Connections between objects of reality and word

Presentation on theme: «Лексикология как наука о словарном составе языка. Цели и задачи курса. Слово как основная единица лексической системы. Основные способы номинации в языке.»— Presentation transcript:

1

Лексикология как наука о словарном составе языка. Цели и задачи курса. Слово как основная единица лексической системы. Основные способы номинации в языке. Комплексная цель: охарактеризовать предмет изучения лексикологии, ее теоретическое и практическое значение, взаимосвязь с другими дисциплинами, ознакомить с такими понятиями, как синхрония и диахрония в лексикологии, парадигматический и синтагматический подходы, представить теоретические основы изучения словарного состава языка, изложить основные проблемы курса лексикологии современного английского языка. Рассмотреть основные проблемы теории слова: 1) определение слова; 2) мотивированность слова; 3) отличия слова от морфемы и от словосочетания; 4) связь между словами и объектами реальной действительности.

2

Lexicology as a Science. A General Characteristic of the English Vocabulary. What is lexicology? What is language? Describe some general problems of the theory of the word: definition of a word; identity and isolation of words; connections between objects of reality and words; motivation of words. Describe the problem of the diachronic and synchronic approaches in vocabulary system. Describe the notion of lexical system. Describe the theory of opposition. Describe the paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships of words in Modern English.

3

Word learning LEXICOLOGY general special contrastive historical descriptive 1965 DIDRO and LAMBERT

4

LANGUAGE Nominative Communicative cognitive Objective Social Historical As old as our consciousness

5

Theoretical basis Dialectical materialism Lenin’s theory of reflection Reflection is the general property of matter Reflection is selective

6

Consciousness The highest form of reflection of objective reality Related to objective reality consciousness represents an ideal image of objects constituting this reality

7

Two Approaches to Language Study the synchronic (or descriptive) and the diachronic (or historical) approach the Swiss philologist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857 — 1913) The term “synchronic” is composed of two Greek morphemes syn meaning “together, with” and chronos which denotes “time”. The synchronic approach is concerned with the vocabulary of a language as it exists at a given period of time, e.g. at the present time. The term “diachronic” is composed of the Greek morphemes dia meaning “through” and chronos meaning “time”. the diachronic approach in terms of special lexicology deals with the changes and the development of vocabulary in the course of time.

8

Some General Problems of the Theory of the Word The term word denotes the basic unit of a given language. It is simultaneously a semantic, grammatical and phonological unit. In linguistic literature we find many different definitions of a word. 1) the problem of defining the word; 2) the connection between words and objects of reality; 3) the motivation of a word since every object of reality possesses a lot of features, but only the most important and characteristic of them may become the representative of the object; 4) the problem of isolation of a word, for the borderline between various linguistic units is not always clear; words of different structural types are characte­rized by inseparability which finds its expression in graphic, morphological and semantic integrity; 5) the problem of identity of word as the word exists in the language in a system of its grammatical forms (morphological and syntactical).

9

The word is a sort of focus for the problems of phonology, lexicology, morphology, syntax and also for some other sciences that have to deal with language and speech, such as philosophy and psychology. There were many attempts to define the word, but all of them are criticized for being incomplete.

10

Any definition of the word is conditioned by the aims and interests of its author. Linguists have tried to define the word syntactiсally, semantically, phonologically and by combining various approaches. H. Sweet defined the word as «the minimum sentence» (syntactic approach). E. Sapir takes into consideration the syntactic and semantic aspects. He defines the word as «one of the smallest completely satisfying bits of isolated ‘meaning’ into which the sentence resolves itself”. French linguist A. Meillet combines the semantic, phonological and grammatical criteria and gives a definition which underlies many definitions suggested both abroad and in our country. «A word is defined by association of a given meaning with a given group of sounds susceptible of a given grammatical employment».

11

INDIVISIBILITY a lion and aliveA lion is a word group and we can insert other words between the article a and the word lion: a dead lion, a beautiful lion. Alive is a word, it is indivisible.

12

The word is a dialectical unity of form and content The system showing a word in all its word-forms is called its paradigm.

13

INTRALINGUISTIC RELATIONS OF WORDS Syntagmatic He got a letter (‘to receive’); He got tired (‘to become’); syntagmatic relations are linear (simultaneous) relationships between words. Paradigmatic the synonymic set: to obtain, to receive, to gain, to acquire, Paradigmatic relations are the relationships that a linguistic unit has with units by which it may be replaced paradigmatic relations are associative (non- simultaneous) relationships between words.

