Basic types of lexical meanings of a word

Clarification of the essence of the meaning of a word, analysis of qualitative changes in the structure of words - in their historical movement - is one of the main tasks of lexicology. Defining or interpreting the meanings of words is the main goal of compiling dictionaries, a direct object of lexicography.

The most important tasks of studying the laws of the semantic side of words and expressions of a particular language are the creation of historical dictionaries of languages ​​with ancient writing and the construction of descriptive, historical and comparative-historical lexicologies of different languages.

One of the ways to approach the solution of complex issues related to the study of a word and its meaning, with the study of the laws of changes in the meanings of words, is to clarify the different types or types of lexical meanings of a word and the ways or forms of their connection in the semantic structure of the word.

It is well known that a word is not only the name of an object or objects, but also an expression of meaning, and sometimes an entire system of meanings. In one and the same meaning, the public understanding of different objects or phenomena, actions, qualities is generalized and united... Denoting a phenomenon, an object, the word at the same time conveys its connections and relationships in a dynamic whole, in historical reality. It reflects the understanding of a “piece of reality” and its relationship to other elements of the same reality, as they were or are realized by society, the people in a certain era, and at the same time with the wide possibility of later rethinking of the original meanings and shades. Thus, the verb nasolit, in addition to the direct specific meaning of “prepare with pickles, put a lot of salt in something,” also has a figurative meaning in modern language “to damage, cause trouble.”

Between the series of objects, actions, qualities denoted by words, there are various interactions and relationships. An object named by a word may turn out to be a link in different functional series, different aspects of reality, included in the overall broad picture of life. The word helps to comprehend and generalize these relationships. All this is reflected in the development of word meanings in the language of a particular historical period. Thus, the word ending is associated with the professional terminology of press workers. In typography, it still means a drawing, a graphic decoration at the end of a manuscript, book, or at the end of a chapter or section. The word ending is formed from the adjective terminal or terminal using the suffix -ka (cf. colloquial table, cherry, postcard, etc.). At the beginning of the 20th century. this word expanded its meaning: it was transferred to the field of literary and musical terminology (the ending of a poem, the ending of a romance). The word ending began to be called the final part of a work. word lexical phrase

Thus, the formation and creation of a new concept or a new understanding of a subject is carried out on the basis of existing linguistic material. This understanding, embodied in the meaning of a word, becomes an element of the semantic structure of a given language as a whole. Whenever a new meaning is included in the lexical system of a language, it enters into connection and interrelation with other elements of the complex and branched structure of the language. Only against the background of the lexical-semantic system of the language, only in connection with it are the boundaries of the word determined, as a complex and at the same time integral linguistic unit, combining a number of forms, meanings and uses.

When treating a word only as a name, it is impossible to establish a fundamental difference between different meanings of the same word and between different homonym words.

The meaning of a word is determined not only by its correspondence to the concept that is expressed using this word (for example: movement, development, language, society, law, etc.); it depends on the properties of that part of speech, the grammatical category to which the word belongs, on the socially conscious and established contexts of its use, on its specific lexical connections with other words, determined by the laws of combination of verbal meanings inherent in a given language, on the semantic relationship of the word with synonyms and in general with words that are close in meaning and shades, depending on the expressive and stylistic coloring of the word.

In a linguistic system, the semantic essence of a word is not exhausted by its inherent meanings. The word for the most part contains indications of adjacent rows of words and meanings. It is full of reflections of other parts of the language system, expressing attitudes towards other words, correlative or associated with its meanings. The value of a successful name or artistic expression lies in the richness of such echoes.

The connection between the meaning of a word and the lexical-semantic system of the language is carried out through internally united various subject-semantic and expressive-synonymous word groups. Due to the complexity of the semantic structure of a word, due to the diversity of its relationships and living interactions with other lexical links of the language system, it can be very difficult to distinguish and convey all the meanings and shades of a word even in a given period of language development, to imagine with all the completeness and vital concreteness the role of the word in speech communication and exchange of thoughts between members of society.

The lack of a developed semantic theory of the word is reflected in the fact that we have not generalized and systematized observations of the qualitative uniqueness of meanings and forms of their connection, their internal unification in words belonging to different grammatical classes. It has been suggested that the semantic scope and methods of combining meanings are different in words belonging to different significant parts of speech. Thus, the semantic structure of a verb is wider than the semantic structure of a noun, and the range of its meanings is more flexible.

The term “lexical” or, as they have recently begun to say, “semantic meaning of a word” cannot be considered completely definite. The lexical meaning of a word is usually understood as its objective and material content, formalized according to the laws of the grammar of a given language and being an element of the general semantic system of the dictionary of this language. The socially fixed content of a word can be homogeneous, unified, but it can also represent an internally connected system of multidirectional reflections of different “pieces of reality” between which a semantic connection is established in the system of a given language. The differentiation and unification of these heterogeneous subject-semantic relations in the structure of a word is fraught with very great difficulties. These difficulties make themselves felt in the constant confusion of meanings and uses of a word, typical for explanatory dictionaries, in the vagueness of the boundaries between the meanings and shades of meaning of a word, in constant disagreements or discrepancies on the issue of the number of meanings of a word and the correctness of their definition.

Observations on the ways of combining different meanings in a word, as well as on the patterns of word usage, lead to the conclusion that not all meanings of words are homogeneous or of the same type, that there are qualitative differences in the structure of different types of lexical meanings. It is well known that a word relates to reality, reflects it and expresses its meanings not in isolation, not in isolation from the lexical-semantic system of a given specific language, but in inextricable connection with it, as its constituent element.

1. In the system of meanings expressed by the vocabulary of a language, the easiest to distinguish are direct, nominative meanings, as if directly aimed at “objects”, phenomena, actions and qualities of reality (including the inner life of a person) and reflecting their public understanding. The nominative meaning of a word is the support and socially conscious foundation of all its other meanings and applications.

The basic nominative meanings of words, especially those that belong to the main vocabulary, are very stable. These meanings can be called free, although their freedom is conditioned socio-historically and subject-logically. The functioning of these meanings of words is usually not limited and not limited by the narrow framework of close phraseological combinations. Basically, the circle of use of the nominative meaning of a word, the circle of its connections corresponds to the connections and relationships of the objects, processes and phenomena of the real world themselves, for example: drink water, kvass, wine, tea, cider, grape juice, etc.; stone house, basement, foundation, floor, barn, etc.; squint, squint eyes; syllabic verse, versification.

