- •3. Word meaning. Types of meaning.
- •4. Classification of morphemes
- •20. Neologisms
- •Classification of neologisms:
- •Formation of neologisms:
- •27. Stress interchange
- •31. Diachronic and synchronic approaches to polysemy
- •33. Types of meaning
- •40 There were constant contacts between England and Russia and they borrowed
- •47. Classification of phraseological units
- •49. Thematic or etymological classification
- •52. American English. Linguistic status of American English.
- •55. Types of English dictionaries
- •56. Polysemy
55. Types of English dictionaries
English dictionaries may all be roughly divided into two groups — encyclopaedic and linguistic.
The encyclopaedic dictionaries, (The Encyclopaedia Britannica and The Encyclopedia Americana) are scientific reference books dealing with every branch of knowledge, or with one particular branch, usually in alphabetical order. They give information about the extra-linguistic world; they deal with facts and concepts. Linguistic dictionaries are wоrd-books the subject-matter of which is lexical units and their linguistic properties such as pronunciation, meaning, peculiarities of use, etc.
Linguistic dictionaries may be divided into different categories by different criteria.
1. According to the nature of their word-list we may speak about general dictionaries (include frequency dictionary, a rhyming dictionary, a Thesaurus) and restricted (belong terminological, phraseological, dialectal word-books, dictionaries of new words, of foreign words, of abbreviations, etc).
2. According to the information they provide all linguistic dictionaries fall into two groups: explanatory and specialized.
Explanatory dictionaries present a wide range of data, especially with regard to the semantic aspect of the vocabulary items entered (e.g. New Oxford Dictionary of English).
Specialized dictionaries deal with lexical units only in relation to some of their characteristics (e.g. etymology, frequency, pronunciation, usage)
3. According to the language of explanations all dictionaries are divided into: monolingual and bilingual.
4. Dictionaries also fall into diachronic and synchronic with regard of time. Diachronic (historical) dictionaries reflect the development of the English vocabulary by recording the history of form and meaning for every word registered (e.g. Oxford English Dictionary). Synchronic (descriptive) dictionaries are concerned with the present-day meaning and usage of words (e.g. Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English).
(Phraseological dictionaries, New Words dictionaries, Dictionaries of slang, Usage dictionaries, Dictionaries of word-frequency, A Reverse dictionary, Pronouncing dictionaries, Etymological dictionaries, Ideographic dictionaries, synonym-books, spelling reference books, hard-words dictionaries, etc.)
56. Polysemy
Most of lex. items in English are polysemantic.
Michael Breat: “Polysemy is a semantic universal”.
“The alternative to it is quite unthinkable: it would mean that we would have to store in our brains a tremendous stock of words with separate names for any possible subject we might wish to talk about. It would also mean that there would be no metaphors & that language would be robbed of much of its expressiveness & flexibility.”
Urban: “The double reference of verbal signs is precisely what makes language an instrument of knowing”.
Ex.: - family - She lost both of her parents. - parent - Envy is the parent of all evils.
My family comes from Scotland.
The cat family includes lions & tigers. (семейство кошачьих)
A family of languages, etc.
There are monosemantic words:
Ex.: a lorryб a loudspeaker
In case of polysemy, we deal with modification of the content plane.
Different meanings of one & the same word are closely interrelated.
Polysemy is a result of:
1. Shifts in application (сдвиг в употреблении)
Ex.: adj. red
red ink (is really red)
red hair
red deer
red cabbage
red Indian
2. Specialization
Ex.: partner
Basic meaning; a type of relationship between 2 or more people.
- business partner
- marriage partner
- partner in crime
3. Metaphorical extension (a fundamental feature of any language)
Ex.:
leaf of a tree – leaf of a book
hands of a person – hands of a clock
Polysemy has been complicated by the tendency of words to pick up the meanings from other dialects, languages & slang.
Ex.: executive
BrE – one who acts under the direction of somebody – исполнитель AmE – a manager
now: AmE meaning is more widely used.
New & old meanings become interrelated, form a hierarchy.
They have some common semantic features, which preserve the integrity of the word.
57. It is an indisputable fact that words are used in certain lexical contexts, i.e. in combination with other words.2 The noun question, e.g., is often combined with such adjectives as vital, pressing, urgent, disputable, delicate, etc. This noun is a component of a number of other wordgroups, e.g. to raise a question, a question of great importance, a question of the agenda, of the day, and many others. The aptness of a word to appear in various combinations is described as its lexical valency or collocability. The range of the lexical valency of words is linguistically restricted by the inner structure of the English word-stock. This can be easily observed in the selection of synonyms found in different word-groups. Though the verbs lift and raise, e.g., are usually treated as synonyms, it is only the latter that is collocated with the noun question. The verb take may be synonymically interpreted as ‘grasp’, ’seize’, ‘catch’, ‘lay hold of, etc. but it is only take that is found in collocation with the nouns examination, measures, precautions, etc., only catch in catch smb. napping and grasp in grasp the truth.There is a certain norm of lexical valency for each word and any departure from this norm is felt as a literary or rather a stylistic device. Such word-groups as for example a cigarette ago, shove a question and the like are illustrative of the point under discussion. It is because we recognise that shove and question are not normally collocable that the junction of them can be effective. Words are used also in grammatical contexts.1The minimal grammatical context in which words are used when brought together to form word-groups is usually described as the pattern of the word-group. For instance, the adjective heavy discussed above can be followed by a noun (e.g. heavy storm or by the infinitive of a verb (e.g. heavy to lift), etc. The aptness of a word to appear in specific grammatical (or rather syntactic) structures is termed g r a m m a t i c a l v a l e n c y . The grammatical valency of words may be different. To begin with, the range of grammatical valency is delimited by the part of speech the word belongs to. It follows that the grammatical valency of each individual word is dependent on the grammatical structure of the language. This is not to imply that grammatical valency of words belonging to the same part of speech is necessarily identical. This can be best illustrated by comparing the grammatical valency of any two words belonging to the same part of speech, e.g. of the two synonymous verbs suggest and propose. Both verbs can be followed by a noun (to propose or suggest a plan, a resolution). It is only propose, however, that can be followed by the infinitive of a verb (to propose to do smth.);
Lexical, grammatical valency of words
There are two factors that influence the ability of words to form word-groups. They are lexical and grammatical valency of words. The point is that compatibility of words is determined by restrictions imposed by the inner structure of the English word stock (e.g. a bright idea = a good idea; but it is impossible to say "a bright performance", or "a bright film"; "heavy metal" means difficult to digest, but it is impossible to say "heavy cheese"; to take [catch] a chance, but it is possible to say only "to take precautions").
The range of syntactic structures or patterns in which words may appear is defined as their grammatical valency. The grammatical valency depends on the grammatical structure of the language (e.g. to convince smb. of smth/that smb do smth; to persuade smb to do smth).
Any departure from the norms of lexical or grammatical valency can either make a phrase unintelligible or be felt as a stylistic device.