14

MOTIVATION The term motivation is used to denote the relationship existing between the morphemic or phonemic and structural pattern of the word on the one hand, and its meaning on the other There are three main types of motivation: phonetical motivation; morphological motivation; semantic motivation.

15

MOTIVATION The phonetical motivation implies a direct connection between the phonetic structure of the word and its meaning. cuckoo (cf. in Russian кукушка) There is a certain similarity between the sound- form of the word and the sounds the bird produces. The morphological motivation implies a direct connection between the lexical meaning of the component morphemes, the pattern of their arrangement and the meaning of the word. to rethink — the idea of “thinking again”

16

The semantic motivation implies a direct connection between the central and marginal meanings of the word. eyewash has two meanings: 1) a lotion for the eyes (примочка для глаз); 2) something said or done to deceive a person so that he thinks what he sees is good though in fact it is not (cf. in Russian очковтирательство) Semantic motivation is based on the coexistence of direct and figurative meanings within the semantic structure of the word.

17

Лексическое значение и семантическая структура английских слов. Комплексная цель: дать общее представление о природе значения слов, определение семасиологии, раскрыть основные типы лексических значений слова и принципы их классификации, взаимосвязь между значением слова и его сочетаемостью, значением и употреблением. Охарактеризовать понятие полисемия, ее роль в языке и причины этого явления, смысловая структура многозначного слова, историческая изменчивость смысловой структуры слова и ее причины, основные типы семантических изменений слов.

18

Semasiology The branch of lexicology which deals not with every kind of linguistic meaning but with lexical meaning only. Word-meaning is not homogeneous. It is made up of various components. These components are described as types of meaning. The two main types of meaning are the grammatical meaning and the lexical meaning.

19

The grammatical meaning It is an expression in speech of relationship between words the tense meaning in the word-forms of the verbs: asked, thought, walked; the case meaning in the word-forms of various nouns: girl’s, boy’s, night’s; the meaning of plurality which is found in the word-forms of nouns: joys, tables, places.

20

LEXICAL MEANING the realization of the notion by means of definite language system. The word-forms go, goes, went, going, gone possess different grammatical meanings of tense, person, number, but in each form they have one and the same semantic component denoting ‘the process of movement’.

21

The denotational aspect of lexical meaning is the part of lexical meaning which establishes correlation between the name and the object, phenomenon, process or characteristic feature of concrete reality (or thought as such), which is denoted by the given word. The term “denotational” is derived from the English word to denote which means ‘be a sign of, indicate, stand as a name or symbol for’. booklet is ‘a small thin book that gives information about something’.

22

THE CONNOTATIONAL ASPECT the part of meaning which reflects the attitude of the speaker towards what he speaks about. Connotation includes: the emotive charge, e.g. daddy as compared to father, evaluation, which may be positive or negative, e. g. clique (a small group of people who seem unfriendly to other people) as compared to group (a set of people); intensity (or expressiveness), e.g. adore as compared to love; imagery, e.g. to wade — to walk with an effort (through mud, water or anything that makes progress difficult). The figurative use of the word gives rise to another meaning which is based on the same image as the first — to wade through a book.

23

The pragmatic aspect of lexical meaning is the part of meaning, that conveys information on the situation of communication 1)information on the “time and space” relationship of the participants. 2)information on the participants and the given language community. information on the tenor of discourse. information on the register of communication Three main types of the situations of communication are usually singled out: formal, neutral and informal the pragmatic aspect of meaning refers words like cordial, fraternal, anticipate, aid, sanguinary, celestial to the formal register while units like cut it out, to be kidding, hi, stuff ‘are to be used in the informal register..

24

CAUSES OF SEMANTIC CHANGE extra-linguistic by extra-linguistic causes various changes in the life of the speech community are meant, i. e. changes in economic and social structure, changes in scientific concepts. hlaford. Originally the word meant ‘bread- keeper’ («хранитель хлеба»), and later on ‘master, ruler’ («повелитель, лорд»). linguistic. factors acting within the language system

25

NATURE OF SEMANTIC CHANGE There are two kinds of association involved in various semantic changes: similarity of meanings; contiguity of meanings. Similarity of meanings or metaphor may be described as the semantic process of associating two referents, one of which in some way resembles the other. hands of the clock {watch Contiguity of meanings or metonymy may be described as the semantic process of associating two referents one of which makes part of the other or is closely connected with it. mother tongue

26

RESTRICTION OR EXTENSION OF MEANING Restriction of meaning can be illustrated by the semantic development of the word hound which used to denote “dog of any breed” but now denotes only “a dog used in the chase”. If the word with the extended meaning passes from the specialized vocabulary into common use, the result of the semantic change is described as the generalization of meaning.

