Polysemy in English.

When analysing the word-meaning we observe, however, that words as a rule are not units of a single meaning. Monosemantic words, i.e. words having only one meaning are comparatively few in number, these are mainly scientific terms, such as hydrogen, moleculeand the like. The bulk of English words are polysemantic, that is to say possess more than one meaning. The actual number of meanings of the commonly used words ranges from five to about a hundred. In fact, the commoner the word the more meanings it has.

In polysemantic words, however, we are faced with the problem of the interrelation and interdependence of the various meanings in the semantic structure of one and the same word.

If Polysemy is viewed diachronically, it is understood 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.

In the course of a diachronic semantic analysis of the polysemantic word tablewe find that of all the meanings it has in Modern English, the primary meaning is ?a flat slab of stone or wood?, which is proper to the word in the Old English period (OE. tabulefrom L. tabula);all other meanings are secondary as they are derived from the primary meaning of the word and appeared later than the primary meaning,

The terms secondary and derived meaning are to a certain extent synonymous. When we describe the meaning of the word as ?secondary? we imply that it could not have appeared before the primary meaning was in existence. When we refer to the meaning as ?derived? we imply not only that, but also that it is dependent on the primary meaning and somehow subordinate to it. (In the case of the word table,e.g., we may say that the meaning ?the food put on the table? is a secondary meaning as it is derived from the meaning ?a piece of furniture (on which meals are laid out)?.

Polysemy may also arise from homonymy. When two words become identical in sound-form, the meaning of the two words are left as making up one semantic group.

It follows that the main source of polysemy is a change in the semantic structure of the word.

Synchronically we understand polysemy as the coexistence of various meanings of the same word at a certain historical period of the development of the English language. In this case the problem of the interrelation and interdependence of individual meanings making up the semantic structure of the word must be investigated along different lines.

It should be noted that whereas the basic meaning occurs in various and widely different contexts, minor meanings are observed only in certain contexts.

A more objective criterion of the comparative value of individual meanings seems to be the frequency of their occurrence in speech. 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.

Of great importance is the stylistic stratification of meanings of a polysemantic word as individual meanings may differ in their stylistic reference. Stylistic (or regional) status of monosemantic words is easily perceived. For instance the word daddycan be referred to the colloquial stylistic layer, the word parentto the bookish. The word movieis recognisably American and barnieis Scottish. Polysemantic words as a rule cannot be given any such restrictive labels. To do it we must state the meaning in which they are used.

Stylistically neutral meanings are naturally more frequent. The polysemantic words workerand hand,e.g., may both denote ?a man who does manual work?, but whereas this is the most frequent and stylistically neutral meaning of the word worker,it is observed only in 2.8% of all occurrences of the word hand,in the semantic structure of which the meaning ?a man who does manual work? (to hire factory hands)is one of its marginal meanings characterised by colloquial stylistic reference.

It should also be noted that the meaning which has the highest frequency is the one representative of the whole semantic structure of the word.

It should be noted, however, that as the semantic structure is never static, the relationship between the diachronic and synchronic evaluation of individual meanings may be different in different periods of the historical development of language. The actual arrangement of meanings in the semantic structure of any word in any historical period is the result of the semantic development of this word within the system of the given language.

The words of different languages which are similar or identical in lexical meaning, especially in the denotational meaning are termed correlated words. Semantic correlation, however, is not to be interpreted as semantic identity. From what was said about the arbitrariness of the sound-form of words and complexity of their semantic structure, it can be inferred that one-to-one correspondence between the semantic structure of correlated polysemantic words in different languages is scarcely possible.

The actual meanings of polysemantic words and their arrangement in the semantic structure of correlated words in different languages may be altogether different.

The semantic structure of polysemantic words is not homogeneous as far as the status of individual meanings is concerned. Some meaning (or meanings) is representative of the word in isolation, others are perceived only in certain contexts.

The whole of the semantic structure of correlated polysemantic words of different languages can never be identical. Words are felt as correlated if their basic (central).

we understand by the term context the minimal stretch of speech determining each individual meaning of the word. This is not to imply that polysemantic words have meanings only in the context. The semantic structure of the word has an objective existence as a dialectical entity which embodies dialectical permanency and variability. The context individualises themeanings, brings them out. It is in this sense that we say that meaning isdetermined by context.

The meaning or meanings of polysemantic words observed only in certain contexts may be viewed as determined either by linguistic (orverbal) contexts or extra-linguistic (non-verbal) contexts.

Lexical context - In lexical contexts of primary importance are the groups of lexical items combined withthe polysemantic word under consideration. The meanings determined by lexical contexts are sometimes referred to as lexically (or phraseologically) bound meanings which implies that such meanings are to be found only in certain lexical contexts.

Grammatical contexts it is the grammatical (mainly the syntactic) structure of the context that serves to determine various individual meanings of a polysemantic word. In a number of contexts, however, we find that both the lexical and the grammatical aspects should be taken into consideration. The grammatical structure of the context although indicative of the difference between the meaning of the word in this structure and the meaning of the same word in a different grammatical structure may be insufficient to indicate in whi?h of its individual meanings the word in question is used.

Date: 2016-06-12; view: 507