Exercises in lexicology

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Table of Contents

Seminar 1. Lexicology as a Science. The Object of Lexicology

The main lexicological units. Their similarity and distinctive functions

Questions

Types of Lexicology. Approaches to Language Study

Questions

The Aims and Tasks of the Course of Modern English Lexicology

Questions

Links of Lexicology with Other Branches of Linguistics

Questions

Seminar 2. Semasiology

Meaning as a Linguistic Notion. Approaches to Meaning Study

Questions

The Semantic Triangle. The Interrelation of Meaning with Sound-form, Referent and Concept

Questions

Types of Meaning

Questions

Semantic Structure of Words. Componential Analysis

Questions

Aspects of Lexical Meaning

Questions

Word-Meaning and Motivation

Questions

Tasks

Seminar 3. Polysemy and Homonymy

Diachronic and Synchronic Approaches to Polysemy

Questions

Polysemy and Context. Types of Context

Questions:

Two Processes of the Semantic Development of a Word

Questions:

Homonymy. Sources of Homonyms

Questions

Classification of Homonyms

Questions

Polysemy and Homonymy: Etymological and Semantic Criteria

Questions

Tasks

Seminar 4. Change of Meaning

Causes of Semantic Change

Questions

Nature of Semantic Change. Metaphor, Metonymy and Other Minor Types

Questions

Results of Semantic Change

Questions

Historical Changeability of Semantic Structure

Questions

Tasks

Seminar 5. Lexical Paradigmatics

English Vocabulary as a System

Questions

Types of Semantic Relations of Words

Questions

Different Groupings of Words

Morphological Groupings

Questions

Semantic Groupings

Questions

Antonyms

Questions

Tasks

Seminar 6. Syntagmatic Relations of Words

Lexical and Grammatical Valency

Questions

Types of Word-Groups

Questions

Phraseology. Criteria of phraseological units

Questions

Classification of Phraseological Units

Questions

The Ways of Forming Phraseological Units

Questions

Proverbs and Sayings

Questions

Tasks

Seminar 7. Morphological Structure of English Words and Word-Formation

Morphemes, Their Definition. Allomorphs

Questions

Classification of Morphemes

Questions

Morphemic and Derivational Analyses

Questions

Productive Ways of Word-Building. Affixation. Synonymity, homonymity and polysemy of affixes

Questions

Conversion. Approaches to Conversion. Synchronic and Diachronic Treatment of Conversion. Types of Relations between Converted Pairs

Questions

Compounding

Questions

Shortening and Other Minor Types145

Questions

Non-Productive Ways of Word-Building

Questions

Historical Changeability of Word-Structure

Questions

Seminar 8. Etymology

Words of Native Origin

Questions

Borrowings. Causes and Ways of Borrowing. Criteria of Borrowings

Questions

Assimilation of Borrowings

Questions

Influence of Borrowings

Questions

Etymological Doublets

Questions

International Words

Questions

Appendix A. Lexicological analysis of the text

Example analysis

Appendix B. Mind-map of lexicology terms

Appendix C. Definitions

Seminar 1. Lexicology as a science. The object of lexicology

Seminar 2. Semasiology

Seminar 3. Polysemy and Homonymy

Seminar 4. Change of Meaning

Appendix D. Examination Questions

Appendix E

Seminar 1. Lexicology as a science. The object of lexicology

Seminar 2. Semasiology

Seminar 3. Polysemy and Homonymy

Seminar 4. Change of Meaning

Seminar 5. Lexical Paradigmatics

Seminar 6. Syntagmatic relations o words



Seminar 1Lexicology as a Science. The Object of Lexicology

The main lexicological units. Their similarity and distinctive functions

I.V. Arnold, The English Word, §1.4. Types of Lexical Units [pp. 18-21]:

The term unit means one of the elements into which a whole may be divided or analyzed and which possesses the basic properties of this whole. The units of a vocabulary or lexical units are two-facet elements possessing form and meaning. The basic unit forming the bulk of the vocabulary is the word. Other units are a morpheme that is parts of words, into which words may be analyzed, and set expressions or groups of words into which words may be combined.

Words 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.

In the spelling system of the language words are the smallest units of written discourse: they are marked off by solid spelling. The ability of an average speaker to segment any utterance into words is sustained by literacy. Yet it is a capacity only reinforced by education:it is well known that every speaker of any language is always able to break any utterance into words. The famous American linguist E. Sapir testified that even illiterate American Indians were perfectly capable of dictating to him -- when asked to do so -- texts in their own language "word by word". The segmentation of a word into morphemes, on the other hand, presents sometimes difficulties even for trained linguists.

