier of the source entry. Often metonymy leads to a change ingrammatical role, and thus it is often the case that a <gramGrp> element block is necessary, whichthen should include whatever subelements are necessary.
Figure 4. Abstract TEI modeling for metonymy.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

39Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

104

In the example below from Mixtepec-Mixtec, the words for “animal” and “horse” are polysemous,the origin of which can clearly be identied as metonymy. Here, the language reects the historyof the people; since there were no horses in Mexico until the arrival of the Spanish, there wasno Mixtecan word for “horse,” and the categorical noun for “animal” was used to describe theunnamed animal.

105

In the TEI entry, the synchronic orthographic and phonetic forms are identical to those of thesource term “animal.” Within the etymology element block (<etym type="metonymy">) and the
etymon (<cit type="etymon">) the source term’s URI is referenced in <oRef> and <pRef> as thevalue of @corresp (@corresp="#animal").

106

In <sense>, the URI corresponding to the DBpedia entry for “horse” is the value for the attribute@corresp. Additionally, the <date notBefore="…"> element–attribute pairing is used to specify

that the term has only been used for the “horse” since 1517 at maximum (corresponding to therst Spanish expedition into Mexico). Within the actual document, the contents of <note> discuss
the historical context of this word origin (commented out in the example).

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

40Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 12. Metonymy: Mixtepec-Mixtec kiti.
<entry xml:id="animal-horse" xml:lang="mix"><form type="lemma"><orth>kiti</orth><pron notation="ipa">kì.̪tí</pron><gramGrp><pos>noun</pos></gramGrp></form><sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Horse"><usg type="dom" corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Animal">Animal</usg><etym type="metonymy"><date notBefore="1517"/><cit type="etymon"><oRef corresp="#animal">kiti</oRef><pRef notation="ipa" corresp="#animal">kì.̪tí</pRef><gloss>animal</gloss></cit><note><!-- notes on historical context of term here --></note></etym><cit type="translation" xml:lang="en"><oRef>horse</oRef></cit><cit type="translation" xml:lang="es"><oRef>caballo</oRef></cit>…
</sense></entry>

9. Compounding107

For various reasons, the lexical process of compounding has traditionally been treated in linguistic
literature focused on synchronic themes, often in the context of such issues as morphology
and word formation. One of the least theoretically controversial reasons for this is that novelcompounds can be formed, used, and understood by speakers instantaneously. However, there issignicant discord in the linguistics literature as to how compound lexical items and the process
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

41Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEIof compounding should be analyzed. This is most distinctly evident in the contrasting approaches
between linguistic theories that make strict divisions between lexicon and grammar (traditional
generative grammar) and those that do not make such distinctions (cognitive linguistic theories)(Langacker 1987, 1991, 2000; Jackendo 2009).
108

In attempting to create typologies and/or generalizations about the nature of compound wordforms and the process in which they are created, the aforementioned viewpoints emphasizedierent aspects of the phenomena. Studies by authors adhering to more formal, generative
theoretical frameworks often focus on analyzing the morphosyntactic makeup of compound
forms in the context of rule patterning: e.g., N+N, A+A, V+V, N+A, P+N. Those adhering to the
cognitive-based theory generally focus on the semantic proles and ontological relationships ofthe constituent parts, as well as on the cognitive processes (metaphor and/or metonymy) active inthe resulting meaning (Goossens 1994; Geeraerts 2002; Benczes 2006a, 2006b; Guevara and Scalise2008). Examples of such semantic/ontological relationships commonly found in compound forms
are type–of (hyponymy), cause–eect, part–whole (meronymy), and location–located (Benczes
2006b).

109

A common means of classifying compounds in linguistics literature (both formal and cognitive) is
according to two main typologies: endocentric and exocentric compounds (Bloomeld 1933).37 There
are numerous dierent typological interpretations according to which the concepts of endocentricand exocentric compounds are dened in the literature. Many of these dierences are attributableto problems with the classication criteria, the types of compounds examined, and the languages
analyzed (Scalise and Guevara 2005; Benczes 2006a).

110

Generally, endocentric compound constructions have a “head” element which is the hypernym
while the full compound represents a subclassication or hyponym of that head (Benczes 2006a,
2006b). An example of this is the bird called a scrub jay, the head of which is “jay”; the compound“scrub jay” is a type of jay. Exocentric compounds are considered “headless,” and while there is no
single standard ontological relationship between the compound and/or its components, they cancontain any variety of relations other than hyponymy.38 An example of this from Benczes (2006b)
is the English compound “hay fever,” which has a cause–eect relation as hay causes the eectof fever.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

42Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

111

While it would be impossible to give a full account of all of the various typologies proposed in theextensive literature, our markup framework for compounding is capable of handling the key pieces
of information for a wide array of theoretical approaches for explicit and implicit encoding of therelevant information within a single entry.

112

Basic pieces of information for modeling compounds and compounding include:•

the delimitation between the components•

the grammatical proles of the components•

the meanings (senses) of the components•

the semantic domain of the components.

9.1 Encoding Compounds: Synchronic Portion
113

Modeling compounding in TEI dictionaries can (and ideally should) be done in both the synchronicand diachronic portions of an entry. On the synchronic level, the attribute value @type="compound"should always be placed in the <entry> element in order to specify that the contents of form(<orth> and/or <pron>) can be further parsed.
Example 13. Compounding (synchronic encoding): French merle noir.
<entry xml:id="merle-noir" type="compound" xml:lang="fr"><form type="lemma"><orth>merle noir</orth><gramGrp><pos>nom</pos><gen>masc</gen></gramGrp></form>…
</entry>

114

From a processing point of view, this is of particular use when the compound form includes
whitespace. Optionally, the editor may choose the more thorough method of encoding theindividual component strings of a compound form with <seg>. Where corresponding entries exist

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

43Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

within a project for each of these portions of the compound, an editor may choose to connect
them with the components encased within <seg> using @corresp with the value being the unique
identier for the given entry.
115

The following example shows the encoding of the number thirteen in Mixtepec-Mixtec, which is acase of an exocentric compound, as there is no “head.” As is the case with the lexical composition of
numbers in many languages, this compound form is the sum of its component parts semanticallyand phonologically: utsi “ten” + uni “three.”
Example 14. Exocentric compounding (synchronic encoding): Mixtepec-Mixtec utsi uni.
<entry xml:id="num-13" type="compound" subtype="exocentric" xml:lang="mix"><form type="lemma"><orth><seg corresp="#num-10">utsi</seg> <seg corresp="#num-3">uni</seg></orth><gramGrp><pos>cardinalNumber</pos></gramGrp></form><!-- sense, etym, translation,etc… --></entry>

116

Where there is a hyphen in a compound, this can be dierentiated from the content portion of
the string by using the TEI character element <pc>. The French example below is a type of birdwhose name is usually spelled with a hyphen but is also occasionally written as a continuous word
without whitespace or a hyphen:

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

44Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 15. Compounding (synchronic encoding): French rouge-gorge, rouge gorge.
<entry xml:id="rouge-gorge" type="compound" xml:lang="fr"><form type="lemma"><orth><seg>rouge</seg><pc>-</pc><seg>gorge</seg></orth><form type="variant"><orth><seg>rouge</seg><pc> </pc><seg>gorge</seg></orth></form><gramGrp><pos>nom</pos><gen>masc</gen></gramGrp></form>…
</entry>

9.2 Encoding Compounds: Diachronic Portion
117

Below is the diachronic portion of the entry of the Mixtepec-Mixtec number “thirteen” discussed
above.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

45

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 16. Compounding: Mixtec-Mixtec utsi uni.
<entry xml:id="num-13" type="compound" xml:lang="mix"><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/10_(number)"><usg type="dom" corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/
Category:Cardinal_numbers">CardinalNumbers</usg></sense><etym type="compounding"><cit type="etymon"><oRef corresp="#num-10">utsi</oRef><gramGrp><pos>cardinalNumber</pos></gramGrp><gloss>ten</gloss></cit><cit type="etymon"><oRef corresp="#num-3">uni</oRef><gramGrp><pos>cardinalNumber</pos></gramGrp><gloss>three</gloss></cit></etym>…
</entry>118

The components of the compound which were encased in the <seg> element within the synchronic
forms correspond to the etymons on the diachronic level; as in any other etymological process
in our encoding system, each subunit of the compound and its given lexical information isrepresented as a separate <cittype="etymon">. Each of these citation-etymon crystals isembedded within the compound-typed <etym>. Since compounds do not represent new senses of asingle existing entry form, the etymology element is placed as a direct child of <entry>. As we have

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

46

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

seen before, the @corresp attribute in the <oRef> and/or <pRef> points to the URI for the entry ofeach component of the compound; in this example these entries are within the same document.
The comprehensive model is depicted in gure 5 below.
Figure 5. TEI modeling diagram: compounding (diachronic portion).

