Linear relationship of word

Syntagmatic Relation
between words in English. Lexical Valency & Collacability.

1. Syntagmatic relations of words. The importance of Syntagmatic
   Analysis.

2. Lexical & grammatical collacability.

3. Types of word-groups.

Syntagmatic relations of
words. The importance of Syntagmatic Analysis.

The relations existing between words as separate lexical units within
the vocabulary as a system are called paradigmatic or the relations
on the vertical axis. They define the meaning through its
interrelation with other members of the subgroup it belongs to within
the vocabulary system.

There are various types of semantic paradigmatic relations in
English:

• Synonimic

• Antonymic

• Hyponimic & the others

In the flow of speech the word combines with other words forming a
kind of chain. These linear relations of words in connected speech
are called syntagmatic relations or the relations on the horizontal
level.

Syntactical relations define the meaning of a word
when it’s used in combination with other words in speech. Words put
together in speech make functional units called phrases or word-group
or word combinations or collacations.

Word-group – the largest, two-facet functional lexical units
(assuming that the word is the basic lexical unit), comprising more
than 1 word on the syntagmatic level of Analysis.

The immediate connections of the word lie within
the simple word-group consisting of 2 notional words. The relations
between these words depend on their semantic structure which in its
turn determines their combining power or collacability.

Thus, the word-group may represent that minimal stretch of speech of
the speech context that determines the individual, actual meaning of
the word in speech.

Syntagmatic Analysis – is the study of the semantic
characteristics of the word & its collacability, i.e. the ability
to combine with other words in speech on the basis of its typical
contexts or combinations with other words in speech.

It may be applied for different purposes:

1. to discover most frequently used collocations in English;

2. to study the possibilities of the realization of certain types of
   mean, in certain collocations;

3. to study the norms of valency & collacability of correlated
   words in different languages which is very important in teaching
   foreing languages, translation & lexicography.

Соседние файлы в папке Lecture9

• #
• #
• #

Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) argued that:

Syntagmatic relation defines the relationship between words that co-occur in the same sentence. It focuses on two main parts: how the position and the word order affect the meaning of a sentence. Let’s look at an example:

↤ Syntagmatic relations ↦

• The word position and order: Paul + is roasting + a chicken
• The relationship between words gives a particular meaning to the sentence:
  • It is a chicken that Paul is roasting, not something else.
  • It is Paul who is roasting a chicken, not someone else.

Thus, the syntagmatic relation refers to a word’s ability to combine with other words, and the syntagmatic dimension (syntagm) always refers to the horizontal axis or linear aspect of a sentence.

The syntagmatic relation can also explain why specific words are often paired together (collocations), such as have + a party in ‘We had a party on Saturday’. If you hear someone say, ‘We made a party on Saturday’, you’ll probably cringe because make + a party doesn’t sound right.

The opposite of syntagmatic relation is paradigmatic relation. Paradigmatic relation refers to the relationship between words that can be substituted within the same word class (on the vertical axis).

↤ Syntagmatic relations ↦
Subject	verb	Object
Determiner	Adjective	Noun	Noun
The	beautiful	woman	buys	some brioche
handsome	man	sold	some cake
tall	boy	is eating	a hotdog

From these sentences, the syntagmatic relations are all the relationships between words within the same sentence. That means there is a syntagmatic relation in:

• The beautiful woman + buys + some brioche (sentence level).
• The + beautiful + woman (phrase level).
• The handsome man + sold + some cake; and the + handsome + man.
• The tall boy + is eating + a hotdog; and the + tall + boy.

Additionally, in all three sentences above, each grammatical function (ie, subject, verb, and object) is at the same level. But in some cases, if you change the order of the sentence structure, it can change the meaning completely. For example:

The two sentences use the same words (syntagms) but differ in order (syntagmatic relationship), which changes the meaning of the sentence.

2. Word substitution is possible

Here are some examples of collocations:

1. The word combination is not interchangeable (fixed expressions).

2. The meaning of each component is not equal to the meaning of the idiom

• It is difficult to find the meaning of an idiom based on the definition of the words alone. For example, red herring. If you define the idiom word by word, it means ‘red fish’, not ‘something that misleads’, which is the real meaning.
• Because of this, idioms can’t be translated to or from another language because the word definition isn’t equivalent to the idiom interpretation.

Here are some examples of popular idioms:

Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations examples in grammar

Paradigmatic relation describes the relationship between words that can be substituted for words with the same word class (eg replacing a noun with another noun). A paradigm in this sense refers to the vertical axis of word selection. This explains why paradigmatic relation is the opposite of syntagmatic relation.

Now that we have covered the paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations, we can say that:

↥ Paradigmatic relations ↧	↤ Syntagmatic relations ↦
Subject	verb	Object
Determiner	Adjective	Noun	Noun
The	beautiful	woman	buys	some brioche
The	unattractive	lady	buys	some bread
That	handsome	man	ate	some chicken

Скачать материал

Скачать материал

Описание презентации по отдельным слайдам:

• 

  1 слайд

  Intralinguistic Relations of Words
  Types of Semantic Relations
  Lecture 6

• 

  2 слайд

  INTRALINGUISTIC RELATIONS OF WORDS
  SYNTAGMATIC RELATIONS
  PARADIGMATIC RELATIONS
  SEMANTIC SIMILARITY
  SEMANTIC CONTRAST
  BASIC TYPES OF SEMANTIC RELATIONS
  PROXIMITY
  EQUIVALENCE
  INCLUSION. HYPONYMIC STRUCTURES
  OPPOSITION.

