Curs 1 English Lexical Semantics The Legacy of Historical Semantics 1. Aim of the course: an introduction to English Lexical Semantics.

The domain of Lexical Semantics is the study of word meaning as embodied in Engl ish Words. As the name lexical semantics suggests, this discipline is a merger of two field s of study: lexicology and semantics 1.1 Lexicology is the synchronic or diachronic study of the vocabulary of the la nguage. Problems such as the constitution and growth of the vocabulary, means of enriching the vo cabulary, including word formation rules and borrowings, lexical relations, all belong to the domain of lexicology. 1.2 Semantics and Semiotics 1.2.1 Semantics is generally defined as the science of meaning (from GK. semanti kos significant?). Semantics as an independent discipline came into being in the seco nd half of the 19-th century. Michel Bral coined the term in the title of his pioneering study, La Smantique, in 1895. Semantics was primarily viewed as the science of word meaning, and accordi ng to Bral semantics was not primarily concerned with the historical change of meaning. 1.2.2 Before the advent of linguistic semantics, the problem of meaning has been a traditional concern of philosophers, logicians and psychologists. In the XX-th century, semantics is approached from the more general perspective of semiotics, the study of signs, including linguistic signs. The branches of Semiotics: syntax/ semantics/ pragmatics. (1) Semiotics the general theory of signs Syntax the study of sign-sign relations (distribution) Semantics the study of sign-object relations (reference) Pragmatics the study of sign- user relations Defining the sign in the semiotic tradition: Ogden and Richards (1923): (2) concept object (form) word Ogden and Richards?s description of the functioning of the sign: the presence of the form causes the concept, while the concept sends to an object. Forms are indirectly relat ed to objects, by means of concepts. There are several points of entry in the study of meaning, which define several major approaches to semantics. a. Referential Semantics: it is devoted to the study of the relation between lin guistic forms and the extra-linguistic entities (objects) they denote. Referential semantics is primarily concerned with sentence meaning; word meaning is of interest only to the extent the word contributes to the denotation and truth of the sente nce. Here are a few familiar statements that are part of referential semantics: (2?) Proper names denote / refer to individuals. VPs denote/ refer to eventualities/events Sentences refer to states of affairs and they can be true or false.

A second problem crucial for referential semantics is that of inferences. Partic ular constructions, as well as particular lexical items allow one to draw specific in ferences which are context independent. Implicative verbs (manage, succeed, force, etc.) entail their complements while desiderative verbs do not. Since/Because clauses are entailed by the sentences w here they occur: (3) He managed to kiss Mary He kissed Mary. He wished to kiss Mary. > He kissed Mary. Since my arms are full, will you open the door for me? My arms are full. b. Structural Semantics: it is devoted to the study of the relation between ling uistic forms and the corresponding concepts. Indeed, in the picture above, if the objec t is ignored, the familiar Saussaurean definition of the sign emerges: form signifier (signifiant) concept signified (signifi) Despite certain theoretical shortcomings, structural semantics has greatly contr ibuted to the progress of the study of meaning in natural languages through a few basic st atements, which are still true: 1. The meaning of a word is not an atomic entity; rather meanings are decomposab le and represent bundles of (structured) features. Structuralism proposed the first met hods of semantic analysis: componential analysis and distributional analysis, meant to objectivel y uncover the semantic features of words, using purely linguistic evidence. 2. Words entertain complex semantic relations with one another: a) they are part of lexical paradigms (semantic fields) b) they entertain paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations. Examples of paradigmatic relations: antonymy, synonymy. (Definition of paradigma tic relations: it is a relation of choice; we choose from among a number of possible words that can fill the same slot: the words may be similar in meaning or have little in common but each is d ifferent from the others (e.g., the judge was cautious/careless/busy/irritable). Example of syntagmatic relations: semantic selection, collocation. (Definition o f syntagmatic relations: the mutual association of two or more words in a sentence so that the meaning of each is affected by the other(s) and together their meanings contribute to the meanin g of the larger unit, the phrase or sentence (e.g., read co-occurs with book or newspaper, happy co-occurs with child, or sit co-occurs with chair). c. Cognitive semantics: it is devoted to the study of the relation between objec ts and concepts, more exactly it is concerned with how objects are categorized and stor ed in the mental lexicon and used in context. A central concern of cognitive semantics is categorization: which objects/ pheno mena of the world are accounted to be sufficiently similar by speakers of a language to be given the same name. A second problem is the structure of the mental lexicon, how word knowledge is s

