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, disorder — make, 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 morpheme — snow-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).
LECTURE
1.
THE
WORD AND ITS MEANING
OUTLINE
-
The
word and its main characteristics. -
Types
of meaning. -
Semantic
changes and their causes.
-
The
word and its main characteristics.
Lexicology
is a branch of linguistics that deals with the vocabulary of the
language and characteristics of words as the main lexical units.
Lexical units comprise words and set expressions, or groups of words
of fixed character.
There are
over 200 definitions of a word but none is generally accepted. The
word reflects world mapping which is culturally and nationally
specific. Word use is also pre-determined by person’s social and
educational status, gender, age, etc.
The word
performs the following functions:
-
denotational
(denotes things, qualities, actions,etc); -
generalizing
function (e.g. tree, house, animal); -
emotive
function (expresses our feelings and emotions); -
structural
function (performs a certain syntactic function, is a part of a
sentence).
The word is
the smallest meaningful unit possessing the following features:
-
isolatability,
i.e. ability of a word to function in communication alone, to make
a sentence, e.g. ‘Help!’ This distinguishes a word from another
meaningful unit – a morpheme, which cannot be used in isolation.
It can function only as a part of a word. -
indivisibility,
i.e. a word cannot be further divided without breaking its meaning.
Cf. asleep – a (sound) sleep, alive – a (quiet) life. -
positional
mobility, i.e. a word can change its position in a sentence. E.g.
Suddenly they came up to a house. They came up to a house suddenly.
Up to a house they suddenly came.
The word is
a two-facet unit combining meaning and form. The relationship between
the two is denoted by the term motivation. If the connection between
the meaning of a word and its form is clear and the form helps us to
understand the meaning, the word is considered motivated. If the
connection is conventional, the word is said to be non-motivated at
the present stage of language development.
There are
three types of motivation:
-
Phonetic
, the sound form of the word helps us to understand its meaning,
e.g. bang, bump, hiss, cuckoo, etc. -
morphological,
the morphemic composition of a word helps to understand its meaning,
e.g. ex+ noun = former …; re+ verb = do again; verb+er = agent,
doer of the action. -
figurative
meaning of a word becomes clear through its direct meaning, e.g. the
leg of the table, the foot of the mountain, the eye of the needle.
The
meaning is not homogeneous. It is a system of systems:
1)
It combines lexical and grammatical meanings, e.g. actress is a
personal noun.
2)
Lexical meaning includes denotative and connotative ones.
3)
Denotative meaning is conceptual (what a word denotes), it is
divided into semantic
components
called semes, e.g. Father is a male parent. Denotative components may
be
culturally predetermined (cf. winter in Siberia and in Australia, it
is a season
between
autumn and spring but all other characteristics are different:
duration,
temperature,
etc.).
4)
Connotative meanings express the speaker’s attitude to the subject
of speech and may
be
as follows:
-
stylistic:
chap, fellow, associate; child, infant, kid; -
emotive:
cool, awesome, terrific; -
expressive:
to trudge, to march, to gobble; -
evaluative:
clever, silly, good, bad(rational evaluation), scoundrel
(emotional evaluation); -
associative
(a fir-tree – forest, New Year); -
national
and cultural (kilt – Scots); -
pragmatic:
Can you open the door?
5)
A word may be polysemantic, i.e. it may have several interrelated
denotative
meanings:
-
One
of the meanings is called primary, this is the meaning in which the
word made its first appearance in the language, all the other
meanings which developed later are called secondary, e.g. chair as a
piece of furniture (primary), chair as the head of some meeting,
conference or chair as a department (secondary meanings). -
One
of the meanings is central, others are peripheral. As a rule,
primary and central meanings coincide but it is not necessarily so.
In the course of language development a secondary meaning may become
the central one ousting the primary meaning to the periphery, e.g.
revolution: primary meaning is that of rotary movement, revolving,
secondary – social change (now central). -
Meaning
can be direct and indirect (figurative, transferred), e.g. white
collar, blue collar, smoke screen, etc.
III.
Semantic changes and their causes.
1.Specialization,
or narrowing of meaning
e.g.
garage – a safe place
meat
– any food
2.Generalization,
or widening of meaning
e.g.
ready (in O.E. – ready for a ride, now – ready for any activity)
arrive
– to land at a shore
3.Elevation
of meaning (getting better, going higher)
e.g.
queen (in O.E. – woman)
knight
(in O.E. – young servant).
4.Degradation
of meaning (getting worse, lower)
e.g.
a spinster – a woman that spins wool
idiot
– a private person
5.
Transference of meaning. The name of one thing is used to name some
other things.
Transference
is further subdivided into metaphor, metonymy and euphemism.
-
Transference
of meaning based on likeness is called a metaphor. Metaphors can be
based on likeness of form (a head of cabbage), of position (the foot
of the mountain), function (Head of the Department), size, quantity
(ocean of troubles, storm of applause), etc. Sometimes a combination
of several features makes up the foundation for a metaphor (a leg of
a table – function, position, shape). Metaphors may involve
transition from proper names to common ones, e.g. a Don Juan,
Apollo, Vandals, Hooligans. -
Transference
of meaning based on associations of contiguity (being together) is
called metonymy. We can use the name of a container for the thing it
contains (Will you have another cup?), instrument for the agent (His
pen knows no compromise), the place for the people who live or work
there (Kharkiv greets the guests. The Kremlin agrees to the treaty),
the name of a person for the things s/he made (He reads Byron), the
name of a part for the whole (Who’s the moustache?) -
Transference
of meaning dictated by social conventions, norms, rules of behavior.
A word or a word combination is used instead of the other word that
is offensive, rude, or taboo.
e.g. to
die: to perish, to pass away, to join the silent majority, to meet
one’s maker, to be with the angels, to cross the Great Divide, etc.
toilet: WC,
bathroom, the necessary facilities, powder room, ladies/ gents,
public conveniences, cloakroom, throne room, porcelain collection,
Windsor Castle, etc.
Causes
of semantic changes may include linguistic and extra-linguistic ones.
The
latter are connected with social, political, economic, cultural and
scientific development.
e.g.
computer, space, feedback, bikini, villain, boor, etc.
The
former embrace differentiation of synonyms (e.g. time and tide),
borrowings (hound and dog), preserving the old meaning in idioms
(love token, token of respect), etc.
LECTURE 2.
PHRASEOLOGY
-
Set
expressions, their features and origin. -
Classification
of phraseological units.
-
Set
expressions, their features and origin.
Set
expressions are stable ready-made units with fixed integrate
structure. They are contrasted to free phrases and semi-fixed
combinations. A free phrase permits substitution of any of its
elements without any semantic change in the other element, e.g. to go
early: to work, get up, move, etc. early: to go late, quickly, down,
etc.
In
semi-fixed combinations there are some boundaries for the
substitution, e.g. go to school (market, college, court, etc.) is
used only with nouns of places where definite actions are performed.
