|АвтоАвтоматизацияАрхитектураАстрономияАудитБиологияБухгалтерияВоенное делоГенетикаГеографияГеологияГосударствоДомДругоеЖурналистика и СМИИзобретательствоИностранные языкиИнформатикаИскусствоИсторияКомпьютерыКулинарияКультураЛексикологияЛитератураЛогикаМаркетингМатематикаМашиностроениеМедицинаМенеджментМеталлы и СваркаМеханикаМузыкаНаселениеОбразованиеОхрана безопасности жизниОхрана ТрудаПедагогикаПолитикаПравоПриборостроениеПрограммированиеПроизводствоПромышленностьПсихологияРадиоРегилияСвязьСоциологияСпортСтандартизацияСтроительствоТехнологииТорговляТуризмФизикаФизиологияФилософияФинансыХимияХозяйствоЦеннообразованиеЧерчениеЭкологияЭконометрикаЭкономикаЭлектроникаЮриспунденкция||
Dialectism – a dialectal word
Dictionaries –compendia containing lexicographic descriptions of lexical units.
- bilingual d.;
- diachronic d.;
- etymological d.;
- general (general-purpose) d.;
- learner's (pragmatically oriented) d.;
- native speaker's d.;
- restricted d.;
- subject (specialised/terminological) d.;
- synchronic d.;
- unilingual (monolingual) d.
Diminutive suffixes –word-building (derivational) suffixes, implying smallness, either actual or imputed in token of affection, scorn, etc. (e.g. –ette, -let, -kin).
Discourse –a continuous stretch of language larger than a sentence, constituting a speech event; a dynamic process of expression and comprehension governing the performance of people within linguistic interaction. D. peculiarities are regarded as sufficiently systematic features, which have a direct bearing on the functioning of discrete lexical units. A combination of factors, such as typical patterns of usage, frequency of occurrence, stylistic conventions of the register become an essential feature of the word's actual and potential significance as a unit within the system of language. Varieties of d. – spoken d.andwritten d. which display some formal differences between them in orthography, morphology and syntax as well as in conventions of usage and style. Many of these differences stem from their functional features, in particular the fact that spoken conversational language is always situation-bound and provides verbal and non-verbal feedback between the speaker and the listener. It has therefore no direct counterpart in the written language.
Discourse analysis – distinguishes between functional varieties of speech events, such as monologues and dialogues, oratory, narrative, and so on; studies the choice of linguistic units as well as conventions governing their use and linguistic regularities in general in each case of a stretch of speech, distinguishing between the informative and the imaginative, formal and informal, spoken and written media in communication.
Disintegration of polysemy – See Split of polysemy
Disjunction –a principle of combinatory semantics (q.v.); applies to negimplicational explicational combinations, oxymora (q.v.) when an incompatible semantic component is 'switched off' or 'wiped/crossed out'.
Disphemisms (kakophemisms) – stylistically marked words and expressions with negative connotations used instead of neutral words with the aim of derogation, pejoration or abuse. Ds. are opposed to euphemisms (q.v.). Euphemisms 'improve' the negative associations connected with the denotata by means of positive evaluative connotation of euphemistic expressions, thus masking the unpleasant content, whereby ds. 'decrease' the evaluation of the denotata by means of negative evaluative connotation (q.v.) of disphemistic expressions, thus accentuating the negative content. E.g. smeller – 'nose', poetaster 'a bad writer'.
Distinctive stress pattern –discrimination between otherwise homographic nouns and verbs with the help of the stress: con'duct v – 'conduct n.
Distinguisher – a differential seme (semantic component) (q.v.) within the semantic structure of a word which makes it semantically distinct from other words. E.g. for words manage and try the distinguishing component will be 'factivity/non-factivity' (respectively). – See Componential analysis; Marker
Distribution –immediate linguistic environment of a morpheme:
- complementary d. –is said to take place when two linguistic variants of one and the same morpheme cannot appear in the same environment (e.g. prefixes il-/ir-/in-/im- are allomorphs of one and the same morpheme as appear in irregular, illegal, innavigable, immortal depending upon the initial sound in the following stem). Their function and meaning are the same, but the environment is different.