tored in the mental lexicon. The hypothesis is that the mental lexicon is a huge netwo rk of inter-related concepts. Concepts are grouped in a variety of idealized cognitive models. As a result of their properties lexical concepts appear in frames, in the company of related words. A third problem of cognitive semantics is the construction of on-line contextual interpretations, putting to use principles of on-line meaning construction: (4) a. (Waiter to his friend) Hurry up! The roast-beef is getting nervous b. The baby ate the bottle and then broke it c. Dickens enjoyed reading himself in public. Consider a by now worn out example of categorization, to give you a flavor of co gnitive semantics. What is common to OVER in the following examples? The assumption is t hat the several types of predications described in these sentences are sufficiently alik e to be included in the same language category, designated by the preposition OVER: (5) a. The plane is flying over the hill. (trajectory (T), land-mark (LM); semn de hotar, jalon) b. Sam walked over the hill. (Contact of T and LM) c. The bird flew over the yard. (extended LM) d. The bird flew over the wall. (vertical LM) e. Sam lives over the hill. (focus on end point of LM) f. Harry still hasn't gotten over his divorce. g. The painting is over the mantel. (no path, stative, no contact) h. She spread the tablecloth over the table. (contact, covering, optional path f or movement of trajectory over the landmark). i. The board is over the hole. (contact, covering). j. The city clouded over. k. The guards were posted all over the hill. Understanding spatial preposition requires the possession of certain image schem ata. In our particular case what is required is a path image schema: using the terms tra jectory for the moving entity and landmark for the background against which movement occurs. Ove r has 3 related senses: a) the above-across sense b) the above sense c) the covering sense 2. Lexical Semantics vs. Historical Semantics 2.1 Prior to the advent of structuralism, which brought about a clear separation of synchrony and diachrony, but also after that, meaning had been and still is investigated from a historical perspective: two disciplines dealt with this problem: a) historical semantics (lexicology) the evolution of meaning, the typology of m eaning changes, the causes of semantic changes; b) etymology (it reflects the hermeneutic/interpretation bias for the earliest m eaning as the truest, unadulterated (from to adulterate: a falsifica, a contraface) meaning of the wor d): e.g.: lord/lady are etymologically related to loaf of bread (i.e., lord: from OE hlaf (loaf)+keeper: one having power and authority over others; a ruler by hereditary right; lady: f rom OE hlaf (loaf)+d?ge: a woman having property rights or authority as a feudal superior; a

woman receiving the homage or devotion of a knight or lover). 2.2 Historical semantics Semantics? was first used to refer to the development or change of meaning, the a ttempt to classify semantic changes and to establish the causes (internal and external) of semantic changes. A representative work in this line is Stern?s Meaning and Change of Meaning (1931) . 2.3 Ullman s typology of semantic change A possible typology of semantic changes is that proposed by Stephen Ullman (Sema ntics, An introduction to the Science of Meaning, 1963). Meaning is defined by Ullman as the relation between name and sense (under the i nfluence of de Saussure). Ullman?s postulate is Leibniz?s Natura non facit saltus, in other wor ds, no matter what causes bring about the change, there must always be some connection, some associ ation between the old meaning and the new one. Semantic changes naturally fall into two categories: a. those based on an association between the senses; b. those based on an association between the names (forms); Within each category, the association may be one due to similarity or due to con tiguity (vecinatate, proximitate). A four fold division of changes emerges: 1. CHANGES BASED ON SIMILARITY OF SENSES (metaphors); a metaphorical change is mediated by some common ground or similarity: (7) Life is a walking shadow; Sally is a block of ice; You are wasting your time ; This gadget will save you hours; I have invested a lot of time in that project; You need to budget your time; You don?t use your time profitably. Ullman (1931) also describes a few categories of metaphors common in the vocabul ary of most languages. a. antropomorphic metaphors are based the features of body parts: a.1. they extend the human body to the realm of animals and plants: (8) brow of a hill (brow [brau]= spranceana, (poetic) frunte), ribs of a vault, mouth of a river, head of a bed / head of a table, the heart of matter, etc. a.2. the opposite tendency is shown in metaphors where the body parts are named after plants, objects, animals: (9) muscle [ Lat. mus, mouse]; apple of the eye (pupila ochilui), ear-drum (timp an) b. animal metaphors are based features properties of familiar animals: b1. similarities between animals and plants, the latter being named after the fo rmer: (10) dog?s tail pipet?n?ri?? cock?s foot golomoz, nuduroasa goat?s beard barba caprei, cre?u?a b.2. perceived similarities between animals and objects: (11) cock of a gun cocosul armei crane (barza) macara cat?s cradle patlagina ingusta cat-head mosor fix, tambuchi b.3 perceived similarities between animals and humans (zoosemy) (12) a fox ( a sly person; sly=siret, viclean); a bear ( a morose person; morose