9.3 Co-occurrence of Compounding and Other Etymological Processes
9.3.1 Compounding and Metaphor
119

The German item Handschuh “glove” is an example of a compound in which metaphor is clearlypresent; Schuh “shoe,” which is an article of clothing specic to the feet (e.g., domain = feet), isused as an article of clothing for the hands (e.g., domain = hand). In the encoding of this itemin the entry below, the structure is a combination of everything we have previously seen in
examples of compounding- and metaphor-typed etymologies, but with the dierence that since<etym type="metaphor"> is a subpart in the larger word-formation process of compounding, it

is embedded within <etym type="compound">. Since compounding is the top-level component of
the etymology, <etym> is placed as a direct child node of <entry>, following the guidelines for thatelement.
120

Also noteworthy is that this example is an “endocentric” compound as the head is schuh “shoe.”39
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

47

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

40

Example 17. Compounding and metaphor: German Handschuh.
<entry xml:lang="de" xml:id="handschuh" type="compound" subtype="endocentric"><form type="lemma"><orth><seg>Hand</seg><seg>schuh</seg></orth><pron notation="ipa"><seg>ˈhant</seg><seg>ʃuː</seg></pron><gramGrp><pos>subst.</pos><gen>mask.</gen></gramGrp></form><sense corresp="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Handschuh">...
</sense><etym type="compounding"><cit type="etymon"><oRef xml:lang="de">Hand</oRef><pRef xml:lang="de" notation="ipa">ˈhant</pRef><gloss>hand</gloss></cit><etym type="metaphor"><cit type="etymon"><oRef xml:lang="de">Schuh</oRef><pRef xml:lang="de" notation="ipa">ʃuː</pRef><gloss>shoe</gloss></cit></etym></etym></entry>121

The classication of a lexical item as a compound hinges on the semantic transparency of its
components to the speakers of a language. An item corresponding to a single conceptual entitythat was derived through compounding in a source can be borrowed by another language and thefact that it was a compound is not relevant to the meaning in the target lexicon. In such cases
it is up to the encoder whether or not to include the etymological details that occurred in thesource language. Below is the full encoding of the earlier example of pamplemousse from SalmonAlt (2006).
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference48Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 18. Borrowing and compounding: pamplemousse (Salmon-Alt 2006).
<entry xml:id="LE1" xml:lang="fr"><form type="lemma"><orth>pamplemousse</orth><gramGrp><pos>commonNoun</pos></gramGrp></form><sense>...
</sense><etym type="borrowing"><lbl>source</lbl> <lang>Dutch</lang><cit type="etymon" xml:id="L2"><oRef xml:lang="nl">pompelmoes</oRef><gloss xml:lang="lat">Citrus maxima</gloss><gramGrp><pos>commonNoun</pos><gen>feminine</gen></gramGrp><note>probablement d'origine tamoule, De Vries, Nedrl</note><ref target="TLF">TLF</ref></cit><etym type="compounding"><cit type="etymon"><oRef xml:lang="nl">pompel</oRef><gramGrp><pos>adjective</pos></gramGrp><gloss>gros, enflé</gloss></cit><cit type="etymon"><oRef xml:lang="nl">limoes</oRef><gramGrp><pos>commonNoun</pos></gramGrp><gloss>citron</gloss></cit>
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference49Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI<ref target="#Boulan-König">Boulan, König...</ref></etym></etym></entry>

9.3.2 Lexicalization
122

Compounds, like morphologically-derived coalesced forms and idiomatic forms or other types ofphrases, may or may not become integrated into the lexicon of a language. When they do, theprocess may occur over an extended period of time, during which the original meaning of partor all of the components may become oblique to speakers41 to the degree that the item is notrecognized as the sum of its parts; this phenomenon is called lexicalization (Jackendo 2009).
While lexicalization is indeed a lexico-cognitive process with etymological implications, it is not
a process that can be summarized and represented in a dictionary, as there are often dierent
degrees of lexicalization between dierent speakers.

10. Grammaticalization
123

A major phenomenon of lexical change is the process of grammaticalization in which, over time,a lexical item undergoes changes to its semantic prole, morphosyntactic form, and possibly
phonological form via systematic patterns of usage in certain linguistic contexts to serve more
grammatical functions within the language.

124

Because of the complexity of the process and the continuing debate as to the details of precisely
what it entails, any single denition of grammaticalization inevitably raises theoretical debate,
and may potentially be modied down the line within the eld. Antoine Meillet (1912), who coined
the term, described it as follows:
The development of grammatical forms by progressive deterioration of previously
autonomous words is made possible by … a weakening of the pronunciation, of the concrete
sense of the words, and of the expressive value of words and groupings of words. The ancillary
word can end up as an element lacking independent meaning as such, linked to a principal
word to mark its grammatical role.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

50Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

125

Studies of grammaticalization have shown that there are certain tendencies for forms to undergo
the same types of functional shifts to their semantic, syntactic, morphological, and phonologicalproperties, which occur in relatively similar orders42 (Svorou 1994; Croft 2003; Hopper andTraugott 2003). These evolutionary pathways are commonly referred to as “clines” (ibid.). On thesemantic level, the most generic characterization of the tendency is for the prole to undergochanges from concrete to abstract (ibid.). Moreover, there is signicant evidence that the semantic
proles of a lexical source may motivate and/or constrain the potential structural characteristics
and grammatical roles that emerge from a lexical source (Svorou 1994; Hopper and Traugott 2003).

126

Parallel to the semantic shifts are the clines that occur on the syntactic and morphological levels,of which there are a number of dierent specic possibilities, but which can be generalized asfollows:
less

127

grammatical

→

more

grammatical

Hopper and Traugott (2003) discuss a correlation between the degree of grammaticalization(grammatical status) and the loss of certain morphological and syntactic properties that arecommonly observed in prototypical members of major grammatical categories (decategorization).

128

majority

category→(intermediate

category)

→

minor

category

It should be noted that because of polysemy, a single form may simultaneously haveseveral grammatical functions in which multiple “stages” in dierent clines can coexist
synchronically (Svorou 1994; Hopper and Traugott 2003). According to Svorou (1994), the studyof grammaticalization requires a “panchronic” view of language change, viewing the component
evolutionary processes as continuous, rather than applying the articially discrete concepts ofsynchronic and diachronic.43
129

The negotiation of meaning by speakers, using metaphor and metonymy to extend the contexts inwhich a lexical item is used, enables such changes as pragmatic/semantic bleaching or enrichment
on the cognitive, semantic, and pragmatic levels. On the syntactic and morphological levels, thesehigher-level changes are manifested in reanalysis44 and analogy.45

130

Grammaticalization is thus very complex and involves multiple possible subprocesses which may
or may not co-occur on dierent levels. As a consequence, encoding such etymologies may require
the use of any number of the strategies discussed above.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

51

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

10.1 Overview of Basic Encoding Recommendations
131

Since grammaticalization potentially involves multiple etymological processes on any level oflanguage at dierent stages in the diachrony of an item, the formatting recommendations
depend on the specics of a given scenario and involve the integration of concepts and data
structures from multiple processes discussed elsewhere in this paper. It is up to the editor todetermine what aspects and features of the etymology they want to emphasize within an encodingof grammaticalization (e.g., processes on dierent levels, bibliographic attestations, discourse,semantics, morphosyntax, or phonology); its nuances and complexities make it impossible to write
an entirely comprehensive set of encoding recommendations. However, the constants which canalways be included in a grammaticalization etymology are as follows:•

given that grammaticalization inherently entails a shift in the sense of an etymon, <etym
type="grammaticalization"> should be embedded within <sense>;•

all forms of the etymon that are hypothesized or attested as having occurred within the
span of the time corresponding to the stages of the grammaticalization process should beencoded within <cit type="etymon"> (as we have previously seen).

