Lecture 2

2. Word Meaning. Types of Meanings.

Motivation of Words.

The word as any linguistic sign is a unit possessing both form and content,
or to be more exact, sound form and meaning. Neither can exist without the other.
Word meaning is one of the controversial terms in linguistics. There had been
many attempts to give a definition of word meaning in accordance with the main
principles of different linguistic schools.
The essential feature of referential approach is that it distinguishes between
the three components closely connected with meaning: the sound form of the
linguistic, the concept underlying this sound form, and the actual referent, that part
of reality to which the linguistic sign refers. The best known referential model of
meaning is the so-called “basic triangle” In a simplified form this triangle may be
represented as follows:

Concept

Sound-form
[rouz] referent
(actual thing).

Originally this triangle scheme was suggested by the German mathematician

and philosopher Gotlib Frege; well-known English scholars C.K.Ogden and
I.A.Richards adopted this problem with considerable modification.
The functional approach maintains that the meaning of a linguistic unit may
be studied only through its relation to other linguistic units. E.g.. We know that the
meaning of the two words “move” and “movement” is different because they
function in speech differently.
Move the chair - movement of smth
We move - slow movement
The distribution of the words is different - their meanings are different. It
follows that in the functional approach meaning is understood essentially as the
function of the use of linguistic units. Functional approach should not be
considered an alternative but rather a valuable complement to the referential
theory.

Types of Meaning

The grammatical meaning is the component of meaning in identical sets of

individual forms of different words, as in the following example: the Tense -
meaning in the word -forms of verbs (asked, wallked, etc) or the meaning of
plurality (books...)
The lexico-grammatical meaning (part – of - speech meaning) is the
common meaning of words belonging to a lexico-grammatical class of words, it is
the feature according to which they are grouped together. The interrelation of the
lexical and grammatical meaning varies in different word-classes. In some parts of
speech the prevailing component is the grammatical type of meaning (e. g. in
prepositions), in others- the lexical (e. g. in nouns, verbs, etc)
The lexical meaning is the component of meaning proper to the given
linguistic unit in all its forms and distributions as e. g. in the forms “go, goes, went,
gone” we find one and the same semantic component denoting the process of
movement. Both the lexical and the grammatical meanings make up the word
meaning as neither can exist without the other. Lexical meaning is not
homogeneous, it includes denotational and connotational components.
The denotational component of lexical meaning expresses the conceptual
content of a word. Fulfilling the significative and communicative functions of the
word, it is present in every word and may be regarded as the central factor in the
functioning of the language.
The connotational component of lexical meaning expresses the pragmatic
communicative value the word receives depending on where, when, how, by when,
for what purpose and in what context it is used. Unlike the denotational
component, the connotational component is optional, there are 4 main types of
connotation. There are stylistic, emotional, evaluative and expressing or
intensifying.
Stylistic: parent (bookish) – father (neutral) – dad (coll...)
Emotional: large, big, tremendous,
Evaluative: clique - group
Intensifying: magnificent, splendid.

