Если у вас возникли сложности с курсовой, контрольной, дипломной, рефератом, отчетом по практике, научно-исследовательской и любой другой работой - мы готовы помочь.
Предоплата всего
Подписываем
Antonymy – (against and name) – another semantic subsystem is based on polarity or contrast of meaning, opposite meaning (young – old; early – late; good – bad.
Antonyms are traditionally defined as words of the same part of speech which are opposite in meaning. Antonymy is oppositeness in meaning. Not every word of a language may have an antonym though practically every word may have a synonym. Antonymy is different in different parts of speech. Different lexical-semantic variants of a word have different antonyms. Antonyms may be defined as two or more words of the same part of speech which have some common denotational components in their semantic structure, but express some contrary or contradictory (contrasting) notions; they are characterized by different types of semantic contrast of denotational meaning and interchangeability at least in some contexts. According to the relationship between the notions expressed antonyms are divided into contradictories and contraries. According to their morphological structure antonyms may be subdivided into root antonyms and derivational antonyms. According to the relations of the general to the particular (specific) words are studied in their hyponymic relations.
Classification of antonyms
The contrast of their meanings is proved by definite types of contexual co-occurence. Words regularly contrasted as homogeneous sentence members, or identically used in parallel constructions in typical contexts, are called absolute antonyms. Another important criterion suggested by V.N. Komissarov is the possibility of substitution and identical lexical valency. Unlike synonyms, antonyms do not differ either in style, emotional colouring or distribution. The possibility of substitution and identical valency show that semantic polarity is a very special kind of difference implying a great deal of sameness. A large number of words listed as antonyms fall into two well-known logical categories- 1.Contradictories: perfect — imperfect; agree — disagree; single — married, dead — alive. 2.Contraries: cold — hot; cold — warm. Contradictories and contraries may be distinguished according to whether the terms for which the relation holds are gradable or not. Among other antonymous groups are incompatibles (morning — night; red — green); reverse terms, e.g. destructive — constructive (though there exists an opposition,destructive :: harmless); contrasted terms, e.g. frank — hypocritical; vigilant — careless. Formally English antonyms fall into two types: 1.formally related antonyms (derivational antonyms), 2. Formally unrelated antonyms (root antonyms). Synonymy and antonymy are correlative and sometimes overlapping notions, but the antonymic oppositions are based on regular co-occurrence of words combined with the approximate similarities of distribution and stylistic value, the synonymic oppositions are based on similarities in denotation with the distinctive features in distribution and stylistic or emotional value. Together with synonyms, antonyms represent the language's important expressive means.
2. Homonymy
Homonymy and sources of homonyms
Homonymy – (similar and name) two or more words identical in sound form of spelling but different in meaning. 89% monosyllabic words. Homonyms are words different in meaning but identical in sound or spelling, or both in sound and spelling. Homonyms can appear in the language not only as a result of split of polysemy, but also as a result of levelling of grammar inflexions, when different parts of speech become identical in their outer aspect.
There are several sources of homonyms in English:
The criterion of etymology:
If homonymy is viewed diachronically all cases of convergent sound development are regarded as cases of homonymy, as homonymous words can be traced back to etymologically different words. These homonyms are separated according to their origin.
The criteria used in the syncronic analysis of homonymy are:
1. the semantic criterion of related or unrelated meanings:
If a connection between various meanings is apprehended by the speaker, these are to be considered as making up the semantic structure of a polysemantic word.
2. the criterion of spelling:
Formal difference in graphic form is felt as indicative of homonymy
3. the criterion of distribution:
It is helpful in cases of grammatical and lexico-grammatical homonymy, but often fails in cases of lexical homonymy. The context serves to differentiate meanings, but is of little help in distinguishing betwen homonymy and polysemy.
Classification of homonyms
Various types of classification for homonyms proper have been suggested.
Consequently all cases of English homonymy may be classified into full and partial homonymy: homonymy of words and homonymy of individual word-forms.
3.Simantic fields and lexico-semantic groups.
