Different meanings of the word much

Enjoy learning English online with Puzzle English for free

когда употребляется much а когда many

It is clear where the confusion can arise between the words many and much: in Russian they have the same meaning. Both words convey the idea of ​​plurality and indicate a large number of those objects to which they refer.

What, then, is the difference between them? And when is many used, and when is much? In order not to confuse these two words with each other, you need to remember small rules.

Countable and uncountable nouns

The words much and many each refer to the object that follows it. The choice of one of these two words depends on the type of the subsequent noun.

All nouns can be divided into two groups: countable and uncountable. The division into these two classes is based on the ability to count objects. Let’s look at this principle with an example: take the word chair.

It has both singular and plural forms: chair — chairs. If we imagine a set of chairs, we can count how many items it contains: one chair, two chairs, and so on.

If we take another noun, for example, snow (snow), then we will not be able to count what elements a lot of snow consists of.

Nouns of the first type that behave like chair are called countable, and nouns of the second type, like snow, are called uncountable.

Many and much: the rule of thumb

How much and many have to do with this? The most direct: the category of calculability of a noun determines which of these words will be used. Let’s turn to the examples we are already familiar with. Chair is a countable item, so many will be used with it. Snow is an uncountable noun, which means that if we want to convey the idea of ​​a large number, we will use much with it.

I need many chairs for the party — I need many chairs for the holiday.
There is much snow in the city — There is a lot of snow in the city.

Thus, for many or much, the rule can be deduced: many appears with countable nouns, and much with uncountable nouns.

Source: https://puzzle-english.com/directory/muchmany

When to use a lot of and many. The use of much — many — a lot of in English — video tutorial

когда употребляется much а когда many
Hello, people! In this article, we will analyze in detail the rules for using the words «much», «many» and «a lot of» in English, find out the differences between them, discuss the nuances of using them in speech, and also show examples for clarity.

Translation and transcription: much — a lot, very, a lot, significantly, very;

Use: is used in a sentence when we mean a large number of uncountable nouns, i.e. those that cannot be counted by the piece;

Example:

there is much black paint left in the garage.
Left in the garage lotblack paint.

Also, it is usually used in negative or interrogative sentences:

Chris does not have muchchange. Only a few five dollar bills.
Chris doesn’t have a lot of money to trade. Just a few five dollar bills.

In affirmative sentences, «much» is sometimes used when a more formal and formal style is implied.

For example:

there is much concern about genetically modified food in the UK.
In the UK the question is acuterelatively genetically modified food.

Many

Transcription and Translation: like “much”, “many” [“menɪ] translates to“ many ”;

Use: used exclusively with countable plural nouns;

Example:

However, despite manymany problems remain unsolved.
However, despite Significantefforts, many problems remain unresolved.

В denials и issues with countable nouns «many» also occurs quite often:

How manyquail eggs are in this salad?
How many quail eggs in this salad? Anthony does not have many bottlesof winein his own private bar. At least that »s what he» s saying.
Anthony’s slightlybottles wine in his own bar. At least that’s what he says.

Can be used in affirmative offer when you need a shade formalities.

There were manyscientific articles taken into account to make a decision.
It was taken into account many scientific articles to make a decision.

A lot of

Transcription and translation: by meaning «a lot of» [ə lɔt ɔf] is similar to «much» and «many» and implies the same translation — a lot;

Use: used with both countable plural and uncountable nouns, mainly in colloquial and informal speech.

Example:

Jack had a lot ofpeanutbutter left in the jar.
Jack has left lotpeanutpastes in the bank.

The equivalent of «a lot of» is «lots of«(Even more informal form).

Lots of teenagers learn Korean because they are into k-pop.
ManyTeens are learning Korean because they are into the K-pop music genre.

Table: Difference between much, many and a lot

WORD Use Value
countable nouns (plural) / negation + question / statement = formal style
uncountable nouns / negation + question / statement = formal style
more / more
The most uncountable + countable nouns / adjectives most / most
A lot (of) uncountable + countable nouns / informal style
lots (of) uncountable + countable nouns / extremely informal style

The use of the words much, many, a lot of often causes some difficulties due to the fact that in the Russian language the word “many” is universal. In English, these words have the following rules:

1. Many: many and much

Much is used with uncountable nouns, usually in negative sentences and questions.

I don’t have much money.
/ I don’t have a lot of money. /

In addition, the word much has the meanings «very», «much», «significant», «much».

«But it doesn» t matter much, «thought Alice.
«/ But it’s not so important,» thought Alice. /

He did it much sooner than she expected.
/ He did it much sooner than she expected. /

Alice was not much surprised at this.
/ This did not surprise Alice. /

Many also means «many,» but is used with countable nouns, often in negative sentences and questions (but not limited to), and in phrases with the words «many of».

I have scarcely spoken of the customs of the Kukuanas, many of which are exceedingly quaint.
/ I hardly talked about the customs of the Kukuanas, many of which are extremely strange. /

Have you been to many countries?
/ Have you been to many countries? /

Many is used, for example, when we say many days, many years, many hours, many times.

We have known each other for many years.
/ We have known each other for many years. /

Also, many can mean many (people).

Though he was a great help in his father’s business, there were many who doubted that he would become the heir to it.
/ Although he was very helpful to his father in his business, many doubted that he would become his heir. /

The words much and many are also used in the constructions as much as / as many as, too much / too many, so much / so many, how much / how many.

Source: https://sokurnso.ru/finansy/kogda-upotreblyat-a-lot-of-i-many-upotreblenie-much-many-a-lot-of-v-angliiskom/

Lesson 7. Words-parameters. The use of much and many

когда употребляется much а когда many

Words much, many (many, many, many) can be used as an addition to a noun, or be used instead.

much used only with uncountable nouns or instead of uncountable nouns:

  • How much money did he spend?
  • You haven’t much time if you want to catch the bus.
  • Not much was written about it.
  • He doesn’t eat much.He doesn’t eat much.

Many is used only with countable nouns or instead of countable nouns:

  • How many books do you have?
  • How many pupils are in this class?
  • Many to play football. Many people like to play football.
  • Not many have heard of her.

In modern English, often instead of words much и many their synonym is used a lot of (lots of). A lot of used with both countable and uncountable nouns:

  • He always makes a lot of mistakes He always makes a lot of mistakes.
  • we have a lot of bags.We have a lot of bags.

If the word «a lot» is preceded by too (too much), very (very), so (So), how (as), as (also) then you need to use much и many. Using A lot of in this case is incorrect.

  • I have so much work to do
  • She works too much.She works too hard.
  • You have made very many mistakes You made a lot of mistakes.

In this lesson, the expression a lot of not used. Only much и many.

little, few

Words little, few (little, not enough) can be used as an addition to a noun, or be used instead.

Little used only with uncountable nouns:

  • we have little money We don’t have much money.
  • She at very little at lunch She ate very little at lunch.
  • Little has been said about this event.
  • John spends little time with his family. John spent little time with his family.

Few used only with countable nouns:

  • He has few friends He has few friends.
  • Few managers admit their mistakes.
  • He has read few books He has read few books.
  • Many people were invited but few came. Many people were invited, but few came.

Pronouns little и few can be used with an indefinite article in the meaning a little, a little.
Consider in comparison:

  • I have a little time. I have a little time.
  • I have little time. I have little time.
  • I know a few words in spanish. I know a few words in spanish.
  • I know few words in spanish. I know few words in Spanish.

Parameter words

AllPartNothingPeople Objects Place Time

everybody, everyone somebody, someone anybody, anyone nobody, no one
everything something something, something anything anything, anything nothing
everywhere somewhere anywhere anywhere, anywhere nowhere
always sometimes sometimes never

examples:

  • He sees todo MundoHe sees everyone.
  • He speaks to somebody.He is talking to someone.
  • I saw him somewhere. I saw him somewhere.
  • I always say the truth. I always tell the truth.
  • I saw someone there. I saw someone there.
  • Anyone can help you. Anyone can help you.
  • We bought everything.We bought everything.
  • You can buy it anywhere.You can buy this anywhere.
  • you will Sometimes hear them. You will sometimes hear them.

Note time parameters the sentence usually uses before the verb… All other parameters are used more often. after the verb.

В general issues the parameter is usually used Any (anybody, anyone, anything, anywhere), a not some.

As you can see from the table, the words somebody, something, somewhere can have the same translation with the words anybody, anything, anywhere.
To understand when which word to use, you need to go from the essence of the words.

Any — any, but some — some.

I saw somebody.
It’s about someone specific, so some.

I did not see anybody (I saw nobody)
Here we are talking about any person, so any.

Consider the following question-answer: Have you seen someone? I saw someone.

Did you see anyone? I saw someone.

Therefore, in the main questions, words with any are used, and in statements with some.

examples:

  • Is anybody is there anyone here?
  • there is somebody here. Someone is here.
  • did you see anything interesting? Did you see anything interesting?
  • I see something interesting there. I see something interesting there.

Using parameters is straightforward. Except for one case where the words nobody, nothing, nowhere, and never are used to convey negation:

  • I didn’t tell him anything bad.

In this case, you should not copy the structure of the Russian sentence, because double negation will be a mistake in an English sentence:

  • I didn’t say anything bad to him. Note tell him nothing bad. (wrong) I told him nothing bad. (right)

Let’s consider a few more suggestions:

  • there is nothing interesting here. There is nothing interesting here.
  • Nobody cares about my plans.

Words anyone, anybody, anything, anywhere are not negatives, therefore in negative sentences they are used as a general rule.

  • I didn’t say anything bad to him. Note tell him anything bad or I told him nothing bath.
  • I didn’t see anything interesting here. Note see anything interesting here or I saw nothing interesting here.

Words todo Mundo, everyone, somebody, someone, anybody, anyone, nobody и no one in English refer to singular… Therefore, the verb with them is used in the singular.

  • Someone calls you.
  • Does anyone hear me? can anyone hear me?
  • No one was at home. Nobody was at home.

Source: https://polyglotmobile.ru/polyglot-english-base/lesson-7/

Much and Many in English. Brief instruction

Much and many in English refer to quantitative pronouns. Pronoun many is used with countable nouns, pronoun much — with uncountable.

Yesterday he spent much money. He spent a lot of money yesterday.

Many friends came to his party. Many friends came to his party.

The quantitative pronouns much and many can be used as adjective pronouns and as noun pronouns.

Pronouns-adjectives

Here much and many will mean «many».

  • In affirmative sentences, they can be used:
    1. With adverbs of degree. These include the frequently used adverbs so — so, so; very — very, too — too, etc. They are used with pronouns to reinforce meaning. You work too much. I found so many mistakes in your work. I found a lot of mistakes in your work.
    2. As definitions to the subject. Much money will be spent for your classes. A lot of money will be spent on your classes. Many students study foreign languages. Many students study foreign languages.
    3. In relative clauses if and whether.I’ll be glad if many children come tomorrow. I will be glad if many children come tomorrow.
  • Interrogative sentences also often contain much and many: How many people were there? How many people were there? Did you find much information? Did you find a lot of information? Much becomes «how much» or «how much» — with the question how much? How much oil should I use? How much oil should I use? How much is this car?
  • The pronouns much and many are also used in negative sentences meaning little (not many, not much). Not many animals live in this forest. Few animals live in this forest. I have not got much money on me. I don’t have much money with me.

Pronouns — nouns

Here many is used to mean «many» and the pronoun much is used to mean «many.» Very often here these pronouns are accompanied by the preposition of. They can be used as:

  1. Subject. Many study English. Many are learning English. Many of them decided not to come. Many of them decided not to come. Much happened that night. A lot happened that night. Much of what she s is not interesting for me. Much that she likes is not interesting to me.
  2. Supplement (answers the questions of what? Who?) They ask much of us. They demand a lot from us. We saw many in this cafe.
  3. Circumstance (if much refers to the predicate and answers the question how?) You sleep too much. He was very much disappointed. He was very disappointed.

Comparative and superlative

Pronouns much and many can form comparative и superlative: much / many — more — (the) most. At the same time, much can act not only as a quantitative pronoun, but also as an adverb.

Much and many are used in the comparative degree more:

  1. With uncountable nouns and the pronoun some. Can I have some more coffee? Can I have some more coffee?
  2. To reinforce meaning (followed by the pronoun much). She has much more work than I do. She has a lot more work than me.
  3. More is used with countable nouns to indicate the exact number (followed by a numeral). I want to buy three more books. I want to buy three more books.
  4. With the preposition of to concretize the statement. He needs more of this fabric. He needs more (more) such fabric.

Much and many are superlative (the) most:

  1. To denote most of the total or number. Moreover, most is used with a noun without an article. Most students are busy now. Most of the students are busy now. Most children to play outside. Most children love to play outside.
  2. To denote most of a limited quantity or number. In this case, most will be used with the preposition of and with a noun with the article the or possessive pronoun. Most of the flowers in this shop were brought from Holland. Most of the flowers in this store were sourced from Holland. Most of your friends are very polite. Most of your friends are very polite.

Article recommended by an expert: Maria Solomatina

Source: https://1hello.ru/grammatika/much-many-v-anglijskom-yazyke-kratkaya-instrukciya.html

Rules for the use of much, many, few, little, a lot of and plenty of

In English, there are words called quantifiers. They are used to indicate quantity. Unlike numerals, which denote an exact amount, these words refer to an approximate amount. In this article, we will talk about words like much, many, few, little, a lot of и plenty of.

Using much, many and a lot of

All these words are translated into Russian as «a lot». However, the use of these words depends on the type of sentence (statement, negation or question) and on which noun it refers to — countable or uncountable. The basic rules are presented in the table below:

For example:

He has a lot of books. — He has lot books.

Kate doesn’t have many DVDs. — At Kate Little DVD. (Literally: Keith doesn’t have a lot of DVDs).

Holly spends a lot of time watching TV shows. — Holly conducts lot time watching television shows.

is there much petrol in the tank? — In the tank lot gasoline?

Much and many in statements

As you can see, a lot of is mainly used in affirmative sentences, and much and many — in denials and questions. However, this rule is not strict, it is based on the frequency of use, therefore much and many can be used in assertions as well. For example:

Joe has many friends. — Joe lot friends.

Also the words much and many are used instead of a lot of in a formal business style:

Many different kinds of research require the permission of the supervisor. — Many types of research require the permission of the supervisor.

If we want to say that there is too much of something (that is, build an affirmative sentence), then instead of a lot of we will use words much and many with additional word too («too much»). For example:

There were too many people at the conference. — The conference was too much people.

Oliver ate too much ice-cream. — Oliver ate too much ice cream

Synonyms of a lot of

Synonymous with the word a lot of is lots of. It is believed that lots of more informal and more often used in colloquial speech, and a lot of on the contrary, it is more formal. Lots of can also be used with both countable and uncountable nouns. For example:

Julia eats a lot of vegetables. / Julia eats lots of vegetables. — Julia is lot vegetables.

They have done a lot of work. / they have done lots of work. — They did lot work.

Another word for a large number is the word plenty of… As a rule, it is used to mean a very large amount of something, something in abundance:

we have plenty of tea at home. — At our home lot tea.

James has brought plenty of biscuits to the office. — James brought to the office lot cookies.

As we see plenty of can also be used with both countable and uncountable nouns.

The use of few, a few, little, a little

In order to understand how these words are used, we need to know two parameters: the first — whether this word refers to a countable or uncountable noun and the second: what is the meaning of the sentence — positive or negative. Consider the table below:

examples:

Kelly has a few close friends. — Kelly has slightly close friends. (Positive value).

Kelly has few close friends. — At Kelly’s little close friends. (Negative meaning).

Bobby has a little money. — Bobby has slightly of money. (A positive value is a little, but still there).

Bobby has little money. — Bobby’s little of money. (Negative meaning).

As we can see from the examples, these words have the same translation into Russian for both countable and uncountable nouns, but a different translation depending on the meaning: with a positive meaning, we translate them as «a little», with a negative meaning, as «little.»

Other meanings of much, a lot, a little

Form a lot sometimes it is used not in the meaning of «a lot», but in the meaning of «often» or «very». For example:

Do you enjoy watching films? — Yes, a lot… — Do you like to watch movies? — Yes, very.

Also the words much и a little can be used to form the comparative degree of adjectives. For example:

Source: https://www.start2study.ru/english-grammar/quantifiers/

Greetings, my dears!

There is an opinion that the Russian language is the richest language with an immense number of beautiful words! .. But how can you agree with it when in Russian there is only one word expressing a large number — «many», and in English there are already as many as three! (in fact, there are more of them — these are just the main ones).

Of course, I will not breed debates about the beauty of the language here — and it is so clear that each language is great in its own way! And here is the «Rule many many”And a few other words that we use to express quantity, I’ll expand it today so that you don’t think to get confused and make mistakes anymore! You are ready? I have already

Let’s start with a table that will clearly show you the difference. And let’s finish with the exercises — without them, your fresh knowledge will fly into the water pipe — in about the same way as an earring that accidentally fell there flies away)).

I think everything is clear from the table. Now I will explain verbally and in more detail.

  • Much / a little / little

The words Much / a little / little are used only with nouns that cannot be counted, that is, with uncountable nouns. Much means a lot of something — much sugar, much water, much money.

Little — on the contrary — very little of anything — little sugar (very little sugar), little water (little water), little money (little money).

A little means «a little», it is a cross between much and little — a little sugar (a little sugar), a little water (a little water), a little money (a little money).

  • Many / a few / few

The words Many / a few / few are used only with nouns that can be counted, that is, with countable nouns. Many means a lot of something — many books, many friends, many thoughts.

Few — on the contrary — very little of anything — few books, few friends, few thoughts.

A few means «several», it is a cross between many and few — a few books (a few books), a few friends (a few friends), a few thoughts (a few thoughts).

A lot of can be used with both countable and uncountable nouns, which is very convenient. A lot of often replaces much and many in affirmative sentences, whereas much and many are more appropriate in negatives and questions.

Do you have much time?

— No, I don’t have much time. or — Yes, I have a lot of time.

By the way, there are several «subtle points» where students often make mistakes. We read and remember!

! Many people! (not much)

many clothes! (not much)

Much money! (not many)

Many fruits! or! Much fruit!

And now, as promised by me, tasks with answers at the end

Exercise 1.Insert much or many instead of dots

  1. Have you found information about this company?
  2. They spent money in a shop yesterday.
  3. There are so places in the world that I’d to visit.
  4. people nowadays use bicycles instead of cars to go to work.
  5. «You’ve put too salt in the soup, I can’t eat it!»
  6. “Don’t buy food in the supermarket, we are going out tonight”.

Exercise 2.Translate sentences into English using much, many, a little, a few, little, few, a lot of

  1. I have few friends in this part of town.
  2. The teacher said so many words, but I didn’t understand anything.
  3. He asked the waiter to bring some water.
  4. In autumn, many birds fly south.
  5. She doesn’t like it when there is too much sugar in her tea.
  6. “There is absolutely no room in the closet! You have so many clothes! ”

I hope you had absolutely mistakes few!

Well, if you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask — I will definitely answer them!

Replies

Exercise 1.

Exercise 2.

  1. I have few friends in this part of the city.
  2. A teacher said so many words but I understood nothing.
  3. He asked a waiter to bring a little water.
  4. In autumn many birds fly to the south.
  5. She doesn’t it when there is too much sugar in tea.
  6. “There is no place in a wardrobe! You’ve got so many clothes! ”

To indicate a large number of someone or something (that is, say «a lot»), in English they use quantitative much, many, a lot of and few… All these pronouns have a meaning and a direct translation into Russian “many”. Beginners, and sometimes those who continue to study English, may have difficulties with what the difference between these pronouns is and how to choose the correct one. In this article, we’ll take a closer look at the much many a lot of rule.

