On one hand, much too much importance is attached to the selection of lemmas in dictionary reviews, on the other, it is an established fact that metalexicographical interest in the selection of lemmas is not remarkable. This is undoubtedly due to the fact that this problem is more one of methodology, which should be based on the genuine purpose of the dictionary, than one of theory, which may generate entirely new metalexicographical theories. The metalexicographical practise more or less matches the metalexicographical interest. Much time and effort may have been spent on various selection decisions, but hardly any on clear lexicographical instructions. This is also the case with the three existing editions of Duden's big German dictionary. Here, an increase in lemma number from one edition to the next is evident/noticeable, but any kind of systematics is conspicuously absent/but systematics is nowhere to be found. This is especially questionable for a dictionary which considers authentic documentation of modern German language to be its most important task. Linked with a criticism of actual systematic phenomena this article offers suggestions for a more systematic methodology.
Untersuchungen Zur Kommerziellen Lexikographie Der Deutschen Gegenwartssprache I. "duden. Das Große Wörterbuch Der Deutschen Sprache in Zehn Bänden", 2003