Like other levels of language (phonetic, derivational, grammatical), vocabulary is a system, that is, a set of elements (including phraseological units) that are in regular relationships and form a certain integrity in the aggregate. This is the lexico-semantic system of the language. Its elements are lexical units that are connected by relations of identity, similarity, opposition, inclusion, etc.
Each unit of the lexical system is included in certain fields on the basis of content similarity and certain associations with other units. The vocabulary as a system is a set of such fields, the units of which are not only interconnected, but also interact with the "words-concepts" of other fields. So, to designate a very young, not matured and therefore inexperienced person, a synonymous unit of another semantic field is used - green (cf. green youth), in which it stands for "unripe, unripe" (the apples on this apple are still green, unripe ). In turn, this designation is the result of an associative causal connection with the original field - color designations (green, green paint): green is still unripe. So the semantic microfields of the designations of a person's age, the ripeness of fruits, fruits, cereals and the names of colors turn out, like many others, to be interrelated.
One of the most important manifestations of the consistency of vocabulary is the fundamental ability to consistently describe the vocabulary of a language by distributing its units over semantic fields (classes of words with a common meaning). Such a classification of vocabulary is presented in ideographic dictionaries. The entire vocabulary is divided into large classes of words, then into subclasses and, finally, into lexical-semantic groups, such as, say, designations of kinship, movement, transmission, creation, destruction, color designation, etc. groups can be quite definitely opposed to each other and described with the help of appropriate definitions. This systematization is based on the sequential inclusion of units of a lower level in the classes of units of a hierarchically higher level.
Another manifestation of the consistency of vocabulary is the widely represented relations of synonymy, antonymy, conversion, word-formation derivation and others. Turning to the explanatory dictionaries, it is easy to notice further that the minimal lexical units (“words-concepts”) with the same sound (and graphic) shells are grouped into polysemantic words - a kind of microsystems, in the formation of which certain patterns lie.
A quite definite, albeit versatile, systematization of the vocabulary of the language is represented by the opposition of classes of words of the type: primordial - borrowed, active - passive (outdated and new), literary - dialectal, etc.
The consistency of vocabulary is found not only in its classification, but also in certain patterns of the use of linguistic units in speech (text). As will be shown later, words with similar or opposite meanings (units of the same lexico-semantic group, synonyms, antonyms, etc.) have similar lexical compatibility, which is an external expression of their internal properties. Moreover, it turns out in principle possible to organize and systematize all non-free lexical compatibility, reducing it to a limited number (to several dozen) of lexical functions (“deep meanings”). This makes it possible to detect functional uniformity in a large variety of combinations.
The lexico-semantic system is in many ways similar to other language systems. At the same time, like any other system, it has its own specificity, which is explained primarily by the nature and composition of its units. The vocabulary of a language is the most complex system: it includes such a large number of objects connected by a wide variety of relationships, which cannot be compared with the number of units of a phonetic (phonological) or grammatical system. It is enough, for example, to compare the number of phonemes of the Russian language (42) and the number of lexical units, which in the seventeen-volume "Dictionary of the Modern Russian Literary Language" exceeds 120,000 words. In addition, the lexical-semantic system, unlike others, is closely related to external, extralinguistic, factors and directly reflects the changes taking place in reality. The vocabulary of the language is in a state of continuous change: it is constantly replenished with words and meanings of words necessary to designate new realities and concepts, and, conversely, is freed from those lexical units that are no longer necessary. Because of this, vocabulary is an open system, opposing such systems as phonetic (phonological) and grammatical. Finally, one more important feature of the lexical system: it is less "rigid" than others, which is explained by the diffuse nature of the meanings of many words.
Lexical units reveal closer, deeper and more diverse connections with the context than units of other systems, and therefore are more “mobile” and variable in their content.
Of course, it would be wrong to think that all microsystems of vocabulary are structured in the same way: some of them are more systematic (and most of them), others are less ordered and more difficult to analyze. Finally, vocabulary also contains asystemic phenomena, just as in most rules there are exceptions, which, however, do not detract from the meaning of the rules themselves.
Semantics and Lexicology. Aspects of lexical semantics
One of the most important tasks of lexicology, as we have already said, is the study of the objective meaning of words and expressions. The meaning of various units of the language is investigated in one of the most important sections of linguistics - semantics. This scientific discipline emerged relatively recently, at the end of the last century, and is now experiencing a period of its rapid development.