Rules for using much, many, a lot of (affirmative sentences)

The rules for using much and many (and lot of) are their own. All of them are translated into Russian, not only «a lot», but in English there is a big difference between them. As a rule, the first step is to find out whether a countable or uncountable noun will be paired with much and many or a lot of — this is the main difference in the use of quantitative nouns.

much

The pronoun much should only be used with uncountable nouns — liquids, bulk solids, gases, etc. That is, the sentences will contain the constructions «much milk» (a lot of milk), «much water» (a lot of water), «much oxygen» (a lot of oxygen), but you will not find «many rice» or «many juice ”(a lot of falcon).

You added too much milk — You added too much milk.
I don’t much pepper in my food— I don’t like a lot of pepper in my food.

Negative sentences

According to the rules for using much and many, the pronouns much and many are most often used in negative sentences. Negations with uncountable nouns have the form not much, and negatives with countable nouns with not many.

Not many students — Few students like history lessons.
Not many of us have elephants — Not many of us have elephants. (Few of us have elephants.)He doesn’t eat much rice — He eats some meat.
Not much weight gain during pregnancy — Slight weight gain during pregnancy.

Interrogative sentences

The rules for using many and much state that the pronouns much and many are most often used in interrogative sentences. Questions with uncountable nouns start with how much, and questions with countable nouns start with how many.

How many roses are there in Kate’s hands? — How many roses does Kate have in her hands?
How many crocodiles do you have? — How many crocodiles do you have?
How many states are there in the USA? — How many states are there in the United States?
How much pepper do you take in your fried eggs? — How much pepper do you put in your scrambled eggs?
How much money does she need for her trip around the world? How much sugar do you have? — How much sugar do you have?

How much does it cost? — How much is it?

Features and exceptions

There is one peculiarity in the rules for using many and much that needs to be mentioned. When the pronouns much and many are followed by the particle of, it means «big half». In Russian, such a construction translates as «most of something», «many of».

Many of her clients live in the village “Many of her clients live outside the city.
Much of the meat is stink

Source: https://www.fanatsporta.ru/kogda-many-a-kogda-much-much-i-many-v-angliiskom-yazyke-kratkaya-instrukciya/

Much and many. Usage rules

Details Karina Galchenko Category: BEGINNER — ELEMENTARY

: 03 June 2019

180735

: 4/5

How not to get confused using much and many? Just pay attention to the rules of use, because it is no coincidence that the English came up with two words with the same meaning. They are not interchangeable: in some cases, you only need much, and in others, you only need many. It all depends on the word itself, which will refer to much or many. Let’s figure out what’s what!

As you know, nouns are divided into countable (you can count) and uncountable (you cannot count), and this is what depends on. rules for using much and many… It is necessary to remember once and for all that many is «friends» only with countable nouns, and much — with uncountable ones.

examples:

many children — many children

much water — a lot of water

But that’s not all about much and many. The rules for using these words suggest that they are best avoided in positive sentences. That is, much and many in English should be used in negations and questions. There are exceptions when these words are part of the subject.

examples:

do you have many friends here? — Do you have many friends here? (many + countable noun).

I don’t much sugar in my tea. — I don’t like a lot of sugar in tea (much + uncountable noun).

Many people speak English. — Many people speak English (many is part of the subject — many people).

Rules for the use of many much a lot of

If your positive proposal cannot do without «a lot», then pay attention to rules for using many much a lot of… It is believed that a lot of is well suited for approval. By the way, you can use it in absolutely any context. Even if you suddenly wondered what would work for a given sentence, a lot of will always help out, since it can be used for both countable and uncountable nouns.

examples:

There are a lot of people in this room. — There are many people in this room (a lot of + countable noun).

I have a lot of work today. — I have a lot of work today (a lot of + uncountable noun).

Do i have a lot of mistakes in the test? — Do I have a lot of mistakes in the test? (interrogative sentence).

They don’t have a lot of information. — They don’t have a lot of information (negative proposal).

Rules for using many much a lot of refer specifically to nouns, you cannot use these words with verbs. But what to do when it is important to «enhance» the meaning of an action? Here a lot will do (without the preposition of).

examples:

We see our parents a lot… — We see our parents a lot (meaning «see each other often»)

Do you practice this language a lot? — Do you practice this language a lot?

Drinking how much how many

Concerning how much how many, then here, too, everything depends on the noun that will follow this or that question phrase. How much should be combined with uncountable nouns, and how many with countable nouns.

examples:

How much milk do you have to buy? — How much milk do you need to buy? (how much + uncountable noun)

How many roses did he present her? — How many roses did he give her? (how many + countable noun)

Finally, I would like to note that with the words years, weeks, days it is better to use many rather than a lot of.

Example:

I have known Mary for many years. — I have known Mary for many years.

Best wishes to you!

Source: http://fluenglish.com/stati/studentam-na-zametku/29-beginner-elementary/367-much-i-many-pravila-upotrebleniya.html

A clear rule of thumb for using much-many in English. Usage examples, exercises with answers

Hello friends! How not to get confused using much and many? Just pay attention to the rules of use, because it is no coincidence that the English came up with two words with the same meaning.

They are not interchangeable: in some cases, you only need much, and in others, you only need many. It all depends on the word itself, which will refer to much or many. Let’s figure out what’s what!

Difference between many and much

Pronoun many used when it refers to objects (animate or inanimate) that can be counted. Words denoting such objects are called countable nouns.

Example:

  • many children — many children
  • many people — many people
  • many tigers — many tigers

use many (since they can be counted)

Pronoun much is used only with nouns that cannot be counted, that is, with uncountable nouns.

Example:

  • much sugar
  • much water
  • much money

use much (since they cannot be counted. Much means a lot of something.)

We look at the table that will clearly show you the difference in the use of Much, Many

Much / Little Many / Few A lot of / Plenty of

Uncountable nouns Countable nouns Countable and uncountable nouns
How much money have you got? — How much money do you have? — There is some ink left in my pen. I have many friends. He has got few best friends. — He has a few (few) best friends. There is a lot of sugar there. — There are plenty of plants in the garden. — There are many plants in the garden.

Many used where items can be counted individually.
If they cannot be counted, feel free to insert the word into the sentence much.

Much / many exercises:

Exercise 1. Use much or many to express How many ?.

  1. how days?
  2. how sugar?
  3. how cigarettes?
  4. How work?
  5. How petrol?
  6. How children?
  7. How theaters?
  8. How juice?

Exercise 2. Translate sentences into English using much, many, a little, a few, little, few, a lot of

  1. I have few friends in this part of town.
  2. The teacher said so many words, but I didn’t understand anything.
  3. He asked the waiter to bring some water.
  4. In autumn, many birds fly south.
  5. She doesn’t like it when there is too much sugar in her tea.
  6. “There is absolutely no room in the closet! You have so many clothes! ”

Exercise 3. Use much or many.

Do you drink ________coffee? I reading. I read _________ books. We have _______ lessons of English this year. I can’t remember _______ from this text. Do you learn _______ new English words every day? We haven’t got ________ bread. I can’t spend ________ money on toys.

Replies

Exercise 1.

  1. How many days? (How many days?)
  2. How much sugar? (How much sugar?)
  3. How many cigarettes? (How many cigarettes?)
  4. How much work? (How much work?)
  5. How much petrol? (How much gasoline?)
  6. How many children? (How many children?)
  7. How many theaters? (How many theaters?)
  8. How much juice? (How much juice?)

Exercise 2.

  1. I have few friends in this part of the city.
  2. A teacher said so many words but I understood nothing.
  3. He asked a waiter to bring a little water.
  4. In autumn many birds fly to the south.
  5. She doesn’t it when there is too much sugar in tea.
  6. “There is no place in a wardrobe! You’ve got so many clothes! ”

Exercise 3.

Do you drink much coffee? I reading. I read many books. We have many lessons of English this year. I can’t remember much from this text. Do you learn many new English words every day? We haven’t got much bread. I can’t spend much money on toys.

Friends like us, we tried!

Source: http://englishfox.ru/pravilo-much-many-v-angliiskom.html

The use of much, many, few, little, a lot of, plenty

In order not to miss new useful materials, subscribe to site updates

Have you noticed how often we use the words «a lot», «a little», «a few» in our speech and how we do not like to give exact numbers? Secretive by nature, the English also use these words very often in speech.

When we say «a lot» in English, we use the words many, much, a lot of, plenty of, and when we say «little» — few, a few, little, a little. These words are called determiners, they indicate an indefinite amount of something.

This article will show you when and where to use much, many, few, little, a lot of, plenty of in English.

The noun plays a key role in the choice of the defining word. The determiner depends on which noun is in front of us, countable (countable) or uncountable (uncountable). Once again, we recall that we can count countable nouns and they have a plural form (a boy — boys). And uncountable nouns do not have a plural form (water — some water), and we cannot count them.

We have divided all words into three groups depending on which noun they are used with. We will consider each group separately.

Much / Little Many / Few A lot of / Plenty of

Uncountable nouns Countable nouns Countable and uncountable nouns
How much money have you got? — How much money do you have? — There is little ink left in my pen. I have many friends. — He has got few friends. — He has few friends. There is a lot of sugar there. — There are plenty of plants in the garden. — There are many plants in the garden.

Many, few, a few with countable nouns

The words many (many), few (few), a few (several) are used with countable nouns. Many denotes a large number of something: many apples (many apples), many friends (many friends), many ideas (many ideas).

The opposite of many is few: few apples, few friends, few ideas. Few often have a negative meaning: very little, not enough, so little that practically none.

A few has an intermediate meaning between many and few, translated as «a few»: a few apples (a few apples), a few friends (a few friends), a few ideas (a few ideas).

— Do you have many friends in this part of the city? — At your place lot friends in this part of town?
— No, I don’t. I have few friends in this part of the city. — I do not have little friends in this part of town. (that is, not enough, I would like more)
— I have a few friends in the city center. — I have some friends in the city center.

Much, little, a little with uncountable nouns

The words much, little, and little are used with uncountable nouns. Usually, the uncountable include liquids (water — water, oil — oil), objects that are too small that cannot be counted (sand — sand, flour — flour), or abstract concepts, since they cannot be seen or touched by hands (knowledge — knowledge, work — Work).

Much stands for a large amount of something uncountable: much sugar, much milk, much time.

The opposite of much is little: little sugar, little milk, little time. Little, like few, means that something is not enough, very little.

A little means a small amount of something that cannot be counted: a little sugar, a little milk, a little time.

— Did she put much salt in the soup? — She lot put salt in the soup?
— No, she didn’t. She put little salt in the soup. — No, she put little salt in the soup. (more could have been)
— I added a little salt in her soup. — I added slightly salt in her soup.

A lot of, plenty of — universal words

The words a lot of (many) and plenty of (many) are the most «convenient»: we can use them with both countable nouns and uncountable ones.

A lot of (lots of) replaces much and many: a lot of people (many people), lots of tea (lots of tea). Plenty of means that there is a lot of something, that is, enough or even more than necessary: ​​plenty of people (a lot of people), plenty of tea (a lot of tea).

We bought lots of souvenirs and plenty of tea when we were on vacation in Sri Lanka. — We bought lot souvenirs and lots of tea when we were on vacation in Sri Lanka.

How to learn to use adjectives with countable and uncountable nouns correctly

The use of adjectives with countable and uncountable nouns in English has its own tricks. What are they?

There are countable and uncountable nouns in English. Most often they are combined with adjectives in the same way. But there are situations when you need to know exactly which adjectives should be used with countable and which with uncountable nouns. Let’s take a look at these rules.

General rules for the use of adjectives with nouns

In English, countable nouns are those that can form a plural form (usually with the ending -s). For example: dog — dogs, pupil — pupils, pocket — pockets.

Uncountable nouns usually do not have plural forms. For example: sky, love, trust, butter, sugar. That is why in English you cannot say: «He saw many beautiful skies.» (He saw many beautiful skies) or: «She bought two milks.» (She bought two milk).

The use of countable and uncountable nouns with adjectives is in most cases identical. For example:

  • «The sky was blue.» (The sky was blue) — The noun sky (sky) is uncountable.
  • «He bought a blue car.» (He bought a blue car) — Here the adjective blue is used with the countable noun car.

However, it is important to remember that with the following adjectives, the use of countable and uncountable nouns will be different:

  • some / any
  • much / many
  • little / few
  • a lot of / lots of
  • a little bit of
  • plenty of
  • enough
  • No.

Some / any

The adjectives some and any can be used with both countable and uncountable nouns. Examples:

  • «There is some milk in the glass.» (There is milk in a glass).
  • «Do you any music?» (Do you like music?)
  • «Do you have any pets?» (Do you have pets?)
  • “There are some actors on the scene.” (On stage — actors).

Much / many

The adjective much is used only with uncountable nouns. For example:

  • “I gained so much weight” (I gained so much weight).
  • «She drinks so much coffee.» (She drinks so much coffee.)

The adjective many is used with countable nouns.

  • «Many Italians are keen on pizza.» (Many Italians love pizza.)
  • “The small boy was happy to see so many animals in the zoo.” (The little boy was happy to see so many animals in the zoo).

Little / few

The adjective little is used only with uncountable nouns. For example:

  • “She feels little fear alone at home.” (She’s a little scared to be home alone.)
  • «He had little time to prepare for exams.» (He had little time to prepare for the exam.)

The adjective few is used with countable nouns.

  • «He has few options in this situation.» (He had few options in this situation.)
  • «There are few animals in the desert.» (Few animals live in the desert.)

A lot of / lots of

The expressions a lot of and lots of are analogous to the adjectives much and many, but, unlike them, they can be used with both countable and uncountable nouns.

  • «They have lots of (many) fans in Europe.» (They have a lot of fans in Europe).
  • «They spent a lot of (much) money in the trip.» (They spent a lot of money on the trip.)
  • «The boy saw a lot of (many) animals in the zoo.» (At the zoo, the boy saw many animals).
  • «He gets lots of (much) pleasure walking in the park.» (He enjoys walking in the park.)

A little bit of

The adjective a little bit of in English is used quite rarely and always accompanies uncountable nouns. For example:

  • «There is a little bit of sugar in the tea.» (There is some sugar in tea.)
  • «There is a little bit of butter on the plate.» (There is some butter on the plate.)

Plenty of

The adjective plenty of can be used with both countable and uncountable nouns.

  • “There are plenty of tourists in Rome.” (There are many tourists in Rome).
  • «She uses plenty of pepper when cooking.» (She uses a lot of peppers when cooking).

Enough

Likewise, enough can be used with all nouns.

  • «She has enough money to travel by plane.» (She has enough money to travel by plane.)
  • «I have enough ideas to manage the project.» (I have enough ideas to manage the project).

No

The adjective no should be used with both countable and uncountable nouns.

Source: https://skyeng.ru/articles/kak-nauchitsya-upotreblyat-prilagatelnye-s-ischislyaemymi-i-neischislyaemymi-sushchestvitelnymi-pravilno

You haven’t said much, Joan — what do you think?

I like her very much.

«Is there any wine left?» «Not much.»

There’s not/nothing much to do around here.

One day I hope I’ll be able to do as much (= the same amount) for you as you’ve done for me.

Things around here are much as always/as usual (= have not changed a lot).

I’m not much good at knitting (= do not do it very well).


Thesaurus: synonyms, antonyms, and examples
  • costHiring a car for the week will cost close to £300!
  • beThe cakes were £1.50 each or two for £2.
  • sell forThe tickets sell for £100 each.
  • fetchThe medieval manuscript fetched a record-breaking £1.2 million at auction.
  • go for somethingHouses around here usually go for about £500,000.
  • set someone back (something)Phew, that ring looks like it set you back.

See more results »

Many English words have multiple meanings. This means that the same word, with the same spelling and pronunciation may have more than one meaning. Sometimes the meanings may be very different. This can be confusing for people learning English. You may wonder,” How do I know what the meaning is?” The best way is rely on context, illustrations, or diagrams in the text. However, if you still are not sure of the meaning, look it up. A dictionary will tell you all the meanings of any word. This posting cannot discuss every word with multiple meanings. There are simply too many of them. In this posting, however, I talk about 25 common words with multiple meanings. These are word you may see and hear in your daily life. I show you parts of speech, definitions, and example sentences for each meaning of each word.The download at the end will give you additional practice understanding words with multiple meanings.

Here is the free English video lesson I taught on YouTube:

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel to see all of our lessons and get the latest videos right away!

You can download the practice sheet NOW!

Below is a list of common words with multiple meanings.

B

  1. bank

2. bark

3. bill

4. break

5. bug

C

6. charge

7. company

8. current

D-H

9. date

10. fair

11. fast

12. fly

13. hit

J-N

14. jam

15. left

16. mine

17. nail

P-R

18. patient

19. pool

20. pupil

21. run

S-T

22. season

23. set

24. take

25. turn

You now know many common English words with multiple meanings. Often you can guess the meaning of the word through context. If that is not helpful, however, don’t hesitate to look the word up. The download will give you additional practice understanding words with multiple meanings.

You can download the practice sheet NOW!

Idioms of the day

  1. no picnic–This means something is difficult and not pleasant. I’m glad I moved, but making all the preparations was no picnic
  2. turn a blind eye to–This means to not notice a very obvious problem. Her husband comes home drunk every night, but she turns a blind eye to his problems. She insists that he’s not an alcoholic. 



Ответы на госы по лексикологии

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 1

1. Lexicology, its aims and significance

Lexicology is a branch of linguistics which deals with a systematic description and study of the vocabulary of the language as regards its origin, development, meaning and current use. The term is composed of 2 words of Greek origin: lexis + logos. A word about words, or the science of a word. It also concerns with morphemes, which make up words and the study of a word implies reference to variable and fixed groups because words are components of such groups. Semantic properties of such words define general rules of their joining together. The general study of the vocabulary irrespective of the specific features of a particular language is known as general lexicology. Therefore, English lexicology is called special lexicology because English lexicology represents the study into the peculiarities of the present-day English vocabulary.

Lexicology is inseparable from: phonetics, grammar, and linguostylistics b-cause phonetics also investigates vocabulary units but from the point of view of their sounds. Grammar- grammatical peculiarities and grammatical relations between words. Linguostylistics studies the nature, functioning and structure of stylistic devices and the styles of a language.

Language is a means of communication. Thus, the social essence is inherent in the language itself. The branch of linguistics which deals with relations between the language functions on the one hand and the facts of social life on the other hand is termed sociolinguistics.

Modern English lexicology investigates the problems of word structure and word formation; it also investigates the word structure of English, the classification of vocabulary units, replenishment3 of the vocabulary; the relations between different lexical layers4 of the English vocabulary and some other. Lexicology came into being to meet the demands of different branches of applied linguistic! Namely, lexicography — a science and art of compiling dictionaries. It is also important for foreign language teaching and literary criticism.

2. Referential approach to meaning

SEMASIOLOGY

There are different approaches to meaning and types of meaning

Meaning is the object of semasiological study -> semasiology is a branch of lexicology which is concerned with the study of the semantic structure of vocabulary units. The study of meaning is the basis of all linguistic investigations.

Russian linguists have also pointed to the complexity of the phenomenon of meaning (Потебня, Щерба, Смирницкий, Уфимцева и др.)