• 

  3 слайд

  I. Intralinguistic Relations of Words
  Ferdinand de Saussure:
  Intralinguistic relations exist between words
  They are basically of two types: syntagmatic and paradigmatic

• 

  4 слайд

  1.1. Syntagmatic Relations —
  are the relationships that a linguistic unit has with other units in the stretch of speech in which it occurs.
  He got a letter (to receive);
  He got tired (to become);
  He got to London (to arrive);
  He could not get the piano through the door (to move smth. to or from a position or place).

• 

  5 слайд

  syntagmatic relations are linear relations between words
  The adjective yellow:
  colour: a yellow dress;
  envious, suspicious: a yellow look;
  corrupt: the yellow press

• 

  6 слайд

  Context — the minimal stretch of speech determining each individual meaning of the word.
  free or denominative meanings — the meaning or meanings representative of the semantic structure of the word and least dependent on context:
  table – a piece of furniture;
  make — construct, produce’

• 

  7 слайд

  1.2. PARADIGMATIC RELATIONS —
  are the relations that a linguistic unit has with units by which it may be replaced: sets of synonyms, pairs of antonyms, lexico-semantic groups, etc.
  E.G. to get synonymic set: to obtain, to receive, to gain, to acquire, etc.

• 

  8 слайд

  The distinction between syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations is conventionally indicated by horizontal and vertical presentation.

• 

  9 слайд

  II. SEMANTIC SIMILARITY
  Lexical units may also be classified by the criterion of semantic similarity and semantic contrasts. The terms generally used to denote these two types of semantic relatedness are synonymy and antonymy.

• 

  10 слайд

  Similar relations between word-groups and sentences are described as semantic equivalence.
  Synonyms may be found in different parts of speech and both among notional and function words. For example, though and al’beit, on and upon, since and as are synonymous because these phonemically different words are similar in their denotational meaning.

• 

  11 слайд

  Synonyms are traditionally described as words different in sound-form but identical or similar in meaning.
  This definition has been severely criticised on many points.

• 

  12 слайд

  Firstly,
  it seems impossible to speak of identical or similar meaning of words as such as this part of the definition cannot be applied to polysemantic words. It is inconceivable that polysemantic words could be synonymous in all their meanings.

• 

  13 слайд

  The verb look, is usually treated as a synonym of see, watch, observe, etc., but in another of its meanings it is not synonymous with this group of words but rather with the verbs seem, appear (cf. to look at smb and to look pale).
  The number of synonymic sets of a polysemantic word tends as a rule to be equal to the number of individual meanings the word possesses.

• 

  14 слайд

  One of the ways of discriminating between different meanings of a word is the interpretation of these meanings in terms of their synonyms, e.g. the two meanings of the adjective handsome are synonymously interpreted as handsome — ‘beautiful’ (usually about men) and handsome — ‘considerable, ample’ (about sums, sizes, etc.).

• 

  15 слайд

  Secondly,
  it seems impossible to speak of identity or similarity of lexical meaning as a whоle as it is only the denotational component that may be described as identical or similar. If we analyse words that are usually considered synonymous, e.g. to die, to pass away; to begin, to commence, etc.,

• 

  16 слайд

  The connotational component or the stylistic reference of these words is entirely different and it is only the similarity of the denotational meaning that makes them synonymous.

• 

  17 слайд

  The words, e.g. to die, to walk, to smile, etc., may be considered identical as to their stylistic reference or emotive charge, but as there is no similarity of denotational meaning they are never felt as synonymous words.

• 

  18 слайд

  Thirdly,
  it does not seem possible to speak of identity of meaning as a criterion of synonymity since identity of meaning is very rare even among monosemantic words.
  Cases of complete synonymy are very few and are confined to technical nomenclatures where we can find monosemantic terms completely identical in meaning as, for example, spirant and fricative in phonetics.

• 

  19 слайд

  Words in synonymic sets are in general differentiated because of some element of opposition in each member of the set. The word handsome, e.g., is distinguished from its synonym beautiful mainly because the former implies the beauty of a male person or broadly speaking only of human beings, whereas beautiful is opposed to it as having no such restrictions in its meaning.

• 

  20 слайд

  Thus
  it seems necessary to modify the traditional definition and to formulate it as follows: synonyms are words different in sound-form but similar in their denotational meaning or meanings. Synonymous relationship is observed only between similar denotational meanings of phonemically different words.

• 

  21 слайд

  Differentiation of synonyms may be observed in different semantic components — denotational or connotational.

• 

  22 слайд

  The difference in denotational meaning cannot exceed certain limits, and is always combined with some common denotational component.

• 

  23 слайд

  The verbs look, seem, appear, e.g., are viewed as members of one synonymic set as all three of them possess a common denotational semantic component “to be in one’s view, or judgement, but not necessarily in fact” and come into comparison in this meaning (cf. he seems (looks), (appears), tired).

• 

  24 слайд

  There is a certain difference in the meaning of each verb:
  seem suggests a personal opinion based on evidence (e.g. Nothing seems right when one is out of sorts);
  look implies that opinion is based on a visual impression (e.g. The city looks its worst in March),
  appear sometimes suggests a distorted impression (e.g. The setting sun made the spires appear ablaze).

• 

  25 слайд

  The relationship of synonymity implies certain differences in the denotational meaning of synonyms.
  This classification proceeds from the assumption that synonyms may differ either in the denotational meaning (ideographic synonyms) оr the connotational meaning, or to be more exact stylistic reference.

• 

  26 слайд

  This assumption cannot be accepted as synonymous words always differ in the denotational component.
  Thus buy and purchase are similar in meaning but differ in their stylistic reference and therefore are not completely interchangeable.

