English Lexicology: SYNONYMS
Розміщено 03-04-10 у розділі Освіта.
Знайшов ще ось таке: доповідь із англійської лексикології – синоніми. Думаєте, я щось із того пам’ятаю?! – ZERO.
Grouping of words is based upon similarities and contrasts. Taking up similarity of meaning and contrasts of phonetic shape we observe that every language has in its vocabulary a variety of words, kindred in meaning but distinct in morphemic composition, phonemic shape and usage, ensuring the expression of the most delicate shades of thought, feeling and imagination. The more developed the language, the richer the diversity and therefore the greater the possibilities of lexical choice enhancing the effectiveness and precision of speech.
Synonymy is one of modern Linguistics’ most controversial problems. The very existence of words traditionally called synonyms is disputed by some linguists; the nature and essence of the relationship of these words is hotly debated and treated in quite different ways by representatives of different linguistic schools.
Even though one may accept synonyms in the traditional meaning of the term are somewhat elusive and, to some extent, fictitious, it is certain that there are words in any vocabulary which clearly develop regular and distinct relationships when used in speech.
The way synonyms function may be seen from the following example: Already in this half-hour of bombardment hundreds upon hundreds of men would have been violently slain, smashed, torn, gouged, crushed, mutilated.
The synonymous words smash and crush are semantically very close, they combine to give a forceful representation of the atrocities of war. Richness and clearness of language are of paramount importance in so far they are promote precision of thought. Even this preliminary example makes it obvious that the still very common definitions of synonyms as words of the same language having the same meaning or as different words that stand for the same notion are by no means accurate and even in a way of misleading. By the very nature of language every word has its own history, its own peculiar motivation, its own typical contexts.
If two words exactly coincide in meaning and use, the natural tendency is for one of them to change its meaning or drop out of the language. Thus synonyms are words only similar but not identical in meaning. This definition is correct but vague. A more precise linguistic definition should be based on a workable notion of the semantic structure of the word and of the complex nature of every separate meaning in a polysemantic word. Each separate lexical meaning consists of a denotational component identifying the notion or the object and reflects the essential features of the notion named, shades of meaning reflecting its secondary features, additional connotations resulting from the typical contexts in which the word is used, its emotional component and stylistic colouring.
Synonyms can therefore be defined in terms of linguistics as two or more words of the same language, belonging to the same part of speech and possessing one or more identical or nearly identical denotational meanings, interchangeable, at least in some contexts, without any considerable alteration in denotational meaning, but differing in morphemic composition, phonemic shade, shades of meaning, connotations, affective value, style, valency and idiomatic use.
To have something tangible to work upon it is convenient to compare some synonyms within their group, so as to make obvious the reasons of the definition. The verbs experience, undergo, sustain and suffer, for example, come together because all for render the notion of experiencing something. The verb and the noun experience indicate actual living through something and coming to know it first hand rather than from hearsay. Undergo applies chiefly to what someone or something bears or is subjected to, as in to undergo an operation, to undergo changes. Compare also the following example: The French language has undergone considerable and more recent changes since the date when the Normans brought it into England.
In the above example the verb undergo can be replaced by its synonyms without any change of the sentence meaning. This may be easily proved if a similar context is found for some other synonym in the same group. For instance: These Latin words suffered many transformations in becoming French. The denotation is obviously the same. Synonyms, then, are interchangeable under certain conditions specific to each group.
Taking into consideration the corresponding series of synonymous verbs and verbal set expressions: to hope, to anticipate, to expect, to look forward to, we shall see that separate words may be compared to whole set expressions. To look forward to is also worthy of note because it forms a definitely colloquial counterpart to the rest. It can easily be shown, on the evidence of examples, that each synonymic group comprises a dominant element. This synonymic dominant is the most general term of its kind potentially containing the specific features rendered by all the other members of the group, as, for instance, undergo above.
The definition states that synonyms possess one or more identical meanings. To realize the significance of this, one must bear in mind that majority of frequent words are polysemantic, and that it is precisely the frequent words that have many synonyms. The result is that the one and the same word may belong in its various meanings to several different synonymic groups. The verb appear in… an old brown cat without a tail appeared from nowhere is synonymous with come into sight, emerge. On the other hand, when the far-off figures of the parachutists who… appeared stationary, appeared is synonymous with look or seem, their common component being ‘give the impression of’. Appear, then, often applies to erroneous impressions.
