Université de Montréal - Thèse sous forme numérique

42The ―formal dimension‖ corresponds to the collocational patterns of lexicalitems. As Atkins and Rundell (2008), Piotrowski believes collocational patterns shouldbe compared so as to establish equivalents. However, he adds that only the most typicalfrequent collocability patterns, or ―focal collocations‖, should be taken into account. Hefurther explains that the two dimensions mentioned are not only theoretical but that, infact, bilingual lexicographers work on their basis intuitively, because lexicographersusually start from the formal dimension and then go on to the situational analysis. Hisposition concerning equivalence can thus be summarized in his own words (Piotrowski1994: 138):Generally our approach to equivalence is in agreement with the theoretical viewthat meaning, however defined, is carried by larger linguistic expressions ratherthan by single lexemes, advocated by some logicians (e.g. Quine 1969) and bysome linguists (cf. Apresjan 1974/80; Mel‘čuk and Pertsov 1987).[…]In our approach equivalence does not hold between single lexemes in L1 andL2, or between their senses, but between whole syntagmatic expressions, i.e.between collocability patterns which contain lexemes.As we will attempt to demonstrate similar positions to equivalence interminology are only adopted by those terminologists who follow a lexicographicapproach to the elaboration of specialized lexical resources. In fact, the featureaccording to which the relationship of equivalence should be established is not entirelyclear or explicit in the literature on terminology. While explaining the onomasiologicalapproach on which the search for equivalence should be based, Felber (1987: 128)states that ―La compréhension d‘une notion est l‘ensemble des caractères qui constituentcette notion. C‘est pourquoi comparer deux notions revient plus ou moins à comparerles caractères de ces notions‖. However, he does not specify the characteristics to whichhe refers. Other answers in the literature refer to the place the concept occupies in theconceptual system of the specialized field, which can be inferred from the statementssuch as the following ones (Arnzt 1993: 6 and 13):