27

Amelioration of meaning Deterioration (or the pejorative development) of meaning the improvement of the connotational component of meaning. the acquisition by the word of some derogatory emotive charge

28

Polysemy is a phenomenon which has an exceptional importance for the description of a language system and for the solution of practical tasks connected with an adequate understanding of the meaning of a word and its use. A word may have several meanings. Then it is called a polysemantic word. Words having only one meaning are called monosemantic. Of special importance is the fact that polysemy exists only in language, not in speech. The meaning of a word in speech is contextual.

Word Semantics is concerned with word meaning. There are two branches of Word Semantics: Referential Semantics and Lexical Semantics.

Referential Semantics

What is the relation between words and the real-life objects they refer to? We use words to refer to objects. Plato, the famous Greek philosopher, suggested that words were names for objects.

We might say that onomatopoeic words like “hiccup” and “buzz” indicate this direct relationship. However, this is very limited because all these words are strongly connected with sound. What about actual real-world things?

Everywhere in the world, people will (probably) agree about the kind of sound a cow makes. However, not all animals are so cooperative. People in different countries have different kinds of words for the sounds made by dogs. Even English-speakers cannot seem to make up their minds! So onomatopoeia does not provide a very reliable way of relating words directly to objects.

That is not the only problem. Some meanings, like Love or Know for example, are abstract and not really concrete objects. Some meanings, like Dinosaurs, refer to real-world objects that no longer exist. How can words have a direct relation to these kinds of objects?

One solution is to say that the relation between words and objects is mediated by concepts. Words are tied to images or ideas in our minds and these then relate to the objects in the real world. Now what form do these concepts take? After all, they’re in our minds; we cannot take them out and look at them. And how are they formed?

Lexical Semantics

The other branch of Word Semantics is concerned with Sense. While Reference deals with the relationship between words and the real world, Sense is concerned with the connections between words and other words. Because it is concerned with the connection between words (lexemes), it is called Lexical Semantics. There are a number of possible relationships between words.

1. The definition of the word

2. Motivation

I

The
definition of the word was given already. The importance of
remembering about definitions is that they should indicate the most
essential characteristic features of the notion expressed by the term
under discussion, the features by which this notion is distinguished
from other similar notions.

E.g.
In defining the word one must distinguish it from other linguistic
units, such as phonemes, the morphemes, or the word groups.

Another
term, a
description
enumerates all the essential features of a notion.

The
definition of every basic notion is a very hard task; the definition
of the word is the most difficult in Linguistics because the simplest
word has many different aspects. The aspects are:

1)
It has a sound form because it is a certain arrangement of phonemes;

2)
It has its morphological structure, being also a certain arrangement
of morphemes, when used in actual speech, it may occur in different
word forms, and signal various meanings.

Being
the central
element
of any language system the word is a sort of focus for problems of
Phonology, Lexicology, Syntax, Morphology and also for some other
sciences that have to deal with language and speech, such as
Philosophy and Psychology etc.

The
characteristic
features of
a word are different depending in the science field where it is
studied. That’s why the variants of definitions were so numerous
and different in character.

E.g.
This example will show that any definition is conditioned by the aims
and interests of its authors. Thomas Hobbes, one of the great English
philosophers, revealed a materialistic approach to the problem of
nomination when he wrote that words are not mere sounds but names of
matter. Three centuries later Russian physiologist Pavlov examined
the word in connection with signal that can substitute any other
signal from the environment in evoking a response in a human
organism.

We
know such a phenomenon as a machine-translation.
It also deals with words (but by words is meant “a sequence of
graphemes which can occur between spaces”).

Within
the scope of Linguistics the word has been defined syntactically,
semantically, phonologically and by combining various approaches.

Words
seldom occur in isolation. They are arranged in certain patterns
conveying the relations between the thongs for which they stand,
therefore alongside with the lexical they possess some grammatical
meaning.

There
is one more, very important characteristics of the word, it is its
indivisibility:
Sapir says “It cannot cut into without a disturbance of meaning”.

E.g.
Compare a lion- alive (a as an article and a as a prefix).

A
purely semantic treatment can be found in Stephen Ullman’s
explanation: From the semantic point of view, “will fall into a
number of meaningful segments which are ultimately composed of
meaningful units. These units are called words”.

The
semantic phonological approach may be illustrated by Gardiner’s
definition: “A word is an articulate sound symbol in its aspect of
denoting something which is spoken about”.

