Theory of linguistics

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Lexicology

Lecture : Semantic Structure of English and Ukrainian Words



1. Semasiology as a branch of linguistics

Diachronically

Studies the change in meaning which words undergo

Synchronically

Studies the semantic structures typical of the language studied

Terms semasiology and semantics

According to prof. J.R. Firth the English word for the historical study of change of meaning was semasiology, until in 1900 Breal's book (Essai de s`emantique) was published in English under the title of Semantics.

`pure semantics' refers to a branch of symbolic or mathematical logic originated by R. Carnap. It is a part of semiotics - the study of signs and languages in general, including all sorts of codes, such as military signals, traffic signals, etc.

Semantics

As the term semantics is widely accepted by a lot of linguists, we consider it possible to use for:

- The branch of linguistics which specializes in the study of meaning;

- The expressive aspect of language in general;

- The meaning of one particular word in all its varied aspects and nuances.

The Word and its Meaning

Referential: seeks to formulate the essence of meaning by establishing the interdependence between the words and things or concepts they denote

Functional: studies the functions of a word in speech and is concerned with how the meaning works

THE TRIANGLE OF REFERENCE

Was introduces by Charles Kay Ogden and Ivor Armstrong Richards in 1923 in their book “The Meaning of Meaning”.

Referential approach

Some advocates of the referential approach point out that the meaning of the linguistic sign is the concept underlying it and thus substitute meaning for concept.

Others identify meaning with the referent.

Suggestions have also been made about meaning as the interrelation of the sound-form, concept and referent, but not as an objectively existing part of the objective sign. With this approach to word-meaning the analysis will inevitably operate with subjective mental processes and will not be able to bring scientific order in semantic analysis.

Ukrainian linguists

Ukrainian linguists agree in one basic principle: they all point out that lexical meaning is the realization of the notion by means of a definite language system. Значення слова - це певне впдображення предмета, явища чи вiдношення в свiдомостi носiiв мови, що утворює в структурi слова його внутрiшню сторону, у вiдношеннi до якоi звукова сторона виступае як матерiальна оболонка слова, необхiдна не тiльки для вираження значення i повiдомлення його iншим членам суспiльства, а й для самого виникнення слова, його формування, iснування i розвитку.”

Componential analysis

It is used for:

A. A detailed comparison of meaning whether within a single language or between languages;

B. Providing a more adequate basis for translational equivalences;

C. The judging of the semantic compatibility as an important feature of style;

D. Treating semantic transpositions of words, figurative extension in particular.

The contrastive study of the semantic structures of English and Ukrainian

Should aim at establishing the most generalized, as well as the most specific relations between word meanings. E.g., all the various relations between the variant meanings of polysemantic words may be indicated systematically. Specific distinctions can also be worked out.

Semantic features (semes)

How would a semantic approach help us to understand something about the nature of language?

The hamburger ate the man

My cat studied linguistics

A table was listening to some music

Notice that the oddness of these sentences does not derive from their syntactic structure. According to some basic syntactic rules for forming English sentences we have well-structured sentences:

The hamburger ate the man

NP + V + NP

This studied sentence is syntactically good but semantically odd. Since the sentence The man ate the hamburger is perfectly acceptable, what is the source of the oddness we experience?

One answer may relate to the components of the meaning of the noun hamburger which differ significantly from those of the noun man, especially when those nouns are used as subjects of the verb ate.

The kinds of nouns which can be subjects of the verb ate must denote entities which are capable of 'eating'.

Differential approach for analyzing the meaning.

If you were asked to give the crucial distinguishing features of the meanings of this set of English words (table, cow, girl. woman, boy, man), you could do so by means of the following diagram:

table cow girl woman boy man

animate - + + + + +

human - - + + + +

male - - - - + +

adult - + - + - +

According to differential approach meaning is constituted by a certain amount of semes on the basis of which words are opposed to each other in lexical semantic groups

This approach is not valid in many cases: attention, world, substance

Integral approach

According to it lexical meaning includes both differential and non-differential (integral) semantic components

There are different levels of the depth and adequacy of describing the meaning

It is impossible to draw the distinct limit of meaning because:

Reasons:

Many objects of reality cannot be distinctly differentiated (bachelor - is Pope a bachelor?)

The change of reality results in the change of its reflection in the consciousness of human beings (queen - leader, tyrant, unnecessary institution; robot - fantastic creature and everyday helper)

The knowledge of the notions is increasing (earth - flat and round; crazy - possessed and mentally ill)

There are differences in the cognition of various people black- the colour of night, coal; snow - in Africa, Europe, north)

Cannot be distinctly differentiated

The semantic structure of the word

The levels of the analysis of the word:

— Sememic (on the level of sememe - a separate sense of a polysemantic word)

— Semic (on the level of semes - separate components of meaning)

The field principle of the description of meaning

1. The meaning is a system of components (semes) constituting a structure (sememe);

2. All components of meaning are arranged into one functional language unit - sememe;

3. The structure of meaning includes semantic components belonging both to the same and different types;

4. In the structure of the meaning macrocomponents can be singles out (connotative, denotative and others)

5. Macrocomponents are organized horizontally, microcomponents are arranged vertically;

6. There are semantic components belonging to nucleus and periphery;

7. The nucleus is constituted by constant, essential and frequent semantic components;

8. The semes of periphery add to the nucleus and stipulate the semantic development of the word (polysemy)

9. The border between the semes of nucleus and periphery is indistinct

10. The semes that constitute one meaning can be repeated in other meanings, the semes of nucleus in one meaning can be those of periphery in a different one

11. Meaning can differ in some semes and coincide in others (synonyms, antonyms)

Macrocomponents: Denotative meaning

The notional content of the word is expressed by the denotative meaning (also called referential or extensional ). To denote is to serve as linguistic expression for a notion or as a name for an actually existing object referred to by a word. The term denotatum (Lat. denotatum, pl. denotata - означуване) is used in different meanings. When we speak about denotative meaning we consider it to be the notional nucleus of meaning abstracted from stylistic, pragmatic, modal, emotional, subjective, communicative and other shades. Quite often the terms denotatum and referent are being used indiscriminatedly as synonyms.

