Semasiology 2:
1. Types of semantic relations
2. Synonymy. Types of synonyms
3. Antonymy. Types of antonyms
4. Hyponymy
5. Homonymy. Types of homonyms
1. Types of semantic relations
Four basic types of semantic relations are distinguished. They are proximity, opposition,
inclusion and equivalence.
Firstly, words are seldom the same semantically that is they are not identical in meaning.
They show both a certain semantic difference and similarity. Similarity in meaning is nearly
always partial which makes it possible to speak about the semantic proximity of words.
Let’s compare the adjectives used for describing a female appearance:
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.
It is obvious that these adjectives are characterized by certain features of semantic
dissimilarity which indicates that they are not absolutely identical in meaning.
It may be inferred that semantic proximity implies that two or more words however
different may enter the semantic relations of proximity if they share some semantic features, e.g.,
the words red and green share the semantic features of “colour”, “rainbow colour”, etc.
The words may be graded in semantic proximity: words with a higher degree of semantic
proximity which helps to single out synonyms, and words with a lower degree of semantic
proximity which helps to unite words in broader and less homogeneous groups.
Secondly, the contrast of semantic features helps to establish the semantic relation of
opposition. The meaning of the word black is in contrast to the meaning of the word white. The
relation of opposition implies the exclusion of the meaning of one word by another. Thus, black
is opposed to white, but it is not opposed to either green or yellow. In the latter case we can
speak about the contrast of meaning, but not the semantic relation of opposition.
The semantic relations of opposition are based on the semantic feature uniting two words
by antonymous relations.
Thirdly, inclusion as another type of semantic relations exists between two words if the
meaning of one word contains the semantic features constituting the meaning of the other word.
Such kind of relations is called hyponymic relations. We will see this point in detail further.
Finally, semantic equivalence means full similarity of meaning of two or more words.
Semantic equivalence can seldom be observed in the words and is met much oftener in
sentences, e.g. Mary lives in London is semantically equivalent to Mary lives in the capital of
Great Britain. Semantic equivalence in words is highly unstable, thus, it tends to turn into the
relation of semantic proximity. This tendency may be regarded as a realization of the economy
principle of the language system which do not need words different in form but absolutely
similar in meaning.
2. Synonymy. Types of synonyms
Synonyms are usually defined as words belonging to one part of speech, close in
meaning and interchangeable at least in some contexts. Synonyms are characterized by either the
semantic relations of equivalence or by the semantic relations of proximity. As the degree of
semantic proximity may be different, different types of synonyms can be singled out. Full (total)
synonyms, i.e. words characterized by semantic equivalence, are extremely rare.
The degree of semantic proximity is best of all estimated in terms of the aspects of
meaning, i.e. the denotational, the emotional, and the pragmatic aspect.
The highest degree of proximity is observed in synonyms which have similar
denotational aspects but differ either in the connotational (1) or the pragmatic (2) aspect of
meanin:
1. The difference in connotation may be illustrated by the words famous meaning 'known
widely, having fame' and the word notorious which is defined as 'widely known because of smth.
bad, for example for being criminal, violent, immoral'. Thus, the word famous implies a positive
emotive evaluation, and the word notorious ~ negative.
2. The difference in the pragmatic value of words is found in a far greater number of
words than the difference in the connotational aspect. It can be observed in synonymic pairs
consisting of a native and a borrowed word. In most cases the native word is more informal,
whereas the foreign word has a learned or abstract air, cf: brotherly – fraternal, bodily –
corporal.
Taking into account the difference of synonyms by the three aspects of their meaning
they may be classified into stylistic, ideographic and ideographic-stylistic synonyms.
Stylistic synonymy implies no interchangeability in context because the underlying
situations are different, e.g. children – infants, dad – father. Stylistic synonyms are similar in the
denotational aspect of meaning, but different in the pragmatic (and connotational) aspect.
Substituting one stylistic synonym for another results in an inadequate presentation of the
situation of communication.
Ideographic synonymy presents a still lower degree of semantic proximity and is
observed when the connotational and the pragmatic aspects are similar, but there are certain
differences in the denotational aspect of meaning of two words, e.g. forest – wood, apartment –
flat, shape – form. Though ideographic synonyms correspond to one and the same referential
area, i. e. denote the same thing or a set of closely related things, they are different in the
denotational aspect of their meanings and their interchange would result in a slight change of the
phrase they are used in.
Ideographic-stylistic synonymy is characterized by the lowest degree of semantic
proximity. This type of synonyms includes synonyms which differ both in the denotational and
the connotational and/or the pragmatic aspects of meaning, e.g. ask – inquire, expect –
anticipate. If the synonyms in question have the same patterns of grammatical and lexical
valency, they can still hardly be considered interchangeable in context.
Each synonymic group comprises a dominant element. This synonymic dominant is the
most general term potentially containing the specific features rendered by all the other members
of the synonymic group. In the set leave – depart – quit – retire – clear out the verb leave, being
general and both stylistically and emotionally neutral, can stand for each of the other four terms.
The other four can replace leave only when some specific semantic component prevails over the
general notion. For example, when it is necessary to stress the idea of giving up employment and
stopping work quit is preferable because in this word this particular notion dominates over the
more general idea common to the whole group.
3. Antonymy. Types of antonyms
Antonyms are usually defined as a class of words grouped together on the basis of the
semantic relations of opposition. Antonyms are words belonging to one part of speech sharing
certain common semantic characteristics and in this respect they are similar to such semantic
classes as synonyms, lexical sets, lexico-semantic groups.