A semantic field is a technical term in the discipline of linguistics to describe a set of words grouped by meaning referring to a specific subject. Semantic fields – one of the ways of classifying words in English – is a grouping of words based on the connection of the notions underlying their meanings (the system of colors. Green, red, white and blue are joined together by the common semantic component – the concept of colours. This semantic component common to all members of the field is sometimes described as the common denominator of meaning.
Lexico-semantic groups are formed of words of the same part of speech, referring to a common notion, but in case the groups are very extensive and cover big conceptual areas, we find them in different parts of speech, we find them in collocations, followed by the same preposition and so on.
Synonymy is one of the most difficult and controversial problems, and the most controversial point is the problem of criteria of synonymy and the definition of synonyms. Traditional linguistics solved the problem with the notional criterion and defined synonyms as words of the same part of speech conveying the same notion but differing either in shades of meaning or in stylistic characteristics.
Some aspects of this definition have been criticised. It has been pointed out that linguistic phenomena should be defined in linguistic terms and the term «notion» makes this an extralinguistic definition.
In contemporary linguistics the semantic criterion of synonymy is frequently used. In terms of componental analysis synonyms may be defined as words with the same or nearly the same denotation (or the denotative components) but differing in connotations (in emotive charge or in stylistic characteristics).
Synonymic sets and sources of synonymy The main sources of synonyms in English are:
1. Borrowings: due to abundant borrowing a characteristic pattern of English synonymic sets is the pattern including the native and the borrowed words. There are countless pairs of synonyms in English where a native term is opposed to one borrowed from French, Latin or Greek, the so called double-scale patterns, the native word is usually colloquial, whereas a borrowed word is as a rule bookish or highly literary. The peculiar feature of the triple-scale pattern is the contrast between stylistically neutral native words, literary words borrowed from French and learned words of Latin or Greek origin. But it is not only borrowings from foreign languages that have made contributions to the stock of English synonyms.
2.Shift of meaning in the words already existing in the language. When the English verb to overlook acquired the transferred meaning of 'deceive', its synonym to oversee underwent a parallel change. This form of analogy active in the semantic development of synonyms is referred to as radiation of synonyms. It has often been found that subjects prominent in the interests and activities of a community tend to attract a large number of synonyms. This principle of synonymy is referred to as law of synonymic attraction.
3. The formation of phrasal verbs: phrasal verbs in their turn supply material for further word-formation, adding to the stock of synonyms.
4.The formation of set expressions with a verb of generic meaning (have, give, take, get, make). Stylistic synonymy is characteristic in replacing a word by a group of words or vice versa.
5.Composition, derivation, conversion; reproduction: it is open to discussion, however, whether words like teaser and tease should be regarded as synonyms or lexical variants.
The study of synonyms is a borderline province between semasiology and stylistics, on the one hand, and semasiology and phraseology, on the other. The distinction between synonyms is often very fine and elusive, so that some special instruction on their use is necessary even for native speaker. This accounts for the great number of books of synonyms that serve as guides for those who aim at good style and precision. The study of synonymic forms of expression peculiar to a given national language helps to determine its living active styles and the laws of their development. Multiformity of synonymic forms of expression is closely connected with the stylistic differentiation of a national language. The existence of numerous groups of synonyms is one of the characteristic features of the English vocabulary. The use of synonyms enables the author to avoid a trivial repetition of the same word and provides variety of expression.
English is the national language of England proper, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Hence, there exist five national variants: British English (BE), American English (AE), Canadian English (CnE), Australian English (AuE), New Zealand English (NZE).
Standard English is the official language of Great Britain used in its literary form. Regional varieties possessing a literary form are called national variants. Local dialects are varieties of English peculiar to some districts and having no normalized literary form. In Great Britain there are two variants, Scottish English and Irish English, and five main groups of dialects: Northern, Midland, Eastern, Western and Southern. Every group contains several (up to ten) dialects. The local dialects are used mainly by the rural population and only for the purposes of oral communication. Local distinctions are more marked in pronunciation, less conspicuous in vocabulary and insignificant in grammar. The British local dialects are traced back to Old English dialects. Numerous and distinct, they are characterized by phonemic and structural peculiarities.
