sign in sign up
<<
Home , Lexicology

3 Lecture 1

INTRODUCTION. WORD AS THE BASIC UNIT OF

1. Lexicology as a branch of and its ties with other disciplines. 2. Word as the basic unit of language and types of its Motivation 3.

1. Lexicology as a branch of linguistics and its ties with other disciplines.

The object of Lexicology (Gr. ―‖ – word, ―logos‖ – learning) is the science of the word. The literal meaning, however, gives only a general notion of the aims of this branch of linguistic science. The basic task of Lexicology is a study and systematic description of in respect to its origin, development and current use. The term v o c a b u l a r y is used to denote the system formed by the sum total of all the words and word equivalents that the language possesses. Lexicology is concerned with words, word-groups, phraseological units, and with that make up words. The term s y s t e m as used in present-day Lexicology denotes a set of elements associated and functioning together according to certain laws. The lexical system of every speech contains productive elements typical of this particular period, others that are archaic and are dropping out of usage, and, finally, some new phenomena, neologisms. The elements of lexical system are characterized by their combinatorial and contrastive properties determining their syntagmatic and paradigmatic relationships. S y n t a g m a t i c combinatorial relations define the meaning of the word when it is used in combination with other words in the flow of speech. E.g., compare the meaning of the ―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. P a r a d i g m a t i c contrastive relations exist between words belonging to one subgroup of vocabulary items (e.g., of motion, of sense perception, sets of , etc.) that can occur in the same context and be contrasted to one another. Paradigmatic relations are observed in the system of language. E.g. to go a mile run walk stroll The lexical system is not homogeneous. Its central part is formed by lexical units possessing all the distinctive features of words. Phrasal verbs, complex prepositions, some compounds, phraseological units, etc. function as lexical items of the vocabulary of the language. Lexicology is closely connected with general linguistics, history of the language, , stylistics, and such new branches of our science as , paralinguistics, pragmalinguistics. 4 The importance of the connection between Lexicology and P h o n e t i c s can be explained if we remember that a word is an association of a given group of sounds with a given meaning. Numerous examples show that in actual speech certain words acquire a different meaning because they are pronounced differently. Thus, discrimination between words may be based upon stress. E.g., ‗import, v. Stress also distinguishes compounds from homonymous word-groups: ‗blackbird : : ‗black ‗bird. Historical Phonetics and Historical can be of great use in the diachronic study of synonyms, homonyms and . When sound changes loosen the ties between members of the same word-family, this is an important factor of semantic changes. Meaning in its turn is indispensable to phonemic analysis because to establish the phonemic difference between /ou / and / o / it is sufficient to know that /houp/ means something different from /hop/. The points of contact between Lexicology and G r a m m a r are numerous and varied. Interactions between them are evident both in the sphere of and in . Morphological indicators often help to differentiate the meanings of the words. E.g., forms can serve to form special lexical meanings: advice (counsel), advices (information); damage (injury), damages (compensation). The suffix ―re‖ – can make verbs with the aspective sense of repetition: remake, reorganize. Causative meaning can find expression in derivatives with the prefix ―en‖: encome, enfree, endear. Syntactic position of a word does not only change its function but its lexical meaning as well. An adjective and a nominal element of the same group can more or less naturally exchange places, e.g., library school – school library. The grammatical form and function of the word affect its lexical meaning. E.g. ―He is going to write a new book‖ – the verb expresses an action in the nearest future; ―The house is gone‖ – the verb denotes absence. S t y l i s t i c s, although from a different angle, studies many problems treated in Lexicology. These are the problems of meaning, connotations, synonymy, functional differentiation of vocabulary according to the sphere of communication and others. The expressive elements of a language cannot be studied outside of their relations to other styles, which are emotionally neutral. Lexicology is closely connected with s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s. It is the branch of linguistics, dealing with relations between the way the language works and develops, on the one hand, and the facts of social life, on the other hand. Language is the reality of thought, and thought develops with the development of society. Every new phenomenon in human society finds a reflection in vocabulary, e.g., computer, cyclotron, . In contrast with Phonology, Morphology and Syntax, Lexicology is essentially a sociolinguistic science. The lexicologist should always take into account correlations between purely linguistic facts and the underlying social facts which brought them into life.