2. In relation to the main nominative meaning, all other meanings of this kind in the word are derivative. This derivativeness of secondary nominative meanings cannot be confused with metaphor and imagery. To the extent that these meanings are not separated from the main one, they are understood in relation to it and can be called nominative-derived meanings. Often they are narrower, tighter, more specialized than the main nominative meaning of the word. This is, for example, the word drop - drops has a nominative-derived meaning “liquid medicine used according to the number of drops.” It is characteristic of the plural forms - drops. For example, in Griboyedov’s “Woe from Wit”: “Should I give you some drops?” In Pushkin’s “The Miserly Knight”: “He makes drops... it’s truly wonderful how they act.”

It is curious to see the combination of three types of nominative meanings in the word friction. The mechanics term friction was used to characterize social relations. In the language system, the nominative-derived meaning of a word (as well as the terminological, scientific) cannot be separated from the basic free one. Therefore, the statement that a word in its basic meaning can be included in the main vocabulary fund, but in a “figurative or special” meaning can be outside it, is erroneous.

Two or more free nominative meanings can be combined in one word only if one or two of them are derived from the main one (at least understood as such at a given period of language development). If there is no such connection between the meanings, then we are already dealing with two homonyms. Analysis of the morphological structure of the word also helps a lot in solving this issue.

The connection of meanings in the semantic structure of a word, the ways of combining words and meanings in speech are determined by the internal semantic patterns of development of the language system. Here lie the grounds and conditions for historically established restrictions in the rules for linking the meanings of words and in the semantic spheres of their use. That is why not all meanings of words in a living, functioning lexical system are directly aimed at the surrounding reality and directly surround it. And in this area, language is a product of different eras. Many meanings of words are locked into strictly defined phraseological contexts and are used to exchange thoughts in accordance with historically established phraseological conditions for their use. Many words in the modern language system do not have direct nominative meanings at all. They exist only as part of a few phraseological combinations. Their meaning is isolated from these combinations most often by substituting synonyms. Many words or individual meanings of many words, mainly of a figurative or synonymous nature, are limited in their connections. These meanings can only appear in combination with strictly defined words, that is, in a narrow sphere of semantic relations. Several phraseological series are grouped around a polysemantic word. Most of the meanings of words (3) are phraseologically related. Having different meanings for a word most often means entering into different types of semantically limited phraseological connections. The meanings and shades of meaning of a word are mostly determined by its phrasal environment.

3. Phraseologically related meaning is devoid of a deep and stable conceptual center. The general subject-logical core does not stand out in it as clearly as in the free meaning. It does not follow either from the functions of the significant parts that make up the word (if the word is derivative), or from the relationship of this word to reality. The meaning of this kind is “scattered”: it tends to be fragmented into a number of shades associated with individual phraseological combinations. For example, the verb grow, although it is defined in explanatory dictionaries by the general formula “to reach some size in growth,” it is usually used only in relation to hair, mustache, beard, and nails. In other cases it is said to grow (compare the meanings of the word shoot: “a shoot extending from a stem or root” and “a branch”). Homogeneous restrictions on verbal connections are also valid for the verbs grow (hair, mustache, beard, nails) and let go (to oneself).

Synonyms can also develop completely synonymous, phraseologically related meanings. A striking example is the verbs vvat and vvaletsya. The verb to fall in one of its meanings is phraseologically related, synonymous with the verb to fall: “to sink deeply, to become sunken.” This meaning is realized in combination with the words - eye (eyes), cheek (cheeks), mouth, lips, chest, sides. For example, in Pushkin’s “The Undertaker”: “... sunken mouths”; from Turgenev in the story “Strange History”: “The lips were so sunken that among the many wrinkles they represented one - transverse. The verb fall is characterized by the fact that its direct nominative meaning is outdated and has fallen out of use (cf. Old Russian fall into a hole, ditch and etc.) To express this verb, the verbs began to be used: fall and get (cf. fall into a hole and get into a hole). Only in imperfective forms has the nominative meaning “to flow in”, “to flow in” (about rivers, streams) been preserved. In the perfect forms of the verb to fall, the meaning “to become sunken” has been fixed, synonymous with the same meaning of the verb to fall in. It is associated only with the words cheeks, eyes (eyes), less often mouth, lips, temples, chest, sides. In Lermontov: “pale cheeks sunken" ("Bela"); in Chekhov's story "The Seizure": "His face was pale and haggard, his temples were sunken."

The distinction between free and phraseologically related meanings of a word helps to more accurately and clearly represent both the semantic boundaries and the semantic composition of the word, the system of all its meanings. The distinction between free and phraseologically related meanings is especially important for the theory and practice of lexicography. It is especially easy to make mistakes in isolating and defining phraseologically related meanings of words, since their use does not provide sufficient means for checking their meaning.

The extreme level in the series of phraseological combinations is occupied by phrases that include words with a single use. For example, the book word advanced occurs only in the expressions “advanced age”, “advanced years” or “years”. It is clear that in an individual style it can be combined with some other synonym for the word “age”. So from Nekrasov: “The old days will set more serene than the Arcadian idyll.”

Its use differs from the meaning of the word. Usage is either a trace of past uses of a word that did not create a special meaning, or a new application of one of the meanings of a word in an individual, not quite ordinary phraseological environment, in a unique situation, with a new figurative orientation. Under the figurative or compositionally complicated use of a word in any of its basic meanings, new, unique semantic meanings arise. They are volatile, changeable, and sometimes even difficult to detect. They are not characteristic of the common language, although they are generally understandable.

The history of word meanings is inextricably linked with the history of phraseological units. Phraseological combinations embody general patterns that govern the connection of meanings within a given semantic system. New, individual uses of a word make themselves felt first in individual phraseological combinations. Based on them, a common phraseologically related, non-free meaning can then crystallize.

At the same time, the fading of the meaning of a word does not always lead to the disappearance of all related contexts of its use. The separation of phraseological combinations also leads to the formation of new expressions and new semantic shades. For example, the verb to get drunk (as well as its expressive synonyms to get drunk, etc.) in colloquial and familiar speech is combined with the expression to hell (cf. to the green serpent) in the meaning “to the extreme degree of intoxication, to hallucinations.” Here, to hell is a designation of the highest, extreme degree, but only of one very specific action. Being torn away from the verb to get drunk, the expression to get drunk as hell can, in individual speech, become a playfully ironic designation of the highest limit of anything at all. This is exactly how the artist A. Ya. Golovin used this expression when talking about Levitan: “What “hells” of virtuosity he reached in his last works!.. Thus, the study of not only synonyms, but also phraseologically related meanings, the use of words closely unites lexicology with stylistics.

