Introduction. Criteria of semantic derivation II. Main body

THEME: CRITERIA OF SEMANTIC DERIVATION


Plan:

1. 
   Introduction.
   

Criteria of semantic derivation
II. Main body:
1. Semantic field is a lexical set of words grouped semantically
2. Synonyms and antonyms are a class of words grouped together on the basis of semantic relations
3. Lexico-semantic groups
III. Conclusion


Introduction
There are two basic principles of grouping words together according to the properties of their content side.
1. To classify words proceeding from the basic types of semantic relations.
2. To group words together starting off with associations connecting the given words with other vocabulary units.
According to these principles of classifying linguistic units the following semantic classes (or categories) can be singled out: 1) synonyms; 2) antonyms; 3) lexical and terminological sets; 4) lexico-semantic groups; 5) semantic field
There are 3 basic options how to classify vocabulary:
1) formal approach:
a) alphabetic
b) B + er -> N (acc. to a pattern)
c) acc. to the rule (full hand-cluster)
2) on the basis of semantic rel-s
Ex. mental abilities of a person (capable, clever, bright, shrewd, smart)
cats (cheetah, puma, jaguar)
Words making up such semantic fields may belong to different parts of speech. For e.g., in sem. field of space we find nouns: expanse, extent, surface, etc.; verbs: extend, spread, spa , etc.; adj. : broad, roomy, vast.

II. Main body:
1. Semantic field is a lexical set of words grouped semantically
It is argued that we cannot possibly know the exact meaning of the w-d if do not know the structure of the semantic field to which the word belongs, the number of the members, etc. e.g. The meaning of wordd captain cannot be properly understood until we know the semantic field in which this term operates – the army, the navy, the merchant service. It means that the meaning of the word captain is determined by the place it occupies among the terms of the relevant system.
3) associative (in speech)
All parts of speech. Co-occurrence of words in the text.
Ex. burning/pressing matter
sky – sun – blue – rain – bright
Words in the semantic groups are joined together by common contextual associations within the framework of the sentence and reflect the words, e.g. tree- grow- green; journey- train- taxi- bags. These words do not possess any common denominator of meaning. Contextual associations are usually conditioned by the context of situation. When watching a play, for e.g., we naturally speak of the actors who act the main parts, of good [bad] staging of the play, of the wonderful scenery and so on. The purpose of singling out sem. correlates: we single out to see the system of a L-ge, to understand the
In linguistics, a semantic field is a lexical set of words grouped semantically (by meaning) that refers to a specific subject. The term is also used in anthropology, computational semiotics, and technical exegesis.
A semantic field is a large group of words of different parts of speech in which the underlying notion is broad enough to include almost all-embracing sections of vocabulary. For example, the words cosmonaut (n), spacious (adj), to orbit (v) belong to the semantic field of 'space
A semantic class contains words that share a semantic feature. For example within nouns there are two sub classes, concrete nouns and abstract nouns. ... According to the nature of the noun, they are categorized into different semantic classes. Semantic classes may intersect.
Semantic field is a closely knit sector of vocabulary characterised by a common concept (e.g. in the semantic field of space we find nouns (expanse, extent, surface);
verbs (extend, spread, span); adjectives (spacious, roomy, vast, broad)). The members of the semantic fields are not synonymous but all of them are joined together by some common semantic component. This semantic component common to all the members of the field is sometimes described as the common denominator of meaning, like the concept of kinship, concept of colour, parts of the human body and so on. The basis of grouping in this case is not only linguistic but also extra-linguistic: the words are associated, because the things they name occur together and are closely connected in reality.
Thematic (or ideographic) groups are groups of words joined together by
common contextual associations within the framework of the sentence and reflect the interlinking of things and events in objective reality. Contextual association are formed as a result of regular co-occurrence of words in similar repeatedly used contexts. Thematic or ideographic groups are independent of classification into parts of speech. Words and expression are here classed not according to their lexico-grammatical meaning but strictly according to their signification, i.e. to the system of logical notions (e.g. tree - -grow - green; journey - train, taxi, bus - ticket; sunshine - brightly - blue - sky).
Hyponomy is the semantic relationship of inclusion existing between elements of various levels. Thus, e.g. vehicle includes car, bus, taxi; oak implies tree, horse implies animal; table implies furniture. The hyponymic relationship is the relationship between the meaning of the general and the individual terms.
