Termout.org logo/LING


Update: February 24, 2023 The new version of Termout.org is now online, so this web site is now obsolete and will soon be dismantled.

Lista de candidatos sometidos a examen:
1) domain (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística

1) Candidate: domain


Is in goldstandard

1
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines177 - : Domain Models can be used to describe lexical ambiguity and variability. Lexical ambiguity is represented by associating one term to more than one domain, while variability is represented by associating different terms to the same domain. For example, the term virus is associated to both the domain Computer Science and the domain Medicine (ambiguity) while the domain Medicine is associated to both the terms AIDS and HIV (variability). More formally, let D = {D[1], D[2],...,D[k']} be a set of domains, such that k' << k. A Domain Model is fully defined by a k x k' domain matrix D representing in each cell d[i,z] the domain relevance of term w[i] with respect to the domain D[z]. The domain matrix D is used to define a function D: R^k [img01-04 .JPG] R^k', that maps the vectors [for06-04.JPG] [j] expressed into the classical VSM, into the vectors [for06-04.JPG] '[j ]in the domain VSM. D is defined by[28]^2:

2
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines192 - : All CLG rules, SNRs, SPRs, and RRs, share the property of assigning condition p three possible classes of value: a single feature, a feature disjunction, or a feature conjunction. They also share the domain type upon which the truth value of condition p is determined, namely: (sub )sets of features composing a selection expression^[33]9. CLG rules differ in the operations they perform (the value assigned to consequence q): SNRs construct selection expressions by inserting semantic features into structures; SPRs alter SNRs by modifying the probabilities assigned to SNR features; RRs perform various other types of operation (filling, composition and exponence, among others).

3
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines371 - : learner would focus on the image and the auditory learner on narration. Even though research in other fields have not confirmed redundancy as an efficacy enhancing factor for learning, it may work differently in SLA by helping learners retain and transfer the new linguistic code. The distinction between these two areas of learning has been explored by Schnotz and Baadte (2008: 22) as they claim that “in language learning, things are different because the primary goal of learning is not to learn about a specific domain, but to master a new language. Thus, Schnotz and Baadte (2008) make the difference between language learning and domain learning where the major distinction is that language learning precedes domain learning, understood as the kind of learning that is institutionalized in the school system: biology, history, geography, etc . On the other hand, in second language learning (particularly in adolescents and adults) the learner already possesses knowledge of the domain (unless it

4
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines375 - : Knowledge engineering in the legal domain: The construction of a FunGramKB Satellite Ontology

5
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines451 - : The domain contains the knowledge base consisting of two main parts:

6
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines485 - : As several scholars, including ^[34]Bhatia (1993) and ^[35]Parodi (2008), have noted, certain textual genres can be viewed as pertaining to a specific domain: for example, recipes are part of the culinary domain, and laws pertain to the legal domain . However, other genres - including, inter alia, research articles, reports, formal letters, and theses- are crosscutting, extending beyond specialized domains and remaining largely unchanged in different disciplines. In this sense, according to ^[36]Parodi (2010), a distinction can also be made between professional genres (such as business plan and patient record) and academic genres (such as PhD thesis and master’s thesis). The former are mostly written by professionals and the latter are mostly written by students.

7
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines485 - : Many studies have analyzed the textual genres that are generated in specific specialized domains. The scientific field, and specially the medical domain, is one of the most formalized and studied specialized fields internationally. Related to the medical domain, ^[37]Piqué-Angordans and Posteguillo (2006: 651) argue that:

8
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines510 - : Monachini, M., Quochi, V., Ruimy, N. & Calzolari, N. (2007). Lexical relations and domain knowledge: The biolexicon meets the qualia structure, ms . Ponencia presentada en GL2007: 4th International Workshop on Generative Approaches to the Lexicon [en línea]. Disponible en: [218]https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Valeria_Quochi/publication/251778861_Lexical_Relations_and_Domain_Knowledge_The_Bio-Lexicon_Meets_the_Qualia_Structure/links/58529ba708aef7d030a51042/Lexical-Relations-and-Domain-Knowledge-The-Bio-Lexicon-Meets-the-Qualia-Structure.pdf [ [219]Links ]

9
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines601 - : In the domain of Corpus Linguistics, recent empirical research using bilingual corpus produced in formal learning environments is mostly cross-sectional and decontextualised: the students’ linguistic competence is only defined as it is at a given time and the language production under examination is not content-bound . However, content plays such an important role in language development that Cummins’ distinction between ‘basic interpersonal communicative skills’ (BICS) and ‘cognitive academic language proficiency’ (CALP) (^[85]Cummins, 2008) is claimed not to be fully comprehensive (^[86]Harwood & Hadley, 2004; ^[87]Dressen-Hammouda, 2008; ^[88]Heine, 2014). For these authors, a third dimension should be added to the dichotomy: specialised academic register specific for each subject.

