1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of When lexical semantics and word sense disambiguation meet lexicography
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

Lexical ambiguity, where a word has multiple related (polysemous) and/or unrelated (homographic) meanings, causes challenges in learning and teaching semi-technical medical vocabulary owing to its lack of consideration in current lexicographical resources, including wordlists and dictionaries. Academic wordlists fail to indicate polysemes and homographs, while conventional dictionaries number multiple meanings of a semi-technical medical word in a vertical format that is unlikely to showcase polysemous and homographic relations. This study focuses on a new lexicographical resource, named SemiMed, which addresses issues in wordlists and dictionaries arising from lexical ambiguity. Hsu’s (2013) Medical Word List (MWL), an academic list of semi-technical medical vocabulary, was selected as a starting point. A qualitative analysis underpinned by lexical semantic theories was conducted to analyse polysemes and homographs of MWL words. Then, a quantitative analysis that employed word sense disambiguation practices calculated MWL word meaning frequency. These analyses resulted in two key features, radial networks of meanings and technicality levels, that are expected to help SemiMed resolve issues in academic wordlists and conventional dictionaries caused by lexical ambiguity.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.24138.ngu
2026-04-08
2026-04-11

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/aral.24138.ngu
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/aral.24138.ngu/aral.24138.ngu.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/aral.24138.ngu&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Cambridge Dictionary
    Cambridge Dictionary. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/
  2. Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary
    Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/medical
  3. Online Etymology Dictionary
    Online Etymology Dictionary. https://www.etymonline.com/
  4. Oxford English Dictionary
    Oxford English Dictionary. https://www.oed.com
  5. Aitchison, J.
    (2003) Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Atkins, B. T. S.
    (1991) Building a lexicon: The contribution of lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography, (), –. 10.1093/ijl/4.3.167
     https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/4.3.167 [Google Scholar]
  7. Atkins, S., Rundell, M., & Sato, H.
    (2003) The contribution of FrameNet to practical lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography, (), –. 10.1093/ijl/16.3.333
     https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/16.3.333 [Google Scholar]
  8. Atkins, B. S., & Rundell, M.
    (2008) The Oxford guide to practical lexicography. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199277704.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199277704.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  9. Béjoint, H.
    (1990) Monosemy and the Dictionary. InBudaLEX’88 Proceedings of the 3rd International EURALEX Congress (pp.–). EURALEX.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Biemiller, A., & Slonim, N.
    (2001) Estimating root word vocabulary growth in normative and advantaged populations: Evidence for a common sequence of vocabulary acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, (), –. 10.1037/0022‑0663.93.3.498
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.498 [Google Scholar]
  11. Boonmoh, A., Singhasiri, W., & Hull, J.
    (2006) Problems using electronic dictionaries to translate Thai written essays into English. rEFLections, , –. 10.61508/refl.v8i0.114304
     https://doi.org/10.61508/refl.v8i0.114304 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bréal, M.
    (1900) Semantics: Studies in the science of meaning. Heinemann.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Brugman, C., & Lakoff, G.
    (1988) Cognitive topology and lexical networks. InS. Small, G. Cottrell & M. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Lexical ambiguity resolution (pp.–). Morgan Kaufmann. 10.1016/B978‑0‑08‑051013‑2.50022‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-051013-2.50022-7 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cantos, P., & Sanchez, A.
    (2001) Lexical constellations: What collocates fail to tell. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, (), –. 10.1075/ijcl.6.2.02can
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.6.2.02can [Google Scholar]
  15. Cantos, P., Sanchez, A., & Almela, M.
    (2009) An attempt to formalize word sense disambiguation: Maximizing efficiency by minimizing computational cost. RESLA, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Carston, R.
    (2021) Polysemy: Pragmatics and sense conventions. Mind & Language, (), –. 10.1111/mila.12329
     https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12329 [Google Scholar]
  17. Cowie, A. P.
    (1988) Stable and creative aspects of vocabulary use. InR. Carter & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary and language teaching (pp.–). Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Cruse, A.
    (1986) Lexical semantics. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. (1992) Monosemy vs. polysemy. Review of Ruhl (1989). Linguistics, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Dominiek, S.
    (1998) What linguists can and can’t tell you about the human mind: A reply to Croft. Cognitive Linguistics, , –. 10.1515/cogl.1998.9.4.361
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1998.9.4.361 [Google Scholar]
  21. Evans, V.
    (2005) The meaning of time: Polysemy, the lexicon and conceptual structure. Journal of Linguistics, (), –. 10.1017/S0022226704003056
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226704003056 [Google Scholar]
  22. Evans, V., & Green, M.
    (2006) Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Gardner, D.