132

Conceptual information necessary in the encoding of grammaticalization includes:•

the synchronic form(s);46•

the grammatical information.

If the grammaticalized item is one of multiple senses of a polysemous form:47•

the grammatical, semantic, and/or pragmatic context in which the given sense occurs;•

the collocates with which it occurs (if any);•

the source form(s);•whether the source form(s) is/are attested or hypothesized.

If attested:•

bibliographic source of attestation;

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

52

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI•

date or date range for each attested form.

If hypothesized:

133•

semantic prole of source (e.g., semantic domain or metalinguistic concept);•

grammatical prole of source.

The placement of the <etym

type="grammaticalization"> is dependent on the specicdiachrony of the etymon. For example, if the item was inherited, it can be placed within <etym
type="inheritance">.

10.2 Traugott (1995): Grammaticalization of the English Discourse Marker“besides”
134

In the following example from Traugott (1995), we show in our encoding a sample of several stagesof the grammaticalization process of the English discourse particle “besides.” The author makes
the case that the following cline (e.g., the process of grammaticalization for a given lexical item)
should be added to the scope of grammaticalization phenomena:48
Adverbial

135

ofExtension>

Sentence

Adverbial>

Discourse

Particle

The major stages of this process are presented in a semichronological order and in terms of thefollowing stages:

136•

Stage 0: Full lexical noun;•

Stage I: Adverbial of extension;•

Stage II: Sentence adverbial;•

Stage III: Discourse marker/particle.

The example below is an encoded representation of the arguments put forth in the source. We
have attempted to represent the linguistic information, terminology, and etymological processes
as accurately as possible without adding or subtracting from the original based on our own
interpretation or external data.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

53Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

10.2.1 Stage 0: Full lexical noun
49

Example 19. Grammaticalization of Old English sidan<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization"><cit type="etymon" xml:id="at-850-950" next="#at-1225-a"><date notBefore="0850" notAfter="0950"/><oRef xml:lang="ang"><seg xml:id="e1s1">sid</seg><seg xml:id="e1s2">an</seg></oRef><gloss>side</gloss><gramGrp><!-- inherently applies to the top level structure --><pos>locativeNoun</pos></gramGrp><cit type="component" corresp="#e1s1"><gramGrp><pos>noun</pos></gramGrp></cit><cit type="component" corresp="#e1s2"><gramGrp><case>dative</case></gramGrp></cit><cit type="attestation" xml:lang="ang"><quote>&amp; þonne licge on ða swiðran <oRef>sidan</oRef> gode hwile</
quote><cit type="translation" xml:lang="en"><quote>and then lie on the right side for a good while</quote></cit>
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

54

Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI</cit><bibl>(850-950 Lacnunga Magicand&amp;Med., p. 120 [HC])</bibl></cit><!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 20-27 -->...
</etym>...
</sense></entry>

137

This rst stage sidan is from Old English (ISO 639–3: "ang"); as usual the <cit> element is
typed as @type="etymon". Within this rst etymon, the noun is inected in the dative case. Thisis represented in the encoding, with the nominal root “sid-” and the dative inection “-an”
each being given unique <seg> tags with their own @xml:ids. These components are annotatedgrammatically within the <gramGrp> element blocks embedded in <cit type="component">, eachof which points to the given segment with the @corresp attribute.

138

The source of this is dated sometime between 850 and 950. As we have discussed previously, a rangeof dates can be expressed using the attributes @notBefore and @notAfter in the <date> element.
While the bibliographic source (the last direct child element of <cit type="etymon">) does containthe date itself, using the <date> element helps keep the consistency of the data structure, which
will likely have benets to any automatic retrieval process.
•a partial example of the context in which the etymon form was observed is given in
the <quote> element whose parent is an embedded <cittype="attestation">. Also

specied here is the language attribute and tag, which as always are expressed in the form
@xml:lang="ang". The form itself is encased in an <oRef> with no attributes.

•

nally, embedded within the attestation is the translation of the Old English source
sentence into Modern English: <cit type="translation" xml:lang="en">Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

55Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

10.2.2 Stage 0.5: Dative nouns with preﬁx
139

These next two attested etymons are both from 1225 (Middle English), and from the same
bibliographic source, yet they have dierent grammatical functions; by including the range ofdates for each with their contrasting grammatical usage, the encoded information is able tocapture the emerging state of polysemy for the lexical item:•

each has the prex bi-;•each is dative case.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

56Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

50

Example 20. Grammaticalization of Middle-English bisiden 1225 (a)<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization">...

<!-- <cit type="etymon"> element from example 19 --><cit type="etymon" xml:id="at-1225-a" prev="#at-850-950" next="#at-1225-b"><date when="1225"/><oRef xml:lang="enm"><seg xml:id="e2s1">bi</seg><pc>-</pc><seg xml:id="e2s2">sid</seg><seg xml:id="e2s3">en</seg></oRef><gloss>at his side</gloss><gramGrp><pos>locativeAdverbial</pos></gramGrp><cit type="component" corresp="#e2s1"><gramGrp><pos>adverb</pos></gramGrp></cit><cit type="component" corresp="#e2s2"><gramGrp><pos>noun</pos></gramGrp></cit><cit type="component" corresp="#e2s3"><gramGrp><case>dative</case></gramGrp></cit><cit type="attestation" xml:lang="enm"><quote>His pic he heold <oRef>bi-siden</oRef></quote><cit type="translation" xml:lang="en">Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

57Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI<quote>He held his staff at his side</quote></cit></cit><bibl>(1225 Lay. Brut 30784 [MED])</bibl></cit><!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 21-27 -->...
</etym>...
</sense></entry>

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

58Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

51

Example 21. Grammaticalization of Middle-English bisiden 1225 (b)<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization">...

<!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 19-20 --><cit type="etymon" xml:id="at-1225-b" prev="#at-1225-a" next="#at-c1300"><date when="1225"/><oRef xml:lang="enm"><seg xml:id="e3s1">bi</seg><pc>-</pc><seg xml:id="e3s2">sid</seg><seg xml:id="e3s3">en</seg></oRef><gloss>in addition</gloss><gramGrp><pos>conjunctiveAdverbial</pos></gramGrp><cit type="component" corresp="#e3s1"><gramGrp><pos>preposition</pos></gramGrp></cit><cit type="component" corresp="#e3s2"><gramGrp><pos>nominalAdposition</pos></gramGrp></cit><cit type="component" corresp="#e3s3"><gramGrp><case>dative</case></gramGrp></cit><cit type="attestation" xml:lang="ang"><quote>Heo letten forð <oRef>bi-siden</oRef> an oþer folc riden, ten þusend
kempen</quote>
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

59Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI<cit type="translation" xml:lang="en"><quote>They sent another army forth in addition, 10,000 warriors</quote></cit></cit><bibl>(1225 Lay Brut 5498 [MED])</bibl></cit><!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 22-27 -->...
</etym>...
</sense></entry>

