Добавил:

Upload Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.

Вуз:

Мордовский государственный университет им. Н. П. Огарёва

Предмет:

[НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

Файл:

ответы по лексикологии.doc

Скачиваний:

Добавлен:

01.07.2025

Размер:

253.44 Кб

Скачать

☆

1 / 41 2 3 4 > Следующая >>>

Lexicology (from Greek lexis “word” and logos “learning”) is the part of linguistics dealing with the vocabulary of a language and the properties (свойства, качества) of words as the main units of language. It became a separate branch of linguistics only in the 19^th century while grammatical system of the language has been studied for a several centuries already. The term “vocabulary” is used to denote the system formed by all the words and word equivalents that the language possesses. The term “word” denotes the basic unit of a given language resulting from the association of a particular meaning with a particular group of sounds capable of a particular grammatical employment (использование). The word is semantic, grammatical and phonological unit. It is the smallest language unit that can stand alone with a complete utterance. From the lexical aspect the word may express one or several notions being in different relations among themselves.

(Modern approaches to the word are characterized by two levels of study: syntagmatic and paradigmatic. On a paradigmatic level the word is studied in its relationship with other words in a vocabulary system. On the syntagmatic level the word is analyzed in its linear relationships in words and speech.)

Of the all the world’s languages (2700) English is the richest in vocabulary. The oxford English dictionary lists about 500000 words and further half a million technical and scientific points remain uncatalogued. According to traditional estimates, German has a vocabulary of about 185000 and French few than 100000.

Modern English lexicology aims at giving a systematic description of the word-stock of modern English. Words, their componing parts - morphemes and various types of group are subjected to structural and semantic analysis primarily from the synchronic angle. Thus, modern English lexicology investigates the problems of word structure and word formation of modern English, the semantic structure of English words and the main principles underline the classification of vocabulary units into various groupings. The general study of words and vocabulary irrespective независимый of the specific features of any particular language is known as general lexicology. Special lexicology devotes its attention to the description of the characteristic peculiarities in the vocabulary of the given language. Contrasting lexicology performs a theoretical basis on which the vocabularies of different languages can be compared and described. The evolution of any vocabulary forms the object of historical lexicology or etymology. Descriptive lexicology deals with the vocabulary of a given language at a given stage of its development. Lexicology also studies all kinds of semantic grouping and semantic relation, synonymy, antonymy, semantic fields etc.

The distinction between 2 basically different ways in which any language can be viewed, the historical or diachronic and the descriptive or synchronic is a methodological distinction. A difference of approach, artificially separating for the purpose of study what in a real language is inseparable, because actually every linguistic structure and system exists in a state of constant development. Language is the reality of thought and thought develops together with the development of the society. Therefore, language and its vocabulary must be studied in the light of social history. A word through its meaning rendering some notion is a generalized reflection of reality. It’s therefore impossible to understand its development if one is ignorant of the changes in social, political or everyday life.

The treatment of words in lexicology cannot be divorced from the study of all other elements in the language system to which words belong. The word is studied in several branches of linguistics, thus, lexicology is closely connected with general linguistics, the history of the lang., phonetics, stylistics, grammar, social linguistics and some others.

The importance of the connection between lexicology and phonetics stands explained if we remember that a word is an association of a given group of sounds with a given meaning. So that “top” is one word and “tip” is another (cat – cap). Phonemes have no meaning of their own, but they serve to distinguish between meanings. Their function is building up more phonemes, and it is on the level of morphemes that form-meaning unity is introduced into language.

Word unity is conditioned обусловлено by number of phonological features. Phonemes follow each other in a fixed sequence. Distinction between words may be based upon stress. For example ‘import (n) is distinguished from the word imp’ort (v) due to the position of stress. Stress also distinguishes compounds from homonyms (black bird, blackbird).

Stylistics, although from a different angle, studies many problems treating in lexicology. These are the problems of meaning, connotations, synonymy and some other issues.

Close connection between lexicology and grammar is conditioned by the manifold многочисленными ties between the objects of their study. Even isolated words as presented in a dictionary bear a definite relation to the grammatical system of the language, because they belong to some part of speech and conform to some lexico-grammatical characteristics of the word class to which they belong. Words seldom occur in isolation. They are arranged in certain pattern, convey the relations between the things for which they stand, therefore, alongside with a lexical meaning, they possess some grammatical meaning (head of the committee, to head a committee). Grammatical form and function of the word affect its lexical meaning. The verb “to go” in a continuous tense followed by to and an infinitive (except go and come) serves to express an intention of future action. (You’re not going to sit there saying nothing the whole evening, are you?) Participle II of the same word following the link verb “be” denotes absence (the house is gone). Lexical meaning in these two cases is grammatically conditioned.

Another point of the interest is the survival of two grammatically equivalent forms of the same word when they help to distinguish between its lexical meanings. Some nouns have two separate plurals. One keeping the etymological plural form and the other with the usual English ending -s. (“brothers” is used to express the family relationship, while the form “brethren” ['breðrɪn] is used to indicate the group of members of society). The plural of genius ['ʤiːnɪəs] meaning a person of exceptional intellect is geniuses, genius in the sense of evil or good spirit has the plural form genii ['ʤiːnɪaɪ].

Sometimes a form that originally expressed grammatical meaning becomes a basis for a new grammatically conditioned lexical meaning. In this new meaning it is isolated from the paradigm. So there few words come into being. For example “arms” is the plural form of “arm” has come to mean “weapon”. This process is called lexicalization of a grammatical form. Grammar and vocabulary make use of the same technique. The formal distinctive features of some derivational словообразовательный opposition противопоставление between different words are the same as there’s opposition contrasting different grammatical forms. Compare for example the opposition such as work – worker, power – will-power, food – feed with grammatical opposition (work –worked, work – will work, foot – feet). Not only the methods and patterns similar, but the more things are often homonymous. For example, alongside the derivational suffixes -en, one of which occurs in adjectives (wooden), and the other in verbs (strengthen), there are two functional suffixes, one for Participle II (written), the other for the archaic plural form (oxen).

–er (lexicology – doer of the action (teacher, singer); grammar – comparative degree of adjective (longer, shorter)

-ed (lex. – complex adjectives (long-legged); gram. – past tense and participle 2 of regular verbs (moved, worked)

Lexicology is bound up with sociolinguistics. Sociolinguistics investigates the extra-linguistic or social cases of the changes in the vocabulary of a language. The word-stock of a language directly and immediately reacts to changes in social life of any speech community. For example, over the years many different meanings of the word “cool” can be accumulated. In 1839 it meant “daring”, in 1924 – clever, in 1943 – exciting, in 1946 – stylish, in 1952 satisfactory or okay. As a verb “to cool” meant: to stop in 1952, to die – in 1960, to relax in 1986. In the 90s among young people “cool” was used to sense something great.

Conventions associated with social situations can have influence on the structure of individual speech situation. These can include anything from conventions for beginning occasional conversation to conventions of asking questions in a formal classroom setting, or conventions for writing a manual or novel. No matter what sort of interruption is involved, it’s a representation of some type of discourse. Discourse is verbal interchange of ideas connected speech or writing. It is a central part of the utterances that constitute event, piece of writing or conversation.

The term “word” denotes the basic unit of a given language resulting from the association of a particular meaning with a particular group of sounds capable of a particular grammatical employment. The word is semantic grammatical and phonological unit. It is the smallest language unit that can stand alone with a complete utterance. From the lexical aspect the word may express one or several notions being in different relations among themselves.

The word is the fundamental unit of the language. It has form and content. Linguists define “word” as the smallest free form found in language. Words have an internal structure consisting of small units organized in a particular way. The most important component of the word structure is the morpheme. M is the smallest unit of language that carries information of meaning and function.

Modern approaches to the word are characterized by two levels of study: paradigmatic and syntagmatic. On a paradigmatic level the word is studied in its relationship with other words in a vocabulary system. On the syntagmatic level the word is analyzed in its linear relationships in words and speech.

Words, their componing parts - morphemes and various types of group are subjected to structural and semantic analysis primarily from the synchronic angle.

When words are used in sentences together with other words they are syntactically organised. Their freedom of entering into syntactic constructions is limited by many factors, rules and constraints (e. g.: They told me this story but not *They spoke me this story).

Being the central element of any language system, the word is a sort of focus for the problems of phonology, lexicology, syntax, morphology and also for some other sciences that have to deal with language and speech, such as philosophy and psychology, and probably quite a few other branches of knowledge.

All major words on semantic theory have been based on referential concepts of meaning. There are three components linked to the meaning: the sound-form of the linguistic sign, the concept underlying this sound from and the actual referent. The best known referential model of meaning is called basic triangle. The sound form of the linguistic sign [kaet] is connected with our concept (cat) which it denotes and through it with referent, with actual cat.

