Файл: Guseva_G_V_Lekcii_po_leksikologii_anglyskogo.pdf

semantic changes (metaphor and metonymy) and secondary ways: gradual (elevation and degradation), momentary (hyperbole and litotes).

II.Specialization

It is a gradual process when a word passes from a general sphere to some special sphere of communication, e.g. case has a general meaning circumstances in which a person or a zhing is. It is soecialized in its meaning when used in law (a lawsuit), in grammar (a form in the paradigm of a noun), in medicine (a patient, an illness). The difference between these meanings is revealed in the context.

The meaning of a word can specialize when it remains in general usage. The English verb starve was specialized in its meaning after the Scandinavian word die was borrowed into English. Die became the general verb with this meaning. Starve got the meaning to die of hunger.

The third way of specialization is the formation of proper names from common nouns. It is often used in toponymics: the City – the business part of London.

The fourth way of specialization is ellipsis. in such cases primarily we have a word-group of the type attribute + noun, which is used constsntly in a definite situation, e.g. the meaning of the word room was specialized because it was often used in the combinations: dining room, sleeping room which meant space for dining, space for sleeping.

III.Generalization

It is the transfer from a concrete meaning to an abstract one, e.g. journey was borrowed from French with the meaning one day trip, now it means a trip of any duration (jour means a day in French).

All auxiliary verbs are cases of generalization of their lexical meaning because they developed a grammatical: have, be, do, shall, will when used as

auxiliary verbs are devoid of their lexical meaning which they have when used as notional verbs or modal verbs, c.f. I have several books by Austin and I have read some books by Austin.

IV. Metaphor

It is a transfer of the meaning on the basis of comparison. Metaphor can be based on different types of similarity:

a)similarity of shape: head (of a cabbage), bottleneck, teeth (of a saw, a comb);

b)similarity of position: foot (of a page, of a mountain), head (of procession);

c)similarity of function, behaviour: a whip (an official in the British Parliament whose duty is to see that members were present at the voting), a bookworm (a person who is fond of books);

d)similarity of colour: orange, hazel, chestnut.

A special type of metaphor is when proper names become common nouns, e.g. philistine – a mercenary person, vandals – destructive people.

V.Metonymy

It is a transfer of the meaning on the basis of contiguity. There are different types of metonymy:

a)the material of which an object is made may become the name of the object: a glass, boards;

b)the name of the place may become the name of the people or of an object placed there: the House – members of Parliement, the White House – the Administration of the USA;

c)names of musical instruments may become names of musicians when they are united in an orchestra: the violin, the saxophone;

d)the name of some person may become a common noun, e.g. boycott was originally the name of an Irish family who were so much disliked by their neighbours that they did not mix with them.

e)names of inventors very often become terms to denote things they invented, e.g. watt, om, roentgen;

f)some geographical names can also become common nouns through metonymy, e.g. holland (linen fabrics), Brussels (a special kind of carpets), china (porcelain).

VI. Secondary Ways of Semantic Changes

There are the following secondary ways of semantic changes:

1.Elevation. It is a transfer of the meaning when it becomes better in the course of time: knight originally meant a boy, then a young servant, then a military servant, then a noble man. Now it is a title of nobility given to outstanding people.

2.Degradation. It is a transfer of the meaning when it becomes worse in the course of time, e.g. villain originally meant working on a villa, now it means a scoundrel.

3.Hyperbole. It is a transfer of the meaning when the speaker uses exaggeration, e.g. to hate (doing something), not to see somebody for ages. hyperbole is often used to form phraseological units, e.g. to split hairs.

4.Litotes. It is a transfer of the meaning when the speaker expresses the affirmative with the negative or vice versa, e.g. not bad (it is good), no coward, not half as important.

Lecture 4

Word-Combination

I.What is a Word-Combination? Lexical and Grammatical Combinability

The word-combination (WC) is the largest two-facet lexical unit observed on the syntagmatic level of analysis. By the degree of their structural and semantic cohesion WCs are classified into three WCs and phraseological units, cf.: at least, point of view, by means of, to take place.

Lexical combinability (collocation) is the aptness of a word to appear in certain lexical contexts, e.g. the word question combines with certain adjectives: delicate, vital, important.

Each word has a certain norm of collocation. Any departure from this norm is felt as a stylistic device: to shove a question.

