The suitability or unsuitability of a word for each particular situation depends on - Word и Excel

Lecture
№2

Just
as there is formal and informal dress, so there is formal and
informal speech. The social context in which the communication is
taking place determines both the mode (way — способ)
of dress and the modes of speech. When placed in different
situations, people instinctively choose different kinds of words and
structures to express their thoughts. The suitability or
unsuitability of a word for each particular situation depends on its
stylistic characteristics or, on other words, on the functional style
it represents.

The
term functional style is generally accepted in modern linguistics.
Functional
style
is a system of expressive means (выразительные
средства)
peculiar to a specific sphere of communication.

The sphere of communication is
circumstances attending the process of speech in each particular
case: professional communication, a lecture, a formal letter etc.

All these circumstances or
situations can be classified into two types: formal (a lecture,
professional communication) and informal (an informal talk).

Accordingly, functional styles
are classified into two groups, with further subdivisions depending
on different situations.

Informal style

Informal
style
is used in one’s immediate (close/nearest) circle: family,
relatives or friends. But it should be pointed out that the informal
talk of well-educated people considerably differs from that of the
illiterate (who cannot read or write) or semi-educated. The choice of
words is determined in each particular case not only by an informal
(or formal) situation, but also by the speaker’s educational and
cultural background, age group, and his occupational and regional
characteristics.

Informal
words and word-groups are traditionally divided into three groups:
colloquial,
slang
and dialect
words
and word-groups.

Colloquial words

Colloquial
words are used by everybody, and their sphere of communication is
comparatively wide, at least of literary colloquial words. These are
informal words that are used in everyday conversational speech both
by cultivated (who has been educated) and uneducated people of all
age groups. The sphere of communication of literary colloquial words
also includes the printed page. They are widely used in modern
fiction to create warm, informal atmosphere.

Slang

Slang
is colloquial words
and phrases typically more colourful, metaphorical, vulgar used by
certain groups of people in popular speech, they are not used in
correct or written language. All or most slang words are current
words whose meanings have been metaphorically shifted. (For example,
“Look at the copper
…” (слэнг) (SC, 543) Copper – a policeman. (ADSUE) “Oh,
he’s a slow, greedy “mick”!”
(слэнг) (SC, 368) Mick – an Irishman. (ADSUE))

People
use slang to be picturesque, striking and different from others, to
sound modern and up-to-date, independent and daring. The circle of
users of slang is more narrow than that of colloquialisms. It is
mainly used by the young and uneducated.

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

Источник

Chapter 1 which word should we choose, formal or informal?

Just as there is formal and informal dress, so there is formal and informal speech. One is not supposed to turn up at a ministerial reception or at a scientific symposium wearing a pair of brightly coloured pyjamas. (Jeans are scarcely suitable for such occasions either, though this may be a matter of opinion.) Consequently, the social context in which the communication is taking place determines both the mode of dress and the modes of speech. When placed in different situations, people instinctively choose different kinds of words and structures to express their thoughts. The suitability or unsuitability of a word for each particular situation depends on its stylistic characteristics or, in other words, on the functional style it represents.

The term functional style is generally accepted in modern linguistics. Professor I, V. Arnold defines it as «a system of expressive means peculiar to a specific sphere of communication». [23]

By the sphere of communication we mean the circumstances attending the process of speech in each particular case: professional communication, a lecture, an informal talk, a formal letter, an intimate letter, a speech in court, etc.

All these circumstances or situations can be roughly classified into two types: formal (a lecture, a speech in court, an official letter, professional communication) and informal (an informal talk, an intimate letter).

Accordingly, functional styles are classified into two groups, with further subdivisions depending on different situations.

Informal Style

Informal vocabulary is used in one’s immediate circle: family, relatives or friends. One uses informal words when at home or when feeling at home.

Informal style is relaxed, free-and-easy, familiar and unpretentious. But it should be pointed out that the informal talk of well-educated people considerably differs from that of the illiterate or the semi-educated; the choice of words with adults is different from the vocabulary of teenagers; people living in the provinces use certain regional words and expressions. Consequently, the choice of words is determined in each particular case not only by an informal (or formal) situation, but also by the speaker’s educational and cultural background, age group, and his occupational and regional characteristics.

Informal words and word-groups are traditionally divided into three types: colloquial, slang and dialect words and word-groups.

Colloquial Words

Among other informal words, colloquialisms are the least exclusive: they are used by everybody, and their sphere of communication is comparatively wide, at least of literary colloquial words. These are informal words that are used in everyday conversational speech both by cultivated and uneducated people of all age groups. The sphere of communication of literary colloquial words also includes the printed page, which shows that the term «colloquial» is somewhat inaccurate.

Vast use of informal words is one of the prominent features of 20th century English and American literature. It is quite natural that informal words appear in dialogues in which they realistically reflect the speech of modern people:

«You’re at some sort of technical college?» she said to Leo, not looking at him … .

«Yes. I hate it though. I’m not good enough at maths. There’s a chap there just down from Cambridge who puts us through it. I can’t keep up. Were you good at maths?»

«Not bad. But I imagine school maths are different.»

«Well, yes, they are. I can’t cope with this stuff at all, it’s the whole way of thinking that’s beyond me… I think I’m going to chuck it and take a. job.»

(From The Time of the Angels by I. Murdoch)

However, in modern fiction informal words are not restricted to conversation in their use, but frequently appear in descriptive passages as well. In this way the narrative is endowed with conversational features. The author creates an intimate, warm, informal atmosphere, meeting his reader, as it were, on the level of a friendly talk, especially when the narrative verges upon non-personal direct speech.

«Fred Hardy was a bad lot. Pretty women, chemin de fer, and an unlucky knack for backing the wrong horse had landed him in the bankruptcy court by the time he was twenty-five …

…If he thought of his past it was with complacency; he had had a good time, he had enjoyed his ups and downs’, and now, with good health and a clear conscience, he was prepared to settle down as a country gentleman, damn it, bring up the kids as kids should be brought up; and when the old buffer who sat for his Constituency pegged out, by George, go into Parliament himself.»

(From Rain and Other Short Stories by W. S. Maugham)

Here are some more examples of literary colloquial words. Pal and chum are colloquial equivalents of friend; girl, when used colloquially, denotes a woman of any age; bite and snack stand for meal; hi, hello are informal greetings, and so long a form of parting; start, go on, finish and be through are also literary colloquialisms; to have a crush on somebody is a colloquial equivalent of to be in love. A bit (of) and a lot (of) also belong to this group.

A considerable number of shortenings are found among words of this type. E. g. pram, exam, fridge, flu, prop, zip, movie.

Verbs with post-positional adverbs are also numerous among colloquialisms: put up, put over, make up, make out, do away, turn up, turn in, etc.

Literary colloquial words are to be distinguished from familiar colloquial and low colloquial.

The borderline between the literary and familiar colloquial is not always clearly marked. Yet the circle of speakers using familiar colloquial is more limited:

these words are used mostly by the young and the semi-educated. This vocabulary group closely verges on slang and has something of its coarse flavour.

E. g. doc (for doctor), hi (for how do you do), ta-ta (for good-bye), goings-on (for behaviour, usually with a negative connotation), to kid smb. (for tease, banter), to pick up smb. (for make a quick and easy acquaintance), go on with you (for let me alone), shut up (for keep silent), beat it (for go away).

Low colloquial is defined by G. P. Krapp as uses «characteristic of the speech of persons who may be broadly described as uncultivated». [31] This group is stocked with words of illiterate English which do not present much interest for our purposes.

The problem of functional styles is not one of purely theoretical interest, but represents a particularly important aspect of the language-learning process. Students of English should be taught how to choose stylistically suitable words for each particular speech situation.

So far as colloquialisms are concerned, most students’ mistakes originate from the ambiguousness of the term itself. Some students misunderstand the term «colloquial» and accept it as a recommendation for wide usage (obviously mistaking «colloquial» for «conversational»). This misconception may lead to most embarrassing errors unless it is taken care of in the early stages of language study.

As soon as the first words marked «colloquial» appear in the students’ functional vocabulary, it should be explained to them that the marker «colloquial» (as, indeed, any other stylistic marker) is not a recommendation for unlimited usage but, on the contrary, a sign of restricted usage. It is most important that the teacher should carefully describe the typical situations to which colloquialisms are restricted and warn the students against using them under formal circumstances or in their compositions and reports.

Literary colloquial words should not only be included in the students’ functional and recognition vocabularies, but also presented and drilled in suitable contexts and situations, mainly in dialogues. It is important that students should be trained to associate these words with informal, relaxed situations.

