The notion of lexical system кратко
Обновлено: 04.07.2024
К сожалению, на данный момент у нас невозможно бесплатно скачать полный вариант книги.
Но вы можете попробовать скачать полный вариант, купив у наших партнеров электронную книгу здесь, если она у них есть наличии в данный момент.
Также можно купить бумажную версию книги здесь.
Лексикология современного английского языка, Арнольд И.В., 1986.
Учебник посвящен слову как основной единице языка, его семантической и морфологической структуре, особенностям английского словообразования и фразеологии. Английская лексика рассматривается как непрерывно развивающаяся система.
В 3-м издании (2-е—1973 г.) обновлен теоретический и иллюстративный материал, расширены главы, посвященные теории слова и семасиологии.
THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD.
Although the borderline between various linguistic units is not always sharp and clear, we shall try to define every new term on its first appearance at once simply and unambiguously, if not always very rigorously. The approximate definition of the term word has already been given in the opening page of the book.
The important point to remember about definitions is that they should indicate the most essential characteristic features of the notion expressed by the term under discussion, the features by which this notion is distinguished from other similar notions. For instance, in defining the word one must distinguish it from other linguistic units, such as the phoneme, the morpheme, or the word-group. In contrast with a definition, a description aims at enumerating all the essential features of a notion.
To make things easier we shall begin by a preliminary description, illustrating it with some examples.
CONTENTS
Preface
Abbreviations
Introduction
Chapter 1. Fundamentals
§1.1 The Object of Lexicology
§1.2 The Theoretical and Practical Value of English Lexicology
§1.3 The Connection of Lexicology with Phonetics, Stylistics, Grammar and Other Branches of Linguistics
§1.4 Types of Lexical Units
§1.5 The Notion of Lexical System
§1.6 The Theory of Oppositions
Part One THE ENGLISH WORD AS A STRUCTURE
Chapter 2. Characteristics of the Word as the Basic Unit of Language
§2.1 The Definition of the Word
§2.2 Semantic Triangle
§2.3 Phonetic, Morphological and Semantic Motivation of Words
Chapter 3. Lexical Meaning and Semantic Structure of English Words
§3.1 Definitions
§3.2 The Lexical Meaning Versus Notion
§3.3 Denotative and Connotative Meaning
§3.4 The Semantic Structure of Polysemantic Words
§3.5 Contextual Analysis
§3.6 Componential Analysis
Chapter 4. Semantic Change
§4.1 Types of Semantic Change
§4.2 Linguistic Causes of Semantic Change
§4.3 Extralinguistic Causes of Semantic Change
Chapter 5. Morphological Structure of English Words. Affixation
§5.1 Morphemes. Free and Bound Forms. Morphological Classification of Words. Word-Families
§5.2 Aims and Principles of Morphemic and Word-Formation Analysis
§5.3 Analysis into Immediate Constituents
§5.4 Derivational and Functional Affixes
§5.5 The Valency of Affixes and Stems. Word-Building Patterns and Their Meaning
§5.6 Classification of Affixes
§5.7 Allomorphs
§5.8 Boundary Cases Between Derivation, Inflection and Composition
§5.9 Combining Forms
§5.10 Hybrids
Chapter 6. Compound Words
§6.1 Definitions and Introductory Remarks
§6.2.1 The Criteria of Compounds
§6.2.2 Semi-Affixes
§6.2.3 “The Stone Wall Problem"
§6.2.4 Verbal Collocations of the Give Up Type
§6.3 Specific Features of English Compounds
§6.4.1 Classification of Compounds
§6.4.2 Compound Nouns
§6.4.3 Compound Adjectives
§6.4.4 Compound Verbs
§6.5 Derivational Compounds
§6.6 Reduplication and Miscellanea of Composition
§6.6.1 Reduplicative Compounds
§6.6.2 Ablaut Combinations
§6.6.3 Rhyme Combinations
§6.7 Pseudo Compounds
§6.8 The Historical Development of English Compounds
§6.9 New Word-Forming Patterns in Composition
Chapter 7. Shortened Words and Minor Types of Lexical Oppositions
§7.1 Shortening of Spoken Words and Its Causes
§7.2 Blending
§7.3 Graphical Abbreviations. Acronyms
§7.4 Minor Types of Lexical Oppositions. Sound Interchange
§7.5 Distinctive Stress
§7.6 Sound Imitation
§7.7 Back-Formation
Chapter 8. Conversion and Similar Phenomena
§8.1 Introductory Remarks
§8.2 The Historical Development of Conversion
§8.3 Conversion in Present-Day English
§8.4 Semantic Relationships in Conversion
§8.5 Substantivation
§8.6 Conversion in Different Parts of Speech
§8.7 Conversion and Other Types of Word-Formation
Chapter 9. Set Expressions
§9.1 Introductory Remarks. Definitions
§9.2 Set Expressions, Semi-Fixed Combinations and Free Phrases
Changeable and Unchangeable Set Expressions
§9.3 Classification of Set Expressions
§9.4 Similarity and Difference between a Set Expression and a Word.