• 

  27 слайд

  That department of an institution which is concerned with acquisition of materials is normally the Purchasing Department rather than the *Buying Department.

  A wife however would rarely ask her husband to purchase a pound of butter. It follows that practically no words are substitutable for one another in all contexts.

• 

  28 слайд

  This fact may be explained as follows: firstly, words synonymous in some lexical contexts may display no synonymity in others.
  The comparison of the sentences The rainfall in April was abnormal and The rainfall in April was exceptional may give us grounds for assuming that exceptional and abnormal are synonymous.
  The same adjectives in a different context are by no means synonymous, as we may see by comparing My son is exceptional and My son is abnormal.

• 

  29 слайд

  Secondly, interchangeability alone cannot serve as a criterion of synonymity.
  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, as a rule, interchangeable in quite a number of contexts: in the sentence
  I saw a little girl playing in the garden
  the adjective little may be formally replaced by a number of semantically different adjectives, e.g. pretty, tall, English, etc.

• 

  30 слайд

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

• 

  31 слайд

  III. SEMANTIC CONTRAST
  Antonymy in general shares many features typical of synonymy.
  Perfect or complete antonyms are fairly rare.
  The relations of antonymy restricted to certain contexts. Thus thick is only one of the antonyms of thin (a thin slice—a thick slice), another is fat (a thin man—a fat man).

• 

  32 слайд

  The term opposite meaning is rather vague and allows of essentially different interpretation.
  kind — ‘gentle, friendly, showing love, sympathy or thought for others’ and cruel — ‘taking pleasure in giving pain to others, without mercy’,
  They denote concepts that are felt as completely opposed to each other.

• 

  33 слайд

  Comparing the adjective kind and unkind we do not find any polarity of meaning as here semantic opposition is confined to simple negation.
  Unkind may be interpreted as not kind which does not necessarily mean cruel, just as not beautiful does not necessarily mean ugly.

• 

  34 слайд

  II. BASIC TYPES OF SEMANTIC RELATIONS
  2.1. PROXIMITY

  Meaning similarity is seldom complete and nearly always partial which makes it possible to speak about the semantic proximity of words and, in general, about the relations of semantic proximity.

• 

  35 слайд

  The adjectives are characterized by certain features of semantic dissimilarity which shows that they are not absolutely identical in meaning

• 

  36 слайд

  Semantic Proximity
  red and green share the semantic features of ‘colour’, ‘basic or rainbow colour’, ‘complementary colour,;
  red vs scarlet or green vs emerald may be graded in semantic proximity;
  table and chair share the semantic features of ‘thingness’, ‘object’, ‘piece of furniture’ that forms a good basis for grouping them together with other nouns denoting ‘pieces of furniture’.

• 

  37 слайд

  2.2. Equivalence
  implies full similarity of meaning of two or more language units;
  is very seldom observed in words;
  Is oftener encountered in case of sentences:
  John is taller than Bill = Bill is shorter than John.
  She lives in Paris = She lives in the capital of France.

• 

  38 слайд

  2.3. INCLUSION. HYPONYMIC STRUCTURE —
  type of semantic relations which exists between two words if the meaning of one word contains the semantic features ‘constituting the meaning of the other word’.
  The semantic relations of inclusion are called hyponymic relations:
  Vehicle: car, lorry, motorcycle, jeep…
  Hyperonym: hyponyms.

• 

  39 слайд

  The general term – vehicle, tree, animal – is referred to as the classifier or the hyperonym.
  The specific term is called the hyponym (car, tram; oak, ash; cat; tiger).
  The more specific term (the hyponym) is included in the more general term (the hyperonym), e.g. the classifier move and members of the group – walk, run, saunter. The individual terms contain the meaning of the general term in addition to their individual meanings which distinguish them from each other.

• 

  40 слайд

  In hyponymic structure certain words may be both classifiers (hyperonyms) and members of the group (hyponyms):

• 

  41 слайд

  The principle of such hierarchical classification is widely used by scientists in various fields of research: botany, geology, etc.
  Hyponymic classification may be viewed as objectively reflecting the structure of vocabulary and is considered by many linguists as one of the most important principles for the description of meaning.

• 

  42 слайд

  Persons
  adults (man, woman, husband, etc.);
  children (boy, girl, lad, etc.) but also
  national groups (American, Russian, Chinese, etc.),

  professional groups (teacher, butcher, baker, etc.),
  social and economic groups, and so on.

• 

  43 слайд

  The problem of great importance for linguists is the dependence of the hierarchical structures of lexical units not only on the structure of the corresponding group of referents in real world but also on the structure of vocabulary in this or that language.

• 

  44 слайд

  In English in Russian
  LSV no word for meals: meals
  breakfast,
  lunch,
  dinner,
  supper,
  snack etc,
  завтрак
  обед
  полдник
  ужин

• 

  45 слайд

  2.4. OPPOSITION —
  is the contrast of semantic features which helps to establish the semantic relations (black is contrasted to white).
  The relations of opposition imply the exclusion of the meaning of one word by another (black is opposed to white but it is not opposed to either red or yellow. In the latter case we can speak about contrast of meaning, but not the semantic relations of opposition.

• 

  46 слайд

  Polar oppositions
  are those which are based on the semantic feature uniting two linguistic units by antonymous relations,
  rich – poor,
  dead – alive,
  young – old.

• 

  47 слайд

  Relative oppositions

  imply that there are several semantic features on which the opposition rests. The verb to leave means ‘to go away from’ and its opposite, the verb to arrive denotes ‘to reach a place, esp. at the end of a journey’.