Features
that make set expressions stable:
-
euphonic;
-
imaginative;
-
connotative.
Euphonic:
rhythm, rhyme, alliteration, e.g. safe and sound, stuff and nonsense,
by hook or by crook.
Semantic
stylistic features: simile, contrast, metaphor, synonymy, antonymy,
e.g. as like as two peas, as old as hills, more or less, from
beginning to end, a lame duck, arms race, to swallow a pill, proud
and hauty.
A bit of
expressions are connected with different spheres of people’s life,
nature, etc.
-
nature,
e.g. out of the blue, as welcome as snow in May, to rain cats and
dogs, etc. -
agriculture,
e.g. plough the sand, reap a rich harvest, sow wild oats, etc. -
sports,
e.g. fair play, to kick a goal, etc. -
mythology,
e.g. the apple of discord, Achilles’ heel, etc. -
the
Bible, e.g. Solomon’s judgement, forbidden fruit, etc. -
folklore,
e.g. peeping Tom, Calamity Jane, etc. -
literature,
e.g. to fight the windmills, a green-eyed monster, etc.
-
Classification
of phraseological units.
There
are different approaches to studying and classifying phraseological
units.
-
The
classification of V.V.Vinogradov is synchronic and semantic. It is
based upon the type of motivation. He distinguishes:-
phraseological
fusions, e.g. tit for tat. They represent the highest stage of
blending, are not motivated nowadays, are specific for every
language and cannot be literally translated; -
phraseological
unities , e.g. to know where a shoe pinches, to rise to the bait,
etc. They are clearly motivated, some of them are easily
translated and even international; -
phraseological
combinations, e.g. to meet the demands, to make friends. They are
not only clearly motivated but also contain one component used in
its direct meaning (demands, friends).
-
2. Larin’s
classification is also semantic but diachronic. He believes that each
unit goes through three stages in its development. First it is a free
word combination, then a motivated metaphoric phrase and then an
idiom with lost motivation, e.g. to give a sack, to give a cold
shoulder, to dance attendance on smb., etc.
Semantic
classifications of Vinogradov and Larin are open to criticism since
the degree of motivation may be different for different speakers
depending on their knowledge of history, customs and traditions,
level of education, etc. So they are subjective, not reliable enough.
-
N.Amosova’s
approach is contextological. She defines phraseological units as
units of fixed context characterized by a specific word-order and
peculiar semantic relationship between the components.
Phraseological units are divided into phrasemes and idioms.
Phrasemes are always binary. One of their components has a
phraseologically bound meaning, the other serves as the determining
context, e.g. small change, small hours, small talk. In idioms the
new meaning is created by the whole, each element having its own
meaning weakened or lost. Idioms may be motivated and demotivated. -
Koonin’s
classification is functional: depends on the functions
phraseological units fulfil in communication. There may be: a)
nominating (e.g. a man of straw, a bull in a china shop); b)
nominative communicative (verbal), e.g. to go round the bush, to
pull one’s leg, etc.; c) communicative (sentences by form), e.g.
Curiosity killed the cat; d) interjectional, e.g. Good heavens, a
pretty kettle of fish, etc. Further classification depends on
whether the units are changeable or unchangeable, what their
structure is, etc.
LECTURES
3-5.
WORD-BUILDING.
STRUCTURE OF WORDS.
OUTLINE
-
Structural
types of words. -
Affixation.
Classification of affixes. Suffixes and prefixes. -
Conversion
(zero derivation). -
Compounding.
Classification of compounds. Criteria of compounding. Borderline
cases (semi-affixes). -
Shortening.
-
Abbreviations.
-
Minor
types of word-building.
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
- #
11.02.2016113.15 Кб4MB.doc
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lexicology is the branch of linguistics that analyzes the lexicon of a specific language. A word is the smallest meaningful unit of a language that can stand on its own, and is made up of small components called morphemes and even smaller elements known as phonemes, or distinguishing sounds. Lexicology examines every feature of a word – including formation, spelling, origin, usage, and definition.[1]
Lexicology also considers the relationships that exist between words. In linguistics, the lexicon of a language is composed of lexemes, which are abstract units of meaning that correspond to a set of related forms of a word. Lexicology looks at how words can be broken down as well as identifies common patterns they follow.[2]
Lexicology is associated with lexicography, which is the practice of compiling dictionaries.[3]
Etymology[edit]
The term lexicology derives from the Greek word λεξικόν lexicon (neuter of λεξικός lexikos, «of or for words»,[4] from λέξις lexis, «speech» or «word»[5]) and -λογία -logia, «the study of» (a suffix derived from λόγος logos, amongst others meaning «learning, reasoning, explanation, subject-matter»).[6]
Etymology as a science is actually a focus of lexicology. Since lexicology studies the meaning of words and their semantic relations, it often explores the history and development of a word. Etymologists analyze related languages using the comparative method, which is a set of techniques that allow linguists to recover the ancestral phonological, morphological, syntactic, etc., components of modern languages by comparing their cognate material.[7] This means many word roots from different branches of the Indo-European language family can be traced back to single words from the Proto-Indo-European language. The English language, for instance, contains more borrowed words (or loan words) in its vocabulary than native words.[8] Examples include parkour from French, karaoke from Japanese, coconut from Portuguese, mango from Hindi, etc. A lot of music terminology, like piano, solo, and opera, is borrowed from Italian. These words can be further classified according to the linguistic element that is borrowed: phonemes, morphemes, and semantics.[7]
Approach[edit]
General lexicology is the broad study of words regardless of a language’s specific properties. It is concerned with linguistic features that are common among all languages, such as phonemes and morphemes. Special lexicology, on the other hand, looks at what a particular language contributes to its vocabulary, such as grammars.[2] Altogether lexicological studies can be approached two ways:
- Diachronic or historical lexicology is devoted to the evolution of words and word-formation over time. It investigates the origins of a word and the ways in which its structure, meaning, and usage have since changed.[9]
- Synchronic or descriptive lexicology examines the words of a language within a certain time frame. This could be a period during the language’s early stages of development, its current state, or any given interval in between.[10]
These complementary perspectives were proposed by Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure.[10] Lexicology can have both comparative and contrastive methodologies. Comparative lexicology searches for similar features that are shared among two or more languages. Contrastive lexicology identifies the linguistic characteristics which distinguish between related and unrelated languages.[9]
Semantics[edit]
The subfield of semantics that pertains especially to lexicological work is called lexical semantics. In brief, lexical semantics contemplates the significance of words and their meanings through several lenses, including synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, and polysemy, among others. Semantic analysis of lexical material may involve both the contextualization of the word(s) and syntactic ambiguity. Semasiology and onomasiology are relevant linguistic disciplines associated with lexical semantics.[9]
A word can have two kinds of meaning: grammatical and lexical. Grammatical meaning refers to a word’s function in a language, such as tense or plurality, which can be deduced from affixes. Lexical meaning is not limited to a single form of a word, but rather what the word denotes as a base word. For example, the verb to walk can become walks, walked, and walking – each word has a different grammatical meaning, but the same lexical meaning («to move one’s feet at a regular pace»).[11]
Phraseology[edit]
Another focus of lexicology is phraseology, which studies multi-word expressions, or idioms, like ‘raining cats and dogs.’ The meaning of the phrase as a whole has a different meaning than each word does on its own and is often unpredictable when considering its components individually. Phraseology examines how and why such meanings exist, and analyzes the laws that govern these word combinations.[12]
Idioms and other phraseological units can be classified according to content and/ or meaning. They are difficult to translate word-for-word from one language to another.[13]
Lexicography[edit]
Lexicography is the study of lexicons, and is divided into two separate academic disciplines. It is the art of compiling dictionaries.[14]
- Practical lexicography is the art or craft of compiling, writing and editing dictionaries.
