Download English To Isizulu Dictionary ((BETTER))

isiZulu.net is a hobby project trying to build a reasonably useful, modernZulu-English online dictionary that anyone can contribute to using the forum. Beyond bidirectional word search, it offers translationof simple Zulu and English phrases, automatic morphological decomposition,conjugation and phonetic transcription of Zulu words, spell checking as well asgrammar and pronunciation basics.PINNED: A side note on papersIf you mention the dictionary in a paper, lecture etc. I'd be happy toreceive an advance copy along with your comments.

Senzelwe ukusiza abafundi ukwazi ukubhala nokukhuluma kahle nangobuchule ngolimi lokwengeza, lesi sichazamazwi esiphelele nesisebenziseka kalula sibheke ukuxazulula izinkinga ezivamile zabafundi. / Designed to enable learners to write and speak effectively and competently in their additional language, this up-to-date and easy-to-use dictionary focuses on overcoming learners' most common difficulties.

Download English To Isizulu Dictionary

Download Zip 🔥 https://bltlly.com/2y3AMT 🔥

Features Izingxoxo EZINTSHA zansukuzonke ezikusiza ukuthi ukhulume isiNgisi ngokuzethemba. / NEW everyday conversations help you use isiZulu confidently. Thola amagama owafunayo kalula nangokushesha esichazamazwini sesiZulu nesiNgisi esehlukile. / Find the words you want easily and quickly like no other isiZulu/English dictionary. Imisho eyizibonelo ikusiza ukuthi uhumushe ngendlela efanele. / Example sentences help you use the right translation. Sikhombisa indela yangempela okusetshenziswa ngayo amagama. / Shows how words are really used. Sinamagama amasha aqhamuka kuzo zonke izinhlelo zezifundo. / Includes new words from across the curriculum. Kanye namakhasi evile ema-50 wokungezelelwe okuwusizo (indlela yokusebenzisa isichazamazwi sakho, imisebenzi nezimpendulo zayo, izincwadi eziyisibonelo, imidwebo, ulimi lwama-SMS nokunye). / Plus more than 50 pages of useful extras (how to use your dictionary, activities with answers, model letters, illustrations, SMS language a nd more

The first the English and Zulu Dictionary dictionary was published in 1958 by Wits Unviersity Press and compiled by C.M. Doke and B.W. Vilakazi, intended as a companion to the Zulu-English Dictionary compiled by Doke and Vilakazi (first published 1948 by Wits University Press). The first combined edition with English-isiZulu / isiZulu-English was published in 1990 and remains the definitive authority. A vised isiZulu orthography is introduced in this Fourth Edition in line with the approved PanSALB (2008) orthography revisions undertaken under the auspices and control of the Wits Language Centre, Johannesburg.

In an ideal world suitable translation equivalents for each lemma in a bilingual dictionary should be available in the target language. The prospective compiler of a bilingual dictionary might assume that one can expect to find translation equivalents for all lemmas and that there might not be many instances where such translation equivalents are not available. Taken at face value, considering common objects and concepts, a first impression is that both the source and target languages have suitable translation equivalents. such an assumption could be strengthened by Adamska-Salaciak's (2006: 117) view that "zero equivalence, while more frequent, is also relatively rare". Gouws and Prinsloo (2008: 869), however, state that there are frequent instances in any given language pair where suitable translation equivalents are not available. it also has to be kept in mind that English is a language with a deeply rooted lexicographic tradition and isiZulu, although having excellent dictionaries, is a language with a strong oral tradition, rich in cultural terminology. Adamska-Salaciak (2006: 24) says that "bilingual dictionaries have to try and do their job despite the fact that the lexicons of natural languages are resistant to pairwise matching" and that finding suitable translation equivalents is problematic because a precise one-to-one correlation between a word and a translation equivalent is rare. Adamska-Salaciak (2006: 99) goes as far as to state that "due to interlingual anisomorphism a bilingual dictionary is, strictly speaking, an impossibility" and that "all we can hope to produce are better or worse approximations".

