Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 54

ФЕДЕРАЛЬНОЕ АГЕНТСТВО ПО ОБРАЗОВАНИЮ

Пензенский государственный педагогический университет


имени B. Г. Белинского

Кафедра английского языка

УЧЕБНО-МЕТОДИЧЕСКИЙ КОМПЛЕКС
ПО ДИСЦИПЛИНЕ

ЛЕКСИКОЛОГИЯ

0503030 Иностранный язык

2007
ФЕДЕРАЛЬНОЕ АГЕНТСТВО ПО ОБРАЗОВАНИЮ
Пензенский государственный педагогический университет
имени В. Г. Белинского

ПРИНЯТО УТВЕРЖДАЮ
на заседании Ученого совета Проректор по учебной работе
факультета иностранных языков
подпись Ф.И.О.
Протокол заседания совета факультета
№ <Г от « Л » 2007 г.

ПРОГРАММА УЧЕБНОЙ ДИСЦИПЛИНЫ

ЛЕКСИКОЛОГИЯ

специальность 050303 Иностранный язык

Факультет иностранных языков

Кафедра английского языка

Пенза - 2007
1. КВАЛИФИКАЦИОННЫЕ ТРЕБОВАНИЯ
Выпускник, получивший квалификацию учителя иностранного языка с
дополнительной специальностью, должен быть готовым осуществлять обучение
и воспитание обучающихся с учетом специфики преподаваемого предмета;
способствовать социализации, формированию общей культуры личности,
осознанному выбору и последующему освоению профессиональных
образовательных программ; использовать разнообразные приемы, методы и
средства обучения; обеспечивать уровень подготовки обучающихся,
соответствующий требованиям Государственного образовательного стандарта;
сознавать необходимость соблюдения прав и свобод учащихся,
предусмотренных Законом Российской Федерации «Об образовании»,
Конвенцией о правах ребенка, систематически повышать свою
профессиональную квалификацию, участвовать в деятельности методических
объединений и в других формах методической работы, осуществлять связь с
родителями (лицами, их заменяющими), выполнять правила и нормы охраны
труда, техники безопасности и противопожарной защиты, обеспечивать охрану
жизни и здоровья учащихся в образовательном процессе.
ТРЕБОВАНИЯ ГОС ПО ЛЕКСИКОЛОГИИ
ДПП.Ф.04. ЛЕКСИКОЛОГИЯ. Предмет лексикологии. Слово - основная
структурно-семантическая единица языка. Теория знака и слово. Функция слова.
Лексическое и грамматическое значение слова. Типы лексических значений.
Роль семантической эволюции слов в обогащении словарного состава.
Многозначность и однозначность слов. Значение м употребление слов. Роль
словообразования в пополнении словарного состава. Роль заимствования в
обогащении словарного состава. Источники заимствований. Устойчивые
словосочетания фразеологического и нефразеологического характера.
Классификация фразеологических единиц. Лексические пласты и группы в
словарном составе языка и их роль в процессе коммуникации. Территориальная
и социальная дифференциация лексики. Неологизмы, архаизмы и историзмы.
Классификация синонимов. Типология антонимов и омонимов. Основные типы
словарей.

2. ЦЕЛИ И ЗАДАЧИ ДИСЦИПЛИНЫ

Цель дисциплины:

- дать студентам необходимую сумму знаний, теоретически обобщающих и


систематизирующих сведения о слове как основной структурно-семантической
единице языка, словарном составе языка как системе и его фразеологическом фонде
в свете традиционных учений и новых направлений в области лексикологических
исследований.

Задачи дисциплины:
- развитие теоретического мышления студентов по вопросам лексикологии
как части науки о языке, формирование научного мировоззрения;
- ознакомление студентов с современным состоянием словарного состава
языка, закономерностями его строения, функционирования, развития и путями
пополнения;
- ознакомление с морфологической структурой слова, спецификой
словообразовательной системы английского языка;
- формирование у студентов представлений о системности словарного состава
языка, лексических категориях синонимии, антонимии, омонимии, полисемии,
национально-культурной специфики семантической структуры слова;
- изучение специфических свойств различных разрядов лексики, их
проявлений в контексте реального употребления;
- изучение сочетаемости лексических единиц в противопоставлении «слово –
словосочетание - фразеологическая единица»;
- ознакомление с особенностями английской фразеологии, происхождением,
типологией и другими аспектами фразеологических единиц;
- рассмотрение вопросов стилистической и территориальной дифференциации
лексики на основе понятия литературной нормы;
- ознакомление с основами лексикографии, различными типами словарей;
- ознакомление с методами лексикологических исследований.

3. МЕСТО ЛЕКСИКОЛОГИИ В ПРОФЕССИОНАЛЬНОЙ


ПОДГОТОВКЕ СТУДЕНТОВ
Лексикология является частью теоретического курса современного
английского языка наряду с такими дисциплинами, как история языка,
теоретическая фонетика, теоретическая грамматика и стилистика, и призвана
наряду с предметами языкового, педагогического и общеобразовательного циклов
обеспечить всестороннюю подготовку будущих учителей английского языка.
Лексикология дает возможность развивать теоретическое лингвистическое
мышление студентов, понимать сущность изучаемых языковых явлений с точки
зрения их развития и места в лексической системе языка, учит умению не только
описывать языковые явления, но также объяснять и анализировать их. Курс
лексикологии приобщает студентов к теоретическим проблемам лингвистики, учит
методике проведения лингвистических исследований, дает теоретическую базу для
написания курсовых и дипломных работ, готовит к дальнейшей самостоятельной
исследовательской работе. Знания, полученные при изучении лексикологии, имеют
практическую ценность и способствуют формированию языковой компетенции,
навыков перевода и интерпретации художественного текста, являются
необходимыми для решения практических задач преподавания иностранного языка
в школе.
Настоящая программа разработана в соответствии с Государственным
образовательным стандартом высшего образования Российской Федерации.
4. РАСПРЕДЕЛЕНИЕ ВРЕМЕНИ, ОТВЕДЕННОГО НА ИЗУЧЕНИЕ
ДИСЦИПЛИНЫ ПО УЧЕБНОМУ ПЛАНУ

Форма обучения
заочная Заочная
очная ДВО
(6лет) (3,5года)
Форма учебной работы
По По По
По семестрам
семестрам семестрам семестрам
5 6 7 3 4 3
Общая трудоемкость,
80 80 92 70 60 130
всего часов
Аудиторные занятия (АЗ) 34 14 16 20 20

Лекции (Л) 17 10 10 14 14

Практические занятия
(ПЗ)

Семинары (С)

Лабораторные занятия
17 4 6 6 6
(ЛЗ)
Другие виды аудиторных
занятий
Самостоятельная работа
46 66 76 50 60 110
(СР)

Контрольная работа + + +

Курсовая работа

Компьютерное
тестирование

Форма итогового
экзамен Экз. Экз. экзамен
контроля (зачет, экзамен)
5. ТЕМАТИЧЕСКИЕ ПЛАНЫ ДЛЯ ОЧНОЙ, ЗАОЧНОЙ ФОРМ
ОБУЧЕНИЯ, СОКРАЩЕННЫХ СРОКОВ ОБУЧЕНИЯ, ДВО:
№ Форма обучения
п/п Наименование разделов Заочная заочная
очная ДВО
дисциплины (6лет) (3,5года)
Л ЛЗ СР Л ЛЗ СР Л ЛЗ СР Л ЛЗ СР
1 Лексикология как
лингвистическая
дисциплина. Основные 2 4 2 13 2 10 2 10
понятия и категории
лексикологии. Слово как
основная единица языка.
2 Этимологическая
характеристика словарного 2 2 4 2 13 2 10 2 10
состава английского языка.
3 Морфологическая структура
английских слов. 3 4 6 4 2 13 2 2 10 2 2 10
Словообразование.
4 Значение слова.
Семантическая структура
слова в английском языке. 2 2 6 4 2 13 2 2 10 2 2 10
Изменения в семантической
структуре слова.
5 Омонимы в лексической 2 1 2 12 10 10
системе английского языка.
6 Синонимические и
антонимические отношения 2 2 5 2 2 13 2 10 2 10
в современном английском
языке.
7 Лексическая сочетаемость в
современном английском 2 3 2 13 2 10 2 10
языке. Типы
словосочетаний.
8
Фразеология современного 2 2 4 2 2 13 2 10 2 10
английского языка.
9 Стилистическая
дифференциация словарного 2 4 2 13 2 10 2 10
состава английского языка.
10 Территориальная
дифференциация английской 2 4 2 13 10 10
лексики. Английский язык в
США.
11 Основы английской 4 13 10 10
лексикографии.
12 Всего часов 17 17 46 20 10 142 14 6 110 14 6 110

6. СОДЕРЖАНИЕ ДИСЦИПЛИНЫ
1. Лексикология как лингвистическая дисциплина.

Лексикология как лингвистическая дисциплина. Цели и задачи курса.


Основные понятия и категории лексикологии. Лексикология общая, частная,
историческая, прикладная, сопоставительная. Предмет и разделы лексикологии.
Связь с другими дисциплинами. Теоретическое и практическое значение
лексикологии. Теоретические основы изучения словарного состава языка.
Системность словарного состава. Синхрония и диахрония в лексикологии. Методы
исследования лексического и фразеологического состава языка. Основные
проблемы лексикологии.
Слово как основная структурно-семантическая единица языка. Теория
знака и слово. Структурный, семантический и функциональный аспекты в изучении
слова. Отличие слова от морфемы и словосочетания.

2. Этимологическая характеристика словарного состава английского языка.

Этимологические основы английского словаря. Лексика исконная и


приобретенная. Лексика общеиндоевропейского и общегерманского происхождения
как историческая основа словарного состава. Характерные черты исконно
английских слов.
Роль заимствований в формировании и развитии словарного состава
английского языка. Хронология и периодизация основных этапов заимствований.
Историческая последовательность заимствований из латинского языка,
скандинавских диалектов, норманнского и парижского диалектов французского
языка и других языков. Особый статус слов латино-романского происхождения.
Пути проникновения иноязычных слов в английский язык. Виды заимствований.
Ассимиляция заимствований. Типы ассимиляции, факторы, обусловливающие
степень ассимиляции. Функционально-стилистические особенности лексики в
зависимости от происхождения. Влияние заимствований на фоно-морфологическую
и лексико-семантическую системы английского языка. Этимологические дублеты,
их происхождение. Интернациональные слова, сферы их использования.

3.Морфологическая структура английских слов. Словообразование.

Морфологическое строение слова. Слова и морфемы. Типы морфем:


словоизменительные, словообразовательные, корневые. Морфемы свободные и
связанные. Алломорфы. Слова простые, производные, сложные и
сложнопроизводные. Деривационная структура слова. Типы основ. Основы
мотивированные и немотивированные. Принципы анализа морфологической
структуры слова.
Словообразовательная система современного английского языка. Роль
словообразования в пополнении словарного состава. Понятие
словообразовательной модели.
Аффиксация. Аффиксы, полуаффиксы. Принципы классификации.
Многозначность, синонимия, омонимия аффиксов. Происхождение аффиксов.
Продуктивность. Префиксальное и суффиксальное словообразование.
Конверсия как один из наиболее продуктивных способов образования новых
слов. Различные точки зрения лингвистов относительно сущности конверсии.
Место конверсии как способа словообразования в различных частях речи. Проблема
«stone wall». Семантические отношения между словами, соотносящимися по
конверсии.
Словосложение. Основные особенности сложных слов в английском языке.
Принципы классификации английских сложных слов: по частям речи, по типу
словосложения, по структуре непосредственно-составляющих, по значению.
Образования типа «give up, make out». Критерии разграничения сложных слов и
словосочетаний.
Сокращение слов и словосочетаний. Различные типы сокращенных слов и
аббревиатур, их стилистическая характеристика.
Звукоподражание (ономатопея). Звукоподражательная теория: признание
первоначальной связи между звуком и значением слова. Классификация
звукоподражательных слов по их соотносимости с денотатом. Редупликация.
Структурные типы слов, образованных в результате редупликации, их
стилистическая характеристика. Дезаффиксация (регрессивная деривация).
Семантические отношения слов при дезаффиксации. Контаминация (скрещение),
продуктивность данного способа словообразования. Перемещение ударения и
умлаут как отражение более ранних процессов в словообразовании.

4. Значение слова. Семантическая структура слова в английском языке.


Изменения в семантической структуре слова

Значение слова как лингвистическая категория. Различные подходы в


изучении лексического значения слова (референтный, функциональный). Структура
значения слова. Лексическое и грамматическое значение. Типы лексического
значения. Лексическое значение как совокупность понятийного ядра и
прагматических коннотаций (значение денотативное и коннотативное). Типы
коннотаций: экспрессивная, эмоциональная, оценочная, стилистическая.
Полисемия, ее роль в языке и причины этого явления. Смысловая структура
многозначного слова. Элементы семантической структуры слова. Выделение
главного, (прямого) номинативного значения и переносных (производных)
значений. Понятие лексико-семантического варианта (ЛСВ). Национально-
культурная специфика смысловой структуры соотносительных слов в английском и
русском языках. Реализация значений многозначного слова в различных типах
контекста. Взаимосвязь между значением слова и его сочетаемостью. Методы
изучения лексического значения слова: дистрибутивный, контекстуальный,
компонентный анализ, метод словарных дефиниций.
Развитие и изменение семантической структуры слова. Причины изменений
лексических значений слов: культурно-исторические, внутрисистемные.
Семантические процессы и типы логических ассоциаций, на которых они
основываются: метафорический и метонимический перенос. Расширение и сужение
значения, в результате которого возникает значение более широкое (общее) или
более узкое (специальное). Так называемое «улучшение» и «ухудшение» значения
слова.

5.Омонимы в лексической системе английского языка

Лексическая омонимия, широкое распространение омонимов в современном


английском языке. Причины возникновения омонимов: совпадение различных по
звучанию слов в результате исторических звуковых изменений, заимствования слов
из других языков, результат различных процессов словообразования, разрыв
первоначально единой семантической структуры многозначного слова (распад
полисемии). Классификация омонимов, разработанная профессором Смирницким
А.И. (омонимы лексические, лексико-грамматические, грамматические, частичные
и полные). Другие классификации. Проблема разграничения полисемии и
омонимии. Функционально-стилистические особенности омонимов.

6.Синонимические и антономические отношения в


современном английском языке

Синонимия как явление варьирования плана выражения. Проблема


определения синонимов. Критерии синонимии – номинативный, семантический,
критерий взаимозаменяемости. Классификация синонимов акад. В.В.Виноградова:
идеографические, стилистические и абсолютные. Классификация синонимов по
типам коннотаций. Эвфемизмы как особый тип стилистических синонимов.
Происхождение синонимов. Генетическая неоднородность английской лексики как
источник синонимии. Синонимический ряд. Понятие «дескриптора» - наиболее
частотного, универсального, широкозначного члена синонимического ряда.
Многозначность слов и синонимия. Разграничение синонимов по признакам
лексической сочетаемости и грамматической валентности. Синонимы как
выразительно-экспрессивные средства языка.
Антонимия и ее логическая основа. Проблема лингвистичности и
экстралингвистичности антонимов. Классификация антонимов. Разнокоренные и
однокоренные антонимы. Классификация антонимов по типу выражаемой
противоположности. Антонимы как выразительно-экспрессивные средства языка.

7.Лексическая сочетаемость в современном английском языке

Сочетаемость лексических единиц. Понятие валентности. Основные типы


словосочетаний в английском языке. Свободные и устойчивые словосочетания.
Относительные признаки переменных (свободных) словосочетаний. Нормы
сочетаемости в английском языке. Факторы, ограничивающие сочетаемость слова.
Использование дистрибутивного анализа для исследования свободных
словосочетаний. Различные принципы классификации словосочетаний: по части
речи головного компонента словосочетания, по принципу дистрибуции в составе
предложения, по типу синтаксических связей между компонентами, по типу
семантических отношений между компонентами словосочетания.
8. Фразеология современного английского языка

Фразеологическая единица как сложный раздельнооформленный эквивалент


слова. Основные различия между свободными, переменными словосочетаниями и
фразеологическими единицами. Основные критерии фразеологических единиц:
устойчивость компонентного состава и грамматической формы,
раздельнооформленность, переосмысление значения, социолингвистическая
обусловленность. Проблема классификации фразеологических единиц. Различные
классификации, предложенные В.В.Виноградовым, А.И.Смирницким,
Н.Н.Амосовой, А.В.Куниным. Структурные типы фразеологических единиц.
Пословицы и поговорки. Вариативность, полисемия и синонимия фразеологических
единиц. Источники возникновения. Функционально-стилистические особенности
фразеологических единиц, образность, экспрессивность.

9.Стилистическая дифференциация словарного состава английского языка.

Функционально-стилистическая дифференциация английской лексики.


Стилистическое расслоение лексики по сферам ее применения. Понятие регистра и
понятие функционального стиля. Нейтральный стиль и нейтральная лексика.
Разговорный стиль. Разговорная лексика и ее особенности: эмоциональность,
односложность, использование глаголов с постпозиционными элементами,
использование субстантивных прилагательных. Деление разговорной лексики на
литературно-разговорную, фамильярно-разговорную (диалектизмы,
профессионализмы, жаргонизмы). Экспрессивно-эмоциональная лексика. Сленг.
Общий и специальный сленг.
Книжный стиль. Характерные типы ситуаций общения. Книжная лексика:
общелитературная и функционально-литературная. Термины. Основные
характеристики терминов. Поэтическая лексика. Неологизмы, окказиональные
слова как отражение тенденций языкового развития. Архаизмы. Историзмы.

10. Территориальная дифференциация английской лексики.


Английский язык в США.

Исторические и экономические причины распространения английского языка


за пределами Англии. Язык-диалект-вариант. Особенности английского языка в
США. Различные точки зрения на проблему статуса американского английского.
Особенности словарного состава: исторические американизмы, американизмы,
отражающие особенности флоры и фауны страны, собственно американизмы.
Различные наименования в британском и американском вариантах для выражения
сходных понятий. Особенности словообразования и орфографии. Некоторые
грамматические и фонетические особенности. Заимствования в американском
варианте английского языка.

11. Основы английской лексикографии.

