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,

First and foremost, the editor of this volume would like to thank the European Science Foundation for making possible both the original working group along with its meetings, and this open access publication. The NeDiMAH network continues to be a point of reference for scholars who are exploring not just how to use digital methods in the humanities and what it means to do this, but also what is at stake in the digital turn for our diverse and yet interconnected disciplines. It would be remiss not to also thank the participants in the NeDiMAH events: their contributions to that early discussion are woven into the fabric of this volume and the issues it pursues. In particular, I would like to thank the Zadar meeting group:

This paper analyzes the application of usage labels in three representative lexicographic works, namely the Portuguese, Spanish, and French Academy Dictionaries as a starting point for creating a consistent classifcation of usage labels and their encoding in accordance with TEI Lex-0. The use of labels is not always entirely consistent within individual dictionaries and even less so across diferent lexicographic projects. This makes the tasks of accurately classifying and encoding them quite diffcult. This difculty is compounded by the diferences and partial incompatibilities found in the lexicographic literature on the treatment of diasystemic information. We address the existing literature and the initial classifcation of TEI Lex-0, and argue for the need to introduce some changes to TEI Lex-0, most notably in terms of diatextual labels. Finally, we argue that the existing classifcations based on examples rather than on clear and explicit defnitions of classifcation categories will always lack in precision and lead to mutually incompatible encodings of diferent dictionaries. We propose a set of defnitions for usage label categories that can be adopted by TEI Lex-0 and used in other similar attempts to create interoperable lexical resources. An agreement on usage label categories is a frst and necessary step before proceeding in the direction of harmonizing and standardizing the actual values of usage labels across various dictionaries and across diferent languages.

No abstract