6. INTRALINGUISTIC RELATIONS OF WORDS.
TYPES OF SEMANTIC RELATIONS
1
2
Intralinguistic Relations of Words.
1.1. Syntagmatic Relations.
1.2. Paradigmatic Relations.
Basic Types of Semantic Relations.
2.1. Proximity.
2.2. Equivalence.
2.3. Inclusion. Hyponymic Structures.
2.4. Opposition.
KEY TERMS
Syntagmatic relations, paradigmatic relations, free (denominative) meanings,
semantic proximity, semantic equivalence, inclusion, hyponyms, hyperonym,
semantic opposition, polar opposition, relative opposition.
1. INTRALINGUISTIC RELATIONS OF WORDS
The principles which determine the internal structure of the language were
derived by Ferdinand de Saussure from two basic notions which have become
traditional in linguistics. Word-meaning can be perceived through intralinguistic
relations that exist between words. Intralinguistic relations of words are basically
of two types: syntagmatic and paradigmatic.
1.1. SYNTAGMATIC RELATIONS
Syntagmatic relations are the relationships that a linguistic unit has with
other units in the stretch of speech in which it occurs. Syntagmatic relations define
the meaning the word possesses when it is used in combination with other words,
for example, the meaning of the verb to get can be understood from the following
contexts: He got a letter (to receive); He got tired (to become); He got to London
(to arrive); He could not get the piano through the door (to move smth. to or from
a position or place). So, syntagmatic relations are linear relations between words.
Most words come to the fore only when the word is used in certain contexts.
This is true of all polysemantic words. The adjective yellow, for example, when
used in isolation is understood to denote a certain colour, whereas other meanings
of this word, for instance, ‘envious’, ‘suspicious’ or ‘sensational’, ‘corrupt’ are
perceived only in certain contexts: a yellow look, the yellow press, etc.
Context is the minimal stretch of speech determining each individual
meaning of the word. The meaning or meanings representative of the semantic
structure of the word and least dependent on context are usually described as free
or denominative meanings. Thus, we assume that the meaning ‘a piece of
furniture’ is the denominative meaning of the word table, the meaning ‘construct,
produce’ is the free or denominative meaning of the verb make.
1.2. PARADIGMATIC RELATIONS
Paradigmatic relations are the relations that a linguistic unit has with units
by which it may be replaced. Paradigmatic relations exist between words which
make up one of the subgroups of vocabulary units: sets of synonyms, pairs of
antonyms, lexico-semantic groups, etc. Paradigmatic relations define the meaning
the word possesses through its interrelations with other members of the subgroup
in question. For instance, the meaning of the verb to get can be fully understood in
comparison with other units of the synonymic set: to obtain, to receive, to gain, to
acquire, etc (see Diagram 11.
Diagram 11. Syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations of words
Syntagmatic relations
He
got
a letter.
I
received
an e-mail
She obtained
a note
Paradigmatic
relations
Paradigmatic relations are associative relationships between words. The
distinction between syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations is conventionally
indicated by horizontal and vertical presentation.
2. BASIC TYPES OF SEMANTIC RELATIONS
There are four basic types of semantic relations: proximity, equivalence,
inclusion and opposition.
2.1. PROXIMITY
Words very seldom are the same semantically, i.e. they are not identical in
meaning and show a certain semantic difference as well as similarity. Meaning
similarity is seldom complete and is nearly always partial which makes it possible
to speak about the semantic proximity of words and, in general, about the relations
of semantic proximity. Let us compare the meanings of some adjectives, which
form a lexico-semantic group (see Table 5).
Table 5. Adjectives used for describing a female appearance from the point
of view of similarity and dissimilarity in their content side
Beautiful
Extremely good-looking, much more so than most women
Pretty
Good-looking in an ordinary way but not really beautiful or sexually
exciting
Attractive
Good-looking, especially in a way that makes you feel sexually
interested
Striking
Very attractive, especially because a woman has a particular feature,
such as hair or eyes, that is beautiful and unusual
Handsome Good-looking in an unusual way, especially because a woman is tall
or strong or looks as if she has a strong character
We can see that the adjectives are characterized by certain features of
semantic dissimilarity which shows that they are not absolutely identical in
meaning.
Semantic proximity implies that two (or more) words however different
may enter the semantic relations of proximity if they share certain semantic
features, for example, the words red and green share the semantic features of
‘colour’, ‘basic or rainbow colour’, ‘complementary colour, etc.
The words may be graded in semantic proximity. A higher degree of
semantic proximity helps to single out synonyms while a lower degree of
proximity provides for a description of boarder and less homogeneous semantic
groups. For example, the degree of proximity will be much lower in the words red
and green which share the semantic feature of ‘colour’ than in red and scarlet or
green and emerald.