- Theoretical lexicography is the scholarly study of semantic, orthographic, syntagmatic and paradigmatic features of lexemes of the lexicon (vocabulary) of a language, developing theories of dictionary components and structures linking the data in dictionaries, the needs for information by users in specific types of situations, and how users may best access the data incorporated in printed and electronic dictionaries. This is sometimes referred to as ‘metalexicography’.
There is some disagreement on the definition of lexicology, as distinct from lexicography. Some use «lexicology» as a synonym for theoretical lexicography; others use it to mean a branch of linguistics pertaining to the inventory of words in a particular language.
Lexicologists[edit]
- Dámaso Alonso (October 22, 1898 — January 25, 1990): Spanish poet, literary critic, and philologist
- Roland Barthes (November 12, 1915 — March 25, 1980): French writer, critic, and semiotician
- Ghil’ad Zuckermann (born June 1, 1971): Israeli linguist and language revivalist
See also[edit]
- Calque
- Computational lexicology
- Lexicostatistics
- Lexical semantics
- Lexical analysis
- English lexicology and lexicography
- List of lexicographers
- List of linguists
- Lexical Markup Framework
References[edit]
- ^ Babich, Galina Nikolaevna (2016). Lexicology : a current guide = Lexicologia angliskogo yazyka (8 ed.). Moscow: Flinta. p. 1. ISBN 978-5-9765-0249-9. OCLC 934368509.
- ^ a b Dzharasova, T. T. (2020). English lexicology and lexicography : theory and practice (2 ed.). Almaty: Al-Farabi Kazakh National University. pp. 4–5. ISBN 978-601-04-0595-0.
- ^ Babich, Galina Nikolaevna (2016). Lexicology : a current guide = Lexicologia angliskogo yazyka (8 ed.). Moscow: Flinta. p. 133. ISBN 978-5-9765-0249-9. OCLC 934368509.
- ^ λεξικός, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek–English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
- ^ λέξις, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek–English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
- ^ λόγος, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek–English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
- ^ a b Joseph, Brian D.; Janda, Richard D., eds. (2003), «The Handbook of Historical Linguistics», The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, p. 183, ISBN 9780631195719
- ^ Babich, Galina Nikolaevna (2016). Lexicology : a current guide = Lexicologia angliskogo yazyka (8 ed.). Moscow: Flinta. pp. 20–23. ISBN 978-5-9765-0249-9. OCLC 934368509.
- ^ a b c Popescu, Floriana (2019). A paradigm of comparative lexicology. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. pp. 19–20. ISBN 1-5275-1808-6. OCLC 1063709395.
- ^ a b Halliday, M. A. K. (2007). Lexicology : a short introduction. Colin Yallop. London: Continuum. pp. 56–57. ISBN 978-1-4411-5054-7. OCLC 741690096.
- ^ Dzharasova, T. T. (2020). English lexicology and lexicography : theory and practice (2 ed.). Almaty: Al-Farabi Kazakh National University. p. 41. ISBN 978-601-04-0595-0.
- ^ Halliday, M. A. K. (2007). Lexicology : a short introduction. Colin Yallop. London: Continuum. pp. 12–13. ISBN 978-1-4411-5054-7. OCLC 741690096.
- ^ Dzharasova, T. T. (2020). English lexicology and lexicography : theory and practice (2 ed.). Almaty: Al-Farabi Kazakh National University. pp. 75–76. ISBN 978-601-04-0595-0.
- ^ Jackson, Howard (2017-10-02), «English lexicography in the Internet era», The Routledge Handbook of Lexicography, Routledge, pp. 540–553, doi:10.4324/9781315104942-34, ISBN 978-1-315-10494-2, retrieved 2022-09-16
External links[edit]
Look up lexicology in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Lexicology.
Societies[edit]
- Association for Automatic Language Processing (ATALA), Paris, France
- International Society for Historical Lexicography and Lexicology, University of Leicester
Theory[edit]
- Lexicology vs. lexicography – an explanation
- Lexicography, lexicology, lexicon theory
Glossary[edit]
- ‘L’ entries (from lexeme to lexicon) at SIL (Summer Institute of Linguistics)’s glossary of linguistic terms
Teaching material[edit]
- English and General Historical Lexicology (by Joachim Grzega and Marion Schöner
Journals[edit]
- Lexis, E-Journal in English Lexicology (by Denis Jamet)
Тема 1. Types of
language Units
1. Lexicology
2. Language Units.
3. Structural Types of words.
4. Word combination
1.
Lexicology
The term lexicology is of Greek origin (from lexis –
word and logos —
science). Lexicology is the part of linguistics which deals
with the vocabulary and
characteristic features of words and word-groups.
The term
word denotes the main lexical unit of a language resulting from the
association of a group of sounds with a meaning. This
unit is used in grammatical
functions characteristic of it. It is the smallest
unit of a language which can stand
alone as a complete utterance.
The term
word-group denotes a group of words which exists in the language
as a ready-made unit, has the unity of meaning, the
unity of syntactical function,
e.g. the word-group as loose as a goose means clumsy (неуклюжий) and is used in a sentence as a predicative (именная часть составного сказуемого) (He is as loose as a goose).
Lexicology
can be general and special. General lexicology is the lexicology
of any language, part of General Linguistics. It is
aimed at establishing language
universals – linguistic phenomena and properties
common to all languages.
Special
lexicology is the lexicology of a particular language (English,
German, Russian, etc.).
Lexicology can study the development of the vocabulary, the origin of
words and word-groups, their semantic relations and
the development of their
sound form and meaning. In this case it is called
historical lexicology.
Another
branch of lexicology is called descriptive and studies the
vocabulary at a definite stage of its development.
Lexicology and its Connection
with Other Linguistc Disciplines
Lexicology is closely connected with other branches of
linguistcs:
1. It is connected with Phonetics because the word‘s
sound form is a fixed
sequence of phonemes united by a lexical stress.