Macrocomponents: Connotative meaning

The emotional content of the word i.e. its capacity to evoke or directly express emotions is rendered by connotative component of meaning (also called emotive charge or intentional connotations) . Connotation (Lat. connotation from connoto - маю додаткове значення) is an emotional , evaluative or stylistic component of a linguistic unit of regular or occasional character. Within the connotains of a word we distinguish its capacity to evoke or express: a) emotion (daddy - father) ; b) evaluation ( clique - group); c) intensity (adore - love); d)stylistic colouring (slay - kill) etc. In a broad sense connotation is any component which adds to the denotative meaning.

Macrocomponents: grammatical meaning

The complexity of the word-meaning is manifold. Apart from the lexical meaning including denotative and connotative meaning it is always combined with the grammatical meaning. The grammatical meaning is defined as an expression in speech of relationship between words based on contrastive features of arrangements in which they occur.

Polysemy

A semantic universal inherent in the fundamental structure of language.

Both in English and in Ukrainian polysemy is widespread but is more characteristic of English due to the predominance of root words.

The greater the relative frequency of the word, the greater the number of elements that constitute its semantic structure, i.e. the more polysemantic it is.

“Principle of diversity of meaning”

G.K.Zipf tried to find a mathematical formula for it: his calculations suggested that “different meanings of a word will tend to be equal to the square root of its relative frequency (with the possible exception of the few dozen most frequent words). Put in a different way: m = F^1/2

Where m stands for the number of meanings and F for relative frequency.

E.g. the total number of meaning registered in NED for the first thousand of the most frequent English words is almost 25 000, i.e. the average number of meanings for each these most frequent words is 25.

2. The etymology of the Ukrainian language

Three main etymological layers of Ukrainian vocabulary

1. Words from earlier periods:

* common Indo-European words

* Proto-Slavonic words

* Common East Slavonic words

2. Proper Ukrainian lexis

3. Words borrowed from other languages

Common Indo-European words

Мати

Russian: мать

Greek: mitйra

Sanskrit: matr

German: Mutter

English: mother

* names of organs and parts of the human body: око, рука, зуб, серце, кров, язик, ніс;

* family relations: батько, мати, брат, сестра, син, дочка;

* natural phenomena: сонце, небо, вогонь, ніч, день, вечір, озеро, вода;

* plants and animals: дерево, осика, верба, вівця, вовк, порося, олень, свиня.

* numbers: п'ять, десять, тисяча, сто;

* names of food: сіль, мед;

* names of the most necessary actions and processes: бути, жити, ходити, стояти, сидіти, їсти, робота, брати, вести;

* qualities: жовтий, босий, довгий.

Proto-Slavonic/Common Slavonic words

Proto-Slavonic language (till 5th-6th centuries A. D.) -> all modern Slavonic languages

Ukrainian плуг косити

Russian плуг косить

Polish pіug kosiж

Czech pluh kosit

Bulgarian плуг кося

Serbian плуг косити

* names of people: чоловік, жінка, бабa;

* parts of the body: чоло, шия, рот, борода, тіло;

* names of clothes, footwear and parts of dwelling: шуба, вікно, дзеркало;

* natural phenomena: вітер, роса, осінь;

* houseware and tools: коса, меч, граблі, весло, мило, ніж, клин, мило, шило, голка, серп, плуг;

* animals and birds: віл, корова, кінь, комар, жук, пес, ведмідь, коза, бик, голуб;

* food: риба, масло, пиво, м'ясо, молоко, яйце, пшоно, жито,тісто, пиріг;

* activities: орати, сіяти, кувати, шити, ловити, писати, косити, варити;

* abstract notions: дар, душа, дума, гріх, стид, кара, диво, правда, кривда, воля, гнів, скорбота;

* rites: Купалa;

* pronouns: я, ми, ти, він;

* some other words: плем'я, сніп, вікно, холодний, гіркий, кислий, сад, межа, берег, сторона.

Common East Slavic words

* family relations: племінник, дядько;

* names of animals: білка, кішка, селезень, собака,соловей, сорока, зозуля, жайворонок;

* names of foods and meals: коровай, пряник, коржик;

* names of plants: гречка, осокa, щавель, хвощ, молочай;

* housewear and tools: ківш, кочерга, горня;

* agricultural notions: урожай, полова, мельник, ярина, сіножать.

Proper Ukrainian vocabulary

11th- 12th c. Ukrainian nation begins to form on the territory of modern Ukraine

How to identify proper Ukrainian word?

1. It has no features of a borrowing.

2. It is translated into Russian by another word, not similar to the Ukrainian one.

Ukr. хвиля мрія нишком

Rus. волна мечта исподтишка

Many Ukrainian proper words were created from roots of Proto-Slavonic and Old East Slavonic words by means of Ukrainian word building elements:

бондаренко -- -енк-, -о

гордощі -- -ощ-, -і

царівна -- -івн-, -а

Words borrowed from Old Slavonic (Church Slavonic)

Church Slavonic - a language which formed in 9th c. on the basis of Macedonian dialect of Old Bulgarian.