Лексикография – наука и практика составления словарей. Подбор и


организация материала в лингвистическом словаре. Построение словарной статьи.
Фонетический и грамматический комментарий к слову, выделение значений слова,
словарные дефиниции, сочетаемость, иллюстративный материал, система маркеров.
Общая типология словарей: энциклопедии, словари-справочники,
лингвистические словари. Толковые словари английского языка, специальные
лингвистические словари – этимологические, синонимические, словари-тезаурусы.
Составление учебных словарей.

7. РЕКОМЕНДУЕМАЯ ЛИТЕРАТУРА
Основная:
1. Антрушина Г.Б., Афанасьева О.В., Морозова Н.Н. Лексикология английского
языка. Учебное пособие. М., 2000
2. Арбекова Т.И. Лексикология английского языка (практический курс0.М., 1977
3. Кунин А.В. курс фразеологии современного английского языка.М., 1966
4. Смирницкий А.И.Лексикология английского языка. М., 1998
5. Хидекель С.С., Гинзбург Р.С., Князева Г.Ю., Санкин А.А. Английская
лексикология в выдержках и извлечениях. М.,1975
6. Arnold I.V. The English Word. M., 1986
7. Ginsburg R.S., Khidekel S.S., Knyazeva G.Y., Sankin A.A. A Course in Modern
English Lexicology. 2 ed.,m., 1979
Дополнительная:
1. Беляева Т.М., Потапова И.А.Английский язык за пределами Англии. Л., 1971
2. Вилюман В.Г. Английская синонимика.М.,1980
3. Дубенец Э.М. Лексикология современного английского языка: лекции и
семинары. М., 2002
4. Заботкина В.И. Новая лексика современного английского языка. М., 1989
5. Кунин А.В. Фразеология современного английского языка.М.,1972
6. Кубрякова Е.С. Типы языковых значений. Семантика производного слова.М.,
1981
7. Кубрякова Е.С. Номинативный аспект речевой деятельности. М.,1986
8. Малаховский Л.В. Теория лексической и грамматической омонимии.Л.,1990
9. Маковский М.М. Английская этимололгия. М.,1986
10. Мешков О.Д. Словообразование современного английского языка. М.,1976
11. Медникова Э.М. Значение слова и методы его описания.М.,1974
12. Ступин Л.П. лексикография английского языка. М., 1985
13. Уфимцева А.А. Лексическое значение. М., 1986
14. Фразеология в контексте культуры. Ответственный редактор Телия В.Н.,
М.,1998
15. Харитончик З.А. Лексикология английского языка. Минск, 1992
16. Швейцер А.Д. Литературный язык в США и в Англии. М., 1986
17. Adams V. Introduction into English Word Formation. London, 1983
18. Halliday M.A.K. Language as Social Semiotics. Social interpretation of Language
and Meaning. London, 1979
19. Jespersen O. Growth and Structure of the English. Oxford, 1982
20. Leech John. Semantics. Penguin Books, 1981
21. Ogden C.R., Richards I.A.The Meaning of Meaning. London,1972
22. Palmer F.R. Semantics. A New Outline. M.,1982.
Словари:
1. Апресян Ю.Д. , Ботякова В.В. и др. Англо-русский синонимический словарь
.М.,1998
2. Большой англо-русский словарь. Под общим руководством проф. Гальперина
И.Р. М., 1979
3. Комиссаров В.Н. Словарь антонимов современного английского языка. М., 1964
4. Кунин А.В. Англо-русский фразеологический словарь. М., 1998
5. Мюллер В.К. Англо-русский словарь.М..1998
6. Русско-английский словарь. Под общим руководством проф.Смирницкого А.И.
М., 1998
7. Hornby A.S. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. London, 2000
8. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. London, 2000
9. Longman Regiser of New Words. M., 1990
10. Oxford Dictionary of English. Oxford University Press, 2003
11. Webster’s New Word Dictionary of American Language. N.Y., 1978
12. 21 Century Dictionary of Slang N.Y.,1994

8. ТРЕБОВАНИЯ К УРОВНЮ ОСВОЕНИЯ СОДЕРЖАНИЯ


ДИСЦИПЛИНЫ
В результате изучения дисциплины студент должен:
- владеть основными понятиями и терминологией по всем разделам изучаемой
дисциплины;
- знать основные направления и проблематику в исследовании слова и
словарного состава языка;
- уметь излагать суть обсуждаемого вопроса, иллюстрировать теоретические
положения конкретным языковым материалом;
- уметь сопоставлять различные точки зрения языковедов по обсуждаемым
проблемам;
- владеть навыками лексикологического анализа слова как языковой единицы
и в условиях реального употребления;
- уметь вести самостоятельное языковедческое исследование;
- знать методы лексикологических исследований;
- уметь работать с различными видами учебных материалов (учебниками,
справочниками, словарями различных типов и др.), использовать
дополнительные теоретические источники;
- уметь применять полученные знания в практике изучения других
дисциплин, а также в практике преподавания иностранного языка в школе.
Примерный перечень вопросов, выносимых на экзамен.

1. Лексикология как лингвистическая дисциплина.


2. Слово как основная единица языка. Основные характеристики слова.
3. Общая характеристика словарного состава английского языка.
4. Исконная лексика английского языка.
5. Заимствования в словарном составе английского языка.
6. Ассимиляция заимствований.
7. Этимологические дублеты.
8. Морфологическая структура английских слов.
9. Префиксация. Классификация префиксов.
10. Суффиксация. Классификация суффиксов.
11. Конверсия как безаффиксальный способ образования новых слов.
12. Словосложение. Классификация сложных слов.
13. Сокращение слов и словосочетаний.
14. Второстепенные способы образования новых слов.
15. Значение слова как лингвистическая категория.
16. Типы значения слова. Компонентный подход к изучению значения слова.
17. Полисемия в английском языке. Семантическая структура многозначных
слов.
18. историческая изменчивость смысловой структуры слова.
19. Омонимия в английском языке.
20. Проблема определения синонимов.
21. Проблема классификации синонимов.
22. Синонимический ряд. Синонимическая доминанта.
23. Антонимия в английском языке.
24. Разговорная лексика.
25. Лексическая валентность и сочетаемость в английском языке.
26. Основные типы словосочетаний.
27. Структурная классификация свободных словосочетаний.
28. Фразеологические единицы. Критерии фразеологических единиц.
29. Проблема классификации фразеологических единиц.
30. Стилистическое использование фразеологических единиц.
31. Пословицы и поговорки, клише, крылатые слова.
32. Функционально-стилистическая дифференциация лексики.
33. Структурная классификация фразеологических единиц.
34. Основные варианты английского языка. Особенности английского языка в
США.
35. Лексикография – теория и практика составления словарей. Типы словарей.
36. Методы лексикологического исследования.
Учебная программа составлена на основании ГОС ВПО 2005 г. для
специальности 050303 Иностранный язык

Программу составил(и)

1. Варламова Н.И., канд.филол.наук, доцент


Ф.И.О., учёная степень, ученое звание

2.

Настоящая программа не может быть воспроизведена ни в какой


форме без предварительного письменного разрешения кафедры-
разработчика программы.

Программа одобрена на заседании кафедры английского языка

от « » 2007года протокол №

Заведующий кафедрой г—.


v
английского языка - ' Т.А.Полукарова

Программа одобрена учебно-методическим советом факультета

« » 2007 г.

Председатель учебно-методического совета /

Программа одобрена учебно-методическим управлением университета

2007 г.
Начальник учебно-методического управления _
Контрольная работа по лексикологии.
Test.
1. Lexicology is the branch of linguistics dealing with …
a) grammatical employment of linguistic units
b) various lexical means and stylistic devices
c) different properties of words and the vocabulary of a language
2. Lexicology has close ties with …
a) phonetics and grammar
b) phonetics, grammar, history of a language, stylistics and sociolinguistics
c) literature, history and sociology
3. The synchronic approach to the study of language material is concerned with …
a) the use of various words and phrases in particular communicative situations
b) the evolution of the vocabulary items
c) the vocabulary of a language as it exists at a given period of time
4. The diachronic approach to the study of a language material deals with…
a) the changes and the development of vocabulary in the course of time
b) the structural and semantic entity of language units within the language system
c) the influence of extra – linguistic factors over the development of a language system as a
whole
5. The associations involved in the semantic change of the word “green” in the
sentence: “I have been green, too, Miss Eyre, -ay, grass green; not a more vernal
tint freshens you now than once freshened me” is based on …
a) metaphor
b) metonymy
6. The result of semantic change in the word “target” which originally meant “a small
round shield” and now denotes “anything that is fired at” and also “any result
aimed at” is …
a) the deterioration of meaning
b) the specialization of meaning
c) the amelioration of meaning
d) the generalization of meaning
7. Which meaning of the polysemantic adjective “fast” is its primary meaning …
a) showing time in advance of the correct time
b) (of a person) spending too much time on
c) (of a photographic film) promoting quick pleasure motion
d) quick, rapid
e) (of a surface) promoting quick motion
8. The words night – knight refer to …
a) homographs
b) homonyms proper
c) homophones
9. The synonyms “forest – wood” refer to …
a) stylistic synonyms
b) ideographic synonyms
c) ideographic – stylistic synonyms
10. The synonyms “well-known – famous – notorious – celebrated” are differentiated
by …
a) the causative connotation
b) the evaluative connotation
c) the connotation of manner

11. The antonyms “single – married” refer to …


a) contraries
b) contradictories
c) incompatibles
12. The word “disagreeable” refers to …
a) polymorphic, monoradical, prefixo-radical-suffixal words
b) monomorphic, prefixo-radical-suffixal words
c) polymorphic, polyradical words
13. The structural pattern of the word “long-legged” is …
a) a + (n + -ed)
b) (a + n) + -ed
c) (a + n) + -sf
14. The suffix –ment found in the words “agreement”, “movement”, “replenishment”
is a …
a) deadjectival suffix
b) denominal suffix
c) noun – forming
15. The semantic relations between the denominal verb “to hand” meaning “give”,
“pass” and the noun “hand” from which it was derived is that of …
a) location
b) instrumental use of the object
c) action characteristic of an object
16. The word “ballet” is a(n) …
a) unassimilated borrowing / a barbarism
b) partially assimilated borrowing
c) completely assimilated borrowing
17. The nouns “shadow” and “shade” are …
a) etymological doublets
b) international words
c) semantic borrowings
18. The syntactic pattern of the word-combination “kind to people” is …
a) A + preposition + N
b) V + preposition + N
c) N + preposition + N
19. The phraseological unit “to show the white feather” meaning “to betray one’s
cowardice” is a …
a) phraseological fusion
b) phraseological collocation
c) phraseological unit
20. The English – Russian Phraseological Dictionary by
A. V. Kunin is …
a) genera, specialized; bilingual, diachronic
b) restricted, explanatory, monolingual, synchronic
c) restricted, bilingual, synchronic
SEMINARS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEXICOLOGY

Seminar 1 (2 hours)
Etymological Characteristics of the Modern English Vocabulary

1. Words of Native Origin as the Historical Basis of the English


Word – Stock. Characteristic Features of Native Words.
2. Borrowings in English. Causes and Ways of Borrowings. Succession
of Borrowings.
3. Assimilation of Borrowings.
4. The Role of Native and Borrowed Elements. Influence of
Borrowings.
5. Etymological Doublets.
6. International Words.
7. Practical Assignment: Antrushina G.B. English Lexicology,
ex. 2,4,8,12,13 p.p. 57-61; ex. 2,4,10,11,12 p.p. 71-75

Seminar 2 (2 hours)
Morphological Structure of English Words.
Word-Formation in English.

1. Morphemes. Classification of Morphemes. Meaning in Morphemes.


2. Morphemic Types of Words.
3. Types of Word – Segmentability. Procedure of Morphemic Analysis
( the Method of Immediate and Ultimate Constituents).
4. Derivational Structure. Derivational Bases. Derivational Affixes.
5. Affixation in English
5.1. Prefixation. Classification of Prefixes.
5.2. Suffixation. Classification of Suffixes.
6. Practical Assignment: Antrushina G.B. English Lexicology,
ex. 3,4,6,8 p.p.98-100. Kashcheyeva Practical Lexicology,
ex. 1,2,7 p.p. 93, 94, 102

Seminar 3 (2 hours)
Word – Formation in English.

1. Conversion
1.1. Different Conceptions of Conversion.
1.2. Basis Criteria of Semantic Derivation in Conversion
1.3. Synchronic and Diachronic Approaches to Conversion
1.4. Patterns of Conversion. Typical Semantic Relations in Conversion.
2. Word – Composition
2.1. Specific Features of English Compounds.
2.2. Classification of Compound Words.
2.3. Meaning of Compound Words.
3. Shortening of Words and Phrases
3.1. Classification of Shortened Words.
4. Minor Types of Word – Formation
4.1. Sound Interchange. Distinctive Stress.
4.2. Sound Imitation.
4.3. Back – Formation.
5. Practical Assignment: Antrushina G.B. English Lexicology,
ex. 10 (1 – 8) p. 101; ex. 5,6,7,8 p.p. 124 – 125; ex. 10 p. 127

Seminar 4 (3 hours)
Word – Meaning. Polysemy. Homonymy.

1. Word – Meaning. Referential, Functional and Operational


Definitions of Meaning.
2. Types of Meaning. Aspects of Lexical Meaning.
3. Change of Meaning. Causes, Nature and Results of Semantic
Change.
4. Polysemy. The Semantic Structure of Polysemantic Words.
5. Polysemy and Context. Types of Context. The Meaning of the Word
and its Usage.
6. Hpmonymy. Sources of Homonymy.
7. Classification of Homonyms.
8. Practical Assignment: Antrushina G.B. English Lexicology,
ex.2,3,5,8 p.p.142 - 146; ex. 7,8,9 p.p. 163 – 164; ex. 2,3,4,5,7
p.p. 176 - 181
Seminar 5 (2 hours)
Semantic Relations of Synonymy and Antonymy.
Other Semantic Groups.

1. The Problem of Definition of Synonyms.


2. The Problem of Classification of Synonyms.
3. Patterns of Synonymic Sets. Synonymic Dominant.
4. Euphemisms
5. Lexical and Terminological Sets, Lexico – Semantic Groups and
Semantic Fields.
6. Antonymy as a Linguistic or Extralinguistic Problem.
7. Classification of Antonyms.
8. Practical Assignment: Antrushina G. B. English Lexicology, ex.
4,5,9,11,13(1) p.p. 202 – 206;ex. 2,7,8(1) p.p. 220 - 223

Seminar 6 (2 hours)
Word – Groups and Phraseological Units.

1. Lexical and Grammatical Valency.


2. Structure and Classification of Word – Groups.
3. Meaning of Word – Groups.
4. Free Word – Groups Versus Phraseological Units.
5. The Problem of Classifications of Phraseological Units.
6. Structural Types of Phraseological Units.
7. The Main Sources of Phraseological Units.
8. Proverbs and Sayings.
9. Practical Assignment: Арбекова Т.И. Лексикология английского
языка, ex. 32,35,38 p.p. 189 – 191. Antrushina G.B. English
Lexicology, ex. 4,5,10,11,13 p.p. 237 – 241.
Give Examples of Learners’ Mistakes Resulting from the Violation of
the Norms of Collocability in English.

Seminar 7 (2 hours)
Stylistic Differentiation of the Vocabulary.

1. The Opposition of Stylistically Marked and Stylistically Neutral


Words.
2. Neutral Words (Basic Vocabulary).
3. Informal Vocabulary:
3.1. Colloquial Words (Literary, Familiar, Low).
3.2. Slang.
3.3. Jargonisms.
3.4. Professionalisms.
3.5. Dialect Words.
3.6. Colloquial Coinages.
4. Formal Vocabulary:
4.1. Learned Words and Official Vocabulary.
4.2. Terminology.
4.3. Poetic Words.
4.4. Archaic and Obsolete Words.
4.5. Neologisms.
5. Practical Assignment: Antrushina G.B. English Lexicology,
ex. 2 p.p. 22,23; ex. 2 (1 – 5),3,4 p.p. 39 – 42

Seminar 8 (2 hours)
Regional Varieties of the English Language.

1. The Main Variants of the English Language


1.1. Variants of English in the UK.
1.2. Variants of English outside the British Isles.
2. Pecularities of American English
2.1. Vocabulary of American English.
2.2. The Grammar System of American English.
2.3. Phonetic Peculiarities.
3. Local Dialects in Great Britain.
4. Local Dialects in the USA.
5. Practical Assignment: Antrushina G.B. English Lexicology,
ex 2 p. 267; ex. 5,6,7,8,9,11,18,19 p.p. 269 - 274
Recommended Reading
Manuals:
1. Антрушина Г.Б., Афанасьева О.В., Морозова Н.Н. Лексикология
английского языка. М.,2000
2. Arnold S.V. The English Word. M., 1986
3. Арбекова Т.И. Лексикология английского языка (практический курс).
M., 1977
4. Дубенец Э.М. Лексикология современного английского языка: лекции
и семинары. М., 2002
5. Ginsburg R.S., Khidekel S.S., Knyazeva G.Y., Sankin A.A. Course in
Modern English Lexicology. 2 ed., M., 1979
6. Зыкова И.В. Практический курс английской лексикологии.
M., 2006
7. Кащеева М.А., Потапова И.А., Тюрина Н.С., Практикум по английской
лексикологии. Л., 1974
8. Кунин А.В. Курс фразеологии современного английского языка. М.,
1996
9. Смирницкий А.И. Лексикология английского языка. М., 1998

Additional Reading:
1. Adams V. Introduction into English Word Formation. London, 1983
2. Беляева Т.М., Потапова И.А. Английский язык за пределами Англии.
Л., 1971
3. Вилюман В.Г. Английская синонимика. М., 1980
4. Заботкина В.И. Новая лексика современного английского языка. М.,
1989
5. Кунин А.В. Фразеология современного английского языка.
М., 1972
6. Кубрякова Е.С. Типы языковых значений. Семантика производного
слова. М., 1981
7. Leech John. Semantics. Penguine Books, 1981
8. Малаховский Л.В. Теория лексической и грамматической омонимии.
Л., 1990
9. Мешков О.Д. Словообразование современного английского языка. М.,
1976
10. Медникова Э.М. Значение слова и методы его описания. М., 1974
11. Palmer F.R. Semantics. A New Outline. M.,1982
12. Ступин Л.П. Лексикография английского языка. М., 1985
13. Фразеология в контексте культуры. Ответственный редактор Телия
В.Н., М., 1998
14. Швейцер А.Д. Литературный язык в США и в Англии. М., 1986

Dictionaries.