Unlike the plane of expression (the formal side), the plane of content (meaning) in the language, addressed directly to the person, for a long time remained without due attention, was taken for granted. Modern linguistics considers meaning as the most important component of the language, since the expression and perception of meaning is its main goal and provides communicative and other functions.
Linguistic semantics studies both the vocabulary of the language and its grammatical structure and is subdivided according to this into lexical and grammatical.
Lexical semantics studies the lexical (subject) meaning, that is, what characterizes a given linguistic unit in the entire system of its forms, for example, the noun chair (chair, chair ..., chair ... chairs, chairs ...) as opposed to from other and, above all, units close in meaning, say, nouns - designations of furniture: an armchair, a stool, a sofa, an ottoman, a table, etc.
Lexical meaning
A word as a unit of vocabulary is a unity of a sign, that is, a sound and graphic shell of a word, and a meaning - a specific linguistic reflection of reality. The sound (and graphic) shell of a word, for example, a sequence of sounds [д "е" р "бвъ] or letters tree, becomes a sign by virtue of what it matters (in this case," a perennial plant with a hard trunk and branches forming a crown ") , stands for something.
What factors determine the lexical meaning? First of all, the objective reality with which the linguistic unit is related. Objects and phenomena of reality, their properties and relationships are reflected in human consciousness as a result of the complex interaction of language and thinking. Hence the close relationship between linguistic meaning and the corresponding logical concept. Finally, meaning as a necessary component of a lexical unit is closely related in each language with a certain sign, is included in the composition of a word in the linguistic system and turns out to be conditioned by it.
The lexical meaning of a word is a specifically linguistic reflection of an object: it is a brief description of the designated object, a minimum set of characteristic features (taken from the number of concept features) that allow one to “recognize” this object in an economical way. The main function of linguistic meaning is to effectively hint at a certain extra-linguistic content, at certain special knowledge that is available in human experience.
As the content side of a linguistic unit, the lexical meaning is included in the language system, reflects its national specifics and characterizes the word in terms of its emotional and expressive coloring.
As you can see, the concept and meaning, despite their belonging to different sciences, are relative categories and are largely homogeneous. The meaning is somewhat simplified, you can present at least the signs of a concept, necessary and sufficient for the recognition and understanding of the word. The difference between the concept and the meaning is that the same phenomenon (the content of the sign) is viewed from different angles (i.e., respectively, from the angle of view of the mental or linguistic processes) and with varying degrees of depth. The meaning is not without reason called a naive, everyday concept, defining it as an idea of an object (phenomenon), characteristic of the average intelligent native speaker and often based on pre-scientific concepts enshrined in the language.
Lexico-semantic groupings of vocabulary. LSH concept. The concept of a thematic group. The concept of a semantic field. The concept of an associative field. Ideographic and associative dictionaries. The concept of a lexical category (LC).
Types of lexical categories from the point of view of formal semantic oppositions.
As already mentioned, one of the central questions of linguistics is the question of the systemic nature of the language, which manifests itself in a set of elements connected by internal relations. The lexical composition of the language is no exception. It is not a collection of disparate units, but a collection of interrelated relationships traditionally presented in two perspectives: paradigmatic and syntagmatic. Due to this, it consists of semantic groups with various types of relationships.
The view of vocabulary as a system took shape, thus, in the so-called. the theory of the semantic field or lexical-semantic groupings. They also agree with two approaches to the study of vocabulary: semasiological (from word to concept) and onomasiological (from concept to word), which complement each other and are the main ones in the construction of the semantic field. The result of the description of vocabulary aimed at identifying its systemic connections is its classification, i.e. selection of various lexical and semantic groups of vocabulary.
The very understanding of the lexical-semantic group (LSG) is ambiguous (See * the work of FP Filin "On lexical-semantic groups of words" in Appendix 1. Reader, text No. 4).
A lexico-semantic group (in a broad sense) is usually called a group of words "sufficiently closely related in meaning". However, this understanding is rather vague, since different semantic groupings are suitable for it: synonyms, and even antonyms, and paronyms, and the LSG itself, and thematic fields, etc. - i.e. everything that has a semantic affinity. Therefore, you should define the concepts.
Under the lexical-semantic group (LSG) in the narrow sense we mean a group of words united by a common categorical-generic seme (archiseme) and a common part-of-speech reference. For example: pine, oak, spruce, birch ... (LSG "trees"), red, yellow, green, blue ... (LSG "color"), run, rush, fly, swim ... (LSG "move), etc."
