5.9.4 Meronymy

The fourth kind of semantic relation is meronymy (from Greek meros = part and onoma = name), which is the semantic relationship between parts of something to the whole. The ‘part of’ relation can be illustrated in the following diagram:

Rose

thorn leaf root bud

Thorn, leaf, root, and bud are meronyms of the holonym (Greek holon = whole and onoma = name) rose.

5.9.5 Related Meanings

Polysemy is a semantic process whereby a lexeme assumes two or more related meanings (Greek poly = ‘ many’, semy = ‘ meanings’). For example, the lexeme “finger” does not only denote ‘a digit of the hand’ but also ‘the part of a glove, covering one of the fingers’; ‘a hand of a clock’; ‘an index’; and ‘a part in various machines’. Body parts are often polysemous; we use leg to refer to the leg of a chair and the leg of a table, arm to refer to the arm of a chair, and eye to refer to the eye of a storm. A lexeme that has more than one meaning in the language is polysemous. It is very important to distinguish between the lexical meaning of a lexeme in speech and its semantic structure in the language. The meaning of a lexeme in speech is contextual; therefore, polysemy can exist only in the language, not in speech. The semantic structure of a polysemous word may be defined as a structured set of interrelated meanings. These meanings belong to the same set because they are expressed by a single form. The set is called structured because its elements are interrelated and can be explained by means of one another.

5.9.6 Different Meanings: Homonymy

Words that sound the same but have different (unrelated) meanings are called homonyms (Greek homeos = ‘same’, onoma = ‘name’). Homonyms are either pronounced or spelled like another, or sometimes they are spelled and pronounced alike but have different meanings. Homonyms which are spelled alike but have differences in pronunciation and meaning are called homographs, e.g., bow (a show of respect or submission)—bow (a flexible strip for firing arrows or something bent into a simple curve); lead (position at the front) -- lead (an insulated electrical conductor connected to an electrical device). Homonyms which are pronounced alike but have differences in spelling and meaning are called homophones, e.g., I—eye, knight—night, sole—soul, gorilla—guerilla, to—too—two), bear—bare, brake—break, scent—sent, jeans—genes, waive—wave, buy—bye, and others. Homophones are often the basis for puns, e.g., Seven days without chocolate make one weak. The sign said “fine for parking here,” and since it was fine, I parked there. Homonyms which are pronounced and spelled alike but have different meanings are called homonyms proper, e.g. bear (to have children)—bear (tolerate)—bear (to carry)—bear (animal), tear (to rip)—tear (to fill with tears), and others.

Homonyms

the same spelling, or the same sound, or both

Homophones homographs homonyms proper

sound the same, different spelling same spelling, sound different the same spelling and sound

James B. Hobbs, who compiled a dictionary, Homophones and Homograph, 3^rd ed., (1930), differentiates homonyms, homophones, and homographs. He defines homonym as “one of two or more words spelled and pronounced alike but different in meaning” (p.7). Homophone is defined as “one of two or more words pronounced alike but different in meaning or derivation or spelling” (p.7). Homograph is “one of two or more words spelled alike but different in meaning or derivation or pronunciation” (p.7). In his dictionary, Hobbs sharply distinguishes these three categories.

Several linguists have addressed the question: Do homophones tend to self-destruct because of their tendency to create confusion and ambiguity? Jules Gilliйron states that “two words of different origin that become homophones by regular sound changes may, because of ambiguity and confusion, interfere with each other to such an extent that one is ultimately driven from the vocabulary of a particular dialect” (as cited in Hobbs, 1999, p.7). The scholars refer to this hypothesis as a conflict of homophones; however, Professor Robert Menner of Yale University argues that if there was a loss of a homophonous word, then it should not be attributed only to a conflict of homophones. He believes that “two homophones are unlikely to interfere unless they belong to the same part of speech, and if they do, then words must fall within the same sphere of ideas and be likely to appear in similar contexts” (as cited in Hobbs, 1999, p. 8). Menner asserts that it is possible that “a combination of like sounds representing two different words could become ambiguous, and the resultant confusion so marked as to lead to elimination of one of the words” (1936, p.229). Homophonous words may disappear not only because of a conflict of homophones but also because they may become obsolete in the course of language development.

Semantic Deviance

When we hear someone’s speech, we try to understand its meaning. When doing so, we often notice syntactic or semantic errors. We find these errors amusing; in fact, humor is often based on deviations from expected meanings. Often, such errors are referred to as “malapropisms (French for mal а propos), after Mrs. Malaprop, a character created by Richard Sheridan in his 1775 Restoration comedy The Rivals ((Denham & Lobeck, 2010, p. 288). Georgios Tserdanelis and Wai Yi Peggy Wong (2004) define malapropism a “type of production error by which a speaker uses a semantically incorrect word in a place of phonetically similar word without being aware of the mistake” (p. 526). These errors may occur in speech production and speech perception. “Slips of the ear” are perception errors when a listener misperceives some words. Some examples are some mothers (heard)—some others (said) and the stuff he knows (heard)--the stuffy nose (said). “Slips of the tongue” are production errors that are inadvertent errors in a person’s speech. Malapropism may be observed in the speeches of politicians. Some of the examples are the following: "This is my maiden voyage” (Bush, 2009, March 17).

“I've abandoned free market principles to save the free market system" (Bush, 2008, December 16). "Anyone engaging in illegal financial transactions will be caught and persecuted" (Bush, 2008, September 19).

“Let me introduce to you the next President -- the next Vice President of the United States of America, Joe Biden” (Obama)--slipping up while introducing Joe Biden at their first joint campaign rally, Springfield, Illinois, August 23, 2008.

“I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go” (Obama) --at a campaign event in Beaverton, Oregon. “How's it going, Sunshine?” (Obama) --campaigning in Sunrise, Florida.

“The police are not here to create disorder, they're here to preserve disorder” (Richard Daley, former Chicago mayor).

“He was a man of great statue” (Thomas Menino, Boston mayor). (Some Famous Malapropisms)

Malapropism can be based both on semantic similarity and on phonological similarity. “The primary point of importance to a speaker searching the lexicon for a word to produce is the meaning of the word” (Tserdanelis & Wong, 2004, p. 323). The speaker is intended to deliver a certain message; therefore, he or she is choosing the right words, and in the course of the search, substitution errors may occur. “The speaker is not concerned with how words sound until the word has been chosen” (Tserdanelis & Wong, 2004, p. 323). When the right word is chosen, the speaker sometimes forgets to use phonological information to organize the pronunciation of the word, which results in a production error.