1. Большой англо – русский словарь. Под общим руководством


проф. Гальперина И.Р. М., 1979
2. Русско - английский словарь. Под общим руководством
проф. Смирницкого А.И. М., 1998
3. Кунин А.В. Англо – русский фразеологический словарь.
М., 1998
4. Hornby A.S. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current
English. London, 2000
5. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. London, 2000
6. Webster’s New Word Dictionary of American Language. N.Y., 1978
7. Longman Regiser of New Words. M.,1990
8. 21 Century Dictionary of Slang N. Y., 1994
9. Oxford Dictionary of English. Oxford University Press, 2003
10. Мюллер В. К. Англо – русский словарь. M.,1998
11. Апресян Ю.Д., Ботякова В.В. и др. Англо – русский
синонимический словарь. M., 1998

Методические указания по организации самостоятельной


работы и выполнению заданий.
Тема 1. Изучить содержание главы I из рекомендованного учебника И.В. Арнольд
«Лексикология английского языка», обратить особое внимание на цели и задачи
курса лексикологии, изучаемые проблемы, а также связь с другими разделами
языкознания, теоретическое и практическое значение лексикологии.
Тема 2. Подготовиться к обсуждению вопросов по плану лабораторного занятия.
Выполнить указанные упражнения в письменном виде. Подобрать примеры
заимствований из разных языков с указанием периода заимствований.
Тема 3. Подготовиться к обсуждению вопросов по плану лабораторного занятия.
Обратить внимание на различные концепции лингвистов по проблеме природы
конверсии. Подобрать из художественной литературы примеры, иллюстрирующие
различные словообразовательные модели.
Тема 4. Проработать материал учебников по данной теме для обсуждения
предлагаемых вопросов на занятии. Выполнить анализ семантической структуры
соотносимых слов английского и русского языка (например, table – стол) с целью
выявления расхождений и сходства в семантической структуре слов. Использовать
данные толковых словарей английского и русского языка.
Тема 5. При изучении данной темы обратить внимание на классификацию
омонимов и источники омонимии. Раскрыть лингвистический механизм, на котором
основан каламбур, создаваемый с использованием омонимов и значений
многозначного слова.
Тема 6. Подготовиться к обсуждению теоретических проблем синонимии и
антонимии по плану лабораторного занятия. Выполнить анализ синонимического
ряда: выделить слово – доминанту, с помощью словарных дефиниций показать
смысловую разницу между синонимами, какими коннотациями они отличаются,
дать модели их лексической и грамматической сочетаемости.
Тема 7. Привести примеры, которые иллюстрируют различия в сочетании
соотносимых слов английского и русского языка, а также примеры ошибок
учащихся, которые являются результатом нарушения норм сочетаемости
английских слов. Обсудить вопрос о том, какое значение имеет знание
теоретических вопросов сочетаемости для практики изучения и преподавания
английского языка. Задание выполняется в письменном виде.
Тема 8. Подготовиться к обсуждению вопросов по плану лабораторного занятия.
Дать сравнительный анализ различных классификаций фразеологических единиц,
обращая внимание на обусловленность существующих различий. Подобрать
примеры фразеологических единиц, соответствующих трем типам по
классификации академика В.В. Виноградова, а также примеры использования
фразеологических единиц как экспрессивных средств языка.
Тема 9. При обсуждении вопросов на лабораторном занятии обратить внимание на
социолингвистические факторы, влияющие на стилистическую стратификацию
словаря. Составить списки лексических единиц, принадлежащих к нейтральному,
литературному и разговорному стилям и их разновидностям. Найти примеры
стилистически окрашенной лексики в художественном тексте.
Тема 10. При подготовке к лабораторному занятию для обсуждения вопроса
“Variants and Dialects of the English Language” рекомендуется использовать прежде
всего материал учебника И. В. Зыковой «Практический курс английской
лексикологии (глава VII). Для обсуждения вопроса об особенностях американского
английского рекомендуется обращаться к учебнику Р.С. Гинзбург и др.
«Лексикология английского языка».
Тема 11. Изучить вопрос по учебнику И.В. Зыковой «Практический курс
английской лексикологии» (глава VIII). Представить в письменном виде анализ
одного из лингвистических словарных единиц, особенности структуры словаря,
особенности построения словарной статьи (на конкретном примере).
Лексикология Английского Языка
Тексты лекций
Тема 1 (2 часа)
1. Лексикология как лингвистическая дисциплина.
2. Основные понятия и категории лексикологии.
3. Слово как основная единица языка.

 Lexicology as a Branch of Linguistics. The Subject Matter of Lexicology.


 The theoretical and Practical Value of Lexicology.
 Links of Lexicology with other Branches of Linguistics.
 Types of Lexical Units. The Word as the Basic Unit of language.

 Lexicology (from Gr lexis 'word' and logos 'learning') is the part of linguistics dealing with
the vocabulary of the language and the properties of words as the main units of language. The term
vocabulary is used to denote the system formed by the sum total of all the words and word equivalents
that the language possesses. The term word denotes the basic unit of a given language resulting from the
association of a particular meaning with a particular group of sounds capable of a particular grammatical
employment. A word therefore is simultaneously a semantic, grammatical and phonological unit.
A great deal has been written in recent years to provide a theoretical basis on which the
vocabularies of different languages can be compared and described. This relatively new branch of study
is called contrastive lexicology. Most obviously, we shall be particularly concerned with comparing
English and Russian words.
The evolution of any vocabulary, as well as of its single elements, forms the object of historical
lexicology or etymology. This branch of linguistics discusses the origin of various words, their change
and development, and investigates the linguistic and extra-linguistic forces modifying their structure,
meaning and usage.
Descriptive lexicology deals with the vocabulary of a given language at a given stage of its
development. It studies the functions of words and their specific structure as a characteristic inherent in
the system. The descriptive lexicology of the English language deals with the English word in its
morphological and semantical structures, investigating the interdependence between these two aspects.
These structures are identified and distinguished by contrasting the nature and arrangement of their
elements.
Language is the reality of thought, and thought develops together with the development of
society, therefore language and its vocabulary must be studied in the light of social history. Every new
phenomenon in human society and in human activity in general, which is of any importance for
communication, finds a reflection in vocabulary. A word, through its meaning rendering some notion, is
a generalized reflection of reality; it is therefore impossible to understand its development if one is
ignorant of the changes in social, political or everyday life, production or science, manners or culture it
serves to reflect. These extra-linguistic forces influencing the development of words are considered in
historical lexicology.
The branch of linguistics, dealing with causal relations between the way the language works and
develops, on the one hand, and the facts of social life, on the other, is termed sociolinguistics. Some
scholars use this term in a narrower sense, and maintain that it is the analysis of speech behavior in small
social groups that is the focal point of sociolinguistic analysis.
 Lexicology came into being to meet the demands of many different branches of applied
linguistics, namely of lexicography, standardization of terminology, information retrieval, literary
criticism and especially of foreign language teaching.
Its importance in training a would-be teacher of languages is of a quite special character and
cannot be overestimated as it helps to stimulate a systematic approach to the facts of vocabulary and an
organized comparison of the foreign and native language. It is particularly useful in building up the
learner's vocabulary by an effective selection, grouping and analysis of new words. New words are better
remembered if they are given not at random but organized in thematic groups, word-families, synonymic
series, etc.
A good knowledge of the system of word-formation furnishes a tool helping the student to guess
and retain in his memory the meaning of new words on their basis of their motivation and by comparing
and contrasting them with the previously learned elements and patterns. The knowledge, for instance, of
the meaning of negative, reversative and pejorative prefixes and patterns of derivation may be helpful in
understanding new words. For example such words as immovable a, deforestation n and miscalculate v
will be readily understood as 'that cannot be moved', 'clearing land from forests' and 'to calculate
wrongly'.
An exact knowledge of the vocabulary system is also necessary in connection with technical
teaching means.
Lexicology plays a prominent part in the general linguistic training of every philologist by
summing up the knowledge acquired during all his years at the foreign language faculty. It also imparts
the necessary skills of using different kinds of dictionaries and reference books, and prepares for future
independent work on increasing and improving one's vocabulary.
 The word, as it has already been stated, is studied in several branches of linguistics and not
in lexicology only, and the latter, in its turn, is closely connected with general linguistics, the history of
the language, phonetics, stylistics, grammar and such new branches of our science as sociolinguistics,
paralinguistics, pragmalinguistics and some others.
The importance of the connection between lexicology and phonetics stands explained if we
remember that a word is an association of a given group of sounds with a given meaning, so that top is
one word, and tip is another. Phonemes have no meaning of their own but they serve to distinguish
between meanings. Their function is building up morphemes, and it is on the level of morphemes that the
form-meaning unity is introduced into language. We may say therefore-that phonemes participate in
signification.
S t y 1 i s t i c s, although from a different angle, studies many problems treated in lexicology.
These are the problems of meaning, connotations, synonymy, functional differentiation of vocabulary ac-
cording to the sphere of communication and some other issues. For a reader without some awareness of
the connotations and history of words, the images hidden in their root and their stylistic properties, a
substantial part of the meaning of a literary text, whether prosaic or poetic, may be lost.
A close connection between lexicology and grammar is conditioned by the manifold and
inseverable ties between the objects of their studt. Even isolated words as presented in a dictionary bear a
definite relation to the grammatical system of the language because they belong to some part of speech
and conform to some lexico-grammatical characteristics of the word class to which they belong. Words
seldom occur in isolation. They are arranged in certain patterns conveying the relations between the
things for which they stand, therefore alongside with their lexical meaning they possess some
grammatical meaning. C f. head of committee and to head a committee.
 W o r d s are the central elements of language system, they face both ways: they are the
biggest units of morphology and the smallest of syntax, and what is more, they embody the main
structural properties and functions of the language. Words can be separated in an utterance by other such
units and can be used in isolation. Unlike words, morphemes cannot be divided into smaller meaningful
units and are functioning in speech only as constituent parts of words. Words are thought of as
representing integer concept, feeling or action or as having a single referent. The meaning of morphemes
is more abstract and more general than that of words and at the same time they are less autonomous.
Set expressions are word groups consisting of two or more words whose combination is
integrated so that they are introduced in speech, so to say, ready-made as units with a specialized
meaning of the whole that is not understood as a mere sum total of the meanings of the elements.
Lexicology stylize the word as the main unit of the language. We know that the word is a unit of
speech which, as such, serves the purposes of human communication. Thus, the word can be defined as a
unit of communication. The word can be perceived as the total of the sounds which comprise it. The
word, viewed structurally, possesses several characteristics. The modern approach to word studies is
based on distinguishing between the external and the internal structures of the word.
By external structure of the word we mean its morphological structure. For example, in the word
post-impressionists the following morphemes can be distinguished: the prefixes post-, im-, the root press,
the noun-forming suffixes -ton, -ist, and the grammatical suffix of plurality -s. All these morphemes
constitute the external structure of the word post-impressionists. The external structure of words, and also
typical word-formation patterns, are studied in the section on word-building. The internal structure of the
word, or its meaning, is nowadays commonly referred to as the word's semantic structure.
The area of lexicology specializing in the semantic studies of the word is called semantics.
Another structural aspect of the word is its unity. The word possesses both external (or formal)
unity and semantic unity.

Тема 2 (2 часа)
Этимологическая характеристика словарного состава английского языка.
Etymological Characteristics of the English Language Vocabulary
 Words of Native Origin
 Borrowings in English
 Assimilation of Borrowings
 Influence of Borrowings

 According to their origin English words may be subdivided into two main sets. The
elements of the are native words, the elements of the other are borrowed words.
A native word is a word which belongs to the original English word stock, as known from the
earliest available manuscripts of the Old English period. A borrowed word or a borrowing is a word
taken over from another language and modified in phonemic shape, spelling, paradigm or meaning
according to the standards of the English language. Diachronically native words are subdivided into three
main layers.
1. Words of the Indo-European origin. These words have cognates in the vocabularies of
different Indo-European languages and form the oldest layer. Words belonging to this layer fall into
definite semantic groups and express the most vital, important and frequently used concepts:
— kinship terms, e.g. father, mother, son, daughter, brother,
— words naming the most important objects and phenomena of nature, e.g. sun, moon, star,
wind, water, wood, hill, stone;
— names of animals and plants, e.g. goose, wolf, cow, tree, corn;
— words denoting parts of the human body, e.g. ear, tooth, eye, foot, heart, lip;
— words naming concrete physical properties and qualities (including some adjectives denoting
colour), e.g. hard, quick, slow, red, white, new;
— numerals from one to a hundred, e.g. one, two, twenty, eighty;
— pronouns (personal, demonstrative, interrogative), e.g. I, you, he, my, that, who;
— some of the most frequent verbs, e.g. bear, do, be, sit, stand and others.
2. Words of Common Germanic origin. The Common Germanic stock includes words having
parallels in German, Norwegian, Dutch, Icelandic. It contains a great number of semantic groups some of
which are the same as in the Indo-European group of native words:
— nouns denoting parts of the human body, e.g. head, arm, finger,
— nouns denoting periods of time, e.g. summer, winter, time, week;
— words naming natural phenomena, e.g. storm, rain, flood, ice, ground, sea, earth;
— words denoting artefacts and materials, e. g. bridge, house, shop, room, coal, iron, lead, cloth;
— words naming different kinds of garment, e.g. hat, shirt, shoe;
— words denoting abstract notions, e. g. care, evil, hope, life, need;
— names of animals, birds and plants, e.g. sheep, horse, fox, crow, oak, grass;
— various notional verbs, e.g. bake, burn, buy, drive, hear, keep, learn, make, meet, rise, see,
send, shoot;
— adjectives, denoting colours, size and other properties, e.g. broad, dead, deaf, deep, grey, blue;
— adverbs, e.g. down, out, before.
3. English words proper. English words proper do not have cognates in other languages. These
words are few and stand quite alone in the vocabulary system of Indo-European languages, e.g. bird, boy,
girl, lord, lady.
Native words for the most part are characterized by:
1) a wide range of lexical and grammatical valency and high frequency value (e.g. the verb watch
(from OE wieccan) can be used in different sentence patterns, with or without object and adverbial
modifiers and can be combined with different classes of words: Do you mind if I watch! Harriet watched
him with interest. She's a student and has to watch her budget closely. American companies are watching
Japanese developments closely. I feel like Fm being watched);
2) a developed polysemy (e.g. the noun watch has the following meanings: 'a small clock to be
worn, esp. on the wrist, or carried'; 'the act of watching'; 'a person or people ordered to watch a place or a
person'; 'a fixed period of duty on a ship, usually lasting four hours'; 'a film or programme considered in
terms of its appeal to the public'; etc.):
3) a great word-building power (e.g. watch is the center of a numerous word-family: watch-dog,
watcher, watchful, watchfulness, watch-out, watchword, watchable, watchfire, etc.); 4) the capacity of
forming phraseological units (e.g. watch enters the structure and forms the semantics of the following
phraseological units: to be on the watch, to keep watch, to watch one's back, to watch one's step).
 Borrowed Words. Borrowings enter the language in two ways: through oral speech (by
immediate contact between people) and through written speech (through books, newspapers, etc.). Oral
borrowings took place in the early periods of history, whereas in recent times written borrowings have
gained importance. Words borrowed orally are usually short and they undergo considerable changes
during the act of adoption. Written borrowings preserve their spelling and some peculiarities of their
sound form, their assimilation is a long process.
Borrowings may be direct or indirect, i. e. through another language. Such languages-
intermediaries were, for example, Latin through which many Greek words came into the English
language and French by means of which many Latin words were borrowed.
Thus, distinction should be made between the term 'source of borrowing' and the term 'origin of
borrowing'. The first should be applied to the language from which the loan word was taken into
English. The second refers to the language to which the word may be traced. For example, the word
paper < Fr papier Lat papyrus < Gr papyros has French as its source of borrowing and Greek as its
origin.
The fact that different languages served as sources of borrowing at different periods of the
development of the English language is accounted for by purely historical causes and facts among which
the most important and the most influential are: the Roman invasion, the introduction of Christianity, the
Danish and Norman conquests, and, in modern times, direct linguistic contacts and political, economical
and cultural relationships with other nations. So English during its historical development borrowed
words from:
1) Celtic: 5th — 6lh c. A.D.;
2) Latin
3) Scandinavian: 8th — IIth c. A. D.;
4) French:
Norman borrowings: 11th — 13th c. A.D.; Parisian borrowings: the Renaissance period;
5) Greek: the Renaissance period;
6) Italian: the Renaissance period and later;
7) Spanish: the Renaissance period and later;
8) Russian: the Renaissance period and later;
9) German, Indian and other languages.
Alongside borrowings proper, translation and semantic borrowings can be distinguished.
Translation borrowings are words and expressions formed from the material already existing in the
English language but according to patterns taken from another language, by way of literal morpheme-for-
morpheme translation, e.g. wall newspaper : Russian cmeнная газema. Semantic borrowing is
understood as the development in an English word of a new meaning under the influence of a related
word in another language. For example, the English word pioneer meant 'explorer' and 'one who is
among the first in new fields of activity'. Under the influence of the Russian word nuonep it has come to
mean 'a member of the Young Pioneers' Organization'.
Borrowing plays a very important role in the development of the English language. Due to this
process the English word-stock was replenished by international words, i. e. words of identical origin
that occur in several languages as a result of simultaneous or successive borrowing from one ultimate
source, e.g. antenna, music, radio.
 The term 'assimilation of borrowings' is used to denote a partial or total conformation to
the phonetical, graphical and morphological standards of the English language and its semantic system.
According to the degree of assimilation all borrowed words can be divided into three groups:
1) completely assimilated borrowings; 2) partially assimilated borrowings; 3) unassimilated
borrowings or barbarisms.
1. Completely assimilated borrowed words follow all morphological, phonetical and
orthographic standards. They take an active part in word-formation. The morphological structure and
motivation of completely assimilated borrowings remain usually transparent, so that they are
morphologically analyzable and therefore supply the English vocabulary not only with free forms but
also with bound forms, as affixes are easily perceived and separated in series of borrowed words that
contain them (e.g. the French suffixes -age, -ance and -ment). Completely assimilated words are found in
all the layers of older borrowings, e. g. cheese (the word of the first layer of Latin borrowings), husband
(Scand), ace (Fr), animal (the Latin word borrowed during the revival of learning).
It is important to mention that a loan word never brings into the receiving language the whole of
its semantic structure if it is polysemantic in the original language. And even the borrowed variants may
change and become specialized in the new system. For example, the word sport had a much wider scope
in Old French denoting pleasures, making merry and entertainments in general. Being borrowed into
Middle English in this character it gradually acquired the meaning of outdoor games and exercise.
2. Partially assimilated borrowed words may be subdivided depending on the aspect that
remains unaltered into:
a) borrowings not completely assimilated graphically. These are, for instance, words borrowed
from French in which the final consonant is not pronounced: ballet, buffet. Some may keep a diacritic
mark: cafe, cliche. Specifically French digraphs (eh, qu, ou, etc.) may be retained in spelling: bouquet,
brioche',
b) borrowings not completely assimilated phonetically. For example, some of French borrowings
keep the accent on the final syllable: machine, cartoon, police. Others, alongside the peculiarities in
stress, contain sounds or combinations of sounds that are not standard for the English language and do
not occur in the native words, e.g. bourgeois, prestige, regime;
c) borrowings not assimilated grammatically. For example, nouns borrowed from Latin or Greek
have kept their original plural forms: crisis :: crises, phenomenon :: phenomena. Some of these also have
English plural forms, but in that case there may be a difference in lexical meaning, as in indices ('an
alphabetical list of names, subjects, etc. at the back of a book, with the numbers of the pages where they
can be found') : indexes ('a standard by which the level of something can be judged or measured');
d) borrowings not assimilated semantically because they denote objects and notions peculiar to
the country from which they come. They may denote foreign clothing (e.g. sari, sombrero); foreign titles
and professions (e.g. shah, rajah, toreador); foreign vehicles (e.g. rickshaw (Chinese)); foreign food and
drinks (e.g.pilau (Persian), sherbet (Arabian)); etc.
3. Unassimilated borrowings or barbarisms'. This group includes words from other languages
used by English people in conversation or in writing but not assimilated in any way, and for which there
are corresponding English equivalents, e.g. the Italian addio, ciao — 'good-bye'. The changes a borrowed
word has had to undergo depending on the date of its penetration are the main cause for the existence of
the so-called etymological doublets. Etymological doublets are two or more words originating from the
same etymological source, but differing in phonetic shape and meaning. For example, the words whole
(originally meant 'healthy', 'free from disease') and hale both come from OE hal: one by the normal
development of OE a into o, the other from a northern dialect in which this modification did not take
place. Only the latter has survived in its original meaning.
 The role of borrowings was so great that they exerted much influence on the development
of English and brought about different changes or innovations practically on all the levels of the language
system. Borrowed words have influenced: 1) the phonetic structure of English words and the sound
system; 2) the word-structure and the system of word-building; 3) the semantic structure of English
words; 4) the lexical territorial divergence.
Тема 3 (3 часа)
Морфологическая структура английских слов. Словообразование.
Morphological Structure of English Words. Word-Formation in English.
 Classification of Morphemes. Morphemic Types of Words.
 Word-formation. Affixation.
 Conversion.
 Word-composition.
 Minor Types of Word-formation.

