A word with many meanings is called

Our language is multifaceted and rich. Sometimes, using this or that word, we do not think about the boundaries of its meaning. We know that the Earth is the name of our planet, and the earth is part of its surface, land, soil. Also, everyone knows that the world is the entire system around us and at the same time the world is the absence of enmity, life without war. Some of the semantic interpretations we express are the same lexical units, which are words with several meanings. Let’s find out why this happens.

Why are there words in the language that have several meanings?

Another linguist AA Potebnya, who lived in the XIX century, wrote in his monograph «Thought and Language» that the development of human speech goes in the direction of greater abstraction.

When our distant ancestors learned how to express theirdesires and emotions with the help of sounds, they did not yet know what the geometry and Mendeleyev’s table were, they did not distinguish between the concepts «bad» and «terrible», «good» and «excellent.» The first words called objects, phenomena and feelings, the ability to identify and express which was necessary in everyday life. Similarly, children who are only learning to speak, at first use simple words such as «mom», «dad», «house», «table», and only then understand what kindness, joy, hatred, anger means.

In the course of development, an ancient person has the ability tofigurative and analytical thinking, it became necessary to come up with new designations for the new concepts. Sometimes as such notations used already existing words in the language, which, however, was given a new meaning. But the original meaning of these words was preserved. So many words appeared that have several meanings.

How correctly to name lexemes with several meanings

In linguistics, a word with several meanings,is called multivalued. This is the term of Russian linguistics, and in foreign science such words bear the names of polysemantic (from the Greek polis — «many», and semanticos — «signifying»).

Russian Academician V. V. Vinogradov called multivalued the ability of one word to convey various information about objects and phenomena of extralinguistic reality. In this case, it should be said that the meaning embedded in the word, its real-semantic envelope is called a lexical meaning. Above, examples of the interpretation of words with several lexical meanings are given. However, very few people know that the word «peace» has not two, but seven values! Check it can be on the explanatory dictionary Ozhegova.

Polysemy and homonymy

In linguistics, as in any other science, there isconcepts that are among the discussion. So, for example, AA Potebnya and R. Jakobson believed that words with several meanings do not exist, because if a lexeme under some circumstances began to designate another object or phenomenon, then it completely changed its semantic core.

However, in the traditional grammar, the concepts of polysemy and homonymy are still different, although they are often confused in Internet resources.

It is believed that words that have several meanings,still retain in each interpretation their semantic center, some representation that lies at the very root of the structure of the lexical unit. It is assumed that polysemantic words have a continuity of meanings, while homonyms do not. For example, a crane and a crane in the kitchen, the note «salt» and the kitchen salt are homonyms, and not many-valued words, because there is no semantic connection between them.

How does the ambiguity of words

It is believed that polysemy occurs in three main ways:

• By metaphorical transfer. A metaphor is a shift in the meaning of a word, based on the similarity of several objects. For example: wheat grain is the seed of truth.
• With the help of metonymy. By metonymy we mean the transfer of the meaning of one word to another according to the principle of the presence of semantic connections between two concepts. For example: a dish of expensive porcelain — a delicious dish of French cuisine.
• With the help of a synecdoche. Many linguists believe that a synecdoche is a special case of metonymy. By this term we mean the transfer of the name of the part to the whole. For example: «home» instead of «home» and «returning home from America» ​​instead of «returning to Russia» (if you mean exactly coming to your country, and not specifically to your home from someone else’s house).

Examples of polysemantic words

We can assume that the name of our planet -Earth — appeared again from the name of land, soil. After all, people and mammals exist on land, it is their real habitat. And the name of our planet was formed by means of metonymic transfer, that is, the designation of a part of the surface was transferred to the whole. We also say, for example, that the class listens attentively to the teacher, meaning by this not the room, but the students in it.

We call raspberries, as well as bush, onwhich they grow. Polysemy here developed on the principle of synecdoche. But the vernacular meaning of the word «raspberry» — «thieves’ stash» is, rather, homonymous to the other two examples of its use.

What does the word «prefix» mean?

Can you at once say — one or morevalues ​​has the word «prefix»? From the school course of the Russian language, everyone knows that the so-called part of the word preceding the root and serving to change the meaning of the lexical unit is called. This noun is formed from the verb «pestering» and actually calls everything that is «attached», that stands next to something.

In the explanatory dictionary of the Russian language two meanings of this word are noted:

• tape recorder, amplifying the sound power;
• morpheme, prefix;
• 10-15 years ago, a prefix for a virtual game was called a prefix.