2. Lexicology is connected with Morphology and
Word-Formation as the
word‘s structure is a fixed sequence of morphemes.
3. It is connected with Morphology because the word‘s
content plane is a
unity of lexical and grammatical meanings.
4. The word functions as part of the sentence and
performs a certain
syntactical function that is why it is also connected
with Syntax.
5. The word functions in different situations and
spheres of life therefore it
is connected with Stylistics, Socio- and
Psycholinguistics.
But
there is also a great difference between lexicology and other linguistc
disciplines. Grammatical and phonological systems are
relatively stable. Therefore
they are mostly studied within the framework of
intralinguistics.
Lexical system is never stable. It is directly
connected with extralinguistic
systems. It is constantly growing and decaying (распадаться). It is immediately reacts to changes in social
life, e.g. the intense development of science and technology in the 20th
century gave birth to such words as computer, sputnik, spaceship. Therefore
lexicology is a sociolinguistic discipline. It studies each particular word,
both its intra- and extralingiustic relations.
Lexicology is subdivided into a number of autonomous
but interdependent
disciplines:
1. Lexicological Phonetics. It studies the expression
plane of lexical units in
isolation and in the flow of speech.
2. Semasiology. It deals with the meaning of words and
other linguistic
units: morphemes, word-formation types, morphological
word classes and
morphological categories.
3. Onomasiology or Nomination Theory. It deals with
the process of
nomination: what name this or that object has and why.
4. Etymology. It studies the origin, the original
meaning and form of words.
5. Praseology. It deals with phraseological units.
6. Lexicography. It is a practical science. It
describes the vocabulary and
each lexical unit in the form of dictionaries.
7. Lexical Morphology. It deals with the morphological
structure of the word.
8. Word-formation. It deals with the patterns which
are used in coining new
words.
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; 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!
2.
Language units
The main unit of the lexical system of a language
resulting from the association of a group of sounds with a meaning is a word. This unit is used in
grammatical functions characteristic of it. It is the smallest language unit
which can stand alone as a complete utterance.
The modern approach to word studies is based on
distinguishing between the
external and the internal structures of the word.
By
external structure of the word we mean its morphological structure. For
example, in the word post-impressionists the following
morphemes can be
distinguished: the prefixes post-, im-, the root
press, the noun-forming suffixes –
ion, -ist, and the grammatical suffix of plurality –s.
The
external structure of the word, and also typical word-formation patterns,
are studied in the framework of word-building.
The
internal structure of the word, or its meaning, is nowadays commonly
referred to as the word‘s semantic structure. This is
the word‘s main aspect.
The
area of lexicology specialising in the semantic studies of the word is
called semantics.
One of
the main structural features of the word that it possesses both
external (formal) unity and semantic unity.
A
further structural feature of the word is its susceptibility- восприимчивость) to grammatical employment. In speech most
words can be used in different grammatical forms in which their interrelations
are realized.
A word can be
divided into smaller sense units — morphemes. The morpheme is the smallest
meaningful language unit. The morpheme consists of a class of variants,
allomorphs, which are either phonologically or morphologically conditioned,
e.g. please, pleasant, pleasure.
Morphemes are divided into two large groups: lexical morphemes and grammatical
(functional) morphemes. Both lexical and grammatical morphemes can be free and
bound. Free lexical morphemes are roots of words which express the lexical
meaning of the word, they coincide with the stem of simple words. Free
grammatical morphemes are function words: articles, conjunctions and
prepositions ( the, with, and).
Bound lexical morphemes are affixes: prefixes (dis-), suffixes (-ish) and also
blocked (unique) root morphemes (e.g. Fri-day, cran-berry). Bound grammatical
morphemes are inflexions (endings), e.g. -s for the Plural of nouns, -ed for
the Past Indefinite of regular verbs, -ing for the Present Participle, -er for
the Comparative degree of adjectives.
In the second half of the twentieth century the English word building system
was enriched by creating so called splinters which scientists include in the
affixation stock of the Modern English wordbuilding system. Splinters are the
result of clipping the end or the beginning of a word and producing a number of
new words on the analogy with the primary word-group. For example, there are
many words formed with the help of the splinter mini- (apocopе (апокопа, отпадение последнего слога или звука в слове) produced by clipping the word «miniature»), such as
«miniplane», «minijet», «minicycle», «minicar», «miniradio» and many others.
All of these words denote objects of smaller than normal dimensions.
On the analogy with «mini-» there
appeared the splinter «maxi»- (apocopе produced
by clipping the word «maximum»), such words as «maxi-series», «maxi-sculpture»,
«maxi-taxi» and many others appeared in the language.
There are also splinters which are
formed by means of apheresis, that is clipping the beginning of a word.
In the seventieths of the twentieth century there was
a political scandal in the hotel «Watergate» where the Democratic Party of the
USA had its pre-election headquarters. Republicans managed to install bugs
there and when they were discovered there was a scandal and the ruling American
government had to resign. The name «Watergate» acquired the meaning «a
political scandal», «corruption». On the analogy with this word quite a number
of other words were formed by using the splinter «gate» (apheresis of the word
«Watergate»), such as: «Irangate», »Westlandgate», »shuttlegate», »milliongate»
etc. The splinter «gate» is added mainly to Proper names: names of people with
whom the scandal is connected or a geographical name denoting the place where
the scandal occurred.
The splinter «mobile» was formed by clipping the beginning of the word
«automobile» and is used to denote special types of automobiles, such as:
«artmobile», «bookmobile», «snowmobile», «tourmobile» etc.
3. According to
the nature and the number of morphemes constituting a word there are different
structural types of words in English: simple, derived, compound,
compound-derived.
Simple words consist of one root morpheme and an inflexion (in many cases the
inflexion is zero), e.g. «seldom», «chairs», «longer», «asked».
Derived words consist of one root morpheme, one or several affixes and an
infection, e.g. «deristricted (снимать ограничения)», «unemployed».
Compound words consist of two or more root morphemes and an inflexion, e.g.
«baby-moons»(искусств.спутник земли), «wait-and-see (policy) выжидательная политика».
Compound-derived words consist of two or more root morphemes, one or more
affixes and an inflexion, e.g. «middle-of-the-roaders» человек занимающий половинчатую позицию, «job-hopper»летун, человек часто меняющий работу.
When speaking about the structure of words stems also
should be mentioned. The stem is the part of the word which remains unchanged
throughout the paradigm of the word, e.g. the stem «hop» can be found in the
words: «hop», «hops», «hopped», «hopping». The stem «hippie» can be found in
the words: «hippie», «hippies», «hippie’s», «hippies’». The stem «job-hop» can
be found in the words : «job-hop», «job-hops», «job-hopped», «job-hopping».
