ВУЗ: Не указан
Категория: Не указан
Дисциплина: Не указана
Добавлен: 06.04.2021
Просмотров: 4673
Скачиваний: 79
guish one part of speech from another. Cf. the noun paradigm — ( ),
-’s
,
-
s, -s’
as distinct from that of the regular verb — ( ) ,
-s,
-ed
1
,
-ed
2
,
-ing,
etc.
1
Besides the grammatical forms of words, i.e. word-forms, some schol-
ars distinguish lexical varieties which they term v a r i a n t s of
w o r d s . Distinction is made between two basic groups of variants of
words.
In actual speech a word or to be more exact a polysemantic word is
used in, one of its meanings. Such a word in one of i t s meanings is de-
scribed as lexico-semantic variant. Thus Group One comprises lexico-
semantic variants, i.e. polysemantic words in each of their meanings, as
exemplified by the meaning of the verb
to learn
in word-groups like
to
learn at school,
cf.
to learn about (of) smth,
etc.
Group Two comprises phonetic and morphological variants. As exam-
ples of phonetic variants the pronouncing variants of the adverbs
often
and
again
can be given, cf. ['o:fn] and ['o:ftэn], [э'gein] and [э'gen]. The
two variant forms of the past indefinite tense of verbs like
to learn
illus-
trate morphological variants, cf.
learned [-d]
and
learnt [-t].
Parallel for-
mations of the
geologic — geological, phonetic — phonetical
type also
enter the group of morphological variants.
2
It may be easily observed that the most essential feature of variants of
words of both groups is that a slight change in the morphemic or phonemic
composition of a word is not connected with any modification of its mean-
ing and, vice versa, a change in meaning is not followed by any structural
changes, either morphemic or phonetic. Like word-forms variants of
words are identified in the process of communication as making up one
and the same word. Thus, within the language system the word exists as a
system and unity of all its forms and variants.
Modern English Lexicology aims at giving a
systematic description of the word-stock of
Modern English. Words, their component
parts — morphemes — and various types of word-groups, are subjected to
structural and semantic analysis primarily from the synchronic angle. In
other words, Modern English Lexicology investigates the problems of
word-structure and word-formation in Modern English, the semantic struc-
ture of English words, the main principles underlying the classification of
vocabulary units into various groupings the laws governing the replenish-
ment of the vocabulary with new vocabulary units.
It also studies the relations existing between various lexical layers of
the English vocabulary and the specific laws and regulations that govern
its development at the present time. The source and growth of the English
vocabulary, the changes it has undergone in its history are also dwelt
upon, as the diachronic approach revealing the vocabulary in the making
cannot but contribute to the understanding of its workings at the present
time.
It has now become a tradition to include in a Course of Lexicology a
1
The symbol ( ) stands for the so-called zero-inflection, i. e. the significant absence of
an inflectional affix.
2
Pairs of vocabulary items like economic — economical, historic — historical differ-
ing in meaning cannot be regarded as morphological variants.
11
§ 6. Course of Modern English
Lexicology.
Its Aims and Significance
short section dealing with Lexicography, the science and art of dictionary-
compiling, because Lexicography is a practical application of Lexicology
so that the dictionary-maker is inevitably guided in his work by the princi-
ples laid down by the lexicologist as a result of his investigations. It is
common knowledge that in his investigation the lexicologist makes use of
various methods. An acquaintance with these methods is an indispensable
part of a course of lexicology.
Modern English Lexicology as a subject of study forms part of the
Theoretical Course of Modern English and as such is inseparable from its
other component parts, i.e. Grammar, Phonetics, Stylistics, on the one
hand, and the Course of History of the English Language, on the other.
The language learner will find the Course of Modern English Lexicol-
ogy of great practical importance. He will obtain much valuable informa-
tion concerning the English wordstock and the laws and regulations gov-
erning the formation and usage of English words and word-groups. Be-
sides, the Course is aimed both at summarising the practical material al-
ready familiar to the students from foreign language classes and at helping
the students to develop the skills and habits of generalising the linguistic
phenomena observed. The knowledge the students gain from the Course of
Modern English Lexicology will guide them in all their dealings with the
English word-stock and help them apply this information to the solution of
practical problems that may face them in class-room teaching. Teachers
should always remember that practical command alone does not qualify a
person to teach a language. •
This textbook treats the following basic problems:
1.
