<<
>>

§ 39. Summary and Conclusions

1. Homonyms are words that sound alike but have different semantic structure. The problem of homonymy is mainly the problem of differentiation between two different semantic structures of identically sounding words.

2. Homonymy of words and homonymy of individual word-forms may be regarded as full and partial homonymy. Cases of full homonymy are generally observed in words belonging to the same part of speech. Partial homonymy is usually to be found in word-forms of different parts of speech.

3. Homonymous words and word-forms may be classified by the type of meaning that serves to differentiate between identical sound-forms. Lexical homonyms differ in lexical meaning, lexico- grammatical in both lexical and grammatical meanings, whereas grammatical homonyms are those that differ in grammatical meaning only.

Lexico-grammatical homonyms are not homogeneous. Homonyms arising from conversion have some related lexical meanings in their semantic structure. Though some individual meanings may be related the whole of the semantic structure of homonyms is essentially different.

5. If the graphic form of homonyms is taken into account, they are classified on the basis of the three aspects — sound-form, graphic form and meaning — into three big groups: homographs (identical graphic form), homophones � (identical sound-form) and perfect homonyms (identical sound-form and graphic form).

6. The two main sources of homonymy are: 1) diverging meaning development of a polysemantic word, and 2) convergent sound development of two or more different words. The latter is the most potent factor in the creation of homonyms.

7. The most debatable problem of homonymy is the demarcation line “between homonymy and polysemy, i.e. between different meanings of one word and the meanings of two or more phonemically different words.

1 See �Introduction’, § 2.

45

8. The criteria used in the synchronic analysis of homonymy are: 1) the semantic criterion of related or unrelated meanings; 2) the criterion of spelling; 3) the criterion of distribution.

There are cases of lexical homonymy when none of the criteria enumerated above is of any avail. In such cases the demarcation line between polysemy and homonymy is rather fluid.

9. The problem of discriminating between polysemy and homonymy in theoretical linguistics is closely connected with the problem of the basic unit at the semantic level of analysis.

<< | >>
Èñòî÷íèê: R. S. Ginzburg S. S. Khidekel, G. Y. Knyazeva, A. A. Sankin. A COURSE IN MODERN ENGLISH LEXICOLOGY. 1979

Åùå ïî òåìå § 39. Summary and Conclusions:

  1. SUMMARY
  2. Ëèòåðàòóðà
  3. Âàøè ñòàòüè: æàíðû
  4. Òåêñò íîâîñòè
  5. Æàíðû è ôîðìàòû
  6. Ë.Î. Äîë³íåíêî, Â.Î. Äîë³íåíêî, Ñ.Î. Ñàðíîâñüêà. Öèâ³ëüíå ïðàâî Óêðà¿íè, 2006
  7. ÖȲËÜÍÅ ÏÐÀÂÎ ÓÊÐÀ¯ÍÈ
  8. ÏÅÐÅÄÌÎÂÀ
  9. ×àñòèíà ² ÏÐÎÃÐÀÌÀ ÊÓÐÑÓ «ÖȲËÜÍÅ ÏÐÀÂÎ ÓÊÐÀ¯ÍÈ»
  10. Ðîçä³ë ². Çàãàëüí³ ïîëîæåííÿ öèâ³ëüíîãî ïðàâà
  11. Òåìà 1. Ïîíÿòòÿ öèâ³ëüíîãî ïðàâà. Ïðåäìåò òà ìåòîä, ñèñòåìà öèâ³ëüíîãî ïðàâà. Ôóíêö³¿ òà ïðèíöèïè öèâ³ëüíîãî ïðàâà
  12. Òåìà 2. Öèâ³ëüíå çàêîíîäàâñòâî Óêðà¿íè
  13. Òåìà 3. Ïîíÿòòÿ, åëåìåíòè òà âèäè öèâ³ëüíèõ ïðàâîâ³äíîñèí
  14. Òåìà 4. Çä³éñíåííÿ öèâ³ëüíèõ ïðàâ ³ âèêîíàííÿ îáîâ’ÿçê³â
  15. Òåìà 5. Çàõèñò öèâ³ëüíèõ ïðàâ òà ³íòåðåñ³â
  16. Òåìà 6. Îá’ºêòè öèâ³ëüíèõ ïðàâ
  17. Òåìà 7.Ô²ÇÈ×Ͳ îñîáè ÿê ñóá’ºêòè öèâ³ëüíîãî ïðàâà