Evaluando al candidato domain:


1) learning: 11
3) genres: 5 (*)
4) distinction: 4
9) ambiguity: 3 (*)
11) academic: 3
13) lexical: 3 (*)
14) snrs: 3
16) specialized: 3 (*)
17) learner: 3 (*)
19) feature: 3

domain
Lengua: eng
Frec: 136
Docs: 54
Nombre propio: 1 / 136 = 0%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 5
Frec. en corpus ref. en eng: 117
Puntaje: 5.789 = (5 + (1+5.39231742277876) / (1+7.09803208296053)));
Rechazado: muy común;

Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término

(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)
domain
: Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives (Vol. 1). Cognitive domain. New York: McKay.
: Carey, S. & Spelke, E. (1993). Domain specific knowledge and conceptual change. En S. Goldman & L. Hirschfeld (Eds.), Cultural knowledge and domain specificity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
: Chiesi, H. I., Spilich, G. J., & Voss, J. F. (1979). Acquisition of domain-related information in relation to high and low domain knowledge. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 275-290.
: Gliozzo, A. & Strapparava, C. (2005b). Domain kernels for text categorization. Proceedings of (CONLL), Michigan, U.S.A.
: Gliozzo, A., Magnini, B. & Strapparava, C. (2004). Unsupervised domain relevance estimation for word sense disambiguation. Proceedings of the Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing Conference, Barcelona, Spain.
: McCray, A. T. (2003). An Upper-level Ontology for the Biomedical Domain. Comparative And Functional Genomics, 4(1), 80-84.
: Moravcsik, J. E., & Kintsch, W. (1993). Writing quality, reading skills, and domain knowledge as factors in text comprehension. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 360-374.
: Pinto, D. (2008). On Clustering and Evaluation of Narrow Domain Short-Text Corpora. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
: Pinto, D., Rosso, P. & Jimenez-Salazar, H. (2010). A self-enriching methodology for clustering narrow domain short texts. The Computer Journal. Oxford University Press.
: Ruimy, N. (2006a). Structuring a domain vocabulary in a general knowledge environment. En LREC 2006 Proceedings [en línea]. Disponible en: [229]http://www.cs.brandeis.edu/~marc/misc/proceedings/lrec-2006/index.htm
: Schnotz, W. & Baadte, C. (2008). Domain learning versus language learning with multimedia. In M. Farías & K. Obilinovic (Eds.), Aprendizaje multimodal/Multimodal learning (pp. 21-49). Santiago de Chile: PUBLIFAHU USACH.
: Smith, J. J., Furbee, L., Maynard, K., Quick, S. & Ross, L. (1995). Salience counts: A domain analysis of English color terms. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 5(2), 203-216.
: Spilich, G., Vesonder, G., Chiesi, H. & Voss, J. (1979). Text processing of domain-related information for individuals with high and low domain knowledge. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 275-290.
: The basic elements of an intelligent tutor model include tutor, leaner, domain, speech processing, and error detection (^[41]Swartz & Yazdani, 2012). These components perform activities which together comprise the L2 teaching-learning process.
: Tolchinsky, L. (2009). The configuration of literacy as a domain of language. En D. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Literacy (pp. 468-486). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
: Verstraete, J. C. (2005). Scalar quantity implicatures and the interpretation of modality. Problems in the deontic domain. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(9), 1401-1418.
: Visser, P. R. S. (1995). Knowledge specification for multiple legal tasks. A case study of the interaction problem in the legal domain. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Leiden, Leiden, Holanda.
: Wong, W., Liu, W. & Bennamoun, M. (2007). Determining termhood for learning domain ontologies using domain prevalence and tendency. Proceedings of the 6th Australasian Conference on Data Mining (pp. 47-54). Gold Coast, Australia.
: ^[34]2 In (Wong, Ziarko & Wong, 1985) a similar schema is adopted to define a Generalized Vector Space Model, of which the Domain VSM is a particular instance.