10.2.3 Stage I: Adverbial of extension/verbal adverbs
140

A major feature of interest in adverbials of extension is where they occur at the end of a clause;in these cases, the adverbs are often an oblique syntactic argument. This is the case in the sectionof the example below in which the tag “extensionAdverb” is used in the source for adverbials ofextension.52•

prex be- now fused onto side;•

adverb oblique argument, labeled as value of @ana in the <oRef> in the attestation.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

60Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 22. Grammaticalization of Early Modern English “beside” 1514–1518.
<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization">...
<!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 19-21 --><cit type="etymon" xml:id="at-1514-1518" prev="#at-1450"
next="#at-1535-1543"><date notBefore="1514" notAfter="1518"/><oRef xml:lang="emodeng">beside</oRef><gramGrp><pos>extensionAdverb</pos></gramGrp><cit type="attestation"><!-- early modern english --><quote>In whiche albeit thei ment as muche honor to hys grace as wealthe
to al the realm <oRef ana="#Oblq">beside</oRef>, yet were they not sure howe hys
grace woulde take it,</quote></cit><bibl>(1514-18 More, History of Richard III, p. 78)</bibl></cit><!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 23-27 -->...
</etym>...
</sense></entry>

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

61Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 23. Grammaticalization of Early Modern English beside 1535–1543.
<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization">...
<!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 19-22 --><cit type="etymon" xml:id="at-1535-1543" prev="#at-1514-1518"
next="#at-1567"><date notBefore="1535" notAfter="1543"/><oRef xml:lang="emodeng">beside</oRef><gramGrp><pos>extentionAdverb</pos></gramGrp><cit type="attestation"><quote>The toune of Chester is chiefly one streate of very meane building
yn lenght: ther is <oRef>beside</oRef> a smaul streat or 2. about the chirch; thatis collegiatid, .... </quote></cit><bibl>(1535-43 Leland, Itinerary I p. 74 [HC])</bibl></cit><!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 24-27 -->...
</etym>...
</sense></entry>

10.2.4 Stage II: Sentential Adverb
141

One of the two contextual conditions in which sentential adverbials (sententialAdverb) occur isthat they need to immediately follow a complementizer. This is represented in the data by theencoding of the relevant item within the <seg> element, and the @ana attribute is used to label itwith the needed data category (complementizer).
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

62Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 24. Grammaticalization of Early Modern English beside 1552–1563.
<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization">...
<!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 19-23 --><cit type="etymon" xml:id="at-1552-1563" prev="#at-1535-1543"
next="#at-1554"><date notBefore="1552" notAfter="1563"/><oRef xml:lang="emodeng">besides</oRef><gramGrp><pos>sententialAdverb</pos></gramGrp><cit type="attestation"><quote>…when the end is knowen, all wil turne to a iape ['trick,deceit'],
Tolde he not you <seg ana="#Complimentizer">that</seg> <oRef>besides</oRef> she stole your Cocke that tyde?</quote></cit><note>The adverbial of extension which signals the extension of a listof referents as per (sense in example “at-#at-1535-1543”) is presumed to be
the source of the clause-initial, focused sentence adverbial, which extends the
propositional content with additional, non-central material:</note><bibl>(1552-63 Gammer Gurton, p. 61 [HC])</bibl></cit><!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 25-27 -->...
</etym>...
</sense></entry>

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

63Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

10.2.5 Stage III: Discourse Marker/Particle
142

In this next stage, besides serves to refocus the attention on the purposes of the discourse, andoccurs on the left periphery of the sentence structure serving a pragmatic function. As in theprevious example, the context is labeled using <seg> with the attribute @ana.
53

Example 25. Grammaticalization of Early Modern English besides 1554
<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization">...

<!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 19-24 --><cit type="etymon" xml:id="at-1554" prev="#at-1552-1563" next="#stage3-26a"><date when="1554"/><oRef xml:lang="emodeng">besides</oRef><gramGrp><pos>discourseMarker</pos></gramGrp><cit type="attestation"><quote>...<seg ana="#LPeriph">And <oRef>besides</oRef></seg>, it is very
unlike, that </quote></cit><bibl>(bef. 1554 Trial Throckmorton I,66.C1 [HC])</bibl></cit><!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 26-27 -->...
</etym>...
</sense></entry>143

In these examples from 1619 and 1872 the usage of “beside” extends the discourse withafterthoughts:
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

64Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 26. Grammaticalization of Early Modern English beside 1619.
<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization">...
<!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 19-25 --><cit type="etymon" xml:id="at-1619" prev="#at-1554" next="#at-1872"><date when="1619"/><oRef xml:lang="emodeng">beside</oRef><gramGrp><pos>discourseMarker</pos></gramGrp><cit type="attestation"><quote>..and <oRef>beside</oRef>, my complexion is so blacke, that..</quote></cit><bibl>(1619 Deloney, Jack of Newbury, p.70 [HC])</bibl></cit><!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from example 27 -->...
</etym>...
</sense></entry>

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

65Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Example 27. Grammaticalization of Modern English “besides” 1872.
<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization">...
<!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 19-26 --><cit type="etymon" xml:id="at-1872" prev="#at-1619"><date when="1872"/><oRef xml:lang="en">besides</oRef><gramGrp><pos>discourseMarker</pos></gramGrp><cit type="attestation"><quote>The whooping cough seems to be a providential arrangement to force
you to come, as the expense will be little greater than going anywhere else;<oRef>besides</oRef> if you put a trusty female at Ravenscroft… </quote></cit><bibl>(1872 Amberley Ltrs, p. 513 [CLME])</bibl></cit>...
</etym>...
</sense></entry>

144

Finally the source of the etymological data is cited as a child element of <etym>:

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

66Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI<entry><!-- form, gramGrp, etc. --><sense>...
<etym type="grammaticalization"><!-- <cit type="etymon"> elements from examples 19-27 -->...
<bibl>(Traugott, 1995)</bibl></etym></sense></entry>

145

This example is obviously an extremely complex yet informative representation of the history of
the lexical item in question (English: “besides”).

146

Despite its importance within the eld of linguistics, grammaticalization is rarely if ever identied
as such in any kind of etymological or print dictionary. Moreover, to our knowledge, there have notbeen any attempts to encode such processes within XML, or any other digital markup standards.
Grammaticalization is thus a major untapped resource of highly advanced etymological data.
Establishing a practice in which this kind of markup is done may help linguists and lexicographers
begin to more regularly make maximum use (and reuse) of the research being done.

11. Problematic and Unresolved Issues
147

For the issues regarded as the most fundamentally important to creating a dynamic and sustainablemodel for both etymology and general lexicographic markup in TEI, we have submitted formal
requests for changes to the TEI GitHub, and will continue to submit change requests as needed.
While this work represents a large step in the right direction for those looking for means ofrepresenting etymological information, there are still a number of unresolved issues that willneed to be addressed. These remaining issues pertain to: (i) expanding the types of etymologicalinformation and rening the representation of the processes and features which are covered;and (ii) the need for continued progress in a number of issues within the body of international
standards on which lexical markup relies.

148

Some examples of issues from (i) are as follows:

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

67Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI•

encoding onomasiological etymological information, which groups and represents theconverging and diverging histories of related forms across multiple related languages;•

relatedly, the markup of existing non-semasiological etymological dictionaries, which canbe extremely long and which can be organized in extremely complex ways;•

sense shifts not involving metaphor or metonymy, but subtle, often usage- and contextbased patterns such as pejoration–amelioration or narrowing–widening;•changes to a lexical item which stem from corresponding changes and functional linguisticpressures occurring within other parts of the lexicon, such as semantic bleaching.

149

An example of issues from (ii) is:•

the need for expansion of the inventory of categories in ISOcat 54 to include well-establishedetymological processes, such as metaphor and metonymy, as well as other features not
specic to etymology.