In addition to the qualitative differences between free meanings (1) and phraseologically related meanings (3), non-free ones, in the lexical system of the Russian language specific features of meanings, the implementation of which is determined (4) syntactically, stand out very clearly. The very nature of the interconnectedness of the lexical meanings of words and their syntactic properties is reflected in the qualitative differences between the two main syntactic categories - phrases and sentences.

A peculiar type of meaning of a syntactically determined nature (4) is formed in words, to which a strictly defined function is assigned as part of a sentence. A functionally syntactically limited meaning is qualitatively different from all other types of meanings in that the syntactic properties of a word as a member of a sentence are, as it were, included in its semantic characteristics. For example, Wed. in colloquial speech the word well done when expressing praise, approval as a predicate: She’s a great guy with us; Well done for passing your exams well.

The word rooster has two meanings: 1) “male chicken”, 2) “bully” when applied to a person. However, it is characteristic that the second meaning of this word is not associated with any of the phraseological units formed on the basis of the word rooster: let the rooster (about the singer); let the red rooster (“set it on fire”, from robber jargon); get up (early) with the roosters, stay up until the roosters (until dawn), stay late. Thus, the figurative meaning of the word rooster cannot be considered phraseologically related. It would be most correct to recognize this meaning, in contrast to the direct, free nominative meaning, as a predicative-characterizing meaning. The predicative-characterizing meaning of a noun can be used to name, designate someone or something only in the case of individual indication (usually through pronoun this). For example, if they said about a bully: That's a rooster! Or: This rooster always ruins everyone's mood! But as a name, as a designation, the word rooster is usually applied to a person only as a surname or nickname (one can recall Gogol’s Pyotr Petrovich Rooster). The predicative-characterizing meaning of a noun can be realized in a predicate or as part of a predicate, in circulation, in a separate definition and application.

The syntactically limited meaning of a word from a semantic point of view is often the result of a figurative-typical generalization of some social phenomenon, character, some personality traits and is a popular expression of their assessment, their characteristics. Therefore, it is used as a predicate, as an address, as an application, or a separate definition, or even initially as a figurative, often metaphorical, designation that appears in speech, in cases where it is necessary to classify a person, object, phenomenon to some category in the system collectively conscious ways to characterize them. The peculiar semantic features of this type of word meaning appear especially clearly in cases of transition, developing, but not yet becoming standard.

Functionally and syntactically limited meanings are characteristic mainly of nouns, adjectives (especially their short forms), as well as adverbs, which under these conditions pass into the category of state. However, there is no doubt that in the verb system a similar type of predicative-characteristic, attributive meanings develops. These meanings usually appear in imperfective forms and are associated with a limitation of not only the aspectual, but also the modal possibilities of using the corresponding verb. For example: The windows overlook the garden; The endeavors of young researchers deserve every encouragement; The matter is worth attention; One is worth seven, etc.

Much more complex, far beyond the limits of simple correlation with three types of lexical meanings of a word - meanings of free, phraseologically related and functionally syntactically limited (or fixed) - is the sphere of meanings (5) constructively organized or constructively determined. Many lexical meanings of words are inseparable from strictly defined forms of compatibility of these words with other words. Moreover, these forms of compatibility depend not only on the belonging of words to certain grammatical categories (for example, verbs to the category of transitivity), but also on the connection of these words with such semantic groups that have a stable type of construction. The fact is that the structure of some types of phrases is determined by the belonging of their grammatically dominant member to one or another semantic class or category of words that have the same type of construction. For example, a small number of verbs of internal state, emotional and volitional experience - cry, lament, complain and some others - usually express their meaning in combination with the preposition na and the accusative case form of a noun denoting the object of the corresponding state or experience. Thus, the direct nominative meaning of the verb to cry (as well as its synonyms with the help of which it is defined - to complain, lament) is constructively determined. You can’t just cry, you can cry about something - about your fate, about your misfortunes.

A constructively determined meaning is characterized by the subject-semantic incompleteness of its disclosure in the forms of the word itself: it is fully realized only in its inherent syntactic structure - in combination with other words, the number and composition of which may not be limited in any way. The possible unlimited connections with other words within a strictly defined syntactic structure is an essential feature of a constructively determined meaning. And by this feature it differs sharply from the phraseologically related meaning, which is characterized by isolation and limited possible combinations with other words.

An example of the interaction of phraseologically related meanings and strictly differentiated constructions is the word play: cf., on the one hand, to play something (cards, lotto, hide and seek, football, chess, etc.) and figuratively - to play feeling, indignation, etc. and, on the other hand, to play something (violin, guitar, piano; cf. also play billiards, on nerves); Wed play with something or someone (life, people), play someone, in something, etc.

Thus, in the system of significant parts of speech, constructive conditionality or connectedness only introduces peculiar shades into the main types of word meanings, contributes to the differentiation of meanings and shades of words, as well as the differentiation of homonyms. The identification of a special type of constructively determined meaning occurs when a significant word is transformed into a functional one (for example, relatively - in the function of a preposition with a homonym regarding - an adverb and a modal word; exactly - in the function of a conjunction in relation to a homonym exactly - an adverb, as well as a modal word and an affirmative particle and so on.).

Distinguishing the main types or types of lexical meanings of words helps to establish a clear perspective in the semantic characteristics of words and contributes to the correct definition of homonyms and synonyms in the lexical system of the language. Different types of meanings of words serve in different ways to reflect and consolidate in the language the successes of the cognitive activity of the people. A. A. Potebnya correctly pointed out that the lexical meanings of words, organically connected with grammatical ones, are a structural element of the language, and in this sense they are formal - in comparison with those concepts that are formed and fixed on their basis and with their help.

A concept can become a free, nominative meaning of a word, but even in this case, the semantics of the word as a whole, considered in the system of aspects of language, is not exhausted and is not limited only to the expression of this concept. As for other types of lexical meanings of words, these meanings are so merged with the specifics of this particular language that the universal, conceptual, logical content in them is overgrown on all sides with peculiar forms and semantic shades of the national creativity of a given people.