A hyperonym is a generic term which serves as the name of the general as distinguished from the names of the species-hyponyms. In other words the more specific term is called the hyponym. For instance, animal is a generic term as compared to the specific names wolf, dog or mouse (these are called equonyms) Dog, in its turn, may serve as a generic term for different breeds such as bull-dog
Philosophers and linguists alike have long debated the intricacies of language, how we construct meaning, and how stationary those meanings really are. You've probably heard the line, 'That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.' Shakespeare asserts here then that a name doesn't matter - it's what that thing or concept really is. Even if we ceased to call a rose a rose, we could still smell its fragrance, feel its velvety petals, and be pricked by its thorns.
You can see from the picture above the mental image I had when I read the word 'rose.' Human communication would become extremely tricky if we all associated completely different meanings with a given vocabulary word. If you said 'mango' when I saw a rose, and we were trying to describe the same thing, you can see where we'd have a problem.
Semantics means the meaning and interpretation of words, signs, and sentence structure. Semantics largely determine our reading comprehension, how we understand others, and even what decisions we make as a result of our interpretations. Semantics can also refer to the branch of study within linguistics that deals with language and how we understand meaning. This has been a particularly interesting field for philosophers as they debate the essence of meaning, how we build meaning, how we share meaning with others, and how meaning changes over time.
Examples of Semantics
One of the central issues with semantics is the distinction between literal meaning and figurative meaning. With literal meaning, we take concepts at face value. For example, if we said, 'Fall began with the turning of the leaves,' we would mean that the season began to change when the leaves turned colors. Figurative meaning utilizes similes and metaphors to represent meaning and convey greater emotion. For example, 'I'm as hungry as a bear' would be a simile and a comparison to show a great need for sustenance.
Let's look at the context of the Shakespearean quote we mentioned earlier:
'Juliet: O Romeo, Romeo! wherefore art thou Romeo?
Deny thy father and refuse thy name;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love,
And I'll no longer be a Capulet.
Romeo: (Aside) Shall I hear more, or shall I speak at this?
Juliet: 'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? It is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.'
The quote, 'That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet,' is actually an example of figurative meaning when we look at the context, the surrounding text that clarifies meaning. Romeo and Juliet's families, the Montagues and the Capulets, were in a notoriously hideous feud, hence the couple's characterization as star-crossed lovers. Juliet uses this metaphor to make the argument to Romeo that his name (his family) does not matter to her; she wants Romeo for himself. Juliet's dialogue about their families would be an example of literal meaning.
As we saw in the Shakespeare passage above, some meanings are clearly literal, while others include figurative elements that add context to what appears to be a simple image. As Shakespeare is a great place to start, read one or more of the passages written below and find as many examples of figurative meanings that differ from phrases' literal meanings as you can. Write down both meanings and then explain how the figurative meaning changes the overall tone and sense of the text.
Synonymy - the kind of semantic relations that implies the coincidence in the essential meanings of linguistic elements, which usually preserve their differences in connotations and stylistic characteristics. Synonymy does not present a perfect type of a linguistic category.
Synonyms - words belonging to one part of speech, close in meaning and interchangeable at least in some contexts. Characteristics: the semantic relations of equivalence or by semantic relations of proximity. Types of synonyms: Full (total) synonyms characterized by semantic equivalence, are extremely rare.
The degree of semantic proximity is estimated in terms of aspect of meaning: 1. the denotational; 2. the connotational; 3. the pragmatic.
The difference in connotation: famous - ‘known widely, having fame’ and notorious ‘widely known because of smth bad, e.g. for being criminal, violent, immoral’. Thus, famous has a positive emotive evaluation, and the word notorious – negative. The difference in the pragmatic value: cf.: brotherly – fraternal (братский), bodily – corporal (телесный). In a few cases these synonymic values are reversed, e.g. deed – action (подвиг поступок), foe – enemy (противник – враг).
CLASSIFICATION OF SYNONYMS
Stylistic synonymy implies no interchangeability in context because the underlying situations are different, e.g. children – infants, dad – father.
Ideographic synonymy presents a still lower degree of semantic proximity and is observed when the connotational and pragmatic aspects are similar, but there are certain differences in the denotational aspect of meaning of two words, e.g. forest – wood, apartment – flat, shape – form.
Ideographic-stylistic synonymy is characterized by the lowest degree of semantic proximity. e.g. ask – inquire, expect –anticipate.
SYNONYMIC DOMINANT a dominant element, which is the most general term potentially containing the specific features rendered by all the other members of the synonymic group. In the series leave – depart – quit – retire – clear out the verb leave is a synonymic dominant.
EUPHEMISM is substitution of words of mild or vague connotations for expressions rough, unpleasant. The word to die has the following euphemisms: to expire, to pass away, to depart, to join the majority, to kick the bucket, etc; pregnant – in the family way.