150

Several signicant issues regarding language identication are as follows:•

the need for continued expansion of the inventory of the IANA registry, probably in
conjunction with the maintenance of future versions of ISO 639;•

the need for more granularity in the means by which @xml:lang is specied without using
the private tag (-x-) (see BCP 47 [IETF 2009a]);55•

the lack of existing codes within any body of standards for historical places such as Gaul
and Carthage;•

the lack of a way to label when the language data is from an intermediate, transitional
period for which there are neither IANA entries nor even commonly used terms within the
body of literature.

12. Conclusion
151

In this paper, we have proposed a number of markup scenarios for encoding dierent types of
etymological information within TEI dictionaries, drawing both from traditional lexicographic
practice and from analytical approaches from functional and cognitive linguistics. Our examples
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

68Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

have shown a number of cases in which, in order to represent the lexical data as accurately as
possible, it has been necessary to alter the content models of certain elements and attributes inways we think should actually be considered necessary evolutions for the TEI Guidelines in the
future. Relevant to both etymological and synchronic lexical markup, we have also touched upon
how encoders can make use of linked open data URIs as a means of linking the sense and semantic
domain(s) of an item to multilingual knowledge bases. Future work that remains to be undertaken
is the encoding of onomasiological lexical data such as that found in dialectal and traditional
etymological dictionaries.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Amsler, Robert A., and Frank Wm. Tompa. 1988. “An SGML-Based Standard for English Monolingual
Dictionaries.” In Proceedings of the 4th Annual Conference of the UW Centre for the New Oxford English Dictionary,
61–80. http://projects.oucs.ox.ac.uk/teiweb/Vault/AI/aiw04.ps.
Bański, Piotr, and Beata Wójtowicz. 2009. “FreeDict: An Open Source Repository of TEI-Encoded
Bilingual Dictionaries.” http://www.tei-c.org/Vault/MembersMeetings/2009/les/Banski+WojtowiczTEIMM-presentation.pdf.
Bazin-Tacchella, Sylvie. 2001. “Rupture et continuité du discours médical à travers les écrits sur la peste de1348.” In Air, miasme et contagion: les épidémies de l’Antiquité au Moyen Âge, edited by S. Bazin-Tacchella,
D. Quéruel, and E. Samama, 105–56. Langres: Guéniot. Author version available at https://hal.archivesouvertes.fr/hal-00526759/.
Benczes, Réka. 2005a. “Metaphor- and Metonymy-based Compounds in English: A Cognitive Linguistic
Approach.” Acta Linguistica Hungarica 52(2–3): 173–98.
———. 2005b. “Creative Noun–Noun Compounds.” Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 3: 250–68.
———. 2006a. Creative Compounding in English: The Semantics of Metaphorical and Metonymical Noun-Noun
Combinations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
———. 2006b. “Analysing Metonymical Noun–Noun Compounds: The Case of Freedom Fries.” In The Metaphorsof Sixty: Papers Presented on the Occasion of the 60th Birthday of Zoltán Kövecses, edited by Réka Benczes andSzilvia Csábi, 46–54. Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University.
———. 2009. “What motivates the production and use of metaphorical and metonymical compounds?” In
Cognitive Approaches to English: Fundamental, Methodological, Interdisciplinary and Applied Aspects, edited by
Mario Brdar, Marija Omazić, and Višnja Pavičić Takač, 49–67. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

69Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Bisetto, Antonietta, and Sergio Scalise. 2005. “The Classication of Compounds.” Lingue e Linguaggio 4(2): 319–
32. doi:10.1418/20728.
Bloomeld, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Henry Holt.
Botne, Robert. 2006. “Motion, Time, and Tense: On the Grammaticization of Come and Go to Future Markers
in Bantu.” Studies in African Linguistics 35(2): 127–88.
Brinton, Laurel J., and Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2005. Lexicalization and Language Change. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Budin, Gerhard, Stefan Majewski, and Karlheinz Mörth. 2012. “Creating Lexical Resources in TEI P5: A Schemafor Multi-purpose Digital Dictionaries.” Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative 3. http://jtei.revues.org/522.
doi:10.4000/jtei.522.
Crist, Sean. 2005. “Toward a Formal Markup Standard for Etymological Data.” Paper presented at the
LSA Annual Meeting. Accessed April 16, 2017. http://www.sean-crist.com/professional/publications/crist_etym_markup.pdf.
Croft, William. 2003. Typology and Universals, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Erjavec, Tomaž, Dan Tuş, and Tamás Váradi. 1999. “Developing TEI-Conformant Lexical Databases for CEE
Languages.” In [Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computational Lexicography], COMPLEX’99,
edited by Ferenc Kiefer, Gábir Kiss, and Júlia Pajzs, 205–209. Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
http://www.racai.ro/media/Erjavec-TV-COMPLEX1999.pdf.
Fauconnier, Gilles. 2007. “Mental Spaces.” In The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, edited by Dirk
Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens, 351–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark B. Turner. 1996. “Blending as a Central Process of Grammar.” In Conceptual
Structure, Discourse, and Language, edited by Adele Goldberg, 113–29. Stanford: Center for the Study ofLanguage and Information.
———. 1998a. “Conceptual Integration Networks.” Cognitive Science 22(2): 133–87. doi:10.1207/
s15516709cog2202_1.
———. 1998b. “Principles of Conceptual Integration.” Discourse and Cognition: Bridging the Gap, edited by JeanPierre Koenig, 269–83. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
———. 2000. “Compression and Global Insight.” Cognitive Linguistics 11(3/4): 283–304. doi:10.1515/
cogl.2001.017.
———. 2003. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. Basic Books.
Fomin, Maxim, and Gregory Toner. 2006. “Digitizing a Dictionary of Medieval Irish: The eDIL Project.” Literaryand Linguistic Computing 21(1): 83–90. doi:10.1093/llc/fqh050.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference70Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEIGeeraerts, Dirk. 2002. “The Interaction of Metaphor and Metonymy in Composite Expressions.” In Metaphor
and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, edited by René Dirven and Ralf Pörings, 435–65. Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.
Good, Je, and Ronald Sprouse. 2000. “SGML Markup of Dictionaries with Special Reference to Comparativeand Etymological Data.” Paper presented at the workshop on Web-Based Language Documentation and
Description, December 12–15, Philadelphia.
Goossens, Louis. 1994. “Metaphtonymy: The Interaction of Metaphor and Metonymy in Figurative Expressionsfor Linguistic Action.” In By Word of Mouth: Metaphor, Metonymy and Linguistic Action in a Cognitive Linguistic
Perspective, by Louis Goossens, Paul Pauwels, Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn, Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen,
and Johan Vanparys, 159–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Guevara, Emiliano, and Sergio Scalise. 2008. “Heads in Compounding: Variation and Patterns.” Paper
presented at the 13th International Morphology Meeting, Main Theme: Variation and Change
in Morphology, Vienna, February 3–6. Abstract available at https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/
d2b5/652c01aca9306dc3f7f7e70cb38a6587ce0f.pdf, p. 43.
Harris, Alice C., and Lyle Campbell. 1995. Historical Syntax in Cross-linguistic Perspective. Cambridge Studies in
Linguistics 74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haspelmath, Martin. 2003. “The Geometry of Grammatical Meaning: Semantic Maps and Cross-linguistic
Comparison.” In The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure,vol.2, edited by Michael Tomasello, 211–42. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
———. 2009. “Lexical Borrowing: Concepts and Issues.” In Loanwords in the World’s Languages: A Comparative
Handbook, edited by Martin Haspelmath and Uri Tadmor, 35–54. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Haspelmath, Martin, and Uri Tadmor, eds. 2009. World Loanword Database. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for
Evolutionary Anthropology. Accessed April 6, 2015. http://wold.clld.org.
Haugen, Einar. 1950. “The Analysis of Linguistic Borrowing.” Language 26(2): 210–31. doi:10.2307/410058.
Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth Closs Traugott, 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Ide, Nancy, Adam Kilgarri, and Laurent Romary. 2000. “A Formal Model of Dictionary Structure andContent.” In Proceedings of the Ninth EURALEX International Congress, EURALEX 2000, edited by Ulrich Heid,
Stefan Evert, Egbert Lehmann, and Christian Rohrer, 113–26. http://euralex.org/category/publications/euralex-2000/.
Ide, Nancy, and Jean Véronis. 1994. “Machine Readable Dictionaries: What Have We Learned, Where Do We
Go?” In Proceedings of the Post-COLING ’94 International Workshop on Directions of Lexical Research, 137–46.
Beijing.
Ide, Nancy. 1995. “Encoding Dictionaries.” Computers and the Humanities 29(2): 167–79.
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

71Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEIIETF (Internet Engineering Task Force). 2009a. BCP [Best Current Practice] 47: Tags for Identifying Languages. Edited
by Addison Phillips and Mark Davis. N.p.: IETF, September. https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp47.
IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force). 2009b. RFC (Request for Comments) 5645: Update to the Language Subtag
Registry. Edited by Doug Ewell. N.p.: IETF, September. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5645.
ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2007. Presentation/representation of entries in dictionaries— Requirements, recommendations and information. ISO 1951:2007. Geneva: ISO.
———. 2008. Language resource management — Lexical markup framework (LMF). ISO 24613:2008. Geneva: ISO.
Jackendo, Ray. 2009. “Compounding in the Parallel Architecture and Conceptual Semantics.” In The Oxford
Handbook of Compounding, edited by Rochelle Lieber and Pavol Štekauer. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
105–28.
Jacobson, Michel, and Boyd Michailovsky. 2002. “Linking Linguistic Resources: Time Aligned Corpus andDictionary.” Paper presented at the International Workshop on Resources and Tools in Field Linguistics,
Las Palmas, Canary Islands, Spain, May 26–27. http://www.mpi.nl/lrec/2002/papers/lrec-pap-27JACMICv2.pdf.
Kövecses, Zoltán, and Günter Radden. 1998. “Metonymy: Developing a Cognitive Linguistic View.” Cognitive
Linguistics (includes Cognitive Linguistic Bibliography) 9(1): 37–77. doi:10.1515/cogl.1998.9.1.37.
Laborderie, Noëlle, and Claude Thomasset. 1994. Précis de phonétique historique. Paris: Nathan.
Lako, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.
———. 1993. “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed., edited by Andrew
Ortony, 202–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lako, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, Ronald W. 1977. “Syntactic Reanalysis.” In Mechanisms of Syntactic Change, edited by Charles N. Li,
57–139. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Langacker, Ronald W.. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 1, Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
———. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 2, Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
———. 2000. Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1962. Historical Linguistics: An Introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Lemnitzer, Lothar, Laurent Romary, and Andreas Witt. 2013. “Representing Human and Machine Dictionaries
in Markup Languages.” Dictionaries: An International Encyclopedia of Lexicography. Supplementary Volume:
Recent Developments with Focus on Computational Lexicography, edited by Rufus H. Gouws, Ulrich Heid,
Wolfgang Schweickard, and Herbert Ernst Wiegand, 1195–1208. HSK 5.4. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Author version available at https://hal.inria.fr/inria-00441215.
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

72Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEIMatras, Yaron, and Jeanette Sakel, eds. 2007. Grammatical Borrowing in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Meillet, Antoine. 1912. “L’Evolution des Formes Grammaticales.” Scientia (Rivista di scienza), XII:XXVI,6.
Reprinted (1965) in Linguistique Historique et Linguistique Cimerale. Paris: Librairie Honoré Champion.
Myers-Scotton, Carol. 2002. Contact Linguistics: Bilingual Encounters and Grammatical Outcomes. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Pagliuca, William, ed. 1994. Perspectives on Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Rennie, Susan. 2000. “Encoding a Historical Dictionary with the TEI (with Reference to the Electronic Scottish
National Dictionary Project).” In Proceedings of the Ninth EURALEX International Congress, EURALEX 2000,
edited by Ulrich Heid, Stefan Evert, Egbert Lehmann, and Christian Rohrer, 261–71. Stuttgart: Institut
für Maschinelle Sprachverarbeitung, Universität Stuttgart. http://euralex.org/category/publications/euralex-2000/.
Romary, Laurent. 2001. “An Abstract Model for the Representation of Multilingual Terminological Data: TMF- Terminological Markup Framework.” Paper presented at TAMA 2001, February 1–2, Antwerp, Belgium.
https://hal.inria.fr/inria-00100405.
———. 2009. “Questions & Answers for TEI Newcomers.” In Jahrbuch für Computerphilologie 10. Paderborn,
Germany: Mentis. Author version available at https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00348372.
———. 2011. “Stabilizing Knowledge through Standards: A Perspective for the Humanities.” In Going Digital:
Evolutionary and Revolutionary Aspects of Digitization, edited by Karl Grandin. Stockholm: Center for Historyof Science at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
———.

2015.

“TEI

and

LMF

Crosswalks.”

Journal for Language Technology and Computational

Linguistics 30(1): 47–70. Author version available at http://hal.inria.fr/hal-00762664; http://
www.jlcl.org/2015_Heft1/3Romary.pdf.
Romary, Laurent, and Werner Wegstein. 2012. “Consistent Modeling of Heterogeneous Lexical Structures.”
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative 3. http://jtei.revues.org/540. doi:10.4000/jtei.540.
Romary, Laurent, and Andreas Witt. 2014. “Méthodes pour la représentation informatisée de données
lexicales/Methoden der Speicherung lexikalischer Daten.” Lexicographica: International Annual for
Lexicography 30: 152–86. Author version available at https://hal.inria.fr/hal-00991745. doi:10.1515/
lexi-2014-0006.
Salmon-Alt, Susanne. 2006. “Data Structures for Etymology: Towards an Etymological Lexical Network.”
BULAG 31: 101–12. Author version available at http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00110971.
Salmon-Alt, Susanne, Laurent Romary, and Eva Buchi. 2005. “Modeling Diachrony in Dictionaries.” Paper
presented at ACH/ALLC Conference 2005, Victoria, BC, Canada, June 15–18.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference73Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

Scalise, Sergio, and Emiliano Guevara. 2005. “The Lexicalist Approach to Word-formation and the Notion of the
Lexicon.” In Handbook of Word-formation, edited by Pavol Štekauer and Rochelle Lieber, 147–87. Dordrecht:
Springer. doi:10.1007/1-4020-3596-9_7.
Scholz, Johannes, Thomas J. Lampoltshammer, Norbert Bartelme, and Eveline Wandl-Vogt. 2015. “SpatialTemporal Modeling of Linguistic Regions and Processes with combined Indeterminate and Crisp
Boundaries.” In Proceedings of the 1st ICA European Symposium on Cartography, edited by Georg Gartner andHaosheng Huang, EuroCarto 2015, 10–12 November 2015, Vienna, Austria.
Schopper, Daniel, Jack Bowers, and Eveline Wandl-Vogt. 2015. “dboe@TEI: Remodelling a Database of Dialects
into a Rich LOD Resource.” Paper presented at the Text Encoding Initiative Conference and Members’Meeting 2015, Lyon, France, October 28–31. Abstract available at http://tei2015.huma-num.fr/en/
papers/#146.
Svorou, Soteria. 1994. The Grammar of Space. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Sweetser, Eve E. 1988. Grammaticalization and Semantic Bleaching. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meetingof the Berkeley Linguistics Society, edited by Shelley Axmaker, Annie Jaisser, and Helen Singmaster, 389–
405. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
TEI Consortium. 2016. TEI P5: Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange. Version 3.1.0. Last updated
December 15. N.p.: TEI Consortium. http://www.tei-c.org/Vault/P5/3.1.0/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/.
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 1995. “The Role of the Development of Discourse Markers in a Theory ofGrammaticalization.” Paper presented at the Twelfth International Conference on Historical Linguistics(ICHL XII), Manchester, England, August 13–18.
Vandeloise, Claude. 2006. “Are There Spatial Prepositions?” In Space in Languages: Linguistic Systems andCognitive Categories, edited by Maya Hickmann and Stéphane Robert, 139–54. Typological Studies in
Language 66. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Windhouwer, Menzo, and Sue Ellen Wright. 2012. “Linking to Linguistic Data Categories in ISOcat.” In Linked
Data in Linguistics: Representing and Connecting Language Data and Language Metadata, edited by Christian
Chiarcos, Sebastian Nordho, and Sebastian Hellmann, 99–107. Berlin: Springer.
Yin, Hui. 2010. “The So-called Chinese VV Compounds—A Continuum between Lexicon and Syntax.” In
Proceedings of the 2010 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, edited by Melinda Heijl.
Toronto: CLA. http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2010/actes2010.html.