• 

  48 слайд

  Summary and Conclusions:
  1. Paradigmatic (or selectional) and syntagmatic (or combinatory) axes of linguistic structure represent the way vocabulary is organised.
  Syntagmatic relations define the word-meaning in the flow of speech in various contexts.
  Paradigmatic relations define the word-meaning through its interrelation with other members within one of the subgroups of vocabulary units.

• 

  49 слайд

  On the syntagmatic axis the word-meaning is dependent on different types of contexts. Linguistic context is the minimal stretch of speech necessary to determine individual meanings.

• 

  50 слайд

  Linguistic (verbal) contexts comprise lexical and grammatical contexts and are opposed to extra-linguistic (non-verbal) contexts. In extra-linguistic contexts the meaning of the word is determined not only by linguistic factors but also by the actual speech situation in which the word is used.

• 

  51 слайд

  The semantic structure of polysemantic words is not homogeneous as far as the status of individual meanings is concerned. A certain meaning (or meanings) is representative of the word taken in isolation, others are perceived only in various contexts.

• 

  52 слайд

  Synonymy and antonymy are correlative and sometimes overlapping notions (частично совпадающие). Synonymous relationship of the denotational meaning is in many cases combined with the difference in the connotational (mainly stylistic) component.

• 

  53 слайд

  It is suggested that the term synonyms should be used to describe words different in sound-form but similar in their denotational meaning (or meanings) and interchangeable at least in some contexts.

• 

  54 слайд

  The term antоnуms is to be applied to words different in sound-form characterised by different types of semantic contrast of the denotational meaning and interchangeable at least in some contexts

• 

  55 слайд

  References:
  Гинзбург Р.З. Лексикология английского языка. М. Высшая школа, 1979. – С.- 47-55.
  Зыкова И.В. Практический курс английской лексикологии. М.: Академия, 2006. – С. – 39-43.

Найдите материал к любому уроку, указав свой предмет (категорию), класс, учебник и тему:

6 209 351 материал в базе

• Выберите категорию:

• Выберите учебник и тему

• Выберите класс:

• Тип материала:

  • Все материалы

  • Статьи

  • Научные работы

  • Видеоуроки

  • Презентации

  • Конспекты

  • Тесты

  • Рабочие программы

  • Другие методич. материалы

Найти материалы

Вам будут интересны эти курсы:

• Курс повышения квалификации «Организация научно-исследовательской работы студентов в соответствии с требованиями ФГОС»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация и предоставление туристских услуг»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Экскурсоведение: основы организации экскурсионной деятельности»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация логистической деятельности на транспорте»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Организация практики студентов в соответствии с требованиями ФГОС педагогических направлений подготовки»

• Курс повышения квалификации «История и философия науки в условиях реализации ФГОС ВО»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Риск-менеджмент организации: организация эффективной работы системы управления рисками»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация деятельности специалиста оценщика-эксперта по оценке имущества»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация системы менеджмента транспортных услуг в туризме»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Метрология, стандартизация и сертификация»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Осуществление и координация продаж»

---

Подборка по базе: Документ Microsoft Word (3).docx, Документ Microsoft Word (3).docx, Документ Microsoft Word (2).docx, Документ Microsoft Word.docx, Документ Microsoft Word (2).docx, Документ Microsoft Word (3).docx, Документ Microsoft Word (2).docx, Microsoft Word Document.docx, Документ Microsoft Word.docx, Документ Microsoft Word.docx

---

Семинар 6 Combinability. Word Groups

KEY TERMS

Syntagmatics — linear (simultaneous) relationship of words in speech as distinct from associative (non-simultaneous) relationship of words in language (paradigmatics). Syntagmatic relations specify the combination of elements into complex forms and sentences.

Distribution — The set of elements with which an item can cooccur

Combinability — the ability of linguistic elements to combine in speech.

Valency — the potential ability of words to occur with other words

Context — the semantically complete passage of written speech sufficient to establish the meaning of a given word (phrase).

Clichе´ — an overused expression that is considered trite, boring

Word combination — a combination of two or more notional words serving to express one concept. It is produced, not reproduced in speech.

Collocation — such a combination of words which conditions the realization of a certain meaning
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION AND EXERCISES
1. Syntagmatic relations and the concept of combinability of words. Define combinability.
Syntagmatic relation defines the relationship between words that co-occur in the same sentence. It focuses on two main parts: how the position and the word order affect the meaning of a sentence.

The syntagmatic relation explains:

• The word position and order.

• The relationship between words gives a particular meaning to the sentence.

The syntagmatic relation can also explain why specific words are often paired together (collocations)

Syntagmatic relations are linear relations between words

The adjective yellow:

1. color: a yellow dress;

2. envious, suspicious: a yellow look;

3. corrupt: the yellow press
TYPES OF SEMANTIC RELATIONS

Because syntagmatic relations have to do with the relationship between words, the syntagms can result in collocations and idioms.
Collocations
Collocations are word combinations that frequently occur together.

Some examples of collocations:

• Verb + noun: do homework, take a risk, catch a cold.
• Noun + noun: office hours, interest group, kitchen cabinet.
• Adjective + adverb: good enough, close together, crystal clear.
• Verb + preposition: protect from, angry at, advantage of.
• Adverb + verb: strongly suggest, deeply sorry, highly successful.
• Adjective + noun: handsome man, quick shower, fast food.

Idioms

Idioms are expressions that have a meaning other than their literal one.