The five varieties of English are national variants of the same language, because their structural peculiarities, especially their word-formation system, syntax and morphology, as well as their word-stock and phonetic system are essentially the same. The main lexical differences of these variants from Standard English (General English) are connected with the lack of equivalent lexical units in one of them, divergences in the semantic structure of polysemantic words and peculiarities of usage of some words on the British Isles and in the named countries. The historic causes of the deviations in lexis are based on the fact of exporting the language of the mother country on a certain date of colonization. The existing cases of difference between regional lexis and General English are classified into several groups:
AMERICAN ENGLISH
The variety of English spoken in the USA has received the name of American English. The term variant or variety appears most appropriate for several reasons. American English cannot be called a dialect although it is a regional variety, because it has a literary normalized form called Standard American, whereas a dialect has no literary form.
An americanism - a word (set expression) peculiar to the English language as spoken in the USA.
An important aspect of his treatment is the distinction made between americanisms belonging to the literary norm and those existing in low colloquial and slang. The difference between the American and British literary norm is not systematic. The American variant of the English language differs from British
English in pronunciation, some minor features of grammar, but chiefly in vocabulary.
The historic causes of the deviations. American English is based on the language imported to the new continent at the time of the first settlements, that is on the English of the 17th century. The first colonies were founded in 1607, so that the first colonizers were contemporaries of Shakespeare, Spenser and Milton. Words which have died out in Britain, or changed their meaning may have survived in the USA. For more than three centuries the American vocabulary developed more or less independently of the British stock and was influenced by the new surroundings. The early Americans had to coin words for the unfamiliar fauna and flora.
The opposition of any two lexical systems among the variants described is of great linguistic and heuristic value because it furnishes ample date for observing the influence of extra-linguistic factors upon the vocabulary. American political vocabulary shows this point very definitely: absentee voting Voting by mail', dark horse 'a candidate nominated unexpectedly and not known to his voters', to gerrymander 'to arrange and falsify the electoral process to produce a favorable result in the interests of a particular party or candidate', all-outer 'an adept of decisive measures'.
Many of the foreign elements borrowed into American English from the Indian dialects or from Spanish penetrated very soon not only into British English but also into several other languages, Russian not excluded, and so became international. They are: canoe, moccasin squaw, tomahawk, wigwam, etc., and translation loans: pipe of peace, pale-face and the like, taken from Indian languages. The Spanish borrowings like cafeteria, mustang, ranch, sombrero, etc. are very familiar to the speakers of many European languages.
As to the toponyms, for instance, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Utah (all names of Indian tribes), or other names of towns, rivers and states named by Indian words, it must be borne in mind that in all countries of the world towns, rivers and the like show in their names traces of the earlier inhabitants of the land in question.
Another big group of peculiarities as compared with the English of Great Britain is caused by some specific features of pronunciation, stress or spelling standards. The American spelling is in some respects simpler than its British counterpart, in other respects just different. The table below illustrates some of the other differences but it is by no means exhaustive.
In the course of time with the development of the modern means of communication the lexical differences between the two variants show a tendency to decrease. Americanisms penetrate into Standard English and briticisms come to be widely used in American speech. Cinema and TV are probably the most important channels for the passage of americanisms into the language of Britain and other languages as well. The jargon of American film-advertising makes its way into British usage; i.e. of all time (in «the greatest film of all time»). The phrase is now firmly established as standard vocabulary and is applied to subjects other than films. The personal visits of writers and scholars to the USA and all forms of other personal contacts bring back americanisms.
The existing cases of difference between the two variants are conveniently classified into:
This question of different frequency distribution is also of paramount importance if we wish to investigate the morphological peculiarities of the American variant. Practically speaking the same patterns and means of word-formation are used in coining neologisms in both variants. American slang uses alongside the traditional ones also a few specific models.
