There is no doubt, as well as – and particularly – certainly masters, our rational vocabulary is highly organised. There are a great number of relations within single terms and conditions from a vocabulary and the significance ones terminology, respectively. Certainly linguists, such affairs are known as “semantic relations”, “feel relationships” or “lexical connections”. These types of semantic interactions can be analysed and you will revealed for part, plus in another, one ones of them connections can be exhibited.
To help you bring a primary, critical malfunction of the state-of-the-art, it ought to be mentioned that there are 
some research projects about this procedure. Although not, so it paper are only able to include a lot of them. Literary works which had been utilized is present less than part half a dozen, “Listing of Works Cited”. Venture delimitations have only been generated so far as outline try alarmed. As this paper is only a highly short little bit of lookup, the fresh new authors have confined themselves not to ever enter excessive detail, but alternatively you will need to render a beneficial survey of the topic.
dos.step one Polysemy And you may Homonymy
Polysemy can be defined as “an expression used in semantic analysis to mention to help you a beneficial lexical item which has a selection of some other significance” (Amazingly 1997, 297). Amazingly offers as analogy having polysemy this new lexical items “plain”, which has various meanings “clear”, “unadorned”, “obvious”, an such like.(ibid. Crystal).
Today, the situation one arises for linguists is exactly how to identify polysemy regarding another type of ambiguity, of homonymy. Amazingly talks of homonymy while the “a phrase found in semantic research to refer to [two or more] lexical things that [accidentally] have the same mode, but disagree from inside the meaning” (Crystal 1997, 185). Crystal’s advice listed here are “bear” and you may “ear”. “Bear” is also establish a pet otherwise can have this is away from “to bring”, “ear” can consider one’s body or to corn (ibid. Crystal).
In these instances, homonymy talks about one another spoken and you can composed models, however it is together with likely that the brand new identity of several lexemes is within one average, whereby linguists do discuss about it limited homonymy otherwise heteronymy (ibid. Crystal). One can differentiate 2 kinds of limited homonymy:
– Homography: two lexical situations have the same composed setting, however, disagree when you look at the pronunciation (an example would be the a couple of lexical bits of “lead”, you to noticable [li:d] and definition “to stay front”, another obvious [led] and defining a separate variety of metal). – Homophony: a few lexical factors have the same enunciation, but disagree when you look at the spelling
(elizabeth.g. the two lexical facts “led” and “lead”, both of being obvious [led], the initial being the earlier in the day demanding regarding “to lead”, the latter again identifying a new style of material).
two sorts Out of Ambiguity
Therefore, polysemy and you may homonymy shall be celebrated away from both from the current otherwise forgotten relatedness between the significance which is designated to at least one phonological setting. What’s the core of one’s matter, is the question to what extent this concept out of “relatedness” might be specified. To put it differently: how can “relatedness” become defined? When the a clear and you can real meaning might be considering, the complete condition might be fixed, to own then trend from phonological forms whoever relatedness are going to be proved will be entitled “homonymy”, whoever relatedness can’t be ended up was entitled “polysemy”. Yet not, since the happens so frequently in neuro-scientific semantics, one cannot promote an obvious and you can indisputable concept of the definition of “relatedness”. There have been two very first remedies for this problem, you to definitely given by historical semantics, others from the synchronic semantics.
Historic semantics interprets the notion “relatedness” generally naturally and therefore talks regarding polysemy in the event the an effective lexeme with other definitions contains the same etymological root (Kastovsky 1982, 121). Instances is actually “game” toward a couple of meanings “wildlife” and you will “playful activity” otherwise “funny” definition either “strange” otherwise “amusing”. Both examples let you know lexemes whose additional definitions have a similar etymological roots and are also ergo translated since polysemy because of the historic semantics.
0 Comments