So stems, the same as words, can be simple, derived, compound and
compound-derived. Stems have not only the lexical meaning but also grammatical
(part-of-speech) meaning, they can be noun stems («girl» in the adjective
«girlish»), adjective stems («girlish» in the noun «girlishness»), verb stems
(«expell» in the noun «expellee») etc. They differ from words by the absence of
inflexions in their structure, they can be used only in the structure of words.
Sometimes it is rather difficult to distinguish between simple and derived
words, especially in the cases of phonetic borrowings from other languages and
of native words with blocked (unique) root morphemes, e.g. «perestroika»,
«cranberry», «absence» etc.
In the English language of the second half of the twentieth century there
developed so called block compounds, that is compound words which have a
uniting stress but a split spelling, such as «chat show», «pinguin suit» etc.
Such compound words can be easily mixed up with word-groups of the type «stone
wall», so called nominative binomials
два названия. Such linguistic units serve to denote a notion which
is more specific than the notion expressed by the second component and consists
of two nouns, the first of which is an attribute to the second one. If we
compare a nominative binomial with a compound noun with the structure N+N we
shall see that a nominative binomial has no unity of stress. The change of the
order of its components will change its lexical meaning, e.g. «vid kid» is «a
kid who is a video fan» while «kid vid» means «a video-film for kids» or else
«lamp oil» means «oil for lamps» and «oil lamp» means «a lamp which uses oil
for burning».
Thus, we can draw the conclusion that in Modern English the following language
units can be mentioned: morphemes, splinters, words, nominative binomials,
non-idiomatic and idiomatic word-combinations, sentences.
4. Word-Combination
What is a Word-Combination?
The word-combination (WC) is the largest two-facet
lexical unit observed
on the syntagmatic level of analysis. By the degree of
their structural and semantic
cohesion(kouhizhn связь)
Lexical combinability (collocation) is the aptness of a word to appear
in
certain lexical contexts, e.g. the word question
combines with certain adjectives:
delicate, vital, important.
Each
word has a certain norm of collocation. Any departure from this norm
is felt as a stylistic device: to shove a question.
The collocations
of correlated words in different languages are not identical,
e.g. both the English flower and its Russian
counterpart цветок
can be combined
with a number of words denoting the place where the
flowers are grown: garden-
flowers, hot-house flowers; садовые цветы, оранжерейные цветы. But the
English word cannot enter into combination with the
word room to denote flowers
growing in the rooms, cf.: комнатные цветы – pot flowers.
Grammatical combinability (colligation) is the aptness of a word to
appear
in certain grammatical contexts, e.g. the adjective
heavy can be followed by a noun
(heavy storm), by an infinitive (heavy to lift). Each
grammatical unit has a certain
norm of colligation: nouns combine with pre-positional
adjectives (a new dress),
relative adjectives combine with pre-positional
adverbs of degree (dreadfully
tired).
The
departure from the norm of colligation is usually impossible:
mathematics at clever is a meaningless string of words
because English nouns do
not allow of the structure N + at + A.
Categories of
Word-Combinations
The study of
WCs is based on the following set of oppositions each
constituting a separate category:
1. Neutral
and stylistically marked WCs: old coat – old boy;
2.
Variable and stable WCs: take a pen – take place;
3.
Non-idiomatic and idiomatic WCs: to speak plainly – to call a spade a
spade;
4.
Usual and occasional WCs: blue sky – angry sky;
5.
Conceptually determined and conceptually non-determined WCs: clean
dress – clean dirt;
6.
Sociolinguistically determined and sociolinguistically non-determined
WCs:
cold war – cold soup.
II. Meaning of Word-Combinations
Meaning of
WCs is anlysed into lexical and grammatical (structural
components).
Lexical meaning of the WC is the combined lexical
meanings of its component
words: red flower – red + flower. But in most cases
the meaning of the whole
combination predominates over the lexical meaning of
its constituents, e.g. the
meaning of the monosemantic adjective atomic is
different in atomic weight and
atomic bomb.
Polysemantic words are used in WCs in one of their meanings: blind man
(horse, cat) – blind type (print, handwriting). Only
one meaning of the adjective
blind (unable to see) is combined with the lexical
meaning of the noun man
(human being) and only one meaning of man is realized
in combination with blind.
The meaning of the same adjective in blind type is
different.
Structural
meaning of the WC is conveyed by the pattern of arrangement of
the component words, e.g. the WCs school grammar and
grammar school consist
of identical words but are semantically different
because their patterns are
different. The structural pattern is the carrier of a
certain meaning quality-
substance that does not depend on the lexical meanings
of the words school and
grammar.
III. Interdependence of Structure and Meaning in
Word-Combinations
The
pattern of the WC is the syntactic structure in which a given word is
used as its head: to build + N (to build a house); to
rely + on + N (to rely on sb).
The pattern and meaning of head-words are
interdependent. The same head-word
is semantically different in different patterns, cf.:
get+N (get a letter); get+to+N
(get to Moscow); get+N+inf (get sb to come).
In these
patterns notional words are represented in conventional symbols
whereas form-words are given in their usual graphic
form. The reason is that
individual form-words may change the meaning of the
word with which it is
combined: anxious+for+N (anxious for news),
anxious+about+N (anxious about
his health).
Structurally simple patterns are usually polysemantic: the pattern
take+N
represents several meanings of the polysemantic
head-word: take tea (coffee), take
neasures (precautions). Structurally complex patterns
are usually monosemantic:
the pattern take+to+N represents only one meaning of
take – take to sports (to sb).
IV. Motivation in
Word-Combinations
Motivation
in WCs may be lexical or grammatical (structural). The WC is
motivated if its meaning is deducible from the
meaning, order and arrangement of
its components: red flower – red+flower –
quality+substance – A+N. Non-
motivated WCs are indivisible lexically and
structurally. They are called
phraseological units.
The WC is
lexially non-motivated if its combined lexical meaning is not
deducible from the meaning of its components: red tape
–bureaucratic methods.
The WC represents a single indivisible semantic
entity.
The WC is
structurally non-motivated if the meaning of its pattern is not
deducible from the order and arrangement of its
components: red tape – substance
– N. The WC represents a single indivisible structural
entity.
V. Categories of
Word-Combinations
The study
of WCs is based on the following set of oppositions each
constituting a separate category:
1. Neutral
and stylistically marked WCs: old coat – old boy;
2.
Variable and stable WCs: take a pen – take place;
3.
Non-idiomatic and idiomatic WCs: to speak plainly – to call a spade a
spade;
4.
Usual and occasional WCs: blue sky – angry sky;
5.
Conceptually determined and conceptually non-determined WCs: clean
dress – clean dirt;
6.
Sociolinguistically determined and sociolinguistically non-determined
WCs:
cold war – cold soup.
This post, Branches of Linguistics (with Definitions, Explanations and Examples), sheds light on what linguistics, as a field of study, is. Linguistics is the scientific study of language. In order to study language at a closer level, scholars have broken down linguistics into various branches for easy study. We also refer to this as levels of language study.