Church Slavonic borrowings - уста, палата, буква, супостат, істина, небеса, Бог, хрест, вождь, святиня, собор, союз, соратник, благодать, владика, глашатай, благословення, предтеча, властолюбець

Features of Church Slavonic borrowings

* sound sequences ра, ла, ре, ле (врата, град, глава, брег) instead of Ukrainian оро, оло, ере, еле (ворота, город, голова, берег);

* initial sound complex йе: єдиний, єдність;

* noun suffixes -тель, -ство (учитель, братство); prefixes воз-, со-, пред- (воздвигнути, премудрий) and suffixes ущ, -ащ, -ящ (трудящий, грядущий);

* components of compound words благо-, бого-, добро-, зло-, град-: благодать, богослов, добродушний, злочин.

Borrowings from other Slavonic languages

* Belarussian: розкішний, обридати, нащадок, бадьоро, дьоготь;

* Polish: перешкода, недолугий, дощенту, обіцяти, цікавий, гасло, міць, шлюб, раптом, принаймні бавитись, барвінок, вдячність, досконало, жупан, склеп, полька, панствo;

* Czech: брама, огида, ярка, паркан, карк, ганьба;

* Serbian: хлопець;

* Slovenian: жменя;

* Russian (2nd part of 17th , Soviet period): болільник, вертоліт, вихідний, відмінник, націнка, учасник, супутник, ударник, електропоїзд.

Words borrowed from non-Slavonic languages

* Greek: фізика, фігура, фокус, психологія, скелет, біологія, мак, миска, крокодил, ангел, ікона;

* Latin: інфекція, ангіна, вена, арматура, мотор, акваріум, радіус, конституція, делегат;

* Arab: алгебра, алкоголь, атлас, нашатир;

* German (17th-18th c.): швабра, паштет, фарш, клейстер, фронт, штат, шпигун, солдат;

* French (from the 2nd part of 18th c.): політика, кур'єр, балет, режисер, роль, романс, абажур, шофер, режисер, гараж;

* English (from the end of 19th c.): док, мічман, футбол, хокей, старт, фініш, трамвай

* Spanish: ананас, карамель, сигара;

* Italian: : адажіо, бас, віолончель, опера, анданте, акорд, композитор, вермішель, бензин, паста;

* Dutch: флот, трос, трап, шлюпка, баркас, каюта, лоцман, бакен,гавань, матрос, дамба;

* Caucasian languages: аул, тамада, джигіт.

* Turkic languages (Turkish, Azerbaijanian, Turkmen, Crimean Tatar etc.): чумак, богатир, козак, гайдамака, балда, отаман, кавун, гарбуз, шашлик, казан, чарка, баран, базар, батіг, сарай, базар, баклажан, байрак, кабан, сазан, барабан, аршин, аркан.кайдани,чабан.

3. Neologism. Definition of the term

The term neologism is of Greek origin and consists of two parts - neo meaning "new", and logos meaning "speech, utterance". The term neologism is first attested in English in 1772, borrowed from French nйologisme (1734).

The term is used to refer to:

1) A new word or phrase coined to denote new notions, objects, phenomena, etc. (a.k.a. lingual neologism, morphological neologism, or innovation): blackmarketeer "someone who engages illegally in trade in scarce or controlled commodities"; Блог (англ. blog, від web log - щоденник);

2) A new word or phrase which conveys in a new fashion the attitude of a speaker to already existing notion, object, phenomena etc. singling out their peculiar, not known or not noticed feature (a.k.a. synonymic neologism) skid-lid "a hardhat of the driver", fuddy duddy "old-fashioned, outdated“;

3) A new sense in which the already existing lingual unit is used (a.k.a. semantic neologism or semantic extension): to dig meaning "to comprehend, to appreciate, to enjoy (slang)", e.g. I can dig it. Do you dig this song?; вірус, мишка(комп.); 4) a word created by a writer or poet in order to achieve certain artistic effects (a.k.a. an individual and stylistic neologism or occasionalism): grok (from a science-fiction novel Stranger in a Strange Land (1961) by Robert A. Heinlein) meaning "to understand intuitively or by empathy“;двостільцевий депутат.

Every neologism goes through the following stages:

· usualisation (it enters a widely used lexis) -

· socialization (it is accepted as a speech norm) -

· Lexicalization/integration (it becomes lexically registered).

Methods of word-formation remain to be dominant in creating neologisms

1. Compounding - Obamamania; skinhead, come-back; Боді-арт; Веб-сторінка

2. Affixation - non-friend ; preschooler; quarkonics ; Блейзер (англ. blazer від to blaze - сяяти, палати)

3. Abbreviations and acronyms : CPF "computer furniture", HDW "hardware", URL "Uniform Resource Locator“;

4. Conversion - the move of the word from one part of speech to another: a friend (n.) -> to friend (v.).

5. Teleskopy-1)smassy=smart + sassy, Chinglish=Chinese + English; 2)cyborg=cybernetic+organism); 3)Californication=California+fornication); 4) slithy=lithe+slimy.terminology and advertisement: infomercial=informatio+commercial, edutainment=education+entertainment, cafetorium=cafeteria+auditorium, netiquette=network+etiquette, trashware=trash+software,

Ways of translating neologisms

1) transcription and transliteration:

punk "панк", ombudsman "омбудсмен", skinhead "cкінхед“;

2) calquing: workaholic "трудоголік", antihero "антигерой"; image maker;

3) descriptive translation: open cry -"відкритий викрик"

Neologism vs Occasionalism

1. Occasional words are created in speech directly for particular situation. Some authors can quote the most widespread occasionalisms.