TYPES OF LEXICAL MEANING OF A WORD

Parameter name	Meaning
Article topic:	TYPES OF LEXICAL MEANING OF A WORD
Rubric (thematic category)	Lexicology

GENERAL CONCEPT OF LEXICOLOGY

LEXICOLOGY

Lexicology(Greek lexikos - related to the word, verbal + logos - teaching) studies vocabulary. A distinction is made between descriptive lexicology, which deals with the current state of the vocabulary of a language, and historical lexicology, which studies it from a historical perspective. The most important branch of lexicology is semasiology(Greek semasia - meaning + logos), which studies the meaning of a word, explores various types of polysemy, as well as antonyms, synonyms, homonyms, paronyms, as well as other phenomena related to the meaning of a word. A word is the “basic structural-semantic unit of language, which serves to name objects and their properties, phenomena, relations of reality, and has a set of semantic, phonetic and grammatical features.” Words combine lexical and grammatical meanings, the first of which lies in the area of ​​interest of lexicology, and the second of grammar. Lexical meaning is the reflection in a word of one or another phenomenon of reality. By naming an object, process, property, quality, etc., the word fulfills its main, nominative function. The lexical meaning is individual (amblyopia 'weakened vision in the absence of visible damage to the eye'), while the grammatical meaning refers the word to a certain class of words (squirrel 'a small fur-bearing animal...' - noun, nominative case, feminine gender, etc. .d.). As you can see, the lexical meaning of a word lies in its base, and the grammatical meaning lies in its affixes. Example L.V. Shcherby (Glokaya kuzdra shteko budlanula bokra and kurdyachit bokrenka), illustrating the presence of grammatical meaning (bokra - bokr, noun, soul, masculine, wine fall, etc.) and the absence of lexical meaning, has long become a classic and became one of the most famous quotes and expressions of the 20th century.

Words with one lexical meaning are classified as unambiguous (monosemantic) (double 'in the amount of two people'), and words with two or more meanings are classified as polysemantic (polysemantic) (stubble - '1) compressed field, stubble, 2) remains of stems compressed cereals on stubble').

Taking into account the aspect of considering a word, three types of lexical meaning are distinguished: a) by correlation with the named object - direct and figurative, b) according to the motivation of the meaning – motivated and unmotivated, c) depending on the context – free and bound.

The direct (nominative) meaning is the main, closest one and has the original subject-conceptual correlation (Atlas ‘in ancient Greek mythology – a titan holding the firmament on his shoulders’). The figurative (secondary, derivative) meaning has a secondary subject-conceptual correlation and arises, as a rule, on the basis of a direct one (atlas 'in architecture - a vertical support in the form of a male figure supporting the ceiling of a building, portico, etc.') or (less commonly ) of another figurative meaning (shortbread cake is baked from shortbread dough). Sometimes the direct meaning is lost, and the original figurative meaning takes its place. So, for example, the oldest meaning of the word eye ‘stone ball(ic), bead’ was supplanted in the 16th-17th centuries. The lexeme belly ‘life’, ‘animal’, ‘property’ has been used since the 11th century, but it acquired its modern meaning much later. The types of secondary nomination are usually distinguished metaphor, metonymy and synecdoche.

Metaphor(Greek metaphora - transfer) - the use of a word in a figurative meaning, based on the similarity (external or internal) of the designated objects, phenomena, actions or characteristics. In a non-terminological sense, a metaphor is sometimes called any use of a word in a figurative sense. Considering that metaphor is a widespread type of motivation of secondary meaning, and that the similarity should be of various kinds, we will give just a few examples: similarity in shape (eyeball, needle 'on the spire of a building'), similarity in color (fiery hair, golden autumn), similarity in location (high gust, train tail), similarity in perception, impression (silk hair, prickly look, easy character), similarity in method or result of action (swallow 'read quickly, a lot, indiscriminately', go deaf 'to become indifferent, insensitive to something'), similarity in degree of value (pearl of the collection), similarity in function (burn 'to be lit, to give light /about modern lighting devices/', to shoot /originally from a bow with arrows/) and etc. There are: a) metaphors that have lost their imagery (erased, dry, dead, petrified, without ó figurative) and therefore do not carry the mark trans., ᴛ.ᴇ in explanatory dictionaries. now the original metaphorical transfer is no longer perceived in them and the dictionary gives their meaning as direct /bow of the boat/; b) figurative (figurative-poetic) metaphors retain their imagery, and their interpretation in the dictionary is preceded by a translation mark. Above the valley darkness, where the smoky fires, the peaks sleep. K. Balmont; Sleep. …|| Peren. Be in a state of complete peace and immobility; Beads.
Posted on ref.rf
…2. Peren. About small shiny droplets of something; c) the author’s metaphors (individual, individual-stylistic, artistic, speech) are individual and are not recorded in ordinary explanatory dictionaries: Rolls of lanterns, and on a chimney, like an owl drowned in feathers, unsociable smoke (B. Pasternak), the sun of herbs (K. Balmont). Οʜᴎ are the object of study primarily for literary criticism, and not for lexicology.

Metonymy(Greek metonymia - renaming) - the use of the name of one object, phenomenon, action instead of the name of another object, phenomenon, action, based on their contiguity (external or internal). Metonymy can be based on temporal (time), spatial, situational, logical, etc.
Posted on ref.rf
connections. The connection must be: a) between the object and the material from which the object is made /collect porcelain/; b) between the contents and the containing / drink a glass /; c) between the author and his work /to love Pelevin, to read Ulitskaya/; d) between the place and the people in this place /the audience was silent/; e) between the action and the place of action /bus stop/, etc. It is worth saying that for the name, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ has as its source the name of a person, and also the term is used for this person himself eponym. Eponyms include, for example, the words cardan 'a device for suspending a body, ensuring its immobility when the supports swing' (named after the Italian mathematician of the 16th century G. Cardano), pockets 'interfaces at the junction of an aircraft wing and fuselage to prevent air separation swirls' (named after the American scientist T. Carman, cardigan 'a knitted women's or men's woolen jacket with long sleeves without a collar' (named after the Earl of Cardigan: James Thomas Brudenell, 7th Earl of Cardigan /1797-1868/).