Idioms are distinct from collocations:

• The word combination is not interchangeable (fixed expressions).
• The meaning of each component is not equal to the meaning of the idiom

It is difficult to find the meaning of an idiom based on the definition of the words alone. For example, red herring. If you define the idiom word by word, it means ‘red fish’, not ‘something that misleads’, which is the real meaning.

Because of this, idioms can’t be translated to or from another language because the word definition isn’t equivalent to the idiom interpretation.
Some examples of popular idioms:

• Break a leg.
• Miss the boat.
• Call it a day.
• It’s raining cats and dogs.
• Kill two birds with one stone.

Combinability (occurrence-range) — the ability of linguistic elements to combine in speech.

The combinability of words is as a rule determined by their meanings, not their forms. Therefore not every sequence of words may be regarded as a combination of words.
In the sentence Frankly, father, I have been a fool neither frankly, father nor father, I … are combinations of words since their meanings are detached and do not unite them, which is marked orally by intonation and often graphically by punctuation marks.
On the other hand, some words may be inserted between the components of a word-combination without breaking it.

Compare,

a) read books

b) read many books

c) read very many books.

In case (a) the combination read books is uninterrupted.In cases (b) and (c) it is interrupted, or discontinuous(read… books).

The combinability of words depends on their lexical, grammatical and lexico-grammatical meanings. It is owing to the lexical meanings of the corresponding lexemes that the word wise can be combined with the words man, act, saying and is hardly combinable with the words milk, area, outline.

The lexico-grammatical meanings of -er in singer (a noun) and -ly in beautifully (an adverb) do not go together and prevent these words from forming a combination, whereas beautiful singer and sing beautifully are regular word-combinations.

The combination * students sings is impossible owing to the grammatical meanings of the corresponding grammemes.

Thus one may speak of lexical, grammatical and lexico-grammatical combinability, or the combinability of lexemes, grammemes and parts of speech.
The mechanism of combinability is very complicated. One has to take into consideration not only the combinability of homogeneous units, e. g. the words of one lexeme with those of another lexeme. A lexeme is often not combinable with a whole class of lexemes or with certain grammemes.
For instance, the lexeme few, fewer, fewest is not combinable with a class of nouns called uncountables, such as milk, information, hatred, etc., or with members of ‘singular’ grammemes (i. e. grammemes containing the meaning of ‘singularity’, such as book, table, man, boy, etc.).
The ‘possessive case’ grammemes are rarely combined with verbs, barring the gerund. Some words are regularly combined with sentences, others are not.

It is convenient to distinguish right-hand and left-hand connections. In the combination my hand (when written down) the word my has a right-hand connection with the word hand and the latter has a left-hand connection with the word my.

With analytical forms inside and outside connections are also possible. In the combination has often written the verb has an inside connection with the adverb and the latter has an outside connection with the verb.

It will also be expedient to distinguish unilateral, bilateral and multilateral connections. By way of illustration we may say that the articles in English have unilateral right-hand connections with nouns: a book, the child. Such linking words as prepositions, conjunctions, link-verbs, and modal verbs are characterized by bilateral connections: love of life, John and Mary, this is John, he must come. Most verbs may have zero

(Come!), unilateral (birds fly), bilateral (I saw him) and multilateral (Yesterday I saw him there) connections. In other words, the combinability of verbs is variable.

One should also distinguish direct and indirect connections. In the combination Look at John the connection between look and at, between at and John are direct, whereas the connection between look and John is indirect, through the preposition at.
2. Lexical and grammatical valency. Valency and collocability. Relationships between valency and collocability. Distribution.
The appearance of words in a certain syntagmatic succession with particular logical, semantic, morphological and syntactic relations is called collocability or valency.

Valency is viewed as an aptness or potential of a word to have relations with other words in language. Valency can be grammatical and lexical.

Collocability is an actual use of words in particular word-groups in communication.
The range of the Lexical valency of words is linguistically restricted by the inner structure of the English word-stock. Though the verbs ‘lift’ and ‘raise’ are synonyms, only ‘to raise’ is collocated with the noun ‘question’.

The lexical valency of correlated words in different languages is different, cf. English ‘pot plants’ vs. Russian ‘комнатные цветы’.
The interrelation of lexical valency and polysemy:

• the restrictions of lexical valency of words may manifest themselves in the lexical meanings of the polysemantic members of word-groups, e.g. heavy, adj. in the meaning ‘rich and difficult to digest’ is combined with the words food, meals, supper, etc., but one cannot say *heavy cheese or *heavy sausage;

• different meanings of a word may be described through its lexical valency, e.g. the different meanings of heavy, adj. may be described through the word-groups heavy weight / book / table; heavy snow / storm / rain; heavy drinker / eater; heavy sleep / disappointment / sorrow; heavy industry / tanks, and so on.

From this point of view word-groups may be regarded as the characteristic minimal lexical sets that operate as distinguishing clues for each of the multiple meanings of the word.
Grammatical valency is the aptness of a word to appear in specific grammatical (or rather syntactic) structures. Its range is delimited by the part of speech the word belongs to. This is not to imply that grammatical valency of words belonging to the same part of speech is necessarily identical, e.g.:

• the verbs suggest and propose can be followed by a noun (to propose or suggest a plan / a resolution); however, it is only propose that can be followed by the infinitive of a verb (to propose to do smth.);

• the adjectives clever and intelligent are seen to possess different grammatical valency as clever can be used in word-groups having the pattern: Adj. + Prep. at +Noun(clever at mathematics), whereas intelligent can never be found in exactly the same word-group pattern.

