Hyper-hyponymic groupings and the relationship of inclusion

The semantic relations of inclusion, which are called hyper-hyponymic relations, are those existing between two words if the meaning of one word contains the semantic components constituting the meaning of the other word. Thus, for example “vehicle” includes “car, bus, taxi, tram”, “flower” includes “carnation, lilac, daffodil, snowdrop etc”.

The hyper-hyponymic relations may be viewed as the hierarchal relationships between the meanings of the general and the individual terms. The general term, such as, for example, “tree, vehicle etc.” is referred to as the classifier or the hyperonym. The more specific term, which is called the hyponym, is included in the more general term, the hyperonym.

For example, the classifier “to move” includes such hyponyms as “to go, to run, to saunter etc”, where the hyponyms contain the meaning of the hyperonym in addition to their individual meaning which distinguish them from each other.

It is necessary to note, that in hyper-hyponymic structures certain words may be both hyperonyms and hyponyms (classifiers and members of the group). For example, the hyperonym “plant” includes such hyponyms as “bush, tree, flower”, which in their turn are hyperonyms to more specific terms, or hyponyms, as “acacia, currants, gooseberry”, or “ash, aspen, oak, birch”, or “lilac, carnation, chrysanthemum” etc.

7.9. Lexical and terminological sets, lexico-semantic groups and semantic fields. Words denoting different things correlated on extralinguistic grounds form lexical sets, e.g. the words “lion, tiger, leopard, puma, cat” refer to the lexical set of “the animals of the cat family”.

Depending on the type of the notional area lexical sets may acquire a more specialized character, e.g. names of “parts of the car mechanism” – “radiator, motor, brakes, wheel etc”. Such classes of words are called terminological sets.

Words describing different sides of one and the same general notion are united in a lexico-semantic group if the underlying notion is not too generalized and all-embracing, unlike the notions of “time, space, life, process etc”; if the reference to the underlying notion is not just an implication in the meaning of the lexical unit but forms an essential part of its semantics.

Thus, it is possible to single out the lexico-semantic group of names of “colours” consisting of the words “white, red, green, black etc.”; the lexico-semantic group of verbs denoting “physical movement” – “go, turn, run, fly etc.”; or “destruction – “ruin, destroy, kill, explode etc”.

If the underlying notion is broad enough to include almost all-embracing sections of vocabulary, we deal with semantic fields. For example, such words as “cosmonaut (n.), spacious (adj.), to orbit (v.)” belong to the semantic field of “space”.

The members of the semantic fields are joined together by some common semantic component, i.e. the component common to all the members of the semantic field, which is sometimes described as the common dominator of meaning, and in this respect they stand apart from conceptual fields, which are a broader philosophical notion.

The correlation between the semantic classes may be represented as concentric circles, where the outer circle is the semantic field, the inner circle is a lexical/ terminological set, and the circle between represents a lexico-semantic group.

7.10. Antonymy. Classification of antonyms.

Antonyms are a class of words grouped together on the basis of the semantic relations of oppositions. Antonyms are words belonging to the same part of speech sharing certain common semantic characteristics and in this respect they are similar to such semantic classes as synonyms, lexical sets, lexico-semantic groupings.

Structurally, antonyms are divided antonyms of the same root (“to do – to undo, cheerful – cheerless”) and antonyms of different roots (“day – night, cold – hot”).

Semantically, antonyms are classified into contradictories, contraries and incompatibles.

Contradictory antonyms are mutually opposed; they deny one another, forming a privative binary opposition. To use one of the contradictories would mean to contradict the other as they are members of two-term sets; and to use ’not’ before one of them makes it semantically equivalent to the other, e.g. “not dead – alive, not single – married”.

Contraries are antonyms that can be arranged into a series according to the increasing difference in one of their qualities. The most distant elements of this series are classified as contrary notions. So, contraries are gradable antonyms being polar members of a gradual opposition which may have intermediate elements. This is observed in the group of contraries including “cold –hot and cool – warm” which are intermediate members. In this case we regard as antonyms not only “cold” and “hot” but also “cold” and “warm” etc. Contrary antonyms may also be considered in terms of degrees of the quality involved, e.g. it may be cold and very cold, or it may be colder.

Incompatibles are antonyms characterized by the relations of exclusion. Semantic relations of incompatibility are typical of antonyms with a common component of meaning; they may be described as the reverse of hyponymy. Incompatibles differ from contradictories as the former are members of the multiple-term sets, while the latter are members of two-term sets, e.g. to say “night” is to say “not day, not morning, not evening etc”. A relation of incompatibility may also be observed between colour terms, as the use of “back” ensues the exclusion of “red, green, white, orange etc”.

Дата добавления: 2014-01-05