=ursuz, nesociabil); a book worm (soarece de bibliteca); a cat (a spiteful woman; spite= rautate, ura), a calf (a beginner), a chicken (a young woman), a monkey (a naughty child) , an oyster ( a silent person; oyster=stridie). c. synestehtic metaphors (from synethesia=a subjective sensation or image of a s ense (as of colour) other than the other (as of sound) being stimulated; a concomitan t sensation): (13) loud colors, sweet noise 2. CHANGES BASED ON THE CONTIGUITY OF SENSES (metonymy) [GK: meta- change; onoma name, hence a change of name?; it is the figure of speech by means of which the name of an object is replaced by one of its significant attributes or by some function it d ischarges] The connection between the basic sense and the figurative one is logical . The term s coexist within some natural entity. a. part used for the whole or whole used for the part (synechdochy): (14) a hand ( for a factory worker) a skirt ( for a woman) a pair of pants ( a man) the foot (for the infantry) b. an instrument for the agent: (15) to be a good sword the horse (for the cavalry) the crown (for the King) c. the holder for the thing held, the container for the contained: (16) the pulpit ( the pulpit, the clergy; pulpit=amvon; the pulpit=predicatorii) the church ( the church, the clergy) the Court (the) galley galera; person made to work like a slave the gallery galeria; the spectators in the gallery 3. CHANGES BASED ON THE SIMILARITY OF NAMES (FOLK ETYMOLOGY) (17) boon (Anglo-Saxon/AS) 1. prayer 2. a blessing, something to be grateful for; the second meaning developed under the influence of the homonymous French adjectives boon (bon, good?, e.g., boon companion) 4. CHANGES BASED ON THE CONTIGUITY OF NAMES Words that co-occur are apt to influence each other?s meanings, so much so that in a set phrase, one term may be omitted and its meaning is transferred to its partner: (18) a daily / weekly/ quarterly paper, magazine the main the main sea The above classification of semantic changes calls for the following comments: a. Only the first two conceptual types are productive and somewhat systematic. b. Many changes fit more than one class: (19) He bought a Picasso; I read a Henry James (is it ellipsis, i.e. contiguity of names, or metonymy, i.e. contiguity of sense s?) c. The semantic development of many words consists of series of successive chang es, leading to chains, concatenation of senses. Expectedly the classification is not exhaustive. There are many types of curiosit ies?, which reflect unexpected conceptual changes or social pressure on speakers: a. shifts to the opposite:

(20) wan[w n] (AS: dark; nowadays it means pale; palid, sters, mat) fast (AS: fixed, firmly; to bind fast; nowadays it means rapidly, to run fast) botch[bot ] (AS: repair, nowadays it means to damage, e.g., the actor botched hi s lines; botch=petec; lucru de carpeala) b. Euphemisms. The development of euphemistic senses has to do with the avoidanc e of a variety of taboos related to socially sensitive areas: sex, race, illness, pover ty, death, mental incapacity, swearing. For instance, gosh is the mincing (to mince=a indulci?; a toca) pronunciation of G od?; other examples: blooming (bloody), flaming (fucking). There was a rejection of the tab oo by the American Flower Children (i.e., hippies who advocated love, beauty and piece) an d the Skinheads. (21) You, flaming idiot! bloody/ blooming waste of time/ nonsense. Within the same broad cultural group there can be different taboos: (22) mother fucker common in AE (street argot/slang of blacks, friendly tone) is unheard of in BE cock common in BE is edited out in AE; it does however appear in compounds like, cock sucker social euphemism industrial action strike recession depression explosive device bomb liquidation murder strategic weapon nuclear missile c. Dysphemisms the respective meaning is directly, even crudely conveyed with a shocking lack of nicety which deliberately isolates the taboo: (24) to push up the daisies (die) 2.4 Consequences of semantic changes Consequences of semantic changes may affect the denotation or the connotation of the word. (Definitions: denotation identifies the central aspect of word meaning, wh ich everybody generally agrees about. Connotation refers to the personal aspect of meaning, th e emotional associations that the word arouses. For instance, the words violin and fiddle (= scripca) have the same denotation but differ in connotation; violin is the neutral term while fidd le is used for humour or to express affection or lack of esteem). Most semanticians (Ullman) discuss two types of changes of denotational range: generalization and specialization. 2.4.1 Changes of denotation a. Words may undergo generalization they take on a broader range of meanings: (25) BOX AS a container made of box-wood, normally safe-keeping of something precious, such as ointment, jewelry (nowadays: casket (=caseta), chest (=lada, cufar)) A box at the opera is an extension of the basic sense. gear box is a technological extension. BED Flower-bed BIRD AS young bird? bird Latin PLANTA meant sprout? (=mugur, lastar), cutting (=butas)? plant HYSTERIA: a diseases considered to be affecting only women, since hysteria? is