 Words consist of morphemes. The term 'morpheme' is derived from Greek morphe —
'form' + -erne. The Greek suffix -erne has been adopted by linguists to denote the smallest unit (cf.
phoneme, sememe). The morpheme is the smallest meaningful unit of form. Morphemes cannot be
segmented into smaller units without losing their constitutive essence, i.e. two-facetedness — association
of a certain meaning with a certain sound-pattern. Morphemes occur in speech only as constituent parts
of words but not independently.
Morphemes may have different phonetic shapes. In the word-cluster please, pleasing, pleasure,
pleasant the root morpheme is represented by the phonetic shapes: [pli:z-] in please, pleasing', [ple3-] in
pleasure', [plez-] in pleasant. All the representations of the given morpheme are called allomorphs or
morpheme variants.
Morphemes may be classified from the semantic point of view and from the structural point of
view. Semantically morphemes fall into two types: 1) root-morphemes and 2) non-root morphemes.
Root-morphemes (or radicals) are the lexical nucleus of words. For example, in the words
remake, glassful, disorder the root-morphemes -make, glass- and -order are understood as the lexical
centres of the words. The root-morpheme is isolated as the morpheme common to a set of words making
up a word-cluster, e. g. the morpheme teach- in to teach, teacher, teaching.
Non-root morphemes include inflectional morphemes (of inflections) and affixational
morphemes (or affixes). Inflections carry only grammatical meaning and are thus relevant only for the
formation of word-forms, whereas affixes are relevant for building various types of stems. Lexicology is
concerned only with affixational morphemes. Affixes are divided into prefixes and suffixes. A prefix is a
derivational morpheme preceding the root-morpheme and modifying its meaning (cf. pronounce — mis-
pronounce, safe — unsafe). A suffix is a derivational morpheme following the root and forming a new
derivative in a different part of speech or a different word class (cf. -en, -y, -less in heart-en, heart-y,
heart-less).
Structurally morphemes fall into three types: 1) free morphemes; 2) bound morphemes; 3) semi-
bound (semi-free) morphemes.
A free morpheme is defined as one that coincides with the stem or a word-form. For example,
the root- morpheme friend- of the noun friendship is naturally qualified as a free morpheme because it
coincides with one of the forms of the word friend.
A bound morpheme occurs only as a constituent part of a word.
Affixes are bound morphemes for they always make part of a word. For example, the suffixes -
ness, -ship, -ize in the words darkness, friendship, to activize; the prefixes im-, dis-, de- in the words
impolite, to disregard, to demobilize.
Some root-morphemes also belong to the class of bound morphemes roots never independently or
pseudo-roots, i.e. root-morphemes which have lost most of the properties of "full" roots. Such are the
root-morphemes goose- in gooseberry, -ceive in conceive.
Semi-bound (semi-free) morphemes are morphemes that can function in a morphemic sequence
both as an affix and as a free morpheme. For example, the morphemes well and half on the one hand
occur as free morphemes that coincide with the stem and the word-form in the utterances to sleep well,
half an hour, on the other hand well and half occur as bound morphemes in the words well-known, half-
done. According to the number of morphemes words are classified into:
1) monomorphic;
2) polymorphic.
Monomorphic or root-words consist of only one root-morpheme (small, dog, make).
Polymorphic words according to the number of root-morphemes are classified into: a)
monoradical (one-root morpheme) and b) polyradical (words consisting of two or more roots).
Monoradical words fall into three subtypes:
1)radical-suffixal words, i.e. words consisting of one root-morpheme and one or more suffixal
morphemes (e.g. acceptable, acceptability);
2)radical-prefixal words, i.e. words consisting of one root-morpheme and a prefixal morpheme
(e.g. outdo, unbutton);
3) prefixo-radical-suffixal words, i.e. words which consist of one root, prefixal and suffixal
morphemes (e.g. disagreeable, misinterpretation).
Polyradical words fall into two subtypes:
1) polyradical words which consist of two or more roots with no affixational morphemes (e.g.
book-stand, lamp-shade);
2) polyradical words which contain at least two roots and one or more affixational morphemes
(e.g. safety-pin, light-mindedness,pen-holder).
 Affixation is generally defined as the formation of words by adding derivational affixes to
different types of bases. Affixation includes suffixation and prefixation. Distinction between suffixal and
prefixal derivatives is made according to the last stage of derivation. For example from the point of view
of derivational analysis the word unreasonable — un + (reason- + -able) is qualified as a prefixal
derivative, while the word discouragement — (dis- + -courage) + -ment is defined as a suffixal
derivative. The last stage of derivation determines the nature of the ICs of the pattern. But from the point
of view of morphemic analysis these words are specified as prefixal-suffixal derivatives.
Suffixation. Classification of Suffixes.
Suffixation is the formation of words with the help of suffixes. Suffixes usually modify the
lexical meaning of the base and transfer words to a different part of speech. There are suffixes, however,
which do not shift words from one part of speech into another. They can transfer a word into a different
semantic group, e.g. a concrete noun becomes an abstract one: friend —friendship.
Suffixes can be classified into different types in accordance with different principles.
1. According to the lexico-grammatical character of the base suffixes are usually added to, they
may be:
a) deverbal suffixes (those added to the verbal base), e.g. -er (speaker); -ing (reading); -ment
(agreement); -able (suitable);
b) denominal suffixes (those added to the nominal base), e.g. -less (endless); -ful (armful); -ist
(novelist); -some (troublesome);
c) deadjectival suffixes (those added to the adjectival base), e.g. -en (widen); -ly (rapidly); -ish
(whitish); -ness (brightness).
2. According to the part of speech formed suffixes fall into several groups:
a) noun-forming suffixes: -age (breakage, bondage); -ance/-ence (assistance, reference); -dom
(freedom, kingdom); -er (teacher, baker); -ess (lioness, actress); -ing (building, washing); -hood
(manhood, childhood); -ness (tenderness, prettiness); -ship (relationship, partnership);
b) adjective-forming suffixes: -able/-ible/-uble (unbearable, audible, soluble); -al (formal,
official); -ic (poetic); -ant/-ent (repentant, dependent); -ed (wooded, shaped); -ful (delightful, doubtful); -
ish (reddish, bookish); -ive (active); -ous (courageous, curious);
c) numeral-forming suffixes: -fold (twofold); -teen (fourteen); -th (seventh); -ly (sixty);
d) verb-forming suffixes: -ate (facilitate); -er (glimmer); -fyl-ify (terrify, speechify); -ize
(equalize, harminize); -ish (establish);
e) adverb-forming suffixes: -ly (quickly, coldly); -ward/-wards : (upward, northwards); -wise
(likewise).
3. Semantically suffixes fall into:
a) monosemantic, e.g. the suffix -ess has only one meaning 'female' — tigress, tailoress; b)
polysemantic, e.g. the suffix -hood has two meanings: I) 'condition or quality' —falsehood, womanhood;
2) 'collection or group' — brotherhood.
4. According to their generalizing denotational meaning suffixes may fall into several groups. For
instance, noun-suffixes fall into those denoting:
a) the agent of the action, e.g. -er (baker); -ant (assistant); b)appurtenance, e.g. -an/-ian
(Victorian, Russian); -ese (Chinese);
c) collectivity, e.g. -dom (officialdom); -ry (peasantry);
d) diminutiveness, e.g. -ie (birdie); -let (cloudlet); -ling (wolfling).
5. According to their stylistic reference suffixes may be classified into: a)those characterized by
neutral stylistic reference, e.g. –able (agreeable); -er (writer); -ing (meeting);
b) those having a certain stylistic value, e.g. -oid (asteroid); -tron (cyclotron). These suffixes
occur usually in terms and are bookish.
Prefixation. Classification of Prefixes
Prefixation is the formation of words with the help of prefixes. Prefixes are derivational
morphemes affixed before the derivational base. Prefixes modify the lexical meaning of the base. They
seldom shift words from one part of speech into another and therefore both the source word and its
prefixed derivative mostly belong to the same part of speech, e.g. to rewrite < to write.
Prefixes can be classified according to different principles.
1. According to the lexico-grammatical character of the base prefixes are usually added to, they
may be:
a) deverbal (those added to the verbal base), e.g. re- (rewrite); over-overdo); out- (outstay);
b) denominal (those added to the nominal base), e.g. un- (unbutton); de- (detrain); ex- (ex-
president);
c) deadjectival (those added to the adjectival base), e.g. un-(uneasy); bi- (biannual).
2. According to the class of words they preferably form prefixes are divided into:
a) verb-forming prefixes, e.g. en-/em (embed, enclose); be-(befriend); de- (dethrone);
b) noun-forming prefixes, e.g. non- (non-smoker); sub- (subcommittee); ex- (ex-husband);
c) adjective-forming prefixes, e.g. un- (unfair); il- (illiterate); ir-(irregular).
d) adverb-forming prefixes, e.g. un- (unfortunately); up- (uphill). It should be specially mentioned
that the majority of prefixes function more than one part of speech.
3. Semantically prefixes fall into:
a) monosemantic, e.g. the prefix ex- has only one meaning 'former' — ex-boxer,
b) polysemantic, e.g. the prefix dis- has four meanings: 1) 'not' (disadvantage); 2) 'reversal or
absence of an action or state' (diseconomy, disaffirm); 3) 'removal of (to disbranch); 4) 'completeness or
intensification of an unpleasant action' (disgruntled).
4. According to their generalizing denotational meaning prefixes fall into:
a) negative prefixes, e.g. un- (ungrateful); non- (nonpolitical); in-(incorrect); dis- (disloyal); a-
(amoral);
b) reversative prefixes, e.g. un2- (untie); de- (decentralize); dis2-(disconnect);
c) pejorative prefixes, e.g. mis- (mispronounce); mal- (maltreat); pseudo- (pseudo-scientific);
d) prefixes of time and order, e.g. fore- (foretell); pre- (pre-war); post- (post-war), ex- (ex-
president);
e) prefix of repetition: re- (rebuild, rewrite);
f) locative prefixes, e.g. super- (superstructure), sub- (subway), inter- (inter-continental), trans-
(transatlantic).
5. According to their stylistic reference prefixes fall into:
a) those characterized by neutral stylistic reference, e.g. over-(ouersee); under- (underestimate);
un- (unknown);
b) those possessing quite a definite stylistic value, e.g. pseudo-(pseudo-classical); super-
(superstructure); ultra- (ultraviolet); uni-(unilateral); bi- (bifocal). These prefixes are of a literary-
bookish character.
The word-forming activity of affixes may change in the course of time. This raises the question of
productivity of derivational affixes, i.e. the ability of being used to form new, occasional or potential
words, which can be readily understood by the language-speakers. Thus, productive affixes are those
used to form new words in the period in question.
The most productive prefixes in Modern English are: de- (decontaminate), re- (rethink), pre-
(prefabricate), non- (non-operational), un- (unfunny), anti- (antibiotic). Non-productive affixes are the
affixes which are not able to form new words in the period in question. Non-productive affixes are
recognized as separate morphemes and possess clear-cut semantic characteristics. In some cases,
however, the lexical meaning of a nonproductive affix fades off so that only its part-of-speech meaning
remains, e.g. the adjective-forming suffix -some (lonesome, loathsome). It is worthy of note that an affix
may lose its productivity and then become productive again in the process of word-formation. This
happened to the suffix -dom. For a long period of time it was nonproductive but in the last hundred years
-dom got a new lease of life so that a great amount of words was coined with its help, e.g. serfdom,
slavedom.
From the point of view of their etymology affixes are subdivided into two main classes: native
affixes and borrowed affixes. Native affixes are those existed in the Old English period or were formed
from Old English words. The latter category is of special. importance. The changes a morpheme
undergoes in the course of time may be of different kinds. A bound morpheme, for example, may be
developed from a free one. Such are the suffixes -dom (< dom 'fate, power'); -hood (< had 'state'); -lock
(< lac 'actions or proceedings, practice'), -ship (< stipe 'state, condition'), and the prefixes over-(< ofer 'in
excess, extra, upper'), out- (< 5r 'foreign, external'), etc. Borrowed affixes are those that have come to
the English language from different foreign languages. The adoption of countless foreign words caused
the appearance of many hybrid words in the English vocabulary. Hybrids are words that are made up of
elements derived from two or more different languages. There are two basic types of forming hybrid
words: 1) a foreign base is combined with a native affix, e.g. colourless, uncertain; 2) a native base is
combined with a foreign affix, e.g. drinkable, ex-wife. There are also many hybrid compounds, such as
blackguard (English + French); schoolboy (Greek + English).
 Conversion is one of the principal ways of forming words in Modern English. It is highly
productive in replenishing the English word-stock with new words. Conversion consists in making a new
word from some existing word by changing the category of a part of speech; the morphemic shape of the
original word remains unchanged, e.g. work — to work, paper — to paper. The new word acquires a
meaning, which differs from that of the original one though it can be easily associated with it. The
converted word acquires also a new paradigm and a new syntactic function (or functions), which are
peculiar to its new category as a part of speech, e.g. garden — to garden.
Among the main varieties of conversion are: 1) verbalization (the formation of verbs), e.g. to ape
(from ape n.); 2) substantivation (the formation of nouns), e.g. a private (from private adj.); 3)
adjectivation (the formation of adjectives), e.g. down (adj) (from down adv.); 4) adverbalization (the
formation of adverbs), e.g. home (adv.) (from home n.). The two categories of parts of speech especially
affected by conversion are nouns and verbs. 1. Verbs converted from nouns are called denominal verbs.
If the noun refers to some object of reality (animate or inanimate) the converted verb may denote:
1) action characteristic of the object: ape n. > ape v. 'imitate in a foolish way';
2) instrumental use of the object: whip n. > whip v. 'strike with a whip';
3) acquisition or addition of the object: fish n. >fish v. 'catch or try to catch fish';
4) deprivation of the object: dust n. > dust v. 'remove dust from smth.';
5) location: pocket n. > pocket v. 'put into one's pocket'.
2. Nouns converted from verbs are called deverbal substantives. If the verb refers to an action,
the converted noun may denote:
1) instance of the action: jump v. > jump n. 'sudden spring from the ground';
2) agent of the action: help v. > help n. 'a person who helps';
3) place of the action: drive v. > drive n. 'a path or road along which one drives';
4) result of the action: peel v. > peel n. 'the outer skin of fruit or potatoes taken off;
5) object of the action: let v. > let n. 'a property available for rent'. The causes that made
conversion so widely spread are to be approached diachronically.
Nouns and verbs have become identical in form firstly as a result of the loss of endings. When
endings had disappeared phonetic development resulted in the merging of sound forms for both elements
of these pairs, e.g. carian (v), cam (n) > care (v, n); lufu (n), lufian (v) > love (n, v).
The similar phenomenon can be observed in words borrowed from the French language. In
French these words were of the same root but belonged to different parts of speech. In the course of time
they lost their affixes and became phonetically identical in the process of assimilation, e.g. crier (v), cri
(n) > cry (v, n); eschequier (v), eschec (n) > check (v, n). Thus, from the diachronic point of view
distinction should be made between homonymous word-pairs, which appeared as a result of the loss of
inflections, and those formed by conversion. The diachronic semantic analysis of a conversion pair
reveals that in the course of time the semantic structure of the base may acquire a new meaning or several
meanings under the influence of the meanings of the converted word. This semantic process is called
reconversion, e.g. smoke (n) — smoke (v). The noun smoke acquired in 1715 the meaning of'the act of
smoke coming out into a room instead of passing up the chimney' under the influence of the meaning of
the verb smoke 'to emit smoke as the result of imperfect draught or improper burning', acquired by this
verb in 1663.
 Word-composition is the type of word-formation, in which new words are produced by
combining two or more Immediate Constituents (lCs), which are both derivational bases. The ICs of
compound words represent bases of all three structural types: 1) bases that coincide with morphological
stems; 2) bases that coincide with word-forms; 3) bases that coincide with word-groups. The bases built
on stems may be of different degrees of complexity: 1) simple, e.g. week-end; 2) derived, e.g. letter-
writer; 3) compound, e.g. aircraft-carrier.
Care should be taken not to confuse compound words with polymorphic words of secondary
derivation, i.e. derivatives built according to an affixal pattern but on a compound stem as its base, e.g.
school-mastership — [n + nl + suf.; ex-housewife — prf. + [n + n].
The meaning of a compound word is made up of two components: structural and lexical.
The structural meaning of compounds is formed on the base of: 1) the meaning of their
distributional pattern and 2) the meaning of their derivational pattern.
The distributional pattern of a compound is understood as the order and arrangement of the ICs
that constitute a compound word. A change in the order and arrangement of the same ICs signals the
compound words of different lexical meanings, cf.: a fruit-market ('market where fruit is sold') and
market-fruit ('fruit designed for selling'). A change in the order and arrangement of the ICs that form a
compound may destroy its meaning. Thus, the distributional pattern of a compound carries a certain
meaning of its own which is largely independent of the actual lexical meaning of their ICs.
The meaning of the derivational pattern of compounds can be abstracted and described through
the interrelation of their ICs. For example, the derivational pattern n + ven underlying the .compound
adjectives duty-bound, wind-driven, mud-stained conveys the generalized meaning of instrumental or
agentive relations which can be interpreted as 'done by' or 'with the help of something'. Derivational
patterns in compounds may be monosemantic and polysemantic. For example, the pattern n + n -» N
conveys the following semantic relations: 1) of purpose, e.g. bookshelf; 2) of resemblance, e.g. needle-
fish; 3) of instrument or agent, e.g. windmill, sunrise.
The lexical meaning of compounds is formed on the base of the combined lexical meanings of
their constituents. The semantic center °f the compound is the lexical meaning of the second component
modified and restricted by the meaning of the first. The lexical meanings of both components are closely
fused together to create a new semantic unu with a new meaning, which dominates the individual
meanings of the bases, and is characterized by some additional component not found in any of the bases.
For instance, the lexical meaning of the compound word handbag is not essentially 'a bag designed to be
carried in the hand' but 'a woman's small bag to carry everyday personal items'.
Compound words can be classified according to different principles.
1. According to the relations between the ICs compound words fall into two classes: 1)
coordinative compounds and 2) subordinative compounds.
In coordinative compounds the two ICs are semantically equally important. The coordinative
compounds fall into three groups:
a) reduplicative compounds which are made up by the repetition of the same base, e.g. pooh-
pooh, fifty-fifty;
b) compounds formed by joining the phonically variated rhythmic twin forms, e.g. chit-chat, zig-
zag (with the same initial consonants but different vowels); walkie-talkie, clap-trap (with different initial
consonants but the same vowels);
c) additive compounds which are built on stems of the independently functioning words of the
same part of speech, e.g. actor-manager, queen-bee.
In subordinative compounds the components are neither structurally nor semantically equal in
importance but are based on the domination of the head-member which is, as a rule, the second IC, e.g.
stone-deaf, age-long. The second IC preconditions the part-of-speech meaning of the whole compound.
2. According to the part of speech compounds represent they fall into:
1) compound nouns, e.g. sunbeam, maidservant;
2) compound adjectives, e.g. heart-free, far-reaching;
3) compound pronouns, e.g. somebody, nothing;
4) compound adverbs, e.g. nowhere, inside;
5) compound verbs, e.g. to offset, to bypass, to mass-produce. From the diachronic point of
view many compound verbs of the present-day language are treated not as compound verbs proper but as
polymorphic verbs of secondary derivation. They are termed pseudo-compounds and are represented by
two groups: a) verbs formed by means of conversion from the stems of compound nouns, e.g. to spotlight
(from spotlight); b) verbs formed by back-derivation from the stems of compound nouns, e.g. to babysit
(from baby-sitter).
However synchronically compound verbs correspond to the definition of a compound as a word
consisting of two free stems and functioning in the sentence as a separate lexical unit. Thus, it seems
logical to consider such words as compounds by right of their structure.
3. According to the means of composition compound words are classified into:
1) compounds composed without connecting elements, e.g. heartache, dog-house;
2) compounds composed with the help of a vowel or a consonant as a linking element, e.g.
handicraft, speedometer, statesman;
3) compounds composed with the help of linking elements represented by preposition or
conjunction stems, e.g. son-in-law, pepper-and-salt.
4. According to the type of bases that form compounds the following classes can be singled out:
1) compounds proper that are formed by joining together bases built on the stems or on the
word-forms with or without a linking element, e. g. door-step, street-fighting;
2) derivational compounds that are formed by joining affixes to the bases built on the word-
groups or by converting the bases built on the word-groups into other parts of speech, e.g. long-legged —
> (long legs) + + -ed; a turnkey —> (to turn key) + conversion. Thus, derivational compounds fall into
two groups: a) derivational compounds mainly formed with the help of the suffixes -ed and -er applied to
bases built, as a rule, on attributive phrases, e.g. narrow-minded, doll-faced, lefthander; b) derivational
compounds formed by conversion applied to bases built, as a rule, on three types of phrases — verbal-
adverbial phrases (a breakdown), verbal-nominal phrases (a kill-joy) and attributive phrases (a sweet-
tooth).
 Shortening is the formation of a word by cutting off a part of the word. According to the
part of the word that is cut off (initial, middle or final) there are the following types of shortenings: I)
initial (or aphesis), e.g. fend (v) < defend, phone < telephone', 2) medial (or syncope), e.g. specs <
spectacles, fancy < fantasy; 3) final (or apocope), e.g. ad, advert < advertisement, veg < vegetables', 4)
both initial and final, e.g. flu < influenza, fridge < refrigerator. Blending is the formation of a new word
by combining parts of two words. Blends may be of two types: 1) additive type that may be transformed
into a phrase consisting of complete stems combined by the conjunction and, e. g. smog — sm(oke) and
(f)og; 2) restrictive type that can be transformed into a phrase, the first element of which serves as a
modifier for the second, e.g.: telecast — television broadcast.
Acronymy (or graphical abbreviation) is the formation of a word from the initial letters of a
word combination. There are two basic types of acronyms:
1) acronyms which are read as ordinary English words, e.g. UNESCO — the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
2) acronyms with the alphabetic reading, e.g. BBC ['bi: 'bi: 'si:J — the British Broadcasting
Corporation
Sound-interchange is the formation of a word due to an alteration in the phonemic composition
of its root. Sound-interchange falls into two groups: 1) vowel-interchange (or ablaut):food — to feed. In
some cases vowel-interchange is combined with suffixation: strong — strength; 2) consonant-
interchange: advice — to advise. Consonant-interchange and vowel-interchange may be combined
together: life — to live.
Sound imitation (or onomatopoeia) is the naming of an action or a thing by a more or less exact
reproduction of the sound associated with it, cf.: cock-a-doodle-do (English) — Ky-Ka-pe-Ky (Russian).
Semantically, according to the source sound, many onomatopoeic words fall into a few very definite
groups: 1) words denoting sounds produced by human beings in the process of communication or
expressing their feelings, e.g. chatter, babble; 2) words denoting sounds produced by animals, birds,
insects, e.g. moo, croak, buzz; 3) words imitating the sound of water, the noise of metallic things, a
forceful motion, movements, e.g. splash, clink, whip, swing.
Back-formation is the formation of a new word by subtracting a real or supposed suffix from the
existing words. The process is based on analogy. For example, the word to butle 'to act or serve as a
butler' is derived by subtraction of -er from a supposedly verbal stem in the noun butler.
Distinctive stress is the formation of a word by means of the shift of the stress in the source
word, cf.: 'increase (n) — in 'crease (v), 'absent (adj) — ab'sent (v).