The collocations of correlated words in different languages are not identical, e.g. both the English flower and its Russian counterpart цветок can be combined with a number of words denoting the place where the flowers are grown: gardenflowers, hot-house flowers; садовые цветы, оранжерейные цветы. But the English word cannot enter into combination with the word room to denote flowers growing in the rooms, cf.: комнатные цветы – pot flowers.

Grammatical combinability (colligation) is the aptness of a word to appear in certain grammatical contexts, e.g. the adjective heavy can be followed by a noun (heavy storm), by an infinitive (heavy to lift). Each grammatical unit has a certain norm of colligation: nouns combine with pre-positional adjectives (a new dress), relative adjectives combine with pre-positional adverbs of degree (dreadfully tired).

The departure from the norm of colligation is usually impossible: mathematics at clever is a meaningless string of words because English nouns do not allow of the structure N + at + A.

II.Meaning of Word-Combinations

Meaning of WCs is anlysed into lexical and grammatical (structural components).

Lexical meaning of the WC is the combined lexical meanings of its component words: red flower – red + flower. But in most cases the meaning of the whole combination predominates over the lexical meaning of its constituents, e.g. the meaning of the monosemantic adjective atomic is different in atomic weight and atomic bomb.

Polysemantic words are used in WCs in one of their meanings: blind man (horse, cat) – blind type (print, handwriting). Only one meaning of the adjective blind (unable to see) is combined with the lexical meaning of the noun man (human being) and only one meaning of man is realized in combination with blind. The meaning of the same adjective in blind type is different.

Structural meaning of the WC is conveyed by the pattern of arrangement of the component words, e.g. the WCs school grammar and grammar school consist of identical words but are semantically different because their patterns are different. The structural pattern is the carrier of a certain meaning qualitysubstance that does not depend on the lexical meanings of the words school and grammar.

III.Interdependence of Structure and Meaning in Word-Combinations

The pattern of the WC is the syntactic structure in which a given word is used as its head: to build + N (to build a house); to rely + on + N (to rely on sb).

The pattern and meaning of head-words are interdependent. The same head-word is semantically different in different patterns, cf.: get+N (get a letter); get+to+N (get to Moscow); get+N+inf (get sb to come).

In these patterns notional words are represented in conventional symbols whereas form-words are given in their usual graphic form. The reason is that

individual form-words may change the meaning of the word with which it is combined: anxious+for+N (anxious for news), anxious+about+N (anxious about his health).

Structurally simple patterns are usually polysemantic: the pattern take+N represents several meanings of the polysemantic head-word: take tea (coffee), take neasures (precautions). Structurally complex patterns are usually monosemantic: the pattern take+to+N represents only one meaning of take – take to sports (to sb).

IV. Motivation in Word-Combinations

Motivation in WCs may be lexical or grammatical (structural). The WC is motivated if its meaning is deducible from the meaning, order and arrangement of its components: red flower – red+flower – quality+substance – A+N. Nonmotivated WCs are indivisible lexically and structurally. They are called phraseological units.

The WC is lexially non-motivated if its combined lexical meaning is not deducible from the meaning of its components: red tape –bureaucratic methods. The WC represents a single indivisible semantic entity.

The WC is structurally non-motivated if the meaning of its pattern is not deducible from the order and arrangement of its components: red tape – substance

–N. The WC represents a single indivisible structural entity.

V.Categories of Word-Combinations

The study of WCs is based on the following set of oppositions each constituting a separate category:

1.Neutral and stylistically marked WCs: old coat – old boy;

2.Variable and stable WCs: take a pen – take place;

3.Non-idiomatic and idiomatic WCs: to speak plainly – to call a spade a spade;

4.Usual and occasional WCs: blue sky – angry sky;

5.Conceptually determined and conceptually non-determined WCs: clean dress – clean dirt;

6.Sociolinguistically determined and sociolinguistically non-determined WCs: cold war – cold soup.

Lecture 5

Phraseology

Phraseological units are word-groups that cannot be made in the process of speech, they exist in the language as ready-made units. They are compiled in special dictionaries. Like words, phraseologocal units express a single notion and are used in a sentence as one part of it. American and British lexicographers call such units idioms.

Phraseological units can be classified according to the ways they are formed, according to the degree of motivation of their meaning, according to their structure and according to their part-of-speech meaning.

I.Ways of forming phraseological units.