The trend to shorten words and to use initial abbreviations is even more pronounced than in the British variant. New coinages are introduced: in advertisements, in the press, in everyday conversatiori; soon they fade out and are replaced by the newest creations.
Canadian English
English appeared in Canada in the 17th cent. with the British colonizers, who met there not only the native people - Red Indians and Eskimos, but with the French colonizers as well, who settled in Canada even earlier – in the 16th cent. Consequently there appeared “French Canada” and “British Canada”. Since the second half of the 18th cent. there enforced immigration of Englishmen and Americans. Besides, quite a large group of Scots and Irish moved to Canada, who settled the province of Nova Scotia.
Modern Canada is a federal state which consists of ten provinces and two territories. The population of Canada is mixed: the main part consists of British Canadians (one half) – the descendants of the British and American settlers, French Canadians (one third of the population) – the offsprings of the first settlers of Canada, and representatives of other nations – Slavonic, Germans, Dutch, Italians and the native people – Indians and Eskimos.
The mixed character of the population naturally finds its reflection in the language. Canadian lexis has much in common with general American, as well as with British. The Canadian vocabulary is comprised of borrowings from the Indian languages and from French, by the way of new coinages from English with the help of different word-forming means, as well as by giving new meaning to old words.
The Indian languages gave names to animals, birds, fishes plants. Most of the geographical names in Canada are also borrowed from Indian and French. In the parts of the country inhabited by the French, there are English and French names at the same time.
Some English words acquired new meaning in Canada: airsome - холодный, cozy - энергичный, proud - довольный, tidy - быстрый, fist - хватать, to saddle - соглашаться, hocks - сапоги, raw – неотесанный парень.
In Canadian slang there are many lexemes made from the material of the English language, as well as hybrid compounds or collocations: bake, white nose - новичок, corner-boy - горожанин, merry-me-got – внебрачный ребенок, omaloor – неуклюжий парень, hang-ashore - бродяга, hardware – спиртные напитки, drop-ball – серьги; to go on the breese – напиться пьяным, to go to oil – стать ничтожеством, to live fast (against) – сердиться на кого-либо, to make wonder - удивляться, on a pig’s back – в хороших условиях, to make fire – скандалить. The words used in Canada are called canadianisms (by analogy with Americanisms and Briticisms).
The phrase can be free and sustainable. The difference between them can be seen from the following examples. In a free collocation fully maintained separate lexical meanings of its constituent significant words. In collocations lexical independence of one of the components is weakened or lost, and the phrase is generally the nature of its value approaches to a single word. To set expressions are also very common in the English compound verbs (verb adverb), where the adverb changes the value of the verb.
Within each category you can select different types of phrase structure, such as an adjective noun preposition (mad about smth, typical of smb, etc.), Set phrases separated into its own sustainable - devoid of imagery and emotional color, and are often the only name for the concept expressed by them. They are registered.
Phraseological units - different imagery and stylistic coloring. They have not only a denominative, but also evaluation function, expressing the attitude of the speaker to the subject of the question.
Idiom play an important role in communication and give different shades mode of expression: they can make a statement (text) more emotional expressiveness give it a certain way forward aesthetic appreciation, to provide certain cultural associations, etc. Very often idioms serve as a source of recognition status of the text (the interlocutor, themes sayings, relationships between the participants of communication, etc.).