- contrastive d. – different morphemes are said to be characterized by c.d. if they occur in same environment and signal different meanings (e.g. suffixes –ment and –ing are different morphemes, not allomorphs, as they have the same environment, but different functions and meanings).
- non-contrastive d. – different morphemes are said to be characterized by n.-c. d. if they occur in the same environment and signal the same meaning – e.g. syntactic – syntactical. They are called free variants of the morpheme. – SeeVariation, morphological
Divisibility, morphological(also morphological segmentation)–the ability of a word to be divided into such elements as root (q.v.), stem, and affix(es) (q.v.).
Domain –aconceptual sphere as a set of conceptual entities concentrating around one concept. In cognitive linguistics domains are understood as cognitive contexts which trigger semantic priming of a certain linguistic unit. Cognitive contexts are chunks of knowledge, informational cognitive networks which underlie and underpin linguistic semantics and provide understanding of linguistic units. These contexts are termed differently: base, domains (cognitive spheres, or contexts)/ active zones (R.Langacker); mental spaces (J.Fauconnier, and G.Lakoff); ground (J.Taylor); scene (R. Dirven); frames (Ch. Fillmore). E.g. TIME – is the domain for understanding lexical meaning of morning, hour, winter, century, moment, etc.
- source domain – in cognitive metaphor (q.v.) theory – the conceptual domain chosen as basis for transference procedure, similar in some respect to target domain (e.g. in metaphor foot of the mountain the source domain is body)
- target domain – in cognitive metaphor (q.v.) theory – the conceptual domain one element of which is sought to be expressed with the help of a unit belonging to a source domain (e.g. in metaphor foot of the mountain the target domain is mountain)
Doublets –1) free morphological or syntactic variants – SeeVariants; 2) etymological ds. – words of the same origin but which appeared in the language via different source. E.g. channel/canal, cavalry/chivalry, cart/chart, shirt/skirt are etymological ds. – SeeBorrowing, Source of borrowing, Origin of borrowing
Doublespeak –the term itself is a blend of newspeak and doublethink from Orwell's '1984' meaning language which pretends to communicate but really does not. It is language which makes the bad seem good, the negative seem positive, the unpleasant appear attractive, or at least tolerable (e.g. one of the best examples of the kind belongs to Colonel Opfer, the United States Air Force press officer in Cambodia. after a US bombing raid, he told reporters: 'You always write it's bombing, bombing, bombing. It's not bombing! It's air support!'). It is language which avoids or shifts responsibility, language which is at variance with its real or its purported meaning. It is language which deliberately avoids clarity, which conceals or prevents thought. Such language is not the product of carelessness or sloppy thinking; rather, it is a result of clear thinking as it is carefully designed to change reality and to mislead. Such dishonest and inhumane use of language and literature on the basis of semantic distortion of words pertains mostly to the sphere of advertizing, mass media, public official discourse, political commentaries and the like. Semantic basis for doublespeak is the ingenious use of connotative (positive and negative) power of the word semantics. – See Euphemism; Political Correctness, Bias words
Echoism / echo words –SeeOnomatopoeia (sound imitation)
Elisional combination –SeePhrase
Ellipsis –the omission of a word or words considered essential for grammatical completeness, but not for the conveyance of the intended lexical meaning: e.g.open on instead of 'open fire on'; put to sea instead of 'put ship to sea'; daily insteadof 'dailypaper' – SeeShortening
Emotive/emotional/affective connotation (colouring, component, force) –part (or the whole) of the word's content, reflecting the speaker's feelings, affections, experiences or prejudices. The larger the emotive component within the word's meaning (q.v.) – the smaller the significance of its referential content. When it comes to 'snarl' words, for example, we can see that their reference becomes irrelevant (who cares about the conceptual meaning of fascism, although it still exists and can be defined as 'the right wing political system used in Germany and Italy in the 1930s and 40s'). In this and similar cases the speaker is making use of the unfavourable connotations of such words in order to give forceful expression to the utterance. That is why emotive words do not only carry affective connotations (q.v.) but become part of the loaded language. E.m. is often interwoven with evaluative and expressive meanings. – SeeDoublespeak; Political Correctness; Euphemism
Enantiosemy –the ability of a lexical unit to develop opposite (antonymic, conversive) meanings within its semantic structure. Words with intensifying component in their meaning often develop polar meanings: awfully conveys positive evaluation 'very'. E. includes cases of the specific use of the word which comes as a result of incompatibility of lexis and prosody. The meaning of the word happens to be at variance with the purport of intonation with which it is actually enunciated. A meliorative word can turn into a pejorative one when pronounced with an altogether different timbre II. Evaluative words are regularly used enantiosemically. E.g. You are a beauty! – Хорош ты, нечего сказать! A fine specimen! – Вот так тип! A pretty business indeed! – Хорошенькое дело! – SeeSense
Epidygmatic relationships between words – relations within a word family (q.v.), relations by word-derivation.