There are 3 main types of definition of meaning:

(a) Analytical or referential definition

(b) Functional or contextual approach

(c) Operational or information-oriented definition of meaning

REFERENTIAL APPROACH

Within the referential approach linguists attempt at establishing interdependence between words and objects of phenomena they denote. The idea is illustrated by the so-called basic triangle:

Concept

Sound – form_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Referent

[kæt] (concrete object)

The diagram illustrates the correlation between the sound form of a word, the concrete object it denotes and the underlying concept. The dotted line suggests that there is no immediate relation between sound form and referent + we can say that its connection is conventional (human cognition).

However the diagram fails to show what meaning really is. The concept, the referent, or the relationship between the main and the concept.

The merits: it links the notion of meaning to the process of namegiving to objects, process of phenomena. The drawbacks: it cannot be applied to sentences and additional meanings that arise in the conversation. It fails to account for polysemy and synonymy and it operates with subjective and intangible mental process as neither reference nor concept belong to linguistic data.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 2

1. Functional approach to meaning

SEMASIOLOGY

There are different approaches to meaning and types of meaning

Meaning is the object of semasiological study -> semasiology is a branch of lexicology which is concerned with the study of the semantic structure of vocabulary units. The study of meaning is the basis of all linguistic investigations.

Russian linguists have also pointed to the complexity of the phenomenon of meaning (Потебня, Щерба, Смирницкий, Уфимцева и др.)

There are 3 main types of definition of meaning:

(a) Analytical or referential definition

(b) Functional or contextual approach

(c) Operational or information-oriented definition of meaning

FUNCTIONAL (CONTEXTUAL) APPROACH

The supporters of this approach define meaning as the use of word in a language. They believe that meaning should be studied through contexts. If the distribution (position of a linguistic unit to other linguictic units) of two words is different we can conclude that heir meanings are different too (Ex. He looked at me in surprise; He’s been looking for him for a half an hour.)

However, it is hardly possible to collect all contexts for reliable conclusion. In practice a scholar is guided by his experience and intuition. On the whole, this approach may be called complimentary to the referential definition and is applied mainly in structural linguistics.

2. Classification of morphemes

A morpheme is the smallest indivisible two-facet language unit which implies an association of a certain meaning with a certain sound form. Unlike words, morphemes cannot function independently (they occur in speech only as parts of words).

Classification of Morphemes

Within the English word stock maybe distinguished morphologically segment-able and non-segment-able words (soundless, rewrite – segmentable; book, car — non-segmentable).

Morphemic segmentability may be of three types:

a) Complete segmentability is characteristic of words with transparent morphemic structure (morphemes can be easily isolated, e.g. heratless).

b) Conditional segmentability characterizes words segmentation of which into constituent morphemes is doubtful for semantic reasons (retain, detain, contain). Pseudo-morphemes

c) Defective morphemic segmentability is the property of words whose component morphemes seldom or never occur in other words. Such morphemes are called unique morphemes (cran – cranberry (клюква), let- hamlet (деревушка)).

· Semantically morphemes may be classified into: 1) root morphemes – radicals (remake, glassful, disordermake, glass, order- are understood as the lexical centres of the words) and 2) non-root morphemes – include inflectional (carry only grammatical meaning and relevant only for the formation of word-forms) and affixational morphemes (relevant for building different types of stems).

· Structurally, morphemes fall into: free morphemes (coincides with the stem or a word-form. E.g. friend- of thenoun friendship is qualified as a free morpheme), bound morphemes (occurs only as a constituent part of a word. Affixes are bound for they always make part of a word. E.g. the suffixes –ness, -ship, -ize in the words darkness, friendship, to activize; the prefixes im-, dis-, de- in the words impolite, to disregard, to demobilize) and semi-free or semi-bound morphemes (can function both as affixes and free morphemes. E.g. well and half on the one hand coincide with the stem – to sleep well, half an hour, and on the other in the words – well-known, half-done).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 3

1. Types of meaning

The word «meaning» is not homogeneous. Its components are described as «types of meaning». The two main types of meaning are grammatical and lexical meaning.

The grammatical meaning is the component of meaning, recurrent in identical sets of individual forms of words (e.g. reads, draws, writes – 3d person, singular; books, boys – plurality; boy’s, father’s – possessive case).

The lexical meaning is the meaning proper to the linguistic unit in all its forms and distribution (e.g. boy, boys, boy’s, boys’ – grammatical meaning and case are different but in all of them we find the semantic component «male child»).

Both grammatical meaning and lexical meaning make up the word meaning and neither of them can exist without the other.

There’s also the 3d type: lexico-grammatical (part of speech) meaning. Third type of meaning is called lexico-grammatical meaning (or part-of-speech meaning). It is a common denominator of all the meanings of words belonging to a lexical-grammatical class (nouns, verbs, adjectives etc. – all nouns have common meaning oа thingness, while all verbs express process or state).

Denotational meaning – component of the lexical meaning which makes communication possible. The second component of the lexical meaning is the connotational component – the emotive charge and the stylistic value of the word.

2. Syntactic structure and pattern of word-groups

The meaning of word groups can be defined as the combined lexical meaning of the component words but it is not a mere additive result of all the lexical meanings of components. The meaning of the word group itself dominates the meaning of the component members (Ex. an easy rule, an easy person).

The meaning of the word group is further complicated by the pattern of arrangement of its constituents (Ex. school grammar- grammar school).

That’s why we should bear in mind the existence of lexical and structural components of meaning in word groups, since these components are independent and inseparable. The syntactic structure (formula) implies the description of the order and arrangement of member-words as parts of speech («to write novels» — verb + noun; «clever at mathematics»- adjective + preposition + noun).

As a rule, the difference in the meaning of the head word is presupposed by the difference in the pattern of the word group in which the word is used (to get + noun = to get letters / presents; to get + to + noun = to get to town). If there are different patterns, there are different meanings. BUT: identity of patterns doesn’t imply identity of meanings.

Semanticallv. English word groups are analyzed into motivated word groups and non-motivated word groups. Word groups are lexically motivated if their meanings are deducible from the meanings of components. The degree of motivation may be different.

A blind man — completely motivated

A blind print — the degree of motivation is lower

A blind alley (= the deadlock) — the degree of motivation is still less.

Non-motivated word-groups are usually described as phraseological units.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 4

1. Classification of phraseological units

The term «phraseological unit» was introduced by Soviet linguist (Виноградов) and it’s generally accepted in this country. It is aimed at avoiding ambiguity with other terms, which are generated by different approaches, are partially motivated and non-motivated.

The first classification of phraseological units was advanced for the Russian language by a famous Russian linguist Виноградов. According to the degree of idiomaticity phraseological units can be classified into three big groups: phraseological collocations (сочетания), phraseological unities (единства) and phraseological fusions (сращения).

Phraseological collocations are not motivated but contain one component used in its direct meaning, while the other is used metaphorically (e.g. to break the news, to attain success).

Phraseological unities are completely motivated as their meaning is transparent though it is transferred (e.g. to shoe one’s teeth, the last drop, to bend the knee).

Phraseological fusions are completely non-motivated and stable (e.g. a mare’s nest (путаница, неразбериха; nonsense), tit-for-tat – revenge, white elephant – expensive but useless).

But this classification doesn’t take into account the structural characteristic, besides it is rather subjective.

Prof. Смирнитский treats phraseological units as word’s equivalents and groups them into: (a) one-summit units => they have one meaningful component (to be tied, to make out); (b) multi-summit units => have two or more meaningful components (black art, to fish in troubled waters).

Within each of these groups he classifies phraseological units according to the part of speech of the summit constituent. He also distinguishes proper phraseological units or units with non-figurative meaning and idioms that have transferred meaning based on metaphor (e.g. to fall in love; to wash one’s dirty linen in public).

This classification was criticized as inconsistent, because it contradicts the principle of idiomaticity advanced by the linguist himself. The inclusion of phrasal verbs into phraseology wasn’t supported by any convincing argument.

Prof. Амазова worked out the so-called contextual approach. She believes that if 3 word groups make up a variable context. Phraseological units make up the so-called fixed context and they are subdivided into phrases and idioms.

2. Procedure of morphemic analysis

Morphemic analysis deals with segmentable words. Its procedure flows to split a word into its constituent morphemes, and helps to determine their number and type. It’s called the method of immediate and ultimate constituents. This method is based on the binary principle which allows to break morphemic structure of a word into 2 components at each stage. The analysis is completed when we arrive at constituents unable of any further division. E.g. Louis Bloomfield — classical example:

ungentlemanly

I. un-(IC/UC) +gentlemanly (IC) (uncertain, unhappy)

II. gentleman (IC) + -ly (IC/UC) (happily, certainly)

III. gentle (IC) +man (IC/UC) (sportsman, seaman)

IV. gent (IC/UC) + le (IC/UC) (gentile, genteel)

The aim of the analysis is to define the number and the type of morphemes.

As we break the word we obtain at any level only 2 immediate constituents, one of which is the stem of the given word. The morphemic analysis may be based either on the identification of affixational morphemes within a set of words, or root morphemes.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 5

1. Causes, nature and results of semantic change

The set of meanings the word possesses isn’t fixed. If approached diachronically, the polysemy reflects sources and types of semantic changes. The causes of such changes may be either extra-linguistic including historical and social factors, foreign influence and the need for a new name, or linguistic, which are due to the associations that words acquire in speech (e.g. «atom» has a Greek origin, now is used in physics; «to engage» in the meaning «to invite» appeared in English due to French influence = > to engage for a dance). To unleash war – развязать войну – but originally – to unleash dogs)

The nature of semantic changes may be of two main types: 1) Similarity of meaning (metaphor). It implies a hidden comparison (bitter style – likeness of meaning or metonymy). It is the process of associating two references, one of which is part of the other, or is closely connected with it. In other words, it is nearest in type, space or function (e.g. «table» in the meaning of “food” or “furniture” [metonymy]).

The semantic change may bring about following results: 1. narrowing of meaning (e.g. “success” – was used to denote any kind of result, but today it is onle “good results”);

2. widening of meaning (e.g. “ready” in Old English was derived from “ridan” which went to “ride” – ready for a ride; but today there are lots of meanings),

3. degeneration of meaning — acquisition by a word of some derogatory or negative emotive charge (e.g. «villain» was borrowed from French “farm servant”; but today it means “a wicked person”).

4. amelioration of meaning — acquisition by a word of some positive emotive charge (e.g. «kwen» in Old English meant «a woman» but in Modern English it is «queen»).

It is obvious that 3, 4 result illustrate the change in both denotational and connotational meaning. 1, 2 change in the denotational.

The change of meaning can also be expressed through a change in the number and arrangement of word meanings without any other changes in the semantic structure of a word.

2. Productivity of word-formation means

According to Смирницкий, word-formation is the system of derivative types of words and the process of creating new words from the material available in the language. Words are formed after certain structural and semantic patterns. The main two types of word-formation are: word-derivation and word-composition (compounding).

The degree of productivity of word-formation and factors that favor it make an important aspect of synchronic description of every derivational pattern within the two types of word-formation. The two general restrictions imposed on the derivational patterns are: 1. the part of speech in which the pattern functions; 2. the meaning which is attached to it.

Three degrees of productivity are distinguished for derivational patterns and individual derivational affixes: highly productive, productive or semi-productive and non-productive.

Productivity of derivational patterns and affixes shouldn’t be identified with frequency of occurrence in speech (e.g.-er — worker, -ful – beautiful are active suffixes because they are very frequently used. But if -er is productive, it is actively used to form new words, while -ful is non-productive since no new words are built).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 6

1. Morphological, phonetical and semantic motivation

A new meaning of a word is always motivated. Motivation — is the connection between the form of the word (i.e. its phonetic, morphological composition and structural pattern) and its meaning. Therefore a word may be motivated phonetically, morphologically and semantically.

Phonetically motivated words are not numerous. They imitate the sounds (e.g. crash, buzz, ring). Or sometimes they imitate quick movement (e.g. rain, swing).

Morphological motivation is expressed through the relationship of morphemes => all one-morpheme words aren’t motivated. The words like «matter» are called non-motivated or idiomatic while the words like «cranberry» are partially motivated because structurally they are transparent, but «cran» is devoid of lexical meaning; «berry» has its lexical meaning.

Semantic motivation is the relationship between the direct meaning of the word and other co-existing meanings or lexico-semantic variants within the semantic structure of a polysemantic word (e.g. «root»— «roots of evil» — motivated by its direct meaning, «the fruits of peace» — is the result).

Motivation is a historical category and it may fade or completely disappear in the course of years.

2. Classification of compounds

The meaning of a compound word is made up of two components: structural meaning of a compound and lexical meaning of its constituents.

Compound words can be classified according to different principles.

1. According to the relations between the ICs compound words fall into two classes: 1) coordinative compounds and 2) subordinative compounds.

In coordinative compounds the two ICs are semantically equally important. The coordinative compounds fall into three groups:

a) reduplicative compounds which are made up by the repetition of the same base, e.g. pooh-pooh (пренебрегать), fifty-fifty;

b) compounds formed by joining the phonically variated rhythmic twin forms, e.g. chit-chat, zig-zag (with the same initial consonants but different vowels); walkie-talkie (рация), clap-trap (чепуха) (with different initial consonants but the same vowels);

c) additive compounds which are built on stems of the independently functioning words of the same part of speech, e.g. actor-manager, queen-bee.

In subordinative compounds the components are neither structurally nor semantically equal in importance but are based on the domination of the head-member which is, as a rule, the second IС, e.g. stone-deaf, age-long. The second IС preconditions the part-of-speech meaning of the whole compound.

2. According to the part of speech compounds represent they fall into:

1) compound nouns, e.g. sunbeam, maidservant;

2) compound adjectives, e.g. heart-free, far-reaching;

3) compound pronouns, e.g. somebody, nothing;

4) compound adverbs, e.g. nowhere, inside;

5) compound verbs, e.g. to offset, to bypass, to mass-produce.

From the diachronic point of view many compound verbs of the present-day language are treated not as compound verbs proper but as polymorphic verbs of secondary derivation. They are termed pseudo-compounds and are represented by two groups: a) verbs formed by means of conversion from the stems of compound nouns, e.g. to spotlight (from spotlight); b) verbs formed by back-derivation from the stems of compound nouns, e.g. to babysit (from baby-sitter).

However synchronically compound verbs correspond to the definition of a compound as a word consisting of two free stems and functioning in the sentence as a separate lexical unit. Thus, it seems logical to consider such words as compounds by right of their structure.

3. According to the means of composition compound words are classified into:

1) compounds composed without connecting elements, e.g. heartache, dog-house;

2)compounds composed with the help of a vowel or a consonant as a linking element, e.g. handicraft, speedometer, statesman;

3) compounds composed with the help of linking elements represented by preposition or conjunction stems, e.g. son-in-law, pepper-and-salt.

4. According to the type of bases that form compounds the following classes can be singled out:

1) compounds proper that are formed by joining together bases built on the stems or on the word-forms with or without a linking element, e.g. door-step, street-fighting;

2) derivational compounds that are formed by joining affixes to the bases built on the word-groups or by converting the bases built on the word-groups into other parts of speech, e.g. long-legged —> (long legs) + -ed; a turnkey —> (to turn key) + conversion. Thus, derivational compounds fall into two groups: a) derivational compounds mainly formed with the help of the suffixes -ed and -er applied to bases built, as a rule, on attributive phrases, e.g. narrow-minded, doll-faced, left­hander; b) derivational compounds formed by conversion applied to bases built, as a rule, on three types of phrases — verbal-adverbial phrases (a breakdown), verbal-nominal phrases (a kill-joy) and attributive phrases (a sweet-tooth).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 7

1. Diachronic and synchronic approaches to polysemy

Diachronically, polysemy is understood as the growth and development of the semantic structure of the word. Historically we differentiate between the primary and secondary meanings of words.

The relation between these meanings isn’t only the one of order of appearance but it is also the relation of dependence = > we can say that secondary meaning is always the derived meaning (e.g. dog – 1. animal, 2. despicable person)

Synchronically it is possible to distinguish between major meaning of the word and its minor meanings. However it is often hard to grade individual meaning of the word in order of their comparative value (e.g. to get the letter — получить письмо; to get to London — прибыть в Лондон — minor).

The only more or less objective criterion in this case is the frequency of occurrence in speech (e.g. table – 1. furniture, 2. food). The semantic structure is never static and the primary meaning of a word may become synchronically one of the minor meanings and vice versa. Stylistic factors should always be taken into consideration

Polysemy of words: «yellow»- sensational (Am., sl.)

The meaning which has the highest frequency is the one representative of the whole semantic structure of the word. The Russian equivalent of «a table» which first comes to your mind and when you hear this word is ‘cтол» in the meaning «a piece of furniture». And words that correspond in their major meanings in two different languages are referred to as correlated words though their semantic structures may be different.

Primary meaning — historically first.

Major meaning — the most frequently used meaning of the word synchronically.

2. Typical semantic relations between words in conversion pairs

We can single out the following typical semantic relation in conversion pairs:

1) Verbs converted from nouns (denominal verbs):

a) Actions characteristic of the subject (e.g. ape – to ape – imitate in a foolish way);

b) Instrumental use of the object (e.g. whip — to whip – strike with a whip);

c) Acquisition or addition of the objects (e.g. fish — to fish — to catch fish);

d) Deprivation of the object (e.g. dust — to dust – remove dust).

2) Nouns converted from verbs (deverbal nouns):

a) Instance of the action (e.g. to move — a move = change of position);

b) Agent of an action (e.g. to cheat — a cheat – a person who cheats);

c) Place of the action (e.g. to walk-a walk – a place for walking);

d) Object or result of the action (e.g. to find- a find – something found).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 8

1. Classification of homonyms

Homonyms are words that are identical in their sound-form or spelling but different in meaning and distribution.

1) Homonyms proper are words similar in their sound-form and graphic but different in meaning (e.g. «a ball»- a round object for playing; «a ball»- a meeting for dances).

2) Homophones are words similar in their sound-form but different in spelling and meaning (e.g. «peace» — «piece», «sight»- «site»).

3) Homographs are words which have similar spelling but different sound-form and meaning (e.g. «a row» [rau]- «a quarrel»; «a row» [rəu] — «a number of persons or things in a more or less straight line»)

There is another classification by Смирницкий. According to the type of meaning in which homonyms differ, homonyms proper can be classified into:

I. Lexical homonyms — different in lexical meaning (e.g. «ball»);

II. Lexical-grammatical homonyms which differ in lexical-grammatical meanings (e.g. «a seal» — тюлень, «to seal» — запечатывать).

III. Grammatical homonyms which differ in grammatical meaning only (e.g. «used» — Past Indefinite, «used»- Past Participle; «pupils»- the meaning of plurality, «pupil’s»- the meaning of possessive case).

All cases of homonymy may be subdivided into full and partial homonymy. If words are identical in all their forms, they are full homonyms (e.g. «ball»-«ball»). But: «a seal» — «to seal» have only two homonymous forms, hence, they are partial homonyms.

2. Classification of prefixes

Prefixation is the formation of words with the help of prefixes. There are about 51 prefixes in the system of modern English word-formation.

1. According to the type they are distinguished into: a) prefixes that are correlated with independent words (un-, dis-), and b) prefixes that are correlated with functional words (e.g. out, over. under).

There are about 25 convertive prefixes which can transfer words to a different part of speech (E.g. embronze59).

Prefixes may be classified on different principles. Diachronically they may be divided into native and foreign origin, synchronically:

1. According to the class they preferably form: verbs (im, un), adjectives (un-, in-, il-, ir-) and nouns (non-, sub-, ex-).

2. According to the lexical-grammatical type of the base they are added to:

a). Deverbal — rewrite, overdo;

b). Denominal — unbutton, detrain, ex-president,

c). Deadjectival — uneasy, biannual.

