Lexicology as a branch of linguistics; its aims and significance. Links with other branches of linguistics

1. 
   Lexicology as a branch of linguistics; its aims and significance. Links with other branches of linguistics.
   

The term «lexicology» is of Greek origin / from «lexis» - «word» and «logos» - «science». Lexicology is the part of linguistics, which deals with the vocabulary and characteristic features of words and word-groups.

The term «vocabulary» is used to denote the system of words and word-groups that the language possesses.

The term «word» denotes the main lexical unit of a language resulting from the association of a group of sounds with a meaning. This unit is used in grammatical functions characteristic of it. It is the smallest unit of a language, which can stand alone as a complete utterance.

The term «word-group» denotes a group of words which exists in the language as a ready-made unit, has the unity of meaning, the unity of syntactical function, e.g. the word-group «as loose as a goose» means «clumsy» and is used in a sentence as a predicative / He is as loose as a goose/.

Lexicology can study the development of the vocabulary, the origin of words and word-groups, their semantic relations and the development of their sound form and meaning. In this case it is called historical lexicology.
Another branch of lexicology is called descriptive and studies the vocabulary at a definite stage of its development.

Lexicology is a branch of linguistics – the science of language. The literal meaning of the term “lexicology” is “the science of the word”. Lexicology as a branch of linguistics has its own aims & methods of scientific research. Its basic task – being a study & systematic description of vocabulary in respect to its origin, development & its current use. Lexicology is concerned with words, variable word-groups, phraseological units & morphemes, which make up words.

Distinction is made between GENERAL LEXICOLOGY & SPECIAL LEXICOLOGY. General lexicology is a part of General linguistics. It is concerned with the study of vocabulary irrespective of the specific features of any particular language. Special lexicology is the lexicology of a particular language (Russian, German, French, etc.).

Lexicology is closely connected with other branches of linguistics: phonetics, for example, investigates the phonetic structure of language & is concerned with the study of the outer sound-form of the word. Grammar is the study of the grammatical structure of language. It is concerned with the various means of expressing grammatical relations between words as well as with patterns after which words are combined into word-groups & sentences. There is also a close relationship between lexicology & stylistics, which is concerned with a study of a nature, functions & styles of languages.

2. 
   Words of native origin and their distinctive features.
   

the native stock of words (25-30%) – words known from the earliest available manuscripts of the Old English period; they were brought to the British Isles from the continent in the 5th century AD by the Germanic tribes of the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes.

high frequency value–80% of the 500 most frequent words;

monosyllabic structure: eye, red, head, sun, door, help etc;

a wide range of lexical and grammatical valency: to raise / bend / bow / shake / bury one’s head; clear / cool / level head; above one’s head; in one’s head etc.

developed polysemy: head, n. 1) the part of the body; 2) the mind or brain; 3) ability; 4) a leader; 5) side of the coin etc.

great word-building power: headed, heading, headache, header, headline, to behead etc;

enter a number of set expressions: heads or tails; head over heels, to keep one’s head above water, from head to toe etc.

Words of Indo-European stock have cognates in the vocabularies of different Indo-European languages:

-terms of kinship: mother, father, son, brother, daughter etc.;

-parts of the human body: foot, nose, eye, heart etc.;

-names of animals and birds: bull, swine, goose, fish, wolf, cat etc;

-names of plants: tree, birch, corn etc.;

-names of celestial bodies: sun, star, moon etc.;

-calendar terms: day, year, month etc.;

-names of domestic objects: home, house, door, stool, floor etc.;

-common verbs: be, go, do, have, see, sit, think, help, love, kiss, drink, bear, eat, ask etc.;

-common adjectives: hard, slow, wide, long, dark, red, white etc.;

-numerals: 1 .. 100;

-pronouns: I, my, that etc.

3. 
   Borrowings. The distinction between the terms origin of borrowing and source of borrowing. Translation loans. Semantic loans.
   

the borrowed stock of words (70-75%) – words taken over from other languages and modified in phonetic shape, spelling, paradigm or / and meaning according to the standards of the English language.
Motivation of borrowing a word:
- to fill a gap in the vocabulary
- to represent the same concept in a new aspect, supplying a new shade of meaning or a different emotional colouring
- prestige

The term source of borrowing is applied to the language from which the loan word was taken into English.

The term origin of borrowing refers to the language to which the word may be traced.

Translation loans (calques) are compound words or expressions formed from the elements existing in the English language according to the patterns of the source language; such loans came in handy when original words were hard to reproduce.

Original Modern English
German umgebung environment
French par coeur by heart
Latin lingua materna mother tongue

Modern English names of the days of the week were also created on the pattern of Latin words as their literal translations and are the earliest examples of calques; have become regularly capitalized since the 17th c.

Monday < Lat. Lunae dies ‘day of the moon’
Tuesday < Lat. Martis dies (Tiw – a Teutonic God corresponding to Roman Mars)
Wednesday < Lat. Mercurii dies (Odin – the chief Teutonic god, the All-Father)
Thursday < Lat. Jovis dies (Jupiter)
Friday < Lat. Veneris dies
Saturday < Lat. Saturni dies (partial calque)
Sunday < Lat. Solis dies (partial calque)

The term semantic loans is used to denote the development in an English word of a new meaning due to the influence of a related word in another language.

pioneer Fr. ‘one who goes before’  Russ. ‘a member of the young communist organisation’
dream O.E. ‘joy, music’  O.N. ‘a vision during sleep’
gift O.E. ‘ransom for a wife’  O.N. ‘a present’
plough O.E. ‘a unit of measurement’  O.N. ‘an agricultural implement’
dwell O.E. ’to wander’  O.N. ‘to live’
bloom O.E. ‘metal’  O.N. ‘a blossom, a flower of a seed plant’

4. 
   Types of borrowed elements in the English vocabulary. Etymological doublets, hybrids, international words, and folk etymology.
   

Etymological doublets are pairs of words of the same language which share the same etymological basis but have entered the language through different routes; often diverge in currect meaning and usage. They may result from:

-shortening: defence – fence, appeal – peal; history – story;

-stressed and unstressed position of one and the same word: of – off, to – too;

-borrowing the word from the same language twice, but in different periods: jail (Par. Fr.) – goal (Norm. Fr.);

-development of the word in different dialects or languages that are historically descended from the same root: to chase (Northern Fr) – to catch (Central Fr); chart – card; channel (Fr) – canal (L); senior (L) – sir (Fr).

Hybrids are words made up of elements from two or more different languages.

Patterns of hybrids:

native affix (prefix or suffix) + borrowed stem: befool, besiege, beguile; graceful, falsehood, rapidly;

borrowed affix + native stem: drinkable, starvation, wordage; recall, embody, mishandle;

borrowed affix + borrowed stem + native affix: discovering;

native affix + native stem + borrowed affix: unbreakable.

The term folk (false, popular, etymythology) etymology (from German Volksetymologie) refers to erroneous beliefs about derivation and the consequent changes to words.

Sources of folk etymology:

reasonable interpretations of the evidence that happen to be false, e.g. cockroach (as if from cock + roach or caca ‘excrement’) < Sp. cucaracha ‘chafer, beetle’ < cuca ‘kind of caterpillar’;

urban legends, e.g. a rule of thumb ‘rough measurement’ is mistakenly thought to refer to an old English law under which a man could legally beat his wife with a stick no thicker than his thumb (though no such law ever existed);

racism and slavery, e.g. picnic as a shortening for pick a nigger is erroneously thought to refer to an outdoor community gathering during which families ate from box lunches while a randomly-chosen Afro-American was hanged for the diners’ entertainment.

5. 
   Assimilation of borrowings. Types and degrees of assimilation.
   

The term assimilation of a loan word is used to denote a partial or total conformation to the phonetical, graphical, and morphological standards of the receiving language and its semantic system.

The term type of assimilationrefers to the changes an adopted word may undergo:

phonetic assimilation;

graphical assimilation;

grammatical assimilation;

semantic assimilation.

The degree of assimilationdepends upon the period of time during which the word has been used in the receiving language, its communicative importance and frequency:

Completely assimilated loan-words are found at all the layers of older borrowings: cheese, street, wall, wine; gate, wing, die, take, happy, ill, low, odd, wrong.

Partially assimilated loan-words:

notassimilated semantically: sheik, sherbet;

not assimilated grammatically: crisis – crises, formula – formulae;

not assimilated phonetically: the final syllable is stressed(machine, cartoon, police); /ʒ/ - beige, prestige, regime; /wα:/ – memoir;

not assimilated graphically: last consonant is not pronounced(ballet, buffet, debut); a diacritic mark(caf , clich ); have specific diagraphs(bouquet, brioche).

Non-assimilated (Barbarisms) are words not assimilated in any way and for which there are corresponding English equivalents: It. addio, ciao; Fr. tête-a-tête.

6. 
   Latin borrowings. Periods of borrowings from Latin.
   

Periodisation:

-Early Latin loans, e.g. cup, kettle, dish, plum, butter, wall etc.;

-Later Latin loans (Christianity), e.g. lily, pearl, palm, choir, library, fiddle, peach, marble etc.;

-Latin loans in Middle English (the Norman conquest+the Renaissance), e.g. animal, legal, simile, gesture, spacious, interest etc.;

-The latest Latin influence, e.g. cf., i.e., ib., viz., etc.

Features of Latin loans:

-polysyllabic words with prefixes: commission, induction, accelerate;

-prefixes with final consonants: ad-, ab-, com-, dis-, ex-, in-, ob-: admix, abnormal, compare, disclose, inattention;

-reduplicated consonants: abbreviation, occasion, illumination, immobility, difference, opportunity, resurrection, assimilation;

-suffixes –ate, -ute in verbs: locate, irritate, abbreviate, execute;

-suffixes –ant, -ent, -ior in adjectives: reluctant, evident, superior;

-Latin plural endings are preserved: memorandum – memoranda; datum – data; formula – formulae, formulas; focus – focuses or foci.

7. 
   Celtic elements in the English vocabulary.
   

-place-names: Kent ‘coastal district’ or ‘land of the hosts or armies’, London ‘hill surrounded with water’, Carlisle (caer ‘fortified place’), Dover ‘water’, York ‘Yew-Tree Estate’ (тисове дерево) etc.;

-river-names: Thames ‘the dark one’, Avon ‘river’ etc.;

-elements: -comb ‘deep valley’ as in Batcombe, -torr ‘high rock’ as in Torcross, -llan ‘church’ as in Llandaff;

-hybrids:

Celtic + Latin: Manchester, Glouchester, Lancaster etc.;

Celtic + Germanic: Yorkshire, Canterbury ‘the fortified town of Kentish people’, Salisbury, Cornwall ‘peninsula people’, in O.E. the name Wealhas (Mod.E. Wales, Welsh) was a common noun meaning ‘strangers’ given by the newcomers to the unfamiliar Celtic tribes.