Тема 4 (2 часа)
Значение слова. Семантическая структура многозначного слова в английском
языке. Изменения в семантической структуре слова.
Word-meaning. The semantic structure of Polysemantic word.
 Two approaches to Word-meaning.
 Types of Meaning.
 Change of Meaning.
 Polysemy. The semantic structure of Polysemantic words.
 Polysemy and Context.
 The essential characteristic of the referential approach is that it distinguishes between
the three components closely connected with meaning:
1) the sound-form of the linguistic sign;
2) the concept underlying this sound-form;
3) the referent, i. e. the part or aspect of reality to which the linguistic sign refers.The referential
model of meaning is the so-called 'basic triangle'. The sound-form of the linguistic sign [dAv] is
connected with our concept of the bird which it denotes and through it with the referent, i. e. the actual
bird. The diagram implies that meaning is in a way a correlation between the sound-form of a word, the
underlying concept and the concrete object it denotes. Hence, the questions arise: in what way does
meaning correlate with each element of the triangle and in what relation does meaning stand to each of
them. The conclusion is that meaning is not to be identical with any of the three points of the triangle —
the sound-form, the concept and the referent, but is closely connected with them. The functional
approach to meaning maintains that the meaning of a linguistic unit can be studied only through its
relation to other linguistic units. According to the given approach the meanings of the words to move and
movement are different because these words function in speech differently, i.e. occupy different positions
in relation to other words. To move can be followed by a noun (to move a chair) and preceded by a
pronoun (we move). Movement may be followed by a preposition (movement of a car) and preceded by
an adjective (slow movement). The position of a word in relation to other words is called distribution of
the word. As the distribution of the words to move and mouement is different they belong to different
classes of words and their meanings are different.
The same is true of different meanings of one and the same word. Analyzing the function of a
word in linguistic contexts and comparing these contexts, we conclude that meanings are different. For
example, we can observe the difference of meanings of the verb to take if we examine its functions in
different linguistic contexts, to take a seat ('to sit down') as opposed to to take to smb. ('to begin to like
someone'). The term 'context' is defined as the minimum stretch of speech necessary and sufficient to
determine which of the possible meanings of a polysemantic word is used.
The functional approach is sometimes described as contextual as it is based on the analysis of
various contexts. In the functional approach which is typical of structural linguistics semantic
investigation is confined to the analysis of the difference or sameness of meaning: meaning is understood
as the function of a linguistic unit.
 Word-meaning is not homogeneous. It is made up of various components. These
components are described as types of meaning. The two main types of meaning are the grammatical
meaning and the lexical meaning. Still one more type of meaning is singled out. It is based on the
interaction of the major types and is called the part-of-speech (or lexico-grammatical) meaning.
The grammatical meaning is defined as an expression in speech of relationship between words.
Grammatical meaning is the component of meaning recurrent in identical sets of individual forms of
different words, as, for example, the tense meaning in the word-forms of the verbs: asked, thought,
walked; the case meaning in the word-forms of various nouns: girl's, boy's, night's; the meaning of
plurality which is found in the word-forms of nouns: joys, tables, places.
The lexical meaning of the word is the meaning proper to the given linguistic unit in all its forms
and distributions. The word-forms go, goes, went, going, gone possess different grammatical meanings of
tense, person, number, but in each form they have one and the same semantic component denoting 'the
process of movement'.
Both the lexical and grammatical meanings make up the word-meaning as neither can exist
without the other. That can be observed in the semantic analysis of correlated words in different
languages. The Russian word cвeдeния is not semantically identical with the English equivalent
information because unlike the Russian cвeдeния the English word does not possess the grammatical
meaning of plurality which is part of the semantic structure of the Russian word.
In some parts of speech the prevailing component is the grammatical type of meaning. For
example, in the verb to be the grammatical meaning of a linking element prevails: He is a teacher.
The essence of the part-of-speech meaning of a word is revealed in the classification of lexical
items into major word-classes (nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs) and minor word-classes (articles,
prepositions, conjunctions, etc).
All members of a major word-class share a distinguishing semantic component which, though
very abstract, may be viewed as the lexical component of part-of-speech meaning. For example, the
meaning of thingness or substantiality may be found in all the nouns, e.g. table, love, sugar, though they
possess different grammatical meaning of number and case.
The grammatical aspect of part-of-speech meaning is conveyed as a rule by a set of forms. If we
describe the word as a noun we mean to say that it is bound to possess a set of forms expressing the
grammatical meaning of number (table-tables) and case (boy-boy's).
The part-of-speech meaning of the words that possess only one form, e.g. prepositions, some
adverbs, etc. is observed only in their distribution, e.g. to come in (here, there); in (on, under) the table.
 Word meaning is liable to change in the course of the historical development of language.
There are distinguished causes of semantic change, nature and results of the process of change of
meaning.
Causes of Semantic Change. The factors accounting for semantic changes may be roughly
subdivided into two groups: a) extra-linguistic; b) linguistic.
By extra-linguistic causes various changes in the life of the speech community are meant, i.e.
changes in economic and social structure, changes in scientific concepts. For example, changes in the
way of life of the British brought about changes in the meaning hlaford. Originally the word meant
'bread-keeper' («xpaнитель xлeбa»), and later on 'master, ruler' («пoвeллитель, лopд»).
Some changes of meaning occur due to purely linguistic causes, i. e. factors acting within the
language system. The commonest form which this influence takes is the so-called ellipsis. In a phrase
made up of two words one of these is omitted and its meaning is transferred to its partner. For example,
the verb to starve in Old English (OE) meant 'to die' and was habitually used in collocation with the word
hunger. In the 16th century the verb to starve itself acquired the meaning 'to die of hunger'.
Another linguistic cause is discrimination/differentiation of synonyms which can be illustrated
by the semantic development of a number of words. In OE the word land meant both 'solid part of earth's
surface' and 'the territory of a nation'. In the Middle English period the word country was borrowed as its
synonym. The meaning of the word land was somewhat altered and 'the territory of a nation' came to be
denoted by the borrowed word country. Fixed context may be regarded as another linguistic factor in
semantic change. For example, the word token, when brought into competition with the loan word sign,
became restricted in use to a number of set expressions, such as love token, token of respect and also
became specialized in meaning. Nature of Semantic Change. A necessary condition of any semantic
change is some connection, some association between the old meaning and the new one. There are two
kinds of association involved in various semantic changes:
a) similarity of meanings;
b) contiguity of meanings.
Similarity of meanings or metaphor may be described as the semantic process of associating two
referents, one of which in some way resembles the other. The word hand, for instance, acquired in the
16th century the meaning of 'a pointer of a clock or a watch' because of the similarity of one of the
functions performed by the hand ('to point to smth.') and the function of the clock-pointer. See the
expression hands of the clock (watch).
Contiguity of meanings or metonymy may be described as the semantic process of associating
two referents one of which makes part of the other or is closely connected with it. This can be illustrated
by the use of the word tongue — 'the organ of speech' in the meaning of 'language' (as in mother tongue).
Results of Semantic Change. Results of semantic change can be generally observed in the changes of
the denotational meaning of the word, i.e. in restriction or extension of meaning.
Restriction of meaning can be illustrated by the semantic development of the word hound which
used to denote 'dog of any breed' but now denotes only 'a dog used in the chase'. If the word with a new
restricted meaning comes to be used in the specialized vocabulary of some limited group within the
speech community it is usual to speak of the specialization of meaning.
Extension of meaning may be illustrated by the word target which originally meant 'a small
round shield' but now means 'anything that is fired at'. If the word with the extended meaning passes
from the specialized vocabulary into common use, the result of the semantic change is described as the
generalization of meaning. Results of semantic change can be also observed in the alteration of the
connotational aspect of meaning, i.e. in amelioration or deterioration of meaning.
Amelioration of meaning implies the improvement of the connotational component of meaning.
For instance, the word minister originally denoted 'a servant' but now — 'a civil servant of higher rank, a
person administering a department of state'.
Deterioration (or the pejorative development) of meaning implies the acquisition by the word of
some derogatory emotive charge. For example, the word boor was originally used to denote 'a peasant'
and then acquired a derogatory connotational meaning and came to denote 'a clumsy fellow'.
 Polysemy is a phenomenon which has an exceptional importance for the description of a
language system and for the solution of practical tasks connected with an adequate understanding of the
meaning of a word and its use. A word may have several meanings. Then it is called a polysemantic
word. Words having only one meaning are called monosemantic. Monosemantic words are few in
number. These are mainly scientific terms. The bulk of English words are polysemantic. A great
contribution to the development of the problem of polysemy was made by the Russian linguist
V.V.Vinogradov. The scientist admitted the importance of differentiating the meaning from the usage (a
contexual variant). Meanings are fixed and common to all people, who know the language system. The
usage is only a possible application of one of the meanings of a polysemantic word, sometimes very
individual, sometimes more or less familiar. Meaning is not identical with usage.
Of special importance is the fact that polysemy exists only in language, not in speech. The
meaning of a word in speech is contextual. Polysemy does not interfere with the communicative function
of a language because in every particular case the situation or context, i. e. the environment of the word,
cancels all the unnecessary meanings and makes speech unambiguous.
A further development of V.Vinogradov's theory was A.I.Smirnitsky's work in the linguistic field
under consideration. According to this scholar all the meanings of the word form identity supported by
the form of the word. A.I.Smirnitsky introduced the term 'a lexico-semantic variant' (LSV). A lexico-
semantic variant is a two-facet unit, the formal facet of which is the sound-form of a word, while the
content facet is one of the meanings of the given word, i. e. the designation (oбoзнaчeниe) of a certain
class of objects. Words with one meaning are represented in the language system by one LSV,
polysemantic words — by a number of LSVs.
All lexico-semantic variants of a word form a homogenous semantic structure ensuring the
semantic unity of the given word. All LSVs are united together by a certain meaning — the semantic
pivot of the word called the semantic center of the word. Thus, the semantic center of the word is the
part of meaning which remains constant in all the lexico-semantic variants of the word.
If polysemy is viewed diachronically it is understood as the growth and development or as a
change in the semantic structure of the word. Polysemy in diachronic terms implies that a word may
retain its previous meaning or meanings and at the same time acquire one or several new ones. Thus,
according to the diachronic approach in the semantic structure of a word two types of meaning can be
singled out: the primary meaning and the secondary meaning. The polysemantic word table, for
example, has at least nine meanings in Modern English (ModE). In the course of a diachronic semantic
analysis it is found that of all the meanings this word has in ModE the primary meaning is 'a flat made of
stone or wood' which is proper to the word in the OE period. All other meanings are secondary as they
are derived from the primary meaning. Semantic changes result as a rule in new meanings which are
dded to the ones already existing in the semantic structure of the word. Some of the old meanings may
become obsolete or even disappear but the bulk of English words tend to an increase in the number of
meanings.
Synchronically polysemy is understood as the coexistence of various meanings of the same word
at a certain historical period of the development of the English language. In the course of a synchronic
semantic analysis of the word table the following question arises: do all the nine meanings of the word
table equally represent the semantic structure of this word? The meaning that first occurs to us whenever
we hear or see the word table is 'an article of furniture'. This emerges as the central (or basic) meaning
of the word, and all other meanings are marginal (or minor) meanings. The central meaning occurs in
various and widely different contexts, marginal meanings are observed only in certain contexts. There is
a tendency in modern linguistics to interpret the concept of the central meaning in terms of the frequency
of occurrence of this meaning. As far as the word table is concerned the meaning 'piece of furniture'
possesses the highest frequency of value and makes up 52 % of all the uses of this word.
 The term 'context' denotes the minimal stretch of speech determining each individual
meaning of the word. Contexts may be of two types: linguistic (verbal) and extra-linguistic (non-verbal).
Linguistic contexts may be subdivided into lexical and grammatical. In lexical contexts of
primary importance are the groups of lexical items combined with the polysemantic word under
consideration. This can be illustrated by the results of the analysis of different lexical contexts in which a
polysemantic word is used. For example, the adjective heavy used with the words load, table means 'of
great weight'. When combined with the words denoting natural phenomena such as rain, storm, snow,
wind the adjective heavy is understood as denoting 'abundant, striking, falling with force'. If used with
the words industry, artillery, arms and the like, heavy has the meaning 'the larger kind of smth'.
It can be easily observed that the main factor in bringing out the individual meanings of the
adjective heavy is the lexical meaning of the words with which this adjective is combined. Thus, the
meanings of heavy may be analyzed through its collocability with the words weight, safe, table; snow,
wind; industry, artillery, etc. The meaning at the level of lexical contexts is sometimes described as
meaning by collocation.
In grammatical contexts it is the grammatical (syntactic) structure of the context that serves to
determine various individual meanings of a polysemantic word. The meaning of the verb to make — 'to
force, to induce' is found only in the grammatical context possessing the syntactic structure to make +
prn. + verb (to make smb. laugh, to make smb. work, to make smb. sit). Another meaning of this verb —
'to become' is observed in the context of a different syntactic structure — to make + adj. + noun (to make
a good wife, to make a good teacher). Such meanings are sometimes described as grammatically bound
meanings.