2. The novelty of neologisms disappears in some time and extraordinary and unfamiliar perception of occasional elements is their distinctive feature.

3. The appearance of occasionalisms in language is always unpredictable. They have so called facultative function.

4. Occasional elements are very expressive because of unaccustomed perception and because of special concentration of content.

“Euphemism” - what it stands for?

A euphemism is a generally innocuous word or expression used in place of one that may be found offensive or suggest something unpleasant.

The word euphemism comes from the Greek word е?цзмЯб (euphemia), meaning "the use of words of good omen", which in turn is derived from the Greek root-words eu (е?), "good, well" and pheme (цЮмз) "glory, flattering speech, praise.

Applicability of the euphemism to various spheres of life

Military: "neutralising" or "clearing" enemy combatants, which means to kill them. "Clearing" refers to a "Search and Clear" sweep--to kill enemy in order to reach objectives--and sounds rather more pleasant than the Vietnam War era term "Search and Destroy." Many countries call their military administration a Department or Ministry of 'Defence' instead of 'War'. “;нейтралізувати (противника).

Disability and handicap: Lame / crippled > handicapped > disabled > physically challenged > differently abled > People with disabilities; неповносправний/з особливими потребами;

Religion: For God and Jesus, such as gosh and gee;

For hell, damnation. "Hell" could be replaced with "heck“;лихий(чорт,нечиста сила);

Death and murder: Kick the bucket; Deceased for "dead“; join the majority; pass away; відійти у вічність; спочити у мирі;

Political correctness

Political correctness (adjectivally, politically correct; both forms commonly abbreviated to PC) is a term that refers to language, ideas, or policies that address perceived or actual discrimination against or alienation of politically, socially or economically disadvantaged groups.

· “Intellectually disabled” in place of mentally retarded/Неповносправний

· “African American” in place of Black and Negro, in the United States/Чорношкірий

· “Native American” in place of Indian, in the United States/ Індіанець

· Gender-neutral terms such as “firefighter” in place of fireman and firewoman, “police officer” in place of policeman and policewoman;

· Value-free terms describing physical disabilities, such as “visually impaired” in place of blind and “hearing impaired” in place of deaf; із слуховими дифектами;

· Value-free cultural terms, such as “Holiday season” and “Winter holiday”, in place of Christmas; святковий час;

How to Be Politically Correct

• Be careful when addressing groups or talking about others.

• Avoid language that addresses only one demographic group unless it is intended for that group only, such as using "men" when you mean "all people".

• Avoid titles that are exclusionary, such as "Chairman" (use "Chairperson"); "Fireman" (use Firefighter); and "Stewardess" (use "Flight Attendant").

• Avoid expressions that are derogatory with regard to physical or mental abilities, such as "handicapped" or "retarded".

• Avoid overly-cautious racial descriptions that can be offensive.

• Avoid the use of religious terms when speaking to a group that may include people who belong to different religions.

• Be sensitive to the inferences people may read in to the words you choose.



4. Synonyms. Antonyms. Homonyms

— synonyms present the same phenomenon in different aspects, shades and variations;

— synonyms can therefore be defined in terms of linguistics as two or more words of the same language, belonging to the same part of speech and possessing one or more identical or nearly identical denotational meanings, interchangeable, at least in some contexts without any considerable alteration in denotational meaning, but differing in morphemic composition, phonemic shape, shades of meaning, connotations, style, valency and idiomatic use;

Examples:

— English: pretty, attractive, good-looking;

— Ukrainian: горіти, палати, палахкотіти, жевріти, тліти;

— English: Think you can play Romeo? Romeo should smile, not grin, walk, not swagger, speak his line, and not mumble them.

History of discussing synonyms:

— Greeks and Romans: mainly in the philosophical perspective, parallel names to the same notions, this proving that the word is just a label for notion;

— 16-17^th centuries: synonyms are considered primarily for stylistic purposes, as a means of decorating and enriching the text;

— Since the 18^th century: sense differentiation of synonyms.

Criteria for synonymy.

— according to traditional linguists - words of the same category, conveying the same notion but differing either in shades of meaning or in stylistic characteristics;

— semantic criterion - may be defined as words with the same denotation, but differing in connotations. For example: moist - wet (denotation) - moderately or slightly (connotation);сирий - мокрий (denotation) - просякнутий вологою (connotation);

— interchangeability - words which are interchangeable at least in some contexts without any considerable alternation in denotational meaning.

For example: He glanced at her (He looked at her briefly and turned away); He peered at her (He tried to see her better but something prevented: darkness, fog, weak eyesight).

Types of synonyms.

According to V. V. Vinogradov, there are three types of synonyms:

— Ideographic - words conveying the same notion, but differing in shades of meaning.

For example:

English: medicine, illness;

Ukrainian: здобуток, завоювання.

— Stylistic - words, differing in stylistic characteristics.

For example:

English: father, parent, dad, daddy;

Ukrainian: мама, матуся, мамочка;

— Absolute - words, coinciding in all their shades of meaning and in all their stylistic characteristics.

Ukrainian: площа - майдан;

The sources of synonymy:

— simple native words are stylistically neutral, literary words are borrowed from French and learned words are of Greek-Latin origin.

For example: to ask - to question - to interrogate; to gather - to assemble - to collect;

— synonymic differentiation - synonyms influence each other semantically.

