The Word as a linguistic sign. Homonymy. Synonymy. Antonymy.

“False
Friends”. Lexical Creativity.

1. Introduction

Meaning is the central issue in the present topic and it has been one of the

central questions in linguistics throughout its history. When analysing synonyms,

antonyms or homonyms, one finds many questions which so far have not received

a satisfactory and definite answer, like those about the relationship the form and

the concept to which the form (the word) refers, or about the possibility of one

form referring to two different concepts. Answers to such questions can be found in

this paper, which follows the following order: the concept of word as a unit of

analysis and a linguistic sign, concepts of homonyms, synonyms and antonyms, the

phenomenon of “false friends” and the creative use of words to express the desired

meaning.

2. The Word as a Linguistic Sign

2.1 Definition of the Word as a Linguistic Sign

Firstly the word has always been described by its concepts of signification,

that is, how words and other parts of the speech constitute signs that represent

things.

A word has been often defined as a sequence of letters limited by a typographical

space in both sides. This idea of word is also conveyed by the term lexeme whose

most simple definition would be that of the set of words and phrases included in a

dictionary as separate entries. For a more accurate difference between word and

lexeme we will say that for example wrote and written are different word forms of

a same lexeme which is write. We can also use the term morphosyntactic words

for example in the case of man and men, which are associated to the lexeme man.

In the case in which we find that morphosyntactic words share the same form i.e.

loved as past simple and past participle, this will be called syncretism.

The first profound analysis towards the word regarding most current

concepts was done by Ferdinand de Saussure in the lectures he gave in the

University of Geneva between 1907 and 1911. Notes taken by his pupils constituted

what became later the “Course on General Linguistics” (1916) the first research on

modern languages and it marked up the beginning of Structuralism, it is stated for

the first time that a scientific study of a language needs to develop and study the

system rather than the history of linguistic phenomena. Among the concepts

introduced by Saussure stands out the definition of the sign as a composition of

signifier and signified. Signifier is the sound and signified is the thought; the

linguistic sign will be the link that unites them, creating at the same time a

relationship between them completely arbitrary. And signs will be created by their

value relationships with other signs. Thus signs derive their meaning by contrast

with coexisting signs of the same nature, that is, opposition.

Saussure states in his theory of linguistics that the central tenet of

Structuralism is that the phenomena of human life, whether language or media are

not intelligible except through their network of relationships, language becomes a

“social activity”, so language will be socialized at every level from the production

of phonemes to the interpretation of complex meanings.

L. Heljmslev also distinguishes two levels in the linguistic sign, he talks

about content and expression, being content the universal and the expression its

realization through language. They are at the same time made of two aspects

substance that in the expression would be the sounds as well as in the content

would be the universals; and form that in the expression would be the phonemes

and in the content is made by philosophy, extra linguistic. Let’s see now some

characteristics of linguistic signs.

2.2 Characteristics of Linguistics Signs

In order to study the characteristics of linguistics signs, language has been

considered as something that transmits a message of direct communication, that is,

giving special importance to the oral function of language. The first characteristic to

be considered is linearity, it makes reference to the chain of speech which implies

a succession of units, and these will be positioned at different levels in language

structure. Since two units cannot be in the same place in the chain of speech the

position of each one will be relevant in the distinction of them. Another

characteristic which is arbitrariness has been previously mentioned regarding

Saussure´s tenets.

Malmberg goes on with the distinction of signs according to opposition. He

understands as discrete elements those which are delimited among them with

precision. Thus, in a lexical level hot would be opposed to cold while in the phonetic

level heat is opposed to eat because of the presence or not of the phoneme /h/.

The linguistic sign can be studied regarding two points of view according to the time

of realization, thus it can be studied synchronically and diachronically. In the

first case the linguistic sign would be immutable, especially if we consider that

there exists a necessity for the language to function as a communication system

that implies that the language of a community of speakers is not modified

voluntarily by them, since its linguistic signs constitute their means of

communication. In the second case we can say that language is mutable since time

changes the linguistic signs slowly or immediately and in order to make the system

more perfect.

Now let’s going to consider some other types of analysis of meaning in words.

2.3 Other Types of Analysis of Meaning in Words

The approach we are going to deal with is called componential analysis

and represents a word intention by breaking it into smaller semantic components.

Semantic differences and equivalences between words can be deduced from the

comparison of their markers of meanings also called semantic components. We can

consider a set of markers called classemes, they work in pairs some examples of

them are: animate / inanimate ; animal / human ; male / female ; alive / dead ;

causing / having. Classemes help to identify some anomalies in a sentence for

example if we consider the sentence: “John is pregnant” we distinguish in John the

classeme + male which can not be related to pregnant which is +female. Thus

words are analyzed according to their semantic components, as we have seen those
usually come in pairs. So we will again use the concept of opposition to analyze

words according to variations in pairs due to how they are related to each other and

how they can be used with other words.