• The individual meanings of a polysemantic word may be described through its grammatical valency, e.g. keen + Nas in keen sight ‘sharp’; keen + on + Nas in keen on sports ‘fond of’; keen + V(inf)as in keen to know ‘eager’.
Lexical context determines lexically bound meaning; collocations with the polysemantic words are of primary importance, e.g. a dramatic change / increase / fall / improvement; dramatic events / scenery; dramatic society; a dramatic gesture.
In grammatical context the grammatical (syntactic) structure of the context serves to determine the meanings of a polysemantic word, e.g. 1) She will make a good teacher. 2) She will make some tea. 3) She will make him obey.
Distribution is understood as the whole complex of contexts in which the given lexical unit(word) can be used. Есть даже словари, по которым можно найти валентные слова для нужного нам слова — так и называются дистрибьюшн дикшенери
3. What is a word combination? Types of word combinations. Classifications of word-groups.
Word combination — a combination of two or more notional words serving to express one concept. It is produced, not reproduced in speech.

Types of word combinations:

1. Semantically:
   1. free word groups (collocations) — a year ago, a girl of beauty, take lessons;
   2. set expressions (at last, point of view, take part).
2. Morphologically (L.S. Barkhudarov):
   1. noun word combinations, e.g.: nice apples (BBC London Course);
   2. verb word combinations, e.g.: saw him (E. Blyton);
   3. adjective word combinations, e.g.: perfectly delightful (O. Wilde);
   4. adverb word combinations, e.g.: perfectly well (O, Wilde);
   5. pronoun word combinations, e.g.: something nice (BBC London Course).
3. According to the number of the components:
   1. simple — the head and an adjunct, e.g.: told me (A. Ayckbourn)
   2. Complex, e.g.: terribly cold weather (O. Jespersen), where the adjunct cold is expanded by means of terribly.

Classifications of word-groups:

1. through the order and arrangement of the components:

• a verbal — nominal group (to sew a dress);

• a verbal — prepositional — nominal group (look at something);

1. by the criterion of distribution, which is the sum of contexts of the language unit usage:

• endocentric, i.e. having one central member functionally equivalent to the whole word-group (blue sky);

• exocentric, i.e. having no central member (become older, side by side);

1. according to the headword:

• nominal (beautiful garden);

• verbal (to fly high);

• adjectival (lucky from birth);

1. according to the syntactic pattern:

• predicative (Russian linguists do not consider them to be word-groups);

• non-predicative — according to the type of syntactic relations between the components:

(a) subordinative (modern technology);

(b) coordinative (husband and wife).

4. What is “a free word combination”? To what extent is what we call a free word combination actually free? What are the restrictions imposed on it?
A free word combination is a combination in which any element can be substituted by another.

The general meaning of an ordinary free word combination is derived from the conjoined meanings of its elements

Ex. To come to one’s sense –to change one’s mind;

To fall into a rage – to get angry.

Free word-combinations are word-groups that have a greater semantic and structural independence and freely composed by the speaker in his speech according to his purpose.

A free word combination or a free phrase permits substitution of any of its elements without any semantic change in the other components.
5. Clichе´s (traditional word combinations).
A cliché is an expression that is trite, worn-out, and overused. As a result, clichés have lost their original vitality, freshness, and significance in expressing meaning. A cliché is a phrase or idea that has become a “universal” device to describe abstract concepts such as time (Better Late Than Never), anger (madder than a wet hen), love (love is blind), and even hope (Tomorrow is Another Day). However, such expressions are too commonplace and unoriginal to leave any significant impression.

Of course, any expression that has become a cliché was original and innovative at one time. However, overuse of such an expression results in a loss of novelty, significance, and even original meaning. For example, the proverbial phrase “when it rains it pours” indicates the idea that difficult or inconvenient circumstances closely follow each other or take place all at the same time. This phrase originally referred to a weather pattern in which a dry spell would be followed by heavy, prolonged rain. However, the original meaning is distanced from the overuse of the phrase, making it a cliché.

Some common examples of cliché in everyday speech:

• My dog is dumb as a doorknob. (тупой как пробка)
• The laundry came out as fresh as a daisy.
• If you hide the toy it will be out of sight, out of mind. (с глаз долой, из сердца вон)

Examples of Movie Lines that Have Become Cliché:

• Luke, I am your father. (Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back)
• i am Groot. (Guardians of the Galaxy)
• I’ll be back. (The Terminator)
• Houston, we have a problem. (Apollo 13)

Some famous examples of cliché in creative writing:

• It was a dark and stormy night
• Once upon a time
• There I was
• All’s well that ends well
• They lived happily ever after

6. The sociolinguistic aspect of word combinations.
Lexical valency is the possibility of lexicosemantic connections of a word with other word

Some researchers suggested that the functioning of a word in speech is determined by the environment in which it occurs, by its grammatical peculiarities (part of speech it belongs to, categories, functions in the sentence, etc.), and by the type and character of meaning included into the semantic structure of a word.

Words are used in certain lexical contexts, i.e. in combinations with other words. The words that surround a particular word in a sentence or paragraph are called the verbal context of that word.
7. Norms of lexical valency and collocability in different languages.
The aptness of a word to appear in various combinations is described as its lexical valency or collocability. The lexical valency of correlated words in different languages is not identical. This is only natural since every language has its syntagmatic norms and patterns of lexical valency. Words, habitually collocated, tend to constitute a cliché, e.g. bad mistake, high hopes, heavy sea (rain, snow), etc. The translator is obliged to seek similar cliches, traditional collocations in the target-language: грубая ошибка, большие надежды, бурное море, сильный дождь /снег/.