So, meaning is a sound form connected with a referent, but a connection is convectional which can be easily proved by comparing the sound forms of different languages conveyed the same meaning. Meaning cannot be identified with a single point of a triangle.

The branch of linguistics concerned with the meaning of words and word equivalents is called semasiology. The name comes from the Greek sēmasiā ‘signification’ (from sēma ‘sign’ sēmantikos ‘significant’ and logos ‘learning’).

Meaning is the object of semasiological study .However , at present there is no universally accepted definition of meaning or rather a definition reflecting all the basic characteristic features of meaning & being at the same time operational . Thus , linguists state that meaning is "one of the most ambiguous & most controversial terms in the theory of language "(Steven Ullman). Numerous statements on the complexity of the phenomenon of meaning are found on the Russian tradition as well by such linguists as А.А.Потебня , И.А.Бодуэн де Куртене , Щерба , Виноградов , А.И. Смирницкий & others

Word meaning is made up of many components, and these components are usually described as types of meaning. Grammatical meaning is an expression of relationship between words based on contrastive features of arrangements in which they are found. Such word forms as girls, winters and tables denote completely different objects, but have a common element – the grammatical meaning of plurality.

Lexical meaning – this is the realization of concept by means of a definite language system. This type of meaning is identical in all the forms of the word. For example, the word forms drive, drives, drove, driven possess different grammatical meaning of tense, person etc, but each form has the same semantic component denoting the process of movement. Lexical meaning can be viewed as including denotative [dɪ'nəutətɪv] and connotative component.

So, denotative meaning serves as a linguistic expression of a concept or as a name of individual object. Language users cannot have any knowledge or thought of the objects or phenomena of the real world around them unless this knowledge is expressed by words which have the same meaning for all speakers of a given language. Denotative meaning as a component of the lexical meaning makes the communication possible.

Connotative meaning is the emotive charge and the stylistic value of the word. Connotation is the pragmatic communicative value the word receives by virtue ['vɜːʧuː] of the where, when, how, by whom, for what purpose and in what contexts it is used or may be used. So, words possess an element of emotive evaluation. When analyzing synonyms like, love, worship we observe the difference in the emotive charge of the items of this set. This does not depend on the feelings of a single speaker but is true for all speakers of the language.

Stylistically words can be divided into literary, neutral and colloquial layers ['leɪəs]. Stylistic reference and emotive charge of words are closely connected and as a rule stylistically colored words possess some emotive charge, for example daddy and mammy are more emotional than neutral father and mother.

In the course of the historical development of language word meaning is liable to change подвержено изменениям because of extra linguistic and linguistic reasons. By extra linguistic reasons we understand various changes in the life of some speech community, changes in economic and social structure and others spheres of human activities as reflected in word meanings. For example earth changed its meaning with peoples enlarging their knowledge about the world. If the old eorthe meant just the ground, the soil that people see at their feet, modern earth means the planet we live on.

Some changes of meaning can be explained by purely linguistic factors. There are several types of semantic change, elaborated by different scholars. The most widely used one was proposed by German linguist Herman Paul who pointed out the following types:

- Specialization of meaning. It takes place when a word formerly represented a notion понятие of a broader scope (границы, предел, размах) has come to render a notion of a narrow scope, so restriction (ограничение, сужение) of meaning takes place. So, when the meaning is specialized, the word can name few(er) objects, so to have few(er) references. At the same time the content of the notion is being enriched, as in includes – a greater number of relevant feature by which the notion is characterized. So the word is applicable to fewer things but tells us more about them. Ex. The old English word “mete” used to denote ‘food’ or ‘article of food’; now the word meat means only the flesh of an animal or bird.

- Generalization of meaning. It occurs when changes in the denotative meaning result in the application of the word to a wider variety of the reference and extension or widening of meaning takes place. The word target for example, which originally meant a small round shield extended and generalized its meaning and now denotes anything that is fired at.

- Similarity of meaning or metaphor ['metəfə]. It can be described as a semantic process of association two referents one of which in some way resembles the other. A cunning person for example can be referred to as a fox. Linguistic metaphor can be dead as a result of long usage, when the comparison [kəm'pærɪs(ə)n] is completely forgotten and the thing named has no other meaning. (Leg of table, a hand of the clock).

- Contiguity [ˌkɔntɪ'gjuːətɪ] (близость) of meaning or metonymy [me'tɔnəmɪ]. This is the semantic process of associating two referents one of which makes part of the other or is closely connected with it. A woman can be called a “skirt”, tongue – “the organ of speech” in the meaning of “language”; bench - judges; house - members of Parliament.

Word Formation is the system of derivative types of words and the process of creating new words from the material available in the language after certain structural and semantic patterns and formulas. There are several types of word formation (derivation – affixation, conversion, compounding).

Derivation (словообразование) can be called one of the major one. We can distinguish 2 types of derivation: derivation by affixation and conversion.

Affixation consists in making up new words by adding endings to some root morpheme. All morphemes which are not roots are affixes. In English all the productive affixes either attached the end of the stem (suffixes) or at the front of the stem (preffixes). Affixes do not always have such clean meaning as roots. They are extremely subject to a process of bleaching in which the original meaning is bleached out completely and what is left behind is almost impossible to specify. Historically roots frequently become affixes.

Conversion is the process of coining new word in different part of speech without adding any derivative element, so that the basic form both of the original and derived words are homonymous. Even though it doesn’t add an affix, conversion is often considered to be a type of derivation because of the change in category and meaning that it brings about. For this reason it is sometimes called zero derivation. We don’t have any doubt it’s correct. We don’t doubt it’s correct. My account is overdrawn. I can’t account for where the money went. Conversion has been the subject of linguistic discussions since 1891, when the term was first used by Henry Sweet in his new English grammar. The English stock contains a great main of words formed by means of conversion in different periods of its history. There are cases of traditional and occasional conversion. Traditional conversion refers to the accepted use of words, which are recorded in dictionaries. E.g. to cook. The individual or occasional use of conversion is also very frequent. It serves to bring out the more vivid meaning in a given context only. E.g when his guests had been washed, mended, brushed and brandied. The cases of individual conversion do not enter the word stock of the English language.

Compounding is the largest and the most important source of new words. New words are produced by putting together two words in perfectly transparent way, and then various changes take place which cause the compound to lose its transparency. For example the following words recognizable now only as fully assimilated single words were once compounds: woman from wife + mon (“female” + “person”), good-bye from God be with you, holiday from holy day.

Also there exist secondary ways of word-building: shortening and blending.

Shortening is a means of word formation which consists in significance attraction in which part of the original word or word group is taken away.

Creations by blending are also called portmanteau words (слово-гибрид). In blending parts of two familiar words are yoked [jəukt] together объединены usually the first part of one word and the second part of the other to produce a word which combines a meaning and sound of the old ones.

Acronyms are a special type of blending. A typical acronym takes the first sound from each of central words and makes a new word from those initial sounds.

Derivation (словообразование) can be called one of the major one. We can distinguish 2 types of derivation: derivation by affixation and conversion.

By productivity of affixes we understand the ability of forming new words. The word forming activity of affixes can be changed, thus productive affixes are those used to form new words in the period of question. The most productive prefixes in modern English are: de- (deactivate), re- (reactivate), pre- (prefabricate, predominate), non- (non-ability), un- (unfair), anti- (antibiotic).

The most productive English suffixes are:

-noun-forming: -er (teacher), -ing (beginning), -ness (sweetness), -ation (automation [ˌɔːtə'meɪʃ(ə)n]), -ee (evacuee [ɪˌvækju'iː]), -ism (materialism), -ist (materialist), -ance/ancy (redundancy [rɪ'dʌndən(t)sɪ]), -ry (gimmickry ['gɪmɪkrɪ]), -or (reactor), -ics (cybernetics [ˌsaɪbə'netɪks]);

-adjective-forming: -able (tolerable ['tɔl(ə)rəbl]), -ic (scientific), ish (mannish), -ed (learned), -less (jobless), -y (tweedy).

-verb-forming: -ize/ise (vitaminize ['vɪtəmɪnaɪz]), -ate (oxidate ['ɔksɪdeɪt]), -ify (falsify ['fɔːlsɪfaɪ]);

-adverb-forming: -ly (equally).

Non-productive affixes are the affixes which not able to form new words in the period of question. Non-productive affixes are recognized as separate morphemes and possess clickard semantic characteristic. Non-productive English suffixes:

-noun-forming: -th (truth), -hood (sisterhood), -ship (scholarship);

-adjective-forming: -ful (peaceful), -ly (sickly), -some (tiresome ['taɪəsəm]), -en (wooden), -ous (courageous [kə'reɪʤəs]);

-verb-forming: -en (strengthen).

