Lecture 4 the semantic structure of words

 
 
5. POLYSEMY OF WORDS 
A word that has more than one meaning in the language is called polysemantic. 
Its meanings form its semantic structure. It is an organised set of recurrent variants 
and shades of meaning a given sound complex can assume in different contexts, 
together with their emotional colouring, stylistic peculiarities and other typical 
connotations, if any. The semantic structure of the word is a fact of language, not of 
speech. It is developed and fixed in the course of the history of the language. 
Since the number of lexical units is not necessarily increased with the 
appearance of new ideas and objects it is usually achieved by making an already 
existing word do this work. Change of meaning is a commonplace and indeed it 
would appear to be fundamental in the living language. 
Examples to illustrate the statement are not far to seek. When watches were 
invented no new words were invented to denote this object and its parts. The word 
face meaning front part of a human head was made to serve as the name of the front 
part of the watch where all the changes of time were shown; the word hand meaning 
part of a human body used to work and indicate things with was made to serve as the 
name of the indicator. 
Or the Ukrainian word лінія – вузька смужка, що тягнеться на якій-небудь 
поверхні. Closely connected with it are the following meanings: уявна смужка 
(лінія горизонту), шлях (трамвайна лінія), послідовний ряд кровно споріднених 
осіб (по материнській лінії), спосіб дії (лінія поведінки). 
Thus words develop plurality of meanings, or, in other words, become 
polysemantic. 
In polysemantic words we are faced not with the problem of the analysis of 
different meanings but primarily with the problem of interrelation and 
interdependence of the various meanings in the semantic structure of the same word. 
Some questions can arise in this connection. 
- Are all meanings equally representative of the semantic structure of the word?

---

- Is the order in which the meanings are enumerated in dictionaries purely 
arbitrary or does it reflect the comparative value of individual meanings, the place 
they occupy in the semantic structure of the word? 
The most objective criterion of the comparative value of individual meanings 
seems to be the frequency of their occurrence in speech. 
Of great importance is the stylistic stratification of meanings of a polysemantic 
word as not only words but individual meanings too may differ in their stylistic 
reference. The stylistic status of monosemantic words is easily perceived.
e.g.: daddy can be referred to the colloquial stylistic layer, the word parent – to 
bookish.
Polysemantic words as a rule cannot be given any much restrictive labels. 
There is nothing colloquial or slangy about the word jerk in the meaning of a sudden 
movement or stopping of movement. But when jerk is used in the meaning of an odd 
person it is slangy. 
Stylistically neutral words are more frequent. 
It should be mentioned that some meanings are representative of the word in 
isolation, i.e. they invariably occur to us when we hear the word or see it written. 
Other meanings come to the fore only when the word is used in certain contexts. The 
meaning or meanings representative of the semantic structure of the word and least 
dependent on context are described as free or denominative meanings. 
By the word context we understand the minimal stretch of speech determining 
each individual meaning of the word. 
The meaning or meanings of polysemantic words observed only in certain 
contexts may be viewed as determined either by linguistic (lexical and grammatical 
or verbal) or extra-linguistic (non-verbal) contexts. 
In lexical contexts of primary importance are the lexical groups combined with 
the polysemantic word under consideration. 
e.g.: The verb to take in isolation has the meaning to lay hold of with the hands,