This post defines language, discusses its nature as advanced by George Yule, it differentiates between language and a language and it finally looks at the various branches of linguistics or levels of language study with definitions of each and various illustrative examples. Remember to share this all-important post with your friends and colleagues. Let us see what language is…
Definitions of Language by Different Scholars
Various definitions have been given by different scholars on what language is. We shall examine some of these definitions:
Henry Sweet submits that “Language is the expression of ideas by means of speech-sounds combined into words. Words are combined into sentences, this combination answering to that of ideas into thoughts.” The American linguists Bernard Bloch and George L. Trager define language thus: “A language is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols by means of which a social group cooperates.” John Milton opines that language is the instrument conveying to us things useful to be known.”
Samuel Johnson, in the preface to his dictionary, asserts that language is “the instrument of science [knowledge]” and words are “the signs of ideas.” In his Life of Cowley, Johnson called language “the dress of thought.” Yet, while language can obviously be used to express thoughts, it can do more than that. Merriam-Webster defines language as “a systematic means of communicating ideas or feelings by the use of conventionalized signs, sounds, gestures, or marks having understood meanings.” Oxford Dictionary defines language as “the method of human communication, either spoken or written, consisting of the use of words in a structured and conventional way; a system of communication used by a particular country or community.”
Definitions of Language (Contd)
Wikipedia says this: “Language is a system that consists of the development, acquisition, maintenance and use of complex systems of communication, particularly the human ability to do so; and a language is any specific example of such a system.” Robinson’s definition of language says “Man’s ability to make noise with the open organ and marks in papers or some other materials by means of which groups of people speaking the same language are able to interact and cooperate as a whole.” Wale Osisanwo sees language as “Human vocal noise or the arbitrary graphic representation of this noise used systematically and conventionally by members if speech community for the purpose of communication. A. C. Gimson submits that language is “A system of conventional signals used for communication by a whole community.” He stresses that the pattern of convention covers a system of significant sound units otherwise called phonemes; the inflection and arrangement of words called grammar and the association of meaning with words, that is, semantics. What can be gathered from all these definitions is that language is: “A system of arbitrary symbols that are conventionally structured by members of a speech community where a particular language is used. In other word, a language is a system of signs (e.g. gestures, vocal sounds or written symbols) that encodes information.”
Let us proceed to see the nature, characteristics or featured of language…
The Nature and Characteristics of Language
The characteristics of language discussed below are sometimes called the “design features” of Language. These features include the following:
- Mode of acquisition – Language is acquired by learning
- It is conventional
- It is systematic; that is, it possesses structure.
- Language is systematic, structured, patterned – it has rules and principles.
- We use language in the process of interaction: it is a unique attribute of man (it is exclusively human), it is human-specie specific.
- Language makes use of arbitrary symbols: language is a matter of personal opinion. It is arbitrary. There is no connection or relationship between the signified (object) and the signifier (symbol)
- Semanticity – language is meaningful because words have meanings.
Design Features of Language – C. F. Hockett
Tecumseh Fitch, in his paper, Unity and diversity in human language, highlights C. F. Hockett’s 16 design features of language which the latter presented in his paper titled, Logical considerations in the study of animal communication. Some features in the list are similar to the ones we discussed above. Let us see each of Hockett’s features:
- Vocal-auditory channel—signal modality involves vocalization and sound perception.
- Broadcast transmission—everyone in earshot can hear what is said.
- Rapid fading—signals fade quickly, and do not ‘clog the airwaves’.
- Interchangeability—any speaker can also be a listener and vice versa.
- Total feedback—speakers can hear everything that they say.
- Specialisation (speech as ‘trigger’)—linguistic signals accomplish their results not via raw energy (as in pushing or biting) but by their fit to the receiver’s perceptual and cognitive systems.
- Semanticity—some linguistic units have specific meanings (words or morphemes).
- Arbitrariness—meanings are generally arbitrarily related to signals, rather than iconic.
- Discreteness—each utterance differs from all others discretely (by at least a distinctive feature).
- Displacement—meanings about past, future or distant referents can be encoded and understood.
- Productivity/openness—new utterances can be readily coined and understood.
- Duality of patterning—meaningless units (phonemes) are combined into meaningful ones (morphemes), which can then be combined into larger meaningful units (sentences).
- traditional (cultural) transmission—languages are learned, not genetically encoded
- Prevarication—it is possible to lie.
- Reflexivity—it is possible to use language to talk about language.
- Learnability—it is possible for a speaker of one language to learn additional languages.
Distinction between Language and a Language
You may wonder if there is any distinction at all; but there is! Language is a general notion, an abstract concept in the mind and a universal phenomenon. A language, on its own part, is a specific instance or manifestation of the phenomenon known as language.
Levels of Language Study
Language, as a very complex phenomenon, has been broken down into more manageable components for easy study. We can see these components from three (3) broad categorisations: Phonology, Grammar and Semantics. Embedded in these 3 major categorisations of the level of language study are the forms and functions of language. Under phonology, we study phonetics and other speech-related disciplines; under grammar, we consider syntax, morphology and other related fields while under semantics, we deal with meaning of utterances in their various shades. Lexical relations (antonymy, synonymy, hyponymy, etc.) come under semantics. Other concepts such as intentional meaning, conventional meaning, connotation, denotation, etc. all come under semantic. In addition, applied linguistics falls into this category also. Let us see each of these branches of linguistics or levels of language study as shown below:
Psycholinguistics
Psycholinguistics, one of the branches of linguistics, as a branch of cognitive science, investigates how we acquire language, how we produce language and how we acquire language. In other words, Psycholinguistics examines language acquisition, language production and language comprehension. It is the study mental aspects of language and speech. It looks critically into how we represent and process language in the brain.
Alan Garnham, in his book Psycholinguistics: Central Topics, defines Psycholinguistics as “the study of the mental mechanisms that make it possible for people to use language. It is a scientific discipline whose goal is a coherent theory of the way in which language is produced and understood.” Psycholinguistics is a branch of both linguistics and psychology. The American psychologist, Jacob Robert Kantor introduced the term ‘Psycholinguistics’ in his book, An Objective Psychology of Grammar, published in 1936.
The two key questions that Psycholinguistics seeks to answer are:
- What knowledge of language do we need to use language?