Slang

Much has been written on the subject of slang that is contradictory and at the same time very interesting.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines slang as «language of a highly colloquial style, considered as below the level of standard educated speech, and consisting either of new words or of current words employed in some special sense.» [33]

This definition is inadequate because it equates slang with colloquial style. The qualification «highly» can hardly serve as the criterion for distinguishing between colloquial style and slang.

Yet, the last line of the definition «current words in some special sense» is important and we shall have to return to this a little later.

Here is another definition of slang by the famous English writer G. K. Chesterton:

«The one stream of poetry which in constantly flowing is slang. Every day some nameless poet weaves some fairy tracery of popular language. …All slang is metaphor, and all metaphor is poetry. …The world of slang is a kind of topsy-turvydom of poetry, full of blue moons and white elephants, of men losing their heads, and men whose tongues run away with them — a whole chaos of fairy tales.» [10]

The first thing that attracts attention in this enthusiastic statement is that the idioms which the author quotes have long since ceased being associated with slang: neither once in a blue moon, nor the white elephant, nor your tongue has run away with you are indicated as slang in modern dictionaries. This is not surprising, for slang words and idioms are short-lived and very soon either disappear or lose their peculiar colouring and become either colloquial or stylistically neutral lexical units.

As to the author’s words «all slang is metaphor», it is a true observation, though the second part of the statement «all metaphor is poetry» is difficult to accept, especially if we consider the following examples: mug (for face), saucers, blinkers (for eyes), trap (for mouth, e. g. Keep your trap shut), dogs (for feet), to leg (it) (for to walk).

All these meanings are certainly based on metaphor, yet they strike one as singularly unpoetical.

Henry Bradley writes that «Slang sets things in their proper place with a smile. So, to call a hat ‘a lid’ and a head ‘a nut’ is amusing because it puts a hat and a pot-lid in the same class». [17] And, we should add, a head and a nut in the same class too.

«With a smile» is true. Probably «grin» would be a more suitable word. Indeed, a prominent linguist observed that if colloquialisms can be said to be wearing dressing-gowns and slippers, slang is wearing a perpetual foolish grin. The world of slang is inhabited by odd creatures indeed: not by men, but by guys (R. чучела) and blighters or rotters with nuts for heads, mugs for faces, flippers for hands.

All or most slang words are current words whose meanings have been metaphorically shifted. Each slang metaphor is rooted in a joke, but not in a kind or amusing joke. This is the criterion for distinguishing slang from colloquialisms: most slang words are metaphors and jocular, often with a coarse, mocking, cynical colouring.

This is one of the common objections against slang: a person using a lot of slang seems to be sneering and jeering at everything under the sun. This objection is psychological. There are also linguistic ones.

G. H. McKnight notes that «originating as slang expressions often do, in an insensibility to the meaning of legitimate words, the use of slang checks an acquisition of a command over recognized modes of expression … and must result in atrophy of the faculty of using language». [34]

H. W. Fowler states that «as style is the great antiseptic, so slang is the great corrupting matter, it is perishable, and infects what is round it». [27]

McKnight also notes that «no one capable of good speaking or good writing is likely to be harmed by the occasional employment of slang, provided that he is conscious of the fact…» [34]

Then why do people use slang?

For a number of reasons. To be picturesque, arresting, striking and, above all, different from others. To avoid the tedium of outmoded hackneyed «common» words. To demonstrate one’s spiritual independence and daring. To sound «modern» and «up-to-date».

It doesn’t mean that all these aims are achieved by using slang. Nor are they put in so many words by those using slang on the conscious level. But these are the main reasons for using slang as explained by modern psychologists and linguists.

The circle of users of slang is more narrow than that of colloquialisms. It is mainly used by the young and uneducated. Yet, slang’s colourful and humorous quality makes it catching, so that a considerable part of slang may become accepted by nearly all the groups of speakers.

Dialect Words

H. W. Fowler defines a dialect as «a variety of a language which prevails in a district, with local peculiarities of vocabulary, pronunciation and phrase». [19] England is a small country, yet it has many dialects which have their own distinctive features (e. g. the Lancashire, Dorsetshire, Norfolk dialects).

So dialects are regional forms of English. Standard English is defined by the Random House Dictionary as the English language as it is written and spoken by literate people in both formal and informal usage and that is universally current while incorporating regional differences. [54]

Dialectal peculiarities, especially those of vocabulary, are constantly being incorporated into everyday colloquial speech or slang. From these levels they can be transferred into the common stock, i. e. words which are not stylistically marked (see «The Basic Vocabulary», Ch. 2) and a few of them even into formal speech and into the literary language. Car, trolley, tram began as dialect words.

A snobbish attitude to dialect on the part of certain educationalists and scholars has been deplored by a number of prominent linguists. E. Partridge writes:

«The writers would be better employed in rejuvenating the literary (and indeed the normal cultured) language by substituting dialectal freshness, force, pithiness, for standard exhaustion, feebleness, long-windedness than in attempting to rejuvenate it with Gallicisms, Germanicisms, Grecisms and Latinisms.» [38]

In the following extract from The Good Companions by J. B. Priestley, the outstanding English writer ingeniously and humorously reproduces his native Yorkshire dialect. The speakers are discussing a football match they have just watched. The author makes use of a number of dialect words and grammatical structures and, also, uses spelling to convey certain phonetic features of «broad Yorkshire».

«‘Na Jess!’ said the acquaintance, taking an imitation calabash pipe out of his mouth and then winking mysteriously.

‘Na Jim!’ returned Mr. Oakroyd. This ‘Na’ which must once have been ‘Now’, is the recognized salutation in Bruddersford,1 and the fact that it sounds more like a word of caution than a word of greeting is by no means surprising. You have to be careful in Bruddersford.

‘Well,’ said Jim, falling into step, ‘what did you think on ’em?’

‘Think on ’em!’ Mr. Oakroyd made a number of noises with his tongue to show what he thought of them.

… ‘Ah ’11 tell tha1 what it is, Jess,’ said his companion, pointing the stem of his pipe and becoming broader in his Yorkshire as he grew more philosophical. ‘If t’ United2 had less brass2 to lake3 wi’, they’d lake better football.’ His eyes searched the past for a moment, looking for the team that had less money and had played better football.’ Tha can remember when t’ club had nivver4 set eyes on two thousand pahnds, when t’ job lot wor not worth two thahsand pahnds, pavilion and all, and what sort of football did they lake then? We know, don’t we? They could gi’ thee1 summat5 worth watching then. Nah, it’s all nowt,6 like t’ ale an’ baccy7 they ask so mich8 for — money fair thrawn away, ah calls it. Well, we mun9 ‘a’ wer teas and get ower it. Behave thi-sen,10 Jess!’ And he turned away, for that final word of caution was only one of Bruddersford’s familiar good-byes.

‘Ay,11’ replied Mr. Oakroyd dispiritedly. ‘So long, Jim!'»

1 tha (thee) — the objective case of thou; 2 brass — money; 3 to lake — to play;

4 nivver — never; 5 summat — something; 6 nowt — nothing; 7 baccy — tobacco;

8 mich — much; 9 тип — must; 10 thi-sen (= thy-self) — yourself; 11 ay(e) — yes.

Exercises

I. Consider your answers to the following.

1. What determines the choice of stylistically marked words in each particular situation?

2. In what situations are informal words used?

3. What are the main kinds of informal words? Give a brief description of each group.

4. What is the difference between colloquialisms and slang? What are their common features? Illustrate your answer with examples.

5. What are the main features of dialect words?

II. The italicized words and word-groups in the following extracts are informal. Write them out in two columns and explain in each case why you consider the word slang/colloquial. Look up any words yon do not know in your dictionary.

1. Т h e Flower Girl…. Now you are talking! I thought you’d come off it when you saw a chance of getting back a bit of what you chucked at me last night.1 (Confidentially.) You’d had a drop in, hadn’t you?

2. Liza. What call would a woman with that strength in her have to die of influenza? What become of her new straw hat that should have come to me? Somebody pinched it; and what I say is, them as pinched it done her in.

Mrs. Eynsfordhill. What does doing her in mean?

Higgins (hastily). Oh, thats the new small talk. To do a person in means to kill them.

3.Higgins. I’ve picked up a girl. Mrs. Higgins. Does that mean that some girl has picked you up?

Higgins. Not at all. I don’t mean a love affair. Mrs. Higgins. What a pity!