    (2007) Validating the construct of word in applied corpus-based vocabulary research: A critical survey. Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1093/applin/amm010
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm010 [Google Scholar]
  24. Garnier, M., & Schmitt, N.
    (2015) The PHaVE List: A pedagogical list of phrasal verbs and their most frequent meaning senses. Language Teaching Research, (), –. 10.1177/1362168814559798
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814559798 [Google Scholar]
  25. Geeraerts, D.
    (1990) The lexicographical treatment of prototypical polysemy. InS. Tsohatzidis (Ed.), Meanings and prototypes: Studies in linguistic categorization (pp.–). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. (2001) The definitional practice of dictionaries and the cognitive semantic conception of polysemy. Lexicographica, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. (2006) Words and other wonders: Papers on lexical and semantic topics. De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219128
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219128 [Google Scholar]
  28. Grabe, W.
    (1991) Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, (), –. 10.2307/3586977
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3586977 [Google Scholar]
  29. Grefenstette, G., & Hanks, P.
    (2023) Competing Views of Word Meaning: Word Embeddings and Word Senses. International Journal of Lexicography, –. 10.1093/ijl/ecad005
     https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/ecad005 [Google Scholar]
  30. Hanks, P.
    (1990) Evidence and intuition in lexicography. InJ. Tomaszczyk & B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Eds.), Meaning and lexicography (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/llsee.28.07han
     https://doi.org/10.1075/llsee.28.07han [Google Scholar]
  31. (2000) Do word meanings exist?Computers and the Humanities, (), –. 10.1023/A:1002471322828
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002471322828 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2002) Mapping meaning onto use. InM. Corréard, Lexicography and Natural Language Proceeding: A festschrift in honour of B. T. S. Atkins (pp.–). EURALEX.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Hoey, M.
    (2012) Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203327630
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203327630 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hsu, W.
    (2013) Bridging the vocabulary gap for EFL medical undergraduates: The establishment of a medical word list. Language Teaching Research, (), –. 10.1177/1362168813494121
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813494121 [Google Scholar]
  35. Jackson, H.
    (2013) Words and their meaning. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Janssen, A. J. M.
    (2003) Monosemy versus polysemy. InH. Cuyckens, R. Dirven & J. Taylor (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics (pp.–). De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219074.93
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219074.93 [Google Scholar]
  37. Jorgensen, J. C.
    (1990) The psychological reality of word senses. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, (), –. 10.1007/BF01077415
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01077415 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kempson, R. M.
    (1977) Semantic theory. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Kilgarriff, A.
    (1997) I don’t believe in word senses. Computers and the Humanities, (), –. 10.1023/A:1000583911091
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1000583911091 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2007) Word senses. InE. Agirre & P. Edmonds (Eds.), Word sense disambiguation: Algorithms and application (pp.–). Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑4809‑8_2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4809-8_2 [Google Scholar]
  41. Klepousniotou, E.
    (2002) The processing of lexical ambiguity: Homonymy and polysemy in the mental lexicon. Brain and Language, (), –. 10.1006/brln.2001.2518
     https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.2001.2518 [Google Scholar]
  42. Knowles, G., & Mohd Don, Z.
    (2004) The notion of a “lemma”: Headwords, roots and lexical sets. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, (), –. 10.1075/ijcl.9.1.04kno
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.9.1.04kno [Google Scholar]
  43. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  44. Le, C. N. N., & Miller, J.
    (2025) Developing and piloting SemiMed — A resource for semi-technical medical vocabulary. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. (), –. 10.1016/j.rmal.2025.100239
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2025.100239 [Google Scholar]
  45. (2023) A core meaning-based analysis of English semi-technical vocabulary in the medical field. English for Specific Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.esp.2023.01.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2023.01.006 [Google Scholar]
  46. Le, C. N. N.
    (2022) Pilot SemiMed — a mini semantic visualization dictionary of semi-technical medical vocabulary: A response to semantic deficiencies in a medicine-related wordlist (Report on A.S. Hornby Dictionary Research Award Project). https://www.hornby-trust.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/ASHDRA-report-Chinh-Ngan-Nguyen-Le-2022.pdf
  47. Leech, G.
    (1974) Semantics. Penguin.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Lehrer, A.
    (1974) Semantic fields and lexical structure. North-Holland.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Li, E. S.-L., & Pemberton, R.
    (1994) An investigation of students’ knowledge of academic and subtechnical vocabulary. InJ. Flowerdew & A. K. K. Tong (Eds.), Entering text (pp.–). The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Lyons, J.