Language puns based on polysemy and homonymy

In every developed language there are words that coincidein form, but different in meaning. The combination of such lexical units in one text is used to create a comic effect, play puns. Try to explain what the comic effect of the following phrases is based on:

• Mowed oblique oblique oblique.
• He stoked the stove all night. By the morning she drowned.
• Parrot us, parrot.
• He learned the verse and the verse.

In the above phrases, the comic effect is basedon the homonymy of certain forms of words. But the vocabulary forms of these lexical units are different. So, in the first example, the words «mow», «oblique», «braid» are used. «Oblique» as an adjective means «uneven,» «curve,» and «oblique» as a noun is a colloquial name for a hare. The second example uses the ambiguity of the word «sink»: kindle the fire, immerse deeply in the water. In the third example, homonyms are used: a parrot as a noun — the name of a bird, a parrot as an imperative from the verb «scare». And finally, in the fourth example, the pun is based on the coincidence of the past tense form of the verb «subscribe» and the noun in the nominative «verse» (a line in poetry).

It is not always easy to understand one or morevalues ​​have words. The root of lexemes and the analysis of usage contexts can help to determine whether the units under consideration are multivalued or homonymous.

Exercise on the interpretation of the meanings of many-valued words

Task: look at the list below and try to determine by yourself, one or more values ​​have the highlighted words: wardrobe, fox, machine, path, hand, core. Explain your choice. How many values ​​did you have for each word?

All of the above words have several lexical meanings:

• Wardrobe refers to clothing items, as well as the room where they are stored.
• The fox is an animal and at the same time a cunning person. The ambiguity developed due to the fact that in ancient times (and in the villages — now) foxes at night, when no one sees them, they penetrated into people’s dwellings and barns to steal food.
• The machine is both a vehicle and technical equipment.
• The path is both a road on earth, and air communication, and metaphorically a person’s life.
• The hand is part of the body and handwriting.
• The core is both the central part of something, and the basis of any movement, for example, of the army.

Several tasks for logic

Look at the phrases below. Can you guess what unites:

1. the post of diplomat and salting;
2. radiation of the sun and the estate of aristocrats;
3. marital relations and poorly made products;
4. a strip of land in the sea and the pride of a Russian beauty;
5. river fish and a dishwashing brush.

Answers: the ambassador; shine; marriage; spit; ruff.

What do you think, which of the above examplesbelong to homonymy, and which ones — to polysemy? Words with several meanings differ from homonyms by the presence of some logical-semantic connection between different concepts. In example 2, the connection is based on a metaphor: how the sun illuminates the earth, so aristocrats, because of their education and development, were the adornment of society. And in Example 5, the connection between the fish and the brush is based on metonymy, so the external shape of the brush resembles a fish. Examples under numbers 1, 3, 4 are based on homonymy.

Thus, we found out that a word havingseveral values, is called multivalued, or polysemantic. But it is desirable to be able to distinguish ambiguity from homonymy. If there is any semantic connection between words with several meanings, then there are no semantic links between them.

Presentation on theme: «Semantic Structure of the Word and Polysemy. Polysemy The ability of words to have more than one meaning is described as polysemy A word having several.»— Presentation transcript:

1

Semantic Structure of the Word and Polysemy

2

Polysemy The ability of words to have more than one meaning is described as polysemy A word having several meanings is called polysemantic Words having only one meaning are called monosemantic (terms, nouns, plurals)

3

Polysemy polysemy is more characteristic of the English vocabulary as compared with Russian monosyllabic character of English, predominance of root words – reasons for widespread development of polysemy

4

Polysemy the greater the frequency of a word the more polysemantic it is the commoner the word the more meanings it has each of the individual meanings may have its own types of meanings: connotational, part-of-speech, etc.

5

Diachronic Approach to Polysemy growth and development in the semantic structure of the word the word retains its previous meaning(s) and at the same time acquires (a) new one(s) some of the old meanings may become obsolete or dissapear

6

Diachronic Approach to Polysemy did the word always possess all its meanings? did some of the meanings appear earlier than the others? are the new meanings dependant on the meanings already existing? can we observe any changes in the arrangement of meanings?

7

Diachronic Approach to Polysemy ME a table primary meaning OE tabule “ a flat slab of stone or wood” a table – 1)people seated secondary, at a table for a meal; derived 2)food provided at a table meaning

8

Diachronic Approach to Polysemy primary meaning – the first meaning with which the word appeared in the language secondary meaning – could appear only after the primary meaning derived meaning – could not have appeared before primary meaning was in existence and is dependant on it

9

Synchronic Approach to Polysemy are all meanings equally representative of the semantic structure of the word? is the order in which the meanings are registered in dictionaries reflect the place they occupy in the semantic structure of the word?