§9.5 Features Enhancing Unity and Stability of Set Expressions
§9.6 Proverbs, Sayings, Familiar Quotations and Clichés
Part Two ENGLISH VOCABULARY AS A SYSTEM
Chapter 10. Homonyms. Synonyms. Antonyms
§10.1 Homonyms
§10.2 The Origin of Homonyms
§10.3 Homonymy Treated Synchronically
§10.4 Synonyms
§10.5 Interchangeability and Substitution
§10.6 Sources of Synonymy
§10.7 Euphemisms
§10.8 Lexical Variants and Paronyms
§10.9 Antonyms and Conversives
Chapter 11. Lexical Systems
§11.1 The English Vocabulary as an Adaptive System. Neologisms
§11.2 Morphological and Lexico-Grammatical Grouping
§11.3 Thematic and Ideographic Groups. The Theories of Semantic Fields. Hyponymy
§11.4 Terminological Systems
§11.5 The Opposition of Emotionally Coloured and Emotionally Neutral Vocabulary
§11.6 Different Types of Non-Semantic Grouping
Chapter 12. The Opposition of Stylistically Marked and Stylistically Neutral Words
§12.1 Functional Styles and Neutral Vocabulary
§12.2 Functional Styles and Registers
§12.3 Learned Words and Official Vocabulary
§12.4 Poetic Diction
§12.5 Colloquial Words and Expressions
§12.6 Slang
Chapter 13. Native Words Versus Loan Words
§13.1 The Origin of English Words
§13.2 Assimilation of Loan Words
§13.3 Etymological Doublets
§13.4 International Words
Chapter 14. Regional Varieties of the English Vocabulary
§14.1 Standard English Variants and Dialects
§14.2 American English
§14.3 Canadian, Australian and Indian Variants
Chapter 15. Lexicography
§15.1 Types of Dictionaries
§15.2 Some of the Main Problems of Lexicography
§15.3 Historical Development of British and American Lexicography
Conclusion
Recommended Reading
Subject Index.
On the buttons above and below you can buy the book in official online stores Labirint, Ozon and others. Also you can search related and similar materials on other sites.
Лекции
Лабораторные
Справочники
Эссе
Вопросы
Стандарты
Программы
Дипломные
Курсовые
Помогалки
Графические
Доступные файлы (1):
The definition of language. The distinction between language and speech. Language as a semiotic system: its functions, elements and structure. Lingual elements (units) as signs. Segmental and supra-segmental lingual units. The levels оf lingual units, their structural and functional features. Hierarchical relations between units of different levels. The word and the sentence as the main level-forming units. The text level as the sphere of functional manifestation of all the lingual units. The three constituent parts (subsystems) of the language: phonological (phonetic), lexical and grammatical systems. The systemic character of grammar. Morphology and syntax - the two main sections of grammar. Grammar as a branch of linguistics. Theoretical and practical grammar. Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations between lingual units; syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations in grammar. The plane of content and the plane of expression; synonymy and homonymy in grammar. The notions of diachrony and synchrony; diachronic and synchronic relations in grammar.
Other terms are used in linguistics by different authors to denote the two basic aspects of language (which, however, do not always coincide with the ‘language – speech’ dichotomy): ‘language competence’ and ‘language performance’ (N. Chomsky), ‘ linguistic schema’ – ‘linguistic usage’, ‘linguistic system’ – ‘linguistic process’ (‘text’) (L. Hjelmslev), ‘code’ – ‘message’ (R. Jacobson), etc. Still, the terms ‘language’ and ‘speech’ are the most widely used.
Ferdinand de Saussure was also among the first scholars who defined lingual units as specific signs - bilateral (two-sided) units that have both form and meaning. Ferdinand de Saussure spoke about an indissoluble link between a phonetic ‘signifier’ (French: ‘signifiant’), and a ‘signified’ (‘signifie’). In the system of language, a lingual sign has only a potential meaning; in speech, in the process of communication, this potential meaning is “actualized”, connected with a particular referent. That is why a lingual sign is graphically presented in the form of a triangle, including the material form, the meaning and the referent. For example, the word ‘elephant’ is a sign, consisting of a signifier, or form – the sequence of phonemes (or, in written presentation, of letters), and a signified, or meaning – the image of the animal in our mind; the referent is the ‘real’ animal in the outside world, which may or may not be physically present.
Первый уровень образован фонемами, мельчайшими материальными языковыми элементами. Они обладают формой, но не обладают значением. Фонемы выполняют функцию дифференциации значений слов и морфем. Например: man – men.
