The Comparative Research Of The Modern Chinese Dictionary Of The2005Version And Revised Edition Of Reweave Mandarin Dictionary

In recent years, the mainland China and Taiwan non-governmental exchanges becomemore frequent, and cross-strait academic community began to interact. Many scholars usedthe dictionary as a carrier to make a detailed analysis of cross-strait Modern Chinese linguafranca of the glyph, pronunciation and vocabulary. However, these studies tend to payattention to the pronunciation and glyph, lack of a full range of discourse on the dictionaryontology. our article is this topic. wo expand the full range of contrast, on behalf of theauthority dictionary on the mainland and Taiwan–The Modern Chinese Dictionary of the2005version and The Revised Edition of Reweave Mandarin Dictionary,to analysis and to explorethe reasons for the two dictionaries’ differences from the macro, micro and the angle of thedictionaries Editor.This article is divided into six parts:Introduction, mainly introduces the research status, the object of study, research methods,research purposes and significance.Chapter One, the comparison of the two dictionary compilation and nature. Thepredecessor of the The Modern Chinese Dictionary of the2005version is The ModernChinese Dictionary (test print),printed in1960by the Commercial Press.The predecessor ofThe Revised Edition of Reweave Mandarin Dictionary is The Mandarin Dictionary, printed duringthe Republic of China. Two dictionaries in nature both have similarities and differences. Thesame point: homology, the language of both the the Baike and the audience; differencesmainly reflect the three aspects: the differences between the synchronic、diachronic differentnormative and the dictionary scale. The characteristics of these aspects, is a basic prerequisitefor comparative analysis in this article.Chapter Two,compare and analyze the the difference and the reasons of the twodictionaries from the macro-structure.The Contrast is mainly include: the word principle andincome of the word-wide comparison. The style comparison section includes the entryarrangements contrast, homophone with the purpose of the form entry processing, and variantforms of treatment, the appendix compared four aspects.Chapter Three, compare and analyze the the difference and the reasons of the twodictionaries from the microscopic structure. The Contrast is mainly include: phonetic and interpretation. In contrast interpretation, mainly from the part of speech tagging, sense ofarrangement, paraphrase mode, arranged cover note and example five aspects. In thecomparation of the interpretation way and cover note arrangment, wo select the twodictionaries, compares the verbs"扌".Chapter Four, compare from the the angle of the dictionaries Editor. The similarities anddifferences between the two dictionaries, a certain extent,aie influenced by the codification ofthe ideological of the editor. The source of the ideas of these two lexicographers are thinkingof the the Lv ShuXiang and Li JinXi. Through comparative analysis of their lexicographythought, wo found that, in addition to the codification of the background reasons, LvShuXiang and Li JinXi.,their respective lexicography lead the differences between the twodictionaries.Finally, in conclusion, summarized the whole research and provide some reference to thecross-strait co-edited the "Chinese Language Dictionary" project.