10

Synchronic Approach to Polysemy coexistence of various meanings at the same historical period of the development of the language

11

Synchronic Approach to Polysemy a table — “ a piece of furniture” – basic/central meaning a table — 1)people seated minor/ at a table for a meal; marginal 2)food provided at a table meanings

12

Synchronic Approach to Polysemy basic/ central meaning – the meaning that first occurs to us whenever we see or hear a word, occurs in different contexts, has the highest frequency minor/ marginal meaning – less frequent, observed only in certain contexts

13

Synchronic and Diachronic Approaches to Polysemy revolution Middle English Middle English – 1) “the revolving motion of celestial bodies” — primary meaning and central meaning 2) “ a complete overthrow of the established government” – secondary and minor meaning Modern English Modern English – 1) “ a complete overthrow of the established government” — secondary and central meaning

14

Semantic Structure of Words Lexico-semantic variant (LSV) 1.polysemantic word in one of its meanings; 2. represents unity of form and meaning; 3.has its own morphological peculiarities, syntactic function, different valency 4.contain a semantic component which may be found in all other LSV of this word

15

Semantic Structure of Words semantic structure of a word – a structured set of interrelated lexico-semantic variants semantic structure of a word – combination of various meanings

16

Semantic Structure of Words e.g. semantic structure of the word Table 1. a piece of furniture 2. people seated at a table for a meal sing. 3. sing. food provided at a table 4. a thin flat piece of metal, wood, etc. pl. 5. pl. slabs of stone pl. 6. pl. words cut into them or written on them (ten tables) 7. an orderly arrangement of facts, figures, etc. 8. part of machine-tool on which the work is put to be operated on

17

Types of Lexical Meanings as Elements of a Word’s Semantic Structure primary : : secondary basic : : minor central : : peripheric direct : : figurative general : : particular abstract : : concrete neutral : : coloured present day : : archaic

18

Polysemy and Context the meaning of a word in speech is contextual – depends on the context meaning is determined by the context

19

Polysemy and Context context – the minimal stretch of speech determining each individual meaning of the word context individualizes the meanings, brings them out

20

Polysemy and Context meaning(s) of the word that are least dependant on the context are free or denominative meanings e.g. table — “a piece of furniture”

21

Types of Contexts contexts linguistic, or verbal lexicalgrammatical extra-linguistic, or non-verbal

22

Types of Contexts extra-linguistic context – a real speech situation in which the word is used e.g. “I’ve got it” – 1) possess 2) understand

23

Types of Contexts grammatical context – where grammatical structure of the context serves to determine various individual meanings of a polysemantic word

24

Grammatical Context e.g. to make – 1)“to force, to induce” – make somebody do something – “make + smbd + bare infinitive” 2) “to become, to turn out to be” – make a good wife – make + adjective + noun

25

Types of Contexts lexical context – the group of words which fill the grammatical pattern which forms the environment of the analyzed word

26

Lexical Context e.g. heavy -”of great weight, weighty” – heavy load, heavy table heavy + natural phenomenon = “striking, falling with force” – heavy rain, heavy wind heavy + industry, arms, artillery = “the larger kind of something” – heavy industry, heavy artillery

The linguistic science at present is not able to put forward a definition of meaning which is conclusive. However, there are certain facts of which we can be reasonably sure, and one of them is that the very function of the word as a unit of communication is made possible by its possessing a meaning. Therefore, among the word’s various characteristics, meaning is certainly the most important.

Generally speaking, meaning can be more or less described as a component of the word through which a concept (mental phenomena) is communicated.
Meaning endows the word with the ability of denoting real objects, qualities, actions and abstract notions. The relationships between
“referent” (object, etc. denoted by the word), “concept” and “word” are traditionally represented by the following triangle:

Thought or Reference

(Concept = mental phenomena)

Symbol Referent

(word) (object denoted by the word)

By the «symbol» here is meant the word; “thought” or “reference” is concept. The dotted line suggests that there is no immediate relation between “word” and “referent”: it is established only through the concept.

On the other hand, there is a hypothesis that concepts can only find their realization through words. It seems that thought is dormant till the word wakens it up. It is only when we hear a spoken word or read a printed word that the corresponding concept springs into mind. The mechanism by which concepts (i. e. mental phenomena) are converted into words (i. e. linguistic phenomena) and the reverse process by which a heard or a printed word is converted into a kind of mental picture are not yet understood or described.