Synonymy is the kind of semantic relations that implies the coincidence in the essential meanings of linguistic elements, which usually preserve their differences in connotations and stylistic characteristics. Synonymy does not present a perfect type of a linguistic category. In human languages equivalence of meaning is hardly ever observed because no two words are absolutely identical in their meanings, connotations, ways of usage, register features, or frequency of occurrence.
Synonyms are usually defined as words belonging to one part of speech, close in meaning and interchangeable at least in some contexts. Synonyms are characterized by either the semantic relations of equivalence or by semantic relations of proximity. As a degree of semantic proximity can be different, different types of synonyms can be singled out. Full (total) synonyms, i.e. words characterized by semantic equivalence, are extremely rare.
The degree of semantic proximity is best of all estimated in terms of the aspect of meaning, i.e. the denotational, the connotational, and the pragmatic aspect.
The highest degree of proximity is observed in synonyms which have similar denotational aspects but differ either in the connotational or pragmatic aspect of meaning.
The difference in connotation may be illustrated by the words famous meaning ‘known widely, having fame’ and the word notorious which is defined as ‘widely known because of something bad, for instance, for being criminal, violent, immoral’. Thus, the word famous implies a positive emotive evaluation, and the word notorious – negative.
The difference in the pragmatic value of words is found in a far greater number of words than the difference in the connotational aspect. It can be observed in synonymic pairs consisting of a native and a borrowed word. In most cases the native word is more informal, whereas the foreign word has a learned or abstract air, cf.: brotherly – fraternal, bodily – corporal. In a few cases these synonymic values are reversed, for example, deed – action, foe – enemy.
2.2. CLASSIFICATION OF SYNONYMS
Taking into account the difference of synonyms by the three aspects of their meaning they may be classified into stylistic, ideographic and ideographic-stylistic synonyms.
1) Stylistic synonymy implies no interchangeability in context because the underlying situations are different, for example, children – infants, dad – father. Stylistic synonyms are similar in the denotational aspect of meaning, but different in the pragmatic (and connotational) aspect. Substituting one stylistic synonym for another results in an inadequate presentation of the situation of communication.
2) Ideographic synonymy presents a still lower degree of semantic proximity and is observed when the connotational and pragmatic aspects are similar, but there are certain differences in the denotational aspect of meaning of two words, for example, forest – woods, apartment – flat, shape – form. Though ideographic synonyms correspond to one and the same referential area, i.e. denote the same thing or a set of closely related things, they are different in the denotational aspect of the meaning and their interchange would result in a slight change of the phrase they are used in.
3) Ideographic-stylistic synonymy is characterized by the lowest degree of semantic proximity. This type of synonyms includes synonyms which differ both in the denotational and connotational and / or pragmatic aspects of meaning, for example, ask – inquire, expect – anticipate. If the synonyms in questions have the same patterns of grammatical and lexical valency, they can still hardly be considered interchangeable in context.
Each synonymic group comprises a dominant element – synonymic dominant, which is the most general term potentially containing the specific features rendered by all the other members of the synonymic group. In this series leave – depart – quit – retire – clear out the verb leave, being general and both stylistically and emotionally neutral, can stand for each of the other four terms. The other four can replace leave only when some specific semantic component prevails over the general notion. For example, when it is necessary to stress the idea of giving up employment and stopping work quit is preferable because in this word this particular notion dominates over the more general idea common to the whole group.
2.3. EUPHEMISMS
Euphemism is the substitution of words of mild or vague connotations for expressions rough, unpleasant. Euphemism is sometimes figuratively called ‘a white-washing device’. Euphemism is used to replace an unpleasant word or expression by a conventionally more acceptable one. For example, the word to die has the following euphemisms: to expire, to pass away, to depart, to join the majority, to kick the bucket, etc; pregnant – in the family way.
Euphemisms are words or expressions that speakers substitute for taboo words in order to avoid a direct confrontation with topics that are embarrassing, frightening, or uncomfortable: God, the devil, sex, death, money, war, crime, or religion. These topics seem to be cross-cultural. A linguistic consequence of cultural taboos is the creation of euphemisms. The euphemism as a linguistic phenomenon shows no signs of disappearing.
Antonyms – a class of words grouped together on the basis of the semantic relations of opposition. CLASSIFICATION OF ANTONYMS Structurally, antonyms can be divided into antonyms of the same root, e.g. to do – to undo; cheerful – cheerless; and antonyms of different roots, e.g. day – night, rich –poor.
Not so many years ago antonymy was not universally accepted as a linguistic problem, and the opposition within antonymic pairs was regarded as purely logical and finding no reflection in the semantic structures of words. The contrast between heat and cold or big and small, said most scholars, is the contrast of things opposed by their very nature. Antonymy is not evenly distributed among the categories of parts of speech.