The key word in such collocations is usually preserved but the collocated one is rendered by a word of a somewhat different referential meaning in accordance with the valency norms of the target-language:

• trains run — поезда ходят;
• a fly stands on the ceiling — на потолке сидит муха;
• It was the worst earthquake on the African continent (D.W.) — Это было самое сильное землетрясение в Африке.
• Labour Party pretest followed sharply on the Tory deal with Spain (M.S.1973) — За сообщением о сделке консервативного правительства с Испанией немедленно последовал протест лейбористской партии.

Different collocability often calls for lexical and grammatical transformations in translation though each component of the collocation may have its equivalent in Russian, e.g. the collocation «the most controversial Prime Minister» cannot be translated as «самый противоречивый премьер-министр».

«Britain will tomorrow be welcoming on an official visit one of the most controversial and youngest Prime Ministers in Europe» (The Times, 1970). «Завтра в Англию прибывает с официальным визитом один из самых молодых премьер-министров Европы, который вызывает самые противоречивые мнения».

«Sweden’s neutral faith ought not to be in doubt» (Ib.) «Верность Швеции нейтралитету не подлежит сомнению».

The collocation «documentary bombshell» is rather uncommon and individual, but evidently it does not violate English collocational patterns, while the corresponding Russian collocation — документальная бомба — impossible. Therefore its translation requires a number of transformations:

«A teacher who leaves a documentary bombshell lying around by negligence is as culpable as the top civil servant who leaves his classified secrets in a taxi» (The Daily Mirror, 1950) «Преподаватель, по небрежности оставивший на столе бумаги, которые могут вызвать большой скандал, не менее виновен, чем ответственный государственный служащий, забывший секретные документы в такси».
8. Using the data of various dictionaries compare the grammatical valency of the words worth and worthy; ensure, insure, assure; observance and observation; go and walk; influence and влияние; hold and держать.

Worth & Worthy
Worth is used to say that something has a value: • Something that is worth a certain amount of money has that value; • Something that is worth doing or worth an effort, a visit, etc. is so attractive or rewarding that the effort etc. should be made. Valency: Worth + N: worth a lot of money; Worth + Ving: worth making; [it] + V-ing: it would be worth asking him [it] + Ν V-ing: it’s not really worth me voting Worth + N + to N: worth money to me [it] + Ν + for Ν to-INF (rare): it would be worth for you to know	Worthy: • If someone or something is worthv of something, they deserve it because they have the qualities required; • If you say that a person is worthy of another person you are saying that you approve of them as a partner for that person. Valency: Attributive: worthy candidate, worthy cause; Predicative: equally worthy + to-INF: worthy to be + of N/V-ing: worthy of closer examination.

Ensure, insure, assure
Ensure means ‘make certain that something happens’. Valency: + Np: ensure fairness + (that)-CLp.it: Ensure that there is adequate humidity in heated rooms + Np + Ν: does not ensure women a place at center stage + Np + for Ν: to ensure good fishing for everyone.	Insure — make sure Valency: + Np: insure continuation; + (that)-CLp.it: insure that future generations; + Np + Νp: They will not insure us victory; + Np + for Ν: insure items for replacement.	Assure: • to tell someone confidently that something is true, especially so that they do not worry; • to cause something to be certain. Valency: +N: assure the owner; + (that)-CL: assure him (that) the car will be ready; + by N: has been assured by the reviews

Observance & Observation
Observance: • the act of obeying a law or following a religious custom: religious observances such as fasting • a ceremony or action to celebrate a holiday or a religious or other important event: [ C ] Memorial Day observances [ U ] Financial markets will be closed Monday in observance of Labor Day.	Observation: • the act of observing something or someone; • the fact that you notice or see something; • a remark about something that you have noticed. Valency: + of: observation of human behaviour; Under +: keeping under observation; For +: to be admitted for observation; + on/about: interesting observations on the nature; to make +: may I make an observation.

Go & Walk
	Walk can mean ‘move along on foot’: • A person can walk an animal, i.e. exercise them by walking. • A person can walk another person somewhere , i.e. take them there, • A person can walk a particular distance or walk the streets. Valency: + Np: walk the dog; +ADJ: made us walk tall again; + into Np: to walk into a controversy; +over Np: to walk over me; ADVP-prep: to walk away/through/away N + ADV: We had to walk three kilometers to the river. Np + ADV: Can I walk you home? ADJ + ADV: it was like walking barefoot in the sand

Influence & Влияние
Influence: • A person can have influence (a) over another person or a group, i.e. be able to directly guide the way they behave, (b) with a person, i.e. be able to influence them because they know them well. • Someone or something can have or be an influence on or upon something or someone, i.e. be able to affect their character or behaviour in some way Valency: the UN is having difficulty exerting its influence; [the] + to-INF: the influence to lead the world + on N/wh-CL: influence on the work of the late 19th-century French avant-garde. + over Ν: Union influence over Labour + upon Ν: Its influence upon female physiology + with Ν: to use their influence with the PLO leadership	Влияние — Действие, оказываемое кем-, чем-либо на кого-, что-либо. Сочетаемость: Прил +: значительное влияние + сущ: влияние среды Сущ +: сферы влияния; Гл +: оказывать влияние.

Hold & Держать
Hold: • to take and keep something in your hand or arms; • to support something; • to contain or be able to contain something; • to keep someone in a place so that they cannot leave. Valency: ADJ +: tight hold; V +: take/keep hold; + on: his hold on her; + OBJ + ADJ: hold the door open; + OBJ + N: hold him hostage	Держать — взять в руки/рот/зубы и т.д. и не давать выпасть Сочетаемость: Сущ +: ноги держат + сущ: держать себя в руках, держать дистанцию.