Тема 5 (2 часа)
Омонимы в лексической системе английского языка.
Homonyms in the lexical system of the English language.
 The Phenomenon of Homonymy in English. Classification of Homonyms.
 Sources of Homonymy.
 Polysemy and Homonymy.

 Two or more words identical in sound form, spelling but different in meaning, distribution
and in many cases in origin are called homonyms. The term is derived from Greek homos – ‘similar’
and onoma – ‘name’, and thus expresses the sameness of name combined with the difference in meaning.
Modern English is reach in homonymous words and word-forms. It is sometimes suggested that the
abundance of homonyms in Modern English is to be accounted for by the monosyllabic structure of the
commonly used English words.
The most widely accepted classification of homonyms is that recognizing homonyms proper,
homophones and homographs.
1. Homonyms proper are words identical in their sound-form and spelling but different in
meaning: pit (a large hole in the ground) and pit (the stone of a fruit).
2. Homophones are words of the same sound-form but of different spelling and meaning: piece
(part separated from something) and peace (a situation in which there is no war between countries or
groups).
3. Homographs are words different in sound-form and in meaning but identical in spelling: lead
[li:d] (the first position at a particular time during a race or a competition) and lead [led] (a soft heavy
grey metal).
All cases of homonymy may be classified into full and partial homonymy — i.e. homonymy of
words and homonymy of individual word-forms.
The bulk of full homonyms are to be found within the same parts of speech (e.g. seal1 n — seal2
n), partial homonymy as a rule is observed in word-forms belonging to different parts of speech (e.g.
seal1 n — seal3 v). This is not to say that partial homonymy is impossible within one part of speech. For
instance in the case of the two verbs — lie [lai] — ‘to be in a horizontal or resting position’ and lie [lai]
— ‘to make an untrue statement' — we also find partial homonymy as only two word-forms [lai], [laiz]
are homonymous, all other forms of the two verbs are different. Cases of full homonymy may be found
in different parts of speech too; e.g. for [fo:] — preposition, for [fo:] — conjunction and four [fo:] —
numeral, as these parts of speech have no other word-forms.
Homonyms may be also classified by the type of meaning into lexical, lexico-grammatical and
grammatical homonyms. In seal1 n and seal2 n, e.g., the part-of-speech meaning of the word and the
grammatical meanings of all its forms are identical (cf. seal [si:l] Common Case Singular, seal’s [si:lz]
Possessive Case Singular for both seal1 and seal2). The difference is confined to the lexical meaning
only: seal1 denotes ‘a sea animal’, ‘the fur of this animal’, etc., seal2 — ‘a design printed on paper, the
stamp by which the design is made’, etc. So we can say that seal2 and seal1 are l e x i c a l
h o m o n y m s because they differ in lexical meaning.
If we compare seal1 — ‘a sea animal’, and (to) seal3 — ‘to close tightly, we shall observe not
only a difference in the lexical meaning of their homonymous word-forms but a difference in their
grammatical meanings as well. Identical sound-forms, i.e. seals [si:lz] (Common Case Plural of the
noun) and (he) seals [si:lz] (third person Singular of the verb) possess each of them different
grammatical meanings. As both grammatical and lexical meanings differ we describe these homonymous
word-forms as l e x i c o - g r a m m a t i c a l .
Lexico-grammatical homonymy generally implies that the homonyms in question belong to
different parts of speech as the part-of-speech meaning is a blend of the lexical and grammatical
semantic components. There may be cases however when lexico-grammatical homonymy is observed
within the same part of speech, e.g., in the verbs (to) find [faind] and (to) found [faund], where the
homonymic word-forms: found [faund] — Past Tense of (to) find and found [faund] — Present Tense
of (to) found differ both grammatically and lexically.
Modern English abounds in homonymic word-forms differing in grammatical meaning only. In
the paradigms of the majority of verbs the form of the Past Tense is homonymous with the form of
Participle II, e.g. asked [a:skt] — asked [a:skt]; in the paradigm of nouns we usually find homonymous
forms of the Possessive Case Singular and the Common Case Plural, e.g. brother’s — brothers. It may
be easily observed that g r a m m a t i c a l h o m o n y m y is the homonymy of different word-forms of
one and the same word.
The two classifications: f u l l and p a r t i a l h o m o n y m y and l e x i c a l , l e x i c o -
homonyms may be described on the basis of the two criteria — homonymy of all forms of the
g r a m m a t i c a l and g r a m m a t i c a l h o m o n y m y are not mutually exclusive. All word or
only some of the word-forms and also by the type of meaning in which homonymous words or word-
forms differ. So we speak of the full lexical homonymy of sea1 n and seal2 n, of the partial lexical
homonymy of lie1 v and lie2 v, and of the partial lexico-grammatical homonymy of seal1 n and seal3 v.
 The description of various types of homonyms in Modern English would be incomplete if
we did not give a brief outline of the diachronic processes that account for their appearance.
The two main sources of homonymy are: 1) diverging meaning development of a polysemantic
word, and 2) converging sound development of two or more different words. The process of
d i v e r g i n g m e a n i n g d e v e l o p m e n t can be observed when different meanings of the
same word move so far away from each other that they come to be regarded as two separate units. This
happened, for example, in the case of Modern English flower and flour which originally were one word
(ME. flour, cf. OFr. flour, flor, L. flos — florem) meaning ‘the flower’ and ‘the finest part of wheat’.
The difference in spelling underlines the fact that from the synchronic point of view they are two
distinct words even though historically they have a common origin.
C o n v e r g e n t s o u n d d e v e l o p m e n t is the most potent factor in the creation of
homonyms. The great majority of homonyms arise as a result of converging sound development which
leads to the coincidence of two or more words which were phonetically distinct at an earlier date. For
example, OE. ic and OE. еаzе have become identical in pronunciation (MnE. I [ai] and eye [ai]). A
number of lexico-grammatical homonyms appeared as a result of convergent sound development of the
verb and the noun (cf. MnE. love — (to) love and OE. lufu — lufian). Words borrowed from other
languages may through phonetic convergence become homonymous. ON. ras and Fr. race are
homonymous in Modern English (cf. race1 [reis] — ‘running’ and race2 [reis] — ‘a distinct ethnical
stock’).
 One of the most debatable problems in semasiology is the demarcation line between
homonymy and polysemy, i.e. between different meanings of one word and the meanings of two
homonymous words.
If homonymy is viewed diachronically then all cases of sound convergence of two or more words
may be safely regarded as cases of homonymy, as, e.g., race1 and race2 can be traced back to two
etymologically different words. The cases of semantic divergence, however, are more doubtful. The
transition from polysemy to homonymy is a gradual process, so it is hardly possible to point out the
precise stage at which divergent semantic development tears asunder all ties between the meanings and
results in the appearance of two separate words. In the case of flower, flour, e.g., it is mainly the
resultant divergence of graphic forms that gives us grounds to assert that the two meanings which
originally made up the semantic structure of о n e word are now apprehended as belonging to t w o
different words.
S y n c h r o n i c a l l y the differentiation between homonymy and polysemy is as a rule
wholly based on the semantic criterion. It is usually held that if a connection between the various
meanings is apprehended by the speaker, these are to be considered as making up the semantic structure
of a polysemantic word, otherwise it is a case of homonymy, not polysemy.

Тема 6 (2 часа)
Синонимические и антонимические отношения в современном английском
языке.
Synonymic and Antonymic Relations in Modern English Vocabulary.
 The Problem of Definition of Synonyms.
 Patterns of Sinonymic Sets.
 Classification of Synonyms.
 Antonyms in English.
 Classification of Antonyms.

