Skip Navigation


International Journal of Lexicography Advance Access originally published online on August 24, 2007
International Journal of Lexicography 2007 20(3):275-293; doi:10.1093/ijl/ecm022
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/3/275    most recent
ecm022v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Moeimam, S.
Right arrow Articles by Steinhauer, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2007 Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The Dutch-Indonesian Dictionary Project

Susi Moeimam

Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde (moeimam{at}mail.com)

Hein Steinhauer

Radboud University Nijmegen (h.steinhauer{at}let.leidenuniv.nl)


  Abstract

The importance of Indonesian as the national language of Indonesia uniting over 700 different ethnic groups with as many languages cannot be underestimated. As the continuation of pre-independence Malay, it has a long history, which is briefly summarized. Since independence Indonesian is developing rapidly, notably by planned and unplanned extension of its lexicon. After two decades of strained relations, contacts between the Netherlands and Indonesia were renewed, and the need for up-to-date lexicographical products became apparent. The Dutch-Indonesian Dictionary project (DIDIC) resulted in two of those: a productive and a receptive version of the dictionary. Illustrations are presented of the differences between these two versions, followed by a discussion of some of the lexicographical challenges caused by the typological differences between the two languages and the natural and cultural differences of the communities of their speakers. The paper ends with some prospects for the lexicographical future.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.