Третий языковой уровень образуется словами, или лексемами - номинативными языковыми единицами, которые выражают конкретное, номинативное значение: они называют различные референты. Слово строится морфемами; оно может состоять из одной морфемы, например: cat. Разница заключается в качестве значения.
Пятый уровень образуется предложениями, или пропоземами - языковыми единицами, которые называют некоторую ситуацию, событие и одновременно выражают предикацию, т.е. показывают отношения между названным событием и реальной действительностью - реально или нереально событие, желательно или обязательно, сообщается как факт или подвергается вопросу, утверждается или отрицается и т.д.; например: Their departure was sudden - реальное событие, имевшее место в прошлом, сообщается как факт и т.д. Предложение часто определяется как предикативная языковая единица. Минимальное предложение может состоять из одного слова, например: Fire!
The 1 st level is formed by phonemes, the smallest material lingual elements, or segments. They have form, but they have no meaning. Phonemes differentiate the meanings of morphemes and words. E.g.: man – men.
The 2 nd level is composed of morphemes, the smallest meaningful elements built up by phonemes. The shortest morpheme can consist of one phoneme, e.g.: step-s; -s renders the meaning of the 3rd person singular form of the verb, or, the plural form of the noun. The meaning of the morpheme is abstract and significative: it does not name the referent, but only signifies it.
The 3rd level consists of words, or lexemes, nominative lingual units, which express direct, nominative meanings: they name, or nominate various referents. The words consist of morphemes, and the shortest word can include only one morpheme, e.g.: cat. The difference is in the quality of the meaning.
The 4 th level is formed by word-combinations, or phrasemes, the combinations of two or more notional words, which represent complex nominations of various referents (things, actions, qualities, and even situations) in a sentence, e.g.: a beautiful girl, their sudden departure. In a more advanced treatment, phrases along with separate words can be seen as the constituents of sentences, notional parts of the sentence, which make the fourth language level and can be called “denotemes”.
The 5 th level is the level of sentences, or proposemes, lingual units which name certain situations, or events, and at the same time express predication, i.e. they show the relations of the event named to reality - whether the event is real or unreal, desirable or obligatory, stated as a fact or asked about, affirmed or negated, etc., e.g.: Their departure was sudden (a real event, which took place in the past, stated as a fact, etc.). Thus, the sentence is often defined as a predicative lingual unit. The minimal sentence can consist of just one word, e.g.: Fire!
The 6 th level is formed by sentences in a text or in actual speech. Textual units are traditionally called supra-phrasal unities; we will call such supra-sentential constructions, which are produced in speech, dictemes (from Latin ‘dicto’ ‘I speak’). Dictemes are characterized by a number of features, the main one of which is the unity of topic. As with all lingual units, dictemes are reducible to one unit of the lower level; e.g., the text of an advertisement slogan can consist of just one sentence: Just do it!; or, a paragraph in a written text can be formed by a single independent sentence, being topically significant.
Not all lingual units are meaningful and, thus, they can not be defined as signs: phonemes and syllables (which are also distinguished as an optional lingual level by some linguists) participate in the expression of the meaning of the units of upper levels; they are called “cortemes” (from Lat. cortex: ‘bark, crust, shell’) as opposed to the majority of meaningful lingual units, called “signemes”.
Paradigmatic relations exist not only in grammar, but in the phonetical and lexical systems of language as well. For example, paradigmatic relations exist between vowels and consonants, voiced and voiceless consonants, etc.; between synonyms and antonyms, in topical groups of words, word-building models, etc. But paradigmatic relations are of primary importance for grammar, as the grammar of language is above all systemic.
Изучение грамматики может быть либо практического характера (практическая грамматика), когда исследование направлено на описание грамматики как набора правил, подлежащих соблюдению, либо теоретического характера (теоретическая грамматика), когда исследование направлено на объяснение механизмов и законов, по которым функционирует грамматическая система языка.
The study of grammar may be either practical (practical grammar), which describes grammar as a set of rules and regulations to follow, or theoretical (theoretical grammar), aiming at the explanation of how and why the grammatical system works.
Each sub-system distinguishes not only its own set of elements, but its own structural organization. For example, within the grammatical system we single out parts of speech and sentence patterns. The parts of speech are further subdivided into nouns, verbs, adjective, adverbs, functional parts of speech; this subdivision of grammar is known as morphology. Sentences are further subdivided into simple and composite: composite sentences are subdivided into complex and compound, etc.; this subdivision of grammar is known as syntax.
