MODELLING SEMANTIC DERIVATION: SEMANTIC SHIFT STRATEGIES OF IRRATIONAL VOCABULARY IN ENGLISH

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.121922

Keywords:

irrational words, models, semantic derivation, semantic shift, situation, participant

Abstract

The paper focuses on the semantic derivation models of irrational vocabulary – a semantic class of words that denote the situation of experience that is not based on logical reasoning or clear thinking. The study shows the characteristics of the development of an irrational vocabulary semantic paradigm and reveals semantic derivation models of irrational verbs and adjectives in the English language. It is posited that semantic derivation strategies are realised simultaneously with the changes of the situation and actants profiles. The change of a situation profile suggests the shift in the experiencer’s vantage point, i.e. gnoseological (either perceptual or evaluative) position from which a situation is considered. The change of an actant profile provides for the shifts at the level of participants and their characteristics. The changes are thought to determine the types (models) of semantic shift strategies that underlie the development of the irrational words’ semantic paradigms. The analysis of the semantic shift strategies of irrational verbs and adjectives in English shows that the concept of irrationality may extend to the boundaries of the internal (occurring within the hierarchy of the person’s inner systems) and external (occurring within the hierarchy of the person’s values) conceptual domains. The study concludes that irrational verbs and adjectives in English may apply to the following semantic shift strategies: role (reduced to the changes of the participant’s type or structure), pragmatic (reduced to the changes of the participant’s communicative rank), deictic (reduced to the changes of the participant’s positional characteristics) and taxonomic (reduced to the changes of the participant’s categorical class).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Oleh Demenchuk, Rivne State University for the Humanities

Department of Romance and Germanic Philology

Doctor of Philological Sciences

Head of Department of Romance and Germanic Philology 

 

References

  1. Altmeyer S., Klein C. (2016). “Spirituality” and “Religion” – corpus analysis of subjective definitions in the questionnaire. In H. Streib, R.W. Hood (Eds.), Semantics and psychology of spirituality: A cross-cultural analysis (pp. 105–123). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International.
  2. Basyrov, Sh.R. (2013). Metaforychni modeli u sferi diiesliv rozuminnia hermanskykh i slov’ianskykh mov [Metaphorical models in the sphere of the verbs of intellectual activity in the Germanic and Slavonic languages]. Odeskyi linhvistychnyi visnyk, 2, 3–9.
  3. Bréal, M. (1897). Essai de sémantique: Science des significations. Paris: Librairie Hachette et Cie.
  4. Burchfield, R.W. (Ed.). (2009). Oxford English Dictionary (2nd ed. on CD-ROM, vers. 4.0). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  5. Darmesteter, A. (1886). The life of words as the symbols of ideas. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co., 1, Paternoster Square.
  6. Dik, S. (1992). Functional grammar in Prolog. An integrated implementation for English, French, and Dutch. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110850451
  7. Eger, S. & Mehler, A. (2016). On the linearity of semantic change: Investigating meaning variation via dynamic graph models. In K. Erk, N.A. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 52–58). Berlin, Germany: Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P16-2009
  8. Filipenko, M.V. (2003). Semantika narechij i adverbial'nyh vyrazhenij [Semantics of adverbs and adverbials]. Moscow, Russia: Azbukovnik.
  9. Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  10. Iomdin, B.L. (1999). Semantika glagolov irratcionalnogo ponimaniia [Semantics of verbs of irrational understanding]. Voprosy iazykoznaniia, 4, 71–90.
  11. Juvonen, P. & Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. (Eds.) (2016). The lexical typology of semantic shifts. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110377675
  12. Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. (2016). The lexical typology of semantic shifts: An introduction. In P. Juvonen, M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Eds.), The Lexical Typology of Semantic Shifts (pp. 1–20). Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110377675
  13. Kustova, G.I. (2004). Tipy proizvodnyh znachenij i mehanizmy jazykovogo rasshirenija [Types of derived meanings and mechanisms of language extensions]. Moscow, Russia: Iazyki slavianskoi kultury.
  14. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
  15. Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations. A preliminary investigation. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  16. Lewandowka-Tomaszczyk, B. (1985). On semantic change in a dynamic model of language. In J. Fisiak (Ed.), Historical Semantics: Historical Word-Formation (pp. 297–324). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110850178
  17. Moghaddam, A.S. &. Moghaddam, F.F. (2013). A semantic change model for French loanwords in Persian. Acta Linguistica Asiatica, 3 (2), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.4312/ala.3.2.73-88
  18. Nerlich, B. & Clark, D.D. (1988). A dynamic model of semantic change. Journal of Literary Semantics, 17 (2), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1515/jlse.1988.17.2.73.
  19. Newman, J. (2015). Semantic shift. In N. Riemer (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Semantics (pp. 266–280). London & New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315685533
  20. Nisnevich, A. et al. (2015). Probabilistically modeling semantic change. Technical Report No. UCB/EECS-2015-36. Retrieved from http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2015/EECS-2015-36.html
  21. Paducheva, E.V. (2004). Dinamicheskie modeli v semantike leksyki [Dynamic models in the semantics of vocabulary]. Moscow, Russia: Iazyki slavianskoi kultury.
  22. Pustejovsky, J. (1996). The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA & London, U.K.: The MIT Press.
  23. Radden, G. & Kӧvecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In K-U. Panther, G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–59). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ. https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.03rad
  24. Rakhylyna, E.V. (Ed.) (2010). Lingvistika konstruktcii [Construction Linguistics]. Moscow, Russia: Azbukovnik.
  25. Rozina, R.I. (2005). Semanticheskoe razvitie slova v russkom literaturnom jazyke i sovremennom slenge: glagol [Semantic development of the word in the Russian literary language and modern slang: A verb]. Moscow, Russia: Azbukovnik.
  26. Skarabela, B., Srinivasan, M. & Rabagliab, H. (2017). The development of a generative lexicon: Evidence from instrument verbs. In Anne B. Bertolini and Maxwell J. Kaplan (Eds.), A Handbook of the 42-nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (p. 77). Boston: Boston University.
  27. Sweetser, E.E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904
  28. Sweetser, E.E. (1999). Compositionality and blending: Semantic composition in a cognitively realistic framework. In T. Janssen, G. Redeker (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, Scope, and Methodology (pp. 129–162). Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110803464.129
  29. The British National Corpus. (2017). Retrieved in 2017 from https://corpus.byu.edu/bnc
  30. Traugott, E.C. & Dasher, R.B. (2005). Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486500
  31. Van Valin, R. (2005). Exploring the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610578
  32. Vanhove, M. (Ed.). (2008). From polysemy to semantic change. Towards a typology of lexical semantic association. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.106
  33. Zalizniak, A. (2008). A catalogue of semantic shifts. Towards a typology of semantic derivation. In M. Vanhove (Ed.), From polysemy to semantic change. Towards a typology of lexical semantic association (pp. 217–232). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.106.10zal

Downloads

Published

2019-06-22

How to Cite

Demenchuk, O. (2019). MODELLING SEMANTIC DERIVATION: SEMANTIC SHIFT STRATEGIES OF IRRATIONAL VOCABULARY IN ENGLISH. Advanced Education, 6(12), 120–126. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.121922

Issue

2019: Issue 12

Section

ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2019 Oleh Volodymyrovych Demenchuk

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).