Many authors devoted a good deal of space to discussing which of the two: the word or the morpheme is to be regarded as the basic unit. Many American linguists (Ch. Hockett or Z. Harris, for instance) segmented an utterance into morphemes ignoring words. Soviet lexicologists proceed from the assumption that it is the word that is the basic unit, especially as all branches of linguistic knowledge and all levels of language have the word as their focal point. A convincing argumentation and an exhaustive review of literature is offered by A. A. Ufimtseva (1980).

If, however, we look now a little more closely into this problem, we shall see that the boundaries separating these three sets of units are sometimes fluid. Every living vocabulary is constantly changing adapting itself to the functions of communication in the changing world of those who use it. In this process the vocabulary changes not only quantitatively by creating new words from the already available corpus of morphemes and according to existing patterns but also qualitatively. In these qualitative changes new morphemic material and new word-building patterns come into being, and new names sometimes adapt features characteristic of other sets, those of groups of words, for instance.

Orthographic words are written as a sequence of letters bounded by spaces on a page. Yet, there exist in the English vocabulary lexical units that are not identical with orthographic words but equivalent to them. Almost any part of speech contains units indivisible either syntactically or in terms of meaning, or both, but graphically divided. A good example is furnished by complex prepositions: along with, as far as, in spite of, except for, due to, by means of, for the sake of, etc.

The same point may be illustrated by phrasal verbs, so numerous in English: bring up 'to educate', call on 'to visit', make up 'to apply cosmetics', 'to reconcile after a disagreement' and some other meanings, put off 'to postpone'. The semantic unity of these verbs is manifest in the possibility to substitute them by orthographically single-word verbs. Though formally broken up, they function like words and they are integrated semantically so that their meaning cannot be inferred from their constituent elements. The same is true about phrasal verbs consisting of the verbs give, make, take and some others used with a noun instead of its homonymous verb alone: give a smile, make a promise, take a walk (cf. to smile, to promise, to walk).

Some further examples are furnished by compound nouns. Sometimes they are not joined by solid spelling or hyphenation but written separately, although in all other respects they do not differ from similar one-word nominations. By way of example let us take some terms for military ranks. The terms lieutenant-commander and lieutenant-colonel are hyphenated, whereas wing commander and flight lieutenant are written separately. Compare also such inconsistencies as all right and altogether, never mind and nevertheless.

All these are, if not words, then at least word equivalents because they are indivisible and fulfil the nominative, significative, communicative and pragmatic functions just as words do.

It is worth while dwelling for a moment on formulaic sentences which tend to be ready-made and are characterized by semantic unity and indivisibility: All right, Allow me, Nothing doing, Never mind, How do you do, Quite the contrary. They are learned as unanalyzable wholes and can also be regarded as word equivalents.

To sum up: the vocabulary of a language is not homogeneous. If we view it as a kind of field, we shall see that its bulk, its central part is formed by lexical units possessing all the distinctive features of words, i.e. semantic, orthographic and morphological integrity as well as the capacity of being used in speech in isolation. The marginal elements of this field reveal only some of these features, and yet belong to this set too. Thus, phrasal verbs, complex prepositions, some compounds, phraseological units, formulaic expressions, etc. are divided in spelling but are in all other respects equivalent to words. Morphemes, on the other hand, a much smaller subset of the vocabulary, cannot be used as separate utterances and are less autonomous in other respects but otherwise also function as lexical items. The new term recently introduced in mathematics to describe sets with blurred boundaries seems expressive and worthy of use in characterizing a vocabulary -- such sets are called fuzzy sets.

R.S Ginzburg, A Course in Modern English Lexicology, §4. Lexical Units, §5. Varieties of Words [pp. 9-11]:

It was pointed out above that Lexicology studies various lexical units: morphemes, words, variable word-groups and phraseological units. We proceed from the assumption that the word is the basic unit of language system, the largest on the morphologic and the smallest on the syntactic plane of linguistic analysis. The word is a structural and semantic entity within the language system.

It should be pointed out that there is another approach to the concept of the basic language unit. The criticism of this viewpoint cannot be discussed within the framework of the present study. Suffice it to say that here we consistently proceed from the concept of the word as the basic unit in all the branches of Lexicology. Both words and phraseological units are names for things, namely the names of actions, objects, qualities, etc. Unlike words proper, however, phraseological units are word- groups consisting of two or more words whose combination is integrated as a unit with a specialized meaning of the whole. To illustrate, the lexical or to be more exact the vocabulary units table, wall, taxi are words denoting various objects of the outer world; the vocabulary units black frost, red tape, a skeleton in the cupboard are phraseological units: each is a word- group with a specialized meaning of the whole, namely black frost is 'frost without snow or rime', red tape denotes bureaucratic methods, a skeleton in the cupboard refers to a fact of which a family is ashamed and which it tries to hide.