-common nouns survived in regional dialects:

bard (Gael.& Ir.) ‘poet, minstrel’, loch (Gael.& Ir.) ‘lake’, plaid (Gael.) ‘blanket’, corgi (Welsh cor ‘dwarf’ + gi/ci ‘dog’), whiskey ‘water of life’, dunn ‘grey’, cross;

-via Romanic languages:

car < Norm.Fr. carre < L. carrum, carrus, orig. ‘two-wheeled Celtic war chariot’ < Gaulish *karros;

8. 
   Scandinavian loan-words in Modern English.
   

-Total number – appr. 900 words; about 700 belong to Stand. E.

-Features:

/k/ and /g/ before e and i, e.g. give, kid, get, gift;

/sk/ in the initial position, e.g. sky, skill, score, skin, skirt;

-nouns: anger, bag, band, bank, bull, calf, cake, dirt, egg, fellow, fog, knife, leg, loan, law, neck, root, ransack, sister, wing, window;

-adjectives: awkward, flat, happy, ill, low, loose, odd, rotten, scant, sly, silver, tight, ugly, wrong;

-verbs: cast, call, clip, die, gasp, get, give, guess, raise, seem, scare, scowl, seem, smile, take, thrive, want;

-pronouns: they, their, them, themselves, though, both, same.

-Legal terms (together with military terms reflecting the relations during the Danish raids and Danish rule represent the earliest loan-words):husband – originally ‘a house holder’, one who owns a house; fellow – originally ‘one who lays down a fee, as a partner or shareholder’;

-Place-names:

-thorp ‘village’ as in Althorp;

-by ‘farm / town’ as in Derby, Rugby;

-toft ‘piece of land’ as in Sandtoft;

-ness ‘cape’ as in Inverness, Loch Ness;

-Forming elements:

are (pr. tense pl. to be), -s (pr. tense, 3rd p. sg)

9. 
   French elements in the English vocabulary. Periods of borrowings from French.
   

-Norman French (XI- XIII c.) – a northern dialect of French: calange, warrant, warden, reward, prisun, gaol

-Parisian French (XIII-XVI c.) – the prestige dialect:

challenge, guarantee, guardian, regard, prison, jail

Features of French loans:

-the accent on the last syllable: finance, finesse, supreme;

-ch /ʃ/, e.g. avalanche, chandelier, chauffeur, charlatan, chic;

-g before e and i /ʒ/, e.g. beige, bourgeois, camouflage, massage;

-ou /u:/: coup, rouge;

-eau /ou/ château;

-silent final consonant p, s, t: coup, debris, ragoût, trait, ballet, debut.

Semantic groups of French borrowings:

administration: crown, country, people, office, nation, government;

titles and ranks of nobility: baron, duke, duchess, prince, peer,

but lord, lady, king, queen, earl, knight – native;

jurisdiction: case, heir, poor, justice, marriage, jury, prove;

the Church and religion: abbey, altar, Bible, grace, pray, saint;

military terms: army, battle, escape, soldier, navy, aid;

entertainment: dance, chase, partner, sport, tournament, cards;

fashion: dress, lace, embroidery, garment, mitten, frock;

food and drink: dinner, supper, appetite, spice, taste, vinegar, fruit;

the domestic life: chair, blanket, lantern, chandelier, couch, towel;

Words related to different aspects of the life of the upper classes and of the town life:

-forms of address (French): sir, madam, mister, mistress, master, servant;

-the names of the animals (native) vs the meat (French): cow – beef; calf – veal, swine – pork; deer – venison; sheep – mutton;

-the names of country occupations (native) vs town trades (French): miller, shepherd, shoemaker, smith – butcher, carpenter, grocer, tailor;

10. 
    Greek borrowings. Features of Greek borrowings.
    

Features of Greek loans:

ch [k]: chemistry, character;
ph [f]: phenomenon, physics, phonetics;

th [θ]: theme, theatre, myth;

ps [s]: pseudonym, psychic;

rh [r]: rhythm, rhetor;

y /i/ in interconsonantal and final positions: system, physics, comedy;

ae: encyclopaedia ‘training in a circle,’ i.e. the ‘circle’ of arts and sciences, the essentials of a liberal education; from enkyklios ‘circular,’ also ‘general’ (from en ‘in’ + kyklos ‘circle’) + paideia ‘education, child-rearing’;

11. 
    The morphemic structure of English words. Types of morphemes. The principles of morphemic analysis.
    

The morphemic structure of English words:

A morpheme (Gr. morphé ‘form, shape’) is one of the fundamental units of a language, a minimum sign that is an association of a given meaning with a given form (sound and graphic), e.g. old, un+happy, grow+th, blue+colour+ed.

Depending on the number of morphemes, words are divided into:

monomorphic are root-words consisting of only one root-morpheme, i.e. simple words, e.g. to grow, a book, white, fast etc.

polymorphic are words consisting of at least one root-morpheme and a number of derivational affixes, i.e. derivatives, compounds, e.g. good-looking, employee, blue-eyed etc.

Baudouin de Courtenay

Ivan Alexandrovich

the Kazan school of linguistics;

was the first in world linguistics to investigate the morphological structure of the word;

introduced a number of linguistic terms, including a morpheme (in 1881), a phoneme, a lexeme, a syntagm etc. The Greek suffix –eme has been adopted to denote the smallest significant or distinctive unit.

Types of morphemes:

An allomorph (a morphemic variant) (Gr. állos ‘different’ and morphé ‘form, shape’) is a phonetically conditioned positional variant of the same derivational or functional morpheme identical in meaning and function and differing in sound only insomuch, as their complementary distribution produces various phonetic assimilation effects, e.g. please /pli:z/ pleasure /pleʒ/ pleasant /plez/.

Complementary distribution takes place when two linguistic variants cannot appear in the same environment, e.g. in-competent, il-logical, ir-responsible, im-possible; cat-s, box-es; organis-ation, corrup-tion.

Contastive distribution characterises different morphemes occurring in the same linguistic environment, but signaling different meanings, e.g. –able in measurable and –ed in measured.

A pseudo-morpheme (a quasi-morpheme) is a morpheme which has a differential meaning and a distributional meaning but does not possess any lexical or functional (part-of-speech) meaning, e.g. re- and -tain in retain, con- and –ceive in conceive etc.

A unique morpheme is an isolated pseudo-morpheme which does not occur in other words but is understood as meaningful because the constituent morphemes display a more or less clear denotational meaning, e.g. ham- in hamlet (cf. booklet, ringlet), cran- in cranberry (журавлина), mul- in mulberry (шовковиця), -et in pocket etc.

The principles of morphemic analysis:

A) The main principles of morphemic analysis.

B) Procedure of morphemic analysis.

C) Classification of morphemes.

The aim of the morphemic analysis is to state the number & type of morphemes that make up a word. This is the method of Immidiate (непосредственный) & Ultimate (конечный) Сonstituents.

B) In the course of the procedure we segment words into the constituent morphemess; each stage of the procedure involves 2 components (2 small meaningful elements) the word immediately breaks into. The analysis is completed when we arrive at the constituents that further can’t be derived – Ucs. Ungentlemanly: un+gentlemanly, gentleman+ly, gentle+man.

12. 
    The derivative structure of English words. The distinction between morphological stem and derivational base. Derivational fields.
    

A morpheme (Gr. morphé ‘form, shape’) is one of the fundamental units of a language, a minimum sign that is an association of a given meaning with a given form (sound and graphic), e.g. old, un+happy, grow+th, blue+colour+ed.

Depending on the number of morphemes, words are divided into:

monomorphic are root-words consisting of only one root-morpheme, i.e. simple words, e.g. to grow, a book, white, fast etc.

polymorphic are words consisting of at least one root-morpheme and a number of derivational affixes, i.e. derivatives, compounds, e.g. good-looking, employee, blue-eyed etc.

According to their functions and meaning, affixes fall into:

derivational, e.g. suffixes: abstract-noun-makers (-age, -dom, -ery, -ing, -ism); concrete-noun-makers (-eer, -er, -ess, -let); adverb-makers (-ly, -ward(s), -wise); verb-makers (-ate, -en, -ify, -ize/-ise); adjective-/noun-makers (-ful, -ese, -(i)an, -ist), etc.; they are attached to a derivational base; they are the object of study of derivational morphology which investigates the way in which new items of vocabulary can be built up out of combinations of elements;

functional (inflectional), e.g. -s (plurality; 3rd person singular); ‘s (genitive case); -n’t (contracted negative); -ed (past tense; past participle); -ing (present participle); -er, -est (comparison); they are attached to a morphological stem; they are the object of study of inflectional morphology which deals with the way words vary in their form in order to express a grammatical contrast.

A derivational field as a part of the nominative field of the concept reflects the totality of all word-building tools representing the concept. It is variable, systematic, and hierarchical. The derivational field structure consists of a core that reflects the most important cognitive criterions which are typed in a derivational meaning, and a periphery. The whole range of factors should be taken into consideration when analyzing the derivational field: the number of derivatives, the word-formation method that implements derivational meaning, frequency of derivatives use, etc. Building a model of a derivational field will make it possible to identify the typology of the nominative field of the concept, as well as to establish the dependence of the derivational field structure on the type of the concept since derivational fields of similar concepts have universal characters and are interrelated, which is manifested in the similarity of the derivational field structure, frequency of certain methods of word-formation and the nature of derivatives.

13. 
    Affixation. Classifications of affixes. Productive and non-productive affixes, dead and living affixes.
    

Affixation (progressive derivation) is the formation of words by adding derivational affixes to stems.

Prefixation is the formation of words with the help of prefixes; does not change part of speech; is more typical of verb-formation (42%), e.g. a pretest, to coexist, to undo, impossible, asleep, to rewrite etc.

Suffixation is the formation of words with the help of suffixes; can change part of speech; is characteristic of noun-, adjective- and adverb-formation, e.g. an employee, childish, quietly, to specify etc.

Synchronic vs diachronic differentiation of affixes:

living affixes are easily separated from the stem, e.g. re-, -ful, -ly, un-, -ion, de- etc.;

dead affixes have become fully merged with the stem and can be singled out by a diachronic analysis of the development of the word, e.g. admit < Lat. ad+mittere;

Productive vs non-productive affixes:

productive affixes take part in word-formation in modern English, e.g. -er, -ing, -ness, -ism, -ance, un-, re-, dis-, -y, -ish, -able, -ise, -ate;

non-productive affixes are not active in word-formation in modern English, e.g. –th, -hood, -some, -en;

non-productive affix == dead affix

14. 
    Word-composition. Types of compound words. Criteria for their classification.
    

Word-composition (compounding) is the formation of words by morphologically joining two or more stems.

A compound word is a word consisting of at least two stems which usually occur in the language as free forms, e.g. university teaching award committee member.