Let us consider in more detail the last example based on the component analysis of the semantics of the words included in the LSG:
RUN - "quickly" "move" "on the ground" "with your feet"
FLY - 1) "quickly" "move" "through the air" "wings"
2) "very" "fast" "move"
SWIM - "move" on the water "with hands and feet"
Crawl - 1) "move" "on the ground" "body"
2) "very" "slow" "move"
RACE - "very" "fast" "move"
We see that LSG has a common generic seme “to move”, but the nature of movement and speed are different. If these are identical, these words will be synonyms: RUN, FLY-2, RACE. With the opposite of some signs of the called concepts (for example, speed), the words will be antonyms: Crawl-2 - FLY-2 (or RACE). Thus, more particular semantic groups or series are included in the LSG): synonyms and antonyms. All members of the LSG in relation to each other will be cohyponyms (or cohyponyms), since call species concepts of the same genus (MOVE).
The generic word in relation to each member of the LSG will be a hyperonym. And generic couples (like RUN - MOVE) are hyponyms. So in LSG there are several more types of relations: identity, opposition, intersection, inclusion (see types of oppositions in 2.2.2.). Yes, and LSG themselves can be included in each other, like nesting dolls: "movement" - "movement" - "movement of a person", i.e. there can be "micro" and "macro". In LSG, words are united mainly on the basis of paradigmatics (oppositions).
Wider associations of words are thematic groups (TG): these are groups of words of different parts of speech, united by a common theme (hence the name). Various types of communication are observed in it: both paradigmatic and syntagmatic. For example, TG “sport” (football, goal, score, football, stadium, fan, etc.) or “trade” (trade, bargain, market, store, buyer, seller, sale, sell, etc.) ... The TG includes various LSGs. For example, LSG "retail establishments" (shop, shop, kiosk, boutique, supermarket), synonyms (buy, buy), antonyms (expensive - cheap), hyponyms (store - deli), conversions (buy - sell), etc. ... in TG "trade". Sometimes TG is called a thematic field, but the term “field” is also used in combination with “semantic field” (often as a synonym for thematic).
A semantic field (LF), or a lexical-semantic field (LSP), is usually understood as a "group of words of one language, closely related to each other in meaning" (Yu.N. Karaulov) or "a hierarchical structure of a set of lexical units united by a common ( invariant) meaning and reflecting a certain conceptual sphere in the language ”(LA Novikov). LSP is a broader association than LSG and even TG, although it is close to the latter. It also includes several LSG and other semantic associations of the paradigmatic and syntagmatic type: for example, the field “color” includes both the LSG of the adjectives “color” (green, red, blue), and the LSG of the verbs “show color” (turn blue, blush, yellow), and the nouns "color" (red, blue, yellow). Or the LSP “time” includes the LSG “time intervals” (hour, minute, second), and the LSG “parts of the day” (morning, evening, noon), and the LSG “season” (spring, summer, autumn), etc. ...
However, a clear delineation of these concepts has not yet emerged. For example, the lexical grouping "kinship" is called a lexical-semantic group, and a thematic group, and a semantic field, since it is very extensive and includes different types of vocabulary and even phrases such as cousin. Therefore, everyone uses these terms to the extent of their understanding. We will adhere to the specified distinction between LSG and TG, as well as LSP. The latter are distinguished as subject-logical categories (TG, reflecting the articulation of the picture of the world itself, its fragments) and semantic, conceptual (SP, reflecting conceptual spheres and relations).
A semantic field (for example, in the theory of Yu.N. Karaulov) has a field name (its name), a core (keywords: usually synonyms and antonyms, as well as typical combinations) and a periphery (words associated with the core less closely semantically or stylistically) ... Let us recall the example with the word FRIEND from the "Dictionary of the associative norms of the Russian language." In fact, almost all the words from the answers of the informants form a field called FRIEND, the core of which will include its synonyms (comrade, friend, friend), antonyms (foe), derivatives (befriend, friendship), typical and stable combination (loyal, close , the best, bosom), and on the periphery there will be the words brother and sidekick.
In linguistics, various types of semantic fields are distinguished: lexical-semantic fields (LSP, discussed above), associative-semantic fields (ASP, compiled on the basis of an associative experiment), as well as functional-semantic fields (FSP, including lexical and grammatical meanings). For example, SP "time" as LSP will include the words hour, year, minute; past, present, future, etc., as a result of an associative experiment, the ASP may also include, for example, the words forward, money (as the implementation of the precedent texts "time - forward" and "time - money"), and the FSP will also include grammatical forms of expression of time: walked, walked, walked.