(From Pygmalion by B. Shaw)

4. Jасk (urgently): Mrs. Palmer, if I ask you a straight question, will you please give me a straight answer?

Muriel: All right. Fire away. Jack: Is your mother divorced? Muriel: Divorced? Mum? Of course not. Jack (quietly): Thank you. That was what I had already gathered.

Muriel: Mind you, she’s often thought of divorcing Dad, but somehow never got round to doing it. Not that she’s got a good word to say for him, mind you. She says he was the laziest, pettiest, most selfish chap she’s ever come across in all her life. «He’ll come to a sticky end,» she used to say to me, when I was a little girl. «You mark my words, Mu,» she used to say, «if your Dad doesn’t end his days in jail my name’s not Flossie Gosport.»

(From Harlequinade by T. Rattigan)

5. My wife has been kiddin’ me about my friends ever since we was married. She says that … they ain’t nobody in the world got a rummier bunch of friends than me. I’ll admit that the most of them ain’t, well, what you might call hot; they’re different somehow than when I first hung around with them. They seem to be lost without a brass rail to rest their dogs on. But of course they are old friends and I can’t give them the air.

(From Short Stories by R. Lardner)

III. a. Read the following extract.

A young man, Freddie by name, had invited a pretty young girl April to a riverside picnic. April could not come and sent her little sister to keep Freddie company.

It was naturally with something of a pang that Freddie tied the boat up at their destination. … The only living thing for miles around appeared to be an elderly horse which was taking a snack on the river-bank. In other words, if only April had been there and the kid hadn’t, they would have been alone together with no human eye to intrude upon their sacred solitude. They could have read Tennyson to each other till they were blue in the face, and not a squawk from a soul.

… Still, as the row had given him a nice appetite, he soon dismissed these wistful yearnings and started unpacking the luncheon-basket. And at the end of about twenty minutes he felt that it would not be amiss to chat with his little guest.

«Had enough?» he asked.

«No,» said the kid. «But there isn’t any more.»

«You seem to tuck away your food all right.»

«The girls at school used to call me Teresa the Tapeworm,» said the kid with a touch of pride.

It suddenly struck Freddie as a little odd that with July only half over this child should be at large. The summer holidays, as he remembered it, always used to start round about the first of August.

«Why aren’t you at school now?»

«I was bunked last month.»

«Really?» said Freddie, interested. «They gave you the push, did they? What for?»

«Shooting pigs.»

«Shooting pigs?»

«With a bow and arrow. One pig, that is to say. Percival. He belonged to Miss Maitland, the headmistress. Do you ever pretend to be people in books?»

«Never. And don’t stray from the point at issue. I want to get to the bottom of this thing about the pig.»

«I’m not straying from the point at issue. I was playing William Tell.»

«The old apple-knocker, you mean?»

«The man who shot an apple off his son’s head. I tried to get one of the girls to put the apple on her head, but she wouldn’t, so I went down to the pigsty and put it on Percival’s. And the silly goop shook it off and started to eat it just as I was shooting, which spoiled my aim and I got him on the left ear. He was

rather vexed about it. So was Miss Maitland. Especially as I was supposed to be in disgrace at the time, because I had set the dormitory on fire the night before.»

«Freddie blinked a bit.»

«You set the dormitory on fire?»

«Yes.»

«Any special reason, or just a passing whim?»

«I was playing Florence Nightingale.»

«Florence Nightingale?»

«The Lady with the Lamp. I dropped the lamp.»

«Tell me,» said Freddie. «This Miss Maitland of yours. What colour is her hair?»

«Grey.»

«I thought as much.»

(From Young Men in Spats by P. G. Wodehouse)

b. Write out the informal words and word-groups which occur in the above passage and explain why you think the author uses so many of them.

IV. Read the following jokes. Write out the informal words and word-groups and say whether they are colloquial, slang or dialect.

1. A Yankee passenger in an English train was beguiling his fellow passengers with tall stories1 and remarked: «We can start with a twenty-story apartment house this month, and have if finished by next.»

This was too much for the burly Yorkshireman, who sat next to him. «Man, that’s nowt», he said. «I’ve seen ’em in Yorkshire when I’ve been going to work just laying the foundation stone and when I’ve been coming home at neet they’ve been putting the folk out for back rent.»

2. A driver and his family had gathered bluebells, primrose roots, budding twigs and so on from a country lane. Just before they piled into the car to move off Father approached a farmer who was standing nearby and asked: «Can we take this road to Sheffield?» The farmer eyed the car and its contents sourly, then: «Aye, you mun as well, you’ve takken nigh everything else around here.»

V. Make up a dialogue using colloquial words from your lists and from the extracts given in the chapter.

a. In the first dialogue, two undergraduates are discussing why one of them has been expelled from his college. (Don’t forget that young people use both literary and familiar colloquial words.)

b. In the second dialogue, the parents of the dismissed student are wondering what to do with him. (Older people, as you remember, are apt to be less informal in their choice of words.)

Источник

Lecture № 6. Free Word-groups. Stylistically Marked and Stylistically Neutral Words

Every utterance is a patterned, rhymed and segmented sequence of signals. On the lexical level these signals building up the utterance are not exclusively words. Alongside this separate words speakers use larger blocks consisting of more than one word. Words combined to express ideas and thoughts make up word-groups. The degree of structural and semantic cohesion of words within word-groups may vary. Some word-groups are functionally and semantically inseparable: rough diamond, cooked goose. Such word-groups are traditionally described as set-phrases or phraseological units. Characteristic features of phraseological units are non-motivation for idiomaticity and stability of context. They cannot be freely made up in speech but are reproduced as ready-made units. The component members in other word-groups possess greater semantic and structural independence: to cause misunderstanding, to shine brightly, linguistic phenomenon, red rose. Word-groups of this type are denned as free word-groups for free phrases. They are freely made up in speech by the speakers according to the needs of communication. Set expressions are contrasted to free phrases and semi-fixed combinations. All these different stages of restrictions imposed upon co-occurrence of words, upon the lexical filling of structural patterns which are specific for every language. The restriction may be independent of the ties existing in extra-linguistic reality between the object spoken of and be conditioned by purely linguistic factors, or have extralinguistic causes in the history of the people. In free word-combination the linguistic factors are chiefly connected with grammatical properties of words.

Free word-group is a group of syntactically connected notional words within a sentence, which by itself is not a sentence. This definition is recognized more or less universally in this country and abroad. Though Other linguistics define the term word-group differently — as any group of words connected semantically and grammatically which does not make up a sentence by itself. From this point of view words-components of a word-group may belong to any part of speech, therefore such groups as in the morning, the window, and Bill are also considered to be word-groups (though they comprise only one notional word and one form-word).

STRUCTURE OF FREE WORD-GROUPS

Structurally word-groups may be approached in various ways. All word-groups may be analysed by the criterion of distribution into two big classes. Distribution is understood as the whole complex of contexts in which the given lexical unit can be used. If the word-group has the same linguistic distribution as one of its members, it is described as endocentric i.e. having one central member functionally equivalent to the whole word-group. The word-groups red flower, bravery of all kinds, are distributionally identical with their central components flower and braver, cf: I saw a red flower — 1 saw a flower; I appreciate bravery of all kinds — I appreciate bravery. If the distribution of the word-group is different from either of its members, it is regarded as exocentric i.e. as having no such central member, for instance side by side or grow smaller and others where the component words are not syntactically substitutable for the whole word-group. In endocentric word-groups the central component that has the same distribution as thewhole group is clearly the dominant member or the head to which all other members of the group are subordinated, in the word-group red flower the head is the noun flower and in theword-group kind of people the head is the adjective kind.

Word-groups are also classified according to their syntactic pattern into predicative and non-predicative groups. Such word-groups, e.g. John works, he went that have a syntactic structure similar to that of a sentence, are classified as predicative, and all others as non-predicative. Non-predicative word-groups may be subdivided according to the type of syntactic relation between the components into subordinate and coordinative. Such word-groups as red flower, a man of wisdom and the like are termed subordinate in which flower and man are head-words and red, of wisdom are subordinated to them respectively and function as their attributes. Such phrases as woman and child, day and night, do or die are classified as coordinative. Both members in these word-groups are functionally and semantically equal. Subordinate word-groups may be classified according to their head-words into nominal groups (red flower), adjectival groups (kind to people), verbal groups (to speak well), pronominal (all of them). The head is not necessarily the component that comes first in the word-group. In such nominal word-groups as very great bravery, bravery in the struggle the noun bravery is the head whether followed or preceded by other words.