The
French linguist Millet combines the semantic, phonological and
grammatic criteria and advances a formula which underlines many
definitions: “A word is defined by the association of a given
meaning with a given group of sounds susceptible of a given
grammatical employment”. We can take this formula together with the
statement that the word is the smallest significant unit of a given
language, capable of functioning alone. This addition is very
important to differentiate between a phoneme, morpheme and a word.

II

The
term motivation
is used to denote the relationship existing between the morphemic or
phonemic composition and structural pattern of the word on the one
hand, and its meaning on the other. There are three main types of
motivation: phonetical motivation, morphological and semantic
motivation.

E.g.
The word hiss is motivated by a certain similarity between the sounds
which make it up, and those referred to by the sense: its motivation
is phonetical.
Examples are also: bang, buzz, giggle, whistle etc.

The
derived word rethink is motivated in as much as its morphological
structure suggests the idea of thinking again. Its motivation is
morphological.

Semantic
motivation is based on the co-existence of direct and figurative
meanings, i.e. of the old sense and new within the same synchronous
system.

E.g.
Mouth continues to denote a part of the human face, and at the same
time it can mean metaphorically any opening or outlet: the mouth of a
river, for instance. In its direct meaning the word mouth is not
motivated, so that semantic motivation is also only relative.

If
there is no influence of other words on the word under discussion,
the word under discussion is said to be non-motivated (there is no
connections between the phonetical structure of the word and its
meaning).

The
difference between motivated and non-motivated words is that between
a symbol and a sign. The sign simply points to a meaning. The meaning
of a symbol is not arbitrary but depends upon its structure.

From
the historical point of view, motivation changes in the course of
time. Words that are non-motivated at present may have lost their
motivation due to changes in the vocabulary, their motivation is said
to be faded.

E.g.
The verb earn doesn’t suggest any necessary connection with
agriculture at present. It is purely conventional; historical
analysis shows that it is derived from OE earnian “to harvest”.
In ME this connection no longer exists, the motivation is lost and
earn is now a non-motivated word.

Some
linguists consider one more type of motivation – sound
symbolism.
Some words are supposed to illustrate the meaning more immediately
than do ordinary words. Their sound form is very closely connected
with the meaning. Examples are: flap, flip, flop, flash, glare,
glitter; sleet, slime, slush, where fl is associated with quick
movement, gl – with light and fire, sl – mud.

It’s
practically enough about fundamentals of Lexicology. Now we come to
the methods used to deal with these problems.

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

• #
• #
• #
• #
• #

  20.03.2015540.67 Кб9W3.doc

• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #

Representing reality*

By Martin Cohen

What is the relationship of words and paintings to mental representations — and ‘reality’ itself? The surrealist artist, René Magritte, is a philosophical favorite (along with Escher whose line drawings depict impossible staircases and infinite spirals) because so many of his pictures play with philosophical themes. Yet, less well appreciated, is his painting rests on a substantial theoretical base and a consistent personal effort to address the key philosophical question — through art — of the relationship of language, thought and reality.

In the Second Surrealist Manifesto, René Magritte offers 18 sketches, each illustrating a supposed 3-way relationship with words and ‘reality. This page explores each image in turn. 


Unlike other artists of the Surrealist school, Magritte’s style is highly realistic — but this is only a meant to later undermine the authority and certainty of ‘appearance’ — of our knowledge of the external world. As Magritte puts it:

«We see the world as being outside ourselves, although it is only a mental representation of it that we experience inside ourselves.» [1]

Les Mots et Les Images

An object is not so attached to its name that one cannot find for it another one which is more suitable [2] The handwritten words ‘le canon’ is usually just translated as ‘the gun’ -but could this in itself be a play on the sense of ‘the canon’, the ‘thing setting the standard’, especially of beauty?

There are objects which can do without a name.
The French word for the rowing boat is ‘canot‘ — but the play on words…?

A word sometimes serves only to designate itself.
‘Ciel‘ is sky… but?

An object encounters its image, and objects encounters its name. It happens that the image and the name of this object encounter each other.
As opposed to the later cases,

Sometimes the name of an object occupies the place of an image.
A hand, a box and a rock?

A word can take the place of an object in reality.
The dame is saying ‘sunshine’. Or ‘the sun’ if you like. Does it link to the next image?

An image can take the place of a word in a sentence. [3]
Well, yes, but logically the sun should be hidden, no?

An object can suggest that there are other objects behind it.
The wall does not make me think there is anything behind it. The sun? The dame?