For example: wench - girl; knave - boy;

— words which came from dialects and regional variants (e.g. American English).

For example: girl - lassie, charm - glamour;

— verbal synonymic groups often include a verb with a postpositive.

For example: to choose - to pick out, to enter - to come into;

— synonymy due to shortening.

For example: memorandum - memo, microphone - mike;

— Conversion and affixation.

For example: commandment - command, laughter - laugh.

The notion of antonym

Defining the notion of antonym:

— the notion indicates words of the same category of a part of speech, which have contrasting meanings;

— I. Arnold: may be also defined as two or more words of the same language belonging to the same part of speech and to the same semantic field, identical in style and nearly identical in distribution, associated and often used together so that their denotative meanings render contradictory and contrary notions.

For example: hot - cold; light - dark; happiness - sorrow; сум - радість; добро - зло.

— contradictory notions are mutually opposed and denying one another;

For example: alive means “not dead”, impatient means “not patient”.

— contrary notions are also mutually opposed but they are gradable.

For example: old and young are the most distant elements of a series like: old - middle-aged - young.

Classification of antonyms:

— absolute - express contrary notions.

For example: young - old, right - wrong.

— derivational - created with negative affixes.

For example: known - unknown, appear - disappear.

The notion of homonym

Defining the notion of homonym.

— words, identical in sound and spelling or at least in one of these aspects, but different in meaning, distribution and often in origin;

— mainly monosyllabic;

For example: bow - поклін, bow - лук.

Classification of homonyms.

Walter Skeat classified homonyms according to their spelling and sound forms into the following three groups:

— homonyms proper - the words identical in sound and spelling.

For example: school - косяк риби or школа; місяць;

— homographs - words with the same spelling but different in sound.

For example: read, lead, live.

— homophones - words identical in sound but different in spelling.

For example: night - knight; piece - peace.

5. Systemic organization of lexicon

Conditioned in all languages by lingual as well as by extralingual factors which are of universal nature

The most important extralingual factors, predetermining the systemic organization of lexicon are:

a) Physical and mental factors,

b) Environmental factors,

c) Social factors.

Common notions

· the physical needs of human beings

· mental activity of man

· natural environment of human beings

· social phenomena as well as relationships and activities of man

Culturally biased words

The English The Ukrainian

farthing, кутя,

shilling, думи,

haggis думи, , січовики

Typologically relevant groups

Universal lexicon

Nationally specific lexicon

Trying to compare universal lexicon of the two languages we proceed from the idea that the basic lexicalization assumption should be explained within the framework of even more fundamental ideas of a language sign nature and its realization during its life.

Word semantic development

The assumptions about the most probable direction of any word semantic development in its history is the key point for understanding main lines of a possible mechanism for historical development of the entire language system.

This assumption has to deal with fact that there are more senses than words, so a word, at least potentially, is polysemous, and possesses some degree of semantic uncertainty.

Polysemy is a semantic universal inherent in the fundamental structure of language.

Both in English and in Ukrainian polysemy is widespread. But it is more characteristic of English or Ukrainian?

The greater the relative frequency of the word, the greater the number of elements that constitute its semantic structure, i.e. the more polysemantic it is.

“Principle of diversity of meaning”

G.K.Zipf tried to find a mathematical formula for it: his calculations suggested that “different meanings of a word will tend to be equal to the square root of its relative frequency (with the possible exception of the few dozen most frequent words). Put in a different way m = F^1/2 m stands for the number of meanings and F for relative frequency.

E.g. the total number of meaning registered in NED for the first thousand of the most frequent English words is almost 25 000, i.e. the average number of meanings for each these most frequent words is 25.

Metaphoric and metonymic transference of meaning

Metaphor (from Greek мефбцпсЬ - transposition ) is the result of the semantic process when a form of a linguistic unit or expressing of a linguistic category is transposed from one object of designation to another on the basis of a certain similarity between these objects as reflected in the speaker's mind. Metaphor is actually based on comparison.

It has been discussed by different linguists [ Shibles 1971, Тараненко 1980, Тараненко 1989, Арутюнова 1979, Телия 1988]

Semasiological approach

lexical meanings are considered to be psychological entities, thoughts and ideas, and meaning changes are explained as resulting from psychological processes. It is considered to be one of the principal ways of the semantic change of linguistic units

Onomasiological approach

Is treated as the general principle of nomination, e.g. in the process of lingual reflection of the cognition of the surrounding world in the designation of:

Relief by names of dishes (котел, жолоб),

Sea flora and fauna by names of land and river creatures and plants (морські заяць, окунь, капуста),

Means of transport - from water to air (летючий корабель, повітряний флот) and from land to water (річковий трамвай, водні лижі).

Stylistic approach: metaphor is considered to be one of the tropes.

Linguaphilosophic and ethnolinguistic approaches: metaphor is presented as the way of world perception, simulation of the world and creating of the lingual picture of the world.

Metaphorisation

Metaphorisation is most vividly represented on the lexical level and we can discover a lot of common features while analyzing linguistic metaphors in English and Ukrainian. Thus, the character of similarity making the basis of metaphors is basically the same:

1) Similarity by physical features:

· Form and sight, for example, Ukr.: стріла крана, гірський хребет, сонечко - комаха, Eng.:

· Position, for example, Ukr.: голова колони,Eng.: foot of the mountain, a page, back of the sofa

· Sounding, for example, Ukr.: барабанити у двері, Eng.: drum fingers

· Peculiarities of movement, for example, Ukr.: коник - комаха, супутник - небесне тіло, Eng.:

· Peculiarities of functioning, for example, Ukr.: повітряний флот, English: leg of the chair, a bookworm

2) Similarity by physiological and psychological impressions from the perception of different objects:

Synesthetic.