1. Contrastive Analysis. Give words of the same root in Russian; compare their valency:

Chance	Шанс
+ to-INF: a chance to win; + (that)-CL: a chance that BA might co-operate; + for N/V-ing: chance for peace/regaining; + of N/V-ing /of Ν V-ing: no chance of her accepting; + for Ν + to-INF: a chance for me to show	Прил +: большой шанс; + сущ: шанс спасения; Сущ +: множество шансов; + гл: шанс даётся Гл +: дать шанс, оценить свой шанс
Situation	Ситуация
As a noun: bland situation, sort of situation; + that-CL: the situation that I was pregnant; + wh-CL: the situation when you open the door; + of N/V-ing: a situation of anarchy; + with Ν: situation with your husband.	Прил +: чрезвычайная ситуация; + сущ: ситуация общения; Сущ +: изменение ситуации; Гл +: оценить ситуацию; + гл: ситуация повторилась.
Partner	Партнёр
с глаголом be, become, create: to become a partner существительным live, business: business partner	Прил +: деловой партнёр; + сущ: партнёр фирмы; Сущ +: смена партнёра; Гл +: найти партнёра; + гл: партнёр решает.
Surprise	Сюрприз
to experience surprise (сочетаемость существительных:) to show surprise (сочетаемость существительных:) to cause no surprise (сочетаемость существительных:) to surprise smb (Глагольные словосочетания) to take smb by surprise (Глагольные словосочетания)	Прил +: небольшой сюрприз; Сущ +: масса сюрпризов; Гл +: сделать сюрприз; + гл: сюрприз удался.
Risk	Риск
As a noun: good risk; + that-CL: the risk that goods go; + for Ν/[at] + for N/V-ing: the risk for the investor; + from N/V-ing: risk from pets; + in N/V-ing: risk in flying south; + of N/V-ing / of Ν V-ing: the risk of crushing; + to Ν: a risk to our health; +for N + to-INF: a risk for Jim to bury Mary there.	Прил +: большой риск; + сущ: риск заражения; Сущ +: группа риска; Гл +: учитывать риск; + гл: риск возрастает.
Instruction	Инструкция
on the instruction of smb (сочетаемость существительных:) сочетаемость глаголов to make, to create.	Прил +: подробная инструкция; + сущ: инструкция пользователя; Сущ +: получение инструкции; Гл +: следовать инструкции; + гл: инструкция требовала.
Satisfaction	Сатисфакция
with satisfaction (сочетаемость существительных:) to cause satisfaction (сочетаемость существительных:) unique satisfaction (сочетаемость существительных:) total satisfaction (сочетаемость существительных:) personal satisfaction (сочетаемость существительных:)	Прил +: полная сатисфакция; Гл +: получить сатисфакцию;
Business	Бизнес
[it/no] + to-INF: He’ll make it his business to find out; [it/no] + V-ing: no business poking their noses; + of N/V-ing: the business of intervention; + with Ν: business with the players	Прил +: семейный бизнес; + сущ: бизнес отца; Сущ +: развитие бизнеса; Гл +: вести бизнес; + гл: бизнес растёт.
Manager	Менеджер
to see the manager (Глагольные словосочетания) He was promoted to manager. (Глагольные словосочетания) to apply to the manager (Глагольные словосочетания) to approach the manager about this matter (Глагольные словосочетания) The guests asked for the manager. (Глагольные словосочетания)	Прил +: старший менеджер; + сущ: менеджер группы; Сущ +: должность менеджера; Гл +: стать менеджером; + гл: менеджер сообщил.
Challenge	Челлендж
challenge to smb (фразеологические сочетания прилагательных с предлогами: господство/ подчинение/давление) challenge to smb (фразеологические сочетания прилагательных с предлогами:угрозы/насмешка/донос) challenge to a fight (фразеологические сочетания прилагательных с предлогами:список глаголов, требующих за собой предлог) to accept smb’s challenge (Глагольные словосочетания) to challenge a report (сочетаемость существительных:)	Прил +: новый челлендж; Гл +: продолжить челлендж; Сущ +: день челленджа.

10. From the lexemes in brackets choose the correct one to go with each of the synonyms given below:

1. Write a short definition based on the clues you find in context for the italicized words in the sentence. Check your definitions with the dictionary.

Sentence	Meaning
The method of reasoning from the particular to the general — the inductive method — has played an important role in science since the time of Francis Bacon.	The way of learning or investigating from the particular to the general that played an important role in the time of Francis Bacon
Most snakes are meat eaters, or carnivores.	Animals whose main diet is meat
A person on a reducing diet is expected to eschew most fatty or greasy foods.	deliberately avoid
After a hectic year in the city, he was glad to return to the peace and quiet of the country.	full of incessant or frantic activity.
Darius was speaking so quickly and waving his arms around so wildly, it was impossible to comprehend what he was trying to say.	grasp mentally; understand.to perceive
The babysitter tried rocking, feeding, chanting, and burping the crying baby, but nothing would appease him.	to calm down someone
It behooves young ladies and gentlemen not to use bad language unless they are very, very angry.	necessary
The Academy Award is an honor coveted by most Hollywood actors.	The dream about some achievements
In the George Orwell book 1984, the people’s lives are ruled by an omnipotent dictator named “Big Brother.”	The person who have a lot of power
After a good deal of coaxing, the father finally acceded to his children’s request.	to Agree with some request
He is devoid of human feelings.	Someone have the lack of something
This year, my garden yielded several baskets full of tomatoes.	produce or provide
It is important for a teacher to develop a rapport with his or her students.	good relationship