- What are the cognitive processes (perception, memory, and thinking) involved in the ordinary use of language? (See Psychology of Language by David Carroll)
Semantics
Semantics, one of the major branches of linguistics, is the study of meaning. This branch of linguistics has a lot of definitions as many scholars have advanced; but basically, Semantics has to do with the functions of signs in language. Semantics differentiates between two major concepts on which meaning rests. These are Sense and Reference. According to linguists, sense has to do with the how a word relates to other words in a language while reference deals with how a word relates to real word concepts. In other words, the sense of a word has to do with its linguistic boundaries in a particular language and the reference of a word has to do with which concepts it refers to in the real world. Sometimes, it is problematic to distinguish between sense and reference because of the biases in languages and the varying linguistic boundaries between conceptual features of language. One of the interests of Semantics is the study of meaning in terms of words and sentence relationships. We refer to this as lexical relations. Some semantic relationship between words include the following:
Synonym
(See Linguistic and Stylistic Concepts You Should Know)
Paronym
This is a type of synonym. It has to do with words associated with meanings which also have great similarities in form. For example:
- Affect/effect
- Aural/oral
- Ingenuous/ingenious
- Access/assess
- Academic/academia
- Believe/belief
- Imminent/Immanent
Antonyms
Antonyms are words that have the opposite meaning. They are words that mean the opposite of another word. When we talk of oppositeness, we are talking about logical category. Antonyms have 3 types:
Complementary pairs
These are antonyms in which when one quality is present, it means the other quality is absent. The two qualities involved are mutually exclusive. There can be no middle ground or an intermediate state. For example:
- male/female
- single/ married
- not pregnant/pregnant
- off/on
Gradable pairs
These are antonyms that give room for gradual transition between two poles. In this case, there is a possibility of making a comparison such as:
- a little/a lot
- good/bad
- hot/ cold
- wet/dry
Relational opposites
For these antonyms, they share the same semantic features but the focus or direction are in reversion. For example:
- tie/untie
- buy/sell
- give/receive
- teacher/pupil
- father/son
- mother/daughter
- dependent/independent
Homonyms
A homonym is a word that has the same spelling and the same pronunciation as another word but which has a meaning different from it. In other words, a way to identify a homonym is to look out for words with the same spellings and same pronunciation but which usually have different meanings. (Read more on homonyms)
Homophones
A homophone is a word that has the same pronunciation with another word but which has a different spelling and meaning. (See Homophones in English)
Homographs
A homograph is a word that has the same spelling as another word but which has a different meaning and a different pronunciation. (See Homographs in English)
Other lexical relations include: polysemy, hyponymy, taxonyms, holonyms, meronyms, figures of speech or tropes, etc. it is important to note that we can describe all semantic relationships in all languages based on similarity or contiguity.
Pragmatics
Pragmatics, which is one of the interesting branches of linguistics, has to deal meaning beyond the surface level; that is, it engages meaning beyond the literal level. Pragmatics highlights the study of meaning in the interactional context. As language is an instrument of interaction, Pragmatics focuses on what implied meanings, that is what people mean when they make use of language. Semantics deals with what a word means while Pragmatics deals with what is meant by a word. Pragmatics has more to do with what a speaker means by a word rather than what the word means in itself.
This is why Pragmatics concerns the negotiation of meaning between the speaker and the listener. It takes into consideration the context of utterance. In essence, Pragmatics is the study of the aspects of meaning and language use that are dependent on the speaker, the addressee and other features of the context of utterance, such as the following:
- principles of communication
- speaker’s goals
- presupposition
- deixis
- speech acts
- implicature
Without Pragmatics, it would be difficult to understand language and responses to it; without Pragmatics, we would not have a holistic understanding of what people mean and their intentions. Let us consider this popular sentence:
- ‘Can you pass the salt?’
If we consider this question on the surface, the speaker is asking the listener if they have the ability to pass the salt through the use of the modal auxiliary, ‘can’ which deals with ability. But the pragmatic import of this interrogative sentence is beyond the ability to pass the salt. It means:
- ‘Will you pass the salt?
So in asking the question, the speaker is simply directing the listener to pass the salt. This is what J. L. Austin deals with in his seminal book, How to do Things with Words.
Semiotics
This brach of linguistics has to do with the study of signs and sign-using behaviour. One of its founders, Ferdinand de Saussure, defines it as the study of ‘the life of signs within society’. Another major proponent of Semiotics is Charles Sanders Peirce. Peirce defines a sign as “something which stands to somebody for something”. He believes that a sign can never have a fixed meaning because we have to constantly qualify what meaning means. (See the Meaning of meaning).
Peirce’s Categorisation of Signs
Peirce categorises signs into 3 major types. These are:
Icon
An icon is that which looks almost exactly (if not exactly) like what is refers to. It is a picture or symbol which we recognise universally to be representative of something. It is a word or sign which stands for something else. Examples includes pictures in different forms, a road sign for falling rocks, the Roman numeral ‘II’ representing the number two (2), etc.
Index
An index is an indicator or sign of something. We associated an index with its referent. For instance, smoke is a sign of fire, dark clouds are indexical of imminent rainfall, a signpost or signboard is pointer or an index of a particular location.
Symbol
A symbol is something that stands for or represents something else, especially an object representing an abstraction or a concept; it is a sign with a specific meaning: a written or printed sign or character that represents something in a specific context. Note that a symbol relates to its referent only by convention (this is why we say language is conventional because there is no relationship between the signified (the concept or idea behind the sign) and the signifier (a set of speech sounds or marks on a page); it is a matter of convention. Socio-cultural contexts also determine what is symbolic and what is not. Modern semioticians who have applied Peirce and Saussure’s principles to a variety of fields, such as aesthetics, anthropology, psychoanalysis, communications, semantics, etc. include these leading scholars: Claude Lévi-Strauss, Jacques Lacan, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Roland Barthes, Julia Kristeva and others.
Grammar
The discussions on branches of linguistics will not be complete without grammar. Grammatical level deals with the morphology and the syntax of a language. The traditional grammar is the earliest form developed by Socrates, Aristotle and Plato. They invented the Parts of Speech and came up with definitions, they are the Prescriptive School. They defined grammar as a body of prescribed rules which is aimed at guiding the use of a language. A school later came up, the empiricist movement, which gave birth to the Structural grammar who based their argument on what is observed and not what is defined. They were averse to prescribing and favours describing descriptive grammar as against prescriptive grammar.
They define grammar as a body of descriptive statements about a language. For instance, the grammar of English is a description of its word classes: the stringing of words together in acceptable sequence such as phrases, clauses, sentences, etc. Their emphasis is on form and function of a word and not what a rule says about the word. Consider this sentence, for example:
- The disbursements have started.
‘Disbursement’ is a noun but it is not a place, person, animal, or thing as prescriptive grammarians have defined nouns. (See the post: What is a Noun?)
Grammar is also a body of instructions that can be studied in schools. (See What is Grammar?) Grammar examines how words or morphemes combine to form meaningful sentences. It is a set of constraints on the possible sequences of symbols expressed as rules or principles. Syntax is the basic ingredient of grammar. Grammar tells us the difference between sets of sentences. We can identify five basic units of grammatical structure. These are: morphemes, word, phrase, clause and sentence. There are posts dedicated to each of these 5 aspects. See them here:
- What is a morpheme?