The branch of linguistics which specialises in the study of meaning is called semantics. As with many terms, the term «semantics» is ambiguous for it can stand, as well, for the expressive aspect of language in general and for the meaning of one particular word in all its varied aspects and nuances (i. e. the semantics of a word = the meaning(s) of a word).

Polysemy.

Semantic Structure of the Word

It is generally known that most words convey several concepts and thus possess the corresponding number of meanings. A word having several meanings is called polysemantic, and the ability of words to have more than one meaning is described by the term polysemy.

Polysemy is certainly not an anomaly. Most English words are polysemantic.
It should be noted that the wealth of expressive resources of a language largely depends on the degree to which polysemy has developed in the language. Sometimes people who are not very well informed in linguistic matters claim that a language is lacking in words if the need arises for the same word to be applied to several different phenomena. In actual fact, it is exactly the opposite: if each word is found to be capable of conveying at least two concepts instead of one, the expressive potential of the whole vocabulary increases twofold. Hence, a well-developed polysemy is a great advantage in a language.

On the other hand, it should be pointed out that the number of sound combinations that human speech organs can produce is limited. Therefore at a certain stage of language development the production of new words by morphological means is limited as well, and polysemy becomes increasingly important for enriching the vocabulary. From this, it should be clear that the process of enriching the vocabulary does not consist merely in adding new words to it, but, also, in the constant development of polysemy.

The system of meanings of any polysemantic word develops gradually, mostly over the centuries, as more and more new meanings are added to old ones, or oust some of them. So the complicated processes of polysemy development involve both the appearance of new meanings and the loss of old ones. Yet, the general tendency with English vocabulary at the modern stage of its history is to increase the total number of its meanings and in this way to provide for a quantitative and qualitative growth of the language’s expressive resources.

When analysing the semantic structure of a polysemantic word, it is necessary to distinguish between two levels of analysis.

On the first level, the semantic structure of a word is treated as a system of meanings. For example, the semantic structure of the noun “fire” could be roughly presented by this scheme (only the most frequent meanings are given):

I

The above scheme suggests that meaning (I) holds a kind of dominance over the other meanings conveying the concept in the most general way whereas meanings (II)—(V) are associated with special circumstances, aspects and instances of the same phenomenon.

Meaning (I) (generally referred to as the main meaning) presents the centre of the semantic structure of the word holding it together. It is mainly through meaning (I) that meanings (II)—(V) (they are called secondary meanings) can be associated with one another, some of them exclusively through meaning (I) — the main meaning, as, for instance, meanings (IV) and
(V).

It would hardly be possible to establish any logical associations between some of the meanings of the noun “bar” except through the main meaning[1]:

Bar, n

Meaning’s (II) and (III) have no logical links with one another whereas each separately is easily associated with meaning (I): meaning (II) through the traditional barrier dividing a court-room into two parts; meaning (III) through the counter serving as a kind of barrier between the customers of a pub and the barman.

Yet, it is not in every polysemantic word that such a centre can be found.
Some semantic structures are arranged on a different principle. In the following list of meanings of the adjective “dull” one can hardly hope to find a generalized meaning covering and holding together the rest of the semantic structure.

Dull, adj.

1. A dull book, a dull film — uninteresting, monotonous, boring.
2. A dull student — slow in understanding, stupid.
3. Dull weather, a dull day, a dull colour — not clear or bright.
4. A dull sound — not loud or distinct.
5. A dull knife — not sharp.
6. Trade is dull — not active.
7. Dull eyes (arch.) — seeing badly.
8. Dull ears (arch.) — hearing badly.

There is something that all these seemingly miscellaneous meanings have in common, and that is the implication of deficiency, be it of colour (m.
III), wits (m. II), interest (m. I), sharpness (m. V), etc. The implication of insufficient quality, of something lacking, can be clearly distinguished in each separate meaning.

Dull, adj.

1. Uninteresting — deficient in interest or excitement.
2. … Stupid — deficient in intellect.
3. Not bright- deficient in light or colour.
4. Not loud — deficient in sound.
5. Not sharp — deficient in sharpness.
6. Not active — deficient in activity.
7. Seeing badly — deficient in eyesight.
8. Hearing badly — deficient in hearing.

The transformed scheme of the semantic structure of “dull” clearly shows that the centre holding together the complex semantic structure of this word is not one of the meanings but a certain component that can be easily singled out within each separate meaning.