Synecdoche(Greek synekdoche - co-impliation, correlation) - transfer of meaning from one word to another, based on the use of the name of the whole instead of the name of the part, the general instead of the particular and vice versa: beard (about a man with a beard), nut (tree or shrub and its fruit) , murrelet (reindeer up to two months old and its fur). Quite often, synecdoche is considered a type of metonymy.

The grounds due to which the names were transferred may be lost or obscured, which leads to the appearance of homonyms. So, for example, the word rook (chess piece) arose through metaphorical transfer (there was chess, where this figure was made in the form of a rook, ᴛ.ᴇ. boat), and the word leggings (a type of clothing) based on metonymy (material → clothing made from it ).

If, from the point of view of modern language, the meaning of the word is non-derivative (why is it customary to call a table /piece of furniture/ a table?), then we have an unmotivated meaning of the word. The motivated word (meaning) has a conscious internal form, a preserved meaning, on the basis of which the word in question arose. The loss of internal form for any reason is usually called de-etymologization. So, for example, the word flattery now has one direct, unmotivated meaning: “obsequious, hypocritical, often selfish praise,” but in the Old Russian language its original meaning was “cunning, deception,” on the basis of which the meaning in question arose. The word week has lost its meaning ‘Sunday’ (cf.
Posted on ref.rf
Belor.
Posted on ref.rf
Nyadzel), and therefore the word Monday lost its motivation.

Implementation free values limited only by the logical foundations of the external world: to close ‘to block, obscure’ - to close the view, to close with oneself, to quickly close, etc. The associated meaning of the word for its implementation requires a certain position, context: in the word close the meaning ‘to close’ is realized only with the words eyelids, lips, eyes. The following are distinguished: types of lexically non-free meanings:

A) syntactically determined meaning, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ the word appears only in a syntactic position unusual for it: wolf ‘about a person who has experienced a lot, accustomed to adversity, danger, experienced in some. business (usually in the function of a predicate)’: Arefiev is an old newspaper wolf (A. Kuprin).

b) structurally limited value, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ is realized only in subordinating phrases of a certain model: the lexeme green acquires the meaning 'unripe, unripe' only in combination with words denoting fruits, cereals, etc.: Yes green [grapes] - there are no ripe berries (I. Krylov ).

V) phraseologically related meaning manifests itself only when combined with supporting component words fixed by linguistic tradition, which leads to the formation of a stable phrase /vlagit (life, century, days), elderly (years, summers)/: We always persecute, now in exile I drag out my chained days (A. Pushkin ); ... the empress, out of respect for the merits and advanced years of her father, decided to pardon her criminal son... (A. Pushkin)

TYPES OF LEXICAL MEANING OF A WORD - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "TYPES OF LEXICAL MEANING OF A WORD" 2017, 2018.

In this article we will look at the types of lexical meanings of words and present their most famous classification, created by V. V. Vinogradov.

What is lexical meaning?

As you know, a word has two meanings - grammatical and lexical. And if the grammatical meaning is abstract and inherent in a large number of words, then the lexical meaning is always individual.

Lexical meaning is usually called the correlation of objects or phenomena of reality with a specific sound complex of a language unit, fixed in the mind of a native speaker. That is, lexical meaning denotes the content inherent in a certain word.

Now let’s look at the basis on which types of lexical meanings of words are distinguished. And then we’ll look at one of the most popular classifications.

Types of lexical meanings

Semantic correlation of various words of the Russian language allows us to identify different types of lexemes. Today there are many systematizations of such meanings. But the most complete classification is considered to be that proposed by V.V. Vinogradov in his article entitled “Basic types of lexical meanings of words.” We will analyze this typology further.

By correlation

Based on nomination (or correlation), it is customary to distinguish two meanings of a lexeme – direct and figurative.

Direct meaning, also called main or basic, is a meaning that reflects the phenomenon of reality, the real world. For example: the word “table” means a piece of furniture; "black" is the color of coal and soot; “boil” means to bubble, seethe, evaporate from heating. Such semantics is permanent in nature and is subject only to historical changes. For example: “table” in ancient times meant “reign,” “throne,” and “capital.”

The main types of lexical meanings of a word are always divided into smaller ones, which we proved in this paragraph, talking about literal and figurative meanings.

Returning to the main topic, we can add that words in their literal meaning are less dependent than others on the context and other words. Therefore, it is believed that such meanings have the least syntagmatic coherence and the greatest paradigmatic conditionality.

Portable

Types of lexical meanings of words were identified on the basis of living Russian speech, in which language games are very often used, part of which is the use of words in figurative meanings.

Such meanings arise as a result of the transfer of the name of one object of reality to another on the basis of common features, similarity of functions, etc.

Thus, the word was able to have several meanings. For example: “table” - 1) in the meaning of “piece of equipment” – “machine table”; 2) in the meaning of “food” - “get a room with a table”; 3) in the meaning of “department in an institution” - “round table”.

The word “boil” also has a number of figurative meanings: 1) in the meaning of “manifestation to a high degree” - “work is in full swing”; 2) excessive manifestation of emotions - “seething with indignation.”

Figurative meanings are based on the rapprochement of two concepts with the help of various kinds of associations that are easily understood by native speakers. Very often, indirect meanings have great imagery: black thoughts, seething with indignation. These figurative phrases quickly become fixed in the language, and then end up in explanatory dictionaries.

Figurative meanings with pronounced imagery differ in their stability and reproducibility from metaphors invented by writers, publicists and poets, since the latter are strictly individual in nature.

However, very often figurative meanings lose their imagery for native speakers. For example, “handles of a sugar bowl”, “bend of a pipe”, “chime of a clock” are no longer perceived by us as figurative phrases. This phenomenon is called extinct imagery.

Types of lexical meanings of words by origin

Depending on the degree of semantic motivation (or origin), the following are distinguished:

• Motivated words (secondary or derivative) - are derived from word-forming affixes and meanings of the word-derived stem.
• Unmotivated words (primary or underived) - they do not depend on the meaning of the morphemes that make up the word.

For example: unmotivated words include “build”, “table”, “white”. Motivated ones include “construction”, “desktop”, “whitewash”, since these words were formed from unmotivated ones; in addition, the primary source words help to understand the meaning of the newly formed lexemes. That is, “whiten,” derived from “white,” means “to make white.”