Synesthesy (from Greek ухнбЯуазуйт - simultaneous perception) is treated in linguistics as the reflection of the semantic structure of physiological associations between different types of senses. Synesthetic metaphors can be based on the perception of hearing, sight, touch, taste, for example, Ukr.: крикливий (одяг), високий/низький (звук), солодкий (запах, голос, обійми),Eng.: soft (voice)

Most often such metaphors reflect the feeling of touch, for example,

Ukr.: гострий(запах, блиск), м'який (голос, світло, рух),

Eng.: soft (voice, colour), least often - smell.

Most productive directions of their development are spheres of sight and hearing.

Metaphors

Transference from the sphere of the physical world to psychological and social spheres, to some abstract relations, for example, Ukr.:горіти (завзяттям), гострий (розум), дрібний (урядовець), Eng.: , in particular, from space to time, for example, довгий(день)

Transference through actualization of a relatively indistinctive semantic feature, often of emotional-evaluative character, for example, горить (взуття), прірва (безліч)

Similarity which exists only in the imagination of the speaker and is only desirable for him, for example, to give intimate colouring to communication one can address a person, who is not a good acquaintance or a relative, as друже, брате.

S.Ullmann suggests the following types of transference:

a) anthropomorphic,

b) zoomorphic,

c) from concrete to abstract,

d) synesthetic,

e) from lexical units that attract a special attention of the society in that or other period.

The last type reflects the position of some lexical units on the scale of the social values of the society.

E.g. “religious” and “agricultural” metaphors used to be quite popular in Ukrainian (чорт, ірод, бусурман; нива, галузь, сіяти добро), but now the accent is mostly on sports, technologies, space investigation, medical science (цейтнот, хід конем, орбіта інтересів, запрограмуватися на що-небудь, больові точки).

Classification of the models of the metaphoric evaluative lexical units is based on the opposition bad - good which reflects the transference of the experience acquired in the physical world to the moral and social sphere. For example, „світло - морок” (світло знань - морок неуцтва), „тепло - холод” (теплий - холодний погляд), „відлига - заморозки” (у суспільстві), „верх - низ” (верхи - низи суспільства, висока - низька посада, підноситися - падати духом), „рух - непорушність” ( суспільний рух - застій) and others.

Metonymy

(from Greek мефщнхмЯб - renaming ) is the result of the semantic process when a form of a linguistic unit or expressing of a linguistic category is transfered from one object of designation to another on the basis of a certain contiguity of these objects conditioned by spatial, temporal, causal, symbolic, instrumental, functional and other relations as reflected in the speaker's mind.

Approaches to metonymy treatment

1. Semasiological approach. It is considered to be one of the principal ways of the semantic change of linguistic units.

2. Onomasiological approach. It is treated as the general principle of nomination, for example naming of psychological phenomena on the basis of their external physiological expression, mimic, jests, for example, тремтіти - to be afraid, червоніти - to be ashamed, рвати на собі волосся - to be in despair

Stylistic approach. Metonymy is considered to be one of the tropes.

Metonymy occurs quite regularly, in comparison to other types of semantic change, within some semantic groups.

For nouns:

· The container for the thing contained, for example, Ukr.: склянка (випив склянку), зал (аплодував), місто (зустрічає гостя), Eng.:a cup (drank a cup), a kettle (is boiling)

· The material for the thing made of it, for example, Ukr.: чай, салат (рослина - страва), золото (вироби з нього) Eng.: marble (the statue made of marble), silver (coin), glass(articles made of glass)

· The object for what is on it, for example, Ukr.:стіл (їжа), лікті (протерлися), Eng.: dish

· The object for a certain activity, for example, Ukr.:гкорона, скіпетр, трон (влада монарха), булава(гетьманство), Eng.:

· The sign for the thing signified, for example, Ukr.:номер (окремий примірник газети, журналу, окрема кімната в готелі, окремий виступ артиста), трійка (гральна карта, трамвай №3), , Eng.: from the cradle to the grave (from childhood to death), arena (Lat. Sand - a reminder that sand was used to strew the floors of the ancient amphitheatres)

· The feature (quality, action etc.) for its subject. Here metonymy can reflect the transference from abstract to concrete, from action to object etc. For example, Ukr.: магістр, граф (про носія титулу), талант (він талант),симпатія(про людину), весілля(святкування) Eng.: the authorities (were greeted)

· The action for its time, place, result, object or subject, for example, Ukr.: косовиця, прохід, набір, випуск, шиття, креслення, рада), Eng.: pass

For verbs

· Process the object in a way and obtain, extract or liquidate something as the result, for example, Ukr.: копати (землю/яму), доїти (корову/молоко), полоти (город/бур'ян), штопати (одяг/дірку), Eng.: to milk

· The action of the subject and the state of the object, for example, Ukr.: протікає (вода/стеля), облазить (шкіра/спина)

ь Metonymy frequently occurs in phraseological units, for example,

ь Ukr.: до сивого волосся (до старості), піднімати руки (здаватися в полон)

ь English: to put one's foot down

Hyperbole

Hyperbole (from Greek эресвплЮ - overexageration) is based on intentional exaggeration of the quantity and size of objects, intensity of a feature or an act aimed at making the image of an object more distinct and thus, the utterance- more convincing.

For example, Ukr.: півтора чоловіка (дуже мало людей), скажу два слова, море крові, черепашача швидкість; Eng.: haven't seen you for ages, I hate troubling you, a thousand thanks.

