Of the republic of uzbekistan tashkent state pedagogical university namedafter nizami

2.2. Characteristics of homonymy on the basis of completeness / partial coincidence of word forms in a pair
In the works of various linguists, this phenomenon is noted under different names, such as: quasi-homonymy, heterothemia, paronomasia, etc., which, of course, indicates the absence of a unified approach to the definition of this phenomenon. In linguistics, there are two main approaches to the definition of paronymy - narrow and wide. Within the framework of a narrow approach, paronyms are limited to the area of ​​consonant single-root words with different meanings, belonging to the same lexical and grammatical category. Proponents of a broad approach include both single-rooted and heterogeneous words as paronyms. In our case, we will talk about words related to paronyms, according to a narrow definition, and we will call them language paronyms in the future. This choice is due to that the misuse of language paronyms is most often due to ignorance of the meanings of the same-root words-paronyms, low culture of speech, i.e. – objective factors, as in the case of a historic/historical event. The use of speech paronyms is mainly due to subjective factors, such as: the desire to pun, sleepy, drunk and other similar states, as well as to realize certain stylistic goals when it comes to a work of art. It is objectively more difficult to decide which noun to use in a particular context: adviser or adviser (linguistic paronyms), and not adviser / adviser, or birdhouse (speech paronyms), for example. subjective factors, such as: the desire to pun, sleepy, drunk and other similar states, as well as to realize certain stylistic goals, if we are talking about a work of art. It is objectively more difficult to decide which noun to use in a particular context: adviser or adviser (linguistic paronyms), and not adviser / adviser, or birdhouse (speech paronyms), for example. subjective factors, such as: the desire to pun, sleepy, drunk and other similar states, as well as to realize certain stylistic goals, if we are talking about a work of art. It is objectively more difficult to decide which noun to use in a particular context: adviser or adviser (linguistic paronyms), and not adviser / adviser, or birdhouse (speech paronyms), for example.
Language paronyms are often found in various areas of language learning - Business English and ESP, where students often do not know, or, even knowing, often make mistakes when using or translating such words. For example, when teaching ESP to law students, mistakes were often made in words such as:
a) inhuman/inhumane prison conditions;
b) judicial – 1. of or by a court of justice-judicial (eg judicial branch) 2. showing or using judgment in thinking about something (eg "He is rather talented"-replied Sarah judicially) and judicious – showing or having good sense - reasonable, reasonable (eg You put your case most judiciously);
c) credible - that can be believed - credible (eg a credible witness)
credulous - ready to believe things - gullible (eg credulous consumers).
d) politic - acting or judging wisely, prudent. Political, prudent.
political - of the state, of government, of politics. Political.
When teaching BE or ESP to economics students, words such as:
a) economic - economic;
economical - economical
b) enviable - causing envy-enviable, tempting (eg The company made profit at an enviable rate);
envious - full of envy-envy (eg The company's success was watched enviously by the competitors);
c) exhausting - exhausting, tiring (eg It was a difficult and exhausting job);
exhaustive - thorough or complete - exhaustive (eg This list is by no means exhaustive);
exhaustible - smth. that exists only in a limited quantity - limited, not unlimited (eg ... possible long term shortages of exhaustible resources).
In connection with the phenomenon of paronymy, i.e. the inability to interchange language paronyms in different phrases, the question arises of variance - the possibility of interchange without distorting the meaning of a particular phrase. Variants of the word include such cases as advance, advancement; analytic, analytical, where the external difference does not lead to a break in the identity of the word.
The phenomenon of paronymy should be distinguished from other similar phenomena. In addition to variation, these are phenomena such as one-root synonymy, one-root antonymy, homonymy.
From the same root antonyms (for example: godly - pious, pious; and godless - godless) paronyms differ in that the meanings of paronym words never reach the complete opposite.
In terms of delimiting paronyms from other single-root formations, the greatest difficulty is the single-root synonyms. In many works on paronymy, one-root synonyms are considered as a special case of linguistic paronyms. The assignment of single-root synonyms to paronyms raises the following objections: the fact is that synonyms are such words that are identical or close in meaning, the mismatching semantic features of which can be neutralized in certain contexts. The principle of neutralization is used as one of the main criteria for the presentation and interpretation of synonyms in dictionaries. Thus, the noun anarchism is semantized through its cognate synonym anarchy. Single-root paronyms, in contrast to single-root synonyms, which allow the neutralization of differential features and, as a result,
Homonyms are closely related to paronyms. The main difference between paronyms and homonyms lies in their phonetic design. If homonyms are completely identical in their sound, then paronyms have only a partial sound similarity.