Another major contribution to the systemic description of language by Ferdinand de Saussure and Beaudoin de Courtenay was the doctrine that the synchronic study of a particular ‘state’ of a language in its development should be separated from the diachronic study of the language changes from one state to another. So, one more fundamental type of relation between language elements is to be distinguished: synchronic relations between language elements coexisting at a certain period of time, and diachronic relations between lingual elements of a certain type at different time periods. Language and each of its subsystems are synchronic systems of co-existing elements; in each system it is also possible to analyze diachronic relations between its elements. For example, synchronic relations in New English: hard – harder – hardest; synchronic relations in Old English: heard - heardra - heardost; diachronic relations: hard – heard; harder – heardra; hardest – heardost.
UNIT 2
MORPHEMIC STRUCTURE OF THE WORD
The definition of the morpheme. The word and the morpheme, their correlation in the level structure of the language. Intermediary phenomena between the word and the morpheme. Traditional classification of morphemes: positional and functional (semantic) criteria. Roots and affixes. Lexical (derivational, word-building) and grammatical (functional, word-changing) affixes. The IC-analysis of the morphemic structure. Grammatical relevance of derivational affixes; lexical (word-building) paradigms. The peculiarities of grammatical suffixes (inflexions) in English. Outer and inner inflexion. The "allo-emic" theory in morphology: morphs, allomorphs and morphemes. Distributional analysis in morphology; contrastive, non-contrastive, and complementary types of distribution. Distributional classification of morphemes: full and empty (zero morphemes), free and bound, overt and covert, segmental and supra-segmental, additive and replacive, continuous and discontinuous morphemes. The assessment of distributional morpheme types.
This approach to treating various lingual units is known in linguistics as “a field approach”: polar phenomena possessing the unambiguous characteristic features of the opposed units constitute “the core”, or “the center” of the field, while the intermediary phenomena combining some of the characteristics of the poles make up “the periphery” of the field; e.g.: functional words make up the periphery of the class of words since their functioning is close to the functioning of morphemes.
According to these criteria morphemes are divided into root-morphemes (roots) and affixal morphemes (affixes). Roots express the concrete, “material” part of the meaning of the word and constitute its central part. Affixes express the specificational part of the meaning of the word: they specify, or transform the meaning of the root. Affixal specification may be of two kinds: of lexical or grammatical character. So, according to the semantic criterion affixes are further subdivided into lexical, or word-building (derivational) affixes, which together with the root constitute the stem of the word, and grammatical, or word-changing affixes, expressing different morphological categories, such as number, case, tense and others. With the help of lexical affixes new words are derived, or built; with the help of grammatical affixes the form of the word is changed.
According to the positional criterion affixes are divided into prefixes, situated before the root in the word, e.g.: under-estimate, and suffixes, situated after the root, e.g.: underestim-ate. Prefixes in English are only lexical: the word underestimate is derived from the word estimate with the help of the prefix under-. Suffixes in English may be either lexical or grammatical; e.g. in the word underestimates -ate is a lexical suffix, because it is used to derive the verb estimate (v) from the noun esteem (n), and –s is a grammatical suffix making the 3rd person, singular form of the verb to underestimate. Grammatical suffixes are also called inflexions (inflections, inflectional endings).
Словообразовательные суффиксы изучаются, прежде всего, в лексикологии с точки зрения значения, которое они привносят в общую семантику слова. В грамматике словообразовательные аффиксы изучаются постольку, поскольку они являются формальными показателями (маркерами) принадлежности слов к разным частям речи; они участвуют в образовании лексических (словообразовательных, деривационных) парадигм слов, объединенных одним корнем, ср.:
to decide - decision - decisive - decisively
to incise - incision - incisive - incisively
Lexical affixes are primarily studied by lexicology with regard to the meaning which they contribute to the general meaning of the whole word. In grammar word-building suffixes are studied as the formal marks of the words belonging to different parts of speech; they form lexical (word-building, derivational) paradigms of words united by a common root, cf.:
to decide - decision - decisive - decisively
to incise - incision - incisive - incisively
Being the formal marks of words of different parts of speech, word-building suffixes are also grammatically relevant. But grammar study is primarily concerned with grammatical, word-changing, or functional affixes, because they change the word according to its grammatical categories and serve to insert the word into an utterance.
under/ estim/ ate/ s
In addition, the derivational history of the word can be hierarchically demonstrated as the so-called “tree of immediate constituents”; such analysis is called “IC-analysis”, IC standing for the “immediate constituents”. E.g.:
under/ estim/ ate/ s
IC-analysis, like many other ideas employed in the study of the morphemes, was developed by an American linguist, Leonard Bloomfield, and his followers within the framework of an approach known as Descriptive Linguistics (or, Structural Linguistics). Immediate constituents analysis in structural linguistics starts with lingual units of upper levels: for example, the immediate constituents of a composite sentence might be clauses, each clause in turn might have noun phrase and verb phrase as constituents, etc.; the analysis continues until the ultimate constituents – the morphemes – are reached.