 Lexical units may also be classified by the criterion of semantic similarity and semantic
contrasts. The terms generally used to denote these two types of semantic relatedness are s y n o n y m y
and a n t o n y m y .
Synonyms are traditionally described as words different in sound-form but identical or similar in
meaning. This definition has been severely criticised on many points. Firstly, it seems impossible to
speak of identical or similar meaning of w o r d s as s u c h as this part of the definition cannot be
applied to polysemantic words. It is inconceivable that polysemantic words could be synonymous in all
their meanings. The verb look, e.g., is usually treated as a synonym of see, watch, observe, etc., but in
another of its meanings it is not synonymous with this group of words but rather with the verbs seem,
appear (cf. to look at smb and to look pale). The number of synonymic sets of a polysemantic word
tends as a rule to be equal to the number of individual meanings the word possesses.
In the discussion of polysemy and context we have seen that one of the ways of discriminating
between different meanings of a word is the interpretation of these meanings in terms of their synonyms,
e.g. the two meanings of the adjective handsome are synonymously interpreted as handsome —
‘beautiful’ (usually about men) and handsome — ‘considerable, ample’ (about sums, sizes, etc.).
Secondly, it seems impossible to speak of identity or similarity of l e x i c a l m e a n i n g a s
a w h о l e as it is only the denotational component that may be described as identical or similar. If we
analyse words that are usually considered synonymous, e.g. to die, to pass away; to begin, to
commence, etc., we find that the connotational component or, to be more exact, the stylistic reference of
these words is entirely different and it is only the similarity of the denotational meaning that makes them
synonymous. The words, e.g. to die, to walk, to smile, etc., may be considered identical as to their
stylistic reference or emotive charge, but as there is no similarity of denotational meaning they are never
felt as synonymous words.
Thirdly, it does not seem possible to speak of i d e n t i t y o f m e a n i n g as a criterion of
synonymity since identity of meaning is very rare even among monosemantic words. In fact, cases of
complete synonymy are very few and are, as a rule, confined to technical nomenclatures where we can
find monosemantic terms completely identical in meaning as, for example, spirant and fricative in
phonetics. Words in synonymic sets are in general differentiated because of some element of opposition
in each member of the set. The word handsome, e.g., is distinguished from its synonym beautiful
mainly because the former implies the beauty of a male person or broadly speaking only of human
beings, whereas beautiful is opposed to it as having no such restrictions in its meaning.
Thus it seems necessary to modify the traditional definition and to formulate it as follows:
synonyms are words different in sound-form but similar in their denotational meaning or meanings.
Synonymous relationship is observed o n l y between similar denotational meanings of phonemically
different words.
Differentiation of synonyms may be observed in different semantic components —
de n o t a t i o n a l or c o n n o t a t i o n a l .
It should be noted, however, that the difference in denotational meaning cannot exceed certain
limits, and is always combined with some common denotational component. The verbs look, seem,
appear, e.g., are viewed as members of one synonymic set as all three of them possess a common
denotational semantic component “to be in one’s view, or judgement, but not necessarily in fact” and
come into comparison in this meaning (cf. he seems (looks), (appears), tired). A more detailed analysis
shows that there is a certain difference in the meaning of each verb: seem suggests a personal opinion
based on evidence (e.g. nothing seems right when one is out of sorts); look implies that opinion is
based on a visual impression (e.g. the city looks its worst in March), appear sometimes suggests a
distorted impression (e.g. the setting sun made the spires appear ablaze). Thus similarity of
denotational meaning of all members of the synonymic series is combined with a certain difference in
the meaning of each member.
It follows that relationship of synonymity implies certain differences in the denotational meaning
of synonyms. In this connection a few words should be said about the traditional classification of
vocabulary units into ideographic and stylistic synonyms. This classification proceeds from the
assumption that synonyms may differ e i t h e r in the denotational meaning (ideographic synonyms) оr
the connotational meaning, or to be more exact stylistic reference. This assumption cannot be accepted
as synonymous words always differ in the denotational component.
Thus buy and purchase are similar in meaning but differ in their stylistic reference and therefore
are not completely interchangeable. That department of an institution which is concerned with
acquisition of materials is normally the Purchasing Department rather than the Buying Department. A
wife however would rarely ask her husband to purchase a pound of butter. It follows that practically no
words are substitutable for one another in all contexts.
This fact may be explained as follows: firstly, words synonymous in some lexical contexts may
display no synonymity in others. As one of the English scholars aptly remarks, the comparison of the
sentences the rainfall in April was abnormal and the rainfall in April was exceptional may give us
grounds for assuming that exceptional and abnormal are synonymous. The same adjectives in a
different context are by no means synonymous, as we may see by comparing my son is exceptional and
my son is abnormal.
Secondly, it is evident that interchangeability alone cannot serve as a criterion of synonymity. We
may safely assume that synonyms are words interchangeable in some contexts. But the reverse is
certainly not true as semantically different words of the same part of speech are, as a rule,
interchangeable in quite a number of contexts. For example, in the sentence I saw a little girl playing in
the garden the adjective little may be formally replaced by a number of semantically different
adjectives, e.g. pretty, tall, English, etc.
Thus a more acceptable definition of synonyms seems to be the following: s y n o n y m s a r e
words different in t h e i r sound-form, but s i m i l a r in t h e i r
d e n o t a t i o n a l m e a n i n g or m e a n i n g s a n d i n t e r c h a n g e a b l e at l e a s t
in s o m e c o n t e x t s .
 The English word-stock is extremely rich in synonyms which can be largely
accounted for by abundant borrowing. Quite a number of words in synonymic sets are usually of Latin or
French origin. For instance, out of thirteen words making up the set see, behold, descry, espy, view,
survey, contemplate, observe, notice, remark, note, discern, perceive only see and behold can be
traced back to Old English (OE. seon and behealdan), all others are either French or Latin borrowings.
Thus a characteristic pattern of English synonymic sets is the pattern including the native and the
borrowed words. Among the best investigated are the so-called double-scale patterns: native versus Latin
(e.g. bodily — corporal, brotherly — fraternal); native versus Greek or French (e.g. answer — reply,
fiddle — violin). In most cases the synonyms differ in their stylistic reference, too. The native word is
usually colloquial (e.g. bodily, brotherly), whereas the borrowed word may as a rule be described as
bookish or highly literary (e.g. corporal, fraternal).
Side by side with this pattern there exists in English a subsidiary one based on a triple-scale of
synonyms; native — French, and Latin or Greek (e.g. begin (start) — commence (Fr.) — initiate (L.);
rise — mount (Fr.) — ascend (L.). In most of these sets the native synonym is felt as more colloquial,
the Latin or Greek one is characterised by bookish stylistic reference, whereas the French stands between
the two extremes.
 The only existing classification system for synonyms was established by Academician V.
V. Vinogradov, the famous Russian scholar. In his classification system there are three types of
synonyms: ideographic (which he defined as words conveying the same concept but differing in shades
of meaning), stylistic (differing in stylistic characteristics) and absolute (coinciding in all their shades of
meaning and in all their stylistic characteristics) However, the following aspects of his classification
system are open to question.
Firstly, absolute synonyms are rare in the vocabulary and, on the diachronic level, the
phenomenon of absolute synonymy is anomalous and consequently temporary: the vocabulary system
invariably tends to abolish it either by rejecting one of the absolute synonyms or by developing
differentiation characteristics in one or both (or all) of them. Therefore, it does not seem necessary to
include absolute synonyms, which are a temporary exception, in the system of classification.
The vagueness of the term "shades of meaning" has already been mentioned. Furthermore there
seems to be no rigid demarcation line between synonyms differing in their shades of meaning and in
stylistic characteristics, as will be shown later on. There are numerous synonyms which are distinguished
by both shades of meaning and stylistic colouring. Therefore, even the subdivision of synonyms into
ideographic and stylistic is open to question.
A more modern and a more effective approach to the classification of synonyms may be based on
the definition describing synonyms as words differing in connotations. It seems convenient to classify
connotations by which synonyms differ rather than synonyms themselves. It opens up possibilities for
tracing much subtler distinctive features within their semantic structures.
I. The connotation of degree or intensity can be traced in such groups of synonyms as to surprise
— to astonish — to amaze — to astound;1 to satisfy — to please — to content — to gratify — to delight
— to exalt.
Some words have two and even more connotative components in their semantic structures. In the
above list the synonymic groups headed by to satisfy and to like contain words which can be
differentiated not only by the connotation of intensity but by other types which will be described later.
П. In the group of synonyms to stare — to glare — to gaze — to glance — to peep — to peer, all
the synonyms except to glance denote a lasting act of looking at somebody or something, whereas to
glance describes a brief, passing look. These synonyms may be said to have a connotation of duration in
their semantic structure.
III. The synonyms to stare — to glare — to gaze are differentiated from the other words of the
group by emotive connotations, and from each other by the nature of the emotion they imply. In the
group alone — single — lonely — solitary, the adjective lonely also has an emotive connotation.
IV. The evaluative connotation conveys the speaker's attitude towards the referent, labelling it as
good or bad. So in the group well-known — famous — notorious — celebrated, the adjective notorious
bears a negative evaluative connotation and celebrated a positive one. Cf.: a notorious murderer, robber,
swindler, coward, lady-killer, flirt, but a celebrated scholar, artist, singer, man-of-letters.
V. The causative connotation can be illustrated by the examples to sparkle and to glitter given
above: one's eyes sparkle with positive emotions and glitter with negative emotions. However, this
connotation of to sparkle and to glitter seems to appear only in the model "Eyes + Sparkle/Glitter".
VI. The connotation of manner can be singled out in some groups of verbal synonyms. The verbs
to stroll — to stride — to trot — to pace — to swagger — to stagger — to stumble all denote different
ways and types of walking, encoding in their semantic structures the length of pace, tempo, gait and
carriage, purposefulness or lack of purpose.
The verbs to peep and to peer also have this connotation in their semantic structures: to peep = to
look at smb./smth. furtively, by stealth; to peer = to look at smb./smth. with difficulty or strain.
VII. The synonyms pretty, handsome, beautiful have been mentioned as the ones which are more
or less interchangeable. Yet, each of them describes a special type of human beauty: beautiful is mostly
associated with classical features and a perfect figure, handsome with a tall stature, a certain robustness
and fine pro portions, pretty with small delicate features and a fresh complexion. This connotation may
be defined as the connotation of attendant features.
VIII. Stylistic connotations stand somewhat apart for two reasons. Firstly, some scholars do not
regard the word's stylistic characteristic as a connotative component of its semantic structure. Secondly,
stylistic connotations are subject to further classification, namely: colloquial, slang, dialect, learned,
poetic, terminological, archaic. Here again we are dealing with stylistically marked words but this time
we approach the feature of stylistic characteristics from a different angle: from the point of view of
synonyms frequent differentiation characteristics.
 There are words in every language which people instinctively avoid because they are
considered indecent, indelicate, rude, too direct or impolite. As the "offensive" referents, for which these
words stand, must still be alluded to, they are often described in a round-about way, by using substitutes
called euphemisms. This device is dictated by social conventions which are sometimes apt to be over-
sensitive, see "indecency" where there is none and seek refinement in absurd avoidances and
pretentiousness.
The word lavatory has, naturally, produced many euphemisms. Here are some of them: powder
room, washroom, restroom, retiring room, (public) comfort station, ladies' (room), gentlemen's (room),
water-closet, w.c. ([d0blju:'si:]), public conveniences and even Windsor castle (which is a comical
phrase for "deciphering" w.c.).
Pregnancy is another topic for "delicate" references. Here are some of the euphemisms used as
substitutes for the adjective pregnant: in an interesting condition, in a delicate condition, in the family
way, with a baby coming, (big) with child, expecting.
There are words which are easy targets for euphemistic substitution. These include words
associated with drunkenness, which are very numerous.
The adjective drunk, for instance, has a great number of such substitutes, some of them
"delicate", but most comical. E. g. intoxicated (form.), under the influence (form.), tipsy, mellow, fresh,
high, merry, flustered, overcome, full (coll.), drunk as a lord (coll.), drunk as an owl (coll.), boiled (sl.),
fried (sl.), tanked (sl.), tight (sl.), stiff (sl.), pickled (sl.), soaked (sl.), three sheets to the wind (sl.), high
as a kite (sl.), half-seas-over (sl.), etc.
Euphemisms may, of course, be used due to genuine concern not to hurt someone's feelings. For
instance, a liar can be described as a person who does not always strictly tell the truth and a stupid man
can be said to be not exactly brilliant.
All the euphemisms that have been described so far are used to avoid the so-called social taboos.
Their use, as has already been said, is inspired by social convention.
Superstitious taboos gave rise to the use of other type of euphemisms. The reluctance to call
things by their proper names is also typical of this type of euphemisms, but this time it is based on a
deeply-rooted subconscious fear. Superstitious taboos have their roots in the distant past of mankind
when people believed that there was a supernatural link between a name and the object or creature it
represented. Therefore, all the words denoting evil spirits, dangerous animals, or the powers of nature
were taboo. If uttered, it was believed that unspeakable disasters would result not only for the speaker
but also for those near him. That is why all creatures, objects and phenomena threatening danger were
referred to in a round-about descriptive way. So, a dangerous animal might be described as the one-
lurking-in-the-wood and a mortal disease as the black death. Euphemisms are probably the oldest type of
synonyms, for it is reasonable to assume that superstitions which caused real fear called for the creation
of euphemisms long before the need to describe things in their various aspects or subtle shades caused
the appearance of other synonyms.
The Christian religion also made certain words taboo. The proverb Speak of the devil and he will
appear must have been used and taken quite literally when it was first used, and the fear of calling the
devil by name was certainly inherited from ancient superstitious beliefs. So, the word devil became
taboo, and a number of euphemisms were substitutes for it: the Prince of Darkness, the black one, the
evil one, dickens (coll.), deuce (coll.), (Old) Nick (coll.).
The word God, due to other considerations, also had a great number of substitutes which can still
be traced in such phrases as Good Lord!, By Heavens!, Good Heavens!, (My) goodness!, (My) goodness
gracious!, Gracious me!
Even in our modern emancipated times, old superstitious fears still lurk behind words associated
with death and fatal diseases. People are not superstitious nowadays and yet they are surprisingly
reluctant to use the verb to die which has a long chain of both solemn and humorous substitutes. E. g. to
pass away, to be taken, to breathe one's last, to depart this life, to close one's eyes, to yield (give) up the
ghost, to go the way of all flesh, to go West (sl.), to kick off (sl.), to check out (sl.), to kick the bucket
(sl.), to take a ride (sl.), to hop the twig (sl.), to join the majority (sl.).
The slang substitutes seem to lack any proper respect, but the joke is a sort of cover for the same
old fear: speak of death and who knows what may happen.
Mental diseases also cause the frequent use of euphemisms. A mad person may be described as
insane, mentally unstable, unbalanced, unhinged, not (quite) right (coll.), not all there (coll.), off one's
head (coll.), off one's rocker (coll.), wrong in the upper storey (coll.), having bats in one's belfry (coll.),
crazy as a bedbug (coll.), cuckoo (sl.), nutty (sl.), off one's nut (sl.), loony (sl.), a mental case, a mental
defective, etc.A clinic for such patients can also be discreetly referred to as, for instance, an asylum,
sanitarium, sanatorium, (mental) institution, and, less discreetly, as a nut house (sl.), booby hatch (sl.),
loony bin (sl.), etc.In the story by Evelyn Waugh "Mr. Loveday's Little Outing" a clinic of this kind,
treating only very rich patients, is described as large private grounds suitable for the charge of nervous or
difficult cases. This is certainly the peak of euphemistic "delicacy".
The great number of humorous substitutes found in such groups of words prove particularly
tempting for writers who use them for comical purposes. The following extracts from a children's book
by R. Dahl are, probably, not in the best of taste, but they demonstrate the range of colloquial and slang
substitutes for the word mad.
All the above examples show that euphemisms are substitutes for their synonyms. Their use and
very existence are caused either by social conventions or by certain psychological factors. Most of them
have stylistic connotations in their semantic structures. One can also assume that there is a special
euphemistic connotation that can be singled out in the semantic structure of each such word. Let us point
out, too, that euphemistic connotations in formal euphemisms are different in "flavour" from those in
slang euphemistic substitutes. In the first case they are solemn and delicately evasive, and in the second
rough and somewhat cynical, reflecting an attempt to laugh off an unpleasant fact.
 We use the term antonyms to indicate words of the same category of parts of speech
which have contrasting meanings, such as hot — cold, light — dark, happiness — sorrow, to accept —
to reject, up — down. If synonyms form whole, often numerous, groups, antonyms are usually believed
to appear in pairs. Yet, this is not quite true in reality. For instance, the adjective cold may be said to
have warm for its second antonym, and sorrow may be very well contrasted with gaiety. On the other
hand, a polysemantic word may have an antonym (or several antonyms) for each of its meanings. So, the
adjective dull has the antonyms interesting, amusing, entertaining for its meaning of "deficient in
interest", clever, bright, capable for its meaning of "deficient in intellect", and active for the meaning of
"deficient in activity", etc. Antonymy is not evenly distributed among the categories of parts of speech.
Most antonyms are adjectives which is only natural because qualitative characteristics are easily
compared and contrasted: high — low, wide — narrow, strong — weak, old — young, friendly —
hostile. Verbs take second place, so far as antonymy is concerned. Yet, verbal pairs of antonyms are
fewer in number. Here are some of them: to lose — to find, to live — to die, to open — to close, to weep
— to laugh. Nouns are not rich in antonyms, but even so some examples can be given: friend — enemy,
joy — grief, good — evil, heaven — earth, love — hatred.
Antonymic adverbs can be subdivided into two groups: a) adverbs derived from adjectives:
warmly — coldly, merrily — sadly, loudly — softly; b) adverbs proper: now — then, here — there, ever
— never, up — down, in — out. Not so many years ago antonymy was not universally accepted as a
linguistic problem, and the opposition within antonymic pairs was regarded as purely logical and finding
no reflection in the semantic structures of these words. The contrast between heat and cold or big and
small, said most scholars, is the contrast of things opposed by their very nature.
Nowadays most scholars agree that in the semantic structures of all words, which regularly occur
in antonymic pairs, a special antonymic connotation can be singled out. We are so used to coming across
hot and cold together, in the same contexts, that even when we find hot alone, we cannot help
subconsciously registering it as not cold, that is, contrast it to its missing antonym. The word possesses
its full meaning for us not only due to its direct associations but also because we subconsciously oppose
it to its antonym, with which it is regularly used, in this case to hot. Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest
that the semantic structure of hot can be said to include the antonymic connotation of "not cold", and the
semantic structure of enemy the connotation of "not a friend".
It should be stressed once more that we are speaking only about those antonyms which are
characterised by common occurrences, that is, which are regularly used in pairs. When two words
frequently occur side by side in numerous contexts, subtle and complex associations between them are
not at all unusual. These associations are naturally reflected in the words' semantic structures. Antonymic
connotations are a special case of such "reflected associations".
There exist different classifications of antonyms. Structurally, antonyms can be divided into
antonyms of the same root (e. g. to do – to undo) and antonyms of different roots (e. g. day – night).
Semantically, antonyms may be classified into contradictories, contraries and incompatibles.
1. Con t r a d i c t o r i e s which represent the type of semantic relations that exist between
pairs like dead and alive, single and married, perfect and imperfect, etc.
To use one of the terms is to contradict the other and to use not before one of them is to make it
semantically equivalent to the other, cf. not dead=alive, not single=married.
Among contradictories we find a subgroup of words of the type young — old, big — small, and
so on. The difference between these and the antonymic pairs described above lies in the fact that to say
not young is not necessarily to say old. In fact terms like young and old, big and small or few and
many do not represent absolute values. To use one of the terms is to imply comparison with some
norm: young means ‘relatively young’. We can say She is young but she is older than her sister. To
be older does not mean ‘to be old’.
2. C o n t r a r i e s differ from contradictories mainly because contradictories admit of no
possibility between them. One is either single or married, either dead or alive, etc. whereas contraries
admit such possibilities. This may be observed in cold — hot, and cool and warm which seem to be
intermediate members. Thus we may regard as antonyms not only cold and hot but also cold and warm.
Contraries may be opposed to each other by the absence or presence of one of the components of
meaning like sex or age. This can be illustrated by such pairs as man — woman, man — boy.
3. I n c o m p a t i b l e s. Semantic relations of incompatibility exist among the antonyms with
the common component of meaning and may be described as the reverse of hyponymy, i.e. as the
relations of exclusion but not of contradiction. To say morning is to say not afternoon, not evening,
not night. The negation of one member of this set however does not imply semantic equivalence with
the other but excludes the possibility of the other words of this set. A relation of incompatibility may be
observed between colour terms since the choice of red, e.g., entails the exclusion of black, blue, yellow
and so on. Naturally not all colour terms are incompatible. Semantic relations between scarlet and red
are those of hyponymy.
Тема 7 (2 часа)
Лексическая сочетаемость в современном английском языке.
Lexical Collocability in English Types of Phrases.
 Lexical and Grammatical Valency.
 Structural Classification of Word-Groups.
 Meaning of Word-Groups.
 Types of Phrases.
 Words put together to form lexical units make phrases or word-groups. It will be recalled
that lexicology deals with words, word-forming morphemes and word-groups. We assume that the word
is the basic lexical unit. The smallest two-facet unit to be found within the word is the morpheme which
is studied on the morphological level of analysis. The largest two-facet lexical unit comprising more
than one word is the word-group observed on the syntagmatic level of analysis of the various ways
words are joined together to make up single self-contained lexical units.
The degree of structural and semantic cohesion of word-groups may vary. Some word-groups,
e.g. at least, point of view, by means of, take place, seem to be functionally and semantically
inseparable. Such word-groups are usually described as set-phrases, word-equivalents or phraseological
units and are traditionally regarded as the subject matter of the branch of lexicological science that
studies phraseology.
The component members in other word-groups, e.g. a week ago, man of wisdom, take lessons,
kind to people, seem to possess greater semantic and structural independence. Word-groups of this type
are defined as free or variable word-groups or phrases and are habitually studied in syntax.
To get a better insight into the essentials of structure and meaning of word-groups we must begin
with a brief survey of the main factors active in uniting words into word-groups. The two main linguistic
factors to be considered in this connection are the lexical and the grammatical valency of words.
It is an indisputable fact that words are used in certain lexical contexts, i.e. in combination with
other words. The noun question, e.g., is often combined with such adjectives as vital, pressing, urgent,
disputable, delicate, etc. This noun is a component of a number of other word-groups, e.g. to raise a
question, a question of great importance, a question of the agenda, of the day, and many others. The
aptness of a word to appear in various combinations is described as its lexical valency or collocability.
The range of the lexical valency of words is linguistically restricted by the inner structure of the
English word-stock. This can be easily observed in the selection of synonyms found in different word-
groups. Though the verbs lift and raise, e.g., are usually treated as synonyms, it is only the latter that is
collocated with the noun question. The verb take may be synonymically interpreted as ‘grasp’, ’seize’,
‘catch’, ‘lay hold of, etc. but it is only take that is found in collocation with the nouns examination,
measures, precautions, etc., only catch in catch smb. napping and grasp in grasp the truth.
The lexical valency of correlated words in different languages is not identical. Both the English
word flower and its Russian counterpart — цветок, for example, may be combined with a number of
other words all of which denote the place where the flowers are grown, e.g. garden flowers, hot-house
flowers, etc. (cf. the Russian садовые цветы, оранжерейные цветы, etc.). The English word,
however, cannot enter into combination with the word room to denote flowers growing in the rooms (cf.
pot flowers — комнатные цветы).
One more point of importance should be discussed in connection with the problem of lexical
valency — the interrelation of lexical valency and polysemy as found in word-groups.
Firstly, the restrictions of lexical valency of words may manifest themselves in the lexical
meanings of the polysemantic members of word-groups. The adjective heavy, e.g., is combined with the
words food, meals, supper, etc. in the meaning ‘rich and difficult to digest’. But not all the words with
more or less the same component of meaning can be combined with this adjective. One cannot say, for
instance, heavy cheese or heavy sausage implying that the cheese or the sausage is difficult to digest."
Secondly, it is observed that different meanings of a word may be described through the possible
types of lexical contexts, i.e. through the lexical valency of the word, for example, the different meanings
of the adjective heavy may be described through the word-groups heavy weight (book, table, etc.),
heavy snow (storm, rain, etc.), heavy drinker (eater, etc.), heavy sleep (disappointment, sorrow,
etc.), heavy industry (tanks, etc.), and so on.
From this point of view word-groups may be regarded as the characteristic minimal lexical sets
that operate as distinguishing clues for each of the multiple meanings of the word.
Words are used also in grammatical contexts. The minimal grammatical context in which words
are used when brought together to form word-groups is usually described as the pattern of the word-
group. For instance, the adjective heavy discussed above can be followed by a noun (e.g. heavy storm
or by the infinitive of a verb (e.g. heavy to lift), etc. The aptness of a word to appear in specific
grammatical (or rather syntactic) structures is termed g r a m m a t i c a l v a l e n c y .
The grammatical valency of words may be different. To begin with, the range of grammatical
valency is delimited by the part of speech the word belongs to. It follows that the grammatical valency
of each individual word is dependent on the grammatical structure of the language.
This is not to imply that grammatical valency of words belonging to the same part of speech is
necessarily identical. This can be best illustrated by comparing the grammatical valency of any two
words belonging to the same part of speech, e.g. of the two synonymous verbs suggest and propose.
Both verbs can be followed by a noun (to propose or suggest a plan, a resolution). It is only propose,
however, that can be followed by the infinitive of a verb (to propose to do smth.). The adjectives
clever and intelligent are seen to possess different grammatical valency as clever can be used in word-
groups having the pattern: Adjective-Preposition at+Noun (clever at mathematics), whereas intelligent
can never be found in exactly the same word-group pattern.
Specific linguistic restrictions in the range of grammatical valency of individual words imposed
on the lexical units by the inner structure of the language are also observed by comparing the
grammatical valency of correlated words in different languages. The English verb influence, for
example, can be followed only by a noun (to influence a person, a decision, choice, etc.). The
grammatical valency of its Russian counterpart влиять is different. The Russian verb can be combined
only with a prepositional group (cf. влиять на человека, на выбор).
It should also be pointed out that the individual meanings of a polysemantic word may be
described through its grammatical valency. Thus, different meanings of the adjective keen may be
described in a general way through different structures of the word-groups keen+N, — keen sight
(hearing, etc.), keen + on + N — keen on sports (on tennis, etc.), keen+V(inf.) — keen to know (to
find out, etc.).
From this point of view word-groups may be regarded as minimal syntactic (or syntagmatic)
structures that operate as distinguishing clues for different meanings of a polysemantic word.
 Structurally word-groups may be approached in various ways. We know that word-groups
may be described through the order and arrangement of the component members. The word-group to see
something can be classified as a verbal — nominal group, to see to smth as verbal — prepositional —
nominal, etc.
All word-groups may be also analysed by the criterion of distribution into two big classes. If the
word-group has the same linguistic distribution as one of its members, it is described as endocentric, i.e.
having one central member functionally equivalent to the whole word-group. The word-groups, e.g., red
flower, bravery of all kinds, are distributionally identical with their central components flower and
bravery (cf., e.g.,-I saw a red flower — I saw a flower).
If the distribution of the word-group is different from either of its members, it is regarded as
exocentric, i.e. as having no such central member, for instance side by side or grow smaller and others
where the component words are not syntactically substitutable for the whole word-group.
In endocentric word-groups the central component that has the same distribution as the whole
group is clearly the dominant member or the head to which all other members of the group are
subordinated. In the word-group red flower, e.g., the head is the noun flower and in the word-group
kind to people the head is the adjective kind, etc.
It follows that word-groups may be classified according to their headwords into n o m i n a l
groups or phrases (e.g. red flower), a d j e c t i v a l , groups (e.g. kind to people), v e r b a l groups
(e.g. to speak well), etc. The head is not necessarily the component that occurs first in the word-group.
In such nominal word-groups as, e.g., very great bravery, bravery in the struggle the noun bravery is
the head whether followed or preceded by other words.
Word-groups are also classified according to their syntactic pattern into predicative and non-
predicative groups. Such word-groups as, e.g., John works, he went that have a syntactic structure
similar to that of a sentence, are classified as predicative, and all others as non-predicative. Non-
predicative word-groups may be subdivided according to the type of syntactic relations between the
components into subordinative and coordinative. Such word-groups as red flower, a man of wisdom
and the like are termed s u b o r d i n a t i v e because the words red and of wisdom are subordinated
to flower and man respectively and function as their attributes. Such phrases as women and children,
day and night, do or die are classified as c o o r d i n a t i v e .
 As with word-meaning, the meaning of word-groups may be analysed into l e x i c a l
and g r a m m a t i c a l components. The lexical meaning of the word-group may be defined as the
combined lexical meaning of the component words. Thus the lexical meaning of the word-group red
flower may be described denotationally as the combined meaning of the words red and flower. It should
be pointed out, however, that the term c o m b i n e d l e x i c a l m e a n i n g is not to imply that the
meaning of the word-group is a mere additive result of all the lexical meanings of the component
members. As a rule, the meanings of the component words are mutually dependent and the meaning of
the word-group naturally predominates over the lexical meaning of its constituents.
Interdependence of the lexical meanings of the constituent members of word-groups can be
readily observed in word-groups made up of polysemantic words. For example, in the nominal group
blind man (cat, horse) only one meaning of the adjective blind, i.e. ‘unable to see’, is combined with
the lexical meaning of the noun man (cat, horse) and it is only one of the meanings of the noun man —
‘human being’ that is perceived in combination with the lexical meaning of this adjective. The meaning
of the same adjective in blind type (print, handwriting) is different.
As can be seen from the above examples, polysemantic words are used in word-groups only in
one of their meanings. These meanings of the component words in such word-groups are mutually
interdependent and inseparable. Semantic inseparability of word-groups that allows us to treat them as
self-contained lexical units is also clearly perceived in the analysis of the connotational component of
their lexical meaning. Stylistic reference of word-groups, for example, may be essentially different from
that of the words making up these groups. There is nothing colloquial or slangy about such words as old,
boy, bag, fun, etc. when taken in isolation. The word-groups made up of these words, e.g. old boy, bags
of fun, are recognisably colloquial. As with polymorphemic words word-groups possess not only the
lexical meaning, but also the meaning conveyed mainly by the pattern of arrangement of their
constituents. A certain parallel can be drawn between the meaning conveyed by the arrangement of
morphemes in words and the structural meaning of word-groups. It will be recalled that two compound
words made up of lexically identical stems may be different in meaning because of the difference in the
pattern of arrangement of the stems. For example, the meaning of such words as dog-house and house-
dog is different though the lexical meaning of the components is identical. This is also true of word-
groups. Such word-groups as school grammar and grammar school are semantically different because
of the difference in the pattern of arrangement of the component words. It is assumed that the structural
pattern of word-groups is the carrier of a certain semantic component not necessarily dependent on the
actual lexical meaning of its members. In the example discussed above (school grammar) the structural
meaning of the word-group may be abstracted from the group and described as ‘quality-substance’
meaning. This is the meaning expressed by the pattern of the word-group but not by either the word
school or the word grammar. It follows that we have to distinguish between the structural meaning of a
given type of word-group as such and the lexical meaning of its constituents. The lexical and structural
components of meaning in word-groups are interdependent and inseparable.