The compound inherits most of its semantic and syntactic information from its head, i.e. the most important member of a compound word modified by the other component.

The structural pattern of English compounds

[ X Y] y

X = {root, word, phrase}, Y = {root, word}, y = grammatical properties inherited from Y

According to the type of the linking element:

compounds without a linking element, e.g. toothache, bedroom, sweet-heart;

compounds with a vowel linking element, e.g. handicraft, speedometer;

compounds with a consonant linking element, e.g. statesperson, craftsman;

compounds with a preposition linking stem, e.g. son-in-law, lady-in-waiting;

compounds with a conjunction linking stem, e.g. bread-and-butter.

According to the type of relationship between the components

-in coordinative (copulative) compounds neither of the components dominates the other, e.g. fifty-fifty, whisky-and-soda, driver-conductor;

-in subordinative (determinative) compounds the components are neither structurally nor semantically equal in importance but are based on the domination of one component over the other, e.g. coffeepot, Oxford-educated, to headhunt, blue-eyed, red-haired etc.

According to the type of relationship between the components, subordinative compounds are classified into:

-syntactic compounds if their components are placed in the order that resembles the order of words in free phrases made up according to the rules of Modern English syntax, e.g. a know-nothing - to know nothing, a blackbird – a black bird;

-asyntactic compounds if they do not conform to the grammatical patterns current in present-day English, e.g. baby-sitting – to sit with a baby, oil-rich – to be rich in oil.

According to the way of composition:

-compound proper is a compound formed after a composition pattern, i.e. by joining together the stems of words already available in the language, with or without the help of special linking elements, e.g. seasick, looking-glass, helicopter-rescued, handicraft;

-derivational compound is a compound which is formed by two simultaneous processes of composition and derivation; in a derivational compound the structural integrity of two free stems is ensured by a suffix referring to the combination as a whole, e.g. long-legged, many-sided, old-timer, left-hander.

According to the semantic relations between the constituents:

non-idiomatic compounds, whose meanings can be described as the sum of their constituent meanings, e.g. a sleeping-car, an evening-gown, a snowfall;

compounds one of the components of which has undergone semantic derivation, i.e. changed its meaning, e.g. a blackboard, a bluebell;

idiomatic compounds, the meaning of which cannot be deduced from the meanings of the constituents, e.g. a ladybird, a tallboy, horse-marine. The bahuvrihi compounds (Sanskrit ‘much riced’) are idomatic formations in which a person, animal or thing is metonymically named after some striking feature (mainly in their appearance) they possess; their word-building pattern is an adjectival stem + a noun stem, e.g. bigwig, fathead, highbrow, lowbrow, lazy-bones.

15. 
    Shortening. Types of shortening.
    

Shortening is the process of substracting phonemes and / or morhemes from words and word-groups without changing their lexico-grammatical meaning.

Abbreviation is a process of shortening the result of which is a word made up of the initial letters or syllables of the components of a word-group or a compound word.

Graphical abbreviation is the result of shortening of a word or a word-group only in written speech (for the economy of space and effort in writing), while orally the corresponding full form is used:

days of the week and months, e.g. Sun., Tue., Feb., Oct., Dec.;
states in the USA, e.g. Alas., CA, TX;

forms of address, e.g. Mr., Mrs., Dr.;

scientific degrees, e.g. BA, BSc., MA, MSc., MBA, PhD.;

military ranks, e.g. Col.;

units of measurement, e.g. sec., ft, km.

Latin abbreviations, e.g. p.a., i.e., ibid., a.m., cp., viz.

internet abbreviations, e.g. BTW, FYI, TIA, AFAIK, TWIMC, MWA.

Lexical abbreviation is the result of shortening of a word or a word-group both in written and oral speech.

-alphabetical abbreviation (initialism) is a shortening which is read as a succession of the alphabetical readings of the constituent letters, e.g. BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation), MTV (Music Television), EU (European Union), MP (Member of Parliament), WHO (World Health Organisation), AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome), GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) etc.;

-acronymic abbreviation (acronym) is a shortening which is read as a succession of the sounds denoted by the constituent letters, i.e. as if they were an ordinary word, e.g. UNESCO (United Nations Scientific, and Cultural Organisation), NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation), UNICEF (United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund) etc.;

-anacronym is an acronym which is longer perceived by speakers as a shortening: very few people remember what each letter stands for, e.g. laser (light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation), radar (radio detecting and ranging), scuba (self-contained underwater breathing apparatus), yuppie (young urban professional).

-homoacronym is an acronym which coincides with an English word semantically connected with the thing, person or phenomenon, e.g. PAWS (Public for Animal Welfare Society), NOW (National Organisation for Women), ASH (Action on Smoking and Health) etc.;

Clipping is the process of cutting off one or several syllables of a word.

apocope (back-clipping) is a final clipping, e.g. prof < professor, disco < discotheque, ad < advertisement, coke < coca-cola;

aphaeresis (fore-clipping) is an initial clipping, e.g. phone < telephone, Bella < Isabella, cello < violoncello;

syncope is a medial clipping, e.g. maths < mathematics, specs < spectacles; ma’m < madam;

fore-and-aft clipping is an initial and final clipping, e.g. flu < influenza, fridge < refrigerator, tec < detective, Liza < Elizabeth;

Blending (telescoping) is the process of merging parts of words into one new word, e.g. Bollywood < Bombay + Hollywood, antiégé < anti + protégé, brunch < breakfast + lunch, Mathlete < Mathematics+ athlete.

A blend (a fusion, a telescoped word, a portmanteau word) is a word that combines parts of two words and includes the letters or / and sounds they may have in common as a connecting element.

Blending has been known since the 15th c. First blends were of comic or mysterious nature as these were charades for readers or listeners to decode. Telescoped words are found in the works by W. Shakespeare (trimpherate < triumph+ triumvirate), E. Spencer (wrizzle < wrinkle + frizzle). The term portmanteau word was coined by Lewis Carroll in Through the Looking-Glass in 1872 to explain some of the words he made up in the nonsense poem Jabberwocky, e.g. galumph < gallop + triumph, chortle < chuckle + snort.

Blending+semantic derivation

camouflanguage < camouflage + language “мова, перенасичена лінгвістичними та мовленнєвими засобами, які допомагають мовцеві сховати справжній зміст повідомлення”

Thematic groups of blends:

information technologies: teleputer < television + computer; webcam < web + camera; netaholic < Internet + alcoholic;

economics: ecolonomics < ecology + economics; freeconomics < free + economics; slowflation < slow + inflation;

geography: Eurabia < Europe + Arabia; Chindia < China + India; Calexico < California + Mexico;

literature and art: dramedy < drama + comedy; fictomercial < fiction + commercial; docusoap < documentary + soap-opera;

linguistics: Spanglish < Spanish + English; Hindlish < Hindi + English; cryptolect < cryptography + dialect; publilect < puberty + dialect;

16. 
    Conversion. Different views on conversion. Semantic relations within converted pairs.
    

Conversion (zero derivation, affixless derivation) is the formation of words without using specific word-building affixes.

The term conversion was introduced by Henry Sweet in his New English Grammar. First cases of conversion registered in the 14th c. imitated such pairs of words as love, n – love, v (O.E. lufu, n – lufian, v) for they were numerous and thus were subconsciously accepted as one of the typical language patterns.

Approaches to the study of conversion:

-conversion as a morphological way of forming words (Prof. Smirnitskiy);

-conversion as a morphological-syntactic word-building means (Prof. Arnold);

-conversion as a syntactic word-building means (a functional approach).

The productivity of conversion:

-the analytical structure of Modern English;

-the simplicity of paradigms of English parts of speech;

-the regularity and completeness with which converted units develop a paradigm of their new category of part of speech;

-the flexibility of the English vocabulary makes a word formed by conversion capable of further derivation, e.g. affixation (to view > a view > a viewer, viewing), word-composition (a black ball > to blackball, a black list > to blacklist).

Criteria for establishing the directionality of conversion:

historical, e.g. crowd, v (O.E. crudan ‘to press, to hasten, to drive’, 937 AD) > crowd, n ‘a compressed mass of people or things’ 16th c. > ‘any mass of people’;

semantic, i.e. the converted word should be semantically more complex than the base word from which it is derived or is semantically dependent on the latter, e.g. bottle, n > bottle, v; better, adj – better, v;

morphological, i.e. in a homonymous verb-noun pair, the regularly inflected form is derived from the irregularly inflected one, e.g. drink, v > drink, n; sleep, v > sleep, n;

phonetic, i.e. in a homonymous verb-noun pair a stress-shift indicates a derived word, e.g. extráct, v – éxtract, n; pùsh úp, v - púsh-up, n;
frequency of occurrence, i.e. being semantically more complex, derived words have a narrower range of meaning to the effect that they cannot be used in as many contexts as their base words, e.g. water, n > water, v.

Semantic Relations in Conversion

1.Verbs converted from nouns (denominal verbs) denote:

-action characteristic of the object, e.g. dog (n) – to dog (v);

-instrumental use of the object, e.g. screw (n) – to screw (v);

-acquisition or addition of the object, e.g. fish (n) – to fish (v);

-time, e.g. winter (n) – winter (v);

-deprivation of the object, e.g. dust (n) – dust (v).

2.Nouns converted from verbs (deverbial nouns) denote:

-instance or process of the action, e.g. dance (v) – dance (n);

-agent of the action, e.g. help (v) – help (n);

-place of action, e.g. walk (v) – walk (n);

-object or result of the action, e.g. peel (v) – peel (n).

17. 
    Non-productive ways of word-formation.
    

Back-formation (regressive derivation) is the derivation of new words by subtracting a real or supposed affix from existing words (often through misinterpretation of their structure), e.g. an editor > to edit, enthusiasm > to enthuse etc.

The earliest attested examples of back-formation are a beggar > to beg; a burglar > to burgle; a cobbler > to cobble.

The most productive type of back-formation in present-day English is derivation of verbs from compounds that have either –er or –ing as their last element, e.g. sightseeing > to sightsee; proofreading > to proofread; mass-production > to mass-produce; self-destruction > to self-destruct; a baby-sitter > to baby-sit etc.

Onomatopeia (Gr. onoma ‘name, word’ and poiein ‘the make’) (sound imitation, echoisms) is the formation of words by a more or less exact reproduction of a sound associated with an object producing this sound.

Semantic classification of onomatopeic words:

-sounds produced by people: to babble, to chatter, to giggle, to grumble, to titter, to grumble etc.;

- sounds produced by animals (to moo, to neigh, to mew, to purr etc.), birds (to twitter, to crow, to cackle etc.), insects and reptiles (to buzz, to hiss);

-water imitating sounds: to bubble, to splash etc.;

-sounds imitating the noise of metalic things: to clink, to tinkle etc.;

-sounds imitating a forceful motion: to crash, to whisk, to clash etc.