Initially, the so-called allo-emic theory was developed in phonetics: in phonetics, phonemes, as the generalized, invariant phonological units, are distinguished from their concrete realizations, the allophones. For example, one phoneme is pronounced in a different way in different environments, cf.: you [ju:] - you know [ju]; in Russian, vowels are also pronounced in a different way in stressed and unstressed syllables, cf.: дом - домой. The same applies to the morpheme, which is a generalized unit, an invariant, and may be represented by different variants, allo-morphs, in different textual environments. For example, the morpheme of the plural, -(e)s, sounds differently after voiceless consonants (bats), voiced consonants and vowels (rooms), and after fricative and sibilant consonants (clashes). So, [s], [z], [iz], which are united by the same meaning (the grammatical meaning of the plural), are allo-morphs of the same morpheme, which is represented as -(e)s in written speech.
The allo-morphs of the plural morpheme -(e)s [s], [z], [iz] stand in phonemic complementary distribution; the allo-morph –en, as in oxen, stands in morphemic complementary distribution with the other allo-morphs of the plural morpheme.
Many of the distributional morpheme types contradict the traditional definition of the morpheme: traditionally the morpheme is the smallest meaningful lingual unit (this is contradicted by the “empty” morphemes type), built up by phonemes (this is contradicted by the “supra-segmental” morphemes type), used to build up words (this is contradicted by the “discontinuous” morphemes type). This is due to the fact that in Descriptive Linguistics only three lingual units are distinguished: the phoneme, the morpheme, and syntactic constructions; the notion of the word is rejected because of the difficulties of defining it. Still, the classification of distributional morpheme types can be used to summarize and differentiate various types of word-building and word-changing, though not all of them are morphemic in the current mainstream understanding of the term “morpheme”.
What are the aims of lexicology concerned with systematizations?
What is a system? Describe peculiarities of lexical system.
What is a set? What is a fuzzy set? Give examples of sets within lexical system.
Prove that lexical system is in a state of constant change.
How are lexical system and extra-linguist reality connected?
What are the main grammatical and phonetical features of English that influence its lexical system?
Types of Semantic Relations of Words
I.V. Arnold, The English Word, §1.5. The Notion of Lexical System [pp. 23-25]
Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations
Last but not least, one final point may be made about the lexical system, namely that its elements are characterized by their combinatorial and contrastive properties determining their syntagmatic and paradigmatic relationships. A word enters into syntagmatic (linear) combinatorial relationships with other lexical units that can form its context, serving to identify and distinguish its meaning. Lexical units are known to be context-dependent. E. g. in the hat on her head the noun head means 'part of the body', whereas in the head of the department head means 'chief'. A word enters into contrastive paradigmatic relations with all other words, e. g. head, chief, director, etc. that can occur in the same context and be contrasted to it. This principle of contrast or opposition is fundamental in modern linguistics […].
Syntagmatic and paradigmatic studies are functional
Paradigmatic and syntagmatic studies of meaning are functional because the meaning of the lexical unit is studied first not through its relation to referent but through its functions in relation to other units.
Functional approach is contrasted to referential or onomasiological approach, otherwise called theory of nomination, in which meaning is studied as the interdependence between words and their referents, that is things or concepts they name, i.e. various names given to the same sense. The onomasiological study of lexical units became especially prominent in the last two decades. The revival of interest in onomasiological matters is reflected in a large volume of publications on the subject. […].
The study of the lexical system must also include the study of the words' combinatorial possibilities — their capacity to combine with one another in groups of certain patterns, which serve to identify meanings. Most modern research in linguistics attaches great importance to what is variously called valency, distributional characteristics, colligation and collocation, combining power or otherwise. This research shows that combinatorial possibilities of words play an important part in almost every lexicological issue.
Basis of syntagmatic relations and methods of their study
Syntagmatic relationships being based on the linear character of speech are studied by means of contextual, valency, distributional, transformational and some other types of analysis.
Basis of pragmatic relations
Paradigmatic linguistic relationships determining the vocabulary system are based on the interdependence of words within the vocabulary (synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, etc.).
Свидетельство и скидка на обучение каждому участнику
Зарегистрироваться 15–17 марта 2022 г.
Описание презентации по отдельным слайдам:
Lecture 11
Vocabulary as a system
Types of groupings
I. Semantic groups.
II. Paradigmatic relations in the vocabulary (homonymy, synonymy, antonymy, paronymy, hyponymy).
III. Syntagmatic relations (types of contexts)
§ 1. Vocabulary studies
deal with ways of grouping and classifying words.
Though vocabulary is defined as a lexical system, the present state of knowledge is insufficient to present the whole of the vocabulary as one articulated system.
It is rather a set of interrelated systems.
