Words_about_words_An_introduction_to_Eng

Word Meaning

consider flower as part of a plant and flour, the powder made by crashing grain, a single word with two senses, since they have, as I have already mentioned, a common etymon, namely the Latin word florem. Lyons (1977: 550) points out that port, meaning “harbour” and port, meaning “fortified wine”, which are most probably considered separate words by the majority of the speakers of English, should, according to the etymology principle, be treated as two senses of a polysemantic word, since they both derive from the Latin portus, only that the latter entered English via the Portuguese Oporto, the name of the town where the wine used to be produced.

Based on the last two examples and on other pairs of etymologically related words such as person – parson, grammar – glamour, shirt – skirt, catch – chase, which would rather be viewed as separate words, the conclusion might be drawn that etymology is not always a useful and reliable criterion for distinguishing between polysemy and homonymy.

The second criterion is that of formal identity or distinctness of the words. Hansen et al (1985), quoted by Lipka (2002), speak about complete homonymy only in the case of spoken, written and grammatical identity of two words. Thus, for them, the identical form bat clearly has two different meanings and can be assigned to two separate lexemes, bat (1), noun, meaning “a specially shaped stick for kicking the ball in cricket” and bat (2), noun also, meaning “a flying mouse-like animal”. For them, distinctions in spelling or pronunciation that lead to homographs or homophones cancel homonymy.

On the other hand, different morphological and syntactic characteristics of two words with the same form, but dissimilar meanings will lead to their being considered separate homonymous lexemes. As Lipka (2002: 156) exemplifies, “we can clearly distinguish between can (1), can

(2) and can (3) because we have a modal auxiliary in one case, a noun in the second and a transitive verb with the meaning “put into a can” in the third case”.

As far as the third criterion, close semantic relatedness, is concerned, Hansen et al (1985) suggest that we should opt for polysemy in two cases: when there is a semantic relation of inclusion or hyponymy between the two words under discussion or when semantic transfer under the form of metaphor or metonymy has been made between them. Thus, the lexeme man contains the lexical units man (1), meaning “human being, in general” and man (2), meaning “adult male human being”, but not man (3), meaning “to furnish with man”. Consequently, man is a polysemantic word with senses (1) and (2) and a homonym of man (3). In the case of the lexeme fox, we can distinguish fox (1), meaning “wild animal”, the metaphoric fox (2), meaning “person as sly as a fox” and the metonymic fox (3), meaning “the fur of the fox”. Transfer of meaning having taken place between fox (1) and fox (2) and (3) as illustrated above, fox may be said to be a polysemantic word.

95

Words about Words

4.8. Semantic change

In the evolution of a language, its vocabulary is continuously changing. Some words are added, while others disappear, their grammatical and phonetic features might change and so might their meaning. It is the last of these phenomena that the discussion in this subchapter focuses on.

4.8.1. Causes of semantic change

There are a number of reasons due to which the meanings of words do not remain stable in time. They may be grouped in two major categories: extra-linguistic and linguistic causes.

4.8.1.1. Extra-linguistic causes of semantic change

Extra-linguistic causes leading to change of meaning are determined by the close connection between language and the evolution of human society. Being the most dynamic and flexible part of a language, vocabulary reacts to almost every change in the outer reality it helps to picture. Thus, torch was used in Middle English (ME) to designate “a piece of cloth damped in oil, lit and held in hand in order to make light”. With the advance of technology, the word has come to also refer to “the small electric lamp that runs on batteries” and serves the same purpose in modern times. The noun mill was initially used for “a building with machinery for grinding corn”. Industrial developments influenced its meaning and extended the reference of the word to “factory - any kind of building with equipment for manufacturing processes” (we now have saw / cotton / silk / paper mills).

Some of the present-day names of institutions are the result of change of meaning of older words, due to the evolution of culture and society. Hulban (1975) quotes the term academy in this respect. When the word was borrowed in the 15th century, it was used as the name of a garden near Athens, where Plato used to teach. Two centuries later, it referred to the school system of Plato, while, beginning with the end of the 17th century, it has been used to designate an institution for the promotion of art or science.

Social causes of semantic change display a large variety of forms. One of them is the need for specialized terms in each branch of science that deals with specific phenomena and concepts. As Hulban (1975) exemplifies, the word cell, whose general meaning is “compartment”, has come to mean “the space between the ribs of a vaulted roof” in architecture, “the space between the nerves of the wings of insects” in entomology and “a vessel containing one pair of plates immersed in fluid to form a battery” in electricity.

