Université de Montréal - Thèse sous forme numérique

28i.e. we may want to select argumentation verbs. Thus, we make the hypothesis thatgenre knowledge may guide us in the task of term selection (Chapter 4).Thirdly, the same kind of information mentioned above may also be useful fordescribing the selected verbs by means of semantic frames (Fillmore 1976, 1977, 1982,1985; Fillmore and Atkins 1992). If we understand that argumentation is a mandatoryframe in the judgments and that both the parties and the judges have to provide for it,the frame Argumentation could be described accordingly: an ARGUER (the parties andthe judges) has to provide ARGUMENTS to justify their position in a given moment of thejudgment scenario.Finally, we can also hypothesize that genre knowledge may be helpful forassigning equivalents and explaining the higher or lower equivalence degree betweenterms in that it presupposes that the instantiations of a given genre may revealsimilarities and differences in its characteristics. Therefore, partial equivalence can beexplained by examining such differences.2.2. EquivalenceThis sub-chapter investigates the theoretical grounds of equivalence in lexicographyand in terminology as well as the methodologies of equivalent selection proposed inthese two disciplines. More specifically, the sub-chapter discusses the nature and thetypes of equivalence formulated in the literature (e.g. semantic equivalence, functionalequivalence, terminological equivalence); it explains equivalence problems (e.g.anisomorphism, culture-dependant terminology); it presents classifications ofequivalence degrees (e.g. full equivalence, partial equivalence, zero equivalence);finally, it surveys methods and practices of establishing equivalence in lexicographyand in classic descriptive terminology (e.g. how do lexicographers and terminographers