The basic unit of the semantic field (its name) is, as already mentioned, a word in one of its meanings (LSV). Each LSV word is included in three types of semantic relations: paradigmatic, syntagmatic, and associative-derivational. And around each of them, their own microfield is formed. For example, the SP ZEMLYA-1 ("soil") will include the words soil, sand, clay (paradigmatics), dig, dig, plow (syntagmatics), earthen, earthy, excavator (derivatics); LAND-2 ("land") - land, water, sea; saw, opened; terrestrial, underground, amphibian; EARTH-3 ("country") - country, homeland, motherland; dear, stranger, seaside; fellow countryman, foreigner. However, being related to each other as LSV of one word, these joint ventures will also be included in the common joint venture EARTH. Those. the field will also include the epidemiological relationship between people with disabilities.
Thus, from the point of view of onomasiology, the entire lexical composition of the language is presented as a system of interacting semantic fields that form a complex and specific for each language linguistic picture of the world (more details about the LQM will be discussed in a special topic): names of time, space, movement, degree of relationship, colors, plants, animals, humans, etc. The organization of the joint venture is based on generic (hyponymic) relations.
Units homogeneous in meaning are combined into lexical-semantic groups (elementary microfields) and other lexical categories (synonyms, antonyms, etc.).
Lexical categories are divided into two aspects: semasiology and onomasiology. In the semasiological aspect, categories such as polysemy (intraword category) are considered. In onomasiological, there are categories such as synonymy and antonymy (inter-word categories).
Lexical categories are defined on the basis of one or another opposition, semantic or formal. Depending on the accounting for PS or PV, words (or both) LC can be divided into three types: 1) semantic (allocated on the basis of PS, identity, similarity of semantics, meaning) - these include synonymy and antonymy, as well as hyponymy and conversion ; 2) formal (allocated on the basis of only PV, form identity) - homonymy; 3) formal-semantic (allocated on the basis of the similarity of PV and PS) - this is paronymy. According to this principle, you can build a definition for each of the LCs:
Polysemy is a semantic relationship of internally related sememes, formally expressed by the identity of the lexeme (PS + PV +): DOM-1 / DOM-2.
Synonymy is the relationship of identical (or close) sememes, formally expressed by different lexemes (PS + PV -): EYES / OCHI.
Antonymy is the relationship of opposed, but intersecting sememes, formally expressed by different lexemes (PS + PV -): YES / NO.
Hyponymy is a relationship of generic inclusion, formally expressed by different lexemes (PS + PV -): HOUSE / BUILDING.
Paronymy is a relationship of similar but not identical sememes, formally expressed by similar but not identical lexemes (PS + PV +): FACT / FACTOR.
Conversion is a semantically inverse relationship, formally expressed by different lexemes (PS + PV -): BUY / SALE.
Homonymy is a relationship of internally unrelated semes, formally expressed by identical lexemes (PS - PV +): KEY (1) / KEY (2).
Semantic fields and other groupings of vocabulary are described in special ideographic (thematic) dictionaries, see, for example, "Thematic dictionary of the Russian language" ed. V.V. Morkovkin or "Russian Semantic Dictionary" ed. N.Yu. Shvedova, in which words are divided into semantic groups.
Separate lexical categories are described in special (semonymic) dictionaries: synonyms, antonyms, homonyms, paronyms.
Let's consider the main lexical categories of the Russian language in more detail.
Lecture number 13
I. The concept of the lexico-semantic system.
II. The main types and types of relations of lexical units.
III. The concept of lexical-semantic and thematic groups.
IV. The theory of semantic fields.
I. The vocabulary of any language is an integral unity of interdependent elements. Words in a language do not exist in isolation, but in close connection with each other, forming systems built on various bases: semantic-grammatical (parts of speech), word-building (word-forming nests), semantic (synonyms, antonyms, homonyms, semantic fields, lexico- semantic groups, etc.).
The idea of a systematic vocabulary was put forward and developed in the works of many scientists (M.M. Pokrovsky, L.V. Shcherba, V.V. Vinogradov, D.N. Shmelev, Yu.N. Karaulov, Z.D. Popova, L.A. Novikov, E.V. Kuznetsova, A.I.Smirnitsky, V.G. Gak, A.A. Ufimtseva, I.V. Arnold, A.M. Kuznetsova and others).
Most researchers who consider vocabulary as part of a language define it as a system that has its own specifics, explained by the nature and composition of units.
There are such lexical system properties:
1) a huge number of its objects, not comparable with the number of units of other levels. Indeed, in the significant vocabulary of any language, a whole world of lexical meanings is represented, since it is the word that is the simplest sign means of naming a fragment of reality (an object, property, action, state, etc.). The multi-object vocabulary allows the language, which has a communicative and cognitive function, to serve as a means of expressing knowledge, tested by the socio-historical practice of people.