The semantic structures of two polysemantic words sometimes coincide in more than one meaning, but never completely. Synonyms may also differ in emotional colouring which may be present in one element of the group and absent in all or some others. Lonely as compared with alone is emotional as is easily seen from the examples: …a very lonely boy lost between them and aware at ten that his mother had no interest in him…; I shall be alone as my secretary doesn’t come today. Both words denote being apart from others, but lonely besides the general meaning implies longing for company. Alone does not necessarily suggest any sadness at being by oneself.
In difference in the meaning of synonyms concerns the notion or emotion expressed, as was the case in the groups discussed above, the synonyms are classed as ideographic synonyms, and the opposition created in contrasting them may be called an ideographic opposition.
In astylistic opposition of synonyms the basis of comparison is the denotational meaning and the distinctive feature is the presence or absence of a stylistic colouring which may also be accompanied by a difference in emotional colouring.
The general effect of poetic or learned synonyms when used in propose or in everyday speech is that of creating an elevated tone. The point may be prove by the very first example above, where the poetic and archaic verb slay is substituted for the neutral kill. We must be on guard too against the idea that the stylistic effect may exist without influencing the meaning: in fact it never does. The verb slay not only lends to the whole a poetical and solemn ring, it also shows the writer’s and his hero’s attitude to the fact, their horror and repugnance of war and their feeling for its victims.
In great number of the semantic difference between two or more synonyms is supported by the difference in valency. Distributional oppositions between synonyms have never been studied systematically, although the amount of data collected is very impressive. The difference in distribution may be syntactical, morphological, lexical, and surely deserves more attention than has been so far given to it. It is, for instance, known that bare in reference to persons is used only predicatively while naked occurs both predicatively and attributively. The same is true about alone, which, irrespectively of referent, is used only predicatively, whereas its synonyms solitary and lonely occur in both functions. The function is predicative in the following sentence: If you are idle, be not solitary, if you are solitary be not idle. Begin and commence, for instance, differ stylistically. It must be noted, however, that their distributional difference is not less important. Begin is generalized in its lexical meaning and becomes a semi-auxiliary when used with an infinitive. It follows naturally that begin and not commence is the right word before an infinitive even in a formal style. Seem and appear may be followed by an infinitive or a that-clause whereas, look which is stylistically equivalent to them is never used in these constructions.
Very often in distributional difference between synonyms concerns the use of prepositions: e.g. to answer a question, but to reply to a question. The adjectives anxious and uneasy are followed by the preposition about, their synonym concerned permits a choice and variously combined with about, at, for, with.
Lexical difference in distribution is based on the difference in valency. An example of this is offered by the verbs win and gain. Both may be used in combination with the noun victory: to win victory, to gain victory. But with the word war only win is possible.
Since the exact meaning of each synonym is delimited by its interrelatedness with the other elements of the same group, comparison plays an important part in synonymic research. The interchangeability and possible neutralization are tested by means of substitution, a procedure also profitably borrowed by semasiology from phonology. The values of words can best be defined by substituting them for one another and observing the resulting changes. When the landlady in John Wain’s “Hurry On Down” says to the main personage: And where do you work? I’ve asked you that two or three times, Mr. Lumley, but you’ve never given me any answer, the verb ask has a very general meaning of seeking information. Substituting its synonyms, question or interrogate, will require a change in the structure of the sentence (the omission of that), which shows the distributional opposition between these words, and also ushers in a change of meaning. These words will heighten the implication that the landlady has her doubts about Lumley and confesses that she finds his character suspicious. The verb question would mean that she is constantly asking her lodger searching questions. The substitution of interrogate would suggest systematic and thorough questioning by a person authorized to do so; the landlady could have used it only ironically and irony would have been completely out of keeping with her mentality and habits.
The meaning of each word is conditioned by the meaning of other words forming part of the same vocabulary system, and especially of those in semantic proximity. High and tall, for instance, could be defined not only from the point of view of their valency (tall is used about people) but also in relation to each other by stating how far they are interchangeable and what their respective antonyms are. A building may be high and it may be tall. High is relative term signifying ‘greatly raised above the surface or the base’, in comparison with what is usual for objects of the same kind: a table is high if it exceeds 75 cm; a hill of a hundred metres is not high. The same relatively is characteristic of its antonym low. As to the word tall, it is used about objects whose height is greatly in excess of their breadth or diameter and whose actual height is great for an object of its kind: a tall man; a tall tree. The antonym is short.