Antonyms are words grouped together on the basis of the semantic relations of opposition. Antonyms are words belonging to one part of speech sharing certain common semantic characteristics. There exist different classifications of antonyms.
Structurally, antonyms can be divided into antonyms of the same root, for example, to do – to undo; cheerful – cheerless; and antonyms of different roots, for example, day – night, rich – poor.
Semantically, antonyms may be classified into contradictories, contraries and incompatibles.
1. Contradictories represent the type of semantic relations that exist between pairs like dead – alive, single – married. Contradictory antonyms are mutually opposed, they deny one another. Contradictories form a privative binary opposition, they are members of two-term sets. To use one of the words is to contradict the other and to use ‘not’ before one of them is to make it semantically equivalent to the other: not dead – alive, not single – married.
2. Contraries are antonyms that can be arranged into a series according to the increasing difference in one of their qualities. The most distant elements of this series will be classified as contrary notions. Contraries are gradable antonyms, they are polar members of a gradual opposition which may have intermediate elements. This may be observed in cold – hot and cool – warm which are intermediate members. Thus, we may regard as antonyms not only cold and hot but also cool and warm. Contrary antonyms may also be considered in terms of degrees of the quality involved. Thus, water may be cold and very cold, and water in one glass may be colder than in another one.
3. Incompatibles are antonyms which are characterized by the relations of exclusion. Semantic relations of incompatibility exist among antonyms with a common component of meaning and may be described as the reverse of hyponymy. For example, to say morning is to say not afternoon, not evening, not night. The use of one member of this set implies the exclusion of the other members of the set. Incompatibles differ from contradictories as incompatibles are members of the multiple-term sets while contradictories are members of two-term sets. A relation of incompatibility may be also observed between colour terms since the choice of red, for instance, entails the exclusion of black, blue, yellow, etc.
3 - reja
Words denoting things correlated on extralinguistic grounds form lexical sets. For example, the words lion, tiger, leopard, puma, cat refer to the lexical set of ‘the animal of the cat family’. Depending on the type of the notional area lexical sets may acquire a more specialized character, for instance, names of ‘musical instruments’: piano, organ, violin, drum; names of ‘parts of the car mechanism’: radiator, motor, handbrake, wheels. Such classes of words are called terminological sets.
Words describing sides of one and the same general notion are united in a lexico-semantic group if 1) the underlying notion is not too generalized and all-embracing, like notions of ‘time’, ‘space’, ‘life’, ‘process’, etc.; 2) the reference to the underlying notion is not just an implication in the meaning of the lexical unit but forms an essential part in its semantics.
Thus, it is possible to single out the lexico-semantic group of names of ‘colours’ consisting of the words pink, red, black, green, white; the lexico-semantic group of verbs denoting ‘physical movement’ – to go, to turn, to run; or ‘destruction’ – to ruin, to destroy, to explode, to kill; etc.
Lexical sets are words denoting things correlated on extralinguistic groups form: lion, tiger, leopard, puma, cat refer to the lexical set of ‘the animal of the cat family’. Terminological sets are lexical sets, which acquire a more specialized character: e.g. names of ‘musical instruments’: piano,organ, violin, drum;
names of ‘parts of the car mechanism’: radiator, motor, handbrake, wheels.
Lexico-semantic group unites words describing sides of one and the same general notion if: the underlying notion is not too generalized and all-embracing, like notions of ‘time’, ‘space’, ‘life’, ‘process’, etc. 2. the reference to the underlying notion is not just an implication in the meaning of the lexical unit but forms an essential part in its semantics. Verbs of ‘destruction’: to ruin, to destroy, to explore, to kill, etc. 1.
The word saleswoman may be analysed into the semantic components ‘human’, ‘female’, ‘professional’. Consequently the word saleswoman may be included into a lexico-semantic group under the heading of human together with the words man, woman, boy, girl, etc. and under the heading female with the words girl, wife, woman and also together with the words teacher, pilot, butcher, etc., as professionals.
Different meanings of polysemantic words make it possible to refer the same word to different lexico-semantic groups:
Make in the meaning of ‘construct’ is naturally a member of the same lexico-semantic group as the verbs produce, manufacture, etc , whereas in the meaning of ‘compel’ it is regarded as a member of a different lexico-semantic group made up by the verbs force, induce, etc.
The verb ‘take’ in combination with any member of the lexical group denoting means of transportation is synonymous with the verb go (take the tram, the bus, etc.). When combined with members of another lexical group the same verb is synonymous with to drink (to take tea, coffee, etc.).