The words table and chair share the semantic features of ‘thingness’,
‘object’, ‘piece of furniture’ that form a good basis for grouping them together
with other nouns denoting ‘pieces of furniture’.
2.2. EQUIVALENCE
Semantic equivalence implies full similarity of meaning of two or more
language units. Being an extreme case of semantic proximity it is qualitatively
different from all other cases suggesting the existence of units different in form but
having identical meaning, i.e. one and the same content side.
Semantic equivalence is very seldom observed in words and is claimed to be
much oftener encountered in case of sentences, for instance, the phrase John is
taller than Bill may be considered equivalent to the phrase Bill is shorter than
John, and the phrase She lives in Paris is semantically equivalent to She lives in the
capital of France.
Semantic equivalence in words is highly unstable, it tends to turn into the
relations of semantic proximity. This pronounced tendency to semantic
differentiation may be viewed as a realization of the economy principle in the
language system which ‘does not need’ words different in form and absolutely
similar in meaning.
2.3. INCLUSION. HYPONYMIC STRUCTURE
Another type of semantic relations is the relationship of inclusion which
exists between two words if the meaning of one word contains the semantic
features constituting the meaning of the other word. The semantic relations of
inclusion are called hyponymic relations. For example, vehicle includes car, bus,
taxi, tram and flower includes daffodil, carnation, snowdrop, lily. The hyponymic
relations may be viewed as the hierarchical relationships between the meaning of
the general and the individual terms.
The general term – vehicle, tree, animal – is referred to as the classifier or
the hyperonym. The specific term is called the hyponym (car, tram, train; oak,
ash, birch; cat, tiger, horse). The more specific term (the hyponym) is included in
the more general term (the hyperonym), for example, the classifier move and
members of the group – walk, run, saunter. The individual terms contain the
meaning of the general term in addition to their individual meanings which
distinguish them from each other.
It is important to note that in hyponymic structure certain words may be both
classifiers (hyperonyms) and members of the group (hyponyms) (see Diagram 12).
Diagram 12. Hyponymic structure of words describing plants
Plant
Grass
bush
pine
white pine
shrub куст
tree
oak
ash
flower
maple
yellow pine
The diagram demonstrates that the words tree and pine are both hyperonyms
(the classifiers) and hyponyms (the members of the group).
2.4. OPPOSITION
The contrast of semantic features helps to establish the semantic relations of
opposition. For instance, the meaning of the word black is contrasted to that of the
word white. The relations of opposition imply the exclusion of the meaning of one
word by another, which, in fact, implies that the referential areas of the two (or
more) words are opposed. Thus, black is opposed to white but it is not opposed to
either red or yellow. In the latter case we can speak about contrast of meaning, but
not the semantic relations of opposition.
There are two types of relations of semantic opposition:
1) Polar oppositions are those which are based on the semantic feature
uniting two linguistic units by antonymous relations, for example, rich – poor,
dead – alive, young – old.
2) Relative oppositions imply that there are several semantic features on
which the opposition rests. The verb to leave means ‘to go away from’ and its
opposite, the verb to arrive denotes ‘to reach a place, esp. at the end of a journey’.
It is quite obvious that the verb to leave implies certain finality and movement in
the opposite direction from the place specified. The verb to arrive lays special
emphasis semantically on ‘reaching something’, i.e. attaining a point which is set
as an aim and implies effort in achieving the goal.
Thus, it is not just one semantic feature the presence of which in one case
accounts for the polarity of meaning, but a whole system of semantic features
which underlies the opposition of two words in the semantic aspect.
QUESTIONS
1. What are the basic types of intralinguistic relations of words?
2. What do syntagmatic relations mean?
3. What relations are called paradigmatic?
4. How do most polysemantic words come to the fore?
5. Which meanings are called free or denominative?
6. What are the main types of semantic relations?
7. What does semantic proximity imply? What are the two extreme cases of
semantic proximity?
8. What is semantic equivalence? Is semantic equivalence a stable type of
semantic relations?
9. What is meant by inclusion as a type of semantic relations?
10.What is the other linguistic term used to denote semantic relations of inclusion?
11.What do the terms hyponym and hyperonym mean?
12.What is opposition as a type of semantic relations?
13.What types of semantic opposition can be singled out?
REFERENCES:
1. Гинзбург Р.З. Лексикология английского языка. М. Высшая школа,
1979. – С.- 47-55.
2. Зыкова И.В. Практический курс английской лексикологии. М.:
Академия, 2006. – С. – 39-43.