Although the ordinary speaker is acutely word-conscious and usually finds no difficulty either in isolating words from an utterance or in identifying them in the process of communication, the precise linguistic definition of a word is far from easy to state; no exhaustive definition of the word has yet been given by linguists.

The word as well as any linguistic sign is a two-facet unit possessing both form and content or, to be more exact, soundform and meaning. Neither can exist without the other. For example, [и?mbl] is a word within the framework of the English language primarily because it has the lexical meaning - `a small cap of metal, plastic, etc. worn on the finger in sewing' (Russ. наперсток) and the grammatical meaning of the Common case, singular. In other languages it is not a word, but a meaningless sound-cluster.

When used in actual speech the word undergoes certain modification and functions in one of its forms.

The system showing a word in all its word-forms is called its paradigm. The lexical meaning of a word is the same throughout the paradigm, i.e. all the word-forms of one and the same word are lexically identical. The grammatical meaning varies from one form to another (cf. to take, takes, took, taking or singer, singer's, singers, singers'). Therefore, when we speak of the word singer or the word take as used in actual utterances (cf., His brother is a well-known singer or I wonder who has taken my umbrella) we use the term word conventionally, because what is manifested in the speech event is not the word as a whole but one of its forms which is identified as belonging to one definite paradigm.

There are two approaches to the paradigm: (a) as a system of forms of one word it reveals the differences and relationships between them; (b) in abstraction from concrete words it is treated as a pattern on which every word of one part of speech models its forms, thus serving to distinguish one part of speech from another. Cf. the noun paradigm - ( ), -'s, -s, -s' as distinct from that of the regular verb - ( ), -s, -ed1, -ed2, -ing, etc.

Besides the grammatical forms of words, i.e. word-forms, some scholars distinguish lexical varieties which they term variants of words. Distinction is made between two basic groups of variants of words.

In actual speech a word or to be more exact a polysemantic word is used in one of its meanings. Such a word in one of its meanings is described as lexico-semantic variant. Thus Group One comprises lexico-semantic variants, i.e. polysemantic words in each of their meanings, as exemplified by the meaning of the verb to learn in word-groups like to learn at school, cf. to learn about (of) smth, etc.

Group Two comprises phonetic and morphological variants. As examples of phonetic variants the pronouncing variants of the adverbs often and again can be given, cf. ['?:fn] and ['?:ftan], [?'ge?n] and [?'gen]. The two variant forms of the past indefinite tense of verbs like to learn illustrate morphological variants, cf. learned[-d] and learnt [-t]. Parallel formations of the geologic--geological, phonetic--phonetical type also enter the group of morphological variants.

It may be easily observed that the most essential feature of variants of words of both groups is that a slight change in the morphemic or phonemic composition of a word is not connected with any modification of its meaning and, vice versa, a change in meaning is not followed by any structural changes, either morphemic or phonetic. Like word-forms variants of words are identified in the process of communication as making up one and the same word. Thus, within the language system the word exists as a system and unity of all its forms and variants.

Questions:

What is a unit? What language units do you know?

What units are studied by lexicology?

What feature do all lexicological units possess?

What is the basic unit of lexicology?

Prove that morphemes, words and set expressions are two-facet units.

What distinguishes morphemes from words and set expressions?

What distinguishes set expressions from words?

How should we treat boundary cases, such as phrasal verbs?

What other boundary cases do you know?

What are the two approaches to word paradigm?

What are variants of words? How are they classified?

Types of Lexicology. Approaches to Language Study

I.V. Arnold, The English Word, §1.1. The Object of Lexicology [pp. 9-12]

The general study of words and vocabulary, irrespective of the specific features of any particular language, is known as general lexicology. Linguistic phenomena and properties common to all languages are generally referred to as language universals. Special lexicology devotes its attention to the description of the characteristic peculiarities in the vocabulary of a given language. […]

It goes without saying that every special lexicology is based on the principles of general lexicology, and the latter forms a part of general linguistics. Much material that holds good for any language is therefore also included, especially with reference to principles, concepts and terms. The illustrative examples are everywhere drawn from the English language as spoken in Great Britain.