Equivalence –the relation between two elements of a system based on the common feature due to which they belong to the same set – See System.
Equonymy –semantic relations between terms of same level within a hierarchical taxonomy (q.v.), e.g. two or more hyponyms to the same hypernym (mother and father would be both hyponyms to the hypernym parents, therefore they are terms equonyms to each other).
Equonym – See Equonymy
Etymological doublet –SeeDoublet 2)
Etymology –the study of lexical history; investigates the origins of individual Lexeme, the affinities they have had to each other, and semantic changes as well as changes in form they underwent in the process of language development
Etymological fallacy –1) the view that an earlier meaning of a lexeme, or its original meaning, is its 'true' or 'correct' one. The fallacy is evident when it's realised that most common lexemes have experienced several semantic changes during their history; 2) (folk etymology, false etymology) inadequate decoding of the word's etymology. Wrong attribution of linguistic ancestry and semantic cognate links to a borrowed unit. E.g. cockroach has nothing to do with cock, buta modified Spanish cucuracha.
Etymological meaning –original meaning of the word.
Euphemism(fromGr. 'well speaking')–is generally used instead of a more direct and straightforward expression to avoid shocking or upsetting someone. Euphemistic power of a lexical unit is based upon its neutral or positive connotations. Es. include genteelisms (q.v.), neutral euphemisms, low colloquial (slang) euphemistic expressions, politically correct words and doublespeak lexicon. – See Political correctness; Doublespeak. Typology of es.:
- stale e. –common vocabulary units, almost clichés which originated as euphemisms but no longer recognized as such:e.g. blooming ('bloody'), gents ('gentlemen's WC'), the late ('dead'), untruth ('lies');
- true e. –expressions vividly demonstrating theireuphemistic nature;
- occasional e. – euphemistic expressions coined for a discourse occasion (cf. true e.);
- usual e. – euphemistic expressions which became part and parcel of the common vocabulary (cf. stale e.) – SeeSexism; Political correctness; Bias words.
Euphony –1. a) pleasantness of sound, esp. of a word or phrase; harmony. b) a pleasant sound; 2. the tendency to make a phonetic change for ease of pronunciation.
Evaluative connotation /evaluative meaning –type ofconnotation(q.v.),expressing the speaker's attitudes – of approval (positive evaluation) or disapproval (negative evaluation). Semantics of some words can become primarily evaluative: e.g. You look fabulous! Horrendous prices!
Explicandum – See Determinandum; Phrase, explicational p.
Explicant – See Determinant; Phrase, explicational p.
Explicational combinations –SeePhrase
Explicitness – expressing the meaning directly, leaving nothing merely implied; making statements in detail. Sometimes leads to excessive use of synonyms and pleonastic usage.
Expressive connotation / expressive meaning(alsoemphatic, intensifying connotation) –type of connotation (q.v.). Words with expressive meaning add to the utterance some emphatic stress for the sake of expressiveness. Thus magnificent, gorgeous, splendid, superb are all used colloquially as forms of exaggeration.
Extension of meaning –SeeGeneralization of meaning
Extensional meaning –referential applicability of a name; the scope of its reference.