An affix can lose its … activity but then become productive again.

For example suffix -dom (slavedom, serfdom) became productive in the last hundred years.

The productivity of affixes shouldn’t be confused with its frequency of occurrence. The last means the existence in the vocabulary of a great number of words containing the affix, an affix may occur in hundreds of words, but if it is not used to form new words, it is not productive. Thus, suf. -ful can be singled out in hundreds of adjectives (beautiful, wonderful, cheerful etc) but no new words seem to be built with its help which makes it non-productive.

Affixes do not always have such clean meaning as roots. They are extremely subject to a process of bleaching in which the original meaning is bleached out completely and what is left behind is almost impossible to specify. Historically roots frequently become affixes. In the following lists meanings are given that reflect the basic sense of each affix. But you cannot count on that meaning as being the only sense that you will ever come across. The examples cover mainly prefixes.

Prefixes

Counting-prefixes: those which in some way quantify the root.

Bi – “twice, double” , e.g. bipolar ['baɪ'pəulə]

Di “two”, e.g dioxide [daɪ'ɔksaɪd]

Mono – “one”, monograph ['mɔnəgrɑːf]

Multi – “many”, multiform ['mʌltɪfɔːm]

Oligo – “few”, oligarchy ['ɔlɪgɑːkɪ]

Omni “all”, omnidirectional [ˌɔmnɪdɪ'rekʃ(ə)n(ə)l]

Poly –“many”, polygamy [pə'lɪgəmɪ]

Tri - “three”, triangle ['traɪæŋgl]

Uni - “one”, univocal [ˌjuːnɪ'vəʊk(ə)l, juː'nɪvək(ə)l]

Involvement prefixes: those which say something about the kind of involvement of the participants in the action of the root

Anti – “opposed, instead”, anti-Semitic [ˌæntɪsɪ'mɪtɪk]

Auto – “self”, autobiography [ˌɔːtəbaɪ'ɔgrəfɪ]

Co-, con-, “together, jointly”, coexistence [ˌkəuɪg'zɪst(ə)n(t)s]

Contra- “against, opposite”, contradiction [ˌkɔntrə'dɪkʃ(ə)n]

Vice- “in place of, instead”, vice-president [ˌvaɪs'prezɪd(ə)nt]

Judgment prefixes: those which make a judgment about the root

Dis- used as an intensifier as in disturb [dɪ'stɜːb]

Dys- “bad, badly”, dyslogistic [ˌdɪslə'ʤɪstɪk]

Eu- “good, well”, euphoria [ juː'fɔːrɪə]

Extra- “outside the scope of”, extraordinary [ɪk'strɔːd(ə)n(ə)rɪ]

Mal- “ill, evil, wrong”, malodorant [ˌmæl'əud(ə)r(ə)nt]

Meta- “transcending, changed”, metaphysics [ˌmetə'fɪzɪks]

Mis- “badly, wrongly”, mislead [mɪs'liːd]

Proto- “first, chief”, prototype ['prəutətaɪp]

Pseudo- “false, deceptive resemblance”, pseudonym ['s(j)uːdənɪm]

Locative prefixes: those which say something about place or direction

Ana- “back”, analogy [ə'næləʤɪ]

Dia- “across, through”, diameter [daɪ'æmɪtə]

En- “in, into”, enclose [ɪn'kləuz]

Endo- “internal”, endocrinology [ˌendəukraɪ'nɔləʤɪ]

Epi-, “on, over”, epidermis [ˌepɪ'dɜːmɪs]

Infra- “below” beneath, within”, infrastructure ['ɪnfrəˌstrʌkʧə]

Inter- “between, among”, interchange [ˌɪntə'ʧeɪnʤ]

Intra- , intro- “inside”, introvert ['ɪntrə(u)vɜːt]

Sub- “under, below”, subtitle ['sʌbˌtaɪtl]

Super “over, above”, supernatural [ˌs(j)uːpə'næʧ(ə)r(ə)l]

Sur- “over, above, beyond”, surrealistic [səˌrɪə'lɪstɪk]

Measurement prefixes

Macro- “large, broad scale”, macroeconomics [ˌmækrəuiːkə'nɔmɪks]

Micro- “tiny, small scale”, microscope ['maɪkrəskəup]

Mid- “middle”, midwinter [ˌmɪd'wɪntə]

Semi- “half, partly”, semicolon [ˌsemɪ'kəulən]

Ultra- “beyond, extreme”, ultraliberal ['ʌltrə 'lɪb(ə)r(ə)l]

Negative prefixes

Dis “apart, reversal, lacking”, displease [dɪs'pliːz]

In “negative”, indiscreet [ˌɪndɪ'skriːt]

Non- “not”, nonsense ['nɔns(ə)n(t)s]

Ob- “inverse, in the opposite direction”, object ['ɔbʤɪkt]

Se-, sed- “apart”, separate ['sep(ə)rət]

Un- “not”, unclean [ʌn'kliːn]

Un- “opposite, untie [ʌn'taɪ]

Temporal prefixes: those which say something about time or duration

Ante- “preceding”, antechamber ['æntɪˌʧeɪmbə]

Fore- “before”, in time or space, forecast ['fɔːkɑːst]

Neo- “new, recent”, neotype, neophyte ['niːəfaɪt]

Post- “after, behind”, postpone [ˌpəust'pəun]

Pre-, pro- “before, in front of”, preconceive [ˌpriːkən'siːv]

Re-, red- “anew, again, back”, regenerate [rɪ'ʤen(ə)rət]

Conversion has been the subject of linguistic discussions since 1891, when the term was first used by Henry Sweet in his new English grammar. Various opinions have been expressed of the nature and character of the process.

Professor Smirnitskiy treats conversion as a morphological way of forming new words, where a word is transferred from paradigm to another and it is the paradigm that is used as a word-forming means. We may define conversion as the formation of a new word through changes in its paradigm.

Irina Vladimirovna Arnold treats conversion as a combined morphological and syntactic way of word building. As a new word appears not in isolation, but in a definite environment of other words and it involves both a change in paradigm and a change in the syntactic function.

Distribution of the word.

There is also a pure syntactic approach known as a functional approach to conversion. The English stock contains a great main of words formed by means of conversion in different periods of its history. There are cases of traditional and occasional conversion.

Traditional conversion refers to the accepted use of words, which are recorded in dictionaries. E.g. to cook.

The individual or occasional use of conversion is also very frequent. It serves to bring out the more vivid meaning in a given context only. E.g When his guests had been washed, mended, brushed and brandied. The cases of individual conversion do not enter the word stock of the English language.

A diachronic survey of the present-day stock of conversion pairs reveals that some of them came to being as a result of the disappearance of inflexions окончаний in the course of the historical development of the English language due to which 2 words of different parts of speech coincide in pronunciation.

A diachronic semantic analysis of a conversion pair points out that in the course of time the semantic structure of the base may obtain a new meaning or even several meanings under the influence of the meanings of the converted words. The process is called reconversion.

If conversion leads to a numerical enlargement of the English vocabulary, reconversion only brings about a new meaning correlated связанный with one of the meanings of the converted word. Reconversion only operates with denominal verbs and deverbal nouns.

E.g. smoke – to smoke. The noun smoke, acquired [ə'kwaɪəd] in 1715 the meaning of “the act of smoke coming out into a room instead of passing up the chimney” under the influence of the following meaning of the verb to smoke “to emit smoke as the result of imperfect draught or improper burning” acquired to a word in 1663.

Compounding is the largest and the most important source of new words. To produce new words by compounding what we do is put 2 words together in perfectly transparent way, and then various changes take place which cause the compound to lose its transparency. For example the following words recognizable now only as fully assimilated single words were once compounds: woman from wife + mon (“female” + “person”), good-bye from God be with you, holiday from holy day.

All compounds have two parts and their meaning is a function of the interaction of its parts that may gradually change them from transparent to opaque трудный для понимания. There are also phrasal compounds made up of more than 2 words. Is “good-for-nothing” or “man of the world” a phrase or a compound? There is no easy answer.

Where the meaning is not obviously computable, some dictionaries list them as lexical compounds. E.g. oxford English dictionary doesn’t list “jack-of-all-trades” but the much smaller Webster’s collegiate [kə'liːʤɪət] does. “maid of honour” is listed by both while is “good-for-nothing” is not listed by any. Nor is the “man of the world”, though in both these instances there would seem to be good reason to single them out as having special properties.