But not everything is so simple; the motivation of some words does not always manifest itself so clearly, since the language changes, and it is not always possible to find the historical root of the word. However, if you conduct an etymological analysis, you can often find an ancient connection between seemingly completely dissimilar words and explain their meanings. For example, after etymological analysis we learn that the words “feast”, “fat”, “cloth”, “window”, “cloud” come from “drink”, “live”, “knot”, “eye”, “drag” respectively. Therefore, it is not always possible for a non-specialist to distinguish an unmotivated word from a motivated one the first time.

Types of lexical meanings of words by compatibility

Depending on the lexical compatibility of meanings, words can be divided into:

• Free - they are based on only subject-logical connections. For example: “drink” can only be combined with words that denote liquid (tea, water, lemonade, etc.), but can never be used with words like “running,” “beauty,” “night.” Thus, the combination of such words will be regulated by the subject compatibility or incompatibility of the concepts that they denote. That is, “freedom” in the combination of such words is very conditional.
• Non-free - such words are limited in their ability to be lexically combined. Their use in speech depends on both the subject-logical factor and the linguistic factor. For example: the word “downcast” can be combined with the words “eyes”, “look”, “eyes”, while these words cannot be correlated with other lexemes - they do not say “put your foot down”.

Non-free types of lexical meanings of words in Russian:

• Phraseologically related - implemented exclusively in stable (or phraseological) combinations. For example: sworn enemy - sworn friend is not used, unless this is the author's language game.
• Syntactically conditioned - implemented only in cases where a word is forced to perform a function unusual for it. For example, the words “hat”, “oak”, “log” become predicates, characterizing a person as narrow-minded, stupid, bungled, insensitive, and lacking initiative. Playing such a role, the word always acquires figurativeness and is classified as a type of figurative meaning.

Syntactically determined meanings also include those vocabulary constructions that can only be realized under certain syntactic conditions. For example: “whirlwind” acquires a figurative meaning only in the form gender. n. - “whirlwind of events.”

By function

Types of transfers of the lexical meaning of words can be distinguished depending on the nature of the functions performed:

• Nominative - the name comes from the word “nomination”, and means the naming of objects, phenomena and their qualities.
• Expressive-semantic - in such words the predominant seme becomes connotative (emotional-evaluative).

An example of a nominative word: “tall man” - this phrase informs the listener that the person being described is tall.

An example of an expressive-semantic word: in the same case as described above, the word “tall” is replaced with the word “lanky” - this is how a disapproving, negative assessment of this growth is added to information about high growth. Thus, the word "lanky" is an expressive synonym for the word "tall".

By the nature of the connection

The main types of lexical meanings of Russian words, depending on the nature of the connection in the lexical system of one meaning with another:

• Correlative meanings are words that are opposed to each other on some basis: good - bad, far - close.
• Autonomous meanings are relatively independent words denoting specific objects: chair, flower, theater.
• Deterministic meanings are words determined by the meaning of other words, since they are expressive or stylistic variants of them: the word “nag” is determined by the word “horse”, “beautiful”, “magnificent” - “good”.

conclusions

Thus, we have listed the types of lexical meanings of words. Briefly we can name the following aspects that formed the basis of the classification we presented:

• Subject-conceptual connections of words or paradigmatic relationships.
• Syntagmatic relationships or the relationship of words to each other.
• Derivational or word-formation connections of lexemes.

By studying the classification of lexical meanings, one can better understand the semantic structure of words and understand in more detail the systemic connections that have developed in the vocabulary of the modern language.

/ 4

4) The set of lexical meanings of words, considered from the point of view of their connections and derivation.

The following types of lexical meanings (LM) are distinguished:

1) main LZ;

2) LZ derivative;

3) direct LZ;

4) figurative lexical meaning.

“...A great misconception,” says F. de Saussure, “is the view of the linguistic element simply as the connection of a certain sound with a certain concept. To define it in this way would mean isolating it from the system of which it is part; this would lead to the false idea that it is possible to begin with linguistic elements and from their sum to build a system, whereas in fact it is necessary, starting from the aggregate whole, through analysis to reach the elements contained in it" (31). But in the language system, speech sounds are significant and meaningful. This was also pointed out by W. Humboldt. True, “only in rare cases,” said W. Humboldt, “can one recognize a certain connection between the sounds of a language and its spirit. However, even in adverbs (of the same language), minor changes in vowels, which little change the language in general, can rightfully be attributed to state of mind of the people (Gemutbeschaffenheit)" (32). According to W. Humboldt, the connection between sound form and internal linguistic laws reaches its highest limit in their penetration with each other (33).

The sexual meanings of a word are subsumed under grammatical categories. A word represents an internal, constructive unity of lexical and grammatical meanings. The definition of the lexical meaning of a word already includes indications of the grammatical characteristics of the word. The grammatical forms and meanings of a word either collide or merge with its lexical meanings. This close connection, this deep interaction of lexical and grammatical forms and meanings has been emphasized recently by all major linguists, especially persistently Schuchardt (43), N.Ya. Marr (44), L.V. Shcherba (45) and A. Belich ( 46). The semantic contours of a word, the internal connection of its meanings, its semantic scope are determined by the grammatical structure of the language. Ed. Sapir subtly noted: “In an analytical language, the primary meaning falls to the sentence, while the word is of less interest. In a synthetic language... concepts are grouped more closely together, words are richer, but at the same time there is a general tendency to limit within narrower limits the range of specific meaning of an individual words" (47). It is clear that both the semantic volume of a word and the methods of combining meanings are different in words of different grammatical categories. Thus, the semantic structure of a verb is wider than that of a noun, and the range of its meanings is more flexible. The meanings of qualitative adjectives and adverbs are even more flexible. The breadth of phrasal connections of a word also depends on its grammatical structure.

5) Types of lexical meanings of words

1. Types of lexical meanings of words according to the nature of the connection of the word with objects, phenomena of reality (by the method of naming): direct and figurative.

2. Types of lexical meanings of words by origin: motivated and unmotivated.

3. Types of lexical meanings of words according to the compatibility of words with other words: free and non-free

The type of lexical meaning of a word is determined by the aspect of its consideration: 1) how the phenomenon of reality is named; 2) the word is not motivated or motivated in naming (nominating) its meaning; 3) how the word functions in the language - is it free or limited in its compatibility. In accordance with this, three types of lexical meaning of a word are distinguished.

1. According to the nature of the connection of the word with objects, phenomena of reality (by the method of naming) differentiate direct And portable meanings. Direct the meaning of a word directly indicates an object, sign, process, etc. and acts as the main meaning in modern language. For example: bread – food product baked from flour.

Portable the meaning of a word is determined by associative connections that unite one object, attribute, process, etc. with another. For example: bread meaning the same as food - figurative meaning in relation to meaning food product baked from flour , but in turn, it is the initial value for another figurative meaning: bread as a means of subsistence, income.

2. Based on their origin, lexical meanings are distinguished between motivated and unmotivated.

Unmotivated (primary) the meaning of the word is non-derivative for the modern Russian language (the word bread literally).

Motivated (secondary) the meaning of a word is derivative in semantic (and/or word-formation) terms. Motivated words have an internal form: they retain the semantic components of the motivating meaning in the motivated one. So, for example, the word bread in two figurative meanings it has common semantic components: food, product, made from flour, baked / baked .

3. Based on the compatibility of words with other words, free and non-free lexical meanings are distinguished.

Free, direct, or nominative, are those meanings that are realized in combination with many words. Words with free meanings can practically be combined with all words that express correlative concepts. So, for example, the word wood in meaning "made of wood" can be combined with many nouns: wooden house, wooden floor, wooden roof, wooden bed etc. But it cannot be combined with words denoting unrelated concepts. So, combinations are impossible wooden iron, wooden book etc., since such relationships are impossible in reality.

Unlike free non-free lexical meanings appear only under certain conditions. Non-free values ​​are divided into phraseologically related and syntactically conditioned. TO phraseologically related These include lexical meanings that are combined with strictly defined words. For example, the word has a phraseologically related meaning disgust in meaning “to prevent something from happening, to prevent” realized only in combination with a small number of words, such as danger, trouble, misfortune, suffering, threat (to avert danger, to avert misfortune etc.). The implementation of the considered meaning of the word is unacceptable in combinations of the type avert joy, avert events. Words languish, prodigal, pregnant can only be used in stable phrases drag out a miserable existence, a prodigal son, fraught with consequences.

They differ from the types of meanings considered (free and phraseologically related) syntactically determined meanings. The realization of meanings of this type is determined not by the connections of a word with certain words, but by its syntactic function. For example, the word donkey in an abusive sense (about a stupid, stupid, stubborn person) can only be used as a predicate: For example, our head is perfectdonkey ! (I. Turgenev). The meanings of words are also syntactically determined head, light, crow, hat etc., if they express an assessment of a person: Break away, smart one, you are delirious,head ?; Sing, little light , don't be ashamed! (I. Krylov); Oh you,crow ! Etc.

The peculiarity of words with syntactically determined meanings lies in their expressive-emotional coloring of a positive or negative nature ( head, well done– positive assessment and hat, donkey– negative). Syntactically determined meanings are always figurative.

Often the same word can have all three types of meanings. For example: He movedhat on the back of my head, put my hands in my pockets(E. Nikolaeva) – free meaning of the word; What a disaster! We’ll come, send you some article, and that’s it.in Hat (F. Reshetnikov) – phraseologically related meaning; You're even in the gamehat ! (P. Pavlenko) – syntactically determined meaning.

In addition to the indicated main types of lexical meanings, many words in the Russian language have shades of meaning that are closely related to one or another meaning, but still differ from it. For example: word scale has as its main direct meaning – “foam, sediment formed on the surface of a liquid as a result of boiling” and its shade: “solid sediment on the walls of boilers or other vessels in which something boils evaporates”. Despite the apparent semantic identity, these meanings differ from each other, but not enough to be considered independent.

Thus, highlighting the types of lexical meanings of words helps to realize the possibility of analyzing the semantics of a word from different points of view, and to study more deeply the role of the word in the language system.

6) The paradigmatics of a language can be defined as a set and system of variants of its units and categories allowed by the structure of the language - variants, from among which the author of speech at each step of speech development makes a choice of only one.

The syntagmatics of a language can be defined as a set and system of combinational capabilities inherent in linguistic units and categories of language and their implementation in the speech process. Like paradigmatics, syntagmatics is characteristic of all levels of linguistic structure. But if syntagmatics and paradigmatics are two forms of functioning of all units of language at all its levels, it follows that there are morphological syntagmatics and syntactic paradigmatics.

Between language units there are paradigmatic, syntagmatic and hierarchical

relationship.

Paradigmatic relations - unite language units into groups, categories, categories. On

paradigmatic relations are based on, for example, a consonant system, a declension system,

synonymous series. When using language, paradigmatic relationships allow you to choose

the desired unit, as well as form forms and words by analogy.

Syntagmatic rel. - rel. units, location linearly, for example, in a stream of speech. They are defined as

rel. horizontally. These include the laws of connection of word compatibility. (Syntagma-sequence of two

or more languages units connected by def. type of connection.) Synth. rel. combine linguistic units into

their usual consistent, they appear in three forms: 1) laws of grammar. compatibility - for example, in Russian

you can't say "give me the phone book", adj. must have the same form of the genus number and

case. 2) the law of lexical compatibility - Wrong. say "dark brown eyes." 3) laws

phonetic connections - The ability of a word to connect with other words based on its lexical meanings is called

semantic valence.

Hierarchical relationships - less complex units of lower levels are included in units of higher ones.

Rel. between heterogeneous elements of different levels of language system. their subordination to each other as private

and general, generic and specific, lower and higher.

Value types

The semantic side of a word is not something monolithic and homogeneous, but represents a complex system of interdependent and interconnected meanings and uses, which differ in the degree of stability and independence, in the nature of the concepts they express, in the form of implementation in the lexical-semantic system of the language.

The most striking opposition here is made up of lexical and grammatical meanings, forming a close and integral unity in the main lexical unit - the word.

Grammatical meaning - a generalized, abstract meaning inherent in a number of words, word forms, syntactic structures and finding its regular expression in the language. In the field of morphology, these are the general meanings of words as parts of speech (for example, the objectivity meaning of nouns, the procedural meaning of verbs). In the field of syntax, this is the meaning of predicativity, as well as various relationships of the components of phrases and sentences as abstract grammatical patterns: the meaning of a semantic object, subject, one or another adverbial qualifier (local, temporal, causal, target, etc.). Grammatical meaning is more abstract and generalized than lexical meaning; it groups words into large groups, such as parts of speech or lexical-grammatical classes.