It is of interest to note that the most productive prefixal pattern for adjectives is the one made up of the prefix un- and the base built either on adjectival stems or present and past participle, e.g. unknown, unsmiling, unseen etc.

3. According to their semantic structure prefixes may fall into monosemantic and polysemantic.

4. According to the generic-denotational meaning they are divided into different groups:

a). Negative prefixes: un-, dis-, non-, in-, a- (e.g. unemployment, non-scientific, incorrect, disloyal, amoral, asymmetry).

b). Reversative or privative60 prefixes: un-, de-, dis- (e.g. untie, unleash, decentralize, disconnect).

c). Pejorative prefixes: mis-, mal-, pseudo- (e.g. miscalculate, misinform, maltreat, pseudo-classicism).

d). Prefixes of time and order: fore-, pre-, post-, ex- (e.g. foretell, pre-war, post-war, ex-president).

e). Prefix of repetition re- (e.g. rebuild, rewrite).

f). Locative prefixes: super-, sub-, inter-, trans- (e.g. superstructure, subway, inter-continental, transatlantic).

5. According to their stylistic reference:

a). Neutral: un-, out-, over-, re-, under- (e.g. outnumber, unknown, unnatural, oversee, underestimate).

b). Stylistically marked: pseudo-, super-, ultra-, uni-, bi- (e.g. pseudo-classical, superstructure, ultra-violet, unilateral) they are bookish.

6. According to the degree of productivity: a). highly productive, b). productive, c). non-productive.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 9

.

1. Types of linguistic contexts

The term “context” denotes the minimal stretch of speech determining each individual meaning of the word. Contexts may be of two types: linguistic (verbal) and extra-linguistic (non-verbal).

Linguistic contexts may be subdivided into lexical and grammatical.

In lexical contexts of primary importance are the groups of lexical items combined with polysemantic word under consideration (e.g. adj. “heavy” is used with the words “load, table” means ‘of great weight’ ; but with natural phenomena “rain, storm, snow, wind’ it is understood as ‘abundant, striking, falling with force’; and if with “industry, artillery, arms” – ‘the larger kind of smth’). The meaning at the level of lexical contexts is sometimes described as meaning by collocation.

In grammatical meaning it is the grammatical (syntactic) structure of the context that serves to determine various individual meanings of a polysemantic word (e.g. the meaning of the verb “to make” – ‘to force, to induce’ is found only in the syntactic structure “to make + prn. +verb”; another meaning ‘to become’ – “to make + adj. + noun” (to make a good teacher, wife)). Such meanings are sometimes described as grammatically bound meanings.

2. Classification of suffixes

Suffixation is the formation of words with the help of suffixes. Suffixes usually modify the lexical meaning of the base and transfer words to a different part of speech. There are suffixes, however, which do not shift words from one part of speech into another; a suffix of this kind usually transfers a word into a different semantic group, e.g. a concrete noun becomes an abstract one, as in the case with child — childhood, friend- friendship etc. Suffixes may be classified:

1. According to the part of speech they form

a). Noun-suffixes: -er, -dom, -ness, -ation (e.g. teacher, freedom, brightness, justification).

b). Adjective-suffixes: -able, -less, -ful, -ic, -ous (e.g. agreeable, careless, doubtful, poetic, courageous).

c). Verb-suffixes: -en, -fy, -ize (e.g. darken, satisfy, harmonize).

d). Adverb-suffixes: -ly, -ward (e.g. quickly, eastward).

2. According to the lexico-grammatical character of the base the suffixes are usually added to:

a). Deverbal suffixes (those added to the verbal base):-er, -ing, -ment, -able (speaker, reading, agreement, suitable).

b). Denominal suffixes (those added to the noun base):-less, -ish, -ful, -ist, -some (handless, childish, mouthful, troublesome).

c). Deadjectival suffixes (those affixed to the adjective base):-en, -ly, -ish, -ness (blacken, slowly, reddish, brightness).

3. According to the meaning expressed by suffixes:

a). The agent of an action: -er, -ant (e.g. baker, dancer, defendant), b). Appurtenance64: -an, -ian, -ese (e.g. Arabian, Elizabethan, Russian, Chinese, Japanese).

c). Collectivity: -age, -dom, -ery (-ry) (e.g. freightage, officialdom, peasantry).

d). Diminutiveness: -ie, -let, -ling (birdie, girlie, cloudlet, booklet, darling).

4. According to the degree of productivity:

a). Highly productive

b). Productive

c). Non-productive

5. According to the stylistic value:

a). Stylistically neutral:-able, -er, -ing.

b). Stylistically marked:-oid, -i/form, -aceous, -tron (e.g. asteroid)

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 10

1. Semantic equivalence and synonymy

The traditional initial category of words that can be singled out on the basis of proximity is synonyms. The degree of proximity varies from semantic equivalence to partial semantic similarity. The classes of full synonyms are very rare and limited mainly two terms.

The greatest degree of similarity is found in those words that are identical in their denotational aspect of meaning and differ in connotational one (e.g. father- dad; imitate – monkey). Such synonyms are called stylistic synonyms. However, in the major of cases the change in the connotational aspect of meaning affects in some way the denotational aspect. These synonyms of the kind are called ideographic synonyms (e.g. clever – bright, smell – odor). Differ in their denotational aspect ideographic synonyms (kill-murder, power – strength, etc.) – these synonyms are most common.

It is obvious that synonyms cannot be completely interchangeable in all contexts. Synonyms are words different in their sound-form but similar in their denotational aspect of meaning and interchangeable at least in some contexts.

Each synonymic group comprises a dominant element. This synonymic dominant is general term which has no additional connotation (e.g. famous, celebrated, distinguished; leave, depart, quit, retire, clear out).

Syntactic dominants have high frequency of usage, vast combinability and lack connotation.

2. Derivational types of words

The basic units of the derivative structure of words are: derivational basis, derivational affixes, and derivational patterns.

The relations between words with a common root but of different derivative structure are known as derivative relations.

The derivational base is the part of the word which establishes connections with the lexical unit that motivates the derivative and defines its lexical meaning. It’s to this part of the word (derivational base) that the rule of word formation is applied. Structurally, derivational bases fall into 3 classes: 1. Bases that coincide with morphological stems (beautiful, beautifully); 2. Bases that coincide with word-forms (unknown- limited mainly to verbs); 3. Bases that coincide with word groups. They are mainly active in the class of adjectives and nouns (blue-eyed, easy-going).

According to their derivational structure words fall into: simplexes (simple, non-derived words) and complexes (derivatives). Complexes are grouped into: derivatives and compounds. Derivatives fall into: affixational (suffixal and affixal) types and conversions. Complexes constitute the largest class of words. Both morphemic and derivational structure of words is subject to various changes in the course of time.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 11

1. Semantic contrasts and antonymy

The semantic relations of opposition are the basis for grouping antonyms. The term «antonym» is of Greek origin and means “opposite name”. It is used to describe words different in some form and characterised by different types of semantic contrast of denotational meaning and interchangeability at least in some contexts.

Structurally, all antonyms can be subdivided into absolute (having different roots) and derivational (of the same root), (e.g. «right»- «wrong»; «to arrive»- «to leave» are absolute antonyms; but «to fit» — «to unfit» are derivational).

Semantically, all antonyms can be divided in at least 3 groups:

a) Contradictories. They express contradictory notions which are mutually opposed and deny each other. Their relations can be described by the formula «A versus NOT A»: alive vs. dead (not alive); patient vs. impatient (not patient). Contradictories may be polar or relative (to hate- to love [not to love doesn’t mean «hate»]).

b) Contraries are also mutually opposed, but they admit some possibility between themselves because they are gradable (e.g. cold – hot, warm; hot – cold, cool). This group also includes words opposed by the presence of such components of meaning as SEX and AGE (man -woman; man — boy etc.).

c) Incompatibles. The relations between them are not of contradiction but of exclusion. They exclude possibilities of other words from the same semantic set (e.g. «red»- doesn’t mean that it is opposed to white it means all other colors; the same is true to such words as «morning», «day», «night» etc.).

There is another type of opposition which is formed with reversive antonyms. They imply the denotation of the same referent, but viewed from different points (e.g. to buy – to sell, to give – to receive, to cause – to suffer)

A polysemantic word may have as many antonyms as it has meanings. But not all words and meanings have antonyms!!! (e.g. «a table»- it’s difficult to find an antonym, «a book»).

Relations of antonymy are limited to a certain context + they serve to differentiate meanings of a polysemantic word (e.g. slice of bread — «thick» vs. «thin» BUT: person — «fat» vs. «thin»).

2. Types of word segmentability

Within the English word stock maybe distinguished morphologically segment-able and non-segmentable words (soundless, rewrite — segmentable; book, car — non-segmentable).

Morphemic segmentability may be of three types: 1. complete, 2. conditional, 3. defective.

A). Complete segmentability is characteristic of words with transparent morphemic structure. Their morphemes can be easily isolated which are called morphemes proper or full morphemes (e.g. senseless, endless, useless). The transparent morphemic structure is conditioned by the fact that their constituent morphemes recur with the same meaning in a number of other words.

B). Conditional segmentability characterizes words segmentation of which into constituent morphemes is doubtful for semantic reasons (e.g. retain, detain, contain). The sound clusters «re-, de-, con-» seem to be easily isolated since they recur in other words but they have nothing in common with the morphemes «re, de-, con-» which are found in the words «rewrite», «decode», «condensation». The sound-clusters «re-, de-, con-» can possess neither lexical meaning nor part of speech meaning, but they have differential and distributional meaning. The morphemes of the kind are called pseudo-morphemes (quasi morphemes).

C). Defective morphemic segmentability is the property of words whose component morphemes seldom or never recur in other words. Such morphemes are called unique morphemes. A unique morpheme can be isolated and displays a more or less clear meaning which is upheld by the denotational meaning of the other morpheme of the word (cranberry, strawberry, hamlet).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 12

1. The main features of A.V.Koonin’s approach to phraseology

Phraseology is regarded as a self-contained branch of linguistics and not as a part of lexicology.

His classification is based on the combined structural-semantic principle and also considers the level of stability of phraseological units.

Кунин subdivides set-expressions into: phraseological units or idioms(e.g. red tape, mare’s nest, etc.), semi-idioms and phraseomatic units(e.g. win a victory, launch a campaign, etc.).

Phraseological units are structurally separable language units with completely or partially transferred meanings (e.g. to kill two birds with one stone, to be in a brown stubby – to be in low spirits). Semi-idioms have both literal and transferred meanings. The first meaning is usually terminological or professional and the second one is transferred (e.g. to lay down one’s arms). Phraseomatic units have literal or phraseomatically bound meanings (e.g. to pay attention to smth; safe and sound).

Кунин assumes that all types of set expressions are characterized by the following aspects of stability: stability of usage (not created in speech and are reproduced ready-made); lexical stability (components are irreplaceable (e.g. red tape, mare’s nest) or partly irreplaceable within the limits of lexical meaning, (e.g. to dance to smb tune/pipe; a skeleton in the cupboard/closet; to be in deep water/waters)); semantic complexity (despite all occasional changes the meaning is preserved); syntactic fixity.

Idioms and semi-idioms are much more complex in structure than phraseological units. They have a broad stylistic range and they admit of more complex occasional changes.

An integral part of this approach is a method of phraseological identification which helps to single out set expressions in Modern English.

2. Types and ways of forming words

According to Смирницкий word-formation is a system of derivative types of words and the process of creating new words from the material available in the language after certain structural and semantic patterns. The main two types are: word-derivation and word-composition (compounding).

The basic ways of forming words in word-derivation are affixation and conversion (the formation of a new word by bringing a stem of this word into a different formal paradigm, e.g. a fall from to fall).

There exist other types: semantic word-building (homonymy, polysemy), sound and stress interchange (e.g. blood – bleed; increase), acronymy (e.g. NATO), blending (e.g. smog = smoke + fog) and shortening of words (e.g. lab, maths). But they are different in principle from derivation and compound because they show the result but not the process.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 13

1. Origin of derivational affixes

From the point of view of their origin, derivational affixes are subdivided into native (e.g suf.- nas, ish, dom; pref.- be, mis, un) and foreign (e.g. suf.- ation, ment, able; pref.- dis, ex, re).

Many original affixes historically were independent words, such as dom, hood and ship. Borrowed words brought with them their derivatives, formed after word-building patterns of their languages. And in this way many suffixes and prefixes of foreign origin have become the integral part of existing word-formation (e.g. suf.- age; pref.- dis, re, non). The adoption of foreign words resulted into appearance of hybrid words in English vocabulary. Sometimes a foring stem is combined with a native suffix (e.g. colourless) and vise versa (e.g. joyous).

Reinterpretation of verbs gave rise to suffix-formation source language (e.g. “scape” – seascape, moonscape – came from landscape. And it is not a suffix.).

2. Correlation types of compounds

Motivation and regularity of semantic and structural correlation with free word-groups are the basic factors favouring a high degree of productivity of composition and may be used to set rules guiding spontaneous, analogic formation of new compound words.

The description of compound words through the correlation with variable word-groups makes it possible to classify them into four major classes: 1) adjectival-nominal, 2) verbal-nominal, 3) nominal and 4) verbal-adverbial.

I. Adjectival-nominal comprise for subgroups of compound adjectives:

1) the polysemantic n+a pattern that gives rise to two types:

a) Compound adjectives based on semantic relations of resemblance: snow-white, skin-deep, age-long, etc. Comparative type (as…as).

b) Compound adjectives based on a variety of adverbial relations: colour-blind, road-weary, care-free, etc.

2) the monosemantic pattern n+venbased mainly on the instrumental, locative and temporal relations, e.g. state-owned, home-made. The type is highly productive. Correlative relations are established with word-groups of the Ven+ with/by + N type.

3) the monosemantic num + npattern which gives rise to a small and peculiar group of adjectives, which are used only attributively, e.g. (a) two-day (beard), (a) seven-day (week), etc. The quantative type of relations.

4) a highly productive monosemantic pattern of derivational compound adjectives based on semantic relations of possession conveyed by the suffix -ed. The basic variant is [(a+n)+ -ed], e.g. long-legged. The pattern has two more variants: [(num + n) + -ed), l(n+n)+ -ed],e.g. one-sided, bell-shaped, doll-faced. The type correlates accordingly with phrases with (having) + A+N, with (having) + Num + N, with + N + N or with + N + of + N.

The three other types are classed as compound nouns. All the three types are productive.

II. Verbal-nominal compounds may be described through one derivational structure n+nv, i.e. a combination of a noun-base (in most cases simple) with a deverbal, suffixal noun-base. All the patterns correlate in the final analysis with V+N and V+prp+N type which depends on the lexical nature of the verb:

1) [n+(v+-er)],e.g. bottle-opener, stage-manager, peace-fighter. The pattern is monosemantic and is based on agentive relations that can be interpreted ‘one/that/who does smth’.

2) [n+(v+-ing)],e.g. stage-managing, rocket-flying. The pattern is monosemantic and may be interpreted as ‘the act of doing smth’.

3) [n+(v+-tion/ment)],e.g. office-management, price-reduction.

4) [n+(v + conversion)],e.g. wage-cut, dog-bite, hand-shake, the pattern is based on semantic relations of result, instance, agent, etc.

III. Nominal compounds are all nouns with the most polysemantic and highly-productive derivational pattern n+n; both bases are generally simple stems, e.g. windmill, horse-race, pencil-case. The pattern conveys a variety of semantic relations; the most frequent are the relations of purpose and location. The pattern correlates with nominal word-groups of the N+prp+N type.

IV. Verb-adverb compounds are all derivational nouns, highly productive and built with the help of conversion according to the pattern [(v + adv) + conversion].The pattern correlates with free phrases V + Adv and with all phrasal verbs of different degree of stability. The pattern is polysemantic and reflects the manifold semantic relations of result.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 14

1. Hyponymic structures and lexico-semantic groups

The grouping out of English word stock based on the principle of proximity, may be graphically presented by means of “concentric circles”.

lexico-semantic groups

lexical sets

synonyms

semantic field

The relations between layers are that of inclusion.

The most general term – hyperonym, more special – hyponym (member of the group).

The meaning of the word “plant” includes the idea conveyed by “flower”, which in its turn include the notion of any particular flower. Flower – hyperonim to… and plant – hyponym to…

Hyponymic relations are always hierarchic. If we imply substitution rules we shall see the hyponyms may be replaced be hyperonims but not vice versa (e.g. I bought roses yesterday. “flower” – the sentence won’t change its meaning).

Words describing different sides of one and the same general notion are united in a lexico-semantic group if: a) the underlying notion is not too generalized and all-embracing, like the notions of “time”, “life”, “process”; b) the reference to the underlying is not just an implication in the meaning of lexical unit but forms an essential part in its semantics.

Thus, it is possible to single out the lexico-semantic group of names of “colours” (e.g. pink, red, black, green, white); lexico-semantic group of verbs denoting “physical movement” (e.g. to go, to turn, to run) or “destruction” (e.g. to ruin, to destroy, to explode, to kill).

2. Causes and ways of borrowing

The great influx of borrowings from Latin, English and Scandinavian can be accounted by a number of historical causes. Due to the great influence of the Roman civilisation Latin was for a long time used in England as the language of learning and religion. Old Norse was the language of the conquerors who were on the same level of social and cultural development and who merged rather easily with the local population in the 9th, 10th and the first half of the 11th century. French (Norman dialect) was the language of the other conquerors who brought with them a lot of new notions of a higher social system (developed feudalism), it was the language of upper classes, of official documents and school instruction from the middle of the 11th century to the end of the 14th century.

In the study of the borrowed element in English the main emphasis is as a rule placed on the Middle English period. Borrowings of later periods became the object of investigation only in recent years. These investigations have shown that the flow of borrowings has been steady and uninterrupted. The greatest number has come from French. They refer to various fields of social-political, scientific and cultural life. A large portion of borrowings is scientific and technical terms.

The number and character of borrowed words tell us of the relations between the peoples, the level of their culture, etc.

Some borrowings, however, cannot be explained by the direct influence of certain historical conditions, they do not come along with any new objects or ideas. Such were for instance the words air, place, brave, gay borrowed from French.

Also we can say that the closer the languages, the deeper is the influence. Thus under the influence of the Scandinavian languages, which were closely related to Old English, some classes of words were borrowed that could not have been adopted from non-related or distantly related languages (the pronouns they, their, them); a number of Scandinavian borrowings were felt as derived from native words (they were of the same root and the connection between them was easily seen), e.g. drop(AS.) — drip (Scand.), true (AS.)-tryst (Scand.); the Scandinavian influence even accelerated to a certain degree the development of the grammatical structure of English.

Borrowings enter the language in two ways: through oral speech (early periods of history, usually short and they undergo changes) and through written speech (recent times, preserve spelling and peculiarities of the sound form).

Borrowings may be direct or indirect (e.g., through Latin, French).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 15

1. Types of English dictionaries

English dictionaries may all be roughly divided into two groups — encyclopaedic and linguistic.

The encyclopaedic dictionaries, (The Encyclopaedia Britannica and The Encyclopedia Americana) are scientific reference books dealing with every branch of knowledge, or with one particular branch, usually in alphabetical order. They give information about the extra-linguistic world; they deal with facts and concepts. Linguistic dictionaries are wоrd-books the subject-matter of which is lexical units and their linguistic properties such as pronunciation, meaning, peculiarities of use, etc.

Linguistic dictionaries may be divided into different categories by different criteria.