Semantic classification of phraseological units
Phraseological units can be classified according to the degree of motivation of their meaning
a) fusions where the degree of motivation is very low, we cannot guess the
meaning of the whole from the meanings of its components
b) unities where the meaning of the whole can be guessed from the
meanings of its components, but it is transferred (metaphorically or
metonimically)
c) collocations where words are combined in their original meaning but
their combinations are different in different languages
Structural classification of phraseological units
three structural types:
a) units of the type to give up (verb + postposition type);
b) units of the type to be tired;
c) prepositional-nominal phraseological units. These units are equivalents of
unchangeabl words: prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs
a) attributive-nominal
b) verbal-nominal
c) phraseological repetitions
Syntactical classification of Structural classification of phraseological units
Here we have the following groups:
a) noun phraseological units denoting an object, a person, a living being,
b) verb phraseological units denoting an action, a state, a feeling,
c) adjective phraseological units denoting a quality,
d) adverb phraseological units, e.g. with a bump, in the soup; e) preposition phraseological units,
f) interjection phraseological units
There are many terms for phraseological units, but the best one is “set expressions”, for it accentuates the specific qualities of phraseological units: stability, idiomaticity, integrity, syntactic indivisibility. The central problem is the criteria of distinguishing them from free word groups. Shakhmatov and Fortunatov singled out the following criteria: stability, idiomaticity, function and context. Criterion of stability means that the components of phraseological units follow each other in the definite constant order, there can be no substitution for them. This view point has been criticized, since many phraseological units lack absolute stability and admit variations. Criterion of idiomaticity is based on the lack of motivation. Vinogradov singled out the degrees of idiomaticity: a phraseological unit is based on a phraseological fusion, which is non-motivated at all, i.g. to kick the bucket. Free word groups can be perceived through the metaphorical or metonymical meaning, i.g. to wash one’s dirty linen in public. Phraseological collocations are stable set word groups which still have a clear motivation but strictly limited vocabulary, i.g. to shrug one’s shoulder. This view point has been criticized, for there is no distinct boarder line between phraseological units and word groups on one hand and word groups and phraseological collocations – on the other.Criterion of function presupposes that phraseological units are grammatically and stylistically inseparable, in a sentence they behave like a single syntactic form, i.g. He wrote it in a long run. This view point has been criticized, as the same phraseological units may be inseparable in 1 type of syntactic context, but quite separable in another, i.g. take care - care was taken. According to the criterion of context phraseological units have a fixed meaning (unlike free word groups). Амосова subdivided them into phraseological units and phraseological idioms. Phraseological units are 2 member groups in which 1 of the members has a specific meaning dependent on the 2nd member (small hours = early). Idioms are characterized by idiomaticity of the whole group (red tape). Amosova’s view point has been criticized, for non-variability of context doesn’t necessarily imply a specific meaning of the component. Some word groups aren’t stable, although they have various degree of idiomaticity. Then, there were we many classifications before Kunin’s. Smith and Ball based their classification on rhyme, alliteration and contrast. Fortunatov and Shakhmatov paid much attention to the syntactic analysis of phraseological units. Their classification is known as structural. There has existed a diachronic classification by Larin, which reflects 3 stages a unit passes on the way of becoming a phraseological one: 1) a free word - group, 2) metaphraseologicalorical unit, 3) an idiom. Some phraseological units had been built spontaneously (they have never been free word groups). Vinogradov’s classification is synchronic. It is based on the motivation of the unit, i.e. the relationship between the meaning of the whole and the meaning of its component parts. The degree of motivation is correlated with the rigidity, indivisibility and semantic unity of the expressions. It suggests 3 types of phraseological units: phraseological fusions, phraseological units, phraseological combinations. Smirnitskii constructed a classification which is reversed in comparison with Vinagradov’s one: 1) traditional phraseological units, 2 phraseological combination with the faded phraseological units (i.g. to fall in love). 3 idioms which have no motivation (i.g. as dead as a doornail). Kunin has many classifications, the main is based upon the combination of functional, semantic features: 1) nominative phraseological units, 2) communicative phraseological units (proverbs and sayings), 3) phraseological units with combined function (interjectional phraseological units, modal phraseological units (i.g. as sure as I’m sitting here)).According to the character all the units may be divided into: 1) expressions with variable verbal or nominal elements (e.g. not to stir / lift a finger), 2) expression with variable pronominal elements (e.g. to pull one’s leg), 3) expressions which combine 2 types of variability (to give s.o (nominal) a piece of one’s mind (pronominal)). Алёхина classified phraseological units and divided them into14 core patterns.