    (1968) Introduction to theoretical linguistics (Vol.). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165570
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165570 [Google Scholar]
  51. Lyon, J.
    (1977) Semantics. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Mel’čuk, I.
    (1988) Semantic description of lexical units in an explanatory combinatorial dictionary: Basic principles and heuristic criteria. International Journal of Lexicography, (), –. 10.1093/ijl/1.3.165
     https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/1.3.165 [Google Scholar]
  53. Moerdijk, F.
    (2003) The codification of semantic information. InP. Sterkenburg (Ed.), A practical guide to lexicography (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tlrp.6.32moe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tlrp.6.32moe [Google Scholar]
  54. Murphy, M. L.
    (2010) Lexical meaning. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511780684
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511780684 [Google Scholar]
  55. Nesi, H., & Haill, R.
    (2002) A study of dictionary use by international students at a British university. International Journal of Lexicography, (), –. 10.1093/ijl/15.4.277
     https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/15.4.277 [Google Scholar]
  56. Ostermann, C.
    (2015) Cognitive lexicography: A new approach to lexicography making use of cognitive semantics. De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110424164
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110424164 [Google Scholar]
  57. Palmer, F. R.
    (1995) Semantics. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Panman, O.
    (1982) Homonymy and polysemy. Lingua, (), –. 10.1016/0024‑3841(82)90059‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(82)90059-6 [Google Scholar]
  59. Perez, M.
    (2013) Identification and analysis of the specialized vocabulary of British Law Reports: A corpus-driven study of this legal genre at the core of common law legal systems [Doctoral dissertation, University of Murcia]. https://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/128621?fbclid=IwAR29vxLl5QEpAcg19TKI6ExdP_9GJ92NunxxFLyTHcJYvz4aOKaKcyv2i10#page=1
  60. Pustejovsky, J.
    (1995) The generative lexicon. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/3225.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3225.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  61. Ravin, Y., & Leacock, C.
    (2000) Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198238423.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238423.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  62. Rizzo, C., & Sanchez, A.
    (2010) Building new meanings in technical English from the perspective of the lexical constellation model. Ibérica, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Rosch, E.
    (1975) Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, (), –. 10.1037/0096‑3445.104.3.192
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.192 [Google Scholar]
  64. Ruhl, C.
    (1989) On monosemy: A study in linguistic semantics. State University of New York Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Thurston, J., & Candlin, C. N.
    (1998) Concordancing and the teaching of the vocabulary of academic English. English for Specific Purposes, (), –. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(97)00013‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00013-6 [Google Scholar]
  66. Tyler, A., & Evans, V.
    (2003a) The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning, and cognition. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486517
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486517 [Google Scholar]
  67. (2003b) Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks: The case of over. Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs, , –. 10.1515/9783110895698.95
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110895698.95 [Google Scholar]
  68. Ullmann, S.
    (1962) Semantics: An introduction to the science of meaning. Basil Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Van der Meer, G.
    (2004) On defining: Polysemy, core meanings and ‘great simplicity’. InG. Williams & S. Vessier (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th EURALEX International Congress (pp.–). EURALEX.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Vicente, A., & Falkum, I. L.
    (2017) Polysemy. Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.325
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.325 [Google Scholar]
  71. Vidhu Bhala, R. & Abirami, S.
    (2014) Trends in word sense disambiguation. Artificial Intelligence Review, (), –. 10.1007/s10462‑012‑9331‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-012-9331-5 [Google Scholar]
  72. Watson-Todd, R.
    (2017) An opaque engineering word list: Which words should a teacher focus on?English for Specific Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.esp.2016.08.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  73. Yamamoto, Y.
    (2014) Multidimensional vocabulary acquisition through deliberate vocabulary list learning. System, , –. 10.1016/j.system.2013.12.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  74. Yarowsky, D.
    (1993) One sense per collocation. InProceedings of the ARPA Human Language Technology Workshop (pp.–). ARPA. 10.3115/1075671.1075731
     https://doi.org/10.3115/1075671.1075731 [Google Scholar]
  75. Yu, A., & Trainin, G.
    (2022) A meta-analysis examining technology-assisted L2 vocabulary learning. ReCALL, (), –. 10.1017/S0958344021000239
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344021000239 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.24138.ngu
Loading
When lexical semantics and word sense disambiguation meet lexicography
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.24138.ngu
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.24138.ngu
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.24138.ngu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: semi-technical vocabulary ; dictionaries ; word sense disambiguation ; wordlists ; lexical semantics

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error