Structurally compound words are characterized by the specific order and arrangement in which bases follow one another. The order in which the two bases are placed within a compound is rigidly ['rɪʤɪdlɪ] fixed in Modern English and the second component is considered to be the head-member of the word, i.e. its structural and semantic centre. E.g. “table cloth”, “diving suit”.

Phonetically, compounds are also marked by a specific structure of their own. The compound word receives a non-stress pattern different from the stress in the motivating words.

Compounds have three stress patterns:

1) high or unity stress on the first component. E.g. ‘honeymoon.

2) double-stress with primarily stress on the first component and secondary stress on the second camp. E.g. ‘washing ma’chine.

3) Level stress: ,arm-‘chair.

Graphically most compounds have 2 spellings. They are spelled either solidly or with “-“hyphen. Both types of spelling serve as an indication of inseparability of compound words in contradiction to phrases.

Phonetically, compounds are also marked by a specific structure of their own. The compound word receives a non-stress pattern different from the stress in the motivating words.

Compounds have three stress patterns:

1) high or unity stress on the first component. E.g. ‘honeymoon.

2) double-stress with primarily stress on the first component and secondary stress on the second camp. E.g. ‘washing ma’chine.

3) Level stress: ,arm-‘chair.

There are several classifications of compounds. The 1^st deals with syntactic or lexical compounds. Syntactic compounds are formed by regular rules of grammar, like sentences, and they are not listed in a dictionary. In fact, the majority of compound words we use on a daily basis are the transparent syntactic ones; “ shoe-maker, candlelight, birdcage, playgoer”. On the other hand, we cannot figure out what ice-cream means from the rules of grammar. Therefore “ice-cream” is a lexical compound and has to be looked up in a dictionary like a totally new word. “cry baby” must also be treated as a lexical compound as it refers not to babies that cry but to people who act like baby that cries.

The semantic center of a compound is the lexical meaning of the second component modified and restricted by the meaning of the first. Thus, compound w. can be divided into certain lexico-semantic groups.

Denoting action described as to its agent: handshake, earthquake
Denoting action described as to its time or place: day-flight, street-fight.
Denoting individual object designed for some goal: bird-cage, diving-suit.
Denoting objects that are parts of the whole: shirt-collar.
Denoting active doers: shoe-maker, book-reader.

There are several classifications of compounds. The 1^st deals with syntactic or lexical compounds.

And also compounds can be classified according to the nature of the basis and the interconnection with other ways of word forming into compounds proper and derivational compounds.

1. Comp. proper are formed by joining together basis built on the stems or on the word forms of independently functioning words with or without the help of a special linking element: handwork, sportsman. Compounds proper constituted the balk of English compounds in all parts of speech.

2. Derivational comp-s: long-legged, a break-down. They differ from comp. proper in the nature of bases and the second immediate constituency. The second immediate constituency of the “long-legged” are the suffix –ed with meaning “having” and the base built on a free word group “long legs”, whose member words lose their grammatical independence and reduced to a single component of the word – a derivational base. The derivational adjective suffix –ed converts this newly formed base into a word. It imparts its part of speech meaning and its lexical meaning thus making an adjective that may be semantically interpreted as “having what is denoted by the motivating word group”.

Derivational c-s fall into 2 groups according to the type of variable phrases that serve as their bases and the derivational means used.

Derivational compound adj. formed with the help of highly-productive adjectival suffix –ed applied to bases built on attributive phrases of the following types

adj. + noun (long-legged), num + noun (three-concerned), noun + noun (doll-faced)

Der. Comp. nouns formed mainly by conversion applied to bases: verb-adverb phrase (breakdown), verbal – nominal (a turkey – one who keeps keys in prison) and attributive phrases (a sweet-tooth - “ a person who likes sweets”

Criteria of distinguishing between compounds and free-word combinations.

Compounds are inseparable lexical units that are presented in dictionaries in special entries and sub-entries. Compounds are reproduced and used in speech as lexical units, they are not formed in speech like free-word combinations. They are only pronounced as lexical units (a red rose, a ‘redskin).

Inseparability of compounds has

graphical (one word or a hyphen) Graphically most compounds have 2 spellings. They are spelled either solidly or with “-“hyphen. Both types of spelling serve as an indication of inseparability of compound words in contradiction to phrases.

phonetic (stress) The compound word receives a non-stress pattern different from the stress in the motivating words. Compounds have three stress patterns: 1) high or unity stress on the first component. E.g. honeymoon. 2) double-stress with primarily stress on the first component and secondary stress on the second camp. E.g. washing machine. 3) Level stress: arm-chair.

morphological (only 2 base shows grammatical category ) blackbird – a black bird blackbirds – the blackest birds I’ve ever seen; a black night bird

semantic (grammatical forms differ from the forms of the motivating words (richer – more oil-richer) criteria.

Shortening is a means of word formation which consists in significance attraction in which part of the original word or word group is taken away. As a result a new form receives some linguistic value on its own. The part retained does not change phonetically but changes in spelling. Dub – double, mike – microphone, trank – tranquilizer.

Shortening may take any part of a word, usually a single syllable or throw away the rest. It is sometimes called clipping. The process often applies not just an existing word but to a whole phrase, e.g. zoo is a shortening of zoological garden.

The change is not only quantitative, but a shortened word is always in some way different from its prototype in meaning and usage. It can be regarded as a type of root creation, because the resulting new morphemes are capable of being used as free forms and combined with bound forms. They can take functional suffixes bike and bikes. Lots of shortenings by conversion produce other words. E.g. to phone, to vet.

They also serve as a basis for the further word formation by derivation of compounding: e.g fancy n. (from fantasy) fancy v. fanciful adj, fancy-dress n.

The correlation of a shortened word with its prototype is a great interest. Two possible developments should be pointed out:

1) the shortened form may be regarded as a variant or a synonym differing from the full form quantitatively, stylistically and sometimes emotionally. The prototype is usually stylistically and emotionally neutral: doc – doctor; Becky – Rebecca; Japs – the Japanese.

The missing part can at all times be supplied by the listener, so that the connection between the prototype and the short form is not lost.

2) In the opposite case the connection can be established установлена only etymologically. The denotative or lexico-grammatical meaning or both may have changed so much that the clipping becomes a separate word. A part of etymological doublets comes into being. E.g. fan – fanatic, fancy –fantasy, Miss – mistress.

Word belonging to the first group can be replaced by their prototypes and show in this way a certain degree of interchangeability. The doublets are never equivalent lexically as there are no context where their prototype can replace the shorten word without a change of meaning. Shortened words of the first group render one of the possible meanings of the prototype creating a colloquial or slang shade and other emotional coloring as well. These words are also often homonymous, e.g. gym for gymnastics and gymnasium, vet for veteran and veterinary.

Unlike conversion, shortening produces a new word in the same part of speech. The balk of shorten words is constituted by nouns, verbs are rarely shortened in present-day English. Such verbs as to phone, to vet, to veg (овощ; быть как овощ) are in fact converted from nouns.

The generally accepted classification of shortened words is based on the position of a clipped part. According to whether it is the final initial or middle part of the word that is cut off, we distinguish:

1. Final clipping or shortening

2. Initial clipping

3. Medial clipping.

1. Final clipping in which the beginning of the prototype is retained сохранено is practically the rule and forms the bulk of the class. Ad – advert – advertisement, coke – coca-cola, fab – fabulous, lab – laboratory.

2. initial-clipped words retaining (сохраняющий) the final part of the prototype are less numerous but much more firmly established as separate lexical units with a meaning very different from that of the prototype and stylistically neutral doublets. Story – history, tend – attend.

3. shortened words with a middle part of the word left out are very few. They may be subdivided into 2 groups:

a) words with a final-clipped stem retaining the functional morpheme: maths – mathematics, specs – spectacles;

b) contractions: fancy – fantasy, ma’am – madam.

Shortened words may rise in various types of colloquial speech as long as the connection with prototype is alive, they remain synonyms. When the connection with the prototype is lost, the shortened words may become stylistically neutral. Shortened words are especially numerous in various branches of slang, nursery words are also often clipped. Stylistic peculiarity often goes with the emotional coloring. That’s why words sometimes reveal ironical attitude to the theme’s name. Much less commonly we find what are called back formations, like “edit’ from ‘editor” where the final -or is wrongly analyzed as a suffix, like the suffix –er in words worker, builder etc. and therefore treated as removable.

Next type of word formation is Blending. Стяжение

Creations by blending are also called portmanteau [pɔːt'mæntəu] words (слово-гибрид). In blending parts of two familiar words are yoked [jəukt] together объединены usually the first part of one word and the second part of the other to produce a word which combines a meaning and sound of the old ones. The process of formation is also called telescoping, because the words seem to slide into one another like section on telescope. E.g. smog from smoke and fog, motel from motor and hotel, heliport from helicopter and airport. Sometimes we lose the track of the component of a new blend. The origin of the word is no longer transparent.

