- •English lexicology a course of lectures
- •Introduction
- •1. Lexicology as a branch of linquistics
- •2. Kinds of lexicology
- •3. Links of Lexicology with other branches of Linguistics
- •Lecture 1. Word-meaning
- •1.1. Semantics as a branch of Lexicology studing meanihg
- •1.2. Approaches to the study of meaning
- •1.2.1. Referential approach to meaning
- •1.2.2. Functional approach to meaning
- •1.3. Types of word-meaning
- •1.3.1. Grammatical meaning
- •1.3.2. Lexical meaning
- •1.3.3. Part-of-speech meaning
- •1.3.4 Denotative, significative and connotative meanings
- •1.3.5. Connotative meaning
- •1.3.6. Emotive charge and sociostylistic reference of words
- •1.3.7. Pragmatic meaning
- •1.4. Types of morpheme-meaning
- •1.4.1. Lexical meaning of morphemes
- •1.4.2. Functional or part-of-speech meaning of morphemes
- •1.4.3. Differential meaning of morphemes
- •1.4.4. Distributional meaning of morphemes
- •1.5.2.2. Morphological motivation of words
- •1.5.2.3. Semantic motivation of words
- •Lecture 2. Change of Meaning
- •2.1. Causes of semantic change
- •2.1.1. Extralinguistic causes of semantic change
- •2.1.2. Linguistic causes of semantic change
- •2.2. Nature, results and types of semantic change
- •2.2.1. Similarity of meanings or metaphor
- •2.2.2. Contiguity of meanings or metonymy
- •2.2.3. Types of semantic change without the transfer of name
- •2.2.3.1. Specialization and generalization of meanings
- •2.2.3.2. Amelioration and pejoration of meaning
- •2.2.3.3. Hyperbole, litotes, irony, euphemism, disphemism, taboo
- •Lecture 3. Polysemy
- •3.1. The notion of polysemy
- •3.2. Approaches to polysemy
- •3.2.1. Diachronic approach to polysemy
- •3.2.2. Synchronic approach to polysemy
- •Lecture 4. Homonymy
- •4.1. Definition of homonymy
- •4.2. Homonymy of words and homonymy of word-forms
- •4.3. Classification of homonyms
- •4.3.1. Full and partial homonymy
- •4.3.2. Classification of homonyms by the type of meaning
- •4.3.3. Classification of homonyms by the sound-form, graphic form and meaning
- •4.4. Sources of homonymy
- •4.4.1. Diverging meaning development
- •4.4.2. Converging sound development
- •4.5. Differentiation of polysemy and homonymy
- •Lecture 5. Word-meaning in syntagmatics and paradigmatics
- •5.1. Definition of syntagmatics and paradigmatics
- •5.2. Conceptual or semantic fields
- •5.3. Hyponimic (or hierarchical) structures and lexico-semantic groups
- •5.4. Synonymy and antonymy
- •Lecture 6. Word-structure
- •6.1. Segmentation of words into morphemes
- •6.2. Classification of morphemes
- •6.3. Procedure of morphemic analysis
- •6.4. Morphemic types of words
- •6.5. Derivative structure of words
- •7.3. Composition or compounding
- •7.4. Conversion
- •7.5. Shortening and abbreviation
- •7.5.1. Shortening or contraction
- •7.5.2. Abbreviation
- •7.6. Back-formation or reversion
- •8. Word-groups and phraseological units
- •8.1. Lexical and grammatical valency
- •8.2. Definition of phraseological units
- •8.3. Classification of phraseological units
- •Literature
- •Contents
- •Introduction 1
2.2.3.3. Hyperbole, litotes, irony, euphemism, disphemism, taboo
Hyperbole as a linguistic but not rhetoric device is an overstatement or exaggerated statement not meant to be understood literally but expressing an intensely emotional attitude of the speaker to what he is speaking about. The emotional tone is due to the illogical character in which the direct denotative and the contextual emotional meanings are combined. For example, It’s a nightmare, Haven’t seen you for ages, A thousand pardons.
