LECTURE 4. Semasiology. Lexical meaning and semantic structure of a word
LECTURE 4. Semasiology. Lexical meaning and semantic structure of a word
1.Lexical meaning. 2.Types of semantic components. 3.Semantic structure of words. Two levels of semantic components.
1. The branch of Lexicology concerned with the meaning of words is called SEMASIOLOGY. Diachronically Semasiology studies the change in meaning which words undergo. Synchronically Semasiology studies semantic structures typical of language and its general semantic system. Every word combines lexical and grammatical meanings. By lexical meaning we understand the meaning proper to the given linguistic unit in all its forms and distributions. By grammatical meaning we understand the meaning proper to a set of words which is forms to all class of words. Lexical and grammatical meanings can not exist without each other. E.g.: go-goes-going-went-gone. This class of words possesses different grammatical meaning but the same lexical.
2. Lexical meaning is not homogeneous and it includes denotative and connotative components. One of the functions of words is to name things. Usage of language can not have any knowledge of the objects or phenomena of the real world around them unless this knowledge is embodied in words which have the same meaning for all speakers. This is denotative component. It makes communication possible. E.g. to glance, to look. The word “look” possesses the denotative component. “To glance” has also the connotative component (It has meaning “to look but passingly”). It is added to the word’s main meaning and serves to express all sorts of emotional, expressive overtones. In other words the connotative component is stylistic value of the word. Due to it the vocabulary is subdivided into two levels:
LITERARY: Neutral colloquial standard bookish
NON-LITERARY: slang jargon professionalism vulgarism
3. It is typical for English words to have more than one meaning. A word having more than one meaning is called polysemantic and the ability of words to have more than one meaning is called polysemy. The process of polysemy development includes the appearance of new meaning and loss of old ones. The general tendency with English vocabulary now is to increase the number of its meanings to provide qualitative and quantitative growth of the language’s resources. It is necessary to distinguish two levels of the semantic structure’s analysis: 1) A system of meanings: 1) Fire: a. Flame b. The shoot of gun (e.g. to open fire) c. Substance of destructive burning (e.g. the forest fire) d. Burning material in a stove, a fireplace, a camp fire e. Strong feeling, passion. It’s clear that meaning one dominates of the other meanings. It discovers the concept in the most general way. Meaning two up to fire are associated with special circumstances, aspects or instances of the fame phenomenon. Meaning one is the main meaning. It is the centre of the semantic structure of the word. It is not in every polysemantic words that such a centre may be found. Some semantic structures are arranged on a different principle. 2)Dull: a. Uninteresting, boring (e.g. a dull book) b. Not sharp (e.g. a dull knife) c. Not loud or distinct (e.g. a dull sound) d. Stupid (e.g. a dull student) e. Seen badly (e.g. dull eyes) f. Hearing badly (e.g. dull ears) g. Not active h. Not clear or bright (e.g. dull weather, dull colour). The meanings are different but there is one thing that they have in common: it is something lacking. a. Lack of interest b. Lack of sharp c. Lack of sound d. Lack of light e. Lack of eyesight f. Lack of earsight g. Lack of activity The transformed scheme of the semantic structure of ”dull” shows that the centre holding together the complex semantic structure of this word is not one of the meaning but certain component that can be single out within each separate meaning. Each separate meaning seems to be subject to structural analysis in which it may be represented as sets of the semantic component. This analysis shows that the word “dull” has not only a system of meanings but it has an inner structure of its own. So, the semantic structure of the word should be investigated at both levels: a) a different meanings; b) of semantic components within each separate meaning. For a monosemantic word it is a word with one meaning. The first level is excluded.
LECTURE 4. Semasiology. Lexical meaning and semantic structure of a word
LECTURE 4. Semasiology. Lexical meaning and semantic structure of a word
1.Lexical meaning. 2.Types of semantic components. 3.Semantic structure of words. Two levels of semantic components.
1. The branch of Lexicology concerned with the meaning of words is called SEMASIOLOGY. Diachronically Semasiology studies the change in meaning which words undergo. Synchronically Semasiology studies semantic structures typical of language and its general semantic system. Every word combines lexical and grammatical meanings. By lexical meaning we understand the meaning proper to the given linguistic unit in all its forms and distributions. By grammatical meaning we understand the meaning proper to a set of words which is forms to all class of words. Lexical and grammatical meanings can not exist without each other. E.g.: go-goes-going-went-gone. This class of words possesses different grammatical meaning but the same lexical.
2. Lexical meaning is not homogeneous and it includes denotative and connotative components. One of the functions of words is to name things. Usage of language can not have any knowledge of the objects or phenomena of the real world around them unless this knowledge is embodied in words which have the same meaning for all speakers. This is denotative component. It makes communication possible. E.g. to glance, to look. The word “look” possesses the denotative component. “To glance” has also the connotative component (It has meaning “to look but passingly”). It is added to the word’s main meaning and serves to express all sorts of emotional, expressive overtones. In other words the connotative component is stylistic value of the word. Due to it the vocabulary is subdivided into two levels:
LITERARY: Neutral colloquial standard bookish
NON-LITERARY: slang jargon professionalism vulgarism
3. It is typical for English words to have more than one meaning. A word having more than one meaning is called polysemantic and the ability of words to have more than one meaning is called polysemy. The process of polysemy development includes the appearance of new meaning and loss of old ones. The general tendency with English vocabulary now is to increase the number of its meanings to provide qualitative and quantitative growth of the language’s resources. It is necessary to distinguish two levels of the semantic structure’s analysis: 1) A system of meanings: 1) Fire: a. Flame b. The shoot of gun (e.g. to open fire) c. Substance of destructive burning (e.g. the forest fire) d. Burning material in a stove, a fireplace, a camp fire e. Strong feeling, passion. It’s clear that meaning one dominates of the other meanings. It discovers the concept in the most general way. Meaning two up to fire are associated with special circumstances, aspects or instances of the fame phenomenon. Meaning one is the main meaning. It is the centre of the semantic structure of the word. It is not in every polysemantic words that such a centre may be found. Some semantic structures are arranged on a different principle. 2)Dull: a. Uninteresting, boring (e.g. a dull book) b. Not sharp (e.g. a dull knife) c. Not loud or distinct (e.g. a dull sound) d. Stupid (e.g. a dull student) e. Seen badly (e.g. dull eyes) f. Hearing badly (e.g. dull ears) g. Not active h. Not clear or bright (e.g. dull weather, dull colour). The meanings are different but there is one thing that they have in common: it is something lacking. a. Lack of interest b. Lack of sharp c. Lack of sound d. Lack of light e. Lack of eyesight f. Lack of earsight g. Lack of activity The transformed scheme of the semantic structure of ”dull” shows that the centre holding together the complex semantic structure of this word is not one of the meaning but certain component that can be single out within each separate meaning. Each separate meaning seems to be subject to structural analysis in which it may be represented as sets of the semantic component. This analysis shows that the word “dull” has not only a system of meanings but it has an inner structure of its own. So, the semantic structure of the word should be investigated at both levels: a) a different meanings; b) of semantic components within each separate meaning. For a monosemantic word it is a word with one meaning. The first level is excluded.