Тема 8 (2 часа)
Фразеология современного английского языка.
Phraseological units in English.
 Free word-groups versus Phraseological Units versus Words.
 Semantic Structure of Phraseological Units.
 Classification of Phraseological Units.
 A phraseological unit can be defined as a reproduced and idiomatic (non-motivated) or
partially motivated unit built up according to the model of free word-groups and semantically and
syntactically brought into correlation with words. Hence, ther is a need for criteria exposing the degree of
similarity/difference between phraseological units and free word-groups, phraseological units and words.
The structural criterion brings forth pronounced features which on the one hand state a certain
structural similarity between phraseological units and free word-combinations at the same time opposing
them to ingle words (a), and on the other hand specify their structural distinctions (b).
(a) A feature proper both to free phrases and phraseological units is the divisibility
(paздельнооформленность) of their structure, i. e. they consist of separate structural elements. This fact
stands them in opposition to words as structurally integral (цельнооформленные) units. The structural
integrity of a word is defined by the presence of a common grammatical form for all constituent elements
of this word. For example, the grammatical change in the word shipwreck implies that inflexions are
added to both elements of the word simultaneously — ship-wreck-( ), ship-wrecks, while in the word-
group the wreck of a ship each element can change its grammatical form independently from the other —
(the) wreck-( ) of the ships, (the) wrecks of (the) ships. Like in word-groups, in phraseological units
potentially any component may be changed grammatically, but these changes are rather few, limited and
occasional and usually serve for a stylistic effect, e.g. a Black Maria a van used by police for bringing
suspected criminals to the police station: the Blackest Maria, Black Marias.
(b) The principal difference between phraseological units and free word-groups manifests itself
in the structural invariability of the former. The structural invariability suggests no (or rather limited)
substitutions of components. For example, to give somebody the cold shoulder means 'to treat somebody
coldly, to ignore or cut him', but a warm shoulder or a cold elbow makes no sense. There are also strict
restrictions on the componentalextention and grammatical changes of components of phraseological
units. The use of the word s big, great in a white elephant meaning ”an expensive but useless thing” can
change or even destroy the meaning of the phraseological unit. The same is true in the plural form feet in
the phraseological unit from head to foot is used instead of the singular form. In a free word-group all
these changes are possible.
The semantic criterion is of great help in stating the semantic difference/similarity between free
word-groups and phraseological units (a), and between phraseological units and words (b).
(a) The meaning in phraseological units is created by mutual interaction of elements and conveys
a single concept. The meaning of a phraseological unit is figurative (transferred) and is opposed to the
literal meaning of a word-combination from which it is derived. The transference of the initial word-
group can be based on simile, metaphor, metonymy, and synecdoche. The degree of transference varies
and may affect either the whole unit or only one of its constituents, cf.: to skate on thin ice — 'to take
risks'; the small hours -'the early hours of the morning'. Besides, in the formation of the semantic
structure of phraseological units a cultural component plays a special and very important role. It marks
phraseological units as bearers of cultural information based on a unique experience of the nation. For
example, the phraseological unit red tape originates in the old custom of Government officials and
lawyers tying up (nepeвязывать) their papers with red tape. Heads or tails comes from the old custom of
deciding a dispute or settling which of two possible alternatives shall be followed by tossing a coin
(heads refers to the sovereign's head on one side of the coin, and tails means the reverse side).
In a free phrase the semantic correlative ties are fundamentally different. The meaning in a word-
group is based on the combined meaning of the words constituting its structure. Each element in a word-
combination has a much greater semantic independence and stands for a separate concept, e.g. to cut
bread, to cut cheese, to eat bread. Every word in a free phrase can form additional syntactic ties with
other words outside the expression retaining its individual meaning.
(b) The semantic unity, however, makes phraseological units similar to words. The semantic
similarity between the two is proved by the fact that, for instance, kick the bucket whose meaning is
understood as a whole and not related to the meaning of individual words can be replaced within context
by the word to die, the phraseological unit in a brown study — by the word gloomy.
The syntactic criterion reveals the close ties between single words and phraseological units as
well as free word-groups. Like words (as well as word-combinations), phraseological units may have
different syntactic functions in the sentence, e.g. the subject (narrow escape), the predicate (to have a
good mind), an ajective (as ugly as sin), an adverb (in full swing). In accordance with the function they
perform in the sentence phraseological units can be classified into: substantive, verbal, adjectival,
adverbial, interjectional.
Like free word-groups phraseological units can be divided into coordinative (e.g. the life and soul
of something, free and easy) and subordinative (e.g. long in the tooth, a big fish in a little pond).
Thus, the characteristic features of phraseological units are: ready-made reproduction, structural
divisibility, morphological stability, permanence of lexical composition, semantic unity, syntactic fixity.
 The semantic structure of phraseological units is formed by semantic ultimate constituents
called macrocomponents of meaning. There are the following principal macrocomponents in the
semantic structure of phraseological units:
1. Denotational (descriptive) macrocomponent that contains the information about the
objective reality, it is the procedure connected with categorization, i.e. the classification of phenomena of
the reality, based on the typical idea about what is denoted by a phraseological unit, i. e. about the
denotatum.
2. Evaluational macrocomponent that contains information about the value of what is denoted
by a phraseological unit, i.e. what value the speaker sees in this or that object/phenomenon of reality —
the denotatum. The rational evaluation may be positive, negative and neutral, e.g. a home from home —
'a place or situation where one feels completely happy and at ease' (positive), the lion's den — 'a place of
great danger' (negative), in the flesh — 'in bodily form' (neutral). Evaluation may depend on empathy (i.e.
a viewpoint) of the speaker/hearer.
3. Motivational macrocomponent that correlates with the notion of the inner form of a
phraseological unit, which may be viewed as the motif of transference, the image-forming base, the
associative-imaginary complex, etc. The notion ‘motivation of a phraseological unit’ can be defined as
the aptness of ‘the literal reading’ of a unit to be associated with the denotational and evaluationalaspects
of meaning. For example, the literal meaning of the phraseological unit to have broad shoulders evokes
associations connected with physical strength of a person. The idea that broad shoulders are indicative of
a person's strength endurance actualizes, becomes the base for transference and forms the following
meaning: 'to be able to bear the full weight of one’s responsibilities'
4. Emotive macrocomponent that is the contents of subjective modality expressing feeling-
relation to what is denoted by a phraseological unit within the range of approval/disapproval, e.g. a
leading light in something — 'a person who is important in a particular group (spoken with approval), to
lead a cat and dog life — 'used to describe a husband and wife who quarrel furiously with each other
most of the time' (spoken with disapproval). Emotiveness is also the result of interpretation of the
imaginary base (oбpaзнoe ocнoвaние) in a cultural aspect.
5. Stylistic macrocomponent that points to the communicative register in which a
phraseological unit is used and to the social-role relationships between the participants of
communication, e.g. sick at heart — 'very sad' (formal), be sick to death — 'to be angry and bored
because something unpleasant has been happening for too long' (informal), pass by on the other side —
'to ignore a person who needs help' (neutral).
6. Grammatical macrocomponent that contains the information about all possible
morphological and syntactic changes of a phraseological unit, e.g. to be in deep water - to be in deep
waters', to take away smb's breath = to take smb's breath away; Achilles' heel = the heel of Achilles.
7. Gender macrocomponent that may be expressed explicitly, i.e. determined by the structure
and/or semantics of a phraseological unit, and in that case it points out to the class of objects denoted by
the phraseological unit: men, women, people (both men and women). For example, compare the
phraseological units every Tom, Dick and Harry meaning 'every or any man' and every Tom, Dick and
Sheila which denotes 'every or any man and woman'. Gender macrocomponent may be expressed
implicitly and then it denotes the initial (or historical) reference of a phraseological unit to the class of
objects denoted by it which is as a rule stipulated by the historical development, traditions, stereotypes,
cultural realia of the given society, e.g. to wash one's dirty linen in public — 'discuss or argue about one's
personal affairs in public'. The implicit presence of the gender macrocomponent in this phraseological
unit is conditioned by the idea about traditional women’s work (cf. with Russian: выносить сор из
избы). Gender, implicitly as well as explicitly expressed, reveals knowledge about such cultural
components as masculinity and femininity that are peculiar to this or that society. The implicit gender
macrocomponent is defined within the range of three conceptual spheres: masculine, feminine,
intergender. Compare, for instance, the implicity expressed intergender macrocomponent in to feel like
royalty meaning ‘to feel like a member of the Royal Family, to feel majestic’ and its counterparts, i. e.
phraseological units with explicitly expressed gender macrocomponent, to feel like a queen and to feel
like a king.
According to the degree of idiomaticity phraseological units can be classified into three big
groups: phraseological fusions (cpaщения), phraseological unities (eдинствa) and phraseological
collocations (coчетания).
Phraseological fusions are completely non-motivated word-groups, e.g. as mad as a hatter —
'utterly mad'; white elephant — 'an expensive but useless thing'.
Phraseological unities are partially non-motivated as their meaning can usually be perceived
through the metaphoric meaning of the whole phraseological unit, e.g. to bend the knee — 'to submit to a
stronger force, to obey submissively'; to wash one's dirty linen in public — 'to discuss or make public
one's quarrels'.
Phraseological collocations are not only motivated but contain one component used in its direct
meaning, while the other is used metaphorically, e.g. to meet the requirements, to attain success. In this
group of phraseological units some substitutions are possible which do not destroy the meaning of the
metaphoric element, e. g. to meet the needs, to meet the demand, to meet the necessity, to have success, to
lose success. These substitutions are not synonymical and the meaning of the whole changes, while the
meaning of the verb meet and the noun success are kept intact.
The consideration of the origin of phraseological units contributes to a better understanding of
phraseological meaning. According their origin phraseological units may be divided into two big groups:
native and borrowed.
The main sources of native phraseological units are:
1) terminological and profassional lexics, e. g. physics: center of gravity (центр тяжести);
navigation: lower one’s colours (спустить свой флаг) – ‘to yield, to give in’;
2) British literature, e.g. the green-eyed monster — 'jealousy' /WShakespeare); like Hamlet
without the prince — 'the most important person at event is absent' (W.Shakespeare); never say die —
'do not give up hope in a difficult situation' (Ch.Dickens);
3) British traditions and customs, e.g. baker's dozen — 'a group of thirteen'. In the past British
merchants of bread received from bakers thirteen loaves instead of twelve and the thirteenth loaf was
merchants' profit.
4) superstitions and legends, e.g. a black sheep — 'a less successful or more immoral person in a
family or a group'. People believed that a black sheep was marked by the devil; the halcyon days — 'a
very happy or successful period in the past'. According to an ancient legend a halcyon hatches/grows its
fledglings in a nest that sails in the sea and during this period (about two weeks) the sea is completely
calm;
5) historical facts and events, personalities, e.g. as well be hanged {or hung) for a sheep as a lamb
— 'something that you say when you are going to be punished for something so you decide to do
something worse because your punishment will not be any more severe'. According to an old law a
person who stole a sheep was sentenced to death by hanging, so it was worth stealing something more
because there was no worse punishment; to do a Thatcher — 'to stay in power as prime minister for three
consecutive terms
6) phenomena and facts of everyday life, e.g. carry coals to Newcastle – ‘to take something to a
place where there is plenty of it available’.
The main sources of borrowed phraseological units are:
1) The Holly Script, e.g. the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing —
'communication in an organization is bad so that one part does not know what is happening in another
part';
2) ancient legends and myths belonging to different religious or cultural traditions, e.g. to cut the
Gordian knot — 'to deal with a difficult problem in a strong, simple and effective way' (from the legend
saying that Gordius, king of Gordium, tied an intricate knot and prophesied that whoever untied it would
become the ruler of Asia. It was cut through with a sword by Alexander the Great);
УМК разработал(и)
1. Варламова Н.И., кандидат филологических наук доиент
Ф.И.О., ученая степень, ученое звание

2.
&.И.О., ученая степень, ученое звание

3.
Ф.И.О., ученая степень, ученое звание

4.
Ф.И.О., ученая степень, ученое звание

УМК одобрен отделом менеджмента качества университета

« ^^Mg-^ 200 R .

Начальник отдела менеджмента качества,


д.э.н., профессор С ' /«>, В.А. Скворцова
3) facts and events of the world history, e.g. to cross the Rubicon — 'to do something which will
have very important results which cannot be changed after'. Julius Caesar started a war which resulted in
victory for him by crossing the river Rubicon in Italy;
4) variants of the English language, e.g. a heavy hitter— 'someone who is powerful and has
achieved a lot' (American); a hole card — 'a secret advantage that is ready to use when you need it'
(American); be home and hosed — 'to have completed something successfully' (Australian);
5) other languages (classical and modern), e.g. second to none — 'equal with any other and better
than most' (from Latin: nulli secundus); for smb's fair eyes — 'because of personal sympathy, not be
worth one's deserts, services, for nothing' (from French: pour les beaux yeux de qn.).

Темы курсовых работ по языкознанию


(по лексикологии).

- Особенности английского словосложения.


- Конверсия как продуктивный способ словообразования.
- Аффиксальное словообразование.
- Особенности семантической структуры слова.
- Лексическое значение слова и его составляющие.
- Омонимы в современном английском языке.
- Лексическая синонимия.
- Особенности слов – антонимов.
- Классификация фразеологических единиц.
- Варианты и диалекты английского языка.