Every word, if it has more than one meaning or sense, has particular meanings/senses which are used more often
than others. I would think about which meaning or sense I thought was used most frequently and I would think of
example sentences which most typically use that meaning or sense of the word in a way in which a learner would
understand. Many words collocate with certain other words (i.e. are frequently used together in phrases or sentences)
and I usually included these collocations.
For the purpose of creating my example sentences I would sometimes consult magazines but I would most often use
examples from my own life. So for example, if the word was 'tennis', I thought of my friend who played tennis and I
would create a sentence using her name and playing tennis.
I would then translate the Afrikaans example sentence. If I recall correctly I translated all the Afrikaans example
sentences I worked on but if I felt unsure doing the translation of any sentence, the Respondent had a translator who
did the translation. I believe the English translation I did was checked anyway.
It helped me to translate the Afrikaans example sentences because if the sentence did not work in English then I went
back to the Afrikaans sentence to adjust it.
I did not purposefully or consciously copy anything out of another dictionary. It is possible that a sentence or type of
sentence may have stuck in my mind but it is not unusual that there are sentences which are similar because it is in
the very nature of writing a dictionary that there will be similarities. As I mentioned before many word collocate with
certain other words or phrases and are therefore typical combinations that are usually/often used together. These
high frequency combinations of words will therefore often be used together in a variety of dictionaries and therefore
there will often be similarities in example sentences.
It was very important to me to keep the sentences as short and as simple as possible and to use examples which
dealt with something that was relevant to learners' lives so that they could recognize and identify themselves with the
Page 323 of [2016] 4 All SA 311 (SCA)
example sentences. I had to be mindful to try to only use words which were already headwords in the dictionary
otherwise learners might come across words in the example sentences that they did not understand and were unable
to look up in the dictionary."
[26] In sum, the evidence of the three compilers was that they did not copy from the Aanleerderswoordeboek. The
possibility that such copying occurred in the editorial process was rejected in the affidavit of Dr Louw. He said
that he did not consult either the Aanleerderswoordeboek o r t h e Pharos Tweetalige Skoolwoordeboek in the
process of editing the untranslated work of the three compilers, nor did he make either of these dictionaries
available to any of the editorial assistants. Given that the dictionary covered only frequently used words and
translations that he knew well, he said he had little need to consult other sources in the course of his editorial
work. When he did so he used a monolingual dictionary, the Verklarende Handwoordeboek van die Afrikaans
Taal. In the case of subject specific terms in the dictionary, such as geography, he would crosscheck
translations against an English geography textbook published by OUP.
[27] Apart from the evidence of those directly involved in the compilation and editing of the dictionary, OUP also
delivered affidavits by three expert witnesses. The first was Professor Timothy Dunne, an ad hominem
professor in the Department of Statistics at the University of Cape Town, where he was previously head of
department. Media24's expert, Professor Kidd, acknowledged his expertise in the field of statistics. Two points
in his evidence were important. The first was an analysis of the correspondences identified by Dr Prinsloo and
incorporated in annexures NB7 and NB 8 to the founding affidavit. Professor Dunne obtained the contributor
labels from OUP that enabled him to identify which compiler was responsible for each of the correspondences.
He analysed that information against the contents of the two annexures and this showed that the
correspondences were more or less evenly distributed among the three compilers. Counsel for Media24
attacked this conclusion on the basis that Professor Dunne had not identified the source of his information,
but that attack was misplaced as the source was clearly stated in Professor Dunne's affidavit. Media24 did not
challenge this evidence in reply. It served to exclude the possibility that the correspondences were all the
work of one of the compilers alone what Counsel referred to as a "rogue compiler".
[28] The second important aspect of the evidence of Professor Dunne was to draw attention to the statistical
principle usually summarised in the maxim that correlation does not imply causation. What this means is that
the mere fact that there is a correlation between two things in this case��the example sentences does not
necessarily mean that the one is the cause or source of the other. In other words, the fact that there is
correspondence between different example sentences does not establish that those that came into existence
later in time were copied from the earlier ones. That is merely one possibility.
[29] Professor Dunne's analysis pointed to the absence of an identifiable single source of copying (which he
referred to as plagiarism). He said that therefore arguably what remained was a requirement that evidence of
a collective conspiracy was necessary. His reason was that if the correspondences were to constitute
evidence of copying, then either the three compilers
Page 324 of [2016] 4 All SA 311 (SCA)
colluded to copy from the same sources, while ostensibly working separately, or they all separately, without
reference to the others, did so of their own volition.
[30] While Professor Dunne was careful not to venture into lexicographical territory, he drew attention to the need
to weigh factors pointing in the direction of copying against other potential explanations of the
correspondences. Those explanations were dealt with in the affidavits of Mr Michael Rundell and Professor
Taljard, both lexicographers. Professor Taljard identified the constraints that apply to the preparation of a
basic bilingual dictionary directed at learners of a language in the context of a school. The headwords in such
a dictionary must be carefully chosen by identifying words in frequent use. The profile of the users affects the
formulation of example sentences. These must not use language that is more difficult than the word being