5

2. Word as the basic unit of the language and types of its motivation

Words are the central elements of language system. The definition of a word is one of the most difficult in linguistics because the simplest word has many different aspects. It has a sound form and morphological structure; when used in actual speech, it may occur in different word-forms, different syntactic functions and signal various meanings. Being the central element of any language system, the word is a sort of focus for the problems of Phonology, Lexicology, Syntax, Morphology and also for some other sciences that have to deal with language and speech, such as philosophy and psychology. All attempts to characterize the word are necessarily specific for each domain of science and are therefore considered one-sided by the representatives of all the other domains. The word has been defined semantically, syntactically, phonologically and by combining various approaches. A w o r d is the smallest unit of a given language capable of functioning alone and characterized by p o s i t i o n a l m o b i l i t y within a sentence, m o r p h o l o g i c a l u n i n t e r r u p t a b i l i t y and s e m a n t i c i n t e g r i t y. All these criteria are necessary because they create a basis for the oppositions between the word and the phrase, the word and the and the ; their common feature is that they are all units of the language, their difference lies in the fact that the phoneme is not significant, and a morpheme cannot be used as a complete utterance. The term m o t i v a t i o n 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. There are three main types of motivation: phonetical motivation, morphological motivation and semantic motivation. 1. When there is a certain similarity between the sound that make up words and their meaning, the motivation is p h o n e t i c a l. All phonetically motivated words have their sounding structure somewhat similar to the sounds which they convey. Due to this, some of these English, Ukrainian and other ' words thus motivated sound almost or quite alike. For example: to cade - кудкудакати, cock-a-doodle-doo - кукуріку, bang - бух/бухнути, bark - гав/гавкати, buzz - дзижчати, chirp/chirrup - цвірінькати, cuckoo - кукукати/ кукувати, crack - трісь/ тріщати, gagle - ґелґотати, hey! - гей!, hiss - 6 шипіти/сичати, hoop - 'гукати (сигналити), howl - вити, smack (one's lips) цмокати, moo - мукати, mewl - нявкати, baa / bar/ бе-е, бекати (вівці), etc. These words imitate sounds in nature because what they are referred to is a sound. These are naturally far from all the words whose notional meaning in the contrasted languages is based on sound imitation. Nevertheless, their number in comparison to other types of motivated words is not large, constituting in English about 1.08 % and in Ukrainian only about 0.8 %. It is also suggested that sounds themselves may be emotionally expressive which accounts for the phonetical motivation in certain words. Initial / f / and / p /, e.g., are felt as expressing scorn, disapproval or disgust: pooh! fie! fiddle-sticks, etc. The sound-cluster / iŋ / is imitative of sound or swift movement: ring, sing, swing, fling, etc. 2. The main criterion in morphological motivation is the relationship between morphemes. Hence, all one-morpheme words are morphologically non-motivated. Morphological motivation is ―relative‖, i.e. the degree of motivation may be different. The word ―endless‖, e.g., is completely motivated as both the lexical meaning of the component morphemes and the meaning of the pattern are perfectly transparent. The word ―cranberry‖ is only partially motivated because of the absence of the lexical meaning in the morpheme ―cran-‖. The words ―matter”, ―repeat‖ are non-motivated because the connection between the structure of the lexical unit and its meaning is completely conventional. The morphological motivation in the contrasted languages remains the major one. It is characteristic of numerous notional words, in which it is clearly indicated by the affixal morphemes. For example, by suffixes: doer one who does smth; flyer one who flies; detainee one who is detained; examinee one who is examined; changable that which is subjected to change/can be changed; movable smth. that can be moved, etc. A similar function may be performed by some prefixal morphemes in both contrasted languages. Cf: asleep the one who is in the state of sleeping; bedew to cover with dew; overturn to turn smth. over; ex-president the one who was president, etc. Similarly in Ukrainian: оповідач той, хто оповідає/розповідає; писар той, хто пише; співець той, хто співає; ношений якого (що) носили; смажений якого (що) смажили; читаючий який читає, носач той, що має великого носа; митець той, хто творить якийсь вид мистецтва (швидко чи дуже якісно/майстерно) малює, будує, 7 співає, танцює; злітати підніматися вище попереднього місця перебування; переказати (щось) розповісти вдруге вже раз сказане чи написане; передісторія історія, що була перед цією/відомою історією; вчетверте те, що повторюється четвертий раз; поверх (чогось) – щось понад чимось чи додатково до чогось, etc. Morphologically motivated words in the contrasted languages naturally constitute the largest part of their motivated : 88,5 % in English and 91.8 % in Ukrainian. 