2) open nature. Language is a long-term evolving system, since as society and its culture develop and become more complex, the lexical system of the language grows, branches and differentiates.
3) constant variability. Vocabulary is the most mobile level of the language, it most reflects changes in various spheres of life (some words become obsolete and leave the language, others appear or are borrowed).
The vocabulary of the language is counted in many thousands of words, but the speaker relatively quickly finds the word he needs. The explanation for this is the consistency of the vocabulary, which simplifies the search. The speaker searches for the necessary word not in the entire vocabulary of the language, but within a small part of it - a synonymic row, a semantic field, a lexical-semantic group, to which the situation and the logic of thinking are oriented.
Russian semasiologist M.M. Pokrovsky, one of the first to realize the systemic nature of vocabulary, wrote: words and their meanings do not live a separate life from each other, but are united in our soul, regardless of our consciousness, into different groups, and the basis for grouping is the similarity or direct opposition in the basic meaning.(Pokrovsky MM Semasiological research in the field of ancient languages. - M., 1986. - p.82.).
The consistency of vocabulary manifests itself not only in the presence of the named groups, but also in the very nature of the use of lexical units, where certain patterns are observed (for example, antonyms can be used in the same contexts, the same in synonyms, and different meanings of one word (lexico- semantic variants) is used, as a rule, in mismatched contexts).
Thus, in modern linguistics, the view on vocabulary as a system of systems has been established. He found expression in the recognition of the existence in the language of various groups of words, opposed in meaning, form, degree of similarity of forms and meanings; by the nature of the relationship that develops between the words that form a particular group, etc.
The term lexical-semantic system.
II. Words included in the lexical system of the language are united by two types of relations - syntagmatic and paradigmatic.
Paradigmatic relationship characterize the structure of any verbal groupings or classes, singled out in the language on the basis of the formal or semantic community of their members and at the same time opposed to each other on one of these grounds.(Kubryakova E.S. Paradigm // Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M., 1990. - p. 366.)
Those. paradigmatic relations are based on the concept of opposition.
Opposition- formal or semantic opposition of a lexical unit to other lexical units included with it in the paradigm (for example, words husband and wife enter the paradigm on the basis of a common feature "family member", but they also form opposition on the basis of the designated biological sex).
Each paradigm allows you to identify common and differential semantic features of the linguistic units included in it. In the lexical-semantic paradigm, as a rule, words connected by equivalence relations are combined (for example, synonyms: blizzard - blizzard), opposites (for example, antonyms: morning evening), affinity (for example, equonyms: mother and father - a semantic series of words included in the group of names of parents), inclusions (for example, a hyperonym is a hyponym or a generic term is a species term: novelist).
Paradigmatic relations of linguistic units are considered in relation to their syntagmatic properties. Words united in the lexical-semantic paradigm can enter into syntagmatic relations with other words of the language.
Syntagmatic relations- this is a linear relationship that arises between the members of the horizontal series, correlated as determinable and defining. Groupings of syntagmatic words: part - whole (for example, branch - wood, carburetor - engine), subject - feature ( snow - flakes, mushroom - white), the object and the action associated with it ( bread - crumbles, a gun - shoots), etc., such relationships can be defined as inherent relationships.
Syntagmatic relations of lexical units are based on the concept of position.
Position - this is the position of a lexical unit in the text, in which its relation to other, semantically close units to it is manifested. Distinguish between strong and weak positions. Strong positions - the position of distinguishing words or their lexical and semantic variants (for example, dog bites, clothes bites, price bites). Weak positions Are positions of nondiscrimination, positions of neutralizing the meanings of words or their lexical-semantic variants (for example, torn edges: paper, clothing, wounds, clouds, etc.).