NOTES
1

Some of these amendments have been validated by the TEI Council. See https://github.com/

TEIC/TEI/issues/1512.
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

74Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

2

Originally titled “Print Dictionaries” before it made an appropriate digital turn to cover lexical

resources at large.
3

Uniform Resource Identier: A naming mechanism to identify a resource on the Internet in a

univocal way.
4

For non-expert readers interested in a quick overview of general encoding possibilitiesoered by the TEI Guidelines, we recommend looking at the TEI by Example initiative, http://
www.teibyexample.org/, or Romary 2009.
5

See Romary and Witt 2014 for an overview of onomasiological and semasiological models;Lemnitzer, Romary, and Witt 2013 and Romary and Wegstein 2012 for an in-depth analysis of the
TEI dictionary model; and Romary 2015 for a discussion of the relation between the TEI dictionarymodel and the ISO 24613 (LMF) standard (ISO 2008).
6

ISO 16642:2003: Computer applications in terminology — Terminological markup framework (https://www.iso.org/standard/32347.html); see also Romary 2001.
7

Standard Generalized Markup Language, ISO standard ISO 8879 published in 1986, which is the

direct ancestor of XML.
8

Document Type Denition, the grammar of an SGML document.

9

The P4 edition of the TEI Guidelines, which was completely based upon XML, was not publisheduntil 2001.
10 Germanic Lexicon Project, accessed June 16, 2017, http://lexicon..cuni.cz/.
11 In the context of the ongoing revision of the LMF document as a multipart standard, there is
now provision for a specic part on diachrony and etymology.
12 Since the paper was written before the XML serialization of LMF was stabilized, Salmon-Alt(2006) construed an XML representation partially informed by the then-ongoing discussions andpartially inspired by the TEI Guidelines.
13 A possible replacement for <gloss> could be a construct such as <refcorresp="…"type="sense">.

14

For the sake of conciseness we have not added the bibliographic description (<bibl>) to thisexample, although it would also t into the <cit> construct outlined here.
15 It may of course be the case that the source of a lexical item is unknown.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

75Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

16 Currently the use of @type in the <etym> element is not permitted in the TEI schema as theaforementioned element is not a member of the att.typed class. However, a proposal for thisuse has been accepted by the TEI Council and will be implemented in a future version of the
TEI Guidelines; meanwhile, the ticket is available at https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/issues/1512.
In our proposal, the <etym> element has to be made recursive in order to allow the ne-grained
representations we propose here. The corresponding ODD customization, together with reference
examples, is available on GitHub.
17 There may also be cases in which it is unknown whether a given etymological process occurred
within the contemporary language or parent system; in such cases the encoder can just use themain language tag for both the diachronic and synchronic portions of the entry as a default (see,for instance, example 11).
18 The language information of an etymon can also be specied within the <cit type="etymon">in which the <pRef> or <oRef> is embedded (as explained above).
19 IANA Language Subtag Registry, accessed June 16, 2017, http://www.iana.org/assignments/
language-subtag-registry/language-subtag-registry.
20 Romance dialectologists estimate the range of dates that Vulgar Latin began to become distinct
in Gaul/France anywhere between the second century CE and the fall of the Roman Empire aroundthe end of the fth century CE (Bazin-Tacchella 2001). Vulgar Latin gave way in the ninth century
to Old French (ISO 639–3 "fro"), which is designated by the registration body as dating between
circa 842 and 1400; however, in the example, the antepenultimate form in the phonologicaldevelopment šyéf̥ is dated as having been used in the eighth century, which means anywhere from
700 to 799 CE, the later end of which is just 43 years prior to the early portion of Old French. Thisissue raises the question of whether it is really useful to designate a separate language for a periodof roughly forty-three years.
21 The interested reader may ponder here the possibility to also encode scripts by means of the@notation attribute instead of using a cluttering of language subtags on @xml:lang. For more on

this issue, see the proposal in the TEI GitHub (https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/issues/1510).

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference76Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

22 The theoretical line between the two (inheritance and borrowing) becomes blurry when the scopeof a language’s history is expanded; depending on how far back one looks, an item that wasinherited from a direct ancestor may have been borrowed at an earlier time. Where such cases are
known, it is possible to encode both etymological lineages within the same entry.
23

Despite the fact that it is widely accepted among researchers that the actual language spoken bymost Roman peoples in everyday life was a non-standardized and non-literary language referred
to as Vulgar Latin (VL), there is no ISO 639 language code for this. Instead, there only exists a single
tag for Latin (ISO 639–3: "la"). Not distinguishing at least between Classical, Vulgar, and Medieval
Latin is just not an accurate depiction of the etymological information. Needless to say, this issue
needs to be addressed and one or more proposals made for the creation of these tags within the
ISO 639 system.
24

The nal form given is the Middle French (and not Modern) because according to the source,

it was the nal stage in the phonological evolution of that item and is identical to the presentday form.
25 In other examples, the values of @notation used in <pron> and <pRef> have been well-known
standard systems with conventional names, e.g., "ipa" and "xsampa". However, in this example,
while in the source the author explains the phonetic correlate for the transcription notation usedin the work, and there are some characters that are used in the IPA, this system has no proper
name, thus we have chosen to label it "private".
26 The element <date> as a child of <cit> is another example which does not adhere to the current
TEI standards. We have allowed this within our ODD document. A feature request proposal will bemade on the GitHub page and this feature may or may not appear in future versions of the TEI
Guidelines.
27 In the (French language) source of this example (Laborderie and Thomasset 1994, 97) the dates
were given in a combination of roman numerals with superscripted numbers and letters to indicate
the century, e.g., IVe2, which corresponds to deuxième moitié du 4e siècle, second half of the
fourth century (CE). Optionally, the encoder could include the original date as the value of the<date> element for human readability. In such a case, for the purposes of quality data structuring,compatibility, and retrievability the dating information should nonetheless also be included as
attribute value(s): e.g., <date notBefore="0350" notAfter="0399"> IVe2 </date>.
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

77Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

28 See Misha Wolf and Charles Wicksteed, “Date and Time Formats” (W3C Note), 1997, accessed
April 26, 2017, http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime.
29 One of our anonymous reviewers kindly noted that we should bear in mind that these attributes
are for Gregorian dates only. If we are ever encoding anything more specic than a year, it isnecessary to use @datingMethod and custom dating attributes to clarify that the Julian calendar isthe one we are using here, rather than the proleptic Gregorian.
30 This would be referred to as case loss from the perspective of the item’s morphosyntactic
etymology.
31 Or any terminological equivalent to either.
32 Which one could easily retrieve by means of a simple XPath instruction such as ./cit[@type='etymon']/gramGrp[gen='neut']