MEANING OF FREE WORD-GROUPS. INTERRELATION OF STRUCTURAL AND LEXICAL MEANINGS IN WORD-GROUPS. MOTIVATION IN WORD-GROUPS

The meaning of word-groups may be defined as the combined lexical meaning of the components. 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 meaning of the component members. As a rule, the meaning of the component words are mutually dependant and the meaning of the word-group naturally predominates over the lexical meanings of its constituents.

Word-groups possess not only the lexical meaning, but also the meaning conveyed by the pattern of arrangement of their constituent’s. Such word groups as school grammar and grammar school are semantically different because of the difference in the pattern of arrangement of the component words. It is assumed that the structural pattern of word-group is the carrier of a certain semantic component which does not necessarily depend on the actual lexical meaning of its members. In the example discussed above school grammar the structural meaning of the word-group may be abstracted from the group and described as equality-substance meaning. This is the meaning expressed by the pattern of the word-group but not by either the word school or the word grammar. It follows that we have todistinguish between the structural meaning of a given type of word-group as such and the lexical meaning of its constituents.

The lexical and structural meaning in word-groups are interdependent and inseparable. The inseparability of these two semantic components in word-groups can be illustrated by the semantic analysis of individual word-groups in which the norms of conventional collocability of words seem to be deliberately overstepped. For instance, in the word-group all the sun long we observe a departure from the norm of lexical valency represented by such word-groups as all the day long, all the night long, all the week long, etc. The structural pattern of these word-groups in ordinary usage and the word-group all the sun long is identical. The generalized meaning of the pattern may be described as “a unit of time”. Replacing day, night, week by another noun the sun we do not find any change in the structural meaning of the pattern. The group all the sun long functions semantically as a unit of time. The noun sun, however, included in the group continues to carry its own lexical meaning (not “a unit of time”) which violates the norms of collocability in this word-group. It follows that the meaning of the word-group is derived from the combined lexical meanings of its constituents and is inseparable from the meaning of the pattern of their arrangement. Word-groups may be also analyzed from the point of view of their motivation. Word groups may be described as lexically motivated if the combined lexical meaning of the group is deducible from the meaning of its components. The degrees of motivation may be different and range from complete motivation to lack of it. Free word-groups, however, are characterized by complete motivation, as their components carry their individual lexical meanings. Phraseological units are described as non-motivated and are characterized by different degree of idiomaticity.

LEXICAL AND GRAMMATICAL VALENCY

Two basic linguistic factors which unite words into word-groups and which largely account for their combinability are lexical valency or collocability and grammatical valency. Words are known to be used in lexical context, i.e. in combination with other words. The aptness of a word to appear in various combinations, with other words is qualified as its lexical collocability or valency. The range of a potential lexical collocability of words is restricted by the inner structure of the language wordstock, This can be easily observed in the examples, as follows: though the words bend, curl are registered by the dictionaries as synonyms their collocability is different, for they tend to combine with different words, cf: to bend a wire/pipe/stick/head/knees; to curl hair/moustache/lips. There can be cases of synonymic groups where one synonym would have the widest possible range of collocability (like shake which enters combinations with an immense number of words including earth, air, mountains, beliefs, spears, walls, souls, tablecloths, carpets etc.) while another will have the limitation inherent in its semantic structure (like wag — to shake a thing by one end, and confined to rigid group of nouns – tail, finger, head, tongue, beard, chin). There is certain norm of lexical valency for each word and any intentional departure from this norm is qualified as a stylistic device, cf: tons of words, a life ago. Words traditionally collocated in speech tend to make up so called cliches or traditional word combinations. In traditional combinations words retain their full semantic independence although they are limited in their combinative power: to wage a war, to render a service, to make friends. Words in traditional combinations are combined according to the patterns of grammatical structure of the given language. Traditional combinations fall into the following structural types:

1 V+N combinations: deal a blow, bear a grudge, take a fancy etc.

V+prep+N: fall into disgrace, take into account, come into being etc.

V+Adj: work hard, rain heavily etc.
V+Adj: set free, make sure, put right etc.

Adj+N: maiden voyage, dead silence, feline eyes, aquiline nose etc.

N+V: time passes/flies, tastes vary etc.

7. N+prep+N: breach of promise, flow of words, flash of hope, flood of tears etc. Grammatical combinability also tells upon the freedom of bringing words together. The aptness of a word to appear in specific grammatical (syntactic) structures is termed grammatical valency. The grammatical valency of words may be different. The range of it is delimited by the part of speech the word belongs to. This statement, though, does not entitle to say that grammatical valency of words belonging to the same part of speech is identical. Thus, the two synonyms clever and intelligent are said to posses different grammatical valency as the word clever can fit the syntactic pattern of Adj+prep at+N clever at physics, clever at social sciences, whereas the word intelligent can never be found in exactly the same syntactic pattern. Unlike, frequent departures from the norms of lexical valency, departures from the grammatical valency norms are not admissible unless a speaker purposefully wants to make the word group unintelligible to native speakers.

FUNCTIONAL STYLES

The social context in which the communication is taking place determines the modes of speech. When placed in different situations, people instinctively choose different kinds of words and structures to express their thoughts. The suitability or unsuitability of a word for each particular situation depends on its stylistic characteristics or, in other words, on the functional style it represents. The term functional style is generally accepted in modern linguistics. Professor I. V. Arnold defines it as a system of expressive means peculiar to a specific sphere of communication. By the sphere of communication we mean the circumstances attending the process of speech in each particular case: professional communication, a lecture, an informal talk, a formal letter, an intimate letter, a speech in court, etc. All these circumstances or situations can be roughly classified into two types: formal (a lecture, a speech in court, an official letter, professional communication) and informal (an informal talk, an intimate letter). Accordingly, functional styles are classified into two groups, with further subdivisions depending on different situations.

INFORMAL STYLE

Informal vocabulary is used in one’s immediate circle: family, relatives or friends. One uses informal words when at home or when feeling at home. Informal style is relaxed, free-and-easy, familiar and unpretentious. But it should be pointed out that the informal talk of well-educated people considerably differs than that of the illiterate or the semi-educated; the choice of words with adults is different from the vocabulary of teenagers; people living in the provinces use certain regional words and expressions. Consequently, the choice of words is determined in each particular case not only by an informal (or formal) situation, but also by the speaker’s educational and cultural background, age group, and his occupational and regional characteristics. Informal words and word-groups are traditionally divided into three types: colloquial, slang and dialect words and word-groups.

COLLOQUIALISMS (COLLOQUIAL WORDS)

Among other informal words, colloquialisms are the least exclusive: they are used by everybody, and their sphere of communication is comparatively wide, at least of literary colloquial words. These are informal words that are used in everyday conversational speech both by cultivated and uneducated people of all age groups. The sphere of communication of literary colloquial words also includes the printed page, which shows that the term colloquial is somewhat inaccurate. Vast use of informal words is one of the prominent features of 20th and 21st century English and American literature. It is quite natural that informal words appear in dialogues in which they realistically reflect the speech of modern people:

“You’re at some sort of technical college?” she said to Leo, not looking at him….

“Yes. I hate it though: I’m not good enough at maths. There’s a chap there just down from Cambridge who puts us through it. I can’t keep up. Were you good at maths?”

“Not bad. But I imagine school maths are different.”

“Well, yes, they are. I can’t cope with this stuff at all, it’s the whole way of thinking that’s beyond me… I think I’m going to chuck it and take a job.” (From The Time of the Angels by I. Murdoch)

However, in modern fiction informal words are not restricted to conversation, but frequently appear in descriptive passages as well. In this way the narrative is enjoyed with conversational features:

“Fred Hardy was a bad lot. Pretty women, chemin de fer, and an unlucky knack for backing the wrong horse had landed him in the bankruptcy court by the time he was twenty—five…

…If he thought of his past it was with complacency; he had had a good time, he had enjoyed his ups and downs; and now, with good health and a clear conscience, he was prepared to settle down as a country gentleman, damn it, bring up the kids as kids should be brought up; and when the old buffer who sat for his Constituency pegged out, by George, go into Parliament himself.” (From Rain and Other Short Stories by W. S. Maugham)

Here are some more examples of literary colloquial words. Pal and chum are colloquial equivalents of friend; girl, when used colloquially, denotes a woman of any age; bite and snack stand for meal; hi, hello are informal greetings, and so long a form of parting; start, go on, finish and through are also literary colloquialisms; to have a crush on somebody is a colloquial equivalent of to be in love. A bit (of) and a lot (of) also belong to this group. A considerable number of shortenings are found among words of this type: pram, exam, fridge, flu, zip, movie. Phrasal verbs are also numerous among colloquialisms: put up, put over, make up, make out, turn in, etc. Literary colloquial words are to be distinguished from familiar colloquial and low colloquial. The borderline between the literary and familiar colloquial is not always clearly marked. Yet the circle of speakers using familiar colloquial is more limited: these words are used mostly by the young and the semi-educated. This vocabulary group closely verges on slang and has something of its coarse flavour: doc (for doctor), hi (for how do you do), ta-ta (for good-bye), goings-on (for behaviour, usually with a negative connotation), to to pick up smb. (for make a quick and easy acquaintance), go on with you (for let me alone), shut up (for keep silent), beat it (for go away). Low colloquial is defined by G. P. Krapp as uses characteristic of the speech of persons who may be broadly described as uncultivated. This group is stocked with words of illiterate English.