Litotes

Litotes (from Greek лйфьфзт - simplicity) is aimed at making the statement less categorical through the use of indirect designation of a certain notion, namely through the negation of the notion that is opposite to the given. Litotes can be based on

• negation, for example, Ukr.: не заперечую (погоджуюсь), неважко (легко); Eng.: no coward, not bad;

• double negation, for example, Ukr.: така подія не видається неможливою. Not characteristic of English.;

• without negation, for example, Eng.: I could do with a cup of coffee. Not characteristic of Ukrainian.

Irony

Irony (from Greek еЯсщнеЯб - mockery) is the type of the semantic change which occurs when a word with a positive or assertive connotation (in a wide sense) is used to denote opposite characteristics. It is usually pronounced with a specific intonation, which in written form can be marked by inverted commas. For example, Ukr.: святий та божий, частувати (палицею), нагородити (стусаном), Eng.: a pretty mess.

Euphemism

Euphemism (Greek еэцзмйумьт - mild expression, from еы - well and цзмЯжщ - praise, glorify) is a word or phrase used for indirect, particularly, mild and polite designation of some objects, phenomena or actions to avoid using their already existing primary names which would be better logically motivated. The sources of euphemisms are the taboo phenomena and the desire to substitute some names by their neutral, “positive” or “negative” equivalents. For example, Ukr.: нерозумний (замість дурний), на заслужений відпочинок (на пенсію), пішов з життя (помер), знайтися (народитися); Eng.: queer (mad), deceased (dead),elevated (drunk).



6. Types of varieties of a language

• region,

• social group,

• field of discourse,

• medium,

• attitude

The first two types of variation relate primarily to the language users and are relatively permanent for them people use a regional variety because they live in a region or have once lived in a region people use a social variety because of their affiliation with a social group many people can communicate in more than one regional or social variety and can therefore switch varieties according to the situation. People can move to other regions or change their social affiliations, and may then adopt a new regional of social variety

The last three types of variation

• relate to language use. People select the varieties according to the situation and the purpose of the communication

• the field of discourse relates to the activity in which they are engaged

• the medium may be spoken or written

• the attitude expressed through language is conditioned by the relationship of the participants in the particular situation.

A common core or nucleus

A common core or nucleus is present in all the varieties, so that however esoteric a variety may be, it has running through it a set of lexico-grammatical characteristics that are present in all the others.

It is that fact that justifies the application of the name “English” or of the name “Ukrainian” to all the varieties.

Dialects

Varieties according to region have a well-established label: dialects.

Geographical dispersion is in fact the classic basis for linguistic variation, and in the course of time such dispersion may result in dialects becoming so distinct that we regard them as different languages.

This stage was long ago reached with the Germanic dialects that are now Dutch, English, German, Swedish, etc, but it has not been reached with the dialects of English that have resulted from the regional separation of communities within the British Isles elsewhere in the world.

Ukrainian dialects

1. Pivnichne Narichchia (Nothern Dialect)

Spoken in Tchernigivsky, Zhytomyrsky, Rivnensky and Volynsky regions and in the northern part of Kyiv and Sumy regions. This dialect is close to Ukrainian-Belarusian patois and is classified into three more dialects: shidnopolisky govir (eastern woodlands patois ['pжtw??] ), seredniopolisky govir (middle woodlands patois) and zakhidnopolisky govir (western woodlands patios). As a sample of this dialect we can take the speech of the second Ukrainian President - Leonid Kuchma.

2. Pivdenno-Skhidne Narichchia (South-Eastern Dialect)

Spoken on the territory of Poltava, Kharkiv, Lugansk, Donetsk, Kherson regions, Crimea, south-eastern parts of Sumy, Kyiv, Kirovograd and Odesa regions, west of Cherkasy region and south of Mykolayiv region. The Middle Dnieper region patios, which makes the basis of Ukrainian literary language also belongs to this group. The dialect is also spoken by Ukrainian settlers in Kuban, Krasnodar, Stavropol and Povolzhye regions of the Russian Federation, Far East, Siberia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan.

3. Pivdenno-Zakhidne Narichchia (South-Western Dialect)

Spoken in Zakarpatsky, Ivano-Frankivsk, Lviv, Tchernivtsi, Khmelnytsk, Vinnytsia, Ternopil regions, north-western part of Kirovograd and Odesa regions, south-western Kyiv region, northern Zhytomyr, western Tcherkasy and northern Mykolayiv regions. This one is also widespread in the bordering territories of Moldova, Romania, Hungary, Slovak Republic and Poland.

Separate patois are spoken among Diaspora in Britain, Canada, USA and other countries. They comprise most numerous stylistically and grammatically different patois, which vary greatly within the group. Diaspora dialects are opposed to the classical Ukrainian language, although are considered the most true Ukrainian language among its speakers.

Regional dialects

Craig M. Carver shows about two dozen dialect regions in the US, based mainly on vocabulary, in his American Regional Dialects.

Peter Trudgill, in his Dialects of England, shows sixteen modern dialect regions in England, based on grammar, vocabulary, and accent (there are more in Wales, Scotland and Ireland)

Regional variation seems to be realized predominantly in phonology. We generally recognize a different dialect from a speaker's pronunciation or accent before we notice that the vocabulary or LEXICON is also distinctive.

Social variation is variation in speech according to educational and social status (sometimes - age and sex differences).