33 The question “Why do languages borrow?” is examined by Haspelmath (2009). This work also
gives an excellent overview of the various typological dierences discussed in past works.
34 Alteration to the gender property in the borrowed form is also evident in the rst example
pamplemousse, as in French it is a masculine noun, whereas in Dutch it was feminine.
35 In the digital source quoted here, entries are associated with an identier (@xml:id) named fromthe English gloss. Besides, dierent senses correspond to dierent entries. The identier "#bean"
thus refers to the entry for ntuchi with the meaning “bean.” In many cases, such a reference would
normally point to senses instead of separate entries.
36 Sometimes the semantic, grammatical, or other aspects of the source item and those of theimporting language are not equivalent. In such a case, the contrast can be inherently represented
through the diering information within the synchronic portion of the entry and that in the <cittype="etymon"> section. Additionally, the encoder can also include a prose description of this witha <note> element.
37 While our examples do not show the use of the exocentric/endocentric typology, if so desired,the basic components of this could be encoded in the synchronic portion of an entry using theattribute @subtype, e.g., <entry type="compound" subtype="endocentric">.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

78Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

38 Studies using a cognitive linguistic framework have additionally shown that metaphor andmetonymy are very often active in both exocentric and endocentric compounds across languages
and regardless of the grammatical subcomponents (Langacker 1987, 1991, 2000; Benczes 2005a,
2005b; Benczes 2006a, 2006b).
39 While we do not show an example here, if the editor desires to label the head of the compound
it could be done using the attribute @ana, the value of which can correspond to a feature structurethat is dened and declared within the project. Where tagging within the synchronic portion of
the entry, @ana should be included in the <seg> of the head component. Where tagging within thediachronic portion, @ana should be included on the <cit type="etymon"> of the head componentof the compound. The ISOcat has an entry for the category “head” whose persistent identier is
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2306.
40 Note that the structure for modeling compounding + metaphor applies in the exact same mannerto compounding + metonymy, which is not shown in these examples.
41 An example of this in English is “horseradish,” which speakers can parse into the components
of “horse” and “radish”; however, the antiquated gurative sense of horsewhich meant “large,strong, or coarse” and which gave rise to the compound is no longer used in modern English (OED
Online, June 2017, s.v. “horse, n.” [Compounds, section 2, sense c], Oxford University Press, accessed
June 19, 2017, http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/88583?rskey=ODVZef&result=1).
42

Examples of some of the most common grammaticalization patterns (“clines”) include thefollowing (from Croft 2003): noun > adposition; adposition > case ax; verb > classier;demonstrative or article > gender/noun class marker; main verb > tense, aspect, mood marker.
43 Svorou’s panchronic view of grammaticalization is supported by Hopper and Traugott (2003),
who state that clines are both diachronic (schema of evolution) and synchronic (all/multiple formsof evolutionary stages may co-exist).
44 According to Hopper and Traugott (2003), reanalysis modies underlying representations(semantic, syntactic, morphophonological) and brings out rules changes. Langacker (1977, 58) has
provided the basis for the denition of reanalysis, describing it as “change in the structure of an
expression or class of expressions that does not involve any immediate or intrinsic modication

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

79Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEIof its surface manifestation.” Harris and Campbell (1995) and Hopper and Traugott (2003) haveadded to the description of the phenomenon, pointing out that reanalysis can only be manifested
through analogy.
45 Analogy involves paradigmatic organization, changes in surface collocations, and changes inpatterns of usage, which in turn make unobservable changes from reanalysis observable (Hopperand Traugott 2003).
46 Given the prominent role of phonological change in grammaticalization (e.g., coalescence,phonological reduction, loss), inclusion of <pron> is recommended though it is not always possible
to present such forms with full certainty (in which case there is always the TEI attribute @cert).
47 While not entirely essential, including any known contextual, pragmatic, or collocational
information greatly enhances the usefulness of the synchronic data modeling and enhances theprecision of the etymological account.
48 In Traugott (1995), discourse markers are a subtype of discourse particle.
49 Additional information related to this etymon could be added here, for instance that sid is astem and the head of the inected noun form. This would be a typical application of @ana on the<cit> element.

50 In this example, the adverbial component of the etymon, the additional feature of prex, which
would be specied as the entry type within a synchronic entry, could be labelled within a @ana
attribute, e.g., <cit type="component" corresp="#e2s1" ana="#prefix">.
51 One etymon from the source has been skipped in this example: beside in the prepositional sense
attested ca. 1450.
52“Extension adverbials” are also referred to by Traugott as “verbal adverbials.”

53

Etymon given in the source but not encoded here: besides in the sense of an adverbial of extension

attested 1567.
54 ISOcat is currently stalled, with two initiatives from ISO TC 37 and CLARIN taking up the legacy.
We shall be working on making the two initiatives converge again.
55 Currently, labeling language varieties while remaining interoperable is limited to thespecication of the following information: (language-country-region).

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference

80Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

ABSTRACTIn this paper we provide a systematic and comprehensive set of modeling principles for representing
etymological data in digital dictionaries using TEI. The purpose is to integrate in one coherent frameworkboth digital representations of legacy dictionaries and born-digital lexical databases that are constructedmanually or semi-automatically.
We provide examples from many dierent types of etymological phenomena from traditional lexicographic
practice, as well as analytical approaches from functional and cognitive linguistics such as metaphor,metonymy, and grammaticalization, which in many lexicographical and formal linguistic circles have notoften been treated as truly etymological in nature, and have thus been largely left out of etymologicaldictionaries.
In order to fully and accurately express the phenomena and their structures, we have made several proposals
for expanding and amending some aspects of the existing TEI framework.
Finally, with reference to both synchronic and diachronic data, we also demonstrate how encoders may
integrate semantic web/linked open data information resources into TEI dictionaries as a basis for the sense,
and/or the semantic domain, of an entry and/or an etymon.

INDEX
Keywords: TEI, dictionary, etymology

AUTHORS
JACK BOWERSJack Bowers is a research assistant at the Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW)—Austrian Center for
Digital Humanities (ACDH). He is the primary curator of the DBÖ (Datenbank der bairischen Mundarten inÖsterreich) corpus and is working on cleaning, converting, and enhancing the lexical and metadata in orderto facilitate reuse, and to bring it in line with international standards and best practice. With a background incognitive and functional approaches to all levels of linguistics and their interfaces (semantics, morphosyntax,
phonetics, phonology, etymology), he applies linguistic expertise to best represent and integrate lexical data
(spoken or textual) with metadata and semantic knowledge/information resources. He is also interested
in working towards interoperability between standards for lexical markup (TEI, LMF, ONTOLEX, TBX) andin the emerging prospects oered by semantic web/ontological resources in the integration of human
Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference81Deep Encoding of Etymological Information in TEI

knowledge across academic and scientic elds. Jack holds a B.A. in history and French from San FranciscoState University (2009) and an M.A. in linguistics and a certicate in computational linguistics from San
Jose State University (2012). He is a member of the DARIAH-GiST project, which works to promote the useof digital standards in the humanities, and became involved in the digital humanities while working on
his documentation/multimedia resource/corpus creation of the Mixtepec-Mixtec language variety (spoken
Juxtlahuaca district, Oaxaca, Mexico) (2011– ).
LAURENT ROMARY
Laurent Romary is Directeur de Recherche at Inria, France, director general of the European infrastructure
DARIAH, and guest scientist at the Centre Marc Bloch and the Academy of Sciences in Berlin. He carries out
research on the modeling of semi-structured documents, with a specic emphasis on texts and linguistic
resources. He received a PhD in computational linguistics in 1989 and his Habilitation in 1999. During several
years he launched and directed the Langue et Dialogue team at Loria in Nancy, France, and participatedin several national and international projects related to the representation and dissemination of language
resources and on human–machine interaction. He is the chairman of ISO committee TC 37 and has been amember (2001–2007), then chair (2008–2011), of the TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) Council and now memberof the TEI board (2017–2018). Beyond his research activities, he has been responsible for dening andimplementing the scientic information and open access policies of major research institutions in Europe,
namely CNRS, Max Planck Society, and Inria.

Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 10, 11/07/2017
Selected Papers from the 2015 TEI Conference82