LexSem2 Flashcards
Polysemy
- Based on lexemes with related meanings
o E.g. Fox, football - Sometimes, revealed by antonymy
o Man vs woman, man vs boy, man vs animal – 3 different meanings of man (male, adult, human) - Economic principle – one form – many meanings
- Single meaning-single form – semantic transparency - doesn’t contribute
- Communication process is difficult
- A special case of polysemy
o When one sense is general and the other specific
E.g. Cat as the beast of pre - So that the term includes tiger, lion, panther
Cat as the common cat - A pet animal which includes various breed
Antonymy
Antonymy
- Opposite meaning
- Contradictory – complementary, inversion
- Contrary – gradable, negation of one does not imply the other
Full antonyms/complementary
- Admit only 2 options
- Not gradable
- Negation of one implies the other
o Dead – alive
Graded antonyms/antonymy in narrow sense
- Scales of antonymy
- Gradable
- Negation of one doesn’t necessarily imply the other
- Degree/scale
o Cold – warm
Several other degrees – lukewarm, icy, hot…all share a particular feature
Minor WF processes
Minor word formation processes refer to the mechanisms by which new words are created in a language through relatively small-scale changes.
Clipping acronymisation blending gemination
Bayeen productivity
Uses a large corpus, and calculates productivity in relation to parole, notably to frequency – number of occurrences (tokens) of a particular derived word (type)
P=n_1/N
N1 = hapax legomena – number of types (of words) with the evaluated affix occurring only once in the sample analysed
N = the total number of tokens of all words with that given affix
P = the potential application of a particular WFR – the rate at which new types are to be expected to appear when N tokens have been sampled
The lower the frequency of individual types, the higher their share of all different types
Prototype theory
Eleonore Rosch
- Came up with a new theory – prototype theory
- If we cannot define the meaning in a traditional way (for the reasons mentioned above) let us try to define the word by its most typical/most characteristic representative
- Experiments – associative experiments – students were told a word and they were supposed to say the first representative that came to their mind
o Bird
Most prototypical = robin
After robin = sparrow, blue jay, bluebird, canary, blackbird, dove
At the opposite end of the prototypicality scale = chicken, turkey, ostrich, penguin, peacock
* Why? They don’t meet one of the basic features that we associate with birds – they cannot fly
Prototype theory can be summarized in 4 points:
1. Degrees of typicality – not every member is equally typical
2. Family resemblance
3. Fuzzy edges
4. Rejection of the theory of the necessary and sufficient conditions
WF SYntagma
- A crucial notion because WF can only be composed of composites analysable into determinans and determinatum. Each of these components is a sign on its own.
- Kastovsky’s identification-specification scheme - ties into this:
o Determinatum identifies the object and determinans specifies it.
Swimming pool = “pool” is the determinatum / head and identifies, while “swimming”, the determinans, specifies what kind of pool it is.
Fixed meaning assumption
- There is a basic meaning of each word and this basic meaning can be captured by necessary and sufficient conditions
o A list of definitions which are absolutely necessary for the definition of the meaning of a particular word and which together are sufficient for the definition of the meaning
o The identification of these necessary and sufficient conditions is the key to defining the meaning of words - Square
o Closed, flat figure
o Having four sides
o All sides are equal in length
o All interior angles are equal
4 necessary conditions and as a combination they are sufficient for defining the meaning of the word square - Nevertheless, this approach faces problems particularly in applicability to all words of a language
- It is impossible to identify the conditions for all words
o Abstract words, words which are perceived differently by different people (e.g., democracy – defined differently in different parts of the world) - It should be preferable to distinguish between basic hard core of the meaning and an external level
o Basic hard core of the meaning – identical for all users and for all situations
o Hard core is surrounded by various subjectively defined aspects of meaning depending on conceptualization, reflected in different imageries, etc. - As a result, as this method worked for a limited number of words and it faced serious applicability problems – cognitivists – fuzzy meaning assumption
Fuzzy meaning assumption
- Sorts out all the problems connected with conceptualization and subjective perception of the meaning of words
- The meaning of word is elusive, the boundaries between the core meaning and the external/subjective layer are fuzzy/cannot be precisely defined
- The same is true about the boundaries between meaning of related words – they overlap
- 2 reasons:
1. Fuzzy edge phenomenon
o There are no clear-cut boundaries – there are no clear boundaries where one word ends, and the meaning of another word starts
o Experiment with the pictures of shapes/drawings, asking students to name them (which is a bowl, a vase, a cup, etc.)