derived from a Greek term for womb? (=uter); ever since Freud, the term is also e qually applicable to men. b) Words may undergo specialization they take on a narrower range of meanings: (26) ENGINE medieval sense: mechanical contrivance often for war or torture? nowadays: mechanical source of power, steam engine FUGOL OE 1. bird Mod E 2. fowl STEORFAN OE 1. die Mod E 2. starve, die/suffer from hunger DEOR OE 1. beast Mod E 2. a certain beast, the deer 2.4.2 Changes of connotation From the numerous changes in connotation that may affect a word, at this point w e focus on the following to: a) changes in emotional overtones (Ullman) b) changes of regi ster. Changes of emotional overtones Under the rubric of changes in emotional overtones, one may first include amelio ration and degradation: Amelioration a word takes on a favorable connotation: (27) minister 1. a servant 2. a very high executive comrade 1. room-mate (Spanish: camarada) 2. friend pest 1. plague (the bubonic plague) 2. garden pests (insects; =daunatori) 3. annoying person blame 1. blasphemy 2. blame Deterioration a word takes on a pejorative association: (28) SILLY (OE saellig) 900 OE saelig happy? 1200 ME seely happy, blessed? 1500 ModE deserving of compassion? weak, feeble? simple, ignorant? feeble-minded? CHURL 800 OE ceorl a male human being? 1000 a man without rank? 1225 ME a serf? ModE a base fellow? KNAVE a boy (Ger. Der Knabe) a servant a person with rude manners Barber: Human nature being what it is, deterioration is commoner than amelioratio n; we are only too prone to believe the worst of anybody, and this is reflected in the way words change?. There are other phenomena which reflect a change of emotion related to semantic shift. Emotive intensification: phenomenal, senasational, diametrical, categorical, etc . e.g. senasational victory/ sensational writer/ You look sensational, are used in emot ive emphatic ways. Dr Johnson mentioned as ludicrous? the use of desperately, abominably, etc. in such ways.

These are inflated words since they describe precise neutral referents which are used as emotive terms. Distortion of meaning tremendous, ghastly(=groaznic, infiorator, oribil) (ghastl y weather), monstrous, divine (divine party) are applied to trivia, and thus defla ted; phenomenal, categorical, terrific deflated mainly through upper class affectation. One cannot imagine a coal miner/crofter/ shepherd complaining about the ghastly weather or praising a divine party? (Hughes). Distortion of meaning may be committed collectively, fashionably or individually . In recent times it has moved beyond harmless personal exaggeration to various forms of organized commercial (adds and political deceit (=inselatorie, truc): miraculous product, luxury margarine, dream house, magic cleanser). Changes of register The second frequent type of connotative change is the change of register?. Register a fairly recent linguistic term, recorded only from 1956, refers princi pally to language variation according to social role (function) or social situation, espe cially to the degree of formality in the language employed. For instance, Eliza Doolittle?s Cockney e xclamation, Not bloody likely? was a notorious violation of the register and the accent appropri ate to polite Edwardian society. Although the degree of formality is the aspect most stressed in discussions of r egister, this emphasis is essentially limiting. Register can also be demonstrated in nume rous other alternatives in word choice: old or new, concrete or abstract, blunt or sharp as against polite or refined, literary or recherch as against slang or provocative or annoying as agai nst humorous or bland (=curtenitor, afabil, politicos).