Types of groupings
2) Morphological groups
1) According to function
form words (functional words)
7% of vocabulary
He is a student.
notional words
a cat, to go, milk
according to morphological structure
root-words, derivatives,
compounds
word-families
dog, doggish, doglike, doggie, to dog, dogged, doggedly, doggedness, dog-biscuit
according to a common suffix or prefix
gladsome, gruesome, handsome, lonesome, tiresome, troublesome, wearisome, wholesome
substitute words
this, that, they, there, then, thus, he, here, how, who, what, where, whither, nobody, never, not
3) Parts of speech and their subdivisions (lexico-grammatical groups)
noun
personal names, animal names, collective names (for people); collective names (for animals), abstract nouns, material nouns, object nouns, proper names for people, toponymic proper nouns
verb
thematic groups
terms of kinship, colour terms
4) Semantic groups
ideographic groups
semantic fields
terminology
7) Non-semantic grouping
rhyming
length
statistical frequency of use
alphabetical
5) According to emotional colouring
coloured
neutral
6) According to word-origin
native
words beginning with a w are mostly native; with a P are borrowed from Greek
borrowed
8) Paradigmatic groupings (based on the contrastive interdependence of words within the vocabulary)
Homonymy
Synonymy
Antonymy
Hyponymy
Paronymy
9) Syntagmatic groupings (based on the combinatorial properties of words)
context-free
context-dependant
notional
functional
word-families
common affix
morphological structure
parts of speech
thematic groups
ideographic groups
semantic fields
antonyms
synonyms
homonyms
colored
neutral
native
borrowed
context-free
context-dependant
Semantic groupings – attempts to describe vocabulary systematically
Thematic subgroups are formed on the extra-linguistic basis: the words are associated, because the things they name occur together and are closely connected in reality; these words often co-occur in certain repeatedly used contexts (topical vocabulary):
tree-grow-green;
journey-train-taxi-bags-ticket
names for parts of the human body, terms of kinship,
Adj-ves for shape, colour, physical or mental qualities, speed, size
2) Ideographic groups - groups uniting words of different parts of speech but thematically related according to their signification, i.e. to the system of logical notions, the significance of each unit being determined by its neighbors. These groups are supposed to reflect the system of notions in our mind:
light n, bright a, to shine
an airport, to delay, a flight, a terminal, a gate, to check in, a boarding pass, luggage, a porter, an airline, a traffic controller, a lounge, on board, a pilot, to fasten belts
3) Semantic fields – closely knit sectors of vocabulary each characterized by a common concept, is the organization of related words and expressions into a system which shows their relationship to one another:
Health: strength, power, potency, robustness, force, vivacity, stingo, energy, vigor
Movement: go, ride, crawl, fly, run, jump
Sense perception: see, observe, notice, feel, hear, listen
Food: bread, cheese, milk, meat,
A lexical gap – absence of a logically necessary element in a system.
Horse = stallion + mare
. = cow + bull
The words which often occur in the text together are semantically related (co-occurrence criterion), have the same valency potential (combine with the same words), have similar grammatical properties.
Terminology as a special vocabulary sphere
Terminology constitutes the greatest part of every language vocabulary.
A term is a word or word-group used to name a notion characteristic of some special field of knowledge, e.g., linguistics, oil-and-gas production, engineering, culture, economics.
Basic characteristics:
monosemantic
does not depend upon the micro-context
constant meaning
no emotional colouring or evaluation (unless used in literary or colloquial speech)
reflects the system of notions of a science
§ 2. Homonymy
Homonyms - words which have identical sounding or spelling but have nothing in common in their meaning.
A penny is one cent.
The soap has a nice scent.
She sent me a letter.
2.2. Main sources of homonymy
break of polysemy (split polysemy)
Different meanings of one and the same word may lose their semantic connection and may form different words. Unlike homonymy different meanings of one word are mutually dependent.
owing, provided
loan words which were adopted to the English standards in their pronunciation and spelling
Fair (a market) was borrowed from Latin “feria”, and fair (light colour, not dark) was developed from native “faeger”.
shortening of words:
flue, short for influenza is homonymous to flew, past tense of the verb “to fly”.
conversion
a ban --- to ban
a shoulder --- to shoulder
2.2. Classifications of homonyms
according to their spelling and sound form
perfect homonyms (identical in sound and in spelling):
key /ki:/ - ключ, key /ki:/ - клавиша and key /ki:/ - амер. островок, особ. коралловый риф;
homophones (words with the same sound but different
spellings):
read (past tense) - red, pair - pear, principle - principal, capital - capitol, heir – air,
write and right, night and knight, sea and see
homographs (words accidentally identical in spelling
but different in sound):
bow/bou/ - a weapon for shooting arrows, bow/bau/ - an inclination of the body or head in salutation.
lead/led/ - the heaviest of the base metals, lead /li:d/ - to conduct;
row /rou/ - a line of people, row/rаи/ - a quarrel.
according to their spelling and sound form, and grammatical meaning
lexical (no link between their lexical meanings, but one part of speech):
can – мочь and can – консервировать;
post – столб, post – почта, post – должность, post – сигнал на горне
grammatical (belong to different parts of speech, formed by conversion):
milk - to milk, practice - to practice
lexico-grammatical (no link between their lexical meanings and they belong to different parts of speech):
tear (n) - tear (v), bear (n)-bare (a), a pullover – to pull over
according to the characteristics of the paradigm
Is homonymy a disease of the language, an annoying lack of distinction between words?