SLANG

The Oxford English Dictionary defines slang as language of a highly colloquial style, considered as below the level of standard educated speech, and consisting either of new words or of current words employed in some special sense. Here is another definition of slang by the famous English writer G. K. Chesterton: The one stream of poetry which in constantly flowing is slang. Every day some nameless poet weaves some fairy tracery of popular language… Slang is metaphor, and all metaphor is poetry….The world of slang is a kind of topsy-turvydom of poetry, full of blue moons and white elephants, of men losing their heads, and men whose tongues run away with them — a whole chaos of fairy tales. All or most slang words are current words whose meanings have been metaphorically shifted. Each slang metaphor is rooted in a joke, but not in a kind or amusing joke. This is the criterion for distinguishing slang from colloquialisms: most slang words are metaphors and jocular, often with a coarse, mocking, cynical colouring. This is one of the common objections against slang: a person using a lot of slang seems to be sneering and jeering at everything under the sun. This objection is psychological. There are also linguistic ones. H. McKnight notes that originating as slang expressions often do, in an insensibility to the meaning of legitimate words, the use of slang checks an acquisition of a command over recognized modes of expression… and must result in atrophy of the faculty of using language. W. Fowler states that as style is the great antiseptic, so slang is the great corrupting matter, it is perishable, and infects what is round it. McKnight also notes that no one capable of good speaking or good writing is likely to be harmed by the occasional employment of slang, provided that he is conscious of the fact…

People use slang for a number of reasons: to be picturesque, arresting, striking and, above all, different from others; to avoid the tedium of outmoded hackneyed common words, to demonstrate one’s spiritual independence and daring, to sound moden and up-to-date. It doesn’t mean that all these aims are achieved by using slang. Nor are they put in so many words by those using slang on the conscious level. But these are the main reasons for using slang as explained by modern psychologists and linguists. The circle of users of slang is more narrow than that of colloquialisms. It is mainly used by the young and uneducated. Yet, slang’s colourful and humorous quality makes it catching, so that a considerable part of slang may become accepted by nearly all the groups of speakers.

DIALECT WORDS

H. W. Fowler defines a dialect as a variety of a language which prevails in a district, with local peculiarities of vocabulary, pronunciation and phrase. England is a small country, yet it has many dialects which have their own distinctive features (e. g. the Lancashire, Dorsetshire, Norfolk dialects). So dialects are regional forms of English. Standard English is defined by the Random House Dictionary as the English language as it is written and spoken by literate people in both formal and informal usage and that is universally current while incorporating regional differences. Dialectal peculiarities, especially those of vocabulary, are constantly being incorporated into everyday colloquial speech or slang. From these levels they can be transferred into the common stock, i.e. words which are not stylistically marked and a few of them even into formal speech and into the literary language.

FORMAL STYLE

Formal style is restricted to formal situations. In general, formal words fall into two (words associated with professional communication and a less exclusive group of so-called learned words.

LEARNED WORDS

These words are mainly associated with the printed page. It is in this vocabulary stratum that poetry and fiction find their main resources. The term learned is not precise and does not adequately describe the exact characteristics of these words. A some what out-of-date term for the same category of words is bookish. The term learned includes several heterogeneous subdivisions of words. We find here numerous words that are used in scientific prose and can be identified by their dry, matter-of-fact flavour, e.g. compile, experimental, heterogeneous, homogeneous, conclusive etc. To this group also belongs so-called officialese (cf. with the Rus. канцеляризмы). These are the words of the official, bureaucratic language: assist (for help), proceed (for go), approximately (for about), sufficient (for enough), attired (for dressed), inquire (for ask).

Probably the most interesting subdivision of learned words is represented by the words found in descriptive passages of fiction. These words, which may be called literary, also have a particular flavour of their own, usually described as refined. They are mostly polysyllabic words drawn from the Romance languages and, though fully adapted to the English phonetic system, some of them continue to sound singularly foreign. They also seem to retain an aloofness associated with the lofty contexts in which they have been used for centuries. Their very sound seems to create complex and solemn associations, e.g. sentiment, fascination, meditation, felicity, elusive, cordial, illusionary. There is one further subdivision of learned words: modes of poetic diction. These stand close to the previous group many words from which, in fact, belong to both these categories. Yet, poetic words have a further characteristic – a lofty, high-flown, sometimes archaic, colouring: “…constancy lives in realms above; And life is thorny; and youth is vain; And to be wroth with one we love, Doth work like madness in the brain…” (Coleridge)

Though learned words are mainly associated with the printed page, this is not exclusively so. Any educated English-speaking individual is sure to use many learned words not only in his formal letters and professional communication but also in his everyday speech. It is true that sometimes such uses strike a definitely incongruous note as in the following extract: “You should find no difficulty in obtaining a secretarial post in the city.” Carel said “obtaining a post” and not “getting a job”. It was part of a bureaucratic manner which, Muriel noticed, he kept reserved for her.” (From The Time of the Angels by I. Murdoch)

Yet, generally speaking, educated people in both modern fiction and real life islearned words quite naturally and their speech is certainly the richer for it. On the other hand, excessive use of learned elements in conversational speech presents grave hazards. Utterances overloaded with such words have pretensions of refinement and; elegance but achieve the exact opposite verging on the absurd and ridiculous. Writers use this phenomenon for stylistic purposes. When a character in a book or in a play uses too many learned words, the obvious inappropriateness of his speech in an informal situationproduces a comic effect: “The story of your romantic origin as relate” to me by mamma, with unpleasing comments, has naturally stirred the deepest fibres of my nature. Your Christian name has anirresistible fascination. The simplicity of your nature makes you exquisitely incomprehensible to me…” (Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest).

Eliza Doolitfle in Pygmalion by B. Shaw engaging in traditional English small tall answers the question “Will it rain, do you think?” in the following way: ”The shallow depression in the west of these islands is likely to move slowly in an easterly direction. There are no indications of any great change in the barometrical situation.” However any suggestion that learned words are suitable only for comic purposes; would be quite wrong. It is in this vocabulary stratum that writers and poets find their most vivid paints and colours, and not only their humorous effects. Here is an extract from Iris Murdoch describing a summer evening: “… A bat had noiselessly appropriated the space between, a flittering weaving almost substanceless fragment of the invading dark…. A collared dove groaned once in the final light. A pink rose reclining upon the big box hedge glimmered with contained electric luminosity. A blackbird, trying to metamorphose itself into a nightingale, began a long passionate complicated song.” (From The Sacred and Profane Love Machine by I. Murdoch)

ARCHAIC AND OBSOLETE WORDS

These words stand close to the learned words, particularly to the modes of poetic dictions. Learned words and archaisms are both associated with the printed page. Yet many learned words may also be used in conversational situations. This cannot happen with archaisms, which are invariably restricted to the printed page. These words are moribund, already partly or fully out of circulation, rejected by the living language! Their last refuge is in historical novels (whose authors use them to create a particular period atmosphere) and, of course, in poetry which is rather conservative in its choice of words. Thou and thy, aye (yes) and nay (no) are certainly archaic and long since rejected by common usage, yet poets use them even today. We also find the same four words and many other archaisms among dialectisms, which is quite natural, as dialects are also conservative and retain archaic words and structures. Further examples of archaisms are: morn (for morning), eve (for evening), damsel (for girl), errant (for wandering, e. g. errant knights), etc. Sometimes, an archaic word may undergo a sudden revival. So, the formerly archaic Hit (for relatives; one’s family) is now current in American usage. The terms archaic and obsolete are used more or less indiscriminately by some authors. Others make a distinction between them using the term obsolete for words which have completely gone out of use. The Random House Dictionary defines an obsolete word like one no longer in use, esp. out of use for at least a century, whereas an archaism is referred to as current in an earlier time but rare in present usage. It should be pointed out that the borderline between obsolete and archaic is vague and uncertain, and in many cases it is difficult to decide to which of the groups this or that word belongs. There is a further term for words which are no longer in use: historisms. By this we mean words denoting objects and phenomena which are, things of the past and no longer exist.