1. According to the nature of their word-listwe may speak about general dictionaries (include frequency dictionary, a rhyming dictionary, a Thesaurus) and restricted (belong terminological, phraseological, dialectal word-books, dictionaries of new words, of foreign words, of abbreviations, etc).

2. According to the information they provide all linguistic dictionaries fall into two groups: explanatory and specialized.

Explanatory dictionaries present a wide range of data, especially with regard to the semantic aspect of the vocabulary items entered (e.g. New Oxford Dictionary of English).

Specialized dictionaries deal with lexical units only in relation to some of their characteristics (e.g. etymology, frequency, pronunciation, usage)

3. According to the language of explanations all dictionaries are divided into: monolingual and bilingual.

4. Dictionaries also fall into diachronic and synchronic with regard of time. Diachronic (historical) dictionaries reflect the development of the English vocabulary by recording the history of form and meaning for every word registered (e.g. Oxford English Dictionary). Synchronic (descriptive) dictionaries are concerned with the present-day meaning and usage of words (e.g. Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English).

(Phraseological dictionaries, New Words dictionaries, Dictionaries of slang, Usage dictionaries, Dictionaries of word-frequency, A Reverse dictionary, Pronouncing dictionaries, Etymological dictionaries, Ideographic dictionaries, synonym-books, spelling reference books, hard-words dictionaries, etc.)

2. The role of native and borrowed elements in English

The number of borrowings in Old English was small. In the Middle English period there was an influx of loans. It is often contended that since the Nor­man Conquest borrowing has been the chief factor in the enrichment of the English vocabulary and as a result there was a sharp decline in the productivity of word-formation. Historical evidence, however, testifies to the fact that throughout its entire history, even in the periods of the mightiest influxes of borrowings, other processes, no less intense, were in operation — word-formation and semantic development, which involved both native and borrowed elements.

If the estimation of the role of borrowings is based on the study of words recorded in the dictionary, it is easy to overestimate the effect of the loan words, as the number of native words is extremely small compared with the number of borrowings recorded. The only true way to estimate the relation of the native to the borrowed element is to con­sider the two as actually used in speech. If one counts every word used, including repetitions, in some reading matter, the proportion of native to borrowed words will be quite different. On such a count, every writer uses considerably more native words than borrowings. Shakespeare, for example, has 90%, Milton 81%, Tennyson 88%. It shows how impor­tant is the comparatively small nucleus of native words.

Different borrowings are marked by different frequency value. Those well established in the vocabulary may be as frequent in speech as native words, whereas others occur very rarely.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 16

1. The main variants of the English language

In Modern linguistics the distinction is made between Standard English and territorial variants and local dialects of the English language.

Standard English may be defined as that form of English which is current and literary, substantially uniform and recognized as acceptable wherever English is spoken or understood. Most widely accepted and understood either within an English-speaking country or throughout the entire English-speaking world.

Variants of English are regional varieties possessing a literary norm. There are distinguished variants existing on the territory of the United Kingdom (British English, Scottish English and Irish English), and variants existing outside the British Isles (American English, Canadian English, Australian English, New Zealand English, South African English and Indian English). British English is often referred to the Written Standard English and the pronunciation known as Received Pronunciation (RP).

Local dialects are varieties of English peculiar to some districts, used as means of oral communication in small localities; they possess no normalized literary form.

Variants of English in the United Kingdom

Scottish English and Irish English have a special linguistic status as compared with dialects because of the literature composed in them.

Variants of English outside the British Isles

Outside the British Isles there are distinguished the following variants of the English language: American English, Canadian English, Australian English, New Zealand English, South African English, Indian English and some others. Each of these has developed a literature of its own, and is characterized by peculiarities in phonetics, spelling, grammar and vocabulary.

2. Basic problems of dictionary-compiling

Lexicography, the science, of dictionary-compiling, is closely connected with lexicology, both dealing with the same problems — the form, meaning, usage and origin of vocabulary units — and making use of each other’s achievements.

Some basic problems of dictionary-compiling:

1) the selection of lexical units for inclusion,

2) their arrangement,

3) the setting of the entries,

4) the selection and arrangement (grouping) of word-meanings,

5) the definition of meanings,

6) illustrative material,

7) supplementary material.

1) The selection of lexical units for inclusion.

It is necessary to decide: a) what types of lexical units will be chosen for inclusion; b) the number of items; c) what to select and what to leave out in the dictionary; d) which form of the language, spoken or written or both, the dictionary is to reflect; e) whether the dictionary should contain obsolete units, technical terms, dialectisms, colloquialisms, and so forth.

The choice depends upon the type to which the dictionary will belong, the aim the compilers pursue, the prospective user of the dictionary, its size, the linguistic conceptions of the dictionary-makers and some other considerations.

2) Arrangement of entries.

There are two modes of presentation of entries: the alphabetical order and the cluster-type (arranged in nests, based on some principle – words of the same root).

3) The setting of the entries.

Since different types of dictionaries differ in their aim, in the information they provide, in their size, etc., they of necessity differ in the structure and content of the entry.

The most complicated type of entry is that found in general explanatory dictionaries of the synchronic type (the entry usually presents the following data: accepted spelling and pronunciation; grammatical characteristics including the indication of the part of speech of each entry word, whether nouns are countable or uncountable, the transitivity and intransitivity of verbs and irregular grammatical forms; definitions of meanings; modern currency; illustrative examples; derivatives; phraseology; etymology; sometimes also synonyms and antonyms.

4) The selection and arrangement (grouping) of word-meanings.

The number of meanings a word is given and their choice in this or that dictionary depend, mainly, on two factors: 1) on what aim the compilers set themselves and 2) what decisions they make concerning the extent to which obsolete, archaic, dialectal or highly specialised meanings should be recorded, how the problem of polysemy and homonymy is solved, how cases of conversion are treated, how the segmentation of different meanings of a polysemantic word is made, etc.

There are at least three different ways in which the word meanings are arranged: a) in the sequence of their historical development (called historical order), b) in conformity with frequency of use that is with the most common meaning first (empirical or actual order), c) in their logical connection (logical order).

5) The definition of meanings.

Meanings of words may be defined in different ways: 1) by means of linguistic definitions that are only concerned with words as speech material, 2) by means of encyclopaedic definitions that are concerned with things for which the words are names (nouns, proper nouns and terms), 3) be means of synonymous words and expressions (verbs, adjectives), 4) by means of cross-references (derivatives, abbreviations, variant forms). The choice depends on the nature of the word (the part of speech, the aim and size of the dictionary).

6) Illustrative material.

It depends on the type of the dictionary and on the aim the compliers set themselves.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 17

1. Sources of compounds

The actual process of building compound words may take different forms: 1) Com­pound words as a rule are built spontaneously according to pro­ductive distributional formulas of the given period. Formulas productive at one time may lose their productivity at another period. Thus at one time the process of building verbs by compounding adverbial and verbal stems was productive, and numerous compound verbs like, e.g. out­grow, offset, inlay (adv + v), were formed. The structure ceased to be productive and today practically no verbs are built in this way.

2) Compounds may be the result of a gradual process of semantic isolation and structural fusion of free word-groups. Such compounds as forget-me-not; bull’s-eye—’the centre of a target; a kind of hard, globular can­dy’; mainland—‘acontinent’ all go back to free phrases which became semantically and structurally isolated in the course of time. The words that once made up these phrases have lost their integrity, within these particular for­mations, the whole phrase has become isolated in form, «specialized in meaning and thus turned into an inseparable unit—a word having acquired semantic and morphological unity. Most of the syntactic compound nouns of the (a+n) structure, e.g. bluebell, blackboard, mad-doctor, are the result of such semantic and structural isolation of free word-groups; to give but one more example, highway was once actually a high way for it was raised above the surrounding countryside for better drainage and ease of travel. Now we use highway without any idea of the original sense of the first element.

2. Lexical differences of territorial variants of English

All lexical units may be divided into general English (common to all the variants) and locally-marked (specific to present-day usage in one of the variants and not found in the others). Different variants of English use different words for the same objects (BE vs. AE: flat/apartment, underground/subway, pavement/sidewalk, post/mail).

Speaking about lexical differences between the two variants of the English language, the following cases are of importance:

1. Cases where there are no equivalent words in one of the variant! (British English has no equivalent to the American word drive-in (‘a cinema or restaurant that one can visit without leaving one’s car’)).

2. Cases where different words are used for the same denotatum, e.g. sweets (BrE) — candy (AmE); reception clerk (BrE) — desk clerk (AmE).

3. Cases where some words are used in both variants but are much commoner in one of them. For example, shop and store are used in both variants, but the former is frequent in British English and the latter in American English.

4. Cases where one (or more) lexico-semantic variant(s) is (are) specific to either British English or American English (e.g. faculty, denoting ‘all the teachers and other professional workers of a university or college’ is used only in American English; analogous opposition in British English or Standard English — teaching staff).

5. Cases where one and the same word in one of its lexico-semantic variants is used oftener in British English than in American English (brew — ‘a cup of tea’ (BrE), ‘a beer or coffee drink’ (AmE).

Cases where the same words have different semantic structure in British English and American English (homely — ‘home-loving, domesticated, house-proud’ (BrE), ‘unattractive in appearance’ (AmE); politician ‘a person who is professionally involved in politics’, neutral, (BrE), ‘a person who acts in a manipulative and devious way, typically to gain advancement within an organisation’ (AmE).

Besides, British English and American English have their own deri­vational peculiarities (some of the affixes more frequently used in American English are: -ее (draftee — ‘a young man about to be enlisted’), -ster (roadster — ‘motor-car for long journeys by road’), super- (super-market — ‘a very large shop that sells food and other products for the home’); AmE favours morphologically more complex words (transportation), BrE uses clipped forms (transport); AmE prefers to form words by means of affixes (burglarize), BrE uses back-formation (burgle from burglar).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 18

1. Methods and procedures of lexicological analysis

The process of scientific investigation may be subdivided into several stages:

1. Observation (statements of fact must be based on observation)

2. Classification (orderly arrangement of the data)

3. Generalization (formulation of a generalization or hypothesis, rule a law)

4. The verifying process. Here, various procedures of linguistic analysis are commonly applied:

1). Contrastive analysis attempts to find out similarities and differences in both philogenically related and non-related languages. In fact contrastive analysis grew as the result of the errors which are made recurrently by foreign language students. They can be often traced back to the differences in structure between the target language and the language of the learner, detailed comparison of these two languages has been named contrastive analysis.

Contrastive analysis brings to light the essence of what is usually described as idiomatic English, idiomatic Russian etc., i.e. the peculiar way in which every language combines and structures in lexical units various concepts to denote extra-linguistic reality.

2). Statistical analysis is the quantitative study of a language phenomenon. Statistical linguistics is nowadays generally recognised as one of the major branches of linguistics. (frequency – room, collocability)

3). Immediate constituents analysis. The theory of Immediate Constituents (IC) was originally elaborated as an attempt to determine the ways in which lexical units are relevantly related to one another. The fundamental aim of IC analysis is to segment a set of lexical units into two maximally independent sequences or ICs thus revealing the hierarchical structure of this set.

4). Distributional analysis and co-occurrence. By the term distribution we understand the occurrence of a lexical unit relative to other lexical units of the same level (the position which lexical units occupy or may occupy in the text or in the flow of speech). Distributional analysis is mainly applied by the linguist to find out sameness or difference of meaning.

5). Transformational analysis can be definedas repatterning of various distributional structures in order to discover difference or sameness of meaning of practically identical distributional patterns. It may be also described as a kind of translation (transference of a message by different means).

6). Componental analysis (1950’s). In this analysis linguists proceed from the assumption that the smallest units of meaning are sememes (семема — семантическая единица) or semes (сема (минимальная единица содержания)) and that sememes and lexemes (or lexical items) are usually not in one-to-one but in one-to-many correspondence (e.g. in lexical item “woman”, semems are – human, female, adult). This analysis deals with individual meanings.

7). Method of Semantic Differential (set up by American psycholinguists). The analysis is concerned with measurement of differences of the connotational meaning, or the emotive charge, which is very hard to grasp.

2. Ways and means of enriching the vocabulary of English

Development of the vocabulary can be described a process of the never-ending growth. There are two ways of enriching the vocabulary:

A. Vocabulary extension — the appearance of new lexical items. New vocabulary units appear mainly as a result of: 1) productive or patterned ways of word-formation (affixation, conversion, composition); 2) non-patterned ways of word-creation (lexicalization – transformation of a word-form into a word, e.g. arms-arm, customs (таможня)-custom); shortening — transformation of a word-group into a word or a change of the word-structure resulting in a new lexical item, e.g. RD for Road, St for Street; substantivization – the finals to the final exams, acronyms (NATO) and letter abbreviation (D.J. – disk jokey), blendings (brunch – breakfast and lunch), clipping – shortening of a word of two or more syllables (bicycle – bike, pop (clipping plus substativization) – popular music)); 3) borrowing from other languages.

Borrowing as a means of replenishing the vocabulary of present-day English is of much lesser importance and is active mainly in the field of scientific terminology. 1) Words made up of morphemes of Latin and Greek origin (e.g. –tron: mesotron; tele-: telelecture; -in: protein). 2) True borrowings which reflect the way of life, the peculiarities of development of speech communities from which they come. (e.g. kolkhoz, sputnik). 3) Loan-translations also reflect the peculiarities of life and easily become stable units of the vocabulary (e.g. fellow-traveler, self-criticism)

B. Semantic extension — the appearance of new meanings of existing words which may result in homonyms. The semantic development of words already available in the language is the main source of the qualitative growth of the vocabulary but does not essentially change the vocabulary quantatively.

The most active ways of word creation are clippings and acronyms.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 19

1. Means of composition

From the point of view of the means by which the components are joined together compound words may be classified into:

1) Words formed by merely placing one constituent after another (e.g. house-dog, pot-pie) can be: asyntactic (the order of bases runs counter to the order in which the words can be brought together under the rules of syntax of the language, e.g. red-hot, pale-blue, oil-rich) and syntactic (the order of words arranged according to the rules of syntax, e.g. mad-doctor, blacklist).

2) Compound words whose ICs are joined together with a special linking-element — linking vowels (o) and consonants (s), e.g. speedometer, tragicomic, statesman.

The additive compound adjectives linked with the help of the vowel [ou] are limited to the names of nationalities and represent a specific group with a bound root for the first component, e.g. Sino-Japanese, Afro-Asian, Anglo-Saxon.

2. Synchronic and diachronic approaches to conversion

Conversion is the formation of a new word through changes in its paradigm (category of a part of speech). As a paradigm is a morphological category, conversion can be described as a morphological way of forming words (Смирницкий). The term was introduced by Henry Sweet.

The causes that made conversion so widely spread are to be approached diachronically. Nouns and verbs have become identical in form firstly as a result of the loss of endings. The similar phenomenon can be observed in words borrowed from the French language. Thus, from the diachronic point of view distinctions should be made between homonymous word-pairs, which appeared as a result of the loss of inflections (окончание, изменяемая часть слова).

In the course of time the semantic structure of the base nay acquire a new meaning or several meanings under the influence of the meanings of the converted word (reconversion).

Synchronically we deal with pairs of words related through conversion that coexist in contemporary English. A careful examination of the relationship between the lexical meaning of the root-morpheme and the part-of-speech meaning of the stem within a conversion pair reveals that in one of the two words the former does not correspond to the latter.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 20

1. Denotational and connotational aspects of meaning

The lexical meaning comprises two main components: the denotational aspect of meaning and the connotational aspect of meaning. The term «denotational aspect of meaning» is derived from «to denote» and it is through this component of meaning that the main information is conveyed in the process of communication. Besides, it helps to insure references to things common to all the speakers of the given language (e.g. «chemistry»- I’m not an expert in it, but I know what it is about, «dentist», «spaceship»).

The connotational aspect may be called «optional». It conveys additional information in the process of communication. And it may denote the emotive charge and the stylistic value of the word. The emotive charge is the emotive evaluation inherent in the connotational component of the lexical meaning (e.g. «notorious» => [widely known] => for criminal acts, bad behaviour, bad traits of character; «famous» => [widely known] => for special achievement etc.).

Positive/Negative evaluation; emotive charge/stylistic value.

«to love» — neutral

«to adore» — to love greatly => the emotive charge is higher than in «to love»

«to shake» — neutral.

«to shiver» — is stronger => higher emotive charge.

Mind that the emotive charge is not a speech characteristic of the word. It’s a language phenomenon => it remains stable within the basical meaning of the word.

If associations with the lexical meaning concern the situation, the social circumstances (formal/informal), the social relations between the interlocutors (polite/rough), the type or purpose of communication (poetic/official)the connotation is stylistically coloured. It is termed as stylistic reference. The main stylistic layers of the vocabulary are:

Literary «parent» «to pass into the next world» — bookish

Neutral «father» «to die»

Colloquial «dad» «to kick the bucket»

But the denotational meaning is the same.

2. Semantic fields

lexico-semantic groups

lexical sets

synonyms

semantic field

The broadest semantic group is usually referred to as the semantic field. It is a closely neat section of vocabulary characterized by a common concept (e.g. emotions). The common semantic component of the field is called the common dominator. All members of the field are semantically independent, as the meaning of each is determined by the presence of others. Semantic field may be very impressive, covering big conceptual areas (emotions, movements, space). Words comprising the field may belong to different parts of speech.

If the underlying notion is broad enough to include almost all-embracing sections of vocabulary we deal with semantic fields (e.g. cosmonaut, spacious, to orbit – belong to the semantic field of ‘space’).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 21

1. Assimilation of borrowings

The term ‘assimilation of borrowings’ is used to denote a partial or total conformation to the phonetical, graphical and morphological standards of the English language and its semantic system.

According to the degree of assimilation all borrowed words can be divided into three groups:

1) completely assimilated borrowings;

2) partially assimilated borrowings;

3) unassimilated borrowings or barbarisms.

1. Completely assimilated borrowed words follow all morpholo­gical, phonetical and orthographic standards, take an active part in word-formation. The morphological structure and motivation of completely assimilated borrowings remain usually transparent, so that they are morphologically analyzable and therefore supply the English vocabulary not only with free forms but also with bound forms, as affixes are easily perceived and separated in series of borrowed words that contain them (e.g. the French suffixes age, -ance and -ment).

They are found in all the layers of older borrowings, e. g. cheese (the first layer of Latin borrowings), husband (Scand),face (Fr), animal (Latin, borrowed during the revival of learning).

A loan word never brings into the receiving language the whole of its semantic structure if it is polysemantic in the original language (e.g., ‘sport’in Old French — ‘pleasures, making merry and entertainments in general’, now — outdoor games and exercise).

2. Partially assimilated borrowed words may be subdivided depending on the aspect that remains unaltered into:

a) borrowings not completely assimilated graphically (e.g., Fr. ballet, buffet;some may keep a diacritic mark: café, cliché;retained digraphs (ch, qu, ou, etc.): bouquet, brioche);

b) borrowings not completely assimilated phonetically (e.g., Fr. machine, cartoon, police(accent is on the final syllable), [3]bourgeois, prestige, regime(stress + contain sounds or combinations of sounds that are not standard for the English language));

c) borrowings not assimilated grammatically (e.g., Latin or Greek borrowings retain original plural forms: crisis — crises, phenomenon — phenomena;

d) borrowings not assimilated semantically because they denote objects and notions peculiar to the country from which they come (e. g. sari, sombrero, shah, rajah, toreador, rickshaw(Chinese), etc.

3. Unassimilated borrowings or barbarisms. This group includes words from other languages used by English people in conversation or in writing but not assimilated in any way, and for which there are corresponding English equivalents, e.g. the Italian addio, ciao— ‘good-bye’.