Sound-interchange is the gradation of sounds occupying one and the same place in the sound form of one and same morpheme in various cases of its occurrence.

Historical causes of sound-interchange:

ablaut (vowel gradation), i.e. a change of one to another vowel accompanying a change of stress, e.g. to ride – a road; to bear – a burden; to bite – a bit etc.;

umlaut (vowel mutation), i.e. a partial assimilation to a succeeding sound, e.g. full – to fill, a tale – to tell etc.;

consonant interchange, e.g. to speak – a speech, to bake – a batch, to live – a life etc.

18. 
    Semasiological and onomasiological perspectives of the English lexicon.
    

Onomasiology (Gr. ònomasía ‘name, designation’, logos ‘study’) is a subdiscipline of lexical semantics that studies the word meaning in the direction ‘from the concept – to a sound form (or forms)’. Thesauruses are compiled according to onomasiological principles.

Semasiology (Gr. sēmasia ‘signification, meaning’ and lógos ‘study’) is a sundiscipline of lexical semantics concerned with the studies of the word meaning in the opposite direction: ‘from the sound form – to its meaning (or meanings)’.

The distinction was introduced by the Austrian linguist Adolf Zauner in 1903 his study on the body-part terminology in Romance languages. Both disciplines can be treated diachronically and synchronically

The term semasiology was introduced by Christian Karl Reisig in 1825 in his Lectures on Latin Linguistics.

The objective of semasiology is to expose and explain meanings signified by word sound forms and to demonstrate the difference between these meanings.

Main objects of semasiological study:

-semantic development of words, its causes and classification;

-relevant distinctive features and types of lexical meaning;

-polysemy and semantic structure of words;

-the phenomena of homonymy and paronymy.

19. 
    Approaches to the definition of word meaning: functional, referential and others.
    

There are three classical theories of meaning:

-analytical or referential (F.de Saussure’s disciples)

Meaning is the relation between the object or phenomenon named and the name itself;

-notional or conceptual (Aristotle, John Locke, A.I. Smirnitskiy, etc.)

Meaning is a certain representation of an object / phenomenon / idea / relation in the mind;

-functional or contextual (L. Bloomfield)

Meaning is the situation in which a word is uttered, i.e. its context.

20. 
    Types of word meaning.
    

Aspects of Meaning

-Objective aspect (denotation): word ↔ referent;

-Notional aspect, i.e. significant features common for classes of objects (signification): word ↔ sense;

-Pragmatic aspect, i.e. the speaker’s attitude to the referent (connotation);

-Systemic or differential aspect, i.e. the relations of the signified word with other words within a word-group or in speech.

Types of meaning:

Word-meaning is not homogeneous but is made up of various components the combination and the interrelation of which determine to a great extent the inner facet of the word.

Grammatical meaning is the meaning which unites words into big groups such as parts of speech or lexico-grammatical classes. It is recurrent in identical sets of individual forms of different words, e.g. stones, apples, kids, thoughts have the grammatical meaning of plurality.

Lexical meaning is the meaning proper to the word as a linguistic unit; it is recurrent in all the forms of this word and in all the possible distributions of these forms, e.g. the word-forms write, writes, wrote, writing, written have different grammatical meanings of tense, person, aspect, but the same lexical meaning ‘to make letters or other symbols on a surface, especially with a pen or pencil’.

Components of Lexical Meaning

Lexical meaning is not homogenous either and may be analysed as including denotative and connotative components.

Denotative (denotational) (Lat. denotatum ‘signified’) component is the conceptual content of the word fulfilling its significative and communicative functions; our experience is conceptualised and classified in it.

Connotative (connotational) (Lat. connoto ‘additional meaning’) component conveys the speaker’s attitude to the social circumstances and the appropriate functional style, one’s approval or disapproval of the object spoken of, the speaker’s emotions, the degree of intensity; unlike denotations or significations, connotations are optional.

Types of Connotations

Stylistic connotation is concerned with the situation in which the word is uttered, the social circumstances (formal, familiar), the social relationships between the communicants (polite, rough etc.), the type and purpose of communication, e.g. father (stylistically neutr.), dad (colloquial), parent (bookish).

Emotional connotation is acquired by the word as a result of its frequent use in contexts corresponding to emotional situations or because the referent conceptualised in the denotative meaning is associated with certain emotions, e.g. mother (emotionally neutr.), mummy (emotionally charged); bright (emotionally neutr.), garish (implies negative emotions).

Evaluative connotation expresses approval or disapproval, e.g. modern is often used appreciatively, newfangled expresses disapproval.

Intensifying connotation expresses degree of intensity, e.g. the words magnificent, gorgeous, splendid, superb are used colloquially as terms of exaggeration.

21. 
    Semantic change and transference of meaning.
    

Semantic change is the process of development of a new meaning or any other change of meaning.

Extra-linguistic causes of semantic changes:

-historical, e.g. a pen ‘any instrument for writing’ < Lat. penna ‘a feather of a bird’; supper ‘the last meal of the day’ < Fr. souper < PIE *sup ‘to drink in sips’;

-social, e.g. a live wire ‘one carrying electric current’ > ‘a person of intense energy’, a feed-back ‘the return of a sample of the output of a system’ > ‘response’, to spark off in chain reaction, a launching pad;

-psychological, e.g. a don ‘a university teacher, a leader, a master’ > ‘the head of Mafia family or other group involved in organised crime’, bikini.

Linguistic Causes of Semantic Change

ellipsis is the omittance of one of the components in a word-group; the meaning is transferred to the other component, e.g. a presale view > a presale; to study works by Ch. Dickens > to study Dickens;

differentiation of synonyms, i.e. a gradual change of the meanings of synonyms which develop different semantic structures, e.g. autumn – harvest, a deer – a beast – an animal;

fixed context results from synonymic differentiation when one of the synonyms becomes to be restricted in use to a number of set expressions and compound words, e.g. meat originally ‘food’ (mincemeat, nutmeat, sweetmeat, meat and drink) > ‘edible flesh’;

linguistic analogy occurs when one of the members of a synonymic set acquires a new meaning and the other members of this set change their menaings in the same way, e.g. to snack – to bite.

Types of Semantic Change (by H. Hirt)

Changes in the denotative component of meaning:

generalisation (broadening, extension) is the widening of a word’s range of meanings, e.g. a fellow ‘a partner or shareholder of any kind’ > ‘a man; a person in the same group’; ready ‘prepared for a ride’ > ‘prepared for anything’; rich ‘powerful’ > ‘wealthy’ etc.;

specialisation (narrowing, restriction) is the reduction in a word’s range of meanings, often limiting a generic word to a more specialised or technical use, e.g. lord ‘the master of the house, the head of the family’ > ‘a man of noble rank’; a disease ‘any inconvenience’ > ‘an illness’; to sell ‘to give’ > ‘to deliver for money’ etc.

Changes in the connotative component of meaning:

amelioration (elevation) of meaning occurs as a word loses negative connotations or gains positive ones, e.g. a knight ‘a boy, youth’ > ‘a noble, courageous man’; fond ‘foolish, silly’ > ‘loving, affectionate’; pretty ‘tricky, sly wily’ > ‘pleasing to look at, charming and attractive’ etc.;

pejoration (degradation) of meaning occurs as a word develops negative connotations or loses positive ones; it is frequently due to social prejudice and often involves words for women and foreigners, e.g. vulgar ‘common, ordinary’ > ‘coarse, low, ill-bred’; silly ‘happy’ > ‘foolish’. A word can have its meaning deteriorate in several directions at once, e.g. a cowboy – (in BrE) ‘an incompetent or irresponsible workman or business’ (cowboy plumbers); (in AmE) ‘a driver who does not follow the rules of the road’; ‘a factory worker who does more than the piece-work norms set by the union or fellow-workers’.

A euphemism (Gr. éu ‘well’, phēmi ‘speak, glorify’; euphēmia ‘a word or phrase used in place of a religious word or phrase that should not be spoken aloud’) is a vague or indirect reference to the taboo topics:

-death, e.g. to join the majority, to kick the bucket, pass away, to check out, to take a leave of life, to pay nature’s last debt, to be beyond the veil etc.;

-human weaknesses, e.g. to be tired and emotional, to be chemically affected (to be drunk), to have a weakness for horses (gambling) etc.;

-mental deficiency, e.g. to be intellectually challenged, to be thick in the head, funny farm etc.;

-pregnancy, e.g. to be eating for two, lady-in-waiting, in the family way, on the nest, in the interesting way, to have a bun in the oven etc;

-age, e.g. God’s waiting room, the golden age etc.;

- politics, e.g. less fortunate elements (the poor), the economic tunnel (the crisis) etc.

Transference of meaning:

Metaphor is the transference of name based on the association of similarity between two referents and thus is actually a hidden comparison. Models of metaphorical transference:

-similarity of shape, e.g. the head of a cabbage, the nose of a plane etc;

- similarity of colour, e.g. orange for colour and fruit, black despair etc.;

-similarity of function, e.g. the wing of a plane, the hand of a clock etc.;

-similarity of age, e.g. a green man etc.;

-similarity of position, e.g. the leg of the table, the foot of a hill etc.;

-similarity of behaviour or qualities of animals, e.g. a bookworm, a pig, a rat etc.;

-similarity in temperature, e.g. cold reason, warm heart etc.;

-transition of proper names into common nouns, e.g. a Rockefeller, a Cinderella, a Judas, a Don Juan, an Adonis etc.

Metonymy is the transference of name based on the association of contiguity (суміжність). Models of metonymical transference:

-the part the whole (synecdoche), e.g. to be all ears;

-the place people occupying it, e.g. The White House, The Pentagon;

-the material the object made from it, e.g. a glass, an iron;

-the container the thing contained, e.g. the kettle is boiling;

-a geographical name a common noun, e.g. madeira, bourbon, champagne, sardine, labrador;

-the instrument the agent, e.g. the best pens of the day;

-the sign the thing signified, e.g. gray hair ‘old age’;

-the symbol the thing symbolised, e.g. the crown ‘the monarchy’.

22. 
    A theory of semantic field. Thematic groups.
    

A semantic field is the extensive organisation of related words and expressions into a system which shows their relations to one another.

The significance of each unit is determined by its neighbours, with the units’ semantic areas reciprocally limiting each other.

The members of the semantic fields are joined together by some common semantic component known as the common denominator of meaning.

‘Human Mind’: mind, reason, cognition, idea, concept, judgment, analysis, conclusion;

A thematic group is a subsystem of the vocabulary for which the basis of grouping is not only linguistic but also extralinguistic: the words are associated because the things they name occur together and are closely connected in reality, e.g.:

-terms of kinship: father, cousin, mother-in-law, uncle;

-names for parts of the human body: head, neck, arm, foot, thumb;

-colour terms: blue, green, yellow, red / scarlet, crimson, coral;

-military terms: lieutenant, captain, major, colonel, general.