Acronyms (acr-o “tip, point” + onym “name”) acronyms are a special type of blending. A typical acronym takes the first sound from each of central words and makes a new word from those initial sounds. If the resulting word is pronounced like any other word, it is a true acronym. E.g NASA (national aeronautics and space administration). WAC (women’s army corps), NATO (north Atlantic treaty organization). Laser stands for light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation.

Sometimes acronyms are based on even larger chunks of the words they abbreviate. E.g. the FORTRAN (formular translation). So such words are half-way between blends and acronyms. If the letters which make acronyms are individually pronounced, such acronyms are called initialisms. OK is an early example, dating from the middle of the 19 century.

A lot of initialisms originated from American English. It was during the first administration of Franklin Roosevelt, starting in 1943 and then during the World War II the fashion for acronyms and initialisms really got moving. The name for American soldiers was GI – general issue, and the vehicle ['vɪəkl] they drove the jeep – GP (general purpose vehicle).

UFO (unidentified flying object) is from early 50s.

Roosevelt created many new government agencies, nearly all of which were referred to by initialisms. E.g. FTC (federal trade commission), IRS (internal revenue service), DMV (division of motor vehicles), NBC (national broadcasting company).

In more recent times Proliferation [prəˌlɪf(ə)'reɪʃ(ə)n] of initialisms and acronyms has been much aggravated by the ubiquity [juː'bɪkwətɪ]of computer terms. DRAN – dynamic render access memory. CPU – central process unit.

An interesting phenomenon in recent years has been the rise of reverse [rɪ'vɜːs] acronyms. The creators start with the word they want as they name and then work for those letters to find the words which represent something like the idea they want to be associated with. E.g. CORE (congress of racial ['reɪʃ(ə)l] equality), MADD (mothers against drunk drivers). AIM (American Indian movement).

Organizations with such names have instant appeal and easy to remember. Another wide-spread recent phenomenon is acronyms based on some popular phrase. People produce acronyms or initialisms from any common phrase and from just about any stream of words, e.g. TGIF (thanks god it’s Friday), FYI – for your information, DEWMS (du:mz) (dead European white males).

UFO (unidentified flying object) is from early 50s.

Eponyms are new words bases on names. All eponyms necessarily involve some degree of change in the meaning. The number of new words of this type in fields like biology, physics and medicine is very large, since new discoveries are very often named after their discoverers.

There are 4 types of eponyms.

1. Eponyms based on personal names: Cardigan – earl of cardigan who lived in 19 century and favored the style of waistcoat. Nicotine – Jacques Nicot who introduced tobacco in 1560.

2. Eponyms based on geographical names: port – shortened form of Oporto, exporting port in Portugal.

3. Eponyms based on names from literature, folklore and mythology. E.g. chimera [kaɪ'mɪərə] – mythological Greek monster purely a creature of imagination.

4. Eponyms based on commercial brand names. E.g Xerox ['zɪərɔks] – copy by any dry process.

Shortening is a means of word formation which consists in significance attraction in which part of the original word or word group is taken away. As a result a new form receives some linguistic value on its own. The part retained does not change phonetically but changes in spelling. Dub – double, mike – microphone, trank – tranquilizer.

They also serve as a basis for the further word formation by derivation of compounding: e.g fancy n. (from fantasy) fancy v. fanciful adj, fancy-dress n.

Next type of word formation is Blending. Стяжение

Eponyms are new words bases on names. All eponyms necessarily involve some degree of change in the meaning. The number of new words of this type in fields like biology, physics and medicine is very large, since new discoveries are very often named after their discoverers.

There are 4 types of eponyms.

1. Eponyms based on personal names: Cardigan – earl of cardigan who lived in 19 century and favored the style of waistcoat. Nicotine – Jacques Nicot who introduced tobacco in 1560.

2. Eponyms based on geographical names: port – shortened form of Oporto, exporting port in Portugal.

3. Eponyms based on names from literature, folklore and mythology. E.g. chimera [kaɪ'mɪərə] – mythological Greek monster purely a creature of imagination.

4. Eponyms based on commercial brand names. E.g Xerox ['zɪərɔks] – copy by any dry process.

The problem of distinguishing set expressions from compound words has not been solved yet. There are several criteria to make the difference seem obvious, though they are not applicable in all cases.

1) Graphic. Unlike set expressions, compound words are usually written either as a single word (waterproof) or with a hyphen (air-line). However, there are a lot of examples when a compound may have several graphic variants. E.g. loudspeaker, loud speaker, loud-speaker.

2) phonetic criterion. Unlike set phrases, most compounds are characterized by unity stress on the first word. E.g blackboard, but there are some expressions with 2 stresses (arm-chair)

3) And another distinguishing criterion may be found in the morphological integrity [ɪn'tegrətɪ] of the compounds. All compound nouns form the plural with a suffix –s. forget-me-nots незабудка, good-for-nothings бездельник.

To sum up, all set above the problem, we should point out that none of the criteria is absolute and the issue remains disputable. Set expressions have their own specific features which enhance [ɪn'tegrətɪ] (увеличивать) their stability and cohesion [kəu'hiːʒ(ə)n]. These are their euphonic [juː'fɔnɪk], imaginative and connotative qualities.

Many set exp. are distinctly rhythmical, contain contrast, imagery, rhyme. These qualities ensure the strongest possible contact between the elements. E.g. by hook or by crook (by any method). This capacity of developing and undivided transferred meaning is a feature that makes set expressions similar to words.

Set expressions fall into 2 major groups: set expressions proper and phraseological units.

Set expressions proper lack in figurativeness and emotional expressiveness. They do not reflect the speaker’s attitude to the object of their utterance. Among a number of disputable types of set expressions proper, there are 2 which one accepted by all scholars and studied most of all. They are:

-nominal phrases, e.g. point of view, registered letter, the milky way, the house of commons

-verbal phrases, e.g. to have a look, to take advantage of, to take place

Nominal set expressions cannot be usually replaced by a single word with a different stem. They often stand for terms.

Verbal set expressions are inclined to have such equivalents; single verbs that often have the same stem as one in the noun of the corresponding verbal set expression. E.g. have a look – to look.

There is some stylistic difference between verbal set expressions and their equivalents. The last ones tend to be bookish. E.g. to take part – to participate.

Phraseological units characterized by figurativeness, emotional and stylistic expressiveness. They not only represent an object or phenomenon, but convey the speaker’s attitude to them. A lot of scholars have shown a great interest in the theoretical aspects of classifying phraseological units. The most significant theory was developed by V.V Vinogradov. His classification is based upon a motivation of the unit, i.e. the relationship existing between the meaning of the whole and the meaning of its componing parts. The degree of motivation is correlated with indivisibility and semantic unity of the expression with possibility of changing the form or the order of the components and of substituting the whole by single word. According to the type of motivation, Vinogradov suggests three types of phraseological units.

1) Phraseological fusions сращения represent the highest stage of blending together. The meaning of components is completely absorbed by the meaning of the whole, by its expressiveness and emotional qualities. E.g. cut off with a shilling – лишить наследства. To talk through one’s hat – говорить вздор, a fishy story – выдумка.

2) Phraseological unities (единства) are more numerous and clearly motivated. The emotional quality is based upon the image created by the whole. E.g. to stick/stand to one’s guns “to refuse to change one’s statements or opinions in the pace opposition” implies courage and integrity. Some of the phraseological unities are easily translated and even international. E.g. to know the way the wind’s blowing, as busy as a bee.

3) Phraseological combinations are not only motivated, but contain one component used in its direct meaning while the other used figuratively. E.g. to meet a demand, requirement, necessity, to break a promise, an agreement, a rule. The mobility of this type is much greater and the substitutions are not necessarily synonymous.

Set expressions have their own specific features which enhance [ɪn'tegrətɪ] (увеличивать) their stability and cohesion [kəu'hiːʒ(ə)n]. These are their euphonic [juː'fɔnɪk], imaginative and connotative qualities.

32,34

English has borrowed a few words from west-African languages mostly Portuguese and Spanish. Banana – African and Spanish origin, likewise voodoo and hoodoo came from American English, but they are of African origin as well. More recent borrowings include gorilla, chimpanzee [ˌʧɪmpæn'ziː], gnu [nu:], safari, and zebra.