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 extralinguistic forces modifying their structure, meaning and usage. In the past historical treatment was always combined with the comparative method. Historical lexicology has been criticized for its atomistic approach, i.e. for treating every word as an individual and isolated unit. This drawback is, however, not intrinsic to the science itself. Historical study of words is not necessarily atomistic. In the light of recent investigations it becomes clear that there is no reason why historical lexicology cannot survey the evolution of a vocabulary as an adaptive system, showing its change and development in the course of time.

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.

It will, for instance, contrast the word boy with its derivatives: boyhood, boyish, boyishly, etc. It will describe its semantic structure comprising alongside with its most frequent meaning, such variants as 'a son of any age', 'a male servant', and observe its syntactic functioning and combining possibilities. This word, for instance, can be also used vocatively in such combinations as old boy, my dear boy, and attributively, meaning 'male', as in boy-friend.

Lexicology also studies all kinds of semantic grouping and semantic relations: synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, semantic fields, etc.

Meaning relations as a whole are dealt with in semantics -- the study of meaning which is relevant both for lexicology and grammar.

The distinction between the two basically different ways in which language may be viewed, the historical or diachronic (Gr dia 'through' and chronos 'time') and the descriptive or synchronic (Gr syn 'together', 'with'), is a methodological distinction, a difference of approach, artificially separating for the purpose of study what in real language is inseparable, because actually every linguistic structure and system exists in a state of constant development. The distinction between a synchronic and a diachronic approach is due to the Swiss philologist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913). Indebted as we are to him for this important dichotomy, we cannot accept either his axiom that synchronic linguistics is concerned with systems and diachronic linguistics with single units or the rigorous separation between the two. Subsequent investigations have shown the possibility and the necessity of introducing the historical point of view into systematic studies of languages.

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 extralinguistic forces influencing the development of words are considered in historical lexicology. The point may be illustrated by the following example:

Post comes into English through French and Italian from Latin. Low Latin posta -- posita fem. p.p. of Latin ponere, posit, v. 'place'. In the beginning of the 16th century it meant 'one of a number of men stationed with horses along roads at intervals, their duty being to ride forward with the King's "packet" or other letters, from stage to stage'. This meaning is now obsolete, because this type of communication is obsolete. The word, however, has become international and denotes the present-day system of carrying and delivering letters and parcels. Its synonym mail, mostly used in America, is an ellipsis from a mail of letters, i.e. 'a bag of letters'. It comes from Old French male (modern malle) 'bag', a word of Germanic origin. Thus, the etymological meaning of mail is 'a bag or a packet of letters or dispatches for conveyance by post'. Another synonym of bag is sackwhich shows a different meaning development. Sack is a large bag of coarse cloth, the verb to sack 'dismiss from service' comes from the expression to get the sack, which probably rose from the habit of craftsmen of old times, who on getting a job took their own tools to the works; when they left or were dismissed they were given a sack to carry away the tools.

In this connection it should be emphasized that the social nature of language and its vocabulary is not limited to the social essence of extralinguistic factors influencing their development from without. Language being a means of communication the social essence is intrinsic to the language itself. Whole groups of speakers, for example, must coincide in a deviation, if it is to result in linguistic change.

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 behaviour in small social groups that is the focal point of sociolinguistic analysis. A. D. Schweitzer has proved that such microsociological approach alone cannot give a complete picture of the sociology of language. It should be combined with the study of such macrosociological factors as the effect of mass media, the system of education, language planning, etc. An analysis of the social stratification of languages takes into account the stratification of society as a whole.

Although the important distinction between a diachronic and a synchronic, a linguistic and an extralinguistic approach must always be borne in mind, yet it is of paramount importance for the student to take into consideration that in language reality all the aspects are interdependent and cannot be understood one without the other. Every linguistic investigation must strike a reasonable balance between them.

The lexicology of present-day English, therefore, although having aims of its own, different from those of its historical counterpart, cannot be divorced from the latter. In what follows not only the present status of the English vocabulary is discussed: the description would have been sadly incomplete if we did not pay attention to the historical aspect of the problem -- the ways and tendencies of vocabulary development.

R.S. Ginzburg, A Course In Modern English Lexicology, §1. Definition. Links with Other Branches of Linguistics, §2. Two Approaches to Language Study, §3. Lexicology and Sociolinguistics [pp. 7-9]

Distinction is naturally made between General Lexicology and Special Lexicology. General Lexicology is part of General Linguistics; it is concerned with the study of vocabulary irrespective of the specific features of any particular language. Special Lexicology is the Lexicology of a particular language (e.g. English, Russian, etc.), i.e. the study and description of its vocabulary and vocabulary units, primarily words as the main units of language. Needless to say that every Special Lexicology is based on the principles worked out and laid down by General Lexicology, a general theory of vocabulary.