Etymological doublets are two or more words originating from the same etymological source, but differing in phonetic shape and meaning (e.g. the words ‘whole’(originally meant ‘healthy’, ‘free from disease’) and ‘hale’both come from OE ‘hal’:one by the normal development of OE ‘a’ into ‘o’, the other from a northern dialect in which this modification did not take place. Only the latter has servived in its original meaning).

2. Semi-affixes

There is a specific group of morphemes whose derivational function does not allow one to refer them unhesitatingly either to the derivational affixes or bases. In words like half-done, half-broken, half-eaten and ill-fed, ill-housed, ill-dressed the ICs ‘half-‘ and ‘ill-‘ are given in linguistic lit­erature different interpretations: they are described both as bases and as derivational prefixes. The comparison of these ICs with the phonetically identical stems in independent words ‘ill’ and ‘half’ as used in such phrases as to speak ill of smb, half an hour ago makes it obvious that in words like ill-fed, ill-mannered, half-done the ICs ‘ill-‘ and ‘half-‘ are losing both their semantic and structural identity with the stems of the independent words. They are all marked by a different distributional meaning which is clearly revealed through the difference of their collocability as compared with the collocability of the stems of the independently functioning words. As to their lexical meaning they have become more indicative of a generalizing meaning of incompleteness and poor quality than the indi­vidual meaning proper to the stems of independent words and thus they function more as affixational morphemes similar to the prefixes ‘out-, over-, under-, semi-, mis-‘ regularly forming whole classes of words.

Be­sides, the high frequency of these morphemes in the above-mentioned generalized meaning in combination with the numerous bases built on past participles indicates their closer ties with derivational affixes than bases. Yet these morphemes retain certain lexical ties with the root-mor­phemes in the stems of independent words and that is why are felt as occu­pying an intermediate position, as morphemes that are changing their class membership regularly functioning as derivational prefixes but still retaining certain features of root-morphemes. That is why they are sometimes referred to as semi-affixes. To this group we should also refer ‘well-‘ and ‘self-‘ (well-fed, well-done, self-made), ‘-man’ in words like postman, cabman, chairman, ‘-looking’ in words like foreign-looking, alive-looking, strange-looking, etc.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 22

1. Degrees of assimilation of borrowings and factors determining it

Even a superficial examination of the English word-stock shows that there are words among them that are easily recognized as foreign. And there are others that have become so firmly rooted in the language that it is sometimes extremely difficult to distinguish them from words of Anglo-Saxon origin (e.g. pupil, master, city, river, etc.).

Unassimilated words differ from assimilated ones in their pronunciation, spelling, semantic structure, frequency and sphere of application. There are also words that are assimilated in some respects and unassimilated in others – partially assimilated words (graphically, phonetically, grammatically, semantically).

The degree of assimilation depends on the first place upon the time of borrowing: the older the borrowing, the more thoroughly it tends to follow normal English habits of accentuation, pronunciation and etc. (window, chair, dish, box).

Also those of recent date may be completely made over to conform to English patterns if they are widely and popularly employed (French – clinic, diplomat).

Another factor determining the process of assimilation is the way in which the borrowings were taken over into the language. Words borrowed orally are assimilated more readily; they undergo greater changes, whereas with words adopted through writing the process of assimilation is longer and more laborious.

2. Lexical, grammatical valency of words

There are two factors that influence the ability of words to form word-groups. They are lexical and grammatical valency of words. The point is that compatibility of words is determined by restrictions imposed by the inner structure of the English word stock (e.g. a bright idea = a good idea; but it is impossible to say «a bright performance», or «a bright film»; «heavy metal» means difficult to digest, but it is impossible to say «heavy cheese»; to take [catch] a chance, but it is possible to say only «to take precautions»).

The range of syntactic structures or patterns in which words may appear is defined as their grammatical valency. The grammatical valency depends on the grammatical structure of the language (e.g. to convince smb. of smth/that smb do smth; to persuade smb to do smth).

Any departure from the norms of lexical or grammatical valency can either make a phrase unintelligible or be felt as a stylistic device.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 23

1. Classification of homonyms

Homonyms are words that are identical in their sound-form or spelling but different in meaning and distribution.

1) Homonyms proper are words similar in their sound-form and graphic but different in meaning (e.g. «a ball»- a round object for playing; «a ball»- a meeting for dances).

2) Homophones are words similar in their sound-form but different in spelling and meaning (e.g. «peace» — «piece», «sight»- «site»).

3) Homographs are words which have similar spelling but different sound-form and meaning (e.g. «a row» [rau]- «a quarrel»; «a row» [rəu] — «a number of persons or things in a more or less straight line»)

There is another classification by Смирницкий. According to the type of meaning in which homonyms differ, homonyms proper can be classified into:

I. Lexical homonyms — different in lexical meaning (e.g. «ball»);

II. Lexical-grammatical homonyms which differ in lexical-grammatical meanings (e.g. «a seal» — тюлень, «to seal» — запечатывать).

III. Grammatical homonyms which differ in grammatical meaning only (e.g. «used» — Past Indefinite, «used»- Past Participle; «pupils»- the meaning of plurality, «pupil’s»- the meaning of possessive case).

All cases of homonymy may be subdivided into full and partial homonymy. If words are identical in all their forms, they are full homonyms (e.g. «ball»-«ball»). But: «a seal» — «to seal» have only two homonymous forms, hence, they are partial homonyms.

2. Lexical and grammatical meanings of word-groups

1. The lexical meaning of the word-group may be defined as the combined lexical meaning of the component words. Thus, the lexical meaning of the word-group “red flower” may be described denotationally as the combined mean­ing of the words “red” and “flower”. It should be pointed out, however, that the term combined lexical meaning is not to imply that the meaning of the word-group is a mere additive result of all the lexical meanings of the component members. The lexical meaning of the word-group predominates over the lexical meanings of its constituents.

2. The structural meaning of the word-group is the meaning conveyed mainly by the pattern of arrangement of its constituents (e.g. “school grammar” – школьная грамматика and “grammar school” – грамматическая школа, are semantically different because of the difference in the pattern of arrangement of the component words. The structural meaning is the meaning expressed by the pattern of the word-group but not either by the word school or the word grammar.

The lexical and structural components of meaning in word-groups are interdependent and inseparable, e.g. the structural pattern of the word-groups all day long, all night long, all week long in ordinary usage and the word-group all the sun long is identical. Replacing day, night, week by another noun – sun doesn’t change the structural meaning of the pattern. But the noun sun continues to carry the semantic value, the lexical meaning that it has in word-groups of other structural patterns.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 24

1. Derivational bases

The derivational bases is the part of the word which establishes connections with the lexical unit that motivates the derivative and defines its lexical meaning. The rule of word formation is applied. Structurally, they fall into 3 classes: 1. bases that coincide with morphological stems (e.g. beautiful (d.b.) — beautifully); 2. bases that coincide with word-forms (e.g. unknown — known); 3. bases that coincide with word groups; adjectives and nouns (e.g. blue-eyed – having blue eyes, easy-going).

2. Emotive charge and stylistic reference

The emotive charge is the emotive evaluation inherent in the connotational component of the lexical meaning (e.g. «notorious» => [widely known] => for criminal acts, bad behaviour, bad traits of character; «famous» => [widely known] => for special achievement etc.).

Positive/Negative evaluation; emotive charge/stylistic value.

«to love» — neutral

«to adore» — to love greatly => the emotive charge is higher than in «to love»

«to shake» — neutral.

«to shiver» — is stronger => higher emotive charge.

Mind that the emotive charge is not a speech characteristic of the word. It’s a language phenomenon => it remains stable within the basical meaning of the word.

The emotive charge varies in different word-classes. In some of them, in interjections (междометия), e.g., the emotive element prevails, whereas in conjunctions the emotive charge is as a rule practi­cally non-existent. The emotive implication of the word is to a great extent subjective as it greatly de­pends of the personal experience of the speaker, the mental imagery the word evokes in him. (hospital – architect, invalid or the man living across the road)

If associations with the lexical meaning concern the situation, the social circumstances (formal/informal), the social relations between the interlocutors (polite/rough), the type or purpose of communication (poetic/official)the connotation is stylistically coloured. It is termed as stylistic reference. The main stylistic layers of the vocabulary are:

Literary «parent» «to pass into the next world» — bookish

Neutral «father» «to die»

Colloquial «dad» «to kick the bucket»

In literary (bookish) words we can single out: 1) terms or scientific words (e.g. renaissance, genocide, teletype); 2) poetic words and archaisms (e.g. aught—’any­thing’, ere—’before’, nay—’no’); 3) barbarisms and foreign words (e.g. bouquet).

The colloquial words may be, subdivided into:

1) Common colloquial words.

2) Slang (e.g. governor for ‘father’, missus for ‘wife’, a gag for ‘a joke’, dotty for ‘insane’).

3) Professionalisms — words used in narrow groups bound by the same occupation (e.g., lab for ‘laboratory’, a buster for ‘a bomb’).

4) Jargonisms — words marked by their use within a particular social group and bearing a secret and cryptic character (e.g. a sucker — ‘a person who is easily deceived’).

5) Vulgarisms — coarse words that are notgenerally used in public (e.g. bloody, hell, damn, shut up)

5) Dialectical words (e.g. lass – девчушка, kirk — церковь).

6) Colloquial coinages (e.g. newspaperdom, allrightnik)

Stylistic reference and emotive charge of words are closely connected and to a certain degree interdependent. As a rule stylistically coloured words — words belonging to all stylistic layers except the neutral style are observed to possess a considerable emotive charge (e.g. daddy, mammy are more emotional than the neutral father, mother).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 25

1. Historical changeability of word-structure

The derivational structure of a word is liable to various changes in the course of time. Certain morphemes may become fused together or may be lost altogether (simplification). As a result of this process, radical changes in the word may take place: root morphemes may turn into affixational and semi-affixational morphemes, compound words may be transformed into derived or even simple words, polymorphic words may become monomorphic.

E.g. derived word wisdom goes back to the compound word wīsdom in which – dom was a root-morpheme and a stem of independent word with the meaning ‘decision, judgment’. The whole compound word meant ‘a wise decision’. In the course of time the meaning of the second component dom became more generalized and turned into the suffix forming abstract nouns (e.g. freedom, boredom).

Sometimes the spelling, of some Modern English words as compared with their sound-form reflects the changes these words have undergone (e.g. cupboard — [‘kʌbəd] is a monomorphic non-motivated simple word. But earlier it consisted of two bases — [kʌp] and [bɔːd] and signified ‘a board to put cups on’. Nowadays, it denotes neither cup nor board: a boot cupboard, a clothes cupboard).

2. Criteria of synonymity

1. It is sometimes argued that the meaning of two words is identical if they can denote the same referent (if an object or a certain class of objects can always be denoted by either of the two words.

This approach to synonymy does not seem acceptable because the same referent in different speech situations can always be denoted by different words which cannot be considered synonyms (e.g. the same woman can be referred to as my mother by her son and my wife by her husband – both words denote the same referent but there is no semantic relationship of synonymy between them).

2. Attempts have been made to introduce into the definition of synonymity the criterion of interchangeability in linguistic contexts (they say: synonyms are words which can replace each other in any given context without the slightest alteration in the denotational or connotational meaning). It is argued that for the linguist similarity of meaning implies that the words are synonymous if either of then can occur in the same context. And words interchangeable in any given context are very rare.

3. Modern linguists generally assume that there are no complete synonyms — if two words are phonemically different then their meanings are also different (buy, purchase – Purchasing Department). It follows that practically no words are substitutable for one another in all contexts (e.g. the rain in April was abnormal/exceptional – are synonymous; but My son is exceptional/abnormal – have different meaning).

Also interchangeability alone cannot serve as a criterion of synonymity. We may safely assume that synonyms are words interchangeable in some contexts. But the reverse is certainly not true as semantically different words of the same part of speech are interchangeable in quite a number of contexts (e.g. I saw a little girl playing in the garden the adj. little may be replaced by a number of different adj. pretty, tall, English).

Thus a more acceptable definition of synonyms seems to be the following: synonyms are words different in their sound-form, but similar in their denotational meaning or meanings and interchangeable at least in some contexts.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 26

1. Immediate Constituents analysis

The theory of Immediate Constituents (IC) was originally elaborated as an attempt to determine the ways in which lexical units are relevantly related to one another. The fundamental aim of IC analysis is to segment a set of lexical units into two maximally independent sequences or ICs thus revealing the hierarchical structure of this set (e.g. the word-group a black dress in severe styleis divided intoa black dress / in severe style.Successive segmentation results in Ultimate Constituents (UC) — two-facet units that cannot be segmented into smaller units having both sound-form and meaning (e.g. a | black | dress | in | severe | style).

The meaning of the sentence, word-group, etc. and the IC binary segmentation are interdependent (e.g. fat major’s wifemay mean that either ‘the major is fat’ (fat major’s | wife) or ‘his wife is fat’ (fat | major’s wife).

The Immediate Constituent analysis is mainly applied in lexicological investigation to find out the derivational structure of lexical units (e.g. to denationalise => de | nationalise (it’s a prefixal derivative, because there is no such sound-forms as *denation or *denational). There are also numerous cases when identical morphemic structure of different words is insufficient proof of the identical pattern of their derivative structure which can be revealed only by IC analysis (e.g. words which contain two root-morphemes and one derivational morphemesnow-coveredwhich is a compound consisting of two stems snow + covered, but blue-eyedis a suffixal derivative (blue+eye)+-ed). It may be inferred from the examples above that ICs represent the word-formation structure while the UCs show the morphemic structure of polymorphic words.

2. Characteristic features of learner’s dictionaries

Traditionally the term learner’s dictionaries is confined to dictionaries specifically complied to meet the demands of the learners for whom English is not their mother tongue. They nay be classified in accordance with different principles, the main are: 1) the scope of the word-list, and 2) the nature of the information afforded. Depending on that, learner’s dictionaries are usually divided into: a) elementary/basic/pre-intermediate; b) intermediate; c) upper-intermediate/advanced learner’s dictionaries.

1. The scope of the word-list. Pre-intermediate as well as intermediate learner’s dictionaries contain only the most essential and important – key words of English, whereas upper-intermediate learner’s dictionaries contain lexical units that the prospective user may need.

Purpose: to dive information on what is currently accepted in modern English. Excluded: archaic and dialectal words, technical and scientific terms, substandard words and phrases. Included: colloquial and slang words, foreign words – if they are of sort to be met in reading or conversation. (frequency)

2. The nature of the information afforded. They may be divided into two groups: 1) learner’s dictionary proper (those giving equal attention to the words semantic characteristics and the way it is used in speech); 2) those presenting different aspects of the vocabulary: dictionaries of collocations, derivational dictionaries (word-structure), dictionaries of synonyms and antonyms and some others.

Pre-intermediate and intermediate learner’s dictionaries differ from advanced sometimes greatly in the number of meanings given and the language used for the description of these meanings.

Pictorial material is widely used. Pictures may define the meanings of different nouns as well as adjectives, verbs, and adverbs. The order of arrangement of meaning is empiric (beginning with the main meaning to minor ones).

The supplementary material in learner’s dictionaries may include lists of irregular verbs, common abbreviations, geographic names, special signs and symbols used in various branches of science, tables of weights and measures and so on.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 27

1. Links between lexicology and other branches of linguistics

Lexicology is a branch of linguistics dealing with a systematic description and study of the vocabulary of the language as regards its origin, development, meaning and current use. The term is composed of 2 words of Greek origin: lexis — word + logos – word’s discourse. So lexicology is a word about words, or the science of a word. However, lexicology is concerned not only with words because the study of the structure of words implies references to morphemes which make up words.

On the other hand, the study of semantic properties of a word implies references to variable (переменный) or stable (set) word groups, of which words are compounding parts. Because it is the semantic properties of words that define the general rules of their joining together.

Comparative linguistics and Contrasted linguistics are of great importance in classroom teaching and translation.

Lexicology is inseparable from: phonetics, grammar, and linguostylistics because phonetics also investigates vocabulary units but from the point of view of their sounds. Grammar in its turn deals with various means of expressing grammar peculiarities and grammar relations between words. Linguostylistics studies the nature, functioning and structure of stylistic devices and the styles of a language.

Language is a means of communication, therefore the social essence of inherent in the language itself. The branch of linguistics dealing with relations between the way the language function and develops on the one hand and develops the social life on the other is called sociolinguistics.

2. Grammatical and lexical meanings of words

The word «meaning» is not homogeneous. Its components are described as «types of meaning». The two main types of meaning are grammatical and lexical meaning.

The grammatical meaning is the component of meaning, recurrent in identical sets of individual forms of words (e.g. reads, draws, writes – 3d person, singular; books, boys – plurality; boy’s, father’s – possessive case).

The lexical meaning is the meaning proper to the linguistic unit in all its forms and distribution (e.g. boy, boys, boy’s, boys’ – grammatical meaning and case are different but in all of them we find the semantic component «male child»).

Both grammatical meaning and lexical meaning make up the word meaning and neither of them can exist without the other.

There’s also the 3d type: lexico-grammatical (part of speech) meaning. Third type of meaning is called lexico-grammatical meaning (or part-of-speech meaning). It is a common denominator of all the meanings of words belonging to a lexical-grammatical class (nouns, verbs, adjectives etc. – all nouns have common meaning oа thingness, while all verbs express process or state).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 28

1. Types of word segmentability

Within the English word stock maybe distinguished morphologically segment-able and non-segmentable words (soundless, rewrite — segmentable; book, car — non-segmentable).

Morphemic segmentability may be of three types: 1. complete, 2. conditional, 3. defective.

A). Complete segmentability is characteristic of words with transparent morphemic structure. Their morphemes can be easily isolated which are called morphemes proper or full morphemes (e.g. senseless, endless, useless). The transparent morphemic structure is conditioned by the fact that their constituent morphemes recur with the same meaning in a number of other words.

B). Conditional segmentability characterizes words segmentation of which into constituent morphemes is doubtful for semantic reasons (e.g. retain, detain, contain). The sound clusters «re-, de-, con-» seem to be easily isolated since they recur in other words but they have nothing in common with the morphemes «re, de-, con-» which are found in the words «rewrite», «decode», «condensation». The sound-clusters «re-, de-, con-» can possess neither lexical meaning nor part of speech meaning, but they have differential and distributional meaning. The morphemes of the kind are called pseudo-morphemes (quasi morphemes).

C). Defective morphemic segmentability is the property of words whose component morphemes seldom or never recur in other words. Such morphemes are called unique morphemes. A unique morpheme can be isolated and displays a more or less clear meaning which is upheld by the denotational meaning of the other morpheme of the word (cranberry, strawberry, hamlet).

2. Basic criteria of semantic derivation within conversion pairs

There are different criteria if differentiating between the source and the derived word in a conversion pair.

1. The criterion of the non-correspondence between the lexical meaning of the root-morpheme and the part-of-the speech meaning of the stem in one of the two words in a conversion pair. This criterion cannot be implied to abstract nouns.

2. The synonymity criterion is based on the comparison of a conversion pair with analogous synonymous word-pairs (e.g. comparing to chat – chat with synonymous pair of words to converse – conversation, it becomes obvious that the noun chat is the derived member as their semantic relations are similar). This criterion can be applied only to deverbal substantives.

3. The criterion of derivational relations. In the word-cluster hand – to hand – handful – handy the derived words of the first degree of derivation have suffixes added to the nominal base. Thus, the noun hand is the center of the word-cluster. This fact makes it possible to conclude that the verb to hand is the derived member.