PROFESSIONAL TERMINOLOGY

Hundreds of thousands of words belong to special scientific, professional or trade terminological systems and are not used or even understood by people outside the particular speciality. Every field of modern activity has its specialized vocabulary. There is a special medical vocabulary, and similarly special terminologies for psychology, botany, music, linguistics, teaching methods and many others.

Term is a word or a word-group which is specifically employed by a particular branch of science, technology, trade or the arts to convey a concept peculiar to this particular activity. There are several controversial problems in the field of terminology. The first is the puzzling question of whether a term loses its terminological status when it comes into common usage. There are linguists in whose opinion terms are only those words which have retained their exclusiveness and are not known or recognized outside their specific sphere. There is yet another point of view, according to which any terminological system is supposed to include all the words and word-groups conveying concept peculiar to a particular branch of knowledge, regardless of their exclusiveness. Modern research of various terminological systems has shown that there is no impenetrable wall between terminology and the general language system. To the contrary, terminologies seem to obey the same rules and laws as other vocabulary strata. Therefore, exchange between terminological systems and the common vocabulary is quite normal, and it would be wrong to regard a term; as something special and standing apart. Two other controversial problems deal with polysemy and synonymy. According to some linguists, an ideal term should be monosemantic (i.e. it should have only one meaning). Polysemantic terms may lead to misunderstanding, and that is a serious shortcoming in professional communication. This requirement seems quite reasonable, yetfacts of the language do not meet it. There are, in actual fact, numerous polysemantic terms. The same is true about synonymy in terminological systems. There are scholars whoinsist that terms should not have synonyms because, consequently, scientists and other specialists would name the same objects and phenomena in their field by different terms and would not be able to come to any agreement. This may be true. But, in fact, terms do possess synonyms. In painting, the same term colour has several synonyms in both its meanings: hue, shade, tint, tinge in the first meaning (колір) and paint, tint, dye in the second (фарба).

BASIC VOCABULARY

These words are stylistically neutral, and, in this respect, opposed to formal and informal words described above. Their stylistic neutrality makes it possible to use them in all kinds of situations, both formal and informal, in verbal and written communication. Certain of the stylistically marked vocabulary strata are, in a way, exclusive: professional terminology is used mostly by representatives of the professions; dialects are regional; slang is favoured mostly by the young and the uneducated. Not so basic vocabulary. These words are used every day, everywhere and by everybody, regardless of profession, occupation, educational level, age group or geographical location. These are words without which no human communication would be possible as they denote objects and phenomena of everyday importance, e.g. house, bread, summer, winter, child, mother, green, difficult, to go, to stand, etc. The basic vocabulary is the central group of the vocabulary, its historical foundation and living core. That is why words of this stratum show a considerably greater stability in comparison with words of the other strata, especially informal. Basic vocabulary words can be recognised not only by their stylistic neutrality but, also, by entire lack of other connotations (i.e. attendant meanings). Their meanings are broad; general and directly convey the concept, without supplying any additional information. T
he basic vocabulary and the stylistically marked strata of the vocabulary do not exist independently but are closely interrelated. Most stylistically marked words have their neutral counterparts in the basic vocabulary. Terms are an exception in this respect. On the other hand, colloquialisms may have their counterparts among learned words, most slang has counterparts both among colloquialisms and learned words. Archaisms, naturally, have their modern equivalents at least in some of the other groups.

Table 1 gives some examples of such synonyms belonging to different stylistic strata, Table 2 sums up the description of the stylistic strata of English vocabulary.

Stylistically-neutral words	Stylistically-marked words
	Informal	Formal
Basic vocabulary	I. Colloquial words	I. Learned words
	A. literary,	A. literary,
	B. familiar,	B. words of scientific prose,
	C. low.	C. officialese,
	II. Slang words.	D. modes of poetic diction.
	III. Dialect words.	II. Archaic and obsolete words.
		III. Professional
		terminology.

Источник

CHAPTER 1 Which Word Should We Choose, Formal or Informal? Just as there is formal and informal dress, so there is formal and informal speech. One is not supposed to turn up at a ministerial re- ception or at a scientific symposium wearing a pair of brightly col- oured pyjamas. (Jeans are scarcely suitable for such occasions either, though this may be a matter of opinion.) Consequently, the social context in which the communication is taking place determines both the mode of dress and the modes of speech. When placed in different situations, people instinctively choose different kinds of words and structures to express their thoughts. The suitability or unsuitability of a word for each particular situation depends on its stylistic character- istics or, in other words, on the functional style it represents. The term functional style is generally accepted in modern linguis- tics. Professor I. V. Arnold defines it as «a system of expressive means peculiar to a specific sphere of communication». [23] By the sphere of communication we mean the circumstances at- tending the process of speech in each particular case: professional communication, a lecture, an informal talk, a formal letter, an inti- mate letter, a speech in court, etc. All these circumstances or situations can be roughly classified into two types: formal (a lecture, a speech in court, an official letter, professional communication) and informal (an informal talk, an inti- mate letter). 12

Источник

1. LECTURE 2 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WORD AS THE BASIC UNIT OF THE LANGUAGE www.philology.bsu.by/кафедры/кафедра английского языкознания/учебные материалы/кафедра английского языкозн

LEXICOLOGY COURSE
LECTURE 2
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
WORD AS THE BASIC UNIT OF
THE LANGUAGE
www.philology.bsu.by/кафедры/кафедра английского
языкознания/учебные материалы/кафедра английского
языкознания/папки преподавателей/Толстоухова В.Ф.

2. The questions under consideration

A word as a fundamental unit of language.
2. Motivation of words.
3. Functional style.
4. Informal style.
5. Colloquial words.
6. Slang.
7. Dialect words.
8. Learned words.
9. Archaic and obsolete words.
10. Professional terminology.
11. Basic vocabulary.
1.

3. TEST 2

1. Give definitions to the following:
lexical system, syntagmatic relations,
paradigmatic relations, a word,
motivation, phonetic motivation,
morphological motivation, semantic
motivation, folk etymology, colloquial
words, slang, dialect words, archaic and
obsolete words, professional
terminology, basic vocabulary.

4. Complete the following sentences using words and expressions given in the list below:

A. The smallest meaningful units of the
language are called … .
B. The biggest units of morphology and the
smallest units of syntax are … .
С. A set of elements associated and functioning
together according to certain laws is termed …
.
D. Contrastive relations of a lexical unit with all
other units that can occur in the same context
and be contrasted to it are known as … .

5. 2.Complete the following sentences using words and expressions given in the list below:

E. When there is a certain similarity between the
sounds that make up words and their meaning, the
motivation is … .
P. Morphological motivation, when both the lexical
meaning of the component morphemes and the
meaning of the pattern are perfectly transparent, is
called … .
G. Motivation based on the co-existence of direct and
figurative meaning of the same word within the same
synchronous system is termed … .
1) lexical system; 2) semantic; 3) paradigmaticс
relations; 4) complete; 5) words; 6) phonetical; 7)
morphemeв.

6. 3. Answer these questions

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
What determines the choice of stylistically
marked words in each particular situation?
In what situations are informal words used?
What are the main kinds of informal words?
Give a brief description of each group.
What is the difference between
colloquialisms and slang? What are their
common features? Illustrate your answer
with examples.
What are the main features of dialect words?
Where are formal words used?

7. 3. Answer these questions

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Are learned words used only in books? Which type of
learned words, do you think, is especially suitable for
verbal communication? Which is least suitable and
even undesirable?
What are the principal characteristics of archaic
words?
What are the controversial problems connected with
professional terminology?
Do you think that students of English should learn
terms? If so, for which branch or branches of
knowledge?
What is understood by the basic vocabulary?
Which classes of stylistically marked words should
be included in the students’ functional vocabulary?

8. 1.A word as a fundamental unit of language.

The term system (definition)

9. The term system

denotes a set of elements associated and
functioning together according to certain
laws.

10. The lexical system of every epoch

contains
productive
elements typical of
this particular period
others that are
archaic and are
dropping out of
usage
some new
phenomena,
neologisms

11. The elements of lexical system

are characterized
by their
combinatorial and
contrastive
properties
determining their
syntagmatic and
paradigmatic
relationships.

12. EXAMPLE

compare the meaning of the verb «to get»
in the sentences
He got a letter.
He got tired
He got to London.
He could not get the piano through the
door.

