Lecture 6

Semasiology
1. Homonyms and their classifications
2. Synonyms and their classifications
3. Antonyms and their classifications
4. Meaning and context.

LITERATURE
1. Dubenets E.M. Modern English Lexicology, pp. 123-139
2. Antrushina G.B. English Lexicology. M.: 1999.
3. Arnold I.V. The English Word. M. 1986.

1. Homonyms and their classifications

Homonyms are words different in meaning but identical in sound or spelling, or both
in sound and spelling.
Sources of homonyms:
1) result of the split of polysemy,
2) result of leveling grammar inflexions, when different parts of speech become
identical in their outer aspect, e.g. care from caru and care from carian.
3) They can be also formed by means of conversion, e.g. to slim from slim, to water
from water.
4) They can be formed with the help of the same suffix from the same stem, e.g-
reader (a person who reads and a book for reading).
5) Homonyms can also appear in the language accidentally, when two words
coincide in their development, e.g. two native words can coincide in their outer aspects: to
bear from beran (= to carry) and bear from bera ( = an animal). A native word and a
borrowing can coincide in their outer aspects, e.g. fair from Latin feria and fair from native
fager ( = blond). Two borrowings can coincide e.g. base from the French base ( = Latin basis)
and base ( = low) from the Latin bas ( = Italian basso).
6) Homonyms can develop through shortening of different words, e.g. cab from
cabriolet, cabbage, cabin.
Classifications of homonyms by different scholars (W. Skeat's classification, A.I.
Smirnitsky's classification, I.V. Arnold's classification)
Walter Skeat classified homonyms according to their spelling and sound forms and
he pointed out three groups:
1. perfect homonyms are words identical in sound and spelling, such as: school -
косяк рыбы and школа;
2. homographs are words with the same spelling but pronounced differently, e.g.
bow -/bau/ - поклон and /bou/ - лук:
3. homophones are words pronounced identically but spelled differently, e.g. night -
ночь and knight - рыцарь.
Another classification was suggested by A.I Smirnitsky. He added to Skeat's
classification one more criterion: grammatical meaning. He subdivided the group of perfect
homonyms in Skeat's classification into two types of homonyms:
1. perfect which are identical in their spelling, pronunciation and their grammar
form, such as: spring in the meanings - the season of the year, a leap, a source,
 2. homoforms which coincide in their spelling and pronunciation but have different
grammatical meaning, e.g. reading - Present Participle, Gerund, Verbal noun, to lobby -
lobby.
A more detailed classification was given by I.V. Arnold. She classified only perfect
homonyms and suggested four criteria of their classification: lexical meaning, grammatical
meaning, basic forms and paradigms.
According to these criteria, I.V. Arnold pointed out the following groups:
1. homonyms identical in their grammatical meanings, basic forms and paradigms
but different in their lexical meanings, e.g. board in the meanings a council and a piece of
wood sawn thin;
2. homonyms identical in their grammatical meanings and basic forms, but different
in their lexical meanings and paradigms, e.g. to lie - lied - lied. and to lie - lay - lain;
3. homonyms different in their lexical meanings, grammatical meanings, paradigms,
but coinciding in their basic forms, e.g. light /lights/, light / lighter, lightest/;
4. homonyms different in their lexical meanings, grammatical meanings, in their
basic forms and paradigms, but coinciding in one of the forms of their paradigms, e.g. a bit
and bit (from to bite).
In I. V. Arnold's classification there are also patterned homonyms, which, differing
from other homonyms, have a common component in their lexical meanings. These are
homonyms formed either by means of conversion, or by leveling of grammar inflexions.
These homonyms are different in their grammar meanings, in their paradigms, identical in
their basic forms, e.g. warm - to warm. Here we can also have unchangeable patterned
homonyms which have identical basic forms, different grammatical meanings, a common
component in their lexical meanings, e.g. before an adverb, a conjunction, a preposition.
There are also homonyms among unchangeable words which are different in their lexical
and grammatical meanings, identical in their basic forms, e.g .for - для and for - ибо.

2. Synonyms and their classifications

Synonyms are words different in their outer aspects, but identical or similar in their
inner aspects. In English there are a lot of synonyms, because there are many borrowings,
e.g. hearty /native/ - cordial /borrowing/. After a word is borrowed it undergoes
desynonymization, because absolute synonyms are unnecessary for a language. However,
there are some absolute synonyms in the language, which have exactly the same meaning
and belong to the same style, e.g. to moan, to groan; homeland, motherland etc.
In cases of desynonymization one of the absolute synonyms can specialize in its
meaning and we get semantic synonyms, e.g. city /borrowed/, town /native/. The French
borrowing city is specialized. In other cases native words can be specialized in their
meanings, e.g. stool /native/, chair /French/.
Sometimes one of the absolute synonyms is specialized in its usage and we get
stylistic synonyms, e.g. to begin /native/, to commence /French borrowing/. Here the French
word is specialized. In some cases the native word is specialized, e.g. welkin /bookish/,
sky /neutral/.
Stylistic synonyms can also appear by means of abbreviation. In most cases the
abbreviated form belongs to the colloquial style, and the full form to the neutral style, e.g.
examination, exam.
 Among stylistic synonyms, we can point out a special group of words which are
called euphemisms. These are words used to substitute some unpleasant or offensive
words, e.g the late instead of dead, to perspire instead of to sweat etc.
There are also phraseological synonyms, these words are identical in their meanings
and styles but different in their combining with other words in the sentence, e.g. to be late
for a lecture but to miss the train, to visit museums but to attend lectures etc.
In each group of synonyms there is a word with the most general meaning-which can
substitute any word in the group, e.g. piece is the synonymic dominant in the group slice,
lump, morsel. The verb to look at is the synonymic dominant in the group to stare, to glance,
to peep. The adjective red is the synonymic dominant in the group purple, scarlet, crimson.
When speaking about the sources of synonyms, besides desynonymization and
abbreviation, we can also mention the formation of phrasal verbs, e.g. to give up - to
abandon, to cut down - to diminish.

3. Antonyms and their classifications.

Antonyms are words belonging to the same part of speech, identical in style,
expressing contrary or contradictory notions.V.N. Komissarov in his dictionary of antonyms
classified them into two groups: absolute or root antonyms (late - early) and derivational
antonyms (to please - to displease). Absolute antonyms have different roots and derivational
antonyms have the same roots but different affixes.
In most cases negative prefixes form antonyms /un-, dis-, non-/.
Sometimes they are formed by means of suffixes -ful and -less. The number of
antonyms with the suffixes ful- and -less is not very large, and sometimes even if we have a
word with one of these suffixes its antonym is formed not by substituting -ful by less-, e.g.
successful -unsuccessful, selfless - selfish.
The same is true about antonyms with negative prefixes, e.g. to man ( = fill up staff
vacancies) is not an antonym of the word to unman ( = devoid of human characteristic), to
disappoint is not an antonym of the word to appoint.
The difference between derivational and root antonyms is not only in their structure,
but in semantics as well. Derivational antonyms express contradictory notions, one of them
excludes the other, e.g. active - inactive. Absolute antonyms express contrary notions. If
some notions can be arranged in a group of more than two members, the most distant
members of the group will be absolute antonyms, e.g. ugly, plain, good-looking, pretty,
beautiful, the antonyms are ugly and beautiful.
Some more examples of antonyms: beautiful - ugly, to beautify - to uglify, beautу –
ugliness, respect - scorn, to respect - to scorn, respectful - scornful, to live -to die, alive -
dead, life – death, here - there, up - down, now - never, before - after, day - night, early - late
etc.
If a word is polysemantic it can have several antonyms, e.g. the word bright has the
antonyms dim, dull, sad.

4. Meaning and Context

It is important that there is sometimes a chance of misunderstanding when a
polysemantic word is used in a certain meaning but accepted by a listener or reader in
another.
It is common knowledge that context prevents from any misunderstanding of
meanings. For instance, the adjective "dull”, if used out of context, would mean different
things to different people or nothing at all. It is only in combination with other words that it
reveals its actual meaning: "a dull pupil", "a dull play", "dull weather", etc. Sometimes,
however, such a minimum context fails to reveal the meaning of the word, and it may be
correctly interpreted only through a second-degree context as in the following example:
"The man was large, but his wife was even fatter". The word 'fatter" here serves as a kind of
indicator pointing that "large" describes a stout man and not a big one.
Current research in semantics is largely based on the assumption that one of the
more promising methods of investigating the semantic structure of a word is by studying the
word's linear relationships with other words in typical contexts, i.e. its combinability or
collocability. Scholars have established that the semantics of words which regularly appear
in common contexts are correlated and, therefore, one of the words within such a pair can
be studied through the other.
They are so intimately correlated that each of them casts, as if it were, a kind of
permanent reflection on the meaning of its neighbor. If the verb "to compose" is frequently
used with the object "music", so it is natural to expect that certain musical associations
linger in the meaning of the verb "to compose".
Note, also, how closely the negative evaluative connotation of the adjective
"notorious" is linked with the negative connotation of the nouns with which it is regularly
associated: "a notorious criminal", "thief", "gangster", "gambler", "gossip", "liar " etc.
All this leads us to the conclusion that context is a good and reliable key to the
meaning of the word.
It's a common error to see a different meaning in every new set of combinations. For
instance: "an angry man", "an angry letter". Is the adjective "angry" used in the same
meaning in both these contexts or in two different meanings? Some people will say "two"
and argue that, on the one hand, the combinability is different ("man" - a name of person;
"letter" - a name of object) and, on the other hand, a letter cannot experience anger. True, it
cannot; but it can very well convey the anger of the person who wrote it. As to the
combinability, the main point is that a word can realize the same meaning in different sets
of combinability. For instance, in the pairs "merry children", "merry laughter", "merry faces",
"merry songs " the adjective "merry" conveys the same concept of high spirits.