| Abstract: |
Reviewing dictionaries is part of the ongoing work in lexicography, and several lexicographers have discussed the process and guidelines for reviews published in academic journals. However, few have addressed the evaluation of the outside matter and, if so, only in a cursory way. This article examines the evaluation of the outside matter in reviews published in Lexikos with a view to proposing some general principles for reviewing outer texts in printed and electronic dictionaries. The study shows that reviewers define the review object differently, some excluding the outside matter altogether, and that the way in which the outside matter is assessed differs within and between reviews. It is proposed that the separate sections of dictionaries should not only be examined independently but that their relationship to each other should also be evaluated so as to represent faithfully the lexicographic elements, i.e. wordlist, front, middle and back matter, their organisation and presentation, as well as three underlying elements: the function(s), data types and structures of the dictionary. Focus on all these elements may result in dictionary reviews that are academically sound because they treat the dictionary as a true research object. |