The article presents the results of a survey on dictionary use in Europe, focusing on general monolingual dictionaries. The survey is the broadest survey of dictionary use to date, covering close to 10,000 dictionary users (and non-users) in nearly thirty countries. Our survey covers varied user groups, going beyond the students and translators who have tended to dominate such studies thus far. The survey was delivered via an online survey platform, in language versions specific to each target country. It was completed by 9,562 respondents, over 300 respondents per country on average. The survey consisted of the general section, which was translated and presented to all participants, as well as country-specific sections for a subset of 11 countries, which were drafted by collaborators at the national level. The present report covers the general section. IntroductionResearch into dictionary use has become increasingly important in recent years. In contrast to 15 years ago, new findings in this area are presented every year, e.g. at every Euralex or eLex conference. These studies range from questionnaire or log file studies to smaller-scale studies focussing on eye tracking, usability, or other aspects of dictionary use measurable in a lab. For an overview of different studies,

Any ambiguity in texts used in the communication about vaccines can not only interfere with comprehension, but also generate safety and liability issues. Within a survey on the quality of written protocols for at-risk interventional procedures and sanitary crises, we analyzed documents relating to vaccination, and among them, the "package-leaflet" of an anti-H1N1 influenza vaccine, widely disseminated to the public in 2009-2010. Among the most common mistakes, we observed that 1) language was not always adjusted to the non-specialist's level of knowledge; 2) chronology, logic, consistency, and homogeneity were often missing; 3) crucial pieces of information were disseminated all over the text, 4) use of the passive voice did not distinguish between instructions and information; 5) use of synonyms could be misleading and impair translation. We propose the use of "Controlled language" (CL) to improve the situation. By constraining lexicon, grammar and syntax, CL is a way to write documents that are clear, accurate and devoid of ambiguity. However, the set of rules necessary to write in CL is difficult to memorize. We thus developed authoring software (Rédacticiel Prolipsia) to make the creation of a CL by linguists and its use by health professionals easy and adapted to any domain. It may considerably improve the writing of vaccine package inserts/leaflets. It could be used to write information documents about vaccines and their safety, and operating procedures for professionals to prepare, store, and administer vaccines, decide upon proper indication of vaccines, and follow patients after vaccine injection.

No abstract

Increasing attention is being paid to safety considerations as well as to