There is an important polarity between uneducated and educated speech. Educated language naturally tends to be given the additional prestige of government agencies, the professions, the political parties, the press, the law court, and the pulpit - any institution which has to address itself to a public. It is codified in dictionaries and grammars and is taught at all levels of schooling. It is almost exclusively the language of printed matter. It comes to be referred to as Standard English or literary Ukrainian.

Varieties according to the field of discourse

The field of discourse is the type of activity engaged in through language.

A speaker of a language has a repertoire of varieties according to field and switches to the appropriate one as occasion requires. The number of varieties that speakers command depends upon their profession, training and interests.

Typically the switch involves turning to the particular set of lexical items habitually used for handling the field in question.

Varieties according to medium those conditioned by speaking and writing respectively. Since speech is the primary or natural medium for linguistic communication, it is reasonable to focus on the differences imposed on language when it has to be expressed in a graphic medium instead.

As with varieties according to the field we are dealing here with two varieties that are in principle at the disposal of any user of a language as occasion may demand, irrespective of the variety of language they use as a result of region and education.

Constraints:

Some field varieties are difficult to compose except in writing (legal statutes especially)

Other varieties are restricted to speech (a radio commentary on a football match will be phrased very differently from a newspaper report of the same game)

Varieties according to attitude

Constitute, like field and medium varieties, a range of a language any section of which is in principle available at will to any individual speaker of a language, irrespective of the regional variant or national standard he may habitually use.

This class of varieties is often called “stylistic”, but this term is used with several different meanings.

In lexicology we are concerned with the choice of words that proceeds from our attitude to the hearer or reader, to the topic and to the purpose of our communication.

We recognize a gradient in attitude between FORMAL (relatively stiff, cold, polite, impersonal) on the one hand and INFORMAL (relatively relaxed, warm, rude, friendly) on the other.

The corresponding linguistic contrasts involve both grammar and vocabulary. For example:

Overtime emoluments are not available for employees who are non-resident…

Staff members who don't live in can't get paid overtime…

Many sentences like the foregoing can be rated `more formal' or `more informal' in relation to each other, but it is useful to acknowledge unmarked variety of English or Ukrainian, bearing no obvious colouring that has been induced by attitude. On each side of NEUTRAL language we may usually distinguish words that are markedly formal or informal.

The three-way contrast of formal-neutral-informal is not quite adequate to describe the full range of linguistic varieties. We should add at least one category at each end of the scale. On the one hand, we need to account for the extremely `frozen' variety of a language some times found in written instructions, e.g.

Distinguished patrons are requested to ascend to the second floor.

Thus, varieties of a language are characterised in the first place by the choice of special types of words peculiar of that or other variety.

These types of words represent the stylistic differentiation of the English and Ukrainian vocabulary.

Stylistic differentiation of the vocabulary

If we follow the stylistic differentiation of the English vocabulary suggested by I.R.Galperin we should distinguish:

1. Stylistically neutral words.

2. Literary-bookish words with the following subdivisions:

technical vocabulary,

barbarisms

poetical words

archaisms

literary neologisms

The word barbarism was originally used by the Greeks for foreign terms used in their language. As such, Anglicisms in other languages, Gallicisms (such as using the verb to assist to mean to be present at (cf. the French assister), Germanisms Hispanisms and so forth in English can also be construed as examples of barbarisms.

Barbarism itself is etymologically rooted in barbaros, the babbling outsider unable to speak Greek

Archaism

Is the deliberate use of an older form that has fallen out of current use. Archaisms are most frequently encountered in poetry, law and ritual writing and speech. Their deliberate use can be subdivided into literary archaisms, which seeks to evoke the style of older speech and writing; and lexical archaisms, the use of words no longer in common use.

Archaisms are kept alive by these ritual and literary uses and by the study of older literature. Should they remain recognised, they can be revived, as the word anent was in this past century anent - regarding; concerning: "This question remains a vital consideration anent the debate over the possibility of limiting nuclear war to military objectives" (New York Times).

In English one indicator of a deliberately archaic style is the use of the second person singular pronoun thou and its related case and verb forms.

Ironically, the word thou fell out of English speech because it was thought abruptly colloquial, like French tu. Thou is now seen in current English usage only in literature that deliberately seeks to evoke an older style, though there are also some still-read works that use thou, especially religious texts

The word ye and its related forms also are indicative of archaism, however in spoken English it might be hard to tell the difference, especially if the speaker has an accent that seems strange to the listener.

Stylistic Differentiation of English and Ukrainian Vocabulary

* Words glisten.

* Words irradiate exquisite splendour.

* Words carry magic and keep us spell-bound…

* Words are like glamorous bricks that constitute the fabric of any language…

* Words are like roses that make the environment fragrant…



7. Stylistically neutral layer

• consists of words mostly of native origin

• comprises fully assimilated borrowings

such words are devoid of any emotive colouring and are used in their denotative meaning, e.g. table, street, sky, go, speak, long, easy, never, often, etc.

Stylistically neutral words

Are not fixed to style. They can be used and dominate in texts of any style.

Can name concrete objects, phenomena, abstract notions, features of objects, action In groups of synonyms neutral words fulfil the function of the synonymic dominant.

Neutral words constitute the basis of both English and Ukrainian languages vocabulary.

Stylistically marked layer

Literary-bookish words (“learned” words):

• belong to the formal style, to the formal category of communication.

• are more stable due to the traditions of the written type of speech

• are used in descriptive passages of fiction, scientific texts, radio and television announcements, official talks and documents, business correspondence, etc.

Literary-bookish words

• mark the text as belonging to this or that style of written speech, but when used in colloquial speech or in informal situations, they may create a comical effect

...