The area of substitution is possible is very limited and outside it all replacement either destroys the beauty and precision, or, more often, makes the utterance vague, ungrammatical and even unintelligible. This makes the knowledge of where each synonym differs from another of paramount importance for correctness of speech.
The distinction between words similar in meaning are often very fine and elusive, so that some special instruction on the use of synonyms is necessary. Translation cannot serve the criterion of synonymy; there cases when several English words of different distribution and valency are translated into Ukrainian by one and the same word (such as also, too and as well which mean також).
Contextual synonyms are similar in meaning only under some specific distributional conditions. The verbs bear, suffer and stand are semantically different and not interchangeable except when used in the negative form; can’t stand is equal to can’t bear in the following words of an officer: Gas. I’ve swallowed too much of the beastly stuff. I can’t stand it any longer. I’m going to the dressing-station.
There are some other distinctions to be made with respect to different kinds of semantic similarity. Some authors, for instance, class groups like ask :: beg :: implore or like :: love :: adore, gift :: talent :: genius as synonyms, calling the relative synonyms. This attitude is open to discussion. Formerly we had oppositions based on the relationships between the members of the opposition, here we deal with proportional oppositions characterized by their relationship with the whole vocabulary system and based on a different degree of intensity of the relevant distinctive features.
Total synonymy, i.e. synonymy where the members of a synonymic group can replace each other in any given context, without the slightest alteration in denotative or emotional meaning and connotations, is an extremely rare occurrence. Examples of this type can be found in special literature among technical terms peculiar to this branch of knowledge. Thus, in linguistics the terms noun and substantive, functional affix, flection and inflection are identical in meaning. What is not generally realized, however, is that terms are peculiar type of words, totally devoid of connotations or emotional colouring, and that their stylistic characterization does not vary. That is why this is very special kind of synonymy: neither ideographic nor stylistic oppositions are possible here. Their interchangeability is also in a way deceptive. The same misunderstood conception of interchangeability lies at the bottom of considering different dialect names for the same plant, animal or agricultural implement and the like as total synonyms.
The distinction between synchronic and diachronic treatment is so fundamental that it cannot be overemphasized, but the two aspects are interdependent and cannot be understood without one another. It therefore essential after the descriptive analysis of synonymy in present-day English to take up the historical line of approach and discuss the origin of synonyms and the causes of their abundance in English.
Synonymy has its characteristic patterns in each language. Peculiar feature in English is the contrast between simple native words stylistically neutral, literary words borrowed from French and learned words of Greco-Latin origin:
Native English / words Borrowed form French / Borrowed form Latin
to ask / to question / to interrogate
belly / stomach / abdomen
to gather / to assemble / to collect
empty / devoid / vacuous
to end / to finish / to complete
to rise / to mount / to ascend
teaching / guidance / instruction
The pattern of stylistic relationship represented in above table, although typical, is by no means universal. For example, the native words dale, deed, fair are the poetic equivalents of their mach more frequent borrowed synonyms valley, act or the hybrid beautiful.
The important thing to remember is that it is not only borrowings from foreign languages but other sources as well that have made increasing contributions to the stock of English synonyms. There are, for instance, words that come from dialects, and, in the last hundred years, from American English in particular. As a result speakers of British English may make use of both elements of the following pairs, the first element in each pair coming from the USA: gimmick :: trick, dues :: subscription, long distance call :: trunk call, radio :: wireless. There are also synonyms that originate in numerous dialects as, for instance, clover :: shamrock, liquor :: whiskey (from Irish), girl :: lass, charm :: glamour (from Scottish).
The role of borrowings should not be overestimated. Synonyms are also created be means of all word-forming processes productive in the language at a given time of history. The words already existing in the language develop new meanings. New words may be formed by affixation or loss of affixes, conversion, compounding, shortening and so on, and being coined, form synonyms to those already in use.