96

Word Meaning

Another important reason that has lead to changes in the meanings of certain lexical items is the need of expressiveness, taboo and euphemisms in language. The last two have already been discussed. One way of achieving expressive effects in everyday language is through the use of slang words. In slang, everyday words and phrases acquire new meanings. Thus, baby is used for “girl” or “sweetheart”, the bread basket is the “stomach”, to lamp means “to hit”, a bag is “an ugly woman” or “an objectionable unpleasant person”, to rabbit is used for “to talk unceasingly”, gear refers to “illicit drugs” and choice is used as an adjective meaning “best, excellent”.

4.8.1.2. Linguistic causes of semantic change

The extra-linguistic causes responsible for semantic change go hand in hand with the linguistic ones - factors acting within the language

system such as ellipsis, analogy, discrimination of synonyms and

borrowings.

Ellipsis consists of the omission of one part of a phrase. Quite frequently, the remaining part takes on the meaning of the whole: sale, obtained by ellipsis from cut-price sale, has come to be used with the meaning of the initial phrase – “an event or period of time during which a shop reduces the prices of some of its goods”.

Analogy occurs when one member of a synonymic series acquires a new meaning and this new meaning is extended to the other elements in the series as well. In the synonymic series to catch – to grasp – to get, the first verb acquired the meaning “to understand”, which was later transferred to the verbs to grasp and to get.

The discrimination of synonyms is the result of the evolution of the meanings of certain synonyms. In OE, land meant both “solid part of the earth’s surface” and “territory of a nation”. Later on, in ME, the word country was borrowed from French and it became a synonym of land. In short time, however, country restricted its meaning to “territory of a nation”, while land remained to be used in everyday language for “solid part of the earth’s surface” (when land is used to refer to an area with recognized political borders, it bears connotations of mystery, emotion or obsolescence).

Borrowings from other languages may also lead to semantic changes. Deer used to mean “animal” up to ME, when, under the pressure of the borrowed words beast, creature, animal, it restricted its meaning to “a large brown wild animal with long thin legs”.

97

Words about Words

4.8.2. Results of semantic change

The main directions in which the meaning of words may change are

extension, narrowing, degradation and elevation (some of which have already been hinted at in the previous section).

4.8.2.1. Extension or widening of meaning

Extension or widening of meaning is the process by which the sense(s) of a word is / are enlarged or enriched.

The word journal originally meant, as Hulban explains (1975: 117), “a daily record of transactions or events”. Through extension of meaning, at present, it means both “a daily newspaper” and “any periodical publication containing news in any particular sphere”. The early meaning of butler, “a male servant in charge of the wine cellar” was later extended to “a male servant in charge of the household”.

Extension of meaning may sometimes involve the evolution of a word from concrete to abstract. Branch, for example, was used with the meaning “a portion or limb of a tree or other plant”. From this initial meaning, several abstract meanings have evolved and are recognized today: “one of the portions into which a family or race is divided”, “a component portion of an organization or system”, “a part of a particular area of study or knowledge”.

4.8.2.2. Narrowing or restriction of meaning

Narrowing or restriction of meaning is the process opposite to extension. By it, a word with a wider meaning acquires a narrower meaning that comes to be applied to some of its previous referents only. Very frequently, narrowing goes hand in hand with specialization of meaning.

Mare, for example, meant “horse” up the moment in the evolution of English when its meaning was restricted to the female horse only. Likewise, any kind of dog was considered a hound. Nowadays, hound is used as such only poetically or archaically, its specialized meaning in the common language being “dog used by hunters for chasing the game”. Fowl is another example of narrowing of meaning. It was used to refer to any kind of bird, while now, it is only the domestic birds that are called fowls.

Specialization of meaning, accompanying narrowing, is very clear in the case of trade names that originated in common nouns: Sunbeam,

Thunderbird, Caterpillar.

4.8.2.3. Degradation of meaning

Degradation of meaning or pejorative development is the process by which a neutral word either loses its original meaning

98

Word Meaning

completely and acquires a new, derogatory one, or it preserves it and develops a new pejorative meaning in addition.

The former case may be illustrated by means of the word quarrel, which meant “complaint”. By a first semantic change, as Hulban (1975: 120) indicates, it came to mean “a ground or occasion of complaint against a person, leading to hostile feelings”. The meaning of the word degraded even further from this and reached the point of “a violent contention or altercation between persons, a rapture of friendly relations”. Knave underwent the same process. It initially meant “boy” and later lost this meaning in favour of “dishonest man”.