4. The criterion of semantic derivation is based on semantic relations within the conversion pairs. If the semantic relations are typical of denominal verbs – verb is the derived member, but if they are typical of deverbal nouns – noun is the derived member (e.g. crowd – to crowd are perceived as those of ‘an object and an action characteristic of an object’ – the verb is the derived member).

5. According to the criterion of the frequency of occurrence a lower frequency value shows the derived character. (e.g. to answer (63%) – answer (35%) – the noun answer is the derived member).

6. The transformational criterion is based on the transformation of the predicative syntagma into a nominal syntagma (e.g. Mike visited his friends. – Mike’s visit to his friends. – then it is the noun that is derived member, but if we can’t transform the sentence, noun cannot be regarded as a derived member – Ann handed him a ball – XXX).

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 29

1. Word-formation: definition, basic peculiarities

According to Смирницкий word-formation is a system of derivative types of words and the process of creating new words from the material available in the language after certain structural and semantic patterns. The main two types are: word-derivation and word-composition (compounding).

The basic ways of forming words in word-derivation are affixation and conversion (the formation of a new word by bringing a stem of this word into a different formal paradigm, e.g. a fall from to fall).

There exist other types: semantic word-building (homonymy, polysemy), sound and stress interchange (e.g. blood – bleed; increase), acronymy (e.g. NATO), blending (e.g. smog = smoke + fog) and shortening of words (e.g. lab, maths). But they are different in principle from derivation and compound because they show the result but not the process.

2. Specialized dictionaries

Phraseological dictionaries have accumulated vast collections of idiomatic or colloquial phrases, proverbs and other, usually image-bearing word-groups with profuse illustrations. (An Anglo-Russian Phraseological Dictionary by A. V. Koonin)

New Words dictionaries have it as their aim adequate reflection of the continuous growth of the English language. (Berg P. A Dictionary of New Words in English)

Dictionaries of slang contain vulgarisms, jargonisms, taboo words, curse-words, colloquialisms, etc. (Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English by E. Partridge)

Usage dictionaries pass judgement on usage problems of all kinds, on what is right or wrong. Designed for native speakers they supply much various information on such usage problems as, e.g., the difference in meaning between words (like comedy, farce and burlesque; formalityand formalism), the proper pronunciation of words, the plural forms of the nouns (e.g. flamingo), the meaning of foreign and archaic words. (Dictionary of Modern English Usage by N. W. Fowler.)

Dictionaries of word-frequency inform the user as to the frequency of occurrence of lexical units in speech (oral or written). (M. West’s General Service List.)

A Reverse dictionary (back-to-front dictionaries) is a list of words in which the entry words are arranged in alphabetical order starting with their final letters. (Rhyming Dictionary of the English Language).

Pronouncing dictionaries record contemporary pronunciation. They indicate variant pronunciations (which are numerous in some cases), as well as the pronunciation of different grammatical forms. (English Pronouncing Dictionary by Daniel Jones)

Etymological dictionaries trace present-day words to the oldest forms available, establish their primary meanings and point out the immediate source of borrowing, its origin, and parallel forms in cognate languages. (Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology edited by С. Т. Onions.)

Ideographic dictionaries designed for English-speaking writers, orators or translators seeking to express their ideas adequately contain words grouped by the concepts expressed. (Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases.)

Besides the most important and widely used types of English dictionaries discussed above there are some others, such as synonym-books, spelling reference books, hard-words dictionaries, etc.

ЭКЗАМЕНАЦИОННЫЙ БИЛЕТ № 30

1. Meaning in morphemes

A morpheme is the smallest indivisible two-facet (form and meaning) language unit which implies an association of a certain meaning and sound-form. Unlike words, morphemes cannot function independently (they occur in speech only as parts of words).

Morphemes have certain semantic peculiarities that distinguish them from words.- the don’t have grammatical meaning. Concrete lexical meaning is found mainly in root-morphemes (e.g. ‘friend” – friendship). Lexical meaning of affixes is generalized (e.g. -er – doer of an action; re- — repetition of some action).

Lexical meaning in morphemes may be analyzed into connotational and denotational components. The connotational aspect of meaning may be found in root-morphemes and affixational morphemes (e.g. diminutive meaning: booklet).

The part-of-speech meaning is characteristic only of affixal morphemes; moreover, some affixal morphemes are devoid of any part of meaning but part-of-speech meaning (e.g. –ment).

Morphemes possess specific meanings (of their own). There are: 1) deferential meaning and 2) distributional meaning.

Differential meaning is the semantic component that serves to distinguish one word from others containing identical morphemes (e.g. bookshelf, bookcase, bookhaunter).

Distributional meaning is the meaning of order and arrangement of morphemes that make up the word (e.g. heartless X lessheart).

Identical morphemes may have different sound-form (e.g. divide, divisible, division – the root morpheme is represented phonetically in different ways. They are called allomorphs or morpheme variant of one and the same morpheme.

2. Morphemic types of words

According to the number of morphemes words maybe classified into: monomorphic (root) words e.g. live, house) and polymorphic words that consist of more than one morpheme (merciless).

Polymorphic words are subdivided into:

1. Monoradical (one-root) words may be of 3 subtypes: a) radical-suffixal words (e.g. helpless), b) radical-prefixal words (e.g. mistrust), c) prefixo-radical-suffixal words (e.g. misunderstanding).

2. Polyradical (two or more roots) words fall into: a) root morphemes without affixes (e.g. bookcase) and b) root morphemes with suffixes (e.g. straw-colored).

Homonymy in modern English

                                                                                     
Автор: учитель английского языка

                                                  
                                   Ермилова Елена Александровна

Introduction

Homonyms
are the words different in meaning, but similar in sound.

Homonyms
are used in stilistics as members of stylistic figures called puns.

The
meaning of homonymy is very actual in our days. The appearance of new,
homonymic meanings is one of the main trends in development of Modern English,
especially in its colloquial layer, which, in its turn at high degree is supported
by development of modern informational technologies and simplification of alive
speech.

The
abundance of homonyms is also closely connected with such a characteristic
feature of the English language as the phonetic identity of word and stem or, in
other words, the predominance of free forms among the most frequent roots. It
is quite obvious that if the frequency of words stands in some inverse
relationship to their length, the monosyllabic words will be the most frequent.
Moreover, as the most frequent words are also highly polysemantic, it is only
natural that they develop meanings, which in the coarse of time may deviate
very far from the central one.

    In
general, homonymy is intentionally sought to provoke positive, negative or
awkward connotations. Concerning the selection of initials, homonymy with
shortened words serves the purpose of manipulation.  The demotivated process of
a shortened word hereby leads to re-motivation.  The form is homonymously
identical with an already lexicalized linguistic unit, which makes it easier to
pronounce or recall, thus standing out from the majority of acronyms.  This
homonymous unit has a secondary semantic relation to the linguistic unit.

    Homonymy of names functions as personified metaphor with the result
that the homonymous name leads to abstraction.  The resultant new word
coincides in its phonological realization with an existing word in English.
However, there is no logical connection between the meaning of the acronym and
the meaning of the already existing word, which explains a great part of the
humor it produces.

    In the coarse of time the number of homonyms on the whole increases,
although occasionally the conflict of homonyms ends in word loss.

The Object is – lexical
figures.

The Subject is – homonymy
in modern English.

The aim is —to
study homonymy in modern English.

The tasks of the work:

1) to give the determination to homonymy

2) to examine the classification  of  homonyms

3) to examine distinguishing homonymy and polysemy

4) to learn the literature on the subject

This work consists of:  introduction,  two chapters   and  bibliography.

Chapter Ι Homonymy as learning of homonyms

1. Determination of homonymy

     Two or more words identical in sound
and spelling but different in meaning, distribution and in many cases origin
are called
homonyms. The term is derived from Greek “homonymous”
(homos – “the same” and onoma – “name”) and thus expresses very well the
sameness of name combined with the difference in meaning.

Modern
English is exceptionally rich in homonymous words and word-forms. It is held
that languages where short words abound have more homonyms than those where
longer words are prevalent. Therefore it is sometimes suggested that abundance
of homonyms in Modern English is to be accounted for by the monosyllabic
structure of the commonly used English words.

Not
only words but other linguistic units may be homonymous. Here, however, we are
concerned with the homonymy of words and word-forms only, so we shall not touch
upon the problem of homonymous affixes or homonymous phrases When analyzing
different cases of homonymy we find that some words are homonymous in all their
forms, i.e. we observe full homonymy of the paradigms of two or more different
words as, e.g., in seal a sea animal and seal—a design printed on paper by
means of a stamp’.[3,p144] The paradigm «seal, seal’s, seals, seals'»
is identical for both of them and gives no indication of whether it is seal (1)
or seal (2) that we are analyzing. In other cases, e.g. seal—a sea animal’ and
(to) seal (3)—’to close tightly, we see that although some individual
word-forms are homonymous, the whole of the paradigm is not identical. Compare,
for instance, the-paradigms:

1.
(to)seal-seal-seal’s-seals-seals’

2.
seal-seals-sealed-sealing, etc.

1
Professor O. Jespersen calculated that there are roughly four times as many
monosyllabic as polysyllabic homonyms. It is easily observed that only some of
the word-forms (e.g. seal, seals, etc.) are homonymous, whereas others (e.g.
sealed, sealing) are not. In such cases we cannot speak of homonymous words but
only of homonymy of individual word-forms or of partial homonymy. This is true
of a number of other cases, e.g. compare find [faind], found [faund], found
[faund] and found [faund], founded [‘faundidj, founded [faundid]; know [nou],
knows [nouz], knew [nju:], and no [nou]; nose [nouz], noses [nouziz]; new
[nju:] in which partial homonymy is observed.

From the examples of homonymy discussed above it
follows that the bulk of full homonyms are to be found within the same parts of
speech (e.g. seal(1) n—seal(2) n), partial homonymy as a rule is observed in word-forms
belonging to different parts of speech (e.g. seal n—seal v). This is not to say
that partial homonymy is impossible within one part of speech. For instance in
the case of the two verbs Me [lai]—’to be in a horizontal or resting
position’—lies [laiz]—lay [lei]—lain [lein] and lie [lai]—’to make an untrue
statement’—lies [laiz]—lied [laid]—lied [laid] we also find partial homonymy as
only two word-forms [lai], [laiz] are homonymous, all other forms of the two
verbs are different. Cases of full homonymy may be found in different parts of
speech as, e.g., for [for]—preposition, for [fo:]—conjunction and four [fo:]
—numeral, as these parts of speech have no other word-forms.

2. Classification of homonyms

The
most widely accepted classification is that recognizing homonyms proper,
homophones and homographs.

                                            Homonyms proper

   
Homonyms proper are words, as I have already mentioned, identical in
pronunciation and spelling, like fast and liver above. Other
examples are: back n ‘part of the body’ – back adv ‘away from the
front’ – back v ‘go back’; ball n ‘a gathering of people for
dancing’ – ball n ‘round object used in games’; bark n ‘the noise
made by dog’ – bark v ‘to utter sharp explosive cries’ – bark n
‘the skin of a tree’ – bark n

‘a
sailing ship’; base n ‘bottom’ – base v ‘build or place upon’ – base
a ‘mean’; bay n ‘part of the sea or lake filling wide-mouth opening of
land’ – bay n ‘recess in a house or room’ – bay v ‘bark’ – bay
n ‘the European laurel’.

    The
important point is that homonyms are distinct words: not different meanings
within one word.

Homophones

   
Homophones are words of the same sound but of different spelling and meaning:

air –
hair; arms – alms; buy – by; him – hymn; knight – night; not – knot; or – oar;
piece – peace; rain – reign; scent – cent; steel – steal; storey – story; write
– right
and many others.

    In
the sentence The play-wright on my right thinks it right that some
conventional rite should symbolize the right of every man to write as he
pleases
the sound complex [rait] is a noun, an adjective, an adverb and a
verb, has four different spellings and six different meanings. The difference
may be confined to the use of a capital letter as in bill and Bill, in the
following example:

“How
much is my milk bill?”

“Excuse
me, Madam, but my name is John.”

    On
the other hand, whole sentences may be homophonic: The sons raise meat – The
sun’s rays meet.
To understand these one needs a wider context. If you hear
the second in the course of a lecture in optics, you will understand it without
thinking of the possibility of the first.

Homographs

   
Homographs are words different in sound and in meaning but accidentally
identical in spelling: bow [bou] – bow [bau]; lead [li:d] – lead [led]; row
[rou] – row [rau]; sewer [‘soue] – sewer [sjue]; tear [tie] – tear [tee]; wind [wind] – wind [waind] and many
more.

    It
has been often argued that homographs constitute a phenomenon that should be
kept apart from homonymy, as the object of linguistics is sound language. This
viewpoint can hardly be accepted. Because of the effects of education and
culture written English is a generalized national form of expression. An
average speaker does not separate the written and oral form. On the contrary he
is more likely to analyze the words in terms of letters than in terms of
phonemes with which he is less familiar. That is why a linguist must take into
consideration both the spelling and the pronunciation of words when analyzing
cases of identity of form and diversity of content. [10, p12]

Modern
English has a very extensive vocabulary; the number of words according to the
dictionary data is no less than 400, 000.A question naturally arises whether
this enormous word-stock is composed of separate independent lexical units, or
may it perhaps be regarded as a certain structured system made up of numerous
interdependent and interrelated sub-systems or groups of words. This problem
may be viewed in terms of the possible ways of classifying vocabulary items.
Words can be classified in various ways. Here, however, we are concerned only
with the semantic classification of words which gives us a better insight into
some aspects of the Modern English word-stock. Attempts to study the inner
structure of the vocabulary revealed that in spite of its heterogeneity the
English word-stock may be analyzed into numerous sub-systems the members of
which have some features in common, thus distinguishing them from the members
of other lexical sub-systems. Classification into monosynaptic and polysemantic
words is based on the number of meanings the word possesses. More detailed
semantic classifications are generally based on the semantic similarity (or
polarity) of words or their component morphemes. Below we give a brief survey
of some of these lexical groups of current use both in theoretical
investigation and practical class-room teaching.

   
Accordingly, Professor A.I. Smirnitsky classifieds homonyms into two large
classes:

a)    
full homonyms

b)   
partial homonyms

Full
homonyms

    Full
lexical homonyms are words, which represent the same category of parts of
speech and have the same paradigm.

Match
n –
a game, a contest

Match
n
– a short piece of wood used for producing fire

Wren
n
– a member of the Women’s Royal Naval Service

Wren
n
– a bird

Partial
homonyms

      
Partial homonyms are subdivided into three subgroups:

A.
Simple lexico-grammatical partial homonyms are words, which belong to the same
category of parts of speech. Their paradigms have only one identical form, but
it is never the same form, as will be soon from the examples:

(to)
found v

      
found v
(past indef., past part. of to find)

(to)
lay v

      
lay v
(past indef. of to lie)

(to)
bound v

      
bound v
(past indef., past part. of to bind)

B.
Complex lexico-grammatical partial homonyms are words of different categories
of parts of speech, which have identical form in their paradigms.

Rose
n

Rose
v
(past indef. of to rise)

Maid
n

Made
v
(past indef., past part. of to make)

Left
adj

Left
v
(past indef., past part. of to leave)

Bean
n

Been
v
(past part. of to be)

One
num

Won v
(past indef., past part. of to win)

C.
Partial lexical homonyms are words of the same category of parts of speech
which are identical only in their corresponding forms.

to
lie (lay, lain) v

to
lie (lied, lied) v

to
hang (hung, hung) v

to
hang (hanged, hanged) v

to
can (canned, canned)

(I)              
can (could)

Chapter
ΙΙ  Problems of Homonymy

1.      Polysemy and homonymy: etymological
and semantic criteria

Words
borrowed from other languages may through phonetic convergence become
homonymous. Old Norse has and French race are homonymous in Modern English (cf.
race1 [reis]—’running’ and race [reis] ‘a distinct ethnical stock’). There are
four homonymic words in Modern English: sound —’healthy’ was already in Old
English homonymous with sound—’a narrow passage of water’, though
etymologically they are unrelated. Then two more homonymous words appeared in
the English language, one comes from Old French son (L. sonus) and denotes
‘that which is or may be heard’ and the other from the French sunder the
surgeon’s probe. One of the most debatable problems in semasiology is the
demarcation line between homonymy and polysemy, i.e. between different meanings
of one word and the meanings of two homonymous words.  [15,p55]

If
homonymy is viewed diachronically then all cases of sound convergence of two
or, more words may be safely regarded as cases of homonymy as, e.g., sound i,
sound2, sound-e, and sound4 which can be traced back to four etymologically
different words.  The transition from polysemy to homonymy is a gradual
process, so it is hardly possible to point out the precise stage at which
divergent semantic development tears asunder all ties of etymological kinship
and results in the appearance of two separate words. In the case of flower,
flour, e.g., it is mainly the resultant divergence of graphic forms that gives
us grounds to assert that the two meanings which originally made up the
semantic structure of one word are now apprehended as belonging to two
different words.

Synchronically
the differentiation between homonymy and polysemy is wholly based on the
semantic criterion. It is usually held that if a connection between the various
meanings is apprehended by the speaker, these are to be considered as making up
the semantic structure of a polysemantic word, otherwise it is a case of
homonymy, not polysemy.

Thus
the semantic criterion implies that the difference between polysemy and
homonymy is actually reduced to the differentiation between related and unrelated
meanings. This traditional semantic criterion does not seem to be reliable,
firstly, because various meanings of the same word and the meanings of two or
more different words may be equally apprehended by the speaker as
synchronically unrelated. For instance, the meaning ‘a change in the form of a
noun or pronoun’ which is usually listed in dictionaries as one of the meanings
of case!—’something that has happened’, ‘a question decided in a court of law’
seems to be just as unrelated to the meanings of this word as to the meaning of
case2 —’a box, a container’, etc

Secondly
in the discussion of lexico-grammatical homonymy it was pointed out that some
of the mean of homonyms arising from conversion (e.g. seal in—seal 3 v; paper
n—paper v) are related, so this criterion cannot be applied to a large group of
homonymous word-forms in Modern English. This criterion proves insufficient in
the synchronic analysis of a number of other borderline cases, e.g.
brother—brothers— ‘sons of the same parent’ and brethren—’fellow members of a
religious society’. The meanings may be apprehended as related and then we can
speak of polysemy pointing out that the difference in the morphological
structure of the plural form reflects the difference of meaning. Otherwise we may
regard this as a case of partial lexical homonymy. The same is true of such
cases as hang—hung—hung—’to support or be supported from above’ and
hang—hanged—hanged—’to put a person to death by hanging’ all of which are
traditionally regarded as different meanings of one polysemantic word.

It
is sometimes argued that the difference between related and unrelated meanings
may be observed in the manner in which the meanings of polysemantic words are
as a rule relatable. It is observed that different meanings of one word have
certain stable relationships which are not to be found between the meanings of
two homonymous words. A clearly perceptible connection, e.g., can be seen in
all metaphoric or metonymic meanings of one word (e.g., foot of the man— foot
of the mountain, loud voice—loud colors, etc.,1 cf. also deep well and deep
knowledge, etc.).

Such
semantic relationships are commonly found in the meanings of one word and are
considered to be indicative’ of polysemy. It is also suggested that the
semantic connection may be described in terms of such features as, e.g., form
and function (cf. horn of an animal and horn as an instrument), process and
result (to run—’move with quick steps’ and a run—act of running).

Similar
relationships, however, are observed between the meanings of two homonymic
words, e.g. to run and a run in the stocking.

