Université de Montréal - Thèse sous forme numérique

308However, even though the labels attributed to each frame were an efficient meansfor grouping together candidate equivalents, they are not exempt of subjectivity. Calling aframe [Verdict] instead of [Decision] or [Judgment] is, most of the times, a matter of choicethat the terminologist has to make the same way sense distinctions are to a certain degreethe product of the terminologists‘ intellectual labours. Nonetheless, it should be noted thatas arbitrary as the labels attributed to the frames may be they were only taken as the startingpoint and that the most important basis for the assignment of equivalents was thecomparison of the ways in which the terms perspectivize the frame. As mentioned insection 5.2.4, the criterion that proved to be the most relevant for grouping terms togetheras well as for assigning their equivalents takes into account the number and nature of coreFEs that a given term may profile. In this study, this criterion is also the one that bestillustrates the ―common features‖ to which Atkins et al. (2003: 334 citing Hanks (2000) andKilgarriff (1997)) refer when they propose that sense distinctions be based on ―clusters ofinstances that share enough common features to justify being treated as a coherent‗meaning group‘‖.In order to counter the relative arbitrariness of the frame labels and to turn the sensedistinctions into a product of the terminologists‘ intellectual labours that has value forfuture users, a number of avenues for research should be discussed. The first one concernsthe automatization of some of the tasks carried out in the research, namely the selection andannotation of contexts. It has been previously mentioned that the task of annotating thecontexts in which the terms occur (section 4.3.8) could benefit from a higher degree ofautomatization, such as the one proposed in Hadouche et al. (2010) and evaluated inHadouche et al. (2011). The second one concerns a systematic validation of the datainvolving a multidisciplinary team composed by legal experts and translators.Finally, in order to provide a larger coverage of the subject field and offertranslators more options for choosing the necessary equivalents, it would be relevant to