23. 
    Neologisms. Their sources and formation.
    

A neologism (Gr néos ‘new’ and logos ‘word, study’) is a new lexical unit introduced into a language to denote a new object or phenomenon. The term is first attested in English in 1772, borrowed from French néologisme. Neologisms are often directly attributable to a specific person, publication, period, or event.

In January 2002 Collins Gem English Pocket Dictionary editorial board have registered 140 neologisms.

Collins Essential English Dictionary (2003) contains 5,500 new words.

The Oxford Dictionary of New Words (1999) includes articles on 2,000 new words and phrases prominent in the media or public eye in the 80s -90s.

While the typical lexical growth areas of the 1980s were the media, computers, finance, money, environment, political correctness, youth culture and music, the 1990s saw significant lexical expansion in the areas of politics, the media and the Internet.

Nonce words (occasional words) (an ellipsis of the phrase for the nonce ‘for the once’) are lexical units created by the speaker on the spur of the moment, for a given occasion only, and may be considered as ‘potentially’ existing in the English vocabulary, e.g. what-d’you-call-him /-her/-it/-them, n. is used instead of a name that one cannot remember.

A lot of neologisms resulted from nonce words, e.g. yuppie, n. ‘a well-paid young middle-class professional who works in a city job and has a luxurious lifestyle’; coach potato, soap opera, generation X, thirty-something, glass ceiling ‘an unacknowledged barrier to advancement in a profession, especially affecting women and members of minorities’; gerrymander /'dʒɛrɪ‚mandə/, v. ‘manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favour one party or class’.

Lexical Neologisms

Two common elements used to produce new words related to the Internet are cyber- and e-:

cybercafé, n. ‘a cafe that offers its customers computers with Internet access’; cyberterrorist, n. ‘a criminal who uses the Internet to do damage to computer systems’;

Semantic neologisms – new meanings of already existing words – result from semantic derivation due to the functional mobility of the vocabulary:

virus, n. ‘a piece of code which is capable of copying itself and typically has a detrimental effect, such as corrupting the system or destroying data’;

Idiomatic Neologisms

to open the kimono ‘to open a company's accounting books for inspection; to expose something previously hidden’; a sleep camel ‘a person who gets little sleep during the week, and then attempts to make up for it by sleeping in and napping on the weekend’; to put skin in the game ‘take an active interest in a company or undertaking by making a significant investment or financial commitment’;

24. 
    Polysemy. Semantic structure of English words. Diachronic and synchronic approaches to polysemy.
    

Polysemy (Gr. πολυσημεία ‘multiple meaning’) is the ability of words to have more than one meaning.

Polysemy is typical of the English vocabulary due to:

-its monosyllabic character;

-the predominance of root words.

A monosemantic word is a word having only one meaning; these are mostly terms, e.g.: hydrogen, molecule.

A polysemantic word is a word having more than one meaning; highly polysemous words can include dozens of meanings, e.g. to go – appr. 40 meanings), to get, to put, to take – appr. 30 meanings).

A lexeme is the totality of all the forms and meanings of a word; a structural item of the vocabulary.

A lexico-semantic variant is one of the individual meanings of a polysemantic word.

The semantic structure of a word is an organised system comprising all meanings and shades of meanings that a particular sound complex can assume in different contexts together with emotional, stylistic and other connotations.

Polysemy in diachronic terms implies that a word may retain its previous meaning and at the same time acquire one or several new ones. The main question of diachronic approach is which meaning came first, e.g.

table, n. ‘a flat slab of stone or wood’ (primary meaning); ‘a piece of furniture’, ‘the food put on the table’, ‘people seated at a table’ (secondary meanings).

Synchronically polysemy is understood as co-existence of various meanings of the same word at a certain historical period and the arrangement of these meanings in the semantic structure of a word. Synchronic typology of meaning is concerned with the opposition of main and derived meanings.

Types of polysemy:

Radial polysemy is the type of polysemy in which the primary meaning of a word stands in the centre and the secondary meanings proceed out of it like rays; each secondary meaning can be traced to the primary meaning.

Chain polysemy is the type of polysemy in which the secondary meanings of a word develop like a chain. In such cases it may be difficult to trace some meanings to the primary one.

Radical-chain (mixed) polysemy is a combination of radial polysemy and chain polysemy. Here the configuration of a diagram depends on the word’s semantic structure, hence there is a great variety of diagrams illustrating this type of polysemy.

25. 
    Homonyms. Classifications and sources of homonyms.
    

Homonymy (Gr. homos ‘same’ + onyma, dial. form of onoma ‘name’) is the sameness of form combined with the difference in meaning.

Homonyms are two or more words identical in sound-form or / and spelling but different in meaning and distribution, e.g. hole, n – whole, adj; need, n – knead, v; polish, n – Polish, adj, etc.

Sources of Homonymy

Divergence of word meaning is the process observed in those cases when different meanings of the same word deviate so far from each other that they come to be regarded as two separate units.

/flauə/

flower from Lat. flos, florem, OFr.flour, flor > ME flour ‘flower’;

flour ‘powder made by crushing grain’. Used from 13c. in the sense of the ‘finest part’ of meal (cf. Fr. fleur de farine ‘flower of flour’). Spelled flower until flour became the accepted form c. 1830 to end confusion.

toast, n

-a slice of bread made brown and crisp by cooking in high temperature, from O.Fr. toster ‘to brown with heat’ (12c.);

-a call to drink to someone's health (1700), originally referring to the beautiful or popular woman whose health is proposed and drunk, from the use of spiced toast to flavor drink.

Convergent sound development is the process which leads to the phonetic coincidence of two (or more) words that were phonetically distinct at an earlier date, e.g.

-OE ic and eaʒe > ModE I and eye /ai /;

-the disappearance of the sound k before n, e.g. knight – night, knot –not;

-the convergence of the ME ā, ai, ei, e.g. fair – fare, pale – pail, wait – weight;

-race 1 and race 2 from Old Norse rās 'running' and MFr from It razza 'ethnic group';

- Fr. mèche ‘wick’ (фитиль), OE meche ‘partner’ > match 1 ‘сірник’, match 2 ‘a relationship, a partnership’, as in matchmaker.

Loss of inflections, e.g. OE lufu (n) and lufian (v) - ModE love; OE sunne and sunu – ModE sun and son.

Conversion which serves the creation of grammatical homonyms, e.g. iron, n. - iron, v.; work, n. - to work, v.

Shortening, e.g. fan, n. ‘an enthusiastic admirer of some kind of sport or of an actor, singer, etc.’ (a clipping from fanatic) – fan, n. ‘an implement for waving li8ghtly to produce a cool current of air’.

Sound-imitation, e.g. bang, n. ‘a loud, sudden, explosive noise’ – bang, n. ‘a fringe of hair combed over the forehead’; mew, n. ‘the sound a cat makes’ – mew, n. ‘a seagull’.

From the viewpoint of their origin homonyms are classified into:

-historical homonyms which result from the breaking up of polysemy; then one polysemantic word will split up into two or more separate words (see the examples on the divergence of word meanings);

-etymological homonyms, i.e. words of different origin which come to be identical in sound or / and in spelling (see the examples on the convergent sound development).

From the point of view of the correlation between the sound form and the graphic forms, homonyms are classified into:

homonyms proper (perfect, absolute, full) are words identical both in pronunciation and in spelling but different in meaning, e.g. back n. ‘part of the body’ - back adv. ‘away from the front’ - back v. ‘go back’; bear n. ‘animal’ - bear v. ‘carry, tolerate’;

homographs are words identical in spelling but different in sound and meaning e.g. bow /bəu/ - bow /bau/; lead /li:d/ - lead /led/; homophones are words identical in sound but different in spelling and meaning: son – sun; pair – pear; air - heir, buy - by, him - hymn, steel – steal; storey – story;

homoforms are words identical in some of their grammatical forms: bound, v. ‘to jump, to spring’ - bound (past participle of bind); found, v. ‘establish’ - found (past participle of find);

capitonyms are words that share the same spelling but have different meanings when capitalised, e.g. polish, v. ‘to make shiny’ - Polish, adj. ‘coming from Poland’; Boxing Day (26th of December) – boxing ‘ a kind of sport’.

The classification based on the distinction between homonymy of words and homonymy of individual word-forms (suggested by Prof. Smirnitskiy).

Full homonyms are two or more words which belong to the same part of speech and coincide in all their forms, i.e. their paradigms are identical, e.g.

blow, v. ‘to send out a strong current of air’ - blow, v. ‘to produce flowers’; mole, n. ‘a small, furry, almost blind animal that digs holes and passages underground to live in’ – mole, n. ‘a small, dark brown, slightly raised mark on a person’s skin’;

Partial homonyms are words found within different (rarely the same) parts of speech which coincide only in some of their forms, i.e. their paradigms are not identical. e.g.:

seal, n. (seals) ‘a semi-aquatic marine mammal’ – seal, v. (sealed, sealing) ‘to close tightly’; lie, v. (lies – lying – lay – lain) ‘to be in a horizontal or resting position’ – lie, v. (lies – lying – lied – lied) ‘to make an untrue statement’;

According to the type of meaning, homonyms are classified into:

lexical homonyms, if they belong to the same part of speech but differ in lexical meaning, e.g.:

bank, n. ‘land along the side of a river’ – bank, n. ‘an establishment for keeping money, valuables, etc.’;

lexical-grammatical homonyms, if they belong to different parts of speech and differ both in their lexical and grammatical meanings, e.g.:

bear, n. – bear, v.; right, adj. – write, v.;

grammatical homonyms, i.e. homonymous word-forms of one and the same word differing in grammatical meaning, e.g. the homonymy of the plural, Possessive Case singular and plural: bears - bear's - bears'.

26. 
    Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations among English words.
    

Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations are understood as basic linguistic relationships describing the complex structure of a language system. This distinction is relevant to all levels of description. It was introduced by the Swiss linguist Ferdinard de Saussure in 1916 as a generalisation of the traditional concepts of a paradigm and a syntagm.

Paradigm (Gr. parádeigma ‘pattern, model’) is a set of homogeneous forms opposed to each other according to their semantic and formal features.

Syntagm (Gr. sýntagma ‘that which is put together in order’) is a structured syntactic sequence of linguistic elements formed by segmentation which can consist of sounds, words, phrases, clauses, or entire sentences.

Paradigmatic relations exist between units of the language system outside the strings where they co-occur. They are based on the criteria of selection and distribution of linguistic elements. Paradigmatic relations determining the vocabulary system are based on the interdependence of words within the vocabulary: synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, meronymy.

F. de Saussure called paradigmatic relationships associative relationships, because they represent the relationship between individual elements in specific environment.

It was the Danish linguist Louis Hjelmslev who replaced the term associative relations for paradigmatic relations.

Syntagmatic relations are immediate linear links between the units in a segmental sequence. Syntagmatic relations are horizontal since they are based on the linear character of speech.