A.V. Koonin classified phraseological units according to the way they are formed. He pointed out primary and secondary ways of forming phraseological units.

Pramary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a unit is formed on the basis of a free word-group:

a)the most productive in Modern English is the formation of phraseological units by means of transferring the meaning of terminological wordgroups, e.g. in cosmic terminology we can point out the following

phrases: launching pad – in its direct meaning стартовая площадка in its transferred meaning – отправной пункт;

b)a large group of phraseological units was formed from free word groups by transferring their meaning (simile, contrast, metaphor), e.g. granny farm – пансионат для престарелых, as old as the hills – старый как мир, Troyan horse – компьютерная программа предварительно составленная для повреждения компьютера;

c)phradeological units can be formed by means of alliteration, e.g. a sad

d)by means of rhyming, e.g. by hook or by crook - by any possible means, high and dry – left without help;

e)by using synonyms, e.g. to pick and choose – to be terribly choosy, really and truly – quite honestly;

f)by means of expressiveness, e.g. My aunt! Hear, hear!

g)by means of distorting a word group, e.g. odds and ends was formed from odd ends;

h)by using archaisms, e.g. in brown study means in gloomy meditation where both components preserve their archaic meanings;

i)by using a sentence in a different sphere of life, e.g. that cock won‘t fight can be used as a free word-group when it is used in sports (cock fighting) but it becomes a phraseological unit when it is used in everyday life;

j)when we use some unreal image, e.g. to have butterflies in the stomach –

испытывать волнение;

k)by using expressions of writers or politicians in everyday life, e.g.

corridors of power (Snow);

Secondary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a phraseological unit is formed on the basis of another phraseological unit:

a)conversion, e.g. to vote with one‘s feet was converted into vote with one‘s feet;

b)changing the grammar form, a sentence, e.g. Make hay while the sun shines was transferred into Make hay while the sun shines;

c)analogy, e.g. Curiosity killed the cat was transferred into Care killed the cat;

d)contrast, e.g. thin cat – a poor person was formed by contrasting it with fat cat – a rich person;

e)shortening of proverbs or sayings, e.g. by means of clipping the middle of the proverb You can‘t make a purse out of a sow‘s ear the phraseological unit to make a sow‘s ear was formed with the meaning to make a mistake;

f)borrowing phraseological units from other languages, either as translation loans, e.g. living space (German), or as phonetic borrowings sotto voce (Italian).

II.Semantic classification of phraseological units

Phraseological units can be classified according to the degree of motivation of their meaning. This classification was suggested by acad. V.V. Vinogradov for Russian phraseological units. He pointed out three types of phraseological units:

a)fusions where the degree of motivation is very low, we cannot guess the meaning of the whole from the meanings of its components, e.g. on Shank‘s mare (on foot); in Russian: бить баклуши;

b)unities where the meaning of the whole can be guessed from the meanings of its components, but it is transferred (metaphorically or metonimically), e.g. to play the first fiddle (to be a leader in something), old salt (experienced sailor);

c)collocations where words are combined in their original meaning but their combinations are different in different languages, e.g. cash and carry – self-service shop, in a big way (in great degree).

III. Structural classification of phraseological units

Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky worked out a detaiked structural classification of phraseological units, comparing them with words. He points out one-top units which he compares with affixed words because affixed words have only one root morpheme. he points out two-top units which he compares with compound words because in compound words we usually have two root morphemes.

Among one-top units he points out 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, e.g. on the

doorstep – quite near, on the nose – exactly, in the course of – during. Among two-top units A.I. Smirnitsky points out the following structural types:

a)attributive-nominal, e.g. a month of Sundays, grey matter;

b)verbal-nominal, e.g. to read between the lines; to speak BBC;

c)phraseological repetitions, e.g. now or never, part and parcel

IV. Syntactical classification of Structural classification of phraseological units

Phraseological units can be classified as parts of speech. This classification was suggested by I.V. Arnold. Here we have the following groups:

a)noun phraseological units denoting an object, a person, a living being, e.g. bullet train, a latchkey child;

b)verb phraseological units denoting an action, a state, a feeling, e.g. to break the log-jam, to get on somebody‘s coattails, to be on the beam;

c)adjective phraseological units denoting a quality, e.g. loose as a goose, dull as lead;

d)adverb phraseological units, e.g. with a bump, in the soup;