1 resultado para Correctness
em Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Portugal
Filtro por publicador
- KUPS-Datenbank - Universität zu Köln - Kölner UniversitätsPublikationsServer (1)
- Repository Napier (3)
- Aberystwyth University Repository - Reino Unido (1)
- AMS Tesi di Dottorato - Alm@DL - Università di Bologna (9)
- Archivo Digital para la Docencia y la Investigación - Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad del País Vasco (1)
- Aston University Research Archive (9)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (3)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (BDPI/USP) (6)
- Biblioteca Digital de la Universidad Católica Argentina (1)
- Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações Eletrônicas da UERJ (3)
- BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça (8)
- Boston University Digital Common (15)
- Brock University, Canada (3)
- Bulgarian Digital Mathematics Library at IMI-BAS (5)
- Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (1)
- CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK (5)
- Chinese Academy of Sciences Institutional Repositories Grid Portal (25)
- Cochin University of Science & Technology (CUSAT), India (5)
- Corvinus Research Archive - The institutional repository for the Corvinus University of Budapest (1)
- Dalarna University College Electronic Archive (1)
- Department of Computer Science E-Repository - King's College London, Strand, London (5)
- Digital Commons - Michigan Tech (2)
- Digital Commons at Florida International University (9)
- Digital Peer Publishing (1)
- DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln (1)
- DRUM (Digital Repository at the University of Maryland) (2)
- Duke University (1)
- FUNDAJ - Fundação Joaquim Nabuco (1)
- Glasgow Theses Service (1)
- Greenwich Academic Literature Archive - UK (3)
- Helda - Digital Repository of University of Helsinki (4)
- Indian Institute of Science - Bangalore - Índia (26)
- Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Portugal (1)
- Iowa Publications Online (IPO) - State Library, State of Iowa (Iowa), United States (1)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (5)
- National Center for Biotechnology Information - NCBI (1)
- Nottingham eTheses (1)
- Portal de Revistas Científicas Complutenses - Espanha (1)
- Publishing Network for Geoscientific & Environmental Data (3)
- QUB Research Portal - Research Directory and Institutional Repository for Queen's University Belfast (12)
- Queensland University of Technology - ePrints Archive (50)
- RDBU - Repositório Digital da Biblioteca da Unisinos (1)
- ReCiL - Repositório Científico Lusófona - Grupo Lusófona, Portugal (1)
- Repositorio Académico de la Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica (2)
- Repositório Científico da Universidade de Évora - Portugal (1)
- Repositório digital da Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV (1)
- Repositório Digital da UNIVERSIDADE DA MADEIRA - Portugal (3)
- Repositório Institucional da Universidade de Aveiro - Portugal (1)
- Repositório Institucional UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista "Julio de Mesquita Filho" (14)
- Repositorio Institucional Universidad EAFIT - Medelin - Colombia (1)
- School of Medicine, Washington University, United States (1)
- Universidad de Alicante (3)
- Universidad del Rosario, Colombia (1)
- Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (32)
- Universidade de Lisboa - Repositório Aberto (1)
- Universidade Federal do Pará (2)
- Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) (11)
- Universidade Metodista de São Paulo (2)
- Universitat de Girona, Spain (1)
- Universitätsbibliothek Kassel, Universität Kassel, Germany (7)
- Université de Montréal (1)
- Université de Montréal, Canada (4)
- University of Michigan (5)
- University of Queensland eSpace - Australia (18)
- University of Washington (1)
- WestminsterResearch - UK (3)
Resumo:
This paper aims to present a contrastive approach between three different ways of building concepts after proving the similar syntactic possibilities that coexist in terms. However, from the semantic point of view we can see that each language family has a different distribution in meaning. But the most important point we try to show is that the differences found in the psychological process when communicating concepts should guide the translator and the terminologist in the target text production and the terminology planning process. Differences between languages in the information transmission process are due to the different roles the different types of knowledge play. We distinguish here the analytic-descriptive knowledge and the analogical knowledge among others. We also state that none of them is the best when determining the correctness of a term, but there has to be adequacy criteria in the selection process. This concept building or term building success is important when looking at the linguistic map of the information society.