There is also a close relationship between Lexicology and Stylistics or, to be more exact, Linguo-Stylistics (Linguistic Stylistics). Linguo-Stylistics is concerned with the study of the nature, functions and structure of stylistic devices, on the one hand, and with the investigation of each style of language, on the other, i.e. with its aim, its structure, its characteristic features and the effect it produces as well as its interrelation with the other styles of language.

There are two principal approachesinlinguistic science to the study of language, namely the synchronic (Gr. syn - 'together, with' andchromos - 'time') and the diachronic (Gr.dia - 'through') approach. With regard to Special Lexicology the synchronic approach is concerned with the vocabulary of a language as it exists at a given time, for instance, at the present time. It is special Descriptive Lexicology that deals with the vocabulary and vocabulary units of a particular language at a certain time. A Course in Modern English Lexicology is therefore a course in Special Descriptive Lexicology, its object of study being the English vocabulary as it exists at the present time.

The diachronic approach in terms of Special Lexicology deals with the changes and the development of vocabulary in the course of time. It is special Historical Lexicology that deals with the evolution of the vocabulary units of a language as time goes by. An English Historical Lexicology would be concerned, therefore, with the origin of English vocabulary units, their change and development, the linguistic and extralinguistic factors modifying their structure, meaning and usage within the history of the English language.

It should be emphatically stressed that the distinction between the synchronic and the diachronic study is merely a-difference of approach separating for the purposes of investigation what in real language is inseparable. The two approaches should not be contrasted, or set one against the other; in fact, they are intrinsically interconnected and interdependent: every linguistic structure and system actually exists in a state of constant development so that the synchronic state of a language system is a result of a long process of linguistic evolution, of its historical development.

A good example illustrating both the distinction between the two approaches and their interconnection is furnished by the wordsto begandbeggar.

Synchronically, the wordsto beg andbeggar are related as a simple and a derived word, the nounbeggar being the derived member of the pair, for the derivative correlation between the two is the same as in the case ofto sing--singer, to teach--teacher, etc. When we approach the problem diachronically, however, we learn that the nounbeggar was borrowed from Old French and only presumed to have been derived from a shorter word, namely the verbto beg, as in the English language agent nouns are commonly derived from verbs with the help of the agent suffix -er.

Closely connected with Historical Lexicology is Contrastive and Comparative Lexicology whose aims are to study the correlation between the vocabularies of two or more languages, and find out the correspondences between the vocabulary units of the languages under comparison. Needless to say, one can hardly overestimate the importance of Contrastive Lexicology as well as of Comparative Linguistics in general for the purpose of class-room teaching of foreign languages. Of primary importance in this respect is the comparison of the foreign language with the mother tongue.

It is a matter of common knowledge that the vocabulary of any language is never stable, never static, but is constantly changing, growing and decaying. The changes in the vocabulary of a language are due both to linguistic and extralinguistic causes or to a combination of both. The extralinguistic causes are determined by the social nature of the language. In this respect there is a tremendous difference between Lexicology, on the one hand, and Phonology, Morphology and Syntax, on the other. Words, to a far greater degree than sounds, grammatical forms, or syntactical arrangements, are subject to change, for the word-stock of a language directly and immediately reacts to changes in social life, to whatever happens in the life of the speech community in question. To illustrate the immediate connection between the development of vocabulary and the extra-linguistic causes a few examples will suffice.

The intense development of science and technology has lately given birth to a great number of new words such ascomputer, cyclotron, radar, psycholinguistics, etc.; the conquest and research of outer space started by the Soviet people contributed words likesputnik, lunokhod, babymoon, moon-car, spaceship, etc. It is significant that the suffix-nik occurring in the nounsputnik is freely applied to new words of various kinds, e.g. flopnik, mousenik, woofnik, etc.

The factor of the social need also manifests itself in the mechanism of word-formation. Among the adjectives with the suffix-y derived from noun stems denoting fabrics (cf.silky, velvety, woolly, etc.) the adjective tweedy stands out as meaning not merely resembling or like tweed but rather 'of sports style'. It is used to describe the type of appearance (or style of clothes) which is characteristic of a definite social group, namely people going in for country sports. Thus, the adjectivetweedy in this meaning defines a notion which is specific for the speech community in question and is, therefore, sociolinguistically conditioned.