The most important difference between a poetic hyperbole and a linguistic one lies in the fact that the former creates an image, whereas in the latter the denotative meaning quickly fades out and the corresponding exaggerating words serve only as general signs of emotion without specifying the emotion itself. For example, such emphatic words as awfully!, lovely!
Litotes [ tt] or understatement may be defined as expressing the affirmative by the negative or its contrary. For example, not half bad for good, no coward for brave. As a rule, litotes creates no permanent change in the semantic structure of the word concerned. The purpose of understatement is not to deceive but to produce a stronger impression on the hearer.
Irony is the expression of one’s meaning by words of opposite meaning, especially a simulated adoption of the opposite point of view for the purpose of ridicule. For example, You’ve got us into a nice mess. Here the adjective nice means bad.
euphemism is the substitution of words of mild connotations for rough or unpleasant expressions. For example, queer for mad, deceased for dead, perspiration for sweat.
From the semantic point of view euphemism is important because meanings with unpleasant connotations appear in words formerly neutral, as a result of their repeated use instead of other words that are for some reasons unmentionable.
euphemism has nothing to do with taboo of primitive peoples as a prohibition meant as a safeguard supernatural forces or taboo names of ritual objects or animals when their names were regarded as the equivalents of what was named. For example, the taboo name of the bear (whose name originally meant ‘brown’; cf. Russian медведь).
The term taboo in modern linguistics, especially in lexicology, is used to denote a vulgar connotation of the word which must not be used in a polite conversation. For example, the so-called ‘four-letter’ words are labeled vulgar.
Disphemism is the substitution of words of rough or unpleasant connotations for mild expressions. For example, to kick the bucket for to die, psycho or gaga for mad.
Lecture 3. Polysemy
3.1. The notion of polysemy
The term polysemy stems from the Greek word polýsēmos ‘having many meanings’. It is defined as the ability of a word to have several meanings simutenuously.
It is very important to distinguish between the lexical meaning of a word in speech and its semantic structure in language. The meaning in speech is contextual. The definite context particularizes the lexical meaning of a word and makes possible the realization of only one meaning. Any word actually used in speech is monosemantic but it may render a complicated notion. Monosemantic words, that is words having only one meaning are few in number; these are mainly scientific terms, such as molecule.
The monosemantic property of a word used in context does not exclude the complexity of each denotative meaning as it serves to signify complex notions with many features. For example, the word table has at least 9 meanings in Modern English: (1) a piece of furniture; (2) meals; (3) a thin flat piece of stone, metal, wood; (4) an orderly arrangemet of facts, figures etc.
If we turn to the meaning of words as they exist in language we shall observe that frequently used words are polysemantic. A word that has more than one meaning in the language is called polysemantic. Its meanings form its semantic structure.
The semantic structure of a polysemantic word may be defined as a structured set of interrelated meanings. It is an organized set of recurrent variants and shades of meaning a given sound complex can assume in different contexts, together with their emotional colouring, stylistic peculiarities and other typical connotations. The semantic structure of the word is a fact of language, not of speech. It is developed and fixed in the course of the language’s history.
Special procedures of componential analysis have been developed to determine the components of each meaning and represent this as a combination of elementary senses or semes. A seme is the smallest, elementary, ultimate constituent of the lexical meaning of the word.
Polysemy exists only in language but not in speech. Polysemy does not interfere with the communicative function of the language because in every particular case the situation and context cancel all the meanings but one and make speech unambiguous.
Polysemy is inherent in the very nature of words and notions, as they always contain a generalization of several traits of the object. Some of these traits are common with other objects, hence the possibility of identical names for objects possessing common features. Thus polysemy is characteristic of most words in many languages. But it is more characteristic of the English vocabulary due to the monosyllabic character of English and the predominance of root words.