o The meaning of words cannot be defined in absolute way/absolutely objectively – it depends on circumstances on its use – the boundaries are not sharp, the meanings overlap
o Fuzzy edges – fundamental property of meaning
Cognitive grammar
Cognitive grammar and cognitive semantics
-either one represent part of the communication scheme
-in the traditional approach there is a sender (speaker, writer) on one end and receiver(listener, reader) on the other
-communication scheme is based on encoding message- means that the content of the message is represented by a specific code (language used), then by means of its language it is transferred to listener who uses the same code (to understand each other) and decodes the message – basic principle of communication
-in the case of cognitive approach we start with resources – IMPORTANT- because resources affect the message with meaning, it is not only the matter of words, and therefore meaning of sentences in general, meaning of messages is not given by objective core but if it carries considerable amount of such activism of subjective processing of message communicated ??? expressed by resources—– dopísať od dakoho
-we use symbolic units – signs – must comply with the grammatical principles of particular language and message is influenced – the way of formulating the message – by knowledge, knowledge of context, experiences etc. – impose influence on the message to be sent to receiver = all of this is a part of coding process (the way how formulate the message, how we construct the sentences)
=resources we use in communication and this communication event is called usage event ( we simply use language and resources to construct our message)
Subjectivist approach to meaning
- Semantic value of an expressions depends not only on the quealities of the thing or situation it represents, but also on how we perceive and mentally picture it
- Factors: different general knowledge, different experiences, education, talents, preferences, etc…
- This individual subjectivist perception of the world as such and as reflected in language = conceptualization – how we understand the world, how we approach it…
- Triangle/three-sided polygon
o Triangle – emphasize 3 angles
o Three-sided polygon – emphasize sides
o One and the same object described in different ways - The glass is half empty/The glass is half full
o The same situation perceived in 2 different ways
Imagery
Langacker
- One of the founders of cognitive linguistics
- American linguist
- Imagery – we produce an image of the situation in the world around us – this image results of our conceptualization of this situation/object - image is the result of the way how we perceive the world
- Langacker uses the term imagery to indicate our ability to mentally construe (analyze) a conceived situation in alternate ways
o All cats are playful/any cat is playful/every cat is playful/each cat is playful
All sentences share a certain property/feature of cats – playfulness
Sentences provide different imagery depending on how we mentally construe the situation
All cats – class collectivity, cats as a whole
Any cat/every cat/each cat – all refer to single cat, but any emphasizes arbitrariness/random selection, every and each are alike in emphasizing individualness, but each indicates that class members are examined sequentially/one at a time
Symbolic units in cognitive linguistics
o Symbolic units = signs – lexical units
o Symbolic units must comply with grammatical principles of a particular language
semantic co-occurence restrictions
verb die, cannot use with unanimate objects
- Every lexical unit has certain restrictions in its use
- Cannot say – table worked all day – table = inanimate
- To die: animate: human, animal, plant
- To kick the bucket – cannot be used with plants or animals, just humans – no logical reasons
- Selectional restrictions – have logical justification
- Collocational restrictions – restriction without logical justification
o E.g. Idioms
Semantic traits and statuses
Theories to explain the nature of meaning are various
Theory based on semantic traits (features) and their status
The meaning of a LU can be defined by means of semantic traits, they have different value or significance for a definition of meaning they differ in their contribution to the meaning of a LU
Degree of significance of a lexical trait regarding the definition of the meaning of a LU is called it´s status.