Finally, a word may have different layers of meaning, the basic layer of a word is

provided by denotation. Denotative meaning can be defined as the meaning

conventionally ascribed to a word, we may call it the meaning of dictionaries, which

is permanently stable. Connotative meaning is more elusive and some different

attributions are given to the word in addition to the denotative meaning. So,

context or shared knowledge between speakers may be helpful for the

understanding of connotative meanings.

Now that a definition of the word as a linguistic unit as been given in addition to

some types for its analysis let´s going to consider some concepts related to it, such

as homonymy, synonymy and antonymy.

3. Homonymy

Homonyms are words which have the same form but which differ in

meaning. for example, we can find the word found in the following sentence:

-When nobody expects it they found one of the major sugar companies

-Some especial equipment is necessary to found iron and cupper

Each of them coincides in their set of forms: found, founds, founding, founded. And

it is interesting that they can also be contrasted with past tense of find. In

conclusion three following conditions are necessary for absolute homonymy

between two lexemes.

1) Lexemic distinction

2) Syntactic equivalence

3) Formal identity

A similar case is that of polysemy which somehow could lead to confusion between

it and homonymy. The contrast between them lies in the fact that in polysemy the
meanings keep some affinity, whereas in homonymy the meanings do not keep any

referential affinity. Let´s see some examples:

Considering the word Mouth, it can refer the opening on the face as well as the

opening on a cave, or even on a tunnel but all them keep some relationship, that of

an opening. Eye is another valuable example, when talking about the organ of sight

we think about a quasi round shape similar to the one we think about when

referring to the eye of a needle. The main criterion to differentiate homonymy and

polysemy has to do with the historic evolution of words. In the case of homonymy

that we have seen previously we consider that the two lexemes have evolved from

two other different ones, the first case found will come from the Latin fundare while

the second one it would come from the Latin fundire. In polysemy we don´t find

any case of etymological evolution but some affinity of meaning; for example the

word Port means the Portuguese city and the wine which is also elaborated in that

area, it can also be noted in the examples above. Now let´s go ahead with another

concept, that of synonymy.

4. Synonymy

Synonyms are words whose different morphological forms share the same

meaning, the very term means to have the same meaning without being necessary

to have the same reference. For example the sentence John has a very sharp sight

shares meaning with the following one: John is hawk-eyed although both of them

doesn´t have the same referential scope, John doesn´t need to have the physical

eyes of a hawk. But the most practical criterion to establish identity and difference

of sense lies in descriptive meaning, rather than in metaphorical meaning. So

synonyms will be that expressions that can be interchangeable without affecting the

descriptive meaning. Let´s see the following example:

John is English, 35 years old, tall, funny and a linguist.

Regarding two features by means of which John is described: funny and a linguist;

if in the sentence John is funny we substitute funny for linguist, we know that we

will be dealing with some features about John but they will not refer to the same
concept, so they won´t be synonyms, they refer to the same veritative meaning

but not to the same descriptive meaning.

Some authors have stated that true synonymy is quite rare and it is almost limited

to technical terms arguing that not all the words are completely substitutable in all

contexts. So they have created a different term which is plesionymy to talk about

this case, regarding words which are very close in meaning but not equal in all

aspects. Considering the following words: lie, untruth and fib all these mean a

statement that does not conform the truth. But while the first one confronts with a

deliberate attempt to deceive, an untruth might be told merely out of ignorance

and a fib is possibly to save one own´s or another´s face. The three of them would

be plesionyms. Acknowledgment of the words of a language in such an efficient way

to find out which words are plesionyms is a difficult task even for native speakers

so it´s important to take into account some of the ways in which plesionyms may

differ as for example: denotation as in the case we have seen with lie,fib…;

Emphasis: foe, enemy; Formality: drunk, pissed ; or the Attitude of the Speaker:

skinny, slim. Another and a very important concept would be Antonymy,

5. Antonymy

It has been a very harsh task for linguists to establish the boundaries of

antonymy, the term opposite commonly has been used as referring the same, and

different types of semantic oppositions have been applied, especially in cases of

such semantic contrast as: parent / child , frank / hypocritical etc. This relation is

one of the most easily apprehended by speakers since probably all languages have

morphological processes that can create antonyms; in English prefixes such as –un

(married / unmarried) –in (formal / informal) -dis (regard / disregard) or –de

(colonize / decolonize) are used to form pairs of antonyms although the most

commonly used opposites tend to be morphologically unrelated ( good / bad ;

high / low ; beautiful / ugly ) we have described antonymy as easily apprehended

because as many linguists have argued the relationship between both opposites is

so close, for example when the word “true” is uttered as an automatic reaction the
word false is likely to come into our minds, an special relation is created between

the opposites. A more careful study of antonymy by many linguists such as Lyon

(1977) have referred to a set of gradable opposites which pays special attention

to adjectives showing some properties of gradability, although there are also nouns

(friend / enemy) or verbs (love / hate), there exist a wide gap among both terms

that can be filled with some other ones. Regarding adjectives we will say that they

present some characteristics proper of gradable opposites such as:

Implicit comparison when something is compared with some other things

of the same type, for example hot and cold, The sentence Today is hot has not the

same value in a city of Spain than in a desert. Using hot in Spain we will be

comparing with the average that will be much colder than in a desert.