The word suburban is illustrative of the latter case. From the initial meaning, “of or belonging to the suburbs of the town”, a new derogatory one evolved, the former still being preserved. Today, suburban is used not only for what is not “in the city”, but also for “typical of the attitudes and way of life of people who live in the suburbs, which some people consider rather boring, conservative, involving inferior manners and narrower views”.

Analogy plays an important role in the process of degradation of meaning. This is very obvious in the following examples of zoosemy, metaphors that implicitly compare humans with animals. Thus, besides the animal itself, a sheep is “a poor-spirited, stupid or timid person”. A fox is a cunning person, a monkey or an ape is one that “plays the ape, an imitator,

amimic”.

4.8.2.4.Elevation of meaning

Elevation of meaning is the reverse of degradation, implying the process by which a newly evolved meaning of a word acquires a “higher” status as compared to the initial one. Fame, for example, originally meant “rumour”, but later on, it became “celebrity, good reputation”. Bard was initially a term of contempt, designating a ministrel-poet. Later, when ministrels started to be idealized, the word referring to them suffered an elevation of meaning, quite obvious in Shakespeare himself having been called “The Bard”. Hulban (1975: 121) quotes the word piquant as an example of elevation of meaning. From the initial meaning, “that pierces or stings; keen, severe, bitter”, it has passed through two stages of elevation. First, it acquired the meaning “agreeable pungent of taste; sharp, stinging, biting; appetizing” and then, that of “that stimulates or excites keen interest or curiosity; pleasantly stimulating” (both of these elevated meanings are in use today).

In some cases, elevation of meaning is partial only. Hulban (1975: 122) supports this claim by the example of the verb to blame, meaning “to find fault with”. A weakening in the original force of the word can be sensed if we consider its etymon, namely the Greek word for blaspheme. The

99

Words about Words

etymological doublet of to blame, to blaspheme, is much stronger, meaning “to talk profanely, to speak evil of, to calumniate”.

4.8.3. Transfer of meaning

Many of the cases of extension and narrowing of meaning mentioned in the previous sections are based on transfer of meaning. There are two main types of such transfer, according to the kind of association that they presuppose. Associations based on similarity lead to metaphor, while those based on contiguity, i.e., on the condition of being in contact, in proximity, in a broad sense, lead to metonymy. Unlike extension, narrowing, elevation and degradation, transfer of meaning is not a gradual process, but rather the result of a sudden change from one field to another, on a particular occasion of use (both metaphors and metonymies may be one-time only creations in language).

4.8.3.1. Metaphor

The generally accepted definition of metaphor is that indicating that its essence is “understanding and experiencing one kind of things in terms of another” (Lakoff, Johnson 1980: 5). In other words, metaphor involves an implicit comparison of two entities, based on an alleged resemblance between them. This implicit comparison is contained in the meaning of a word or phrase that has come to be different from its original meaning.

There are several types of metaphor. Of them, the live metaphors, conscious creations used by writers as stylistic devices, are of less interest here. Instead, two sub-categories of linguistic metaphors will be discussed in more detail. One of these sub-categories is that of standardized lexical metaphors in whose case the idea of similarity is lost. They are usually considered “dead” metaphors and include examples such as daisy, whose origin is the OE daeges aege (“the day’s eye”) and wind, coming from the OE windes aege (“the wind’s eye”). The other sub-category includes the “degrading” or “fading” metaphors in whose case the idea of similarity is still evident. As Hulban points out (1975: 126), such metaphors may rely on:

•similarity of shape: the head of the pin, the mouth of the river, the foot of the hill, ball-point-pen;

•similarity of position: head-word, headstone;

•similarity of colour: red-admiral, blue-bell, blue-wing;

•similarity of destination or purpose: blood bank, data bank;

•space and duration in time: long run, long-lived, shortcircuit,

shortcoming, short-dated;

100

Word Meaning

• physical sensations: cold war, warm congratulations, sweet

dreams, bitter remark;

Ulmann (1970) offers another classification of degrading linguistic metaphors. According to him, they may be grouped into:

• anthropomorphic metaphors, involving the transfer of meaning from the human body and its parts to inanimate objects: the mouth

of the river, the lungs of the town, the heart of the matter;

•animal metaphors: dog’s tail (a plant), cat-o’-the-nine-tails. People can also be called foxes, lions, doves, donkeys, etc;

•metaphors that translate abstract experiences into concrete terms:

to throw light on, to enlighten, brilliant idea;

• synaesthetic metaphors, involving the transposition from one sense to another: cold voice, loud colours, piercing sounds.