13. On the syntagmatic level,

the semantic structure of the word is
analysed in its linear relationships with
neighbouring words in connected
speech. In other words, the semantic
characteristics of the word are observed,
described and studied on the basis of its
typical contexts.

14. Paradigmatic contrastive relations

Where do they exist ?
Example:
to go a mile
to run a mile
to walk a mile
To stroll a mile

15. Paradigmatic contrastive relations

exist between words belonging to one
subgroup of vocabulary items (e.g.,
verbs of motion, of sense perception,
sets of synonyms, etc.) that can occur in
the same context and be contrasted to
one another. Paradigmatic relations are
observed in the system of language.

16. On the paradigmatic level

the word is studied in its relationships
with other words in the vocabulary
system.
So, a word may be studied in comparison
with other words of similar meaning.

17. work n – labour n.

Work работа, труд; 1 the job
that a person does especially
in order to earn money. This
word has many meanings (in
Oxford Dictionary – 14), many
synonyms and idioms
[`idiemz]: creative work
творческая деятельность;
public work общественные
работы; his life`s work дело
его жизни; dirty work
(difficult, unpleasant) 1
чёрная работа; 2 грязное
дело, подлость. Nice work!
Отлично! Здорово! Saying
(поговорка): All work and no
play makes Jack a dull boy
labour – 1 work, especially
physical work: manual labour,
a labour camp –
исправительно-трудовой
лагерь; 2 people who work: a
shortage of labour; cheap
labour; skilled labour –
квалифицированные
рабочие, Labour Party; labour
relations; a labour of Sisyphus;
Sisyphean labour [,sisi‘fi:en]
сизифов труд; тяжёлый и
бесплодный труд – of a task
impossible to complete

18. On the paradigmatic level

words of similar
meaning
e.g. to refuse v – to
reject v
of opposite meaning
(e.g. busy adj – idle
adj;
to accept v – to reject
v)

19. On the paradigmatic level

of different stylistic characteristics
(e.g. man n – chap n – bloke n – guy n).
Man – chap (coll.) – парень, малый; a good chap –
славный малый; old chap – старина; chap – BrE,
informal, becoming old-fashioned – used to talk about
a man in a friendly way: He isn`t such a bad chap really.
Bloke (coll.) тип, парень: He seemed like a nice bloke.
Guy – coll. US – малый; tough guy железный малый;
wise guy умник; guys (informal, especially US) a group
of people of either sex: Come on, you guys!

20. The main problems of paradigmatic studies

are synonymy,
antonymy,
functional styles.

21. Words vs Morphemes

the central elements of
language system
the biggest units of
morphology
the smallest units of
syntax
can be separated in an
utterance
can be used in isolation
as a complete utterance
is composed of one or
more morphemes
are also meaningful
units
can not be used
independently
are always parts of
words
cannot be divided into
smaller meaningful
words

22. Why is the definition of a word the most difficult?

The simplest word has many different
aspects:
• a sound form and morphological
structure;
• may occur in different word-forms,
different syntactic functions
• signal various meanings

23. Why is the definition of a word the most difficult?

the word is a sort of focus for the
problems of
phonology,
lexicology,
syntax,
morphology
sciences that have to deal with language
and speech, such as philosophy and
psychology

24. The definition of a word

The word has been defined semantically,
syntactically, phonologically and by
combining various approaches.

25. The definition of a word

Many eminent scholars such as V.V.
Vinogradov, A.I. Smirnitsky, O.S.
Akhmanova, M.D. Stepanova, A.A.
Ufimtseva contributed to creating a word
theory. It is based upon the
understanding of the relationship
between word and thought, on the one
hand, and language and society, on the
other.

26. The definition of a word

A word is the smallest unit of a given
language capable of functioning alone
and characterised by positional mobility
within a sentence, morphological
uninterruptability and semantic
integritу.

27. The definition of a word

«a word is defined by the association of a
particular meaning with a particular
group of sounds capable of a particular
grammatical employment.» (A. Meillet.
Linguistique historique et linguistique
generate. Paris, 1926. V. 1. P. 30.)

28. 2. Motivation of words.

The term mоtivation is used to denote
the relationship existing between the
phonemic or morphemic composition
and structural pattern of the word, on the
one hand, and its meaning, on the other.

29. Three types of motivation

phonetical motivation,
morphological motivation
semantic motivation

30. What motivation is it?

e.g., bump,
buzz,
chatter,
clatter,
giggle,
hiss,
whistle, etc.

31. The phonetical motivation is

when there is a certain similarity
between the sound that make up words
and their meaning.

32. morphological motivation

The main criterion in morphological
motivation is the relationship between,
morphemes.
e.g., «endless” is completely motivated
as both the lexical meaning of the
component morphemes and the
meaning of the pattern are perfectly
transparent.

33. morphological motivation

«cranberry» is only partially motivated
because of; the absence of the lexical
meaning in the morpheme «cran-«.
The words «matter», «repeat» are nonmotivated because the connection
between the structure of the lexical unit
and its meaning is completely
conventional.

34. Semantiс motivation

is based on the co-existence of direct and
figurative meaning of the same word
within the same synchronous system.
E.g., «mouth» denotes a part of a human
face and can be metaphorically applied to
any opening: the mouth of a river, the
mouth of a furnace, mouth of pipe.

35. Semantiс motivation

Semantic motivation is clear in popular
names of flowers, plants and birds
violet,
bluebell,
bluebottle,
blackcap,
blackbird,
nightingale,
hummingbird, etc.

36. Semantiс motivation

As to compounds their motivation is
morphological if the meaning of the
whole is based on the direct meaning of
the components (e.g., headache — pain in
the head), and semantic if the
combination of components is used
figuratively (headache — anything or
anyone very annoying).

37. fоlk etуmоlogy (popular etymology, false etymology)

E.g. «mushroom” from French
«moucheron» has nothing in common
with «room» (a borrowed word)

38. 3. Functional style (definition)

”a system of expressive means peculiar to
a specific sphere of communication”.
(I.V. Arnold )
The suitability or unsuitability of a word for
each particular situation depends on its
stylistic characteristics or, in other words,
on the functional style it represents.

39. Functional style (definition)

A system of expressive means peculiar to a
specific sphere of communication.
By the sphere of communication scholars
mean the circumstances attending the
process of speech in each particular case:
professional communication, a lecture,
an informal talk, a formal letter, an
intimate letter, a speech in court, etc.

40. Subdivisions of spheres of communications

formal (a lecture, a speech in court, an
official letter, professional
communication)
informal (an informal talk, an intimate
letter).

41. 4. Informal style (where?)

Informal vocabulary is used in one’s
immediate circle: family, relatives, or
friends. One uses informal words when at
home or feeling at home.

42. Informal style (characteristics)

relaxed,
free-and-easy
familiar

43. the informal talk differs

well-educated
people
adults (the choice of
words)
people living in cities
the illiterate or the
semi-educated
teenagers
people living in the
provinces
(regional words and
expressions)

44. The choice of words

is determined not
only by informal and
formal situations
but by
speaker’s
educational
background
speaker’s cultural
background
age group
occupational and
regional
characteristics

45. three types of informal words

colloquial
slang
dialect words and word-groups

46. 5. Colloquial words (Where? By whom?)

in everyday conversational speech both
by cultivated and uneducated people of
all age groups.

47. literary colloquial words

appear in dialogues in which they
realistically reflect the speech of modern
people
appear in descriptive passages as well
(in modern fiction)

48. examples of literary colloquial words

Pal (кореш, друг) and chum (приятель,
дружок) are colloquial equivalents of
friend; girl, when used colloquially,
denotes a woman of any age;
bite and snack (quick meal – перекусить)
stand for meal;
hi, hello are informal greetings, and so
long a form of parting;
start, go on, finish and be through
(покончить)

49. examples of literary colloquial words

A considerable number of shortenings
are found among words of this type.
E.g. pram, exam, fridge, flu, zip, movie.
Verbs with post-positional adverbs are
also numerous among colloquialisms:
E.g. put up, put over, make up, make out,
turn up,

50. literary colloquial words (are to be distinguished from)

familiar colloquial words (by the young
and the semi-educated )E.g. doc (for
doctor), ta-ta (for good-bye), to kid
smb.(for tease, banter – подшутить), to
pick up smb. (for make a quick and easy
acquaintance), shut up (for keep silent).
Low colloquial (просторечие)
(uncultivated people).