In distinguishing between single-root paronyms and related phenomena, it seems to us important to be guided not only by the results of the analysis of the meanings of affixes, but also by the sign of parallelism of paronyms: “Referring the sign of parallelism to paronymy is logical from the point of view of the common principles of approach to characterizing differences in the relationship between the form and content of lexical units: the meanings of paronyms do not coincide (do not intersect like with synonyms), do not oppose (like with antonyms), their appearance is not the same (like with homonyms) - paronyms exist side by side, parallel to one another.
When meeting with paronymic words, special attention should be paid to them. It seems appropriate to introduce paronyms semantizing them through synonyms and antonyms, providing each pair (row) with examples of compatibility as far as possible. In the case when the paronyms of the English language have their "paronymic brothers" in the Russian language (economic / economic - economic / economical), it seems possible to introduce these specific pairs in a translated way, which helps to improve the culture of speech of the native language.
The formal commonality of words combines them into a subsystem under the common name of homonyms (homonyms < Gk homo - same + onoma - name), i.e. words that have a similar form with a different content of each of them. Homonyms in a language can appear not only as a result of the loss of connection between the LSV of a polysemantic word (stock - part of a gun; a share; line of ancestry; etc), but also as a result of word-formation processes, for example, conversion (which will be discussed below in relevant section); the source of homonyms can also be the result of the sound coincidence of different words in the process of phonological changes in diachrony (knight < kniht; night < niht). Another source of homonyms in English is etymological doublets, words repeatedly borrowed into English from other languages. For example,
There are various definitions of homonymy, based on the differences of opinion of linguists on the issue of understanding the language form. A number of researchers limit it to the sound shell of the word, other scientists expand the concept of form, including graphic representation; thus, all possible coincidences of units in terms of expression can be called homonymous. This explains the existence of various classifications of homonyms, taking into account differences in form, both general and in word forms, the degree of coincidence of the form, as well as the belonging of homonyms to the same or different parts of speech.
In accordance with the form, homonyms are divided into homophones, homographs and absolute homonyms. Homophones (homophones < Gk homos - same, phono - sound), as their name implies, have the same sound form, but differ not only semantically, but also graphically (bare/bear, road/rode, etc). Homographs (homographs < Gk homos - same, grapho - write), on the contrary, coincide graphically, but are read differently (row, read, bow, etc). Absolute homonyms have a common sound and graphic form, differing in semantics and often part-of-speech affiliation (bear - carry, bear - animal; match - contest, match - person; match - fit).
The degree of coincidence of the formal side of the homonyms makes it possible to single out full homonyms, coinciding throughout the paradigm (lighter - device; lighter - boat, PI. lighters), and partial, coinciding only in some word forms (rose - flower; Past form of "rise"), the rest word forms, in particular the plural of a noun and the infinitive of a verb, are non-homonymous; a similar example is the word forms saw (past tense of the verb see and singular of the noun saw). Partial homonyms are very typical for inflectional languages ​​with a large number of word forms, but there are also many of them in English.
Depending on the belonging of each of the homonyms to any part of speech, lexical, grammatical and lexico-grammatical homonyms are distinguished. Lexical homonyms are grammatically identical, but lexically different, i.e. within the meaning of. So, the homonyms match - contest and match - person belong to the same part of speech, but are not reducible to a common meaning. The same sound graphic form and grammatical features allow us to consider them homonyms, but the semantic difference classifies these homonyms as lexical. In grammatical homonyms, one can find a semantic community, but they belong to different parts of speech, which, in particular, distinguishes them from the LSV of a polysemantic word. So, the homonyms match-contest (noun) and match-put smth in competition (verb) are not only the same in terms of pronunciation and graphics, but are also related by the common meaning of compete; however, their categorical difference makes these words grammatical homonyms. In a similar relationship are the homonyms mere (noun) - pond, small lake and mere (adj) - not more than, connected by the common seme "smallness". As for lexico-grammatical homonyms, their coincidence is limited to the formal side, and the differences relate to both grammatical and lexical characteristics. Examples of such homonymy are the pair match - possible husband / match - put smth in competition; stem - severe, strict / stern - back end of a ship and many others. In this case, as a rule, word-formation conversion is involved in the formation of a homonymous group, and the process itself is called modeled homonymy. The presence of modeled homonymy is not recognized by all linguists due to the proximity of the lexical meanings of these homonyms. However,
Homonymy in English can refer not only to words and word forms, but also to other language units, such as morphemes (-s: 3rd person Sg, Present Indefinite form of a verb/Pl of a noun/Possessive marker; - er: Noun suffix/ Comparison form of adjective suffix).
Each of the above classifications is based on one attribute. There are, in addition, typologies of homonyms built on two or more parameters, which indicates the multidimensionality of the phenomenon of homonymy. Within the framework of this manual, however, we will limit ourselves to highlighting the most obvious types of homonyms, paying particular attention to the fact that in terms of expression, the main feature of homonymy is the identity of form (sound or graphic), and in terms of content, the difference in meanings (lexical and grammatical).