4.8.3.2. Metonymy

Metonymy consists of the use of the name of one thing for that of something else, with which it is usually associated. This association is not a mental process that links two independent entities, like in the case of metaphor, but one that brings together entities which are in a certain proximity or contact.

According to the type of relationship established between the two elements in a metonymy, the following types of associations are possible (partly as indicated by Loos, Day, Jordan (1999), who quote examples from Kovecses (1986) and Lakoff and Johnson (1980)):

•the use of the symbol for the thing symbolized: From the cradle to the grave, one has always something new to learn, The Crown visited the soldiers on the battle field;

•the use of the material an object is made of for the object itself: iron, glass;

•the use of the holder for the thing held: The gallery applauded, He is fond of the bottle, You should save your pocket if you want to buy a new computer;

•the use of the maker’s name for the object made: I like the Rembrand on that wall, Put that Dickens away and listen to me, I hate reading Heidegger, He bought a Ford;

•the use of the place name where the object is or was originally made for the object itself: At dinner, they served the soup in their best china;

•the use of the instrument for the agent: They answered the door / phone, The sax has the flu today, The gun he hired wanted 50 grants;

101

Words about Words

•the use of the concrete for the abstract and of the abstract for the concrete: They dedicated their pens to a just cause, He is of noble blood; The leadership took action against thefts;

•the use of the name of an organization or an institution for the people who make a decision or work there: Exxon has raised its prices again, The Senate thinks abortion is immoral;

•the use of the place name where an event was recorded for the event itself: Do you remember the Alamo?, Pearl Harbour still has an effect on America’s foreign policy;

•the use of a place name where an institution is located for the institution itself: The White House voted against entering war, Wall Street has been in panic these days;

•the reference to the behaviour of a person experiencing a particular emotion for the emotion itself: She gave him a tonguelashing, I really chewed him out good;

•the use of the part for the whole (also called synecdoche) and of the whole for the part: They hired ten new hands, We don’t accept longhairs here, She is wearing a fine fox.

102

Words about Words

Here, fill and switch on collocate directly with kettle in a “verb + object” structure, but boil, while collocating directly with water in an “adjective + noun” structure, also collocate across the sentence boundary with kettle, though less directly.

5.1.2. Characteristics and classification

The elements of a collocation are the node, i.e., the lexical item that is being studied and the collocate(s), i.e. the lexeme(s) that co-occur with the node. “Each successive word in a text is both node and collocate, though never at the same time”, Sinclair (1991: 115) posits. When a is a node and b is a collocate, Sinclair (1991) speaks about downward collocations, the collocations of a with some less frequent bs. On the other hand, when b is a node and a is collocate, the linguist speaks about upward collocations. He illustrates this distinction with an analysis of the collocational pattern of back. Thus, according to him, its upward collocates may be:

•prepositions / adverbs / conjunctions: at, from, into, now, on, then, to, up, when;

•personal pronouns: her, him, me, she, them, we;

•possessive pronouns: her, his, my;

•verbs: get, got.

Downward collocates of back include:

•verbs: arrive, bring, climb, come, cut, date, draw, drive, fall, fly, fling, hand, hold, lay, lean, pay, pull, run, rush, sink, sit, throw, trace, walk, wave, etc;

•prepositions: along, behind, onto, past, toward;

•adverbs: again, forth, further, slowly, straight;

•adjective: normal;

•nouns: camp, flat, garden, home, hotel, office, road, village, yard

/bed, chair, couch, door, sofa, wall, window / feet, forehead, hair, hand, head, neck, shoulder, car, seat / mind, sleep / kitchen, living

room, porch, room.

The number of lexemes a node may have represents its range.

If the range of a node is taken into consideration, one may speak about various types of collocations. Fixed, unique or frozen collocations occur when a node can combine with one collocate only. This is the case of the adjective auburn which can collocate with the noun hair only. When the node may combine with a limited number of collocates, one speaks about restricted collocations. Rancid, which may modify nouns that refer to objects that contain fat, such as fat, butter, lard, lipstick, is illustrative for this type of collocations. Finally, when a node can combine with a large number of collocates, one speaks about unrestricted or multiple collocations, a sub-category whose existence some linguists do not recognize, on the grounds that the semantic relationship between the

104