51. 6.Slang

The Oxford English Dictionary defines
slang as “language of a highly colloquial
style, considered as below the level of
standard educated speech, and
consisting either of new words or of
current words employed in some special
sense.”

52. Slang

All or most slang words are current words
whose meanings have been
metaphorically shifted. Each slang
metaphor is rooted in a joke, but not in a
kind or amusing joke. This is the criterion
for distinguishing slang from
colloquialisms: most slang words are
metaphors and jocular, often with a
coarse, mocking, cynical colouring.

53. Slang (the main reasons to use?)

To be picturesque,
To be arresting,
To be striking
To be different from others.
To demonstrate one’s spiritual
independence and daring.
To sound “modern” and “up-to-date”.

54. Slang (who are users?)

The circle of users of slang is more narrow
than that of colloquialisms.
It is mainly used by the young and
uneducated.

55. 7.Dialect words

dialects are regional forms of English
Dialect is a variety of a language which
prevails in a district, with local
peculiarities of vocabulary, pronunciation
and phrase.
(e.g. the Lancashire, Dorsetshire, Norfolk
dialects).

56. Dialect words are constantly being incorporated into

everyday colloquial speech or slang
into the common stock (words which are
not stylistically marked)
a few of them even into formal speech
into the literary language
e.g.Car, trolley, tram began as dialect
words.

57. Dialect words (examples)

tha (thee) – the objective case of thou;
brass – money;
nivver – never;
nowt – nothing.

58. 8. Learned words (two main groups):

words associated with professional
communication
associated with the printed page. It is
in this vocabulary stratum that poetry
and fiction find their main resources.

59. Learned words (further subdivision)

We find here numerous words that are
used in scientific prose and can be
identified by their dry, matter-of-fact
flavour (e.g. comprise, experimental,
heterogeneous, homogeneous, conclusive,
divergent, etc).

60. Learned words

‘officialese’ (канцеляризмы). These are
the words of the official, bureaucratic
language. They should be avoided in
speech and in print, e.g. assist (for help),
endeavour (for try), proceed (for go),
approximately (for about), sufficient (for
enough), inquire (for ask).

61. Learned words (further subdivision)

the words found in descriptive passages
of fiction. These words, which may be
called ‘literary’, also have a particular
flavour of their own, usually described as
‘refined’. They are mostly polysyllabic
words drawn from the Romance
language and, though fully adapted to
the English phonetic system, some of
them continue to sound singularly
foreign.

62. Learned words

Here are some examples:
solitude=loneless, lonely place
(уединение, одиночество),
sentiment=feeling (чувство),
fascination=strong attraction
(очарование, обаяние), delusion
(заблуждение), meditation
(размышление), cordial=friendly
(сердечный, радушный).

63. Learned words (further subdivision)

There is one further subdivision of
learned words: modes of poetic diction.,
Poetic words have a further characteristic
– a lofty, sometimes archaic, colouring:

64. Examples of poetic words

“Alas! (увы) they had been friends in youth;
But wispering tongues can poison truth
And constancy (постоянство) lives in
realms (царства) above;
And life is thorny; and youth is vain…

65. Learned words (not only in printed page)

Though learned words are mainly
associated with the printed page, this is
not exclusively so. Any educated Englishspeaking individual is sure to use many
learned words not only in his formal
letters and professional communication
but also in his everyday speech. Educated
people in both modern fiction and real
life use learned words quite naturally and
their speech is richer for it.

66. Learned words

But on the other hand, utterances
overloaded with such words are absurd
and ridiculous.

67. Learned words and Writers

Writers use this phenomenon for stylistic
purposes. When a character in a book or
in a play uses too many learned words,
the obvious inappropriateness of his
speech in an informal situation produces
a comic effect.

68. Learned words

However any suggestion that learned
words are suitable only for comic
purposes, would be quite wrong. It is in
this vocabulary stratum that writers and
poets find their most vivid paints and
colours, and not only their humorous
effects.

69. Learned words

It is also true that some of these words
should be carefully selected and
“activized” to become part of the
students’ functional vocabulary.
Without knowing some learned words, it
is even impossible to read fiction (not to
mention scientific articles) or to listen to
lectures in the foreign language.

70. 9.Archaic and obsolete words

Archaic – are old and no longer used
words;
obsolete – no longer used because
something new was invented. Obsolete
words have completely gone out of use.

71. Archaic words

are restricted to the printed page. These
words are already partly or fully out of
circulation. They are used in historical
novels and in poetry which is rather
conservative in its choice of words.
Thou [θаu] – (ты) and thy [ðai] – (твой),
aye [ai] – (‘yes’) and nay [nei] – (‘no’) are
certainly archaic and long since rejected
by common usage, yet poets use them
even today.

72. Archaic words

Numerous archaisms can be found in
Shakespeare, but it should be taken in
consideration that what appear to us
today as archaisms in the works of
Shakespeare, are in fact examples of
everyday language of Shakespeare`s
time.
Further examples of archaisms are: morn
(for morning), eve (for evening), errant
(for wandering, e.g. errant knights), etc.

73. Archaic words

Sometimes an archaic word may undergo
a sudden revival. So, the formerly archaic
kin (for relatives; one`s family) is now
current in American usage.

74. 10.Professional terminology

Every field of modern activity has its
specialized vocabulary, and similarly
special terminologies for psychology,
music, management, finance, economics,
jurisprudence, linguistics and many
others.

75. Professional terminology

Term, as traditionally understood, is a
word or a word-group which is
specifically employed by a particular
branch of science, technology, trade or
the arts to convey a concept peculiar to
his particular activity.

76. Professional terminology

So, share, bank, balance sheet are finance
terms;
court, lawyer, civil law are legal terms;
and top manager, creative team,
motivation are used in management.
Bilingual, interdental, labialization,
palatalization, glottal stop, descending
scale are terms of theoretical phonetics.

77. controversial problems in the field of terminology.

a term loses its terminological status
It is quite natural that under
circumstances numerous terms pass into
general usage without losing connection
with their specific fields.

78. Professional terminology

There are linguists in whose opinion terms are
only those words which have retained their
exclusiveness and are not known or recognized
outside their specific sphere. From this point of
view, words associated with the medical
sphere, such as unit (доза лекарственного
препарата), theatre (операционная), contact
(носитель инфекции) are no longer medical
terms as they are in more or less common
usage.

79. Professional terminology

There is yet another point of view,
according to which any terminological
system is supposed to include all the
words and word-groups conveying
concept peculiar to a particular branch of
knowledge, regardless of their
exclusiveness. It would be wrong to
regard a term as something “special” and
standing apart.

80. polysemy and synonymy

According to some linguists, an “ideal”
term should be monosemantic (i.e. it
should have only one meaning).
Polysemantic terms may lead to
misunderstanding, and that is a serious
shortcoming in professional
communication. This requirement seems
quite reasonable, yet facts of the
language do not meet it. There are
numerous polysemantic terms.

81. synonymy

The same is true about synonymy in
terminological systems. There are
scholars who insist that terms should not
have synonyms because, consequently,
scientists and other specialists would
name the same objects and phenomena
in their field by different terms and would
not be able to come to any agreement.
This may be true. But, in fact, terms do
possess synonyms.

82. 10.Basic vocabulary

are stylistically neutral,
used them in all kinds of situations, both
formal and informal, in verbal and written
communication
are used every day, everywhere and by
everybody, regardless of profession,
occupation, educational level, age group
or geographical location.

83. Basic vocabulary

without them no human communication
would be possible as they denote objects
and phenomena of everyday importance
(e.g. house, bread, summer, child, mother,
difficult, to go, etc.).
is the central group of the vocabulary, its
historical foundation and living core.

84. Basic vocabulary

Basic vocabulary words can be
recognized not only by their stylistic
neutrality but, also, by lack of other
connotations (i.e. attendant meanings).
Their meanings are broad, general and
directly convey the concept, without
supplying any additional information.

85. Basic vocabulary

For instance, the verb to walk means merely ‘to
move from place to place on foot’ whereas in
the meanings of its synonyms to stride
(шагать), to stroll (прогуливаться), to trot
(семенить, бежать вприпрыжку), to stagger
– to sway while walking (идти шатаясь) and
others, some additional information is encoded
as they each describe a different manner of
walking, a different gait, tempo, purpose or
lack of purpose.

86. Basic vocabulary

Basic vocabulary 1.begin, 2.continue
3.end 4.child, baby
Informal 1.start, get started 2.go on, get
on 3.finish, be through, be over 4.kid,
brat, bairn (dial.),
Formal 1.commence 2.proceed 3.
terminate 4.infant, babe

Источник