- Parts of Speech
- Phrase/Groups in English
- The English Clause
- The English Sentence
- Types of Sentence according to Function
- Types of Sentences according to Structure
Morphology
Morphology is a branch of linguistics which deals with the study of words; precisely the study of the internal structure of words. The term originates from the Greek and it deals with ‘morph’ which means ‘shape’ or ‘form’. Morphology is a branch of linguistics that came into existence in 1859. The German linguist, August Schleicher, first made use of the term to describe the study of the form of words. Morphology deals with word formation out of morphemes. It is the study and description of word formation (such as inflection, derivation, and compounding) in language; it is the system of word-forming elements and processes in a language. Morphemes are the building blocks of morphology and they are the smallest meaning-bearing units of language (O’Grady, 1997). Read more in this post on Morphemes.
Syntax
Edward J. Vajda informs us that ‘Syntax’ is a derivative of the Greek word syntaxis, which means arrangement. Syntax deals with phrase and sentence formation out of words. Syntax is the study of the arrangement of words in sentences, clauses, and phrases; it is also the study of the formation of sentences and the relationship between their component parts. A major concern of syntax is ‘word order’ which is a main device for showing the relationship among words. Usually, the subject comes first in a sentence; the verbs follows and the object or complement follows the verb. (See Patterns of the English Sentence) and (The Syntactic Elements of the Clause Structure). When the order changes, it may affect the meaning of the utterance. Syntax is the grammar, structure, or order of the elements in a language statement. In essence, syntax is the way in which we put linguistic elements together to form constituents such as phrases or clauses. We also refer to the part of grammar dealing with this as syntax. In a sentence, syntax tells us which word comes before and after another word. Syntax deals with arrangement of words to form meaningful sentences.
Sociolinguistics
Sociolinguistics is an interface between sociology and linguistics or language and the society. This accounts for the definition of sociolinguistics as the study of patterns and variations in language within a society or community. Sociolinguistics, another branch of linguistics, focuses on the way people use language to express social class, group status, gender, or ethnicity, and it looks at how they make choices about the form of language they use. It also examines the way people use language to negotiate their roles in a society and to achieve positions of power. Sociolinguistics also deals with the assignment of roles to various languages that exist in a speech community such as First Language, Official Language, National Language, etc.
Discourse Analysis
This branch of linguistics is the study of language of sentences; the analysis of features of language that extend beyond the limits of a sentence. A scholar suggests that the term discourse analysis is very ambiguous. According to him, Discourse Analysis “refer mainly to the linguistic analysis of naturally occurring connected speech or written discourse.” Explaining further, discourse analysis “refers to attempts to study the organisation of language above the sentence or above the clause, and therefore to study larger linguistic units, such as conversational exchanges or written texts.” Discourse Analysis takes linguistic enquiry beyond the clause-bound ‘objects’ of grammar and semantics to the level of analysing ‘utterances’, ‘texts’ and ‘speech events’. It engages itself with meaning that cannot be located in the ‘linguistic system’. Discourse Analysis deals with language use in social contexts; and in particular with interaction or dialogue between speakers.
Deborah Tannen, in explaining Discourse analysis, defines it as “the analysis of language ‘beyond the sentence’. She submits that this analysis contrasts with the typical analysis by modern linguistics which mainly deals with the study of grammar: the study of smaller bits of language, such as sounds (phonetics and phonology), parts of words (morphology), meaning (semantics), and the order of words in sentences (syntax). According to her, “Discourse analysts study larger chunks of language as they flow together.” Discourse analysts examine larger discourse context so that they ca determine how it affects the meaning of a sentence. For instance, let us look at the example of two signs/sentences at a swimming pool given by Charles Fillmore:
- Please use the toilet, not the pool.
- Pool for members only.
If these two sentences are read separately, they might seem reasonable; but when we take them together as a single discourse, we will have to check again the interpretation of the first sentence having read the second sentence. This is what discourse analysts do. Rechecking the first sentence to properly determine its meaning is known in Discourse Analysis as Reframing.
Stylistics
This is one of the most interesting branches of linguistics that explores the linguistic choices available to users of language in a particular language. We cannot talk about stylistics without talking about style. Stylistics is the study of textual meaning. It arose from the Russian formalist approach to literary meaning. Stylistics deals with style and its consequent meaning. Stylistics is the study of linguistic styles in a language. It is the use of linguistic tools to arrive at the meaning of an utterance or a text. Stylistics explores how readers interact with the language of (mainly literary) texts in order to explain how we understand, and how texts affect us when we read them. Stylistics is also the study of the devices in languages (such as rhetorical figures and syntactical patterns) that are considered to produce expressive or literary style. Modern stylistics makes use of the tools of formal linguistic analysis alongside methods of literary criticism and the goal is to try to isolate characteristic uses and functions of language and rhetoric rather than advance normative or prescriptive rules and patterns.
Phonology
Phonology, a major branch of linguistics, deals with sounds of a language. It is the study of the patterns of sounds in a language. It deals with how speech sounds are organised and used in a language; especially how the sounds are organised in the mind and how they are used to convey meaning. The phonological system of a language has to do with two basic foci: the inventory of sounds and their features and the rules which govern how sounds interact with one another. Phonology is related to other branches of linguistics like phonetics, morphology, syntax, semantics and pragmatics. Phonology is different from phonetics. Phonetics analyses the production or articulation of speech sounds irrespective of the language, but phonology analyses the sound patterns of a particular language. Phonetics is concerned with the physical properties of sounds while phonology deals more with how the sounds function in a language. There are some other aspects to Phonology which study specific things. These include: Generative Phonology, Auto-segmental Phonology, Metrical Phonology, Lexical Phonology, etc. The person who specialises in Phonology is a Phonologist.
Phonetics
Phonetics, closely related with phonology, is another important branch of linguistics that studies speech sounds. It deals with how we produce speech sounds and how we perceive speech sounds. There are three major aspects to the study of phonetics: articulatory phonetics (the exploration of how the human vocal tract or apparatus produce speech sound, the way the articulators or speech organs interact together to produce sounds); acoustic phonetics (studies the sound waves the human vocal apparatuses produce; it deals with the physical or acoustic properties of speech sounds) and auditory phonetics (this studies or determines how the human ear perceives speech sounds which the articulators produce). There are other posts on this site that focus specifically on some of these branches of linguistics in a more detailed manner. You can check them out.
Conclusion
This post, Branches of Linguistics (with Definitions, Explanations and Examples), considers various aspects and branches of linguistics; core linguistics and applied linguistics alike. It focuses on what language is and its features and the various levels at which we study it. Do someone a world of good by sharing this post with them. Many students of English will need this post; do share it with them. I am sure you have learned something definite in this post. Check out other educative posts on Akademia. See you around.
References
Hockett C. F. (1960). Logical considerations in the study of animal communication. In Animal sounds and communication (eds. Lanyon W. E., Tavolga W. N., editors.), pp. 392–430 Washington, DC: American Institute of Biological Sciences.
O’Grady, W., (1997). Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction. London: Longman