False etymology/folk etymology – SeeEtymological fallacy
Fallacy, etymological –SeeEtymological fallacy
Fashion words – See Vogue words
Figurative language –allows speakers/writers to communicate meanings that differ in various ways from what they literally say. People speak figuratively for reasons of politeness, to avoid responsibility for the import of what is communicated, to express ideas that are difficult to communicate using literal language, and to express thoughts in a compact and vivid manner. Among the most common forms of figurative language, often referred to as "tropes" or "figures of speech," are metaphor (q.v.), where ideas from dissimilar knowledge domains are either explicitly, in the case of simile (q.v.) (e.g., "My love is like a red, red rose"), or implicitly (e.g., "Our marriage is a roller-coaster ride") compared; metonymy (q.v.), where a salient part of a single knowledge domain is used to represent or stand for the entire domain (e.g., "The White House issued a statement"); idioms (q.v.), where a speaker's meaning cannot be derived from an analysis of the words' typical meanings (e.g., "John let the cat out of the bag about Mary's divorce"); proverbs, where speakers express widely held moral beliefs or social norms (e.g.."The early bird captures the worm"); irony (q.v.), where a speaker's meaning is usually, but not always, the opposite of what is said (e.g., "What lovely weather we're having" stated in the midst of a rainstorm): hyperbole, where a speaker exaggerates the reality of some situation (e.g., "I have ten thousand papers to grade by the morning"); understatement/litotes (q.v.), where a speaker says less than is actually the case (e.g., "John seems a bit tipsy" when John is clearly very drunk); oxymora (q.v.), where two contradictory ideas/concepts are fused together (e.g., "When parting is such sweet sorrow"); and indirect requests, where speakers make requests of others in indirect ways by asking questions (e.g., "Can you pass the salt?"), or stating a simple fact (e.g., "It seems cold in here" meaning "Go closethe window").
Figure –a profiled (salient, conspicuous) element of a cognitive domain which underpins the semantics of a word.Other terms: perspective, focus. –SeeBackground; Domain.
Foreign word/foreignism -SeeAssimilation, barbarism; Borrowing
Form –as opposed tomeaning;the sound or graphical form of a linguistic expressionas opposed toitscontent; the material form, body of the sign; the designator, the unit of the plane of expression as opposed to designatum, the unit of the plane of content; linguistic means (phonetic, morphological, lexical, grammatical) in some conceptual content is enwrapped. – SeeSignifier; Signified
Form/structural/functional/semi-notional/syncategorematic words –serve to build up grammatical relationships between notional words in a grammatically correct structure.
Formative – same as affix (q.v.)
- inner f.– derivational affix;
- outer f.– functional affix.
Frame – 1) a unit of cognition, a type of concept (q.v.), a complex one involving a number of cognitive images connected by some essential relationship; a multicomponential concept or cognitive model representing a package of information, knowledge of a stereotyped situation. Formally a frame is represented as a two level structure of knots and relationships:
a) head knots which contain data always relevant to the given situation;
b) terminal knots or slots which are filled by the data form a concrete practical situation and are represented as subframes or enclosed frames.
E.g. the semantics of the verb buy represents a frame as it suggests of a complicated relationship between a buyer and a seller, including the product dealt on, and other matter involved (place, price, etc.); 2) synonymous to domain (q.v.), base, background – a conceptual area which serves as a general semantic substratum for priming the meaning of a certain word: e.g. the word bill will be primed within a frame 'buying'.
Free forms –a form is said to be free if it may stand alone without changing its meaning; if not, it is a bound form, so called because it is always bound to sth else (e.g. sport, sportive, elegant are free forms, while –ive, eleg-, -ant are bound forms, because they never occur alone).
Frequency –range of occurrence of a lexical unit, differentiated for spoken and written discourse; indicated in frequency dictionaries.
Functional affix –SeeAffix
Functional approach to meaning –See'Textocentric' approach to meaning
Functional change –SeeConversion
Functional style –vertical diversification of the vocabulary in correlation with the notion of functions of language. According to Acad. V.V.Vinogradov's classification of f.s. the main division lies between all kinds of informative language (publicistic style or genre) and imaginative language – the style (or genre) of fiction. The former relies on the function of message while the latter is based on the function of aesthetic impact.
Все материалы представленные на сайте исключительно с целью ознакомления читателями и не преследуют коммерческих целей или нарушение авторских прав. Студалл.Орг (0.019 сек.)