It is widely used for stylistic purposes in puns (word plays):
“Waiter, waiter, what's this?”
“It's bean soup”.
“I can see that. But what is it now?”
§ 3. Description of English Synonymy
A synonym is a word that has the same or nearly the same meaning as another word.
English is rich in synonyms for the historical reason; its vocabulary is made up of Anglo-Saxon words on one hand and of French, Latin and Greek on the other.
The native words are often shorter and stylistically neutral, while French borrowings are literary and Latin/Greek - learned:
belly – stomach – abdomen
to end - to finish - to complete
teaching - guidance - instruction
division - part - branch;
buy and purchase,
world and universe,
A synonymic dominant of a synonymic group is the most general word that expresses the notion common for all the members of the group. It belongs to the basic stock of words, is stylistically neutral, has high frequency of usage and vast combinability, lacks connotations.
WORK: toil, drudgery, labour, grind, job, task;
FAMOUS: celebrated, distinguished, eminent;
FASHIONABLE: chic, dressy, elegant, modish, smart, stylish, trendy.
Each LSV (meaning) of one word has its own synonyms:
Compare the following groups synonymous to five different meanings of the adjective fresh:
A fresh metaphor — fresh : : original : : novel : : striking.
To begin a fresh paragraph — fresh : : another : : different : : new.
Fresh air — fresh : : pure : : invigorating.
A freshman — fresh : : inexperienced : : green : : raw.
3.1. What are synonyms?
Lexical synonyms are different words 1) of the same part of speech having the same grammatical distribution, which 2) have some common denotational components of meaning, but 3) differ either in some denotational component(s) or in some connotational components of meaning and thus usually have different lexical valency.
What’s the difference between synonyms?
3.2. Classification of synonyms
Ideographic or denotational: the difference in the meaning concerns the notion expressed:
change (become or make different) – alter – vary (undergo change or change something within a range of possibilities);
understand - realize;
to walk - to pace - to stroll - to stride.
Ideographic-stylistic synonyms have the same denotational components but differ in connotational components of meaning:
imitate - monkey;
terrible – horrible - atrocious.
intelligent -shrewd - clever - bright - sagacious;
Typical groups of stylistic synonyms:
archaic/ modern (oft - often);
neologisms / common (baby-moon – artificial satellite);
British/American (post-mail);
euphemisms (die – pass away).
absolute synonyms of exactly the same meaning can replace each other in any given context, without the slightest alteration in denotative or emotional meaning and connotations:
the terms noun and substantive; functional affix, flexion and inflection
phraseological synonyms which are used in different collocations: language - tongue (only mother tongue)
contextual synonyms that are similar in meaning under some specific distributional conditions (e.g. get and buy).
Translation cannot serve as a criterion of synonymy!
words as also, too and as well, all translated by the Russian word тоже, are never interchangeable.
Euphemism - a shift of meaning a word of more or less pleasant or at least inoffensive connotation becomes synonymous to one that is harsh, obscene, indelicate or otherwise unpleasant
naked : : in one's birthday suit;
pregnant : : in the family way
drunk : : merry
§ 4. Lexical Oppositions and Antonymy
Types of lexical opposition doubtfully referred to antonymy:
complementarity/contradictory:
single – married; alive - dead;
(not antonyms because antonyms are gradable)
converseness - mirror-image relations of functions
teacher -student, host - guest, give – take, buy - sell; logical conversives: man and woman, husband and wife
autoantonymy – a word combines two opposite meanings
Unlike antonymy these LSV are used with different words and/or with different prepositions.
an odor – 1) an agreeable scent; fragrance; 2) a disagreeable smell.
a public school - 1) a state school (USA); 2) a private school (UK).
4.1. What’s an antonym? Forms of antonymy
Antonyms are words 1) of the same part of speech 2) having common denotational component of meaning but 3) expressing contrasting opposite points of the same notion.
wide/narrow, admit/deny, produce/consume, old/young bitter/sweet
Types of relations referred to antonymy
contradictory, mutually opposed and denying one another:
alive means 'not dead' and impatient means 'not patient‘;
contrary relations (qualitative or gradual ) opposition;
old and young are the most distant elements of a series like: old : : middle-aged : : young,
hot and cold form a series with the intermediate cool and warm;
high - low
vectorial opposition
to widen - to narrow
What’s characteristic of English Antonymy
Almost every word can have one or more synonyms. ComparativeIy few words have antonyms.