Semasiology and semantic classifications of words;
2.
Word-groups and phraseological units;
3.
Word-structure;
4.
Word-formation;
5.
Etymological survey of the English word-stock;
6.
Various aspects of vocabulary units and replenishment of Modern
English word-stock;
7.
Variants and dialects of Modern English;
8.
Fundamentals of English Lexicography;
9.
Methods and Procedures of Lexicological Analysis.
All sections end with a paragraph entitled “Summary and Conclu-
sions". The aim of these paragraphs is to summarise in brief the contents
of the preceding section, thus enabling the student to go over the chief
points of the exposition of problem or problems under consideration. Ma-
terial for Reference at the end of the book and the footnotes, though by no
means exhaustive, may be helpful to those who wish to attain a more
complete and thorough view of the lexicological problems.
II. Semasiology
By definition Lexicology deals with words, word-forming morphemes
(derivational affixes) and word-groups or phrases.
1
All these linguistic
units may be said to have meaning of some kind: they are all significant
and therefore must be investigated both as to form and meaning. The
branch of lexicology that is devoted to the study of meaning is known as
S e m a s i o l o g y .
2
It should be pointed out that just as lexicology is beginning to absorb a
major part of the efforts of linguistic scientists
3
semasiology is coming to
the fore as the central problem of linguistic investigation of all levels of
language structure. It is suggested that semasiology has for its subject - mat-
ter not only the study of lexicon, but also of morphology, syntax and senten-
tial semantics. Words, however, play such a crucial part in the structure of
language that when we speak of semasiology without any qualification, we
usually refer to the study of word-meaning proper, although it is in fact very
common to explore the semantics of other elements, such as suffixes, pre-
fixes, etc.
Meaning is one of the most controversial terms in the theory of lan-
guage. At first sight the understanding of this term seems to present no dif-
ficulty at all — it is freely used in teaching, interpreting and translation.
The scientific definition of meaning however just as the definition of some
other basic linguistic terms, such as w o r d . s e n t e n c e , etc., has
been the issue of interminable discussions. Since there is no universally
accepted definition of meaning
4
we shall confine ourselves to a brief sur-
vey of the problem as it is viewed in modern linguistics both in our coun-
try and elsewhere.
WORD-MEANING
§
1.
Referential Approach There are broadly speaking two schools to
Meaning of thought in present-day linguistics representing the main lines
of contemporary thinking on the problem: the referential approach, which
seeks to formulate the essence of meaning by establishing the interde-
pendence between words and the things or concepts they denote, and the
functional approach, which studies the functions of a word in speech and
is less concerned with what meaning is than with how it works.
1
See ‘Introduction’, § 1.
2
Sometimes the term s e m a n t i c s is used too, but in Soviet linguistics preference is given
to s e m a s i о l о g у as the word s e m a n t i c s is often used to designate one of the schools
of modern idealistic philosophy and is also found as a synonym of m e a n i n g .
3
D. Bolinger.
Getting the Words In. Lexicography in English, N. Y., 1973.
4
See, e. g., the discussion of various concepts of meaning in modern linguistics in:
Л. С. Барху-
даров.
Язык и перевод. М., 1975, с, 50 — 70.
All major works on semantic theory have so far been based on referen-
tial concepts of meaning. The essential feature of this approach is that it
distinguishes between the three components closely connected with mean-
ing: the sound-form of the linguistic sign, the concept underlying this
sound-form, and the actual referent, i.e. that part or that aspect of reality to
which the linguistic sign refers. The best known referential model of
meaning is the so-called “basic triangle” which, with some variations, un-
derlies the semantic systems of all the adherents of this school of thought.
In a simplified form the triangle may be represented as shown below:
As can be seen from the diagram the sound-form of the linguistic sign,
e.g. [dAv], is connected with our concept of the bird which it denotes and
through it with the referent, i.e. the actual bird.