In psycholinguistics these terms are used in a different sense.

The term paradigmatic relations denotes the mental associations between words which form part of a set of mutually exclusive items, e.g. black responds with white.

The term syntagmatic relations refers to mental associations between words which frequently occur together, e.g. black magic / tie / sheep.

27. 
    Synonyms. Types of synonyms. Sources of synonymy.
    

Synonyms (Gr. syn ‘with’, ónyma ‘name’) are two or more words belonging to the same part of speech and possessing a common denotative semantic component, interchangeable at least in some contexts without any considerable alteration in sense, but differing in morphemic composition, phonemic shape, shades of meaning, connotations, style, valency and idiomatic use, e.g.:

Classifications of Synonyms
(Acad. V. V. Vinogradov’s approach)

Lexical synonyms are similar in meaning in the language system.

Contextual synonyms are similar in meaning only under some specific contextual conditions, cf. the following sentences:

I’ll go to the shop to buy some bread.

I’ll go to the shop to get some bread.

I can’t bear him anymore.

I can’t stand him anymore.

Lexical Synonyms

Absolute synonyms coincide in all their shades of meaning and in all their stylistic characteristics, e.g. word-building – word-formation;

Ideographic synonyms convey the same concept but differ in shades of meaning, i.e. in their denotative component;

interesting – (exciting), (makes you want to know more sth);

fascinating – (exciting), (makes you want to know more sth), [extremely];

intriguing – (exciting), (makes you want to know more sth), [there is sth you find difficult to understand or explain];

Stylistic synonyms differ in their stylistic characteristics, i.e. in their connotative component, e.g. head (neutral) – attic (stylistic).

Ideographic-stylistic synonyms differ in shades of meaning and belong to different styles, e.g. to see ‘to have or use the powers of sight and understanding’ – to behold (elevated, archaic) ‘to look at that which is seen’.

Sources of Synonymy

development of the native elements, mostly denoting different shades of common meaning, e.g. fast – speedy – swift; handsome – pretty – lovely;

adaptation of words from dialects and varieties of English, e.g. dark – murk (Northern English); girl – lass (Scottish English); wireless – radio (American English);

foreign borrowings, e.g. to ask (native) – to question (French) – to interrogate (Latin); to end (native) – to finish (French) – to complete (Latin);

euphemisms, e.g. drunk – intoxicated – tired and emotional; to kill – to finish – to make away with sb – to remove;

etymological doublets, e.g. shade – shadow; canal – channel;

productive word-forming processes, e.g. await – wait; memorandum – memo; resistance – fight back.

28. 
    Antonyms. Definition. Morphological and semantic classifications of antonyms.
    

Antonymy is a type of paradigmatic relations based on polarity of meaning.

Antonyms (Gr. antí ‘against,’ ónyma ‘name’) are two or more words of the same language belonging to the same part of speech and to the same semantic field, identical in style and nearly identical in distribution, associated and often used together so that their denotative meanings render contrary or contradictory notions.

According to the character of semantic opposition:

Antonyms proper (contrary antonyms) are antonyms which possess the following characteristics:

-they are gradable, i.e. there are some intermediate units between the most distant members of a set, e.g. cold – cool – tepid – warm – hot; never – seldom – sometimes – often – always;

-they are capable of comparison, e.g. good – better – best vs. bad – worse – worst;

-they can be modified by such intensifiers as very, slightly, extremely, fairly, rather etc., e.g. huge – very big – BIG – quite big – medium-sized – quite small – SMALL – very small – tiny;

-they do not deny one another, e.g. She is not beautiful ≠She is ugly;

-they refer not to independent absolute qualities but to some implicit norm, e.g. a big mouse vs a small elephant.

Contradictory antonyms (complementary antonyms) are mutually opposed (exclusive) and deny one another, e.g. male – female; married – single; asleep – awake; same – different. Their features:

-not gradable;

-truly represent oppositeness of meaning;

-cannot be used in the comparative or superlative degree;

-the denial of one member of such antonymic opposition always implies the assertion of the other, e.g. not dead – alive.

Conversive antonyms (conversives) are words which denote one and the same situation as viewed from different points of view, with a reversal of the order of participants and their roles, e.g. husband – wife; teacher – pupil; to buy – to sell; to lend – to borrow; to precede – to follow. These antonyms are mutually dependent on each other and one item presupposes the other.

Vectorial antonyms (directional antonyms) are words denoting differently directed actions, features, e.g. to rise – to fall; to arrive – to depart; to marry – to divorce; to learn – to forget; to appear – to disappear.

Morphological classification of antonyms by V. N. Komissarov (Dictionary of English Antonyms):

root antonyms (absolute antonyms) are antonyms having different roots, e.g. clean – dirty; late – early; day – night;

derivational antonyms are antonyms having the same root but different affixes, e.g. to fasten – to unfasten; flexible – inflexible; useful – useless.

29. 
    Grammatical and lexical valency. Grammatical and lexical context.
    

The appearance of words in a certain syntagmatic succession with particular logical, semantic, morphological and syntactic relations is called collocability or valency.

Valency is viewed as an aptness or potential of a word to have relations with other words in language. Valency can be grammatical and lexical.

Collocability is an actual use of words in particular word-groups in communication.

Lexical valency is the aptness of a word to appear in various collocations, i.e. in combinations with other words. The lexical valency of correlated words in different languages is not identical. Both the E. plant and Ukr. рослина may be combined with a number of words denoting the place where the flowers are grown, e.g. garden plants, hot-house flowers, etc. (cf. Ukr. садові рослини, оранжерейні рослини, etc.). The English word, however, cannot enter into combination with the word room to denote plants growing in the rooms (cf. pot plants — кімнатні рослини).

The interrelation of lexical valency and polysemy:

-the restrictions of lexical valency of words may manifest themselves in the lexical meanings of the polysemantic members of word-groups, e.g. heavy, adj. in the meaning ‘rich and difficult to digest’ is combined with the words food, meals, supper, etc., but one cannot say *heavy cheese or *heavy sausage;

-different meanings of a word may be described through its lexical valency, e.g. the different meanings of heavy, adj. may be described through the word-groups heavy weight / book / table; heavy snow / storm / rain; heavy drinker / eater; heavy sleep / disappointment / sorrow; heavy industry / tanks, and so on.

From this point of view word-groups may be regarded as the characteristic minimal lexical sets that operate as distinguishing clues for each of the multiple meanings of the word.

Grammatical valency is the aptness of a word to appear in specific grammatical (or rather syntactic) structures. Its range is delimited by the part of speech the word belongs to. This is not to imply that grammatical valency of words belonging to the same part of speech is necessarily identical, e.g.

-the verbs suggest and propose can be followed by a noun (to propose or suggest a plan / a resolution); however, it is only propose that can be followed by the infinitive of a verb (to propose to do smth.);

-the adjectives clever and intelligent are seen to possess different grammatical valency as clever can be used in word-groups having the pattern: Adj. + Prep. at + Noun (clever at mathematics), whereas intelligent can never be found in exactly the same word-group pattern.

-The individual meanings of a polysemantic word may be described through its grammatical valency, e.g.

- keen + N as in keen sight ‘sharp’; keen + on + N as in keen on sports ‘fond of’; keen + V(inf) as in keen to know ‘eager’.

Lexical context determines lexically bound meaning; collocations with the polysemantic words are of primary importance, e.g. a dramatic change / increase / fall / improvement; dramatic events / scenery; dramatic society; a dramatic gesture.

In grammatical context the grammatical (syntactic) structure of the context serves to determine the meanings of a polysemantic word, e.g. 1) She will make a good teacher. 2) She will make some tea. 3) She will make him obey.

30. 
    Free word-groups. Definition. Classifications.
    

A word-group is a combination of at least two meaningful words joined together according to the rules of a particular language.

According to the head-word:

Nominal, verbal, adjectival, statival, numerical, pronominal, adverbial

According to the type of connection:

Predicative

Non-predicative

-subordinate

-coordinate

According to the criterion of distribution, word-groups are classified into:

-exocentric, i.e. having the distribution different from either of its members, e.g. side by side, to grow smaller, kind to people etc.

-endocentric, i.e. having one central member functionally equivalent to the whole word-group, e.g. a red flower, bravery of all kinds etc.

Endocentric word-groups are further subdivided into:

-coordinative if they have the same distribution as two or more of its members, e.g. bread and butter; coffee, tea, and milk;

-subordinative if they have the same distribution as one of their members, e.g. fresh milk; very fresh.

This classification was elaborated by the American linguist Leonard Bloomfield in the book Language (1933).

31. 
    Discrepancies between free word-groups and phraseological units.
    

A word-group is a combination of at least two meaningful words joined together according to the rules of a particular language.

According to the head-word:

Nominal, verbal, adjectival, statival, numerical, pronominal, adverbial

According to the type of connection:

Predicative

Non-predicative

-subordinate

-coordinate

According to the criterion of distribution, word-groups are classified into:

-exocentric, i.e. having the distribution different from either of its members, e.g. side by side, to grow smaller, kind to people etc.

-endocentric, i.e. having one central member functionally equivalent to the whole word-group, e.g. a red flower, bravery of all kinds etc.

Endocentric word-groups are further subdivided into:

-coordinative if they have the same distribution as two or more of its members, e.g. bread and butter; coffee, tea, and milk;

-subordinative if they have the same distribution as one of their members, e.g. fresh milk; very fresh.
Phraseological units:

European tradition: a branch of linguistics that studies stable word-groups with partially or fully transferred meanings (Ye. D. Polivanov, V. V. Vinogradov, A. V. Kunin etc.)

Anglo-American tradition: a form of expression peculiar to a language including separate words and word-groups (R. Glaeser, G. Knappe etc.)

A phraseological unit is a non-motivated word-group that cannot be freely made up in speech but is reproduced as a ready-made unit

idiomaticity

reproducibility

stability

predictability

inseparability

32. 
    Phraseological units: a variety of terms and the problem of definition. Characteristic features of phraseological units.
    

Approaches to the definition

European tradition: a branch of linguistics that studies stable word-groups with partially or fully transferred meanings (Ye. D. Polivanov, V. V. Vinogradov, A. V. Kunin etc.)

Anglo-American tradition: a form of expression peculiar to a language including separate words and word-groups (R. Glaeser, G. Knappe etc.)

Charles Bally

F. de Saussure’s disciple, the Geneva School of Linguistics;

introduced the term phraséologie in his book Précis de stylistique (1905);

considered phraseology a branch of stylistics.

Yevgeniy Polivanov

one of the founders of the Society for the Study of Poetic Language (ОПОЯЗ);

defined phraseology as a separate linguistic discipline.