From the above-adduced examples it follows that in contrast with Phonology, Morphology and Syntax, Lexicology is essentially a sociolinguistic science. The lexicologist should always take into account correlations between purely linguistic facts and the underlying social facts which brought them into existence, his research should be based on establishing scientifically grounded interrelation and points of contact which have come into existence between the language and the social life of the speech community in question.

I.V. Zykova, A Practical Course in English Lexicology, 1. The Object of Lexicology. Links of Lexicology with Other Branches of Linguistics, 2. Two Approaches to Language Study [pp. 6-8]

Distinction is naturally made between General Lexicology and Special Lexicology.

The general study of words and vocabulary, irrespective of the specific features of any particular language, is known as General Lexicology.

Special Lexicology is the lexicology of a particular language (e.g. English, Russian, etc.), i.e. the study and description of its words and vocabulary. Special Lexicology may be historical and descriptive.

The evolution of any vocabulary, as well as of its single elements, forms the object of Historical Lexicology. This branch of linguistics deals with the origin of various words, their change and development, and investigates the linguistic and extra-linguistic forces modifying their structure, meaning and usage. In the past historical treatment was always combined with the comparative method. Historical lexicology has been criticized for its atomistic approach, i.e. for treating every word as an individual and isolated unit. This drawback is, however, not intrinsic to the science itself.

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.

There are two principal approaches in linguistic science to the study of language material, namely the synchronic (or descriptive) and the diachronic (or historical) approach. The distinction between a synchronic and a diachronic approach is due to the Swiss philologist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857 --1913) who separated the two approaches stating that synchronic linguistics is concerned with systems and diachronic linguistics -- with single units. Subsequent investigations, however, have shown the possibility and the necessity of introducing the historical point of view into systematic studies even in lexicology.

The term 'synchronic' is composed of two Greek morphemes syn meaning 'together, with' and chronos which denotes 'time'. Thus, with regard to special lexicology the synchronic approach is concerned with the vocabulary of a language as it exists at a given period of time, e.g. at the present time.

The term 'diachronic' is composed of the Greek morphemes dia meaning 'through' and chronos meaning 'time'. Thus, the diachronic approach in terms of special lexicology deals with the changes and the development of vocabulary in the course of time.

The two approaches in lexicology (synchronic and diachronic) should not be contrasted or set one against the other; in fact, they are interconnected and interdependent: every linguistic structure and system exists in a state of a constant development so that the synchronic state of a language system is a result of a long process of linguistic evolution, the result of the historical development of the language.

A good example illustrating both the distinction between the two approaches and their interconnection is furnished by the words to beg and beggar. Synchronically, these words are related as a simple word {to beg) and a derived word (beggar). The noun beggar is derived from the verb to beg by means of the suffix -ar. Diachronically, however, we learn that the noun beggar was borrowed from Old French and the verb to beg appeared in the English language as a result of back derivation, i. e. it was derived from the noun beggar.

Thus, the synchronic approach studies language at a theoretical 'point' in time. It refers to Descriptive Lexicology as this branch of Linguistics deals with the vocabulary and vocabulary units of language at a certain time. The diachronic approach refers to Historical Lexicology that studies the development of language or languages over time.

Questions:

What are the two main branches of lexicology? What do they study?

What is historical lexicology? What is descriptive lexicology?

Prove that social nature of language is important for lexicology.

What are the two approaches to language study?

Give example of applying the two approaches.

How do the two approaches correlate to historical and descriptive lexicology?

How do they correlate to each other?

Which lexicology do we study?

The Aims and Tasks of the Course of Modern English Lexicology

R.S. Ginzburg, A Course in Modern English Lexicology, §6. Course of Modern English Lexicology. Its Aims and Significance [pp. 11-12]

Modern English Lexicology aims at giving a systematic description of the word-stock of Modern English. Words, their component parts -- morphemes -- and various types of word-groups, are subjected to structural and semantic analysis primarily from the synchronic angle. In other words, Modern English Lexicology investigates the problems of word-structure and word-formation in Modern English, the semantic structure of English words, the main principles underlying the classification of vocabulary units into various groupings, the laws governing the replenishment of the vocabulary with new vocabulary units.

It also studies the relations existing between various lexical layers of the English vocabulary and the specific laws and regulations that govern its development at the present time. The source and growth of the English vocabulary, the changes it has undergone in its history are also dwelt upon, as the diachronic approach revealing the vocabulary in the making cannot but contribute to the understanding of its workings at the present time.