Commitedness involves an adjective´s behaviour in questions. An

adjective is said to be committed when it implies a certain value in questions and

uncommitted when it doesn´t. The committed member is said to be marked as

well as the uncommitted unmarked. Let´s see an example:

In the sentence How old is Paul? Paul will be an uncommitted and unmarked

element of the sentence because it doesn´t imply any value at all, it´s just being a

part of the sentence that helps to develop the question by means of which the age

of Paul is being asked, while in the sentence: How young is Paul? It is being stated

that Paul in young and in addition to this it is asked for his age. A value it is being

stated in addition to the question, so it is marked and committed. Some other cases

of Commitedness and uncommitedness are: heavy / light ; tall / short etc.

Most researches on antonymy have been based on the study of gradable

opposites, but some other types can be considered, maybe these lack the special

properties found with gradable properties but they also show a dependence on

dichotomization. Thus they have been also studied in pairs and it has been said

that they form some exclusive compartments in such a way that what doesn´t fall

in one of them fall in the other. Different types are more developed as follows:
Directional opposites are generally adverbs or prepositions which include pairs

such as up / down ; in / out etc.

Reversive opposites signify an act or state that undoes the quality. Although they

are neither contradictory nor contrary terms, they present a clear opposition. Some

examples are tie / untie ; marry / divorce ; enter / leave ; appear / disappear.

Relational opposites are pairs of words that indicate such a relationship that one

of the cannot be used without suggesting the other: above / below ; teacher /

student ; parent / child.

Antonymy has being identified with opposites but we should make a clear

distinction between antonyms and near-opposites, we have seen that one of the

specific characteristics of antonyms is that a pair of them, even they denote

contrast they seem to share some kind of semantic dimension being close and far

apart at the same time. Linguists such as Cruse (1986) or Lehrer and Lehrer (1982)

have tried to determine that distinction, arguing that near-opposites share a

stronger semantic dimension than antonyms. They enumerate some factor which

affect the “goodness” of a pair of near-opposites:

1) Purity of the semantic opposition, when semantic opposition does not

exhaust the meaning of words;i.e.: whisper / shout in the sentence They

whispered something was wrong – They shouted something was wrong ; We

find a extremely different degree of intensity in both sentences although but

the result is not different one to the other.

2) Distance from the midpoint of a semantic dimension, in some cases one

member of the pair of near-opposites (i.e.: terrible) seems to name a more

extreme value than the other member (i.e.: good). The implication is that

prototypical opposites are similar in distribution.

3) Similarity in distribution, we find some opposites in some context which are

not in a different one. Little – big – Large , here the implication consists of

they should keep their opposite relationship no matter the context where

they are settled.

Once the different cases we have came across during the study of antonyms have

been seen let´s go ahead with a typical case that lead students to error when

acquiring English as a second language, this case is False Friends.

6. False Friends

False friends are words or expressions which have the same form in two or

More languages but convey different meanings. False friends are often associated

with historically or culturally related languages such as English, French and

Spanish, but in fact false friends also abound among totally unrelated languages

such as English and Japanese.

Once a word or expression has been borrowed into a language, we cannot predict

or control its development or the additional meanings it might or might not take.

Some false friends are easy to spot because the difference in their meanings is so

great that only an inexperienced speaker of the foreign language is likely to be

unaware of it, case of sympathetic / simpatico between English and Spanish. A

funny example of this is the English / Japanese contrast of the term feminist, used

in Japanese to describe a man who is excessively soft with women.

And finally to end with the topic we have to emphasize the fact that both native and

competent non native speakers of a language are able to use the majority of its

words to produce phrases they have never heard before as well as to comprehend

and admit them as correct. It is what we call lexical creativity.

7. Lexical Creativity

In order to achieve lexical creativity some rules for word creation such as

prefixes and affixes, conversion, compounding, derivation, and the figurative use of

words are applied being regarded useful end economic linguistic strategies for

language production and comprehension. Metaphor and Metonymy are frequently

found in poetry but they are also extensively used in everyday language.

Metaphor can be defined as a figure of speech that implies comparison between

two unlike entities, as distinguished from an explicit comparison signalled by the

words “like” or “as”. The metaphor makes a qualitative leap from a reasonable
perhaps prosaic comparison, to an identification or fusion of two objects, to make

one new entity partaking of the characteristics of both. i.e.: eyes- stars on her face.

Metonymy, on the other hand, is a figure of speech in which the name of an object

or concept is replaced with a word closely related to or suggested by the original,

as “crown” for “king”. Metonymy is closed related to synecdoche the naming of a

part for the whole or a whole for the part. Metonymy has the effect of creating

concrete and vivid images in place of generalities i.e. the law for a police officer a

cutthroat for an assassin.

Expressivity is one more resource of creativity. By expressive it is meant here the

features of an utterance by which a speaker or a writer establishes his or her

individuality in an especially original way. It belongs more to the scope of stylistics

than to semantics.