Moreover
in the synchronic analysis of polysemantic words we often find meanings that
cannot be related in any way, as, e.g., the meanings of the word case discussed
above. Thus the semantic criterion proves not only untenable in theory but also
rather vague and because of this impossible in practice as it cannot be used in
discriminating between several meanings of one word and the meanings of two
different words.

A
more objective criterion of distribution suggested by some linguists is
criteria: undoubtedly helpful, but mainly increase-distribution of lexico —
grammatical and grammatical homonymy. When homonymic words of Context, belong
to different parts of speech they differ not only in their semantic structure,
but also in their syntactic function and consequently in their distribution. In
the homonymic pair paper n—(to) paper v the noun may be preceded by the article
and followed by a verb; (to) paper can never be found in identical
distribution. This formal criterion can be used to discriminate not only
lexico-grammatical but also grammatical homonyms, but it often fails the
linguists in cases of lexical homonymy, not differentiated by means of
spelling.

Homonyms
differing in graphic form, e.g. such lexical homonyms as knight—night or
flower—flour, are easily perceived to be two different lexical units as any
formal difference of words is felt as indicative of the existence of two
separate lexical units. Conversely lexical homonyms identical both in
pronunciation and spelling are often apprehended as different meanings of one
word. It is often argued that the context in which the words are used suffices
to perceive the borderline between homonymous words, e.g. the meaning of case
in several cases of robbery can be easily differentiated from the meaning of
case2 in a jewel case, a glass case. This however is true of different meanings
of the same word as recorded in dictionaries, e.g. of case as can be seen by
comparing the case will be tried in the law-court and the possessive case of
the noun. Thus, the context serves to differentiate meanings but is of little
help in distinguishing between homonymy and polysemy. Consequently we have to
admit that no formal means have as yet been found to differentiate between
several meanings of one word and the meanings of its homonyms. We must take
into consideration the note that in the discussion of the problems of polysemy
and homonymy we proceeded from the assumption that the word is the basic unit
of language.

1
It should be pointed out that there is another approach to the concept of the
basic language unit which makes the problem of differentiation between polysemy
and homonymy irrelevant.

Some
linguists hold that the basic and elementary units at the semantic level of
language are the lexico-semantic variants of the word, i.e. individual
word-meanings. In that case, naturally, we can speak only of homonymy of
individual lexico-semantic variants, as polysemy is by definition, at least on
the synchronic plane, the co-existence of several meanings in the semantic
structure of the word. The criticism of this viewpoint cannot be discussed
within the framework different semantic structure. The problem of homonymy is
mainly the problem of differentiation between two different semantic structures
of identically sounding words.

2.
Homonymy of words and homonymy of individual word-forms may be regarded as full
and partial homonymy. Cases of full homonymy are generally observed in words
belonging to the same part of speech. Partial homonymy is usually to be found
in word-forms of different parts of speech.

3.
Homonymous words and word-forms may be classified by the type of meaning that
serves to differentiate between identical sound-forms. Lexical homonyms differ
in lexical meaning, lexico-grammatical in both lexical and grammatical meaning,
whereas grammatical homonyms are those that differ in grammatical meaning only.

4.
Lexico-grammatical homonyms are not homogeneous. Homonyms arising from conversion
have some related lexical meanings in their semantic structure. Though some
individual meanings may be related the whole of the semantic structure of
homonyms is essentially different.

5.
If the graphic form of homonyms is taken into account, they are classified on
the basis of the three aspects — sound-form, graphic form and meaning — into
three big groups: homographs (identical graphic form), homophones (identical
sound-form) and perfect homonyms (identical sound- and graphic form).

6.
The two main sources of homonymy are:

1)
diverging meaning development of one polysemantic word, and

2)
convergent sound development of two or more different words. The latter is the
most potent factor in the creation of homonyms.

7.
The most debatable problem of homonymy is the demarcation line between homonymy
and polysemy, i.e. between different meanings of one word and the meanings of
two or more phonemically different words.

8.
The criteria used in the synchronic analysis of homonymy are:

1)
the semantic criterion of related or unrelated meanings;

2)
the criterion of spelling;

3)
the criterion of distribution, and

4)
the criterion of context.

In
grammatical and lexico-grammatical homonymy the reliable criterion is the
criterion of distribution. In lexical homonymy there are cases when none of the
criteria enumerated above is of any avail. In such cases the demarcation line
between polysemy and homonymy is rather fluid.’

9.
The problem of discriminating between polysemy and homonymy in theoretical
linguistics is closely connected with the problem of the basic unit at the
semantic level of analysis.

In
applied linguistics this problem is of the greatest importance in lexicography
and also in machine translation.

During
several scores of years the problem of distinction of polysemy and homonymy in
a language was constantly arising the interest of lexicologists is in many
countries.

                      2. Distinguishing homonymy from
polysemy

    The
synchronic treatment of English homonyms brings to the forefront a set of
problems of paramount importance for different branches of applied linguistics:
lexicography, foreign language teaching and information retrieval. These
problems are: the criteria distinguishing homonymy from polysemy, the
formulation of rules for recognizing different meanings of the same homonym in
terms of distribution, and the description of difference between patterned and
non-patterned homonymy. It is necessary to emphasize that all these problems
are connected with difficulties created by homonymy in understanding the
message by the reader or listener, not with formulating one’s thoughts; they
exist for the speaker though in so far as he must construct his speech in a way
that would prevent all possible misunderstanding.

    All three problems are so closely
interwoven that it is difficult to separate them. So we shall discuss them as
they appear for various practical purposes. For a lexicographer it is a problem
of establishing word boundaries. It is easy enough to see that match, as
in safety matches, is a separate word from the verb match ‘to
suit’. But he must know whether one is justified in taking into one entry match,
as in football match, and match in meet one’s match ‘one’s
equal’.

     On the synchronic level, when
the difference in etymology is irrelevant, the problem of establishing the
criterion for the distinction between different words identical in sound form,
and different meanings of the same word becomes hard to solve. Nevertheless the
problem cannot be dropped altogether as upon an efficient arrangement of
dictionary entries depends the amount of time spent by readers in looking up a
word: a lexicographer will either save or waste his readers’ time and effort.

    Actual solutions
differ. It is a wildly spread practice in English lexicography to combine in
one entry words of identical phonetic form showing similarity of lexical
meaning or, in other words, revealing a lexical invariant, even if they belong
to different parts of speech. In our country a different trend has settled.    
Polysemy characterizes words that have more than one meaning — any dictionary
search will reveal that most words are polysemes — word itself has 12
significant senses, according to WordNet. This means that the word,
word, is used in texts scanned by lexicographers to represent twelve different
concepts.

The point is that words are
not meanings, although they can have many meanings.     Lexicographers make a
clear distinction between different words by writing separate entries for each
of them, whether or not they are spelled the same way. The dictionary of Fred
W. Riggs has 5 entries for the form, bow — this shows that
lexicographers recognize this form (spelling) as a way of representing five
different words. Three of them are pronounced bo and two bau, which identifies two
homophones in this set of five homographs, each of which is a polyseme, capable
of representing more than one concept. To summarize: bow is a word-form that
stands for two different homophones and, as a homograph, represents five
different words.

    Moreover, the form bow
is polysemic and can represent more than 20 concepts (its various meanings or
senses). By gratuitously putting meaning in its definition of a homograph, WordNet
can mislead readers who might think that a word is a homonym because it has
several meanings — but having one word represent more than one concept is
normal — just consider term as an example: it can not only refer to the
designator of a concept, but also the duration of something, like the school
year or a politician’s hold on office, a legal stipulation, one’s standing in a
relationship (on good terms) and many other notions — more than 17 are
identified in the dictionary edited be Fred W. Riggs. By contrast, homonyms are
different words and each of them (as a polyseme) can have multiple meanings.

    To make their definitions precise, lexicographers need
criteria to distinguish different words from each other even though they are
spelled the same way. This usually hinges on etymology and, sometimes, parts of
speech. One might, for example, think that that firm ‘steadfast’ and firm
‘business unit’ are two senses of one word (polyseme). Not so! Lexicographers
class them as different words because the first evolved from a Latin stem
meaning throne or chair, and the latter from a different root in Italian
meaning signature.

    Dictionaries are not uniform in their treatment of the
different grammatical forms of a word. In some of them, the adjective firm
(securely) is handled as a different word from the noun firm (to settle)
even though they have the same etymology. Fred W. Riggs isn’t persuaded such
differences justify treating grammatical classes (adjectives, nouns, and verbs)
of a word-form that belongs to a single lexeme as different words — the
precise meaning of lexeme is 1. WordNet is a Lexical Database for
English prepared by the Cognitive Science Laboratory at Princeton University.

explained below. The relevant point here is that deciding
whether or not a form identifies one or more than one lexeme does not hinge on meanings.
There is agreement that a word-form represents different words when they
evolved from separate roots, and some lexicographers treat each grammatical use
of a lexeme (noun, verb, adjective) as though it were a different word.

    The etymological criterion may lead to distortion of the
present day situation. The English vocabulary of today is not a replica of the
Old English vocabulary with some additions from borrowing. It is in many
respects a different system, and this system will not be revealed if the
lexicographers guided by etymological criteria only.

    A more or less simple, if not very rigorous, procedure
based on purely synchronic data may be prompted by analysis of dictionary
definitions. It may be called explanatory transformation. It is based on
the assumption that if different senses rendered by the same phonetic complex
can be defined with the help of an identical kernel word-group, they may be
considered sufficiently near to be regarded as variants of the same word; if
not, they are homonyms.

    Consider the following set of examples:

1.    
A child’s voice is heard.1

2.    
His voice…was…annoyingly well-bred.2

3.    
The voice-voicelessness
distinction…sets up some English consonants in opposed pairs…

4.    
In the voice contrast of active and
passive…the active is the unmarked form.

    The first variant (voice1) may be
defined as ‘sound uttered in speaking or singing as characteristic of a
particular person’, voice2 as ‘mode of uttering sounds in
speaking or singing’, voice3 as ‘the vibration of the vocal chords
in sounds uttered’. So far all the definitions contain one and the same kernel
element rendering the invariant common basis of their meaning. It is, however,
impossible to use the same kernel element for the meaning present in the fourth
example. The corresponding definition is: “Voice – that form of the verb that
expresses the relation of the subject to the action”. This failure to satisfy
the same explanation formula sets the fourth meaning apart. It may then be
considered a homonym to the polysemantic word embracing the first three
variants. The procedure described may remain helpful when the items considered
belong to different parts of speech; the verb voice may mean, for
example, ‘to utter a sound by the aid of the vocal chords’.  

    This brings us to the problem of patterned homonymy,
i.e. of the invariant lexical meaning present in homonyms that have developed
from one common source and belong to various parts of speech.

     Is a lexicographer justified in placing the verb voice
with the above meaning into the same entry with the first three variants of
the noun? The same question arises with respect to after or before
– preposition, conjunction and adverb.

    English lexicographers think it quite possible for one
and the same word to function as different parts of speech. Such pairs as act
n – act v; back n — back v; drive n – drive v;
the above mentioned after and before and the like, are all
treated as one word functioning as different parts of speech. This point of
view was severely criticized. It was argued that one and the same word could
not belong to different parts of speech simultaneously, because this would
contradict the definition of the word as a system of forms.

    This viewpoint is not faultless
either; if one follows it consistently, one should regard as separate words all
cases when words are countable nouns in one meaning and uncountable in another,
when verbs can be used transitively and intransitively, etc. In this case hair1
‘all the hair that grows on a person’s head’ will be one word, an uncountable
noun; whereas ‘a single thread of hair’ will be

denoted by another word (hair2)
which, being countable, and thus different in paradigm, cannot be considered
the same word. It would be tedious to enumerate all the absurdities that will
result from choosing this path. A dictionary arranged on these lines would
require very much space in printing and could occasion much wasted time in use.
The conclusion therefore is that efficiency in lexicographic work is secured by
a rigorous application of etymological criteria combined with formalized
procedures of establishing a lexical invariant suggested by synchronic
linguistic methods.

    As to those concerned with
teaching of English as a foreign language, they are also keenly interested in
patterned homonymy. The most frequently used words constitute the greatest
amount of difficulty, as may be summed up by the following jocular example: I
think that this “that” is a conjunction but that that “that” that that man used
as pronoun.

    A correct understanding of this
peculiarity of contemporary English should be instilled in the pupils from the
very beginning, and they should be taught to find their way in sentences where
several words have their homonyms in other parts of speech, as in Jespersen’s
example: Will change of air cure love? To show the scope of the problem
for the elementary stage a list of homonyms that should be classified as
patterned is given below:

    Above, prp, adv, a; act,
n, v; after, prp, adv, cj; age, n, v; back, n, adv, v;   ball,
n, v; bank, n, v; before, prp, adv, cj; besides, prp, adv;
bill, n, v; bloom, n, v; box, n, v. The other examples
are: by, can, close, country, course, cross, direct, draw, drive, even,
faint, flat, fly, for, game, general, hard, hide, hold, home, just, kind, last,
leave, left, lie, light, like, little, lot, major, march, may, mean, might,
mind, miss, part, plain, plane, plate, right, round, sharp, sound, spare,
spell, spring, square, stage, stamp, try, type, volume, watch, well, will
.  

    For the most part all these words
are cases of patterned lexico-grammatical homonymy taken from the minimum
vocabulary of the elementary stage: the above homonyms mostly differ within
each group grammatically but possess some lexical invariant. That is to say, act
v follows the standard four-part system of forms with a base form act,
an s-form (act-s), a Past Indefinite Tense form (acted) and an
ing-form (acting) and takes up all syntactic functions of verbs, whereas
act n can have two forms, act (sing.) and act (pl.). Semantically
both contain the most generalized component rendering the notion of doing
something.

    Recent investigations have shown
that it is quite possible to establish and to formalize the differences in
environment, either syntactical or lexical, serving to signal which of the
several inherent values is to be ascribed to the variable in a given context.
An example of distributional analysis will help to make this point clear.

    The distribution of a
lexico-semantic variant of a word may be represented as a list of structural
patterns in which it occurs and the data on its combining power. Some of the
most typical structural patterns for a verb are: N + V + N; N + V + Prp + N; N
+ V + A; N + V + adv; N + V + to + V and some others. Patterns for nouns are
far less studied, but for the present case one very typical example will
suffice. This is the structure: article + A + N.

    In the following
extract from “A Taste of Honey” by Shelagh Delaney the morpheme laugh
occurs three times: I can’t stand people who laugh at other people. They’d
get a bigger laugh, if they laughed at themselves.

    We recognize laugh
used first and last here as a verb, because the formula is N + laugh +
prp + N and so the pattern is in both cases N + V + prp + N. In the beginning
of the second sentence laugh is a noun and the pattern is article +     
A + N.

    This elementary example
can give a very general idea of the procedure which can be used for solving
more complicated problems.

    We may sum up our
discussion by pointing out that whereas distinction between polysemy homonymy
is relevant and important for lexicography it is not relevant for the practice
of either human or machine translation. The reason for this is that different
variants of a polysemantic word are not less conditioned by context then
lexical homonyms. In both cases the identification of the necessary meaning is
based on the corresponding distribution that can signal it and must be present
in the memory either of the pupil or the machine. The distinction between
patterned and non-patterned homonymy, greatly underrated until now, is of far
greater importance. In non-patterned homonymy every unit is to be learned
separately both from the lexical and grammatical points of view. In patterned
homonymy when one knows the lexical meaning of a given word in one part of
speech, one can accurately predict the meaning when the same sound complex
occurs in some other part of speech, provided, of coarse, that there is
sufficient context to guide one.

Conclusion

We
have come to conclusion  that:

1.Homonyms
are the words identical in sound and spelling, but different in meaning.

Modern
English is exceptionally rich in homonymous words and word-forms. It is held
that languages where short words abound have more homonyms than those where
longer words are prevalent. Therefore it is sometimes suggested that abundance
of homonyms in Modern English is to be accounted for by the monosyllabic
structure of the commonly used English words.

2.Homonyms
are classifiable into:

  
-homophones

  
— homographs

  
— homonyms proper

Homophones
are the words of the same sound but of different spelling and meaning.

Homographs
are words different in sound and in meaning, but accidentally identical in
spelling.

Homonyms
proper are words identical in pronunciation  and spelling.

3. Synchronically the differentiation
between homonymy and polysemy is wholly based on the semantic criterion. It is
usually held that if a connection between the various meanings is apprehended
by the speaker, these are to be considered as making up the semantic structure
of a polysemantic word, otherwise it is a case of homonymy, not polysemy.

Thus
the semantic criterion implies that the difference between polysemy and
homonymy is actually reduced to the differentiation between related and
unrelated meanings. This traditional semantic criterion does not seem to be
reliable, firstly, because various meanings of the same word and the meanings
of two or more different words may be equally apprehended by the speaker as
synchronically unrelated.

4.Having
learned the literature , we have come to conclusion that great contribution to 
lexicology was  brought by: Akhmanova O.S, Potter S., Smirnitsky A.I.

Bibliography

1 Abayev
V.I. Homonyms T. O’qituvchi 1981 p. 29

2. Akhmanova
O.S. Lexicology: Theory and Method. M. 1972 p. 59

      3.Arakin English Russian Dictionary
M.Russky Yazyk 1978 p. 119     

     4. Arnold
I.V. The English Word M. High School 1986 p. 143

     5. Bloomsbury Dictionary of New Words. M. 1996 p.276

     6. Buranov, Muminov
Readings on Modern English Lexicology T. O’qituvchi   1985 p. 47

    7.  Burchfield R.W.
The English Language. Lnd. ,1985 p.47

    8.  Canon G.
Historical Changes and English Wordformation: New Vocabulary items. N.Y., 1986.
p.284

     9.  Dubenets E.M.
Modern English Lexicology (Course of Lectures) M., Moscow State Teacher
Training University Publishers 2004 p. 31

10.   Ginzburg
R.S. et al. A Course in Modern English Lexicology. M., 1979 p. 82

 11 .Halliday
M.A.K. Language as Social Semiotics. Social Interpretation of Language and
Meaning. Lnd., 1979.p.53

 12.  Hornby
The Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. Lnd. 1974 p. 111

 13 . Howard
Ph. New words for Old. Lnd., 1980. p.311

 14.   Jespersen.
Linguistics. London, 1983, p. 412

 15.   Jespersen
,Otto. Growth and Structure of the English Language. Oxford, 1982 p. 249

16.    Longman
Lexicon of Contemporary English. Longman. 1981p.23

17.   Maurer
D.W. , High F.C. New Words — Where do they come from and where do they go.
American Speech., 1982.p.171

18.    Potter
S. Modern Linguistics. Lnd., 1957 p. 54

19.   Schlauch,
Margaret. The English Language in Modern Times. Warszava, 1965. p.342

 20.   Sheard,
John. The Words we Use. N.Y..,1954.p.3

    21. Smirnitsky A.I.
Homonyms in English M.1977 p. 90

    22. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Oxford 1964, p.147

    23. Aпресян Ю.Д.Лексическая семантика. Омонимические
средства языка. М.1974. 46
c.

    24. Арнольд
И.В. Лексикология современного английского языка.М. Высшая школа 1959.- 212
c.

   25.  Беляева
Т.М., Потапова И.А. Английский язык за пределами Англии. Л. Изд-во ЛГУ 150
c.

  26. Виноградов
В. В. Лексикология и лексикография. Избранные
труды. М.
1977- .122c

Понравилась статья? Поделить с друзьями:
  • Different meanings of the word base
  • Different meanings of a polysemantic word develop into homonymous words
  • Different meaning of the word state
  • Different meaning of the same word in english
  • Different meaning for the word there