64.Definition of Synonymy

Semasiology has gone a long way reviewing its understanding of the nature of synonymy. The traditional definition states ( the conceptional criterion) that synonyms are the words of the same category of parts of speech conveying thr same concept but differing either in shades of meaning or in stylistical characteristics.

By Vinogradov synonyms were stated to express the same notion but differ in the shades of meaning. This was done within the framework of the notional approach to meaning but lexicological meaning can’t be identical to a notion and a shade of meaning can not be used as a term in the conception of synonymy. ( it is unscientific).

Thus, synonyms – are words of the same language and part of speech, having the same denotation to differ in connotational components, they are characterized by the common notional part of their lexical meanings, they also may occasionally substitute for each other in some contexts without a considerable change or lose in meaning. ( inerchangeability)

The semantic criterion states that the basis of a synonymic relationship is formed by the expression of the same general notion, phenomena as the common denotational component. The partial difference between synonyms’ meanings is provided by varying secondary features of the phenomenon as distinct components (connotations).

65. Classification of Synonyms

Synonyms – are words of the same language and part of speech, having the same denotation to differ in connotational components, they are characterized by the common notional part of their lexical meanings, they also interchangeable in some contexts without a considerable change or lose of denotational meaning.

THe only existing system for classification of synonyms was established by academician V.V.Vinogradov : 3 types :

1) ideografic - words conveying the same concept but differing in connotations;

2) stylistic - differing in stylistic characteristic;

3) absolute - coinciding in all their shades of meaning and in all their stylistic characteristics, but they are rare in the vocabulary, and on the diachronic level, the phenomenon of absolute synonymity is anomalous and consequently temporary: the vocabulary system invariably tends to abolish it either by rejecting one of the absolute synonyms or by developing differentiation characteristics in one or both of them.

A more modern and effective approach to the classification of synonyms may be based on difference in connotations.

1) the connotation of degree or intensity ( to satisfy – to please – to delight);

2) of duration ( to stare – to glare – to gaze – to peer);

3) emotive (to love –to admire - to adore);

4) evaluative - speakers attitude toward the referent ( well-known – famous – notorious);

5) causative (sparkle – positive emotions – glitter -negative);

6) of manner ( to peep – look by stealth – to peer- look with strain);

7)attended circumstances (to peer- in darkness—to peep – through a hole/a half-closed door);

8)attendant features (pretty-handsome-beautiful—all describe a special type of human beauty);

9) stylistic ( meal: snack, bite; girl: bird, skirt,maiden; to leave – to depart, to beat it, to retire)

the last one is the subject of further classification, namely: colloquial, slang, dialect, poetic…

66. Synonymic dominant

Synonyms are words different in their sound-form but similar in their denotational meaning or meanings and interchangeable at least in some contexts.

Synonyms may be more or less close to each other depending on the member of differentiating components. In a synonymic set there is for the most part a semantic centre the dominant synonym to whole the other members together. It has the simplest semantic structure as it expresses only the common denotation and is devoid of any distinctive components of meaning, the rest of the members of the group keep at different semantic distances from the dominant.

The synonymic dominant is the most general term of its kind potentially containing the specific features rendered by all the other members of the group.

The dominant synonym express the notion common to all synonyms of the group in the most general way, without contributing any additional information as to the manner, intensity, duration or any attending feature of the referent. So, any dominant synonym is a typical basic-vocabulary word. Its meaning, which is broad and generalized more or less “covers” the meanings of the rest of the synonyms, so that it may be substituted for any of them. It seems that here, at last, the idea of interchangeability of synonyms comes into its own. And yet each such substitution would mean an irreparable loss of the additional information supplied by connotative components of each synonym. So using to look instead of to glare, to stare, to peep, to peer we preserve the general sense of the utterance but lose a great deal in precision, expressiveness and colour.

Summing up everything, the following characteristic features of the dominant synonym can be underlined:

1 high frequency of usage

2 Broad combinability, i.e. ability to be used in combinations with classes of words

3 Broad general meaning

4 Lack of connotations( this goes for stylistic connotations as well, so that neutrality as to style is also a typical feature of the dominant synonym).

67. National type of synonymic sets.

The English wordstock is extremely rich on synonyms which can be largely accounted for by abundant borrowing. Quite a number of words in a synonymic set are usually Latin or French by origin.