All the variety of relationships of lexical units can be reduced to four the main types of oppositions and distributions(possible environments and word usage):
1) type matching : lexical units completely coincide in use and meaning, since they are absolute synonyms (for example: argument - argument). They possess equivalent(latin aequalis"Equal"), that is, coincident distribution and null the opposition;
2) type including , genus-specific: the meaning of one unit includes the meaning of the second, while the meaning of the including word turns out to be more meaningful, having, in addition to general semes, specific, differentiating (for example, move - fly: the meaning of movement is completely included in the meaning of the verb fly, but does not exhaust this value - in its content there are also components "through the air" and "with the help of wings." Therefore, the distribution of the first unit is included in the distribution of the second). This type of distribution is called including, and the opposition - privative(that is, private, since one member of the opposition has some kind of semantic feature, and the other is deprived of it);
3) type overlapping or intersecting (most clearly represented in antonyms): lexical units overlap (for example, mother and father, possessing a common seme "parent", they differ in differential semes "a man in relation to his children" and "a woman in relation to her children"), the distribution of such lexical units contrasting, and the opposition - equipolent(latin aequipollens"Having the same meaning"), that is, equivalent (distinctive features are in equilibrium);
4) not matching neither in meaning nor in use, these words are out-of-scope (for example: table - will), such a relationship can be observed both in homonyms and in LSV polysemantic words; these lexical units have additional distribution and disjunctive(latin disjunctio"Disunity, division, difference") opposition.
Some researchers (in particular, D.N. Shmelev) propose to distinguish, in addition to paradigmatic and syntagmatic, a third type of relationship - epigmatic (relations of formal and semantic word formation).
Epidigmatic relations- these are relations that reveal the word-formative connections of a word, thanks to which it is able to enter into various lexical and semantic paradigms. Epidigmatic relations are most often or equivalence relations, relations of parallel derivation, i.e. word formation, between derivatives of the same degree (for example, teach - student, teach - teacher, teach - teaching), or relations of inclusion, subordination, relations of successive derivation ( learn – teaching - teaching).
III. The lexical system should be presented not as a network of oppositional connections of individual words, but as a complex interaction of verbal groups and series. The significance of each individual word can be revealed only by taking into account all its "occurrences" in certain classes of words.(Kuznetsova E.V. Lexicology of the Russian language: Textbook for philology. Faculty.
Un-tov. 2nd ed. M .: Higher school, 1989. - S. 84)
The semantics of a word can be determined by both extralinguistic and intralinguistic factors. Therefore, the structuring of the vocabulary of the language occurs on different grounds - its own linguistic and extra-linguistic. Even M.M. Pokrovsky pointed out that there are various groups or "word fields" in the lexical system of the language. Some of them are intra-lingual associations ("by spheres of representation"), others are extra-linguistic associations ("by subject areas"). These ideas of M.M. Pokrovsky were developed in the modern language in the development of the issue of the semantic organization of words in the composition of the language, in particular, in the theory of lexical-semantic groups, thematic groups and semantic fields.
The problems of the semantic organization of the lexical system of the language are one of the most difficult, which has not received its final solution. Therefore, there is still no strict definition of each of the named semantic categories. The following definitions are used as workers:
Lexical-semantic group(LSG) - a set of words related to the same part of speech, united by intra-lingual links based on interdependent and interrelated elements of meaning. Words in LSG are characterized by semantic interconnectedness.
These are relations of partial semantic intersection, in which words have common semes.
For example, the word field in Russian has several meanings (LSV), italicized in the scheme (see below). Each lexical-semantic variant has a number of synonyms located in the scheme in horizontal rows, which together form a lexical-semantic group.
1) plain- landscape - surface,
2) Earth- possession - estate,
FIELD: 3) area- plot - space,
4) space- place - gap - zone,
5) field- industry - a range of occupations,
6) edge- the limit is the end.
Thus, a word with all its lexical-semantic variants serves as the basis for highlighting a lexical-semantic group. The paradigmatic nature of the members of the lexical-semantic group is based on an integral semantic feature.
Thematic group- a set of words, united on the basis of the extra-linguistic community of objects or concepts designated by them. The basis for identifying a thematic group is a set of objects or phenomena of the external world, united according to a certain criterion and expressed in different words (for example, the thematic group “ parts of the human body"Combining words hand, leg, back, knee, head, heart, liver, foot etc.).
One of the important features of a thematic group is the heterogeneity of linguistic relations between its members or the absence of such, therefore, the loss of one or another word of the thematic group or a change in its meaning does not affect the meanings of other words of this group.
The absence of linguistic ties between members of the thematic group does not mean the absence of extra-linguistic ties, thanks to which the thematic group stands out.
The thematic group is based on the classification of the objects themselves and the phenomena of the external world. This is its fundamental difference from the lexical-semantic group, which is based on the intra-lingual connections of the words included in it (for example, the thematic group character traits: sensitivity, intelligence, passion, modesty, tolerance, cruelty, selfishness etc.).
IV. Researchers developing the principles of vocabulary systematization use the field model for structuring the lexical system. Different scholars have identified fields in vocabulary on different grounds.