In table 1 there is no English translation equivalent for the isiZulu word ingcuba. In this case paraphrase of meaning and two short descriptions are given. Table 1 reflects zero equivalence in the form of a lexical gap, i.e. the concepts meat of an animal which died from natural causes, lean meat and worthless person are known to speakers of English but there are no English translation equivalents. Likewise, in (3) there is no isiZulu translation equivalent for the English word mistral. In such cases the challenge for the lexicographer is to treat the lemma mistral in such a way that users get the required information from the dictionary. The Collins Dictionary gives the meaning of mistral as 'a strong, cold north-westerly wind that blows through the Rhone valley and southern France into the Mediterranean, mainly in winter' ( ). The entire concept of a wind blowing through the Rhone valley and southern France into the Mediterranean is unknown in isiZulu, thus representing a referential gap in addition to the language not having a word for it. Thus in terms of Dagut (1981: 63) "there is no single designator ... which provides the required equivalent encapsulation" in isiZulu of "strong, cold north-westerly wind" + "Rhone valley" + "southern France" + "into the Mediterranean". It is not a matter of an inability in the target language to express the meaning of the source language item but whether equivalents are available in the target language.

GXD1, however, gives a detailed treatment for isidanga in figure 3 in the central text of the dictionary supplemented by more detailed information given in the form of an addendum (12) in isiXhosa, English and Afrikaans in the back matter as given in figure 4 for isiXhosa and English.

The question to be addressed in the following section is to what extent does the lexicographer in a bidirectional bilingual English-isiZulu dictionary has to deal with zero equivalence. Will it be a matter of finding surrogate equivalents for a few rare cases according to the view of Adamska-Salaciak or that instances of zero equivalence between English and isiZulu are so frequent that it presents a major challenge to the lexicographer?

Consider the following analysis of a single, randomly selected page from the English-isiZulu side of EID covering the lemma stretch misdealings to mitigate and a random page from the isiZulu-English side of the same dictionary covering the lemma stretch -ngcuba to -ngeke in the following discussion.

This page is part of the alphabetical stretch N dealing with the alphabetical range -ngcuba - -ngeke. Forty-two lemmas are presented on this page. For 24 lemmas isiZulu translation equivalents are offered of which 15 lemmas were treated using only translation equivalents. For 27 lemmas surrogate equivalents were given of which 18 lemmas were treated using only surrogate equivalents. Nine lemmas were treated using both translation equivalents and surrogate equivalents. What is important to note for the isiZulu-English side of the dictionary is the huge number of lemmas for which surrogate equivalents were used, i.e. 27 out of 42 = 64,3%, compared to translation equivalents 24 out of 42 = 57.1% - thus more lemmas treated with surrogate equivalents than translation equivalents. Consider table 3 and figure 9.

Comparison between the isiZulu to English alphabetical stretch -ngcuba to -ngeke and the English to isiZulu stretch misdealings to mitigate in EID in table 4 and figure 10 indicate that the use of translation equivalents only is only 3.5% more in the English to isiZulu side than in the isiZulu to English side and 11% more in the English to isiZulu side for cases where both translation equivalents and surrogate equivalents were used. However, instances where the compilers had surrogate equivalents as the only option for treatment were much more frequent, 14.5% more in the isiZulu to English side than in the English to isiZulu side of the dictionary.

A total number of 101 surrogate equivalents were used in the treatment of lemmas in the two randomly selected pages from the isiZulu to English and the English to isiZulu sides of the dictionary. Extrapolation for the entire dictionary gives a total of 63,000 instances of the use of surrogate equivalents in EID. A total number of 171 translation equivalents were used in these two pages. Extrapolation for the entire dictionary gives a total of 107,000. it is clear that the occurrence of zero equivalence is not rare in English-isiZulu dictionaries.

A fundamental task of the lexicographer is to act as the mediator between the language(s) treated in the dictionary and the target user. In modern lexicography users require a user friendly reference work in which they, in terms of Haas (1962) could find the word preferably in the first place they are looking and in terms of Laufer (1992) enabled by the lookup to "know the word". In respect of lexical gaps the lexicographer should utilise all treatment options available such as loan words, paraphrase of meaning and pictorial illustrations to guide the users to understand the meaning of a word. In this article it has been indicated that lexical gaps are very frequent in the language pair isiZulu/English and subsequently poses a big challenge to the lexicographer to treat them in a satisfactory way in English-isiZulu / isiZulu-English bilingual dictionaries. Lexical gaps in isiZulu (English as source language and isiZulu as target language) are less frequent than lexical gaps in English (isiZulu as source language and English as target language). The research results indicate that EID did well in the treatment of the many lexical gaps in both directions of the dictionary. IsiZulu is rich in cultural terms for which there are no English equivalents and the compilers put much effort into finding ways to convey the meaning of such words. Likewise, for the lexical gaps in isiZulu, users are well-provided with surrogate equivalents. 2351a5e196