Thus, a characteristic pattern of English synonymic sets is the pattern including the native and the borrowed words. Among the sets investigated are the so-called double-scale patterns( native Latin(bodily-corporal) native vs Greek or French: answer-reply, fettle-violin).

The 2nd pattern is a triple-scale of synonyms: native-French-Latin or Greek( begin-commence-initiate(L) rise-mount-ascend(L). It has often been found that subjects prominent in the interest of a community tend to attract a Large number of synonyms. In modern English there are at least 20 words used to denote money: bucks, beans, the clups, do-re-mi, the needful, etc. It has also been observed that when a particular word is given a transferred meaning its synonyms tend to developing along the parallel lines. We know that in early New England the verb “overtook” was employed in the meaning of “took with an evil eye upon” from which there developed the meaning “ deceive” later the word achieved a synonym of overtook employed in the meaning of “deceive”. This form of analogy active in the semantic development of synonyms is referred to as “ radiation of synonyms”

68. LAWS IN SYNONYMY

Since smth is connected, all the units connected to develop certain common features, to look like the others.

The laws of Synonymy concern the meanings of synonyms.

Universal tendencies which exist in nature are at work and have been adopted by language:

1) differentiation

2) integration

and consequently the opposite processes.

Naturally, synonyms differ but at the same time they tend to acquire the same meaning which is called semantic analogy.

e.g. catch- “understand”

this meaning has been acquired by the synonyms: to get, to grasp the idea.

It is not only the discrimination of synonyms, but analogy

There is one more Law- synonymic attraction ( to attract common attention)

Money, sex, violence, prison.

69. National peculiarities of meaning and grouping of Synonyms.

Like anything in Language substance synonyms can’t be identical in different languages. Ither in their meanings proper or in the number of synonyms belonging to the equivalent synonymic groups. These differences (in 2 ways) are objective and fully depend on the language picture of the word.

e.g. “хитрый” – cunning sly.

“смелый” correlates with “brave, valiant, valorous”

“beautiful” –красивый

“buxom” – of women alone ( good-looking, Healthy –looking, well-covered by flesh

Manysidedness of objects is the origin of synonymity.

70. COMPONENTAL ANALYSIS (CA) OF MEANING

To illustrate what is meant by CA we have taken an Example: Man, Woman, Boy, Girl, Bull, Cow. We can arrange them as correlations of binary oppositions. The Meanings of words man, boy, bull on the 1 hand and woman, girl, cow on the other, have smth. in common. This distinctive feature we call semantical component (seme). In this case the sem. distinctive feature is that of sex-male/female.

CA is an attempt to describe the Meanings (M) of Words (W) in terms of a universal inventory of sem. components and their possible combinations.

A form of CA describing sem. components is a sub-category of the previous one. The linguists involve the A of dictionary M into sem. markers and distinguisher. The markers refer to features which the Word has in common with other lexical items, whereas a distinguisher as the term implies differs from all other Words.

e.g.: spinster – count., human, adult female who has never been married. Class seme (part of speech) is a marker – marks all M that can be counted. Human is the next marker. Adult is the marker pointing at a specific subdivision of living being into adult and not grown-up. Female is a marker representing a whole class of adult human females. “Who has never been married” is a distinguisher which differentiates the Word spinster from other Words which have other features in common.

CA can be used in the A of hyponimic groups. In the sem.A of such groups we find that they constitute a series with an increasingly larger range of inclusion. CA is also used in the investigation of the sem. There’s always a certain component of M which makes q member of the synonymic set different from sny other member of the same set.

71. CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF MEANING

It holds its own method alongside statical, structural and other developments. It’s based on the assumption that difference in M of Linguistical Units is always indicated by a difference in environment.

CA concentrates its attention on determing the min. stretch of speech and the conditions necessary and sufficient to reveal in which of its individual Ms the word in question is needed.

Roughly context may be subdivided into lexical synt. and mixed. Lex. Context determines the M of the Word. E.g.: BLACK – denotes colour when used with the key-words, denoting feeling or thought it means SAD, DISMAL - black thoughts. With Words denoting time the Ms UNHAPPY, FULL OF HARDSHIPS (black days).

A purely synt. context is rare. As a rule the indication comes from synt., lex. And morph. Factors combined.

All lex. Contexts are subdivided into lex. Context of the 1st degree and lex. context of the 2nd degree. In the 1st one there’s a direct syntactical connection – the indicator and the dependant. In the 2nd one – there’s no direct syntactical connection – a dependant and an indicator.