4.4. Sources of homonymy

The two main sources of homonymy are: (1) divergent meaning development of a polysemantic word and (2) convergent sound development of two or more different words.

4.4.1. Diverging meaning development

The process of divergent meaning development can be observed when different meanings of the same word move so far away that they come to be regarded as two separate units. This happened, for example, in the case of MnE flower and flour which originally were one word < MdE < Ofr flour, flor meaning ‘the flower’ and ‘the finest part of wheat’ < L. flōs, flōris ‘the flower’. In this case we observe disintegration or split of polysemy. The difference in spelling underlines the fact that from the synchronic point of view they are two distinct words though historically they have a common origin.

4.4.2. Converging sound development

The majority of homonyms arise as a result of convergent sound development which leads to the coincidence of two or more words which were phonetically distinct at an earlier stage. E.g. OE ic and eae have become identical in pronunciation in MnE I and eye; OE sēōn and sæ > MnE see and sea; OE sonne and sunu > sun and son.

A number of lexico-grammatical homonyms appeared as a result of convergent sound development of the verb and the noun; cf. MnE love :: (to) love > OE lufu and lufian.

Words borrowed from foreign languages may also become homonyms through phonetic convergence; e.g. ON ras and Fr race are homonyms in MnE > race₁ ‘running’ :: race₂ ‘an ethnic stock’.

4.5. Differentiation of polysemy and homonymy

One of the most debatable problems in semasiology is the demarcation line between homonymy and polysemy, that is between different meanings of one word and the meanings of two homonymous words.

If homonymy is viewed diachronically then all cases of sound convergence of two or more words may be regarded as cases of homonymy as these homonyms can be traced back to two etymologically different words; cf. sea :: see.

The cases of semantic divergence are more doubtful, because the transition from polysemy to homonymy is a gradual process and it is difficult to point out the precise stage at which the divergent semantic development in the semantic structure of one word results in the appearance of two separate words.

The criteria used in the synchronic differentiation between homonymy and polysemy are: (1) the semantic criterion of related or unrelated meanings, (2) the criterion of spelling and (3) the criterion of distribution.

Lecture 5. Word-meaning in syntagmatics and paradigmatics

5.1. Definition of syntagmatics and paradigmatics

It is recognized that word-meaning can be perceived through intralinguistic relations that exist between words. Intralinguistic relations of words are of two main types: syntagmatic and paradigmatic.

Syntagmatic relations define the meaning which the word possesses when it is used in combination with other words in the flow of speech. For example, compare the meaning of the verb to get in He got a letter, He got tired, He got to London.

Paradigmatic relations are those that exist between individual lexical items which make up one of the subgroups of vocabulary items, e.g. sets of synonyms, lexico-semantic groups.

Paradigmatic relations define the word-meaning through its interrelation with other members of the subgroup in question. For example, the meaning of the verb to get can be fullz understood only in comparison with other items of the synonymic set: get, obtain, receive, etc.

The distinction between syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations may be indicated by horizontal and vertical presentation as is shown below.

Syntagmatic relations

He got a letter

I received a note

She obtained an epistle

A full understanding of the semantic structure of any lexical item can be gained only from the study of the intralinguistic relations of words in the flow of speech.

In analyzing the semantic structure of the polysemantic word table we observed thar some meanings are representative of the word in isolation, that is they invariably occur to us when we hear the word or see it written on paper. Other meanings come to the fore only when the word is used in certain contexts. This is true of all polysemantic words.The adjective yellow, for example, when used in isolation is understood to denote a certain colour, whereas other meanings of this word , e.g. “envious”, “suspicious”, “sensational”, “corrupt”, are perceived only in certain contexts, e.g. “a yellow look”, “the yellow press”.

We understand by the term context the minimal stretch of speech determining each individual meaning of the word.