A phraseological unit is a non-motivated word-group that cannot be freely made up in speech but is reproduced as a ready-made unit

idiomaticity

reproducibility

stability

predictability

inseparability

33. 
    Classifications of phraseological units.
    

The Thematic Classification

Smith, Logan Pearsall (1865-1946), an American-born essayist and critic, and a notable writer on historical semantics.

English Idioms (1923), Words and Idioms (1925)

Phraseological units are classified according to their source of origin, i.e. source referring to the particular sphere of human activity, natural phenomena, domestic and wild animals, etc.; through time most of them develop metaphorical meaning;

Idioms related to the sea and the life of seamen: to be all at sea; to be in deep waters; to be in the same boat with sb; to sail through sth; to show one’s colours; to weather the storm; three sheets in the wind (sl) etc.

The Semantic Classification

The idea of the semantic classification of phraseological units was first advanced by the Swiss linguist Charles Bally.

This research work was carried out by Acad. V. V. Vinogradov in the field of Russian phraseology.

The underlying principle of the semantic classification is the degree of motivation (idiomaticity), i.e. the relationship existing between the meaning of the whole phraseological unit and the meaning of its components.

The degree of motivation correlates with the semantic unity (cohesion) of the phraseological unit, i.e. the possibility of changing the form or order of the components and substituting the whole by a single word.

Phraseological combinations (collocations) are:

clearly motivated;

made up of words possessing specific lexical valency which accounts for a certain degree of stability in such word-groups; variability of member-words is strictly limited.

e.g. to meet the demand, to make a mistake, to bear a grudge, to pay a compliment, to give a speech etc.

Phraseological unities are:

partially non-motivated, i.e. their meaning can usually be perceived through the metaphoric meaning of the whole unit.

e.g. to lose one’s head, a fish out of water, to show one’s teeth, to wash one’s dirty linen in public, to sit on the fence etc.

Phraseological fusions are:

completely non-motivated, i.e. the meaning of the components has no connection, at least synchronically, with the meaning of the whole group;

characerised by complete stability of the lexical components and the grammatical structure of the whole unit.

e.g. once in a blue moon, to be on the carpet, under the rose etc.

The Contextual Classification

Prof. Natalia N. Amosova Основы английской фразеологии (1963)

the contextual approach proceeds from the assumption that individual meanings of polysemantic words can be observed in certain contexts and may be viewed as dependent on these contexts;

a phraseological unit is a unit of fixed context characterised by specific and unchanging sequence of definite lexical components and a peculiar semantic relationship between them;

the two criteria of PhU – specialised meaning of the components and non-variability of context – display unilateral dependence.

According to whether or not one of the components of the whole word-group possesses specialised meaning, PhU are subdivided into:

phrasemes – two-member word-groups in which one of the members has specialised meaning dependent on the second component; the word served as a clue to the specialised meaning of one of the components is habitually used in its central meaning, e.g. small hours, black frost, white lie;

idioms – are semantically and grammatically inseparable units characterised by impossibilty of attaching meaning to the members of the group taken in isolation (as in red tape, dark horse), logical incompatibilty (as in mare’s nest).

The Functional Classification

Prof. Alexander I. Smirnitskiy Лексикология английского языка (1956)

-the functional approach proceeds from the assumption that PhU may be defined as non-motivated word-groups functioning as word-equivalents;

-the functional approach seeks to establish formal criteria of idiomaticity by analysing the syntactic functions of PhU by analysing the syntactic function of PhU in speech;

-semantic inseparability and grammatical inseparability of PhU are viewed as the aspects of idiomaticity which enables to regard them semantically and grammatically equivalent to single words;

-PhUn are characterised by a single stylistic reference irrespective of the number and nature of the component words.

Phraseological units vs idioms proper

-PhU are non-motivated word-groups functioning as word-equivalents by virtue of their semantic and grammatical inseparability.

-Idioms proper (proverbs, sayings and quotations) are ready-made expressions with a specialised meaning of their own which cannot be inferred from the meaning of their components taken singly; they do not always function as word-equivalents.

According to the number and semantic significance of their constituent parts, PhU are classified into:

-one-summit (одновершинные) units, which have one meaningful component;

-two-summit and multi-summit (двухвершинные или многовершинные), which have two or more meaningful constituents.

According to the parts of speech of the summit constituents, one-summit units are subdivided into:

-verbal-adverbial units, the semantic and grammatical centres are in the first component, e.g. to give up, to put through, to get up etc.;

-units equivalent to verbs, their semantic centre being in the second component and the grammatical centre – in the first one, e.g. to be surprised, to be tired etc.; --prepositional-substantive units equivalent either to adverbs or to copulas, their semantic centre being in the nominal constituent and no grammatical centre, e.g. by heart, by means of etc.

According to the parts of speech of the summit constituents, two-summit units are subdivided into:

-attribute-substantive units equivalent to nouns, e.g. black art, couch potato, dark horse, Dutch courage, rough diamond etc.;

-verb-substantive units equivalent to verbs, e.g. to take the floor, to break the ice, to lose one’s heart, not to lift a finger etc.;

-phraseological repetions equivalent to adverbs, e.g. now and never etc.;

-adverbial multi-summit unts, e.g. every other day etc.

The Structural-Semantic Classification

Prof. Alexander V. Kunin Английская фразеология (1970)

-Phraseology is regarded as a self-contained branch of linguistics and not as part of lexicology.

-Phraseology deals with a phraseological subsystem of the language and not with isolated PhU.

-Phraseology is concerned with all types of set expressions.

-Semantically set expressions fall into phraseological units with fully or partially transferred meanings, phraseomatic units with components used in their literal meanings and border-line cases.

-Phraseological and phraseomatic units are not regarded as word-equivalents, but some of them are treated as word correlates.

-Set-expressions are ready-made units not created in speech; they are not elements of individual style but language units; they are characterised by lexical and semantic stability.

According to the communicative function determined by their structural-semantic features four classes of set-expressions are defined:

nominating units denote extralingual entities, e.g. as the crow flies;

nominating-communicative verbal phrases can be transformed into a sentence when used in the passive voice, e.g. to break the ice – the ice is broken; to pull somebody’s leg – somebody’s leg is pulled.

interjectional units express emotions, e.g. a pretty kettle of fish, by George!

communicative units are proverbs, sayings, quotations whose structure is similar to that of a sentence, e.g. Familiarity breeds contempt.

The Formal Classification

Types of phraseological units:

-nominal phrases: the root of trouble;

- verbal phrases: the break the news;

- adjectival phrases: as good as gold, head and shoulders over sb;

- adverbial phrases: in the long run, from head to foot, by heart;

- conjunctional phrases: on the one hand, as long as;

- prepositional phrases: in the course of sth;

- interjectional: Well, I never!

Phraseological units functioning like nouns:

N + N maiden name

N’s + N cat’s paw, ladies’ man

N + prep + N the arm of the law

N + subordinate clause ships that pass in the night

Phraseological units functioning like verbs:

V +N to take advantage

V + postpositive to give up

V + and + V to pick and choose

V + one’s + N + prep to snap one’s fingers at

V + one + N to give one the bird

V+subordinate clause to see how the land lies

Phraseological units functioning like adjectives:

A + A high and mighty

A + as + N as old as the hills

Phraseological units functioning like adverbs:

N + N tooth and nail

prep + N by heart, of course

adv + prep + A + N once in a blue moon

prep + N + or + N by hook or by crook

Phraseological units functioning like interjections:

imperative sentences: Bless (one’s) soul!, God bless you!

According to their origins, phraseological units in Modern English may be divided into:

native, e.g. to eat the humble pie ‘to submit to humiliation’ < ME to eat umble pie (umbles ‘the internal organs of a deer’); to save for a rainy day; to beat about the bush ‘not to speak openly and directly’; to lose one’s rag ‘to lose one’s temper’ etc.;

borrowed, which, in their turn, can be either intralingual (borrowed from American English and other variants of English) or interlingual (borrowed from other languages).

34. 
    Polysemy, synonymy and stylistic features of phraseological units.
    

Semantic Aspect of Phraseological Units

Absolute synonyms (identical in meaning and stylistic connotations):

break one’s word = depart from one’s word; bring (drive) to the bay = drive (force) to the wall; like lightning = with lightning speed = like a streak of lightning;

Ideographic synonyms denote different shades of common meaning, e.g. to come to / arrive at / jump at / leap at a conclusion. In other cases, they differ in intensity of a given meaning:

to have two minds – to be in twenty minds; to be in one’s cups ‘tipsy’ – to be drunk as a skunk ‘drunk and incapable’;

Stylistic synonyms (appropriate only to definite contexts):

What on earth is this? – What the hell is this?

on the Greek calends – When pigs fly.

Polysemy of phraseological units:

to be on the go – 1) be energetic; 2) keep doing smth; 3) be in a hurry; 4) be drunk.

Phraseological units may contain different figures of speech.

metaphor, i.e. the transference of the name based on the association of similarity between two referents, e.g. a lame duck, in a nutshell, to swallow the pill;

simile, e.g. as old as the hills, as good as gold, as cross as two sticks;

metonymy, i.e. the transference of name based on the association f contiguity (an attribute or adjunct is substituted for the thing meant), e.g. all ears, all eyes for, cat’s paw;

hyperbole, i.e. deliberate exaggerated statement not meant to understood literally, but expressing an intensely emotional attitude, e.g. a whale of time; a drop in the ocean.

Stylistic Aspect of Phraseology

Not all phraseological units bear imagery:

clichés / stock phrases (see you later, take it easy, joking apart etc.);

some proverbs (better late than never);

some euphonic units:

- rhyme (out and about);

- alliteration (forgive and forget, now or never, safe and sound);

- repetition (little by little, inch by inch);

- with archaic words (to buy a pig in a poke).

35. 
    Origins and sources of phraseological units.
    

According to their origins, phraseological units in Modern English may be divided into:

native, e.g. to eat the humble pie ‘to submit to humiliation’ < ME to eat umble pie (umbles ‘the internal organs of a deer’); to save for a rainy day; to beat about the bush ‘not to speak openly and directly’; to lose one’s rag ‘to lose one’s temper’ etc.;

borrowed, which, in their turn, can be either intralingual (borrowed from American English and other variants of English) or interlingual (borrowed from other languages).

Intralingual borrowings: e.g. to bite off more than one can chew; to shoot the bull ‘’to talk nonsense’ (from American English); to pull sb’s leg (from Scottish Gaelic); a knock back (from Australian English) etc.

Interlingual borrowings:

-translation loans from Latin, e.g. to take the bull by the horns, a slip of the tongue (Lat. lapsus linguae), with a grain of salt (Lat. cum grano salis), second to none (Lat. nulli secundus); from French, e.g. by heart (Fr. par coeur), that goes without saying (Fr. cela va sans dire); from Spanish, e.g. the moment of truth (Sp. el momento de la verdad), blue blood (Sp. la sagre azul) etc;

-barbarisms (non-assimilated loans), e.g. sotto voce (It.) ‘quietly, in a low voice’, la dolce vita (It.) ‘the good life full of pleasure’, al fresco (It.) ‘in the open air’, cordon bleu (Fr.) ‘high quality, esp. of cooking’.