Antonyms do not differ stylistically, in emotional colouring or distribution; an antonymic substitution never results in a change of stylistic colouring.
4.2. Classifications of antonyms
Morphological and semantic basis
a) root antonyms expressing contrary notions:
bad - good, tall - short, slow - fast, ancient – modern;
b) derivational antonyms expressing contradictory notions:
like -dislike, efficient - inefficient, useful - useless, logical – illogical;
§ 5. Hyponymy and Paronymy
Hyponymy is a paradigmatic relation of sense between a more specific, or subordinate lexeme, and a more general, or superordinate, lexeme:
Hyponym is a word the meaning of which may be said to be included in that of another word.
Thus, hyponymy is based on logical and semantic relationship of inclusion.
cow (a specific term, or a hyponym) : : animal (a general term, or a hyperonym, a superordinate),
rose, chamomile, dandelion (co-hyponyms) : : flower,
honesty: virtue,
buy: get,
crimson: red.
Paronyms are words that are kindred both in sound form and meaning and therefore liable to be mixed but in fact different in meaning and usage and therefore only mistakenly interchanged.
to affect ('to influence') and to effect (‘to bring about, to result in');
prosecute and persecute;
policy and politics;
moral and morale;
respectfully and respectively;
human and humane;
economy and economics;
conscience, conscious, consciousness and conscientious.
Lexical valency of words is restricted by the inner structure of the language and extralinguistic factors (notional combinability):
Linguistic limits:
the verbs lift and raise are considered to be synonyms, but only raise can collocate with the noun question.
a buxom woman/waitress, but not a buxom bachelor,
a pretty girl but a handsome boy;
to commit a murder and not commit a task,
monumental ignorance and not monumental brilliance;
to be green with envy,
a book has a purple passage (витиеватый).
Extraliguistic limits
V+N pattern:
to read a book, but not to eat a book,
to write a letter, but not to write a fish
Different nations have different standards for notional combinability:
hostage of war
стоимость эксплуатационных издержек
a. Our neighbors are throwing a party tonight.
They were very grateful to the rescue party.
The Conservative Party has lost many votes.
d.The lawyer refuted the arguments of the other party.
e.Your party is on the line/an old party with spectacles.
A colligation (≈grammatical context) is the occurrence of lexical items in this or that syntactical construction or function. In other words it is the position that lexical units may occupy in the sentence. The corresponding type of meaning is called grammatical valency.
The verbs suggest and offer can be followed by a noun, but only offer can be followed by the infinitive of a verb.
To make (when followed by a Complex Object) has causative meaning.
a) I have only one apple in my basket. The red team won the game.
b) "— Was she a pretty girl?
— I would certainly have called her attractive."
c). The writer should seek his reward in the pleasure of his work and in release from the burden of his thought; and indifferent to aught else, care nothing for praise or censure, failure or success (From The Moon and Sixpence by W. S. Maugham).
2. Which type of paradigmatic relations of words in the vocabulary is the basis for the following jokes (homonymy, polysemy, rhyme)?
When asked what they do with all their fruit the Californians answer: we eat what we can and what we cannot we can.
What has one horn (рог, гудок) and gives milk?
A milk truck (грузовик).
A man, after being hurt, calls 911 for help.
Man: Operator, operator, call me an ambulance!
Operator: Okay, sir, you're an ambulance!
What has a lot of keys but can not open any doors?
A piano.
Where can a man buy a cap (кепка, коленная чашечка) for his knee,
Or the key to a lock (замок, копна волос) of his hair?
Can his eyes be called an academy
Because there are pupils (ученик, зрачок) there?
3. Homonymy or polysemy?
Customer:
- Do you serve shrimps?
Waiter:
- We serve anyone, sir…
NOTES:
To serve (обслуживать; подавать (на стол)
A shrimp (креветка; маленький, слабый человек)
4. From the lexemes in brackets choose the correct one to go with each of the synonyms given below (make typical collocations):
a) acute, keen, sharp (knife, mind, sight);
b) deep, profound (ignorance, river, sleep);
d) diminutive, petite, small, tiny (camera, house, speck, suffix, woman)
5. Which types of vocabulary groupings are these sets of words (rhyme, ideographic group, word-family, synonyms, homonyms, borrowed by origin):
a) loath, resent, dislike, abhor, hate, detest, to be sick of
b) power, powerless, superpower, powerful, powerfully, power station
c) weather, whether
d) bet, let, met, set, net, wet
e) an axe, to cut, wood, to chop, a blade, a handle
f) concert, photo, cliché, yacht, beauty, common, paradise
6. Which word is the dominant in the synonymic group above?
Читайте также: