Ideographic(denotational) stylistic(ideographic-stylistic)

Differentiation of synonyms may be observed in dif semantic components – denotational or connotational

T difference in denotational M can’t exceed certain limits – there is alw some common denotational component

 look, seem, appear - to be in one’s view or judgement but not necessarily in fact

Here stylistic reference may be regarded as identical+some difference in the denotational component

Synonymous Ws alw differ in T denotational component irrespective of T identity or difference of stylistic reference

Stylystic synonyms 1.to see(neuter)=2.to behold(bookish, poetic)

1.‘have or use power of sight’+understand+have knowledge or experience of

2.‘looking at that which is seen’ – there is dif-ce in T denotational component

Sources of synonyms.

1. Borrowing

Quite a number of Ws in synonymic sets are usu of Latin or French origin (set includes both native & borrowed Ws)

Often double-scale patterns: native vs Latin  bodily-corporal, brotherly-fraternal

Native vs Greek or French  answer-reply, fiddle-violin

Stylistic reference may differ: native Ws are usu colloquial, borrowed often bookish or highly literary  see above

2. T law of synonymic attraction-interests of T community tend to attract a large number of synonyms

 in Beowulf there are 37 syn-s for ‘hero’ & at least a dozen for battle & fight

in mod Am Eng 20 Ws denoting money  bucks, beans, do-re-mi,

рус: деньги, мани, лаве, капуста, бабки…

3. radiation of synonyms – when a particular W is given a transferred M its syn-s tend to develop along parallel lines

 get  understand, grasp  understand

T bulk of synonyms may be referred to stylistically marked Ws см пример про деньги

^ can’t be identical as T same referent in dif speech situations can be denoted by dif Ws

 woman-mother by her son or wife by her husband

^ Ws interchangeable in any given context are very rare

 buy & purchase are dif in their stylistic reference – not completely interchangeable

3. The morphological structure of the w. Morphemes & allomorphs. The morphological meaning of the w.

A great number of words have a composite nature & are made up of smaller units (morphemes), each posessing sound-form & meaning. A w. is the smallest autonomous meaningful unit of the L. It is a 2facet (2сторонний) unit (form + meaning). A morph-m – also 2facet, meaningful, but not autonomous.

Morpheme – smallest non-segmantable meaningful unit of language.

While morphemes can’t be segmented into smaller units without losing their constituent essence, words can be. There are 3 types of segmentability:

1. complete – you can easily split a w: natural.

2. conditional – semantically isn’t possible: de-ceive, re-ceive – segmentation is doubtful. (where ceive is a preudo-morpeme).

3. defective – components never occur in other ws or very seldom: straw-berry, rasp-berry, cran-berry.

Morphemes may have dif phonemic shapes. In that cases they are called allomorphs or morpheme variants, because the morphemic shapes of the w stand in alternation with each other: number- numerous, school- scholar.

Types of morphological meanings:

1)lexical – it’s defined in the dictionary

2)p-of-sp – typical of affixes, not roots. –er shoulder-surfer – подглядывающий номер тел.

3)differential – to distinguish 1 w from another: re-do, over-do.

4)distributional – shows the arrangement of morphemes in a w: skylight – light sky.