A source of synonymy also well worthy of note is the so-called euphemism in which by a shift of meaning a word of more less pleasant or at least inoffensive connotation substitutes one that is harsh, obscene, indelicate or otherwise unpleasant. The denotational meaning of drunk and merry may be the same. The euphemistic expression merry fully coincides in denotation with the word it substitutes, but the connotations of the latter fade out and so the utterance on the whole is milder, less offensive. The substitution is accounted for by the speaker’s tendency to be considerate, and not to hurt other people’s feelings. The affect is achieved because the periphrastic expression is not so harsh, sometimes jocular and usually motivated according to some secondary feature of the notion: poor :: underprivileged, naked :: in one’s birthday suit, pregnant :: the family way.
Euphemisms can also be treated within the synchronic approach because both expressions, the euphemistic and the direct one, coexist in the language and form a lexical opposition. Not only English but other modern languages as well, have a definite set of notions attracting euphemistic circumlocutions. These are notions of death, madness, stupidity, drunkenness, certain physiological processes, crimes and so on. For example: to die :: to be no more :: to be gone :: to lose one’s life :: to breath one’s last :: to join the silent majority :: to go the way of all flesh :: to pass away :: to be gathered to one’s fathers.
Euphemisms always tended to be a source of new formations because after a short period of use the new term becomes so closely connected with the notion that it turns into a word as obnoxious as earlier synonym.
There are many cases of similarity between words easily confused with synonymy but in fact essentially different from it.
Lexical variants, for instance, are examples of free variation in language, in so far as they are not conditioned by contextual environment but are optional with the individual speaker. E.g. northward/ norward, whoever/ whosoever. The variation can concern morphological or phonological features or it may be limited to spelling. Compare weazen/ weazened ‘shrivelled and dried in appearance’, an adjective used about a person’s face and looks; directly which may be pronounced [d1’rektl1] or [da1’rektl1] and whisky with spelling variant whiskey. Lexical variants are different from synonyms because they are characterized by similarity in phonetical or spelling form and identity of both meaning and distribution.
The cases of similarity of form and meaning combined with a difference in distribution should be classed as synonyms and not as lexical variants. These are words belonging to the same part of speech, containing identical stems and synonymical affixes, and yet not permitting free variation, not optional. The adjectives luxurious and luxuriant are synonyms when meaning ‘characterized by luxury’. Otherwise, luxuriant is restricted to the expression of abundance (used about hair, leaves, flowers). Luxurious is the adjective expressing human luxury and indulgence (used about habits, tastes, food, mansions).
Synonyms of this type should not be confused with paronyms – words that are kindred both in sound form and meaning and therefore liable to be mixed but in fact different in meaning and usage and therefore only mistakenly interchanged. For example ingenious and ingenuous. The first of these means ‘clever’ and may be used both of man and of his inventions. The second word means ‘frank’, ‘artless’.
A special type of word confusion in English has received the name of malapropism (after Mrs. Malaprop, a character in Sheridan’s comedy “The Rivals”). The name of this personage is in its turn derived from the French expression mal á propos which is used about misapplied or out-of-place words and expressions. A malapropism, then, is a word misapplied through the habit of using learned and sonorous language without understanding it. For example, wishing to tell her niece that she should forget about penniless suitor, Mrs Malaprop recommends her to illiterate instead of to obliterate the man from her memory.
SOURCES
- И. В. Арнольд, The English Word, , Москва, “ПРОСВЕЩЕНИЕ” – 1966. – 346 с.
- O. D. Soloshenko, Yu. A. Zavhorodniev, LECTURE NOTES ON ENGLISH LEXICOLOGY (for the 2nd and 3rd – year students of the English Department), LVIV, “Євросвіт” – 1998. – 228 p.
Теги: in English, реферати
Схожі публікації
2 Відповіді на "English Lexicology: SYNONYMS"
empyreal 14-04-10
Thank You very much for Your comment. Unfortunately I have nothing more about synonyms. This work was written by me long ago at university. Books were borrowed from library.
I am glad that my work is useful for You. Good luck!
Olesea 14-04-10
your information is super..it helped me a lot….a lot…a lot….really thank you very very much…
you know i am writing my diploma paper on Peculiarities of Synonyms in “A walk to remember” by Nicholas Sparks and I really would like to know if you still have more information on Synonyms..please let me know…here is my email: turcan.olesea[-at-]gmail.com…
Thank you a lot!