Lexical meaning - the content of a word, reflecting in the mind and consolidating in it the idea of ​​an object, property, process, phenomenon, content that is peculiar only to this word and distinguishes it from other words of the language.

In linguistics, lexical meaning is compared with the philosophical category of the concept. However, the concept and lexical meaning do not coincide. The relationship between them is different in different respects: meaning is broader than the concept, since it includes evaluative and a number of other components; the meaning is narrower than a concept in the sense that it includes only the distinctive features of objects, while concepts cover their deeper and more essential properties.

Also stands out lexico-grammatical meaning , which is the common denominator of all meanings of words belonging to the lexical-grammatical class of words. Based on this common characteristic, they are grouped. Words in which the degree of abstraction and generalization is very high can be lexical representatives of lexico-grammatical meanings and can replace any word of their class. They are called in general terms. For example, the word matter is a general term for material nouns, the word group– for collective nouns, word person– for personal nouns.

Structure of the lexical meaning of a word

The lexical meaning of a word is a complex structure determined by the general properties of the word as a sign: its semantics, pragmatics, syntactics.

In fact semantic sense In the structure of the lexical meaning of a word, two aspects are distinguished: significative and denotative.

Significate, as already noted, is the conceptual content of a linguistic sign. From an epistemological point of view, a significant is a reflection of the properties of a denotation in human consciousness.

Denotation A linguistic unit is a set of objects of reality (things, properties, relationships, situations, states, processes, actions, etc.) that can be called this unit. This use of the term “denotation” corresponds to what in traditional logic is called the “scope of the concept.”

Pragmatic aspect The lexical meaning of a word includes an emotional assessment and various connotations determined by the speaker’s attitude to the object denoted by the sign.

Syntactic (systemic or differential) aspect, formed on the basis of the relationship of a word to other words, is determined syntagmatically - by its connections with other meanings of linguistic units in a phrase and sentence, and paradigmatically - by its position within the corresponding group of words with which the word is semantically connected (primarily synonymous series) . This aspect is also called significance.

The above typology is consonant to some extent with the typology that arose as a result cognitive approach to language. The division in it is carried out according to what structures of consciousness underlie them - cognitive, reflecting a person’s objective knowledge of the world around him, or pragmatic, carrying information about a person’s subjective assessment of the phenomena around him, his personal experiences. Within the framework of the cognitive approach to the meaning of a word, lexical meaning can combine both cognitive and pragmatic components or be limited to one of them. A significant number of words are pragmatically neutral; their meanings represent only the cognitive component of the content: water, take, green. In other words, both components are combined, and one of them may be dominant (for example, in the words upstart"upstart", monster“freak” the pragmatic component dominates, in words like coward"coward", informer“informant” has a dominant cognitive component, but the type of people they call evokes a certain assessment).

In general, lexical meaning is often defined as a combination of the conceptual core and pragmatic connotations.

The conceptual content of a word is expressed in its denotative meaning .It relates to the sphere of thinking and understanding, generalizes and classifies our experience and names the objects in question. Performing the significative and communicative functions of a word, denotative meaning is present in every word and is considered a central factor in the functioning of language. A description of the denotative meaning or meanings is given in dictionaries, examples:

month– any of the twelve parts into which the year is divided;

savannah– treeless, grassy plain, in tropical and subtropical America and Eastern and Western Africa;

sausage– chopped up meat, etc. flavored and stuffed into a casing or tube of thin skin.

If denotative meaning exists because of what the word refers to, then connotative meaning is the pragmatic value that a word receives through where, when, how, by whom, for what purpose and in what context it is or can be used. In other words, this is an emotional, evaluative or stylistic coloring of a linguistic unit of a usual (fixed in the language) or occasional nature. In a broad sense, this is any component that complements the subject-conceptual (or denotative), as well as grammatical content of a language unit and gives it an expressive function.

In the structure of connotative meaning the following are distinguished:

stylistic component;

emotional-evaluative component.

Stylistic component of connotation carries information about the place of the unit in the language system, reports the type of speech sphere (official business, oratorical, poetic, scientific, everyday colloquial speech) for which a given linguistic unit is typical or about the source of speech in general. The stylistic component signals the place of a lexical unit on the scale of aesthetic value and assigns it to a certain category: bookish, poetic, official ceremonial words, words-terms, colloquial words, dialectisms, slangisms, jargons, vulgarisms.

Stylistic connotation is “a kind of label attached to a thing, a company label indicating the place and time of manufacture of the product and its cost” (Skrebnev 1975: 21).

Stylistically neutral (stylistically unmarked) words can be used both in book and colloquial speech, both in written and oral speech, in all forms and situations of communication, without causing stylistic dissonance.

Stylistically marked vocabulary is limited in its application - it can be assigned to certain communication situations, and can be used primarily by separate groups of people united by a certain community. Here, lexical categories are identified that correspond to the degrees of increased and decreased aesthetic value of the vocabulary. In terms of highlighting the stylistic component of connotation, the following series of words is interesting: parent, father, dad, daddy, pop, oldman, oldie, octogenarian, oldster.

Under the emotional-evaluative component of connotation refers to the expression of emotions or feelings by words. It arises on the basis of the logical-substantive content of words, but, having arisen, is characterized by a tendency to displace it or greatly modify it.

A linguistic unit can be associated with the expression of emotion in several aspects:

1. A linguistic unit can directly express an emotion, but not convey it. Such units include emotional interjections, intended to express emotions, but not having a communicative orientation.

2. A linguistic unit can express and convey the speaker’s emotional attitude towards any object or phenomenon. Such a linguistic unit necessarily contains some characteristic of the object plus an emotional attitude towards it. Most of these units are words that emotionally characterize individuals, as well as their actions and behavior.

3. A linguistic unit can evoke an emotion without conveying it. Here it is necessary to distinguish between the emotional connotation conveyed by the word and the subject’s emotional reaction to the words.

4. A linguistic unit can communicate an emotion without causing it.

In the process of analysis, one cannot associate the emotional-evaluative component of a word with the truth or falsity of the use of a word with this component; the assessment of the word used may not correspond to the real situation.

The evaluative component is often accompanied by an emotional one, but their combination is not necessary. Also stands out rational (intellectual-logical) assessment , based on information about the properties objectively inherent in the referent. Rational assessment is part of the denotative