The optimal representation of vocabulary in the system-functional aspect is the semantic field. The founder of the theory of the semantic field is the German scientist I. Trier. In Russian linguistics, the concept of the field was developed by A.V. Bondarko, Yu.N. Karaulov, A.A. Ufimtseva, and others.
Semantic field Is a set of linguistic units united by a common meaning and reflecting the subject, conceptual or functional similarity of the designated phenomena.
The semantic field is characterized by the following main properties:
The presence of semantic relations between its constituent words;
The systemic nature of these relations;
Interdependence and interdependence of lexical units;
The relative autonomy of the field;
Continuity of designation of its semantic space;
The interrelation of semantic fields within the entire lexical
The words included in the semantic field are characterized by the presence of a common semantic feature, on the basis of which this field is formed (for example, for words go, run, fly, swim, ride etc. such a common feature is the “movement” feature, on the basis of which they are combined into a semantic field “ verbs of motion»).
Sections of the semantic field are lexical-semantic groups, in this sense the semantic field appears as a generic concept in relation to the lexical-semantic group - a species concept.
The presence of a common semantic feature that unites the linguistic units of the field does not exclude the existence of differential features (for example, such features as "movement with the help of feet", "on the water", "speed of movement" and others). Thus, the semantic field is a series of paradigmatically related words or their individual meanings.
The initial concept is the name of the field, which should have the semantically simplest meaning included in the content of all units of this field (cf. move, the meaning of this word is included in the semantics of all verbs of the field " movement»).
In the structure of the semantic field, a core is distinguished, which includes the most common, functionally loaded words. Hyper-hyponymic relations are established between the field name and its core part, which includes lexical units equivalent or opposite in meaning to the field name (i.e. synonyms or antonyms). In the center of the field there is a word denoting a generic concept and is a hyperonym in relation to other words denoting narrower concepts and protruding hyponyms.
Each of these words can, in turn, be a hyperonym in relation to other words, but of a narrower meaning (cf. “ walk»Hyperonyms in relation to words come in, go out, come in etc.).
On the periphery of the field there are nominations acting in their secondary semantic functions. According to their primary values, these units are components of adjacent fields. Therefore, elements of one field (especially peripheral ones) can be included in another field (for example: the verb “ surround"Can be included in the field" movement» - soldiers surrounded the house and in the field "Locations" - trees surround the house).
The functional and semantic organization of semantic fields is based on the constant interaction of the "center" and "periphery", the main elements of the field and the elements of the "periphery" of this field, as well as units of adjacent fields that act in their secondary semantic functions. Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations in the semantic field, various and multidimensional connections of its elements are based on more elementary relations, on the organic interaction of various categorical units within the field.
A classic example of a semantic field is the color field, developed in many languages of the world.
Descriptions of all the available fields (at least one language) do not yet exist, just as there are no exact criteria for their delimitation from the lexical-semantic group and thematic groups.
In addition to semantic fields, other types of fields are distinguished in the language:
- morphosemantic combining words based on not only
semantic affinity, but also morphemic, i.e. by the presence of a common affix or stem (for example, a fragment of the morphosemantic field of verbs of movement with a stem years- In russian language: fly, fly, take off, fly, fly, fly etc.);
- associative , combining words around a word - a stimulus based on common associations (for example: word a donkey evokes in our minds such rows of words as animal, cloven-hoofed, stupidity, stubbornness etc.);
- grammatical combining words based on common grammatical meaning (for example, time field, collateral field etc.);
- syntagmatic combining words (phrases) based on their semantic compatibility (for example, the presence of a verb read involves the use of words such as book, out loud, loudly, written etc.).
The existence in the language of lexical-semantic and thematic groups, as well as various types of fields, indicates that the vocabulary of a language is not just a set of lexical units, but a certain organized and structured unity. Semantic fields and lexical-semantic groups form the macrostructures of the lexical-semantic system of the language.
educational:
1. Kodukhov V.I. Introduction to linguistics. M .: Education, 1979.-
with. 204 - 207.
2. Maslov Yu.S. Introduction to linguistics. M .: Higher school, 1987 .-- p. 96 - 98.
3. Reformatskiy A.A. Introduction to linguistics. M .: Aspect Press, 2001 .-- p. 150-151.
additional:
1. Antrushina G.B. Lexicology of the English language: Textbook for students.
Universities studying on ped. spec. / Antrushina G.B., Afanasyeva O.V.,
Morozova N.N. M .: Bustard, 2000.
2. Arnold I.V. Lexicology of modern English: Textbook. For
in-tov and fak. Foreign language M .: Higher. shk., 1973.