On the second level of analysis of the semantic structure of a word: each separate meaning is a subject to structural analysis in which it may be represented as sets of semantic components.

The scheme of the semantic structure of “dull” shows that the semantic structure of a word is not a mere system of meanings, for each separate meaning is subject to further subdivision and possesses an inner structure of its own.

Therefore, the semantic structure of a word should be investigated at both these levels: 1) of different meanings, 2) of semantic components within each separate meaning. For a monosemantic word (i. e. a word with one meaning) the first level is naturally excluded.

Types of Semantic Components

The leading semantic component in the semantic structure of a word is usually termed denotative component (also, the term referential component may be used). The denotative component expresses the conceptual content of a word.

The following list presents denotative components of some English adjectives and verbs:

Denotative components

lonely, adj. — alone, without company … notorious, adj. — widely known celebrated, adj. — widely known to glare, v. — to look to glance, v. — to look to shiver, v. — to tremble to shudder, v. — to tremble

It is quite obvious that the definitions given in the right column only partially and incompletely describe the meanings of their corresponding words. They do not give a more or less full picture of the meaning of a word. To do it, it is necessary to include in the scheme of analysis additional semantic components which are termed connotations or connotative components.

Denotative Connotative components components

The above examples show how by singling out denotative and connotative components one can get a sufficiently clear picture of what the word really means. The schemes presenting the semantic structures of “glare”, “shiver”,
“shudder” also show that a meaning can have two or more connotative components.

The given examples do not exhaust all the types of connotations but present only a few: emotive, evaluative connotations, and also connotations of duration and of cause.

Meaning and Context

It’s important that there is sometimes a chance of misunderstanding when a polysemantic word is used in a certain meaning but accepted by a listener or reader in another.

It is common knowledge that context prevents from any misunderstanding of meanings. For instance, the adjective “dull”, if used out of context, would mean different things to different people or nothing at all. It is only in combination with other words that it reveals its actual meaning: “a dull pupil”, “a dull play”, “dull weather”, etc. Sometimes, however, such a minimum context fails to reveal the meaning of the word, and it may be correctly interpreted only through a second-degree context as in the following example: “The man was large, but his wife was even fatter”. The word “fatter” here serves as a kind of indicator pointing that “large” describes a stout man and not a big one.

Current research in semantics is largely based on the assumption that one of the more promising methods of investigating the semantic structure of a word is by studying the word’s linear relationships with other words in typical contexts, i. e. its combinability or collocability.

Scholars have established that the semantics of words which regularly appear in common contexts are correlated and, therefore, one of the words within such a pair can be studied through the other.

They are so intimately correlated that each of them casts, as it were, a kind of permanent reflection on the meaning of its neighbour. If the verb
“to compose” is frequently used with the object “music”, so it is natural to expect that certain musical associations linger in the meaning of the verb “to composed”.

Note, also, how closely the negative evaluative connotation of the adjective “notorious” is linked with the negative connotation of the nouns with which it is regularly associated: “a notorious criminal”, “thief”,
“gangster», “gambler”, “gossip”, “liar”, “miser”, etc.

All this leads us to the conclusion that context is a good and reliable key to the meaning of the word.

It’s a common error to see a different meaning in every new set of combinations. For instance: “an angry man”, “an angry letter”. Is the adjective “angry” used in the same meaning in both these contexts or in two different meanings? Some people will say «two» and argue that, on the one hand, the combinability is different (“man” —name of person; “letter” — name of object) and, on the other hand, a letter cannot experience anger.
True, it cannot; but it can very well convey the anger of the person who wrote it. As to the combinability, the main point is that a word can realize the same meaning in different sets of combinability. For instance, in the pairs “merry children”, “merry laughter”, “merry faces”, “merry songs” the adjective “merry” conveys the same concept of high spirits.

The task of distinguishing between the different meanings of a word and the different variations of combinability is actually a question of singling out the different denotations within the semantic structure of the word.

1) a sad woman,
2) a sad voice,
3) a sad story,
4) a sad scoundrel (= an incorrigible scoundrel)
5) a sad night (= a dark, black night, arch. poet.)

Obviously the first three contexts have the common denotation of sorrow whereas in the fourth and fifth contexts the denotations are different. So, in these five coniexts we can identify three meanings of “sad”.

Литература:

Г.Б.Антрушина, О.В.Афанасьева. Лексикология английского языка. — М. Изд.

Дрофа. 1999

F.R.Palmer. Semantics. A new outline. — M. V.Sh. 1982