There exist different classifications of antonyms.
Structurally, antonyms can be divided into antonyms of the same root, e.g. to do – to
undo, cheerful – cheerless; and antonyms of different roots (2), e.g. day – night, rich – poor.
Semantically, antonyms may be classified into contradictories, contraries and
incompatibles.
Contradictories represent the type of semantic relations that exist between pairs like, for
example, dead – alive, single – married. Contradictory antonyms are mutually opposed, they
deny one another. Contradictories form a privative binary opposition, they are members of twoterm sets. To use one of the words is to contradict the other and to use 'not' before one of them is
to make it semantically equivalent to the other: not dead = alive, not single = married.
Contraries are antonyms that can be arranged into a series according to the increasing
difference in one of their qualities. The most distant elements of this series will be classified as
contrary notions. Contraries are gradable antonyms; they are polar members of a gradual
opposition which may have intermediate elements. This may be observed in cold – hot and cool
– warm which are intermediate members. Thus, we may regard as antonyms not only cold and
hot but also cold and warm. Contrary antonyms may also be considered in terms of degrees of
the quality involved. Thus, water may be cold or very cold, and water in one glass may be colder
than in another glass.
Incompatibles are antonyms which are characterized by the relations of exclusion.
Semantic relations of incompatibility exist among antonyms with a common component of
meaning and may be described as the reverse of hyponymy. For example, to say morning is to
say not afternoon, not evening, not night. The use of one member of this set implies the
exclusion of the other members of the set. Incompatibles differ from contradictories as
incompatibles are members of the multiple-term sets while contradictories are members of twoterm sets. A relation of incompatibility may be also observed between colour terms since the
choice of red, for example, entails the exclusion of black, blue, yellow, etc.
4. Hyponymy
Hyponymy is a relationship between specific and general lexical items where the
meaning of the specific item is included in the meaning of the more general item. Hyponymy is a
kind of asymmetrical synonymy; its basic organization is hierarchical. Let’s see the example: the
word vehicle includes car, bus, tram, etc.
The hyponymic relations may be represented hierarchically:
vehicle
car
bus
tram
The word vehicle is called hyperonym and is defined as a general term. The more specific
term (car, tram, bus) is called hyponym and is included in the general term.
5. Homonymy. Types of homonyms
Homonyms are words which are identical in sound and spelling, or, at least, in one of
these aspects, but different in meaning. The term is derived from Greek "homos", meaning similar
and "onoma", meaning name. English vocabulary is rich in such pairs and even groups of words.
Their identical forms are mostly accidental.
Joke:
• Waiter!
• Yes, sir.
• What's this?
• It's bean soup, sir.
• Never mind what it has been. I want to know what it is now.
The most widely accepted classification is that recognizing homonyms proper,
homophones and homographs.
Homonyms proper are homonyms which have the same pronunciation and spelling, but
differ in meaning, e.g., sound, sound, sound, sound; saw, saw, saw; school, school; mole, mole,
mole; blow, blow, blow.
Homophones are words of the same sound but of different spelling and meaning, e.g., buy,
bye, by; piece, peace; scent, cent, sent; write, right, rite.
Homographs are words different in sound and in meaning but accidentally identical in
spelling, e.g., leadiy), lead(n); wind(n), wind(y); row (n), row (n).
The subdivision of homonyms into homonyms proper, homophones and homographs is not
precise enough and doesn't reflect certain important features of these words. Homonyms may belong
both to the same or to different parts of speech. Classification of homonyms should reflect this
distinctive feature. The paradigm of each word should be considered. Professor Smirmtsky classified
homonyms into two large classes: full homonyms and partial homonyms.
Full lexical homonyms are words which represent the same category of part of speech and
have the same paradigm, e.g., match, match.
Partial homonyms are subdivided into three subgroups:
Simple lexico-grammatical partial homonyms are words which belong to the same
category of parts of speech. Their paradigms have one identical form, but it's never the same form,
e.g., to found, found (to find).
Complex lexico-grammatical partial homonyms are words of different categories of
parts of speech which have one identical form in their paradigms, e.g., one, won; maid, made;
rose, rose.
Partial lexical homonyms are words of the same category of parts of speech which are
identical only in their corresponding forms, e.g., to lie (lay, lain); to lie (lied, lied); can (could); to
can (canned, canned).
Sources of Homonymy
Phonetic change - words undergo changes in the course of their historical development. As
a result of such changes, two or more words which were originally pronounced differently may
develop identical sound forms and become homonymous, e.g., night, knight in OE were not
homonymous, as the initial [k] was pronounced, in ME the initial [k] is not pronounced.
Borrowings can be considered to be one more source of borrowings. A borrowed word
in the final stage of its phonetic adaptation may duplicate in form either a native word or another
borrowing, e.g., write - native; right -native; rite - Latin.
Word-building (conversion, shortening, sound-imitation) also contributes significantly to
the growth of homonymy. The most productive type here is conversion, e.g., comb - to comb, pale
- to pale, aupair — to aupair. Homonyms of this type are the same in sound and spelling but refer to
different categories of parts of speech. Shortening also increases the number of homonyms, e.g., fan enthusiastic admirer of some kind of sport or of an actor, singer, etc; fan (Latin borrowing) - an
implement for waving lightly to produce a cool current of air. Sound-imitation forms pairs of
homonyms with other words, e.g., bang - a loud, sudden, explosive noise; bang - a fringe of hair.