What is the semantic trait is a particular feature (of an object) represented by Lexical unit
Scale of 5 degrees – most significant semantic traits are called:
* Criterial - without them it is not possible to define the meaning of a lexical unit they represent the core meaning of a LU.
* Expected semantic traits they are not indispensable for the object
* Possible semantic traits they can occur but these don’t have to
* Unexpected we don’t expect them to be a feature of an object but under certain circumstances they can
* Excluded semantic traits feature which cannot be a part of the definition of an object represented by a LU they cover an immense space which resist inclusion of a LU
Idioms
- An expression whose meaning cannot be inferred from the meanings of its parts
- Idioms function as a single semantic unit
- Idiom as a whole is a single semantic constituent
- Idiom is a lexical complex which is semantically simplex
o Lexical complex = consists of several lexical elements
o Semantically simplex = carries single meaning - Idioms – idiomaticity – a matter of a degree
- Scale of idiomaticity – scale for transparency based on principle of compositionality
collocations
Collocation
- Can be analysed as location and co (co = coexistence, cooccurrence)
- 2 constituents that frequently/typically cooccur
- Strong bond between the constituents due to frequent cooccurrence
Light drizzle, fine weather, high winds…
- Principle of compositionality can be applied to this type of lexical units
- Collocational ranges
o Peculiar to each word,
o E.g. Disease and illness are very close in meaning, and yet catch a disease is acceptable and *catch an illness is not
No two words share exactly the same range and frequency of occurrences within a range - Habitual collocations
o Clichés – languages may differ, e.g. ‘smiling sun’ is much more frequent in czech than in english - Semantic cohesion
o Sometimes the bond can be strengthened – semantic cohesion – the link is very strong between the constituents – two situations
One situation: one of the words is not used in its core meaning - Heavy drinker (heavy not in its core meaning, rather meaning of high consumption)
If one constituent can only be used with one word, the bond is very strong - To foot the bill – to pay the bill…only used in this context, cannot use i will foot it
Principle of compo
The principle of compositionality in lexical semantics states that the meaning of a complex expression is derived from the meanings of its individual parts and the way those parts are combined. In other words, the meaning of a phrase or sentence can be understood by understanding the meanings of its constituent words and how they are syntactically arranged.
According to this principle, the meaning of a whole is not simply the sum of the meanings of its parts but is determined by the way those parts interact and combine. The combination of words follows certain grammatical rules and syntactic structures, and these rules contribute to the interpretation of the expression.
For example, let’s consider the phrase “big red ball.” The meanings of the individual words “big,” “red,” and “ball” contribute to the overall meaning of the phrase. The compositionality principle tells us that the phrase refers to a ball that is both big and red. The meaning is not arbitrary but is determined by the meanings of the individual words and their arrangement within the phrase.
Cognitive synonymy
- Refers to lexical units which share the basic denotative meaning, but they differ in connotation
- Connotation – may refer to opposition between formal and informal language, differ in register, literal language vs slang
o Father – daddy
o Rich vs wealthy
o Go on – continue
Cognitive theory of metaphor
- Metaphor is a cognitive phenomenon (not exclusively lexical)
- It comes in patterns
o Love is a journey – look how far we have come, our love is at crossroads, we have to go our separate ways, this relationship is a dead-end street, our love has been a long bumpy road, we have gone off the tracks..
o Theories and arguments are buildings – foundations of the theory, the theory needs more support, the argument is shaky, we need to construct a strong argument, the argument collapsed…
- Used creatively
o Not fixed once and forever, but can be used creatively by every user
o Do you follow my argument?
- Metaphoric patterns occur outside language: the ‘thumb up’ gesture
o Things are looking up, we hit peak last week but it’s been looking downhill ever since - Metaphor – based on mapping between two domains
- Source and target – journey and evolution of relationship - Metaphor – based on experiences