Most of the other borrowings have been made more in time. Polka came via France from Czech (19th century). Russian words are Bolshevik, glasnost, perestroika, tundra, vodka. Turkish words include: fez, shish kebab. There are some Hungarian words: goulash, paprika. And coach came via French from Hungarian kosci. Native American languages: moccasin, toboggan, tomahawk, skunk. English still borrows however borrowing in recent times is characterized by two main factors: the frequency of borrowing is considerably reduced and English tends to borrow from less and less known languages.

The etymological study of 1997 shows that about 25% of English borrowings are from French, 8% - from Japanese and Spanish, 7% from Italian and Latin, 6% from African languages, German and Greek, 4% each from Russian and Yiddish, 3% from Chinese, and progressively smaller percentages from Arabic, Portuguese, Hindi, Sanskrit, Hebrew, Afrikaans, Malayo-Polynesian, Vietnamese, etc.

French is still the largest supplier of words to English which may be explained by the geographical proximity of France and Britain. The increase in the importance of Japanese as a source of loans is a consequence of increased commercial importance of Japan in the world generally. The decline of Latin as a source of loan words may have a dual explanation: on the one hand, English has already borrowed so much of Latin vocabulary, that there is little left to be borrowed. On the other hand, rather than borrowing directly from Latin, English now often makes new Latinate words from English morphemes which originally from Latin.

A native word is a word which belongs to the original English stock as known from the earliest available manuscripts of the old English period. The native words are subdivided into those of the European stock and common Germanic origin. A loan word or borrowed word or borrowing is a word taken over from another language and modified in phonemic shape, spelling, paradigm or meaning according to the standards of the English language. The part played by borrowings in the vocabulary of a language depends upon the history of this given language being conditioned by direct linguistic contexts, economic and cultural relationships between nations. The fact that up to 80 percent of English vocabulary consists of loan words is due to specific conditions of the English language development. The term source of borrowing should be distinguished from the term original borrowing. The first if applied to the language from which the word was taken into English, the second refers to the language to which the word may be traced. There are certain structural features which enable us to identify some words as borrowings even to determine the source of language.

Latin affixes: N: -ion, tion; V: -ate, -ute, -ct, -d (e), dis-. Adj; -able, -ate, -ant, -ent, -or, -er.

French affixes: N: -ance, -ence, -ment, -age, -ess. V: -en. Adj: -ous.

We also distinguish loan translations and semantic loans. Loan translations are words and expressions formed from the material already existing in the English language but according to patterns taken from another language by way of literal morpheme for morpheme or word for word translation. Loan translation is facilitated by the existence of formally related words even though in other context and with a different meaning.

The term semantic loan is used to denote the development in an English word of a new meaning due to the influence of a related word in another language. Many loan words in spite of the changes they have undergone after penetrating into English retain some peculiarities in pronunciation, spelling and morphology. The phonomorphological structure of borrowings is characterized by a high percentage of polysyllabic words. Bloomfield points out that English possesses a great mass of words with a separate pattern of derivation. Their chief characteristic is the use of certain accented suffixes and combination of suffixes. Another feature according to Bloomfield is the presence of certain phonetic alterations.

The term synonymy comes from a Greek word meaning “the same name”. It is used to refer to relationship of sameness of meaning that may hold between two or more words. Synonymy is a wide-spread relation in the vocabulary of English, for which good evidence is provided by synonym dictionaries and thesauruses. [θɪ'sɔːrəs]

Here’s the list of examples: beseech – implore, glitter – sparkle, lazy – indolent, weak – close, plentiful – abundant.

Syn. Dictionaries attempt to explain sometimes very subtle difference in the meaning between words that are closely related in meaning. Beseech – implore.

All the words (beg, entreat умолять, beseech заклинать, implore умолять заклинать, supplicate молить and importune надоедать) signify making of an appeal which is likely to be refused or demurred at возражать. A person begs for what they cannot claim as the right. Beg suggests insistence and sometimes self-abasement. By entreating someone, one hopes to persuade somebody by earnest pleading and reasoning. Beseech and implore convey eager anxiety which seeks to inspire, sympathy or pity. Implore may be stronger than beseech, with the suggestion of tearfulness or evident anguish. Supplicate adds to entreat a humble prayerful attitude. Importune denotes persistence with one’s requests to the point of annoyance or even harassment ['hærəsmənt]. Such an attempt to analyze synonyms implies that even between identifiable synonyms there is some difference in meaning. If we take such a position, there’s arguably ['ɑːgjuəblɪ] no such thing as true synonymy.

Many linguists take this position and make a distinction between strict or absolute synonymy and loose synonymy. In the strict sense two words that are synonyms would have to be interchangeable in all the possible contexts of use. A free choice would exist for a speaker of either one or the other word in any given context. The choice would have no effect on the meaning, style or connotation of what was said or written. Linguists argue that such strict synonymy does not exist, or if it does, it exists only as semantic change is taking place.

Strict synonymy is not economical, it creates unnecessary redundancy избыточность in a language. To have a completely free choice between 2 words for a particular context is a luxury that we can well do without. Indeed, it would appear that where historically two words have been in danger of becoming strict synonyms, one of them has either change its meaning or fall out of use. For example, when the word sky was borrowed from old-north into English, it came into competition with a native English word heaven. The 2 words denoted both the physical firmament (небесный свод) and the spiritual realm of god and angels. In due course, sky came to denote just the physical, and heaven just the spiritual. Similarly, when spirit was borrowed from French, it was in competition with a native word ghost. Spirit has taken over as the term with the more general meaning and ghost is more a less restricted to disembodied spirit meanings.

Consider the following absolute words, which have been replaced by the items in brackets.

Culver (pigeon), dorp (village), erst (formerly), fain (willing), Levin (lightning), trig (neat), wight (human being)

When we speak of synonymy, we mean different degrees of loose synonymy, where we identify not only a significant overlap between 2 words but also some context, where the synonyms cannot substitute for each other. Take the synonyms find and discover. They are substitutable in the context. Lidia found/discovered the ball behind the garden shed. Marie curie discovered radium in 1898. Franz found it easy to compose sonatas.

Thus we may conclude that synonyms may be substitutable where the meaning overlaps частично совпадает. But where the meaning falls outside of the shade area, one cannot be used instead of the other.

Classification of synonyms.

The first type. Some synonym pairs differ in way they belong to different dialects in English. The dialects may be one of the national standards, e.g. British, American Australian English or there may be regional dialect within a country or area, e.g. south-west dialects of British English.

Bonnet (car) – hood, caravan – trailer, drawing pin –thumbtack, farm – ranch, lawyer – attorney, lift – elevator, pavement – sidewalk, rubbish – garbage, tap – faucet, windscreen – windshield.

Some more examples of British and Northern-British English.

Anyway – anyroad, armpit – oxter, brew (tea) – mash, child – bairn, frightening – fleysome, money – brass, nothing – nowt, sandwich – butty.

The second general way in which we distinguish synonyms relates to the style or formality of the context, in which word may be used. One or more may be used in a more formal context than the other or one of the pair may belong to the slang or colloquial English.

Style or formality of the context:

Argument – disputation, beauty – pulchritude, cross – traverse, die – decease, give up – renounce, letter – missive, praise – eulogy, warning – caveat, western – occidental.

Standard English and English slang pairs.

Astonished – godsmacked, crash – prang, destroy – zap, drunk – sloshed, heart – ticker, insane – barmy, money – rhino, etc, prison – chink, steal – nick.

For some ordinary language words such as money or drunk slang synonyms proliferate увеличиваются.

The third way in which synonyms may be distinguished is where connotation [ˌkɔnə'teɪʃ(ə)n] differs. Two words may largely share denotation when referring to a particular entity суть, but they may have different associative or emotive meanings.

E.g. ambiguous – equivocal, famous – notorious, hate – loathe (with repugnance or disgust), misuse –abuse, new – novel, obtain – procure (with effort), persuade (inveigle (with ingenuity or deceit), proud – haughty (with disdain), recollection – reminiscence (with pleasure), simulate – feign (with craftiness).

And there may be collocation [ˌkɔlə'keɪʃ(ə)n] difference in pairs:

rancid and rotten are synonyms, but the former is used only of butter or bacon; kingly, royal and regal synonyms, but mail has to be royal in the UK.

English is a language particularly rich in pairs of synonyms. The primary reason for this has to do with the history of the language and especially with the wholesale ['həulseɪl] borrowing from other languages, especially French and Latin.

Old English	French and Latin
Ask for	Request
need	Require
drop	Globule
slake	Satisfy

The words from old English are generally shorter than their French or Latin synonyms. They also tend to belong to the ordinary colloquial language, whereas their Latinate synonyms belong to more formal context.

Words borrowed directly from Latin may sometimes be more formal or technical than a synonym that entered English as a consequence of the Norman French invasion [ɪn'veɪʒ(ə)n]. Here are some examples of this case, with the French – derived word on the left and the Latin – derived word on the right: commencement, inception, devise – excogitate [eks'kɔʤɪteɪt], generous – munificen [mjuː'nɪfɪs(ə)nt]t, imprison – incarcerate, mount [maunt] – ascend [ə'send], pardon – amnesty ['æmnəstɪ], urgency – exigency ['eksɪʤən(t)sɪ].

It is not always the case that the Latin – derived word will be more formal and less familiar. In the course of history, some words derived directly from Latin have found their place in the common language, but the clear tendency is for words derived from Latin, especially where these were borrowed into Latin from Greek, to belong to formal and often technical styles.

Oppositeness is perhaps not such a pervasive meaning relation in the vocabulary of English as synonymy, but it has an important role in structuring the vocabulary of English. This is especially so in the adjective word class, where a good many words occur in antonymous pairs, e.g. long –short, wide – narrow, new –old, rough – smooth, light - dark, straight –crooked, deep – shallow, fast – slow. While antonymy is typically found among adjectives it is not restricted to this word class: bring – take (verbs), death – life (nouns), noisily – quietly (adverbs), above – below (prepositions), after – before (conjunctions or prepositions).

Besides having morphologically unrelated antonyms, as in the examples above, English can also derive antonyms by means of prefixes and suffixes. Negative prefixes such as dis-, un-, or in- may derive an antonym from the positive root, e.g. dishonest, unsympathetic, infertile.

Compare also: encourage – discourage but entangle –disentangle, increase – decrease, include – exclude.

Similarly, the suffixes –ful, -less may derive pairs of antonyms, e.g. useful – useless, thoughtful – thoughtless, but this is by no means always the case, e.g. grateful has no counterpart ['kauntəpɑːt] graceless, selfless has no counterpart selfful.

It is often the case that antonyms occur together, either ['aɪðə] within the same sentence. One reason is that certain expressions are structured in this way, e.g. “a matter of life and death”, “from start to finish”, “the long and the short of it”, “neither friend nor foe”, “wanted dead or alive”. A second reason is that antonyms may be used redundantly to emphasize a point, e.g. “It was a remark made in private, not in public”, or to make a rhetorical [rɪ'tɔrɪk(ə)l] question, e.g. “Is this the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning?” Another context in which antonyms are typically employed is where reference is to change of state, e.g. “The museum opens at nine and closes at four”.

We generally think of antonymy as a relation holding between words belonging to the same word class, but since antonymy is a semantic relation, it may hold between words that belong to different word classes. For example, in “Lighten our darkness, we pray”, a verb and a noun form an antonym pair. In “She remembered to shut the door but left the window open”, a verb and an adjective are in a relation of antonymy. Clearly, oppositeness influences our thinking and communicating to a significant extent, as the widespread use of antonymy demonstrates.

Unlike synonymy, antonymy covers a number of different types of oppositeness of meaning. Three types are commonly identified: gradable antonyms, contradictory противоречивые or complementary antonyms, and converses. Antonym pairs of these types express oppositeness in rather different ways, though it is not clear that we as speakers are necessarily aware of these differences or that they play a part in how we store antonyms in our mental lexicon.

Gradable antonyms include pairs like the following: beautiful – ugly, expensive – cheap, fast – slow, hot – cold, increase – decrease, long – short, love – hate, rich – poor, sweet – sour, wide – narrow.

These pairs are called gradable antonyms because they do not represent an either/ or relation but rather a more/less relation. The more/less relation is evident in a number of ways: the terms allow comparison, e.g. “My arm is longer/shorter than yours”, “I love a good book more than a good meal”; the adjectives can be modified by “intensifying” adverbs, e.g. very long, extremely hot, extraordinary beautiful. The terms do not represent absolute values; for the adjectives the value depends on the noun being described; the length of arms is on a different scale from the length of, say, roads. In such pairs of adjectives, one is usually a marked term, the other unmarked. This manifests itself, for example, in questions such as “How long is the street?” To ask “How short is the street?” already assumes that the street has been identified as short. The use of long does not make an assumption either way. Also, in giving dimensions, you would use the “larger” term, e.g. “The street is 400 metres long” (not short).

The following are examples of contradictory or complementary antonyms: asleep – awake, dead – alive, on – off, permit – forbid, remember – forget, shut – open, true – false, win – lose.

These pairs of antonyms are in an either/or relation of oppositeness. An animate being can be described as either dead or alive, but not as some grade of these or as being more one than the other. The assertion утверждение of one implies the denial of the other member of the pair: if you permit some behavior, then it is not forbidden; if you lose a contest, then you have not won it; if a switch is on, then it is not off.

The following are examples of converse antonyms: above – below, before – after, behind – in front of, buy – sell, give – receive, husband – wife, parent – child, speak – listen.

For each pair of antonyms, one expresses the converse противоположное meaning of the other. In the case of sentences with buy and sell, for example, the same transaction is expressed from different (converse) perspectives: Lydia bought the car from Kristen. Kristen sold the car to Lydia. Similarly with nouns such as husband and wife, a sentence may express the relationship in one of two converse ways: Margaret is Malcolm’s wife. Malcolm is Margaret’s husband. And the same is also true for prepositions like above and below: The spaghetti is on the shelf above the rice. The rice is on the shelf below spaghetti.

Polysemy means diversity of meanings, the existence within one word of several connected meanings as a result of the development and changes of its original meaning. The reality of the word is infinite, while the resources of even the richest language are limited. This language keeps stretching out its lexical units to cover new phenomena of objective reality. The speaker observes certain similarities between objects and enquires the habit of using words metaphorically. When the method becomes habitual, it’s included its lexico-semantical variant in the word semantic structure. A word that has several meanings is called polysemantic. Words having only one meaning are called monosemantic words. Monosemantic words are few in number. These are mainly scientific terms. The bulk of English words are polysemantic.

The great contribution into the development of the problem of the polysemy was made by V.V. Vinogradov. He admitted the importance of differentiating the meaning from the usage or a contextual variant. Meanings are fixed and common to all people who know the language system. The usage is only a possible application of one of the meanings of a polysemantic word, sometimes very individual, sometimes more-less familiar. Meaning is not identical with usage. Polysemy exists only in language and not in speech. The meaning of the word in speech is contextual. Polysemy does not interfere with the communicative function of the language, because in every particular case the situation or context cancels all the unnecessary meanings and makes speech unambiguous.

A further development of Vinogradov’s theory was Alexander Ivanovich Smirnitsky’s work in the linguistic field under consideration. According to this school, all the meanings of the word form identity, supported by the form of the word. Smirnitsky introduced the term lexico-semantical variant. A lexico-semantical variant is a two-facet unit (двусторонняя единица), the formal facet of which is the sound form of the word, while the content facet is one of the meanings of the given word, the designation (обозначение) of a certain class of objects. All lexico-semantical variants of a word form a homogenous semantic structure insuring the semantic unity of a given word. All lexico-semantical variants are united together by a certain meaning, the semantic pivot of the word called the semantic center of the word. Thus, the semantic center of the word is the part of meaning which remains constant in all the lexico-semantical variants of the word.

If polysemy is viewed diachronically it is understood as a change in the semantic structure of the word. Polysemy in the diachronic terms implies that a word may retain its previous meaning(s) and at the same time acquire one or the several new ones. Thus, according to the diachronic approach in the semantic structure of a word two types of meaning can be singled out, the primary meaning and the secondary meaning. The polysemantic word table for example has at least nine meanings in modern English. In the course of diachronic semantic analysis, it is found that of all the meanings this word has (in modern English) the primary meaning is “a flat slab of stone of wood”, which is proper to the word in the old English period. All other meanings are secondary as they a derived from the primary meaning. Semantic changes result in new meanings which are addict to the old ones, already existing in the semantic structure of the word. Some of the old meanings may become absolute, or even disappear, but the bulk of English words tend to an increase in the number of meanings. Synchronically polysemy is understood is the coexistence of various meanings of the same word at a certain historical period of the development of the English language. In the course in the synchronic analysis of the word table the question rises: do all the 9 meanings of this word equally represent the semantic structure of the word? The meaning that first occurs to us whenever we see or hear the word “table” is an article of furniture. This emerges as the central or the basic meaning of the word and all the others are marginal or minor meanings. The central meaning occurs in various and widely different contexts. Marginal meanings are observed only in certain context. There’s a tendency in modern linguistics to interpret the concept of the central meaning in terms of the frequency of occurrence of this meaning as far as the word table is concerned, the meaning “piece of furniture” possesses the highest frequency of value and makes up 25 percent of all the uses of this word.

As the semantic structure is never static, the primary meaning of the word may become synchronically one of its marginal meanings and diachronically a secondary meaning may become the central meaning of the word. The relationship between the diachronic and synchronic evaluation of an individual meaning may be different in different periods of the historical development of the language. This can be illustrated by the semantic analysis of the word “evidence”. Originally, when this word first appeared in Middle English in the 13^th century it denoted “significant appearance, token”. This meaning in the Middle English was both diachronically primary and synchronically central. Later on, the word acquired other meanings and among them “information tending to establish fact”. In modern English, however, while we still can diachronically describe the meaning “significant appearance, token” as primary, it is no longer synchronically central, as the arrangement of meanings in the semantic structure of the word evidence has changed.

Two or more words identical in some form spelling, but different in meaning distribution and origin are called homonyms. The term is derived from Greek (“homos” - similar and “onoma” - name). Thus, expresses the sameness of name combined with difference in meaning. Although they have the same shape, homonyms are considered distinct lexemes, mainly because they have unrelated meanings and different etymologies. Modern English is rich in homonymous words and word forms. It is sometimes that the abundance of homonyms in modern English is to be accounted by monosyllabic structure of the commonly used English words. There is however some difficulty in the establishment of sameness of shape owing to the fact that we don’t make the same distinctions in both speech and writing. The dog’s lead [li:d] and lead [led] (metal) are spelled the same, but pronounced differently, while right (correct), rite (ceremony) and write (to put down) are spelled differently, but pronounced the same.

In addition to the difference in meaning, homonyms may also be kept apart.by syntactic differences. For example, when homonyms belong to different word classes as in the case of tender which has different lexis as an adjective, verb and noun, each homonym has not only a distinct meaning, but also a different grammatical function. The same observation applies to the pairs of words such as bear [bɛə] (noun) and bear [bɛə] (verb), grave (adjective) and grave (noun), hail (noun) and hail (verb), hoarse (adj.) and horse (noun).

Homonymy was known long years ago. First dictionaries of homonyms appeared in china in the third-forth centuries. Homonymy is the result of various processes which take place in a language. In English quite a number of homonyms have been created through the break of polysemy. The creation of homonyms was due to a great number of loan words, which were adaptive to the English standards in the pronunciation and spelling. Homonyms can be created by shortening of words, for example flu short for influenza is homonymous to flew, past tense of the verb to fly. Homonyms can be formed through the changes of the meaning of the words, different meanings of one and the same word may lose their semantic connection and may form different words which coincide in their phonetic form but have nothing in common in their meaning. Flower (plant) – flour (we use in baking), sea (water) – see (watch). Homonyms can also be formed by means of conversion. For example, water – to water.

Because of the sameness of shape, there is a danger of homonymous conflict or clashes столкновения in the sense that homonyms with totally different meanings may both make sense in the same utterance, (The route was very long. The root was very long. Helen didn’t see the bat (animal or wooden implement)). And the difference in overall context can reduce any possibility of confusion.

Many homonyms exist only in theory, since in practice there is no risk of confusion, because they belong to different word classes. Consider the pairs of homophones. Knows and nose, rights (n) and writes (v).

Apart from differences in meaning, it is difficult to imagine a context in which both members of a given pair might occur interchangeability. They are in complementary distribution in the sense that where one occurs, the other cannot occur. However is must be specified since the number of each pair differ in word class, the choice of one homonym instead of the other is determined mainly by the rules of syntax, not the rules of lexicology.

Similar types of restriction also apply to pairs of homonyms which are identical in spelling and pronunciation. Grave (adj.) and grave (n), stick (v) and stick (n). The analysis shows that difference in grammatical class contributes to a sustention reduction in the number of effective homonyms in English. However it must also be acknowledged that difference in class alone does not automatically rule out all possibilities of confusion. English has a non-phonetic writing system in the sense that there is no absolute one-to-one correspondence between the letters in writing and the sounds in the pronunciation of words. Consequently spelling will often help to differentiate the words which are identical in sound. This aspect also reduces the number of homonyms on the written page; it may also be useful in spoken language, because it provides a quick and easy way of removing confusion. For example if there is any doubt in the listeners mind if it is rite or right, route or root, it may be much simpler to spell the words out than to define their meanings. This distinction of the illumination of homonym clashes shows that in this respect English writing is more intelligible than speech and that homonymy in the language as a whole spoken as well as written is reduced by writing conventions. It also shows that even if we focus on individual words, grammatical and graphological considerations play an important role in the distinction of homonyms. It is hard to determine clearly where polysemy ends and homonymy begins. With polysemy a single word has several connotations, while with homonymy different words coinciding form. In case of homonymy, different meanings of words are mutually independent. When a word is a polysemantic, it may have a variety of synonyms, each corresponding to one of its meanings and will often have a set of antonyms.

The most widely accepted classification of homonyms by W. Skeat recognizes:

1) homonyms proper are words identical in their sound form and spelling, but different in meaning. Ball – a round object used in games and ball – a gathering of people for dancing.

2) Homophones are the words of the same sound form, but of different spelling and meaning. Piece – part separated from something, peace – a situation in which there is no war between countries or groups.

3) Homographs are words different in sound form and meaning, but identical in spelling. Bow (beu) – a weapon made from a long curved piece of wood, used for shooting arrows and bow (bau) - a forward movement of the top part of the body, especially to show respect.

Another classification was suggested by A.I. Smirnitsky who added to skits classification one more criteria – grammatical meaning. So, according to Smirnitsky, homonyms fall into free groups:

1) lexical (no link between their lexical meanings): fair – fare, bow – bow,

2) grammatical (belong to different parts of speech); milk –to milk, practice – to practice; and

3) lexico-grammatical (no link between their lexical meanings and they belong to different parts of speech) to tear (n) – tear (v), to bear - bear.

According to the third classification by Galina Nikolaevna Babich, we distinguish between full homonyms and partial homonyms.

Full homonyms are identical in sound in all their forms of paradigms (ear “ухо” и колос).

Partial homonyms are identical in sound in several forms (to lie [laɪ] pp лежать – lay [leɪ]).

48. The relation of hyponymy serves to structure large parts of vocabulary. It is perhaps an all – pervasive structuring relation. It is almost evident in the taxonomies of natural phenomena.

Plant

Fungus lichen shrub creeper tree

Mushroom toadstool ivy bindweed conifer deciduous

Pine spruce oak ash

The term at the top of the hierarchy (plant) has the most general meaning, and it can be used to refer to all the objects denoted by tern below it. It is a ‘superordinate’ term. Those immediately below it, the directly “subordinate” terms (fungus, lichen, shrub, etc.), are its “hyponyms”. So, tree is a hyponym of plant, but is in turn a superordinate to its hyponyms conifer, deciduous; conifer is in turn a superordinate to its hyponyms pine, spruce, etc. Reading up from the bottom of the hierarchy, pine is a “kind of” conifer, which is a kind of tree, which is a kind of plant.

Hyponymy relations are not restricted to the classification system of natural phenomena. They are found also, for example, in taxonomies of natural human artifacts, e.g.

Container

Pot barrel box tin bag

Cask keg case crate sack pouch purse

Suitcase briefcase

The hierarchy is neither complete nor entirely accurate. For one thing, the term barrel probably needs to occur as a hyponym of itself; in other words, barrel denotes a class of objects that includes casks, kegs and barrels. Barrel has both a more general and a more specific meaning. What this begins to illustrate is that hyponymy hierarchies are not necessarily either complete or neatly arranged. After all, our vocabulary presumably contains the words that we, as members of a particular culture or speech community, need in order to communicate with each other about environment and our experience. In many instances, we do not need words of varying degrees of generality, so that we can refer tyo classes and subclasses of entities; but that does not mean that they will always form a neat system of terms.

1 / 41 2 3 4 > Следующая >>>

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

#
23.04.20191.06 Mб14Ответы на экзаменац.вопросы.doc
#
18.04.2019367.1 Кб30Ответы по геоэкологии.doc
#
25.03.2016852.45 Кб35Ответы по гостиницам в пдф.pdf
#
17.11.2019196.61 Кб42ответы по ландшафтоведению.doc
#
01.04.2025232.03 Кб2Ответы по Лариной.docx
#
01.07.2025253.44 Кб0ответы по лексикологии.doc
#
26.09.2019662.02 Кб15Ответы по математике.doc
#
01.04.202540.19 Кб0Ответы по МСС для УК.docx
#
16.08.2019850.43 Кб13ответы по программному.doc
#
01.05.202529.54 Кб0ответы по статистике.docx
#
11.02.20151.18 Mб170ответы по тпм.docx