It has now become a tradition to include in a Course of Lexicology a short section dealing with Lexicography, the science and art of dictionary-compiling, because Lexicography is a practical application of Lexicology so that the dictionary-maker is inevitably guided in his work by the principles laid down by the lexicologist as a result of his investigations. It is common knowledge that in his investigation the lexicologist makes use of various methods. An acquaintance with these methods is an indispensable part of a course of lexicology.

Modern English Lexicology as a subject of study forms part of the Theoretical Course of Modern English and as such is inseparable from its other component parts, i.e. Grammar, Phonetics, Stylistics, on the one hand, and the Course of History of the English Language, on the other.

The language learner will find the Course of Modern English Lexicology of great practical importance. He will obtain much valuable information concerning the English wordstock and the laws and regulations governing the formation and usage of English words and word-groups. Besides, the Course is aimed both at summarizing the practical material already familiar to the students from foreign language classes and at helping the students to develop the skills and habits of generalizing the linguistic phenomena observed. The knowledge the students gain from the Course of Modern English Lexicology will guide them in all their dealings with the English word-stock and help them apply this information to the solution of practical problems that may face them in class-room teaching. Teachers should always remember that practical command alone does not qualify a person to teach a language.

This textbook treats the following basic problems:

Semasiology and semantic classifications of words;

Word-groups and phraseological units;

Word-structure;

Word-formation;

Etymological survey of the English word-stock;

Various aspects of vocabulary units and replenishment of Modern English word-stock;

Variants and dialects of Modern English;

Fundamentals of English Lexicography;

Methods and Procedures of Lexicological Analysis.

I.V. Zykova, A Practical Course in English Lexicology, 3. The Course of Modern English Lexicology [p. 9]

Modern English Lexicology aims at giving a systematic description of the word-stock of Modern English. Words, their component parts -- morphemes -- and various types of word-groups, are subjected to structural and semantic analysis primarily from the synchronic angle. Thus, Modern English Lexicology investigates the problems of word-structure and word-formation in Modern English, the semantic structure of English words, the main principles underlying the classification of vocabulary units into various groupings, the laws governing the replenishment of the vocabulary with new vocabulary units.

Modern English Lexicology studies the relations between various layers of the English vocabulary and the specific laws and regulations that govern its development at the present time. The source and growth of the English vocabulary, the changes it has undergone in its history are also dwelt upon. A section dealing with Lexicography, the science and art of dictionary-compiling, is also traditionally included in a course of Lexicology.

The course of Modern English Lexicology is of great practical importance as the language learner will obtain much valuable information concerning the English word-stock and the laws and regulations governing the formation and usage of English words and word-groups.

This text-book treats the following basic problems:

1.Semasiology;

2.Word-Structure;

3.Word-Formation;

4.Etymology of the English Word-Stock;

5.Word-Groups and Phraseological Units;

6.Variants and Dialects of the English Language;

7.English Lexicography.

Questions

What is the main aim of lexicology?

What is the subject matter of lexicography?

Prove that lexicology is of great practical importance.

What are the basic problems of lexicology?

Links of Lexicology with Other Branches of Linguistics

I.V. Arnold, The English Word, §1.3. The Connection of Lexicology with Phonetics, Stylistics and Other Branches of Linguistics [pp. 14-18]

The treatment of words in lexicology cannot be divorced from the study of all the other elements in the language system to which words belong. It should be always borne in mind that in reality, in the actual process of communication, all these elements are interdependent and stand in definite relations to one another. We separate them for convenience of study, and yet to separate them for analysis is pointless, unless we are afterwards able to put them back together to achieve a synthesis and see their interdependence and development in the language system as a whole.

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.

Word-unity is conditioned by a number of phonological features. Phonemes follow each other in a fixed sequence so that [p?t] is different from [t?p]. The importance of the phonemic make-up may be revealed by the substitution test which isolates the central phoneme of hope by setting it against hop, hoop, heap or hip. […]

Discrimination between the words may be based upon stress: the word 'import is recognized as a noun and distinguished from the verb im'port due to the position of stress. Stress also distinguishes compounds from otherwise homonymous word-groups: 'blackbird : : 'black 'bird. Each language also possesses certain phonological features marking word-limits.

Historical phonetics and historical phonology can be of great use in the diachronic study of synonyms, homonyms and polysemy. When sound changes loosen the ties between members of the same word-family, this is an important factor in facilitating semantic changes.