1
The common feature of
any referential approach is the implication that meaning is in some form or
other connected with the referent.
Let us now examine the place of meaning in this model. It is easily ob-
served that the sound-form of the word is not identical with its meaning,
e.g. [dAv] is the sound-form used to denote a peal-grey bird. There is no
inherent connection, however, between this particular sound-cluster and
the meaning of the word
dove.
The connection is conventional and arbi-
trary. This can be easily proved by comparing the sound-forms of different
languages conveying one and the same meaning, e.g. English [dAv], Rus-
sian [golub'], German [taube] and so on. It can also be proved by compar-
ing almost identical sound-forms that possess different meaning in differ-
ent languages. The sound-cluster [kot], e.g. in the English language means
‘a small, usually swinging bed for a child’, but in the Russian language
essentially the same sound-cluster possesses the meaning ‘male cat’. -
1
As terminological confusion has caused much misunderstanding and often makes it
difficult to grasp the semantic concept of different linguists we find it necessary to mention
the most widespread terms used in modern linguistics to denote the three components de-
scribed above:
sound-form — concept — referent
symbol — thought or reference — referent
sign — meaning — thing meant
sign — designatum — denotatum
14
For more convincing evidence of the conventional and arbitrary nature
of the connection between sound-form and meaning all we have to do is to
point to the homonyms. The word
seal
[si:l], e.g., means ‘a piece of wax,
lead’, etc. stamped with a design; its homonym
seal
[si:l] possessing the
same sound-form denotes ‘a sea animal’.
Besides, if meaning were inherently connected with the sound-form of a
linguistic unit, it would follow that a change in sound-form would necessi-
tate a change of meaning. We know, however, that even considerable
changes in the sound-form of a word in the course of its historical devel-
opment do not necessarily affect its meaning. The sound-form of the
OE.
word
lufian [
luvian] has undergone great changes, and has been trans-
formed into
love
[lАv], yet the meaning ‘hold dear, bear love’, etc. has
remained essentially unchanged.
When we examine a word we see that its meaning though closely con-
nected with the underlying concept or concepts is not identical with them.
To begin with, concept is a category of human cognition. Concept is the
thought of the object that singles out its essential features. Our concepts
abstract and reflect the most common and typical features of the different
objects and phenomena of the world. Being the result of abstraction and
generalisation all “concepts are thus intrinsically almost the same for the
whole of humanity in one and the same period of its historical develop-
ment. The meanings of words however are different in different languages.
That is to say, words expressing identical concepts may have different
meanings and different semantic structures in different languages. The
concept of ‘a building for human habitation’ is expressed in English by the
word
house,
in Russian by the word
дом,
but the meaning of the English
word is not identical with that of the Russian as
house
does not possess
the meaning of ‘fixed residence of family or household’ which is one of
the meanings of the Russian word
дом
; it is expressed by another English
polysemantic word, namely
home
which possesses a number of other
meanings not to be found in the Russian word
дом.
The difference between meaning and concept can also be observed by
comparing synonymous words and word-groups expressing essentially the
same concepts but possessing linguistic meaning which is felt as different
in each of the units under consideration, e.g.
big, large; to, die, to pass
away, to kick the bucket, to join the majority; child, baby, babe, in-
fant.
The precise definition of the content of a concept comes within the
sphere of logic but it can be easily observed that the word-meaning is not
identical with it. For instance, the content of the concept
six
can be ex-
pressed by ‘three plus three’, ‘five plus one’, or ‘ten minus four’, etc. Ob-
viously, the meaning of the word
six
cannot be identified with the mean-
ing of these word-groups.
To distinguish meaning from the referent, i.e. from the thing denoted
by the linguistic sign is of the utmost importance, and at first sight does
not seem to present difficulties. To begin with, meaning is linguistic
whereas the denoted object or the referent is beyond the scope of lan-
guage. We can denote one and the same object by more than one word of
a different meaning. For instance, in a speech situation an apple can be
denoted
15