3. Kuznetsov A.M. Structural and semantic parameters in vocabulary. On
material in English. Moscow: Nauka, 1980.
4. Kuznetsova E.V. Lexicology of the Russian language: Textbook for philology. fac.
un-tov. 2nd ed. M .: Higher school, 1989.
5. Novikov L.A. Semantics of the Russian language. M., 1982.
6. Kharitonchik Z.A. Lexicology of the English language: Textbook.
Minsk, 1992.
7. Popova Z.D., Sternin I.A. The lexical system of the language (internal
Voronezh: Voronezh University Publishing House, 1984.
8. Stepanova M.D. Lexicology of the modern German language: Textbook. For
in-tov and fak. Foreign language M .: Higher. shk., 1975.
9. Ufimtseva A.A. Experience in studying vocabulary as a system. (On the material
of English language). M .: Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1962.
10. Ufimtseva A.A. Word in the lexico-semantic system of the language. M., 1968.
Equonim(lat. aequs"Equal" and Greek. onoma"Name") - a concept and its expressing name in relation to other concepts and names of the same level of generalization in the hierarchical system.
Hyperonym(Greek. hyper"Over" and onoma"name") – a word or phrase with a generic, more generalized meaning in relation to words and phrases of a specific, less generalized meaning.
Hyponym(Greek. hypo"Under" and onoma"Name") - a word or phrase of a specific, more special meaning in relation to a word or phrase of a generic, more generalized meaning.
Lexical-semantic group
Lexical-semantic group- the unification of words of one part of speech with a common main component of meaning. LSG stands out within semantic fields. For example: LSH (temperature adjectives): warm, cold, icy, hot, cool, hot, etc.
Signs of LSH
- is a combination of two, several or many words according to their lexical meanings;
- develops historically, i.e. it is dynamic in nature;
- close to the thematic group, but significantly different from it
Example of LSG
So, to the lexico-semantic group lexemes Earth include words:
- planet - globe - world;
- soil - soil - layer;
- possession - manor - manor - manor;
- country - state - power.
Literature
- Filin F.P. "On lexical-semantic word groups"
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
See what the "Lexical-semantic group" is in other dictionaries:
lexical-semantic group- A set of words of one part of speech that have a common semantic feature and similar compatibility ... Research methods and text analysis. Reference dictionary
lexico-semantic word group (лсг)- An extensive organization of words, united by a basic semantic component, which denotes a class of classes of objects, attributes, processes, relationships. For example, the basic semantic component of the LSG “plant” includes in the semantic sphere ... ...
lexico-semantic word group (LSG)- An extensive organization of words, united by a basic semantic component, which denotes a class of classes of objects, attributes, processes, relationships. For example, the basic semantic component of the LSG plant includes the following in the semantic sphere ... ...
lexico-semantic group (LSG)- Words of one part of speech, united by a nuclear (main) seme (for example, LSG verbs of movement, color adjectives, etc.) ... Dictionary of linguistic terms T.V. Foal
semantic group- ▲ set word related (with), the meaning of the frame is a set of words related by content. lexico-semantic group is a group of words of one part of speech, which, in addition to common grammatical semes, have at least one common lexical seme. semantic ... ... Ideographic Dictionary of the Russian Language
Field- Field is a set of linguistic (mainly lexical) units, united by a common content (sometimes also by a common formal indicators) and reflecting the conceptual, subject or functional similarity of the designated phenomena. On… …
_List of abbreviations- Ag. M. Ageev Aleshk. Y. Aleshkovsky A. N. T. A. N. Tolstoy A. Plat. A. Platonov B. You. B. Vasiliev bezl. impersonal Bulg. M. Bulgakov V. view V. Ax. V. Aksenov wines. accusative case V. Kav. V. Kaverin Voin. V. Voinovich V. Sol. V. Soloukhin is tall. ... ... Experimental Syntactic Dictionary
Olga Pavlovna Frolova Date of birth: 1931 (1931) ... Wikipedia
analysis of the word paradigmatic- (analysis scheme) A type of analysis in which the unions of the same parts of speech are considered, their homonymic paradigms, synonymous, antonymic, thematic, hyperhyponymic paradigms, lexico-semantic groups, ... ... Linguistic terms and concepts: Vocabulary. Lexicology. Phraseology. Lexicography
Semantics- (from the Greek σημαντικός denoting) 1) all content, information transmitted by the language or any of its units (word, grammatical form of a word, phrase, sentence); 2) the section of linguistics that studies this content, information; ... Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary