26.Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations among English words.

Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations are understood as basic linguistic relationships describing the complex structure of a language system. This distinction is relevant to all levels of description. It was introduced by the Swiss linguist Ferdinard de Saussure in 1916 as a generalisation of the traditional concepts of a paradigm and a syntagm.

Paradigm (Gr. parádeigma ‘pattern, model’) is a set of homogeneous forms opposed to each other according to their semantic and formal features.

Syntagm (Gr. sýntagma ‘that which is put together in order’) is a structured syntactic sequence of linguistic elements formed by segmentation which can consist of sounds, words, phrases, clauses, or entire sentences.

Paradigmatic relations exist between units of the language system outside the strings where they co-occur. They are based on the criteria of selection and distribution of linguistic elements. Paradigmatic relations determining the vocabulary system are based on the interdependence of words within the vocabulary: synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, meronymy.

F. de Saussure called paradigmatic relationships associative relationships, because they represent the relationship between individual elements in specific environment.

It was the Danish linguist Louis Hjelmslev who replaced the term associative relations for paradigmatic relations.

Syntagmatic relations are immediate linear links between the units in a segmental sequence. Syntagmatic relations are horizontal since they are based on the linear character of speech.

In psycholinguistics these terms are used in a different sense.

The term paradigmatic relations denotes the mental associations between words which form part of a set of mutually exclusive items, e.g. black responds with white.

The term syntagmatic relations refers to mental associations between words which frequently occur together, e.g. black magic / tie / sheep.

27. Synonyms. Types of synonyms. Sources of synonymy.

Synonyms (Gr. syn ‘with’, ónyma ‘name’) are two or more words belonging to the same part of speech and possessing a common denotative semantic component, interchangeable at least in some contexts without any considerable alteration in sense, but differing in morphemic composition, phonemic shape, shades of meaning, connotations, style, valency and idiomatic use, e.g.:strange – (unusual or unexpected); queer – (unusual or unexpected), odd – (unusual or unexpected), weird – (unusual or unexpected), peculiar (unusual or unexpected),

The synonymic dominant is the general term of its kind potentially containing the specific features rendered by all the other members of the group. It is characterised by:

high frequency value;

broad combinability;

broad general meaning;

lack of connotations;

stylistic neutrality;

it may substitute for other synonyms at least in some contexts;

it is often used to define other synonyms in dictionary definitions.

Lexical synonyms are similar in meaning in the language system.

Contextual synonyms are similar in meaning only under some specific contextual conditions, cf. the following sentences:

I’ll go to the shop to buy some bread.

I’ll go to the shop to get some bread.

I can’t bear him anymore.

I can’t stand him anymore.

Absolute synonyms coincide in all their shades of meaning and in all their stylistic characteristics, e.g. word-building – word-formation;

Ideographic synonyms convey the same concept but differ in shades of meaning, i.e. in their denotative component;

interesting – (exciting), (makes you want to know more sth);

fascinating – (exciting), (makes you want to know more sth), [extremely];

intriguing – (exciting), (makes you want to know more sth), [there is sth you find difficult to understand or explain];

absorbing – (exciting), (makes you want to know more sth), [holds your attention for a long time];

gripping – (exciting), (makes you want to know more sth), [holds your attention for a long time], [you want to know what is going to happen next];

Stylistic synonyms differ in their stylistic characteristics, i.e. in their connotative component, e.g. head (neutral) – attic (stylistic).

Ideographic-stylistic synonyms differ in shades of meaning and belong to different styles, e.g. to see ‘to have or use the powers of sight and understanding’ – to behold (elevated, archaic) ‘to look at that which is seen’.

development of the native elements, mostly denoting different shades of common meaning, e.g. fast – speedy – swift; handsome – pretty – lovely;

adaptation of words from dialects and varieties of English, e.g. dark – murk (Northern English); girl – lass (Scottish English); wireless – radio (American English);

foreign borrowings, e.g. to ask (native) – to question (French) – to interrogate (Latin); to end (native) – to finish (French) – to complete (Latin);

euphemisms, e.g. drunk – intoxicated – tired and emotional; to kill – to finish – to make away with sb – to remove;

etymological doublets, e.g. shade – shadow; canal – channel;

productive word-forming processes, e.g. await – wait; memorandum – memo; resistance – fight back.