Sources of Phraseological Units

Phraseological units based on real events:

-everyday life, e.g. to be packed like sardines; to play cat and mouse; to be wet behind the ears; to go to bed with the chickens;

professional jargon, e.g. to be in deep waters, to be in the same boat with sb (nautical sphere); to nip sth in the bud (agriculture and gardening); to keep one’s finger on the pulse (medical sphere); fair play (sports); to come up against a brick wall (building); flavour of the month (cooking) etc.;

-historic references: to throw someone to the lions (Roman entertainment of putting people in the arena with wild animals); Baker’s dozen (to guard against miscounting, bakers habitually gave thirteen loaves when selling a dozen), red tape (legal documents were bound with a red tape), white elephant (a precious gift given by a Thai King to a sub-king to ruin the latter) etc.

Phraseological units based on folklore and literary sources:

-national folklore, e.g. to rain cats and dogs, to have nine lives etc.; proverbs, e.g. the last straw, to catch at a straw etc.;

-antique myths and legends, e.g. a swan song (Ancient Greece); the Trojan horse (Rome); crocodile tears (Egypt); the lion’s share, a dog in the manger (Aesop’s fables) etc.;

-the Bible, e.g. an eye for an eye; a wolf in sheep’s clothing etc.;

-literature, e.g. to be as busy as a bee (G. Chaucer); to fight the windmills (M. de Cervantes); an albatross around one’s neck (S. T. Coleridge); something is rotten in the state of Denmark (W. Shakespeare); to grin like a Cheshire cat (L. Carroll) etc.;

-film production, e.g. Elementary, my dear Watson! home alone.

36. 
    Standard English: features and the problem of definition.
    

-a variety of English with standardised pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary and spelling that have no local base;

-used as the norm of communication by the government, law courts, and media;

-taught to native speakers in school and to learners of English as a foreign language;

-a canon of literature and translations;

-prestigious within a country;

-only a minority of people within a country (e.g. radio newscasters, translators) use it. Most people speak a variety of regional English, or a mixture of standard and regional English.

37. 
    Local dialects in the British Isles. Scotticisms in Standard English.
    

Dialects

Northern

Midland

Eastern

Western

Southern

Variants

Scottish English

Irish English

Scottish English is the result of language contact between Scots and English after the 17th c. It is the most distinctive from Standard English (not to be confused with the Scottish Gaelic language, which is a Celtic language spoken in the Highlands). Its special status is conditioned by:

-a strong literary tradition and the Bible (1983);

-its own dialects;

-vast lexicographic description: John Jamieson's Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language (1808-1825, 4 vols); Scottish National Dictionary (1976, 10 vols); the Scots Thesaurus (1990, 20 000 items).

Scotticisms: a lassie, a laddie, a billy, a kilt, a tartan, a glamour ‘magic spell; charm’, a slogan ‘a battle cry of a Scottish clan’, a wean ‘child’; wee, bonny; to greet ‘to cry’, to keek ‘to peep’, to ken ‘to know’; ilk ‘the same’, ilka ‘every’;

Scotticisms of Germanic origin: a bairn ‘a child’, a burgh ‘a small town’; stark ‘strong’, couthie ‘nice, pleasant’, to awe ‘to have, to possess’, to wale ‘to choose’; Scotticisms of Celtic origin: a bannock ‘flat quick bread’, an ingle ‘fire, fireplace’, a binn ‘a waterfall’;

English words that underwent semantic changes in Scottish English: scheme ‘local government housing estate’, mind ‘memory, recollection’, travel ‘go on foot’, gate ‘road’; idioms: to miss oneself ‘miss a treat’; to be up on high doh ‘to be overexcited’, etc.;

colloquial words: high ‘highest quality’ as in it’s high; fair ‘completely’ as in I fair forgot; brave ‘good’ etc.;

a wide usage of contractions: canna (cannot), dinna (do not), mebbe (may be), didna (did not), twouldna (it would not), etc.

Insular Scots is the variety of the Scots language used in the Shetland and Orkney Isles and is said to be one of the most distinctive of all Scottish dialects.

Ulster Scots (Ullans) is the variety of the Scots language spoken in parts of Ulster, a northern province in Ireland.

Irish English (Hiberno-English) is the variant of English spoken in Ireland. It is the product of the Irish language and the interaction of English and Scots brought to Ireland during the 16th – 17th c. The linguistic influence of the Irish language is most clearly seen in Gaeltachaí.

English first appeared in Ireland during the Norman invasion of Ireland in the late 12th century. Since the 19th century, it has become the dominant language, with Gaelic found only in certain rural parts of the west. In the east, the link was the strongest with England, but in the north it was with Scotland (now Ulster Scots).

The standard spelling and grammar of Irish English are the same as that of Standard English; however, there are some unique characteristics, especially in the spoken language, due to the influence of the Irish language on pronunciation.

-words borrowed from Irish Gaelic: a bracket ‘a spotty cow’, a booley ‘a temporary dwelling’, a smur ‘thick fog’, agra ‘a form of address to a beloved person’, a bannalana ‘a woman who sells beer’, cardia ‘friendship’, a colleen ‘a young woman’, a doorshay ‘a gossip’; whiskey, shamrock, blarney ‘flattery’;

-English words which underwent semantic changes in Irish English: able ‘strong, muscular, energetic’; a boy ‘any man before marriage’; room ‘non-residential premises’; to fox ‘to simulate’; to join ‘to start’; to travel ‘to walk’; strong ‘healthy; rich’;

-English words which retained their original meanings in Irish English: harvest ‘autumn’; lock ‘a small number’; mad ‘angry’;

-words of Irish origin in Modern English: phraseological expressions and proverbs which are translation loans from Irish Gaelic: He had no more use for it, than a pig for side pockets; to be on the baker’s list; to be on a bad head to sb.

38. 
    Chief characteristic features of the American English lexicon.
    

a limited vocabulary;

a greater use of paraphrase and metaphor;

a simplified phonological system;

a reduced morphology and syntax.

39. 
    Slang, its place in the vocabulary of the English language and its distinctive features.
    

Slang is a type of language consisting of words and phrases that are:

considered to be very informal
more common in speech than in writing
typically restricted to a particular context or group of people

The problem for learners of English is to know when or when not to use slang. Many people condemn slang, but in fact we all use it. The trick is to use slang in the right context. For the learner, perhaps the first thing to remember is that slang is normally spoken, not written. The second thing is that you may wish to learn slang so that you can understand it when you hear it, but not necessarily to use it.

The origin of the word "slang" is unknown.

For example: crush, blink, pack, admin, funky

Slang register

Offensive slang

These words should be used with care. Although they are not particularly "hot", they can be offensive to the person they are applied to. For example, if you call somebody an "airhead", that person could be insulted although anybody listening would not be shocked.
Vulgar slang
Vulgar slang words should be used with extreme care. In general we recommend that non-native speakers do not use this language. If used inappropriately, you could easily shock both the person you are talking to and anyone listening. You could cause resentment and anger.

Taboo slang

In general, taboo words are the most shocking in the language and should be avoided. We recommend that non-native speakers do not use this language. As with vulgar slang, you could easily shock both the person you are talking to and anyone listening. You could cause extreme resentment and anger, with unpredictable results.

40. 
    Types of dictionaries.
    

A unilingual (explanatory) dictionary is a dictionary in which the entry usually presents the following data: spelling, pronunciation, grammatical characteristics, meanings, illustrative examples, derivatives, phraseology, etymology, synonyms and antonyms, e.g. Collins COBUILD Essential English Dictionary.

A bilingual (translation) dictionary is a word-book containing vocabulary items in one language and their equivalents in another language, e.g. N. I. Balla Modern English-Ukrainian Dictionary.

A polyglot (multilingual) dictionary is dictionary in which information is given in several languages (more than two), e.g. ABBYY Lingvo 10 багатомовна електронна версія.

A general dictionary represents vocabulary as a whole. Some of these dictionaries may have very specific aims and still be considered general due to their coverage. They include:

-a pronouncing dictionary is a dictionary recording contemporary pronunciation, e.g. Jones D. Everyman’s English Pronouncing Dictionary;

-a rhyming dictionary is a list of words in which headwords are arranged in alphabetical order starting with their final letters, e.g. Walker’s Rhyming Dictionary of the English Language;

-a frequency dictionary is a list of words, each followed by a record of its frequency of occurrence in one or several sets of reading matter;

A special dictionary provides information limited to one particular linguistic aspect. Special dictionaries may be further subdivided depending on whether the words are chosen according to:

-the sphere of human activity in which they are used (linguistic dictionary, medical dictionary);

-the type of the units (phraseological dictionary, dictionary of abbreviations);

-the relationships existing between them (dictionary of synonyms and antonyms).

A concordance (O.Fr. concordance (12c.) ‘agreement, harmony’) is a list of all the words which are used in a particular book or in the works of a particular author, together with the contexts in which each word occurs, e.g. The Concordance of the Bible, The Concordance to Shakespeare.

One and the same dictionary can be described as general and special, e.g. a pronouncing dictionary.

41. 
    The main problems in lexicography.
    

The problems of lexicography are connected with the selection of headwords, the number, the structure and contents of the dictionary entry.

Selection of headwords:

-the problem of whether a general descriptive dictionary, whether unilingual or bilingual, should give the historical information about a word;

-selection between scientific and technical terms;

-it is debatable whether a unilingual explanatory dictionary should try to cover all the words of the language, including neologisms, nonce-words, slang etc.;

-the problem of whether the selected units have the right to a separate entry (syntagmatic boundaries of the word) and which are to be included under one common headword (paradigmatic boundaries of the word).

42. 
    History of British and American lexicography.
    

The history of lexicography of the English language goes as far back as the Old English period where its first traces are found in the form of glosses of religious books with interlinear translation from Latin. Regular bilingual English-Latin dictionaries already existed in the 15th century.

The First unilingual English dictionary, explaining words appeared in 1604. Its aim was to explain difficult words.

The first big explanatory dictionary was complied by Dr Samuel Johnson and published in 1755. The most important innovation of S. Johnson's Dictionary was the introduction of illustrations of the meanings of the words by examples from the best writers.

The Golden Age of English lexicography began in the last quarter of the 19th century when the English Philological Society started work on compiling The Oxford English Dictionary (OED), which was originally named. New English Dictionary on Historical Principles (NED).

The History of American Lexicography

Curiously enough, the first American dictionary of the English language was compiled by a man whose name was also Samuel Johnson. Samuel Johnson Jr., a Connecticut schoolmaster, published in 1798 a small book entitled "A School Dictionary". This book was followed in 1800 by another dictionary by the same author, which showed already some signs of Americanisation.