Everything tends to make us think that there is little relationship between an object and that which represents it.  [4] Confusingly, the ‘real’ and the ‘image’ are of course the same here…

The words which serve to indicate two different objects do not show what may divide these objects from one another. The ‘surreal’ labelling in French translates as ‘person with memory loss’ and ‘woman’s body’.

In a painting the words are of the same substance as the images.
But are they?

You can perceive words and images differently in a painting.
Is Magritte saying a new meaning can be created by juxtapositions like this?

A shape can replace the image of an object for any reson.
A very confusing play on shapes here…

An object never serves the same purpose as either its name or its image does.
The man is calling his horse — or is he calling his horse ‘horse’?

Sometimes the visible shapes of objects, in real life, form a mosaic
René seems to have drifted somewhat from his original theme here…

Vague or unclear shapes have a precise significance every bit as necessary as that of perfect shapes.
Again, the example has left language slightly out of the debate. But the point could be extended…

Sometimes, the names written in a picture designate precise things, while the images are vague.
Well… yes…

Or equally, the opposite:
But is the word ‘fog’ (brouillard) itself imprecise?

Decoding Magritte

The images above all appeared in an article by Magritte entitled, rather literally, ‘Les mots et les images’ (Words and Images), in La Révolution surréaliste in December 1927. The series is intended to introduce the theme of all Magritte’s painting, namely that of the ambiguity of the connections between real objects, their image and their name. The fifth statement here: «sometimes the name of an object stands for an image» he went on to illustrate with this image:

This is one of a series of ‘alphabet paintings’ or ‘word paintings’ produced by Magritte during his time in Paris from 1927 to 1930. Here, the words ‘foliage’, ‘horse’, ‘mirror’, ‘convoy’, written on the canvas, replace the image they designate. ‘Placed at the tip of the points of a mysterious star and each inscribed on a brown stain, «any form whatsoever that can replace the image of an object», these words play a full part in the spatial composition of a new fantasy image. This painting undoes the connection that we spontaneously establish between objects, images and words.’ [5]

Another clue as to Magritte’s philosophy is provided by a series of paintings dealing with the concept of ‘categories’. In The Palace of Curtains (1929) two frames contain respectively the word ciel (‘sky’) and a pictorial representation of a blue ‘sky’. Magritte’s point is that both the word and image ‘represent’ the ‘real thing’ — one works by resemblance while the other is only by an intellectual — arbitary — association.

Les Mots et Les Images

In two pictures called Empty Mask (a ‘mask’ being a ‘frame’, here) Magritte again makes a point about what ‘represents’ what. In the first picture the frame is empty by virtue of nothing being painted in the spaces, but equally in the second frame, full of characteristic Magritte images, the frame is still empty because these fragments do not represent anything. Or so at least art historians theorise. [6]

‘The dividedness, the fragmented quality and the separateness of their components deprive them of anything that resembles reality, destroys all narrative content’ (says one, Bart Ottinger).

Another image, The Threshold of Liberty (1929), adds a gun, threatening in surrealist fashion to destroy the conventional representations.

In the Key to Dreams series, which this page starts with an image of, Magritte uses images in the style of a schoolroom reading text, probably based on the Petit Larousse, texts in which an obvious and exact correspondence is implied. Thus his simple images pack a subversive message.

It is, as one art critic says, a school reading primer gone wrong — yet sometimes, not completely wrong, for example in the image opposite (Key to Dreams,1930) the lower right-hand cell is correct.

In the six panel image above, none of the nouns (the acacia, moon, snow, ceiling, storm, desert) match up.

The title, ‘Key to Dreams’ (La clef des songes) however implies that there may be deeper, hidden connections.

So are we any nearer to decoding that meaning? Not really. However, Michel Foucault knew Magritte and discussed these ideas in an essay ‘Ceci n’est pas une pipe’ (This is not a Pipe). Foucault has some definite suggestions on the matter.

---

*This essay originally appeared on the now disappeared Pi Alpha. It has been slightly updated here.

Notes


• 1 This much quoted line comes from a lecture Magritte gave, entitled, ‘La Ligne de vie’ — how should we translate that though?
• 2 The first 12 translations are based on that at http://www.kraskland.com/
• 3 This is NOT the translation at http://www.kraskland.com/ — which uses ‘propositon’ — ridiculous!
• 4 This is slightly better than the translation at http://www.kraskland.com/
• 5 As explained here: http://www.centrepompidou.fr/education/ressources/ENS-surrealistart-EN/ENS-surrealistart-EN.htm
• 6 For example, this interestingand informative essay here: http://courses.washington.edu/hypertxt/cgi-bin/book/wordsinimages/magritte.html