Motivation of Words

The term “motivation” is used to denote the relationship existing between

the phonemic or morphemic composition and structural pattern of the word, on one
hand, and its meaning on the other. There are three main types of motivation:
phonetic, morphological, and semantic /20/
Phonetical motivation implies a direct connection between the phonetic
structure of the word and its meaning. The words hiss, whistle, giggle, cuckoo,
bang, splash are motivated because the soundclusters [his], [misl] [kuku], are a
direct imitation of the sounds these words denote. It is also suggested that sounds
themselves may be emotionally expressive which accounts for the phonetic
motivation of certain words. Initial [f] and [p], e.g. are felt as expressing scorn,
contempt, disapproval or disgust which, can be illustrated by the word pooh! Bie!
Fiddle-sticks, fiddle-fadle and the like.
It is argued that speech sounds may suggest spatial and visual dimensions,
shape, size, etc. Experiments carried out by a group of linguists showed that back
open vowels are suggestive of big size, heavy weight, dark colour, etc. The
experiments were repeated many times and the results were always the same.
Native speakers of English were asked to listen to pairs of antonyms from an
unfamiliar (or non-existent) language unrelated to English, e.g. ching—chung and
then to try to find the English equivalents, e.g. light—heavy, (big—small, etc.),
which foreign word translates which English word. About 90 per cent of English
speakers felt that ching is the equivalent of the English light (small) and chung of
its antonym heavy (large).
This type of phonetical motivation may be observed in the phonemic
structure of some newly coined words. For example, the small transmitter that
specializes in high frequencies is called 'a tweeter', the transmitter for low
frequences 'a woofer'.
This hypothesis seems to require verification. This of course is not to deny
that there are some words which involve phonetic symbolism: these are the
onomatopoeic, imitative or echoic words such as the English cuckoo, splash and
whisper. And even these are not completely motivated but seem to be conventional
to quite a large extent,(cf. кукареку and cock-a-doodle-doo). In any case words
like these constitute only a small and untypical minority in the language. As to
symbolic value of certain sounds, this too is disproved by the fact that identical
sounds and sound-clusters may be found in words of widely different meaning, e.g.
initial [p] and [f], are found in words expressing contempt and disapproval (fie,
pooh) and also in such words as “plough, fine, and others”. The sound-cluster [in]
which is supposed to be imitative of sound or swift movement (ring, swing) is also
observed in semantically different words, e.g. thing, king, and others.
The main criterion in morphologic motivation is the relationship between
morphemes. Hence all one-morpheme words e.g. sing, tell, eat, are by definition
non-motivated. In words composed of more than one morpheme the carrier of the
word-meaning is the combined meaning of the component morphemes and the
meaning of the structural pattern of the word. This can be illustrated by the
semantic analysis of different words composed of phonemically identical
morphemes with-identical lexical meaning. The words finger-ring and ring-finger,
e.g., contain two morphemes, the combined lexical meaning of which is the same;
the difference in the meaning of these words can be accounted for by the difference
in the arrangement of the component morphemes. /20/
If we can observe a direct connection between the structural pattern of the
word and its meaning, we say that this word is motivated. Consequently words
such as singer, rewrite, eatable, etc., are described as motivated. If the connection
between the structure of the lexical- unit and its meaning is completely arbitrary
and conventional, we speak of non-motivated or idiomatic words, e.g. matter,
repeat.
It should be noted in passing that morphologic motivation is "relative", i.e.
the degree of motivation may be different. Between the extremes of complete
motivation and lack of motivation, there exist various grades of partial motivation.
The word endless, e.g., is completely motivated as both the lexical meaning of the
component morphemes and the meaning of the pattern is perfectly transparent. The
word cranberry is only partially motivated because of the absence of the lexical
meaning in the morpheme cran-.
A synchronic approach to morphological motivation presupposes historical
changeability of structural patterns. Some English place-names may serve as an
illustration. Such place-names as Newtowns and Wildwoods are lexically and
structurally motivated and may be easily analysed into component morphemes.
Other place-names, e.g. Essex, Norfolk, Sutton, are non-motivated. To the average
English speaker these names are non-analysable lexical units like sing or tell.
However one will perceive their components to be East+Saxon, North+Folk and
South+Town which shows that in earlier days they were just as completely
motivated as Newtowns or Wildwoods are in Modern English.
Morphologic motivation implies a direct connection between the lexical
meaning of the component morphetes, the pattern of their arrangement and the
meaning of the word. The degree of morphologic motivation may be different
varying from the extreme of the complete motivation to lack of motivation.The
derived word rethink is motivated as its morphological structure suggests the idea
of thinking again. (e.g. rewrite, ex-minister, etc.) As to compounds, their
motivation is morphologic if the meaning of the whole is based on the literal
meaning of the components and semantic if the combination of components is used
figuratively.
E.g. eyewash as “ a lotion for the eyes ” is motivated morphologically. The
same applies to such compounds as airtaxi, crash-land, etc. If, on the other hand,
when eyelash is used methaforically and means “something said or done to
deceive a person”, the motivation is semantic ( e.g. watchdog – “a dog kept for
watching property” and “a watchful human quardian ” ).
The term m o t i v a t i o n, is also used by a number of linguists to denote
the relationship between the central and the coexisting meaning or meanings of a
word which are understood as a metaphorical extension of the central meaning.
Metaphorical extension may be viewed as generalization of the denotational
meaning of a word permitting it to include new referents which are in some way
like the original class of referents. Similarity of various aspects and/or functions of
different classes of referents may account for the semantic motivation of a number
of minor meanings. For example, a woman who has given birth is called a mother;
by extension, any act that gives birth is associated with being a mother, e.g. in
Necessity is the mother of invention. The same principle can be observed in other
meanings: a mother looks after a child, so that we can say She became a mother to
her orphan nephew, or Romulus and Remus were supposedly mothered by a wolf.
Cf. also mother country, a mother's mark (=a birthmark), mother tongue, etc. Such
metaphoric extension may be observed in the so- metaphors, such as burn with
anger, break smb's heart, jump at a chance, etc.
When the connection between the phonetic and morphologic structure of the
word and its meaning is conventional and there is no reason for the word having
the phonetic shape and morphologic composition it has, the word is said to be non
– motivated. The difference between a motivated and a non-motivated word is that
between a symbol and a sign. The sign simply points to a meaning. The meaning
of a symbol is not arbitrary but depends upon its structure.
From the historical point of view motivation changes in the course of time.
Words that are non-motivated at present may have lost their motivation due to
changes in the vocabulary, their motivation is said to be faded. The verb earn does
not suggest any necessary connection with agriculture at present. It is purely
conventional; historical analysis shows, however, that it is derived from OE
(ge-)earnian ‘to harvest’. In Modern English this connection no longer exists, the
motivation is lost and earn is now a non-motivated word.
Motivation is the way in which a given meaning is represented in the world.
It reflects the type of nomination process chosen by the creator of the new word.
Some scholars of the past used to call the phenomenon the inner word form.