The words whole, heal, hail, for instance, are etymologically related. The word whole originally meant 'unharmed', 'unwounded'. The early verb whole meant 'to make whole', hence 'heal'. Its sense of 'healthy' led to its use as a salutation, as in hail. Having in the course of historical development lost their phonetical similarity, these words cannot now exercise any restrictive influence upon one another's semantic development. Thus, hail occurs now in the meaning of 'call', even with the purpose to stop and arrest (used by sentinels).

Meaning in its turn is indispensable to phonemic analysis because to establish the phonemic difference between [ou] and [?] it is sufficient to know that [houp] means something different from [h?p].

All these considerations are not meant to be in any way exhaustive, they can only give a general idea of the possible interdependence of the two branches of linguistics.

Stylistics, although from a different angle, studies many problems treated in lexicology. These are the problems of meaning, connotations, synonymy, functional differentiation of vocabulary according 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.

The difference and interconnection between grammar and lexicology is one of the important controversial issues in linguistics […].

A close connection between lexicology and grammar is conditioned by the manifold and inseverable ties between the objects of their study. 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 the committee and to head a committee.

The two kinds of meaning are often interdependent. That is to say, certain grammatical functions and meanings are possible only for the words whose lexical meaning makes them fit for these functions, and, on the other hand, some lexical meanings in some words occur only in definite grammatical functions and forms and in definite grammatical patterns.

On the other hand the grammatical form and function of the word affect its lexical meaning. A well-known example is the same verb go when in the continuous tenses, followed by to and an infinitive (except go and come), it serves to express an action in the near and immediate future, or an intention of future action: You're not going to sit there saying nothing all the evening, both of you, are you? (Simpson)

Participle II of the same verb following the link verb be denotes absence: The house is gone.

Lexical meanings in the above cases are said to be grammaticallyconditioned, and their indicating context is called syntactic or mixed. The number of words in each language being very great, any lexical meaning has a much lower probability of occurrence than grammatical meanings and therefore carries the greatest amount of information in any discourse determining what the sentence is about.

It may also happen that a form that originally expressed grammatical meaning, for example, the plural of nouns, becomes a basis for a new grammatically conditioned lexical meaning. In this new meaning it is isolated from the paradigm, so that a new word comes into being. Arms, the plural of the noun arm, for instance, has come to mean 'weapon'. E. g. to take arms against a sea of troubles (Shakespeare). The grammatical form is lexicalized; the new word shows itself capable of further development, a new grammatically conditioned meaning appears, namely, with the verb in the singular arms metonymically denotes the military profession. The abstract noun authority becomes a collective in the form authorities and denotes 'a group of persons having the right to control and govern'. Compare also colours, customs, looks, manners, pictures, works which are the best known examples of this isolation, or, as itis also called, lexicalization of a grammatical form. In all these words the suffix -s signals a new word with a new meaning.

The ties between lexicology and grammar are particularly strong in the sphere of word-formation which before lexicology became a separate branch of linguistics had even been considered as part of grammar. The characteristic features of English word-building, the morphological structure of the English word are dependent upon the peculiarity of the English grammatical system. The analytical character of the language is largely responsible for the wide spread of conversion and for the remarkable flexibility of the vocabulary manifest in the ease with which many nonce-words are formed on the spur of the moment.

I.V. Zykova, A Practical Course in English Lexicology, 1. The Object of Lexicology. Links of Lexicology with Other Branches of Linguistics [p. 7]

Lexicology has close ties with other branches of linguistics as they also take into account words in one way or another approaching them from different angles.

There is a relationship between lexicology and phonetics since phonetics is also concerned with the study of the word, i.e. with the sound-form of the word. A close connection between lexicology and grammar is conditioned by the manifold ties between the objects of their study. 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. Lexicology is linked with the history of a language since the latter investigates the changes and the development of the vocabulary of a language. There is also a close relationship between lexicology and stylistics. Stylistics studies many problems treated in lexicology. These are the problems of meaning, synonymy, differentiation of vocabulary according to the sphere of communication and some other issues. Lexicology is bound up with sociolinguistics. Sociolinguistics investigates the extra-linguistic or social causes of the changes in the vocabulary of a language. The word-stock of a language directly and immediately reacts to changes in social life. The intense development of science and technology, which is a social, i.e. an extra-linguistic factor, has lately given birth to a great number of new words, e.g.: CD-ROM ('compact disc read-only memory: a CD on which large quantities of information can be stored to be used by a computer, etc.'), e-mail ('a system that allows you to send and receive messages by computer'), SMS ('technical short message service: a method of sending a text message to a mobile phone'); pager ('a small radio device, activated from a central point which emits a series of bleeps or vibrates to inform the wearer that someone wishes to contact them or that it has received a short text message').