3. Semantic motivation of lexical units 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. This is expressed by many semantically motivated words and word-groups in both contrasted languages. Cf. foot of a mountain підніжжя гори, hand/ hands of a watch стрілка/стрілки (схожі на руки) годинника, to keep house вести домашнє господарство, an ancient house стародавній рід (династія); the house of Tudor династія Тюдорів; the first/second house перший/другий сеанс (у кінотеатрі); bed of roses легке/розкішне життя; bed of a river русло річки; bed of honour поле бою; arm рука, but: secular arm світська влада; the arm of the law сила закону; the arm of the sea вузька затока; the arms of a coat рукава (піджака, пальта); the arms of a tree великі гілляки дерева; the arms of a chair бильця (крісла), a coat of arms герб, etc. Many similar examples of semantic motivation of words are also observed in Ukrainian: легка/важка рука (легко/ дошкульно б'є), легкий/ важкий на руку, липкі руки/липкий на руку (злодій); купатися в розкошах, купатися в славі/купатися в промінні південного сонця, братися за справу (діло), etc. Their meanings are very trans- parent and mostly need no further explanation. Some words denoting in the contrasted languages popular names of flowers, trees, birds, and animals have a transparent etymological motivation as well. Thus, in English and Ukrainian bluet (flower) is васильок, bluebell is дзвоник, blue-bottle is васильок which is blue (синій), blackbird is чорний дрізд, blackcock is тетерук, black berry means ожина, horse-tail/cat's tail means хвощ, redwood means секвоя, umbrella-tree means американська магнолія, violet means фіалка. More similar examples may also be found in English and Ukrainian: жовтець (yellow gold), чорниця (bilberry), чорнобривці (French 8 marigold), чорногуз (чорне гузно), чорнослив (smocked prunes), соняшник (sunflower), куцохвостий (заєць), круторогі (воли), серпокрилець (стриж). A brilliant example of etymological semantic motivation present in Ukrainian and Byelorussian (or Polish) names of months. Cf. січень (сніг січе), лютий (мороз лютує), березень (береза сік пускає), квітень (перші квіти – проліски з'являються і зацвітають), липень (липа зацвітає), серпень (серпами жали і жнуть збіжжя). Semantical1у motivated lexical units constitute in English about 10 % and in Ukrainian about 7.4 % of their total motivated lexicons. Compound words are either morphologically or semantically motivated in the contrasted languages. Their motivation is morphological if the meaning of the whole is based on the direct meaning of the components (e.g., headache is pain in the head, air-crew is a crew of an aircraft; after-effect effect that occurs after some action; to blackboard to write on a black board.), and semantic if the combination of components is used figuratively (headache – anything or anyone very annoying, good-neighbourhood being near good neighbours, classroom (room for classes or for schoolchildren), drawbridge, halfpenny, landowner, mine thrower (thrower of mines), note-book (book for notes), self-defense, a schoolboy, Zululand (land of the Zulus), etc. Or in Ukrainian: вільнодумець (думає про волю), добродійник (робить добро), домовласник (володіє домом), електродояр, кожум'яка (мне шкуру тварин), кораблеводіння, користолюбство (любить корисливість), лизогуб (облизує губи), лісовоз, маслоробня, марнотратство (витрата чогось без користі, марно), etc. Generally, however, a great many words in English, Ukrainian and in other languages have no clear motivation, i. e. their remains obscure, far from explicable at present. It has been lost in the course of semantic development of these words. As a result, one can not say why the "sun" is named the sun and the "head" or the "heart" has been named this way and not otherwise. Because of the obscure etymology most words and some collocations/idiomatic expressions remain non-motivated in the contrasted languages. In other words, their motivation is impossible to identify nowadays on the basis of their componential meanings.

9

3. SEMANTIC CHANGE

Words have changed their meanings in the course of their development. This change is called semantic change. Every word in its development has undergone many semantic changes. There are distinguished causes of semantic change, nature and results of the process of change of meaning.

2.1.CAUSES OF SEMANTIC CHANGE

The factors accounting for semantic changes may be roughly subdivided into two groups: extra-linguistic and linguistic. Causes of semantic change (see Diagram).

Diagram 1. Causes of semantic change

CAUSES OF SEMANTIC CHANGE

Linguistic Extra-linguistic

ellipsis differentiation of synonyms fixed context

By extra-linguistic causes various changes in the life of speech community are meant, i.e. changes in economic and social structure or scientific concepts. For example, changes in the way of life of the British brought about changes in the meaning hlaford meant ‗bread-keeper‘ and later on ‗master, ruler‘. The word car, for example, ultimately goes back to Latin carrus which meant ‗a four- wheeled wagon‘ (Middle English carre). Now car denotes ‗a motor-car‘, ‗a railway carriage‘ (in the USA), ‗that portion of an airship, or balloon which is intended to carry personnel, cargo or equipment‘. Linguistic causes are factors acting within the language system. The commonest form which this influence takes place is called ellipsis – the omission of one word in a phrase, for instance, the verb to starve in Old English meant ‗to die‘ and was habitually used in 10 collocation with the word hunger. Later this verb itself acquired the meaning ‗to die of hunger‘. Similar semantic changes may be observed in Modern English when the meaning of one word is transferred to another because they habitually occur together in speech. Another linguistic cause is discrimination / differentiation of synonyms, for example, in Old English the word land meant both ‗solid of earth‘s surface‘ and ‗the territory of a nation‘. In the Middle English period the word country was borrowed as its . The meaning of the word land was altered and ‗the territory of a nation‘ came to be denoted by the borrowed word country. One more linguistic cause of semantic change is called fixed context. For example, the word token brought into competition with the word sign and became restricted in use to a number of set expressions, such as love token, token of respect and became specialized in meaning.

NATURE OF SEMANTIC CHANGE

A necessary condition of any semantic change is some connection, some association between the old meaning and the new one. There are two kinds of association involved in various semantic changes: a) similarity of meanings; b) contiguity of meanings.

Diagram 2. Nature of semantic change

NATURE OF SEMANTIC CHANGES

Similarity of meanings Contiguity of meanings METAPHOR METONYMY

Similarity of meanings or metaphor may be described as the semantic process of associating two referents, one of which in some way resembles the other. The word hand, for example, acquired in the 16th century the meaning of ‗a pointer of a clock or a watch‘ because of the similarity of one of the functions performed by the hand (‗to point to smth.‘) and the function of the clock-pointer. 11 Since metaphor is based on the perception of similarities it is only natural that when an analogy is obvious, it should give rise to a metaphoric meaning. This can be observed in the wide currency of metaphoric meanings of words denoting parts of the human body in various languages (cf. ‗the leg of the table‘, ‗the foot of the hill‘, etc.). Sometimes it is similarity of form, outline, etc. that underlies the metaphor. Contiguity of meanings or metonymy may be described as the semantic process of associating two referents one of which makes part of the other or is closely connected with it. This can be illustrated by the use of the word tongue – ‗the organ of speech‘ in the meaning of language (as in mother tongue). The word bench acquired the meaning ‗judges‘ because it was on the bench that judges used to sit in the law court, similarly the House required the meaning of ‗members of the House‘ (Parliament). It is generally held that metaphor plays a more important role in the change of meaning than metonymy.

RESULTS OF SEMANTIC CHANGE

Results of semantic change generally take place in the changes of the denotational and connotational components of the word (see diagram 7).

Diagram 3. Results of semantic change

RESULTS OF SEMANTIC CHANGE

Change Change of the denotational component of the connotational component

Restriction Extension Deterioration Amelioration of meaning of meaning of meaning of meaning

12 CHANGES OF THE DENOTATIONAL MEANING

Results of semantic change can be observed in the changes of the denotational meaning of the word, i.e. in restriction or extension of meaning. See diagram 8.

Diagram 4. Changes of the denotational meaning

Specialization

common specialized vocabulary vocabulary

Generalization

1. Restriction of meaning can be illustrated by the semantic development of the word hound which used to denote ‗dog of any breed‘ but now denotes only ‗a dog used in the chase‘. If the word with a new restricted meaning comes to be used in the specialized vocabulary of some limited group within the speech community it is usual to speak of the specialization of meaning. For example, we can observe restriction and specialisation of meaning in the case of the verb to glide (Old English glidan) which had the meaning ‗to move gently and smoothly‘ and has now acquired a restricted and specialised meaning ‗to fly with no engine‘. 2. Extension of meaning may be illustrated by the word target which originally meant ‗a small round shield‘ but now means ‗anything that is fired at‘. If the word with extended meaning passed from the specialized vocabulary into common use, the result of the semantic change is described as generalization of meaning. The word camp, for example, which originally was used only as a military term and meant ‗the place where troops are lodged in tents‘ (cf. Latin campus — ‗exercising ground for the army) extended and generalised its meaning and now denotes ‗temporary quarters‘ (of travellers, nomads, etc.).

13 CHANGES OF THE CONNOTAIONAL MEANING

Results of semantic change can be also observed in the alteration of the connotational aspect of meaning (see Diagram 9.

Diagram 5. Changes of the connotational meaning

Amelioration

Degradation Elevation of meaning of meaning

Deterioration

1. Amelioration of meaning implies the improvement of the connotational component of meaning, for example, the word minister originally denoted ‗a servant‘ but now – ‗a civil servant of higher rank, a person administrating a department of state‘. 2. Deterioration of meaning implies the acquisition by the word of some derogatory emotive charge, for instance, the word boor was originally to denote ‗a peasant‘ and then acquired a derogatory connotational meaning and came to denote ‗a clumsy or ill-bred fellow‘. It is of interest to note that in derivational clusters a change in the connotational meaning of one member does not necessarily affect the others. This peculiarity can be observed in the words accident аnd accidental. The lexical meaning of the noun accident has undergone pejorative development and denotes not only ‘something that happens by chance‘, but usually ‘something unfortunate‘. The derived adjective accidental does not possess in its semantic structure this negative connotational meaning (cf. also fortune: bad fortune, good fortune and fortunate).

14 QUESTIONS FOR SELF-TRAINING FOR PRACTICAL CLASS #1

1) What are the main tasks of Lexicology? 2) What are syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations? 3) What disciplines is Lexicology connected with? 4) Give definition of the WORD. 5) What does the process of motivation depend on? 6) What does the inner form of a word mean? 7) What is the term motivation used to denote? 8) What is the phonetical motivation? 9) What is implied by the term morphological motivation? 10) What does the semantic motivation mean? 11) How do you understand the term semantic change of a word? 12) What factors influence semantic changes of words? 13) What are extra-linguistic causes of semantic change of words? 14) What linguistic causes of semantic change can be singled out? 15) What is the commonest form of linguistic causes? 16) What is meant by discrimination / differentiation of synonyms? 17) What does fixed context denote as a linguistic cause of semantic change? 18) What is a necessary condition of any semantic change? 19) What are the basic types of association involved in various semantic changes? 20) How can you describe similarity of meanings or metaphor? 21) How can contiguity of meanings or metonymy be interpreted? 22) What are the results of the change of denotational aspect of lexical meaning? 23) What is meant by restriction of meaning? 24) What is extension of meaning like? 25) What are the results of the change of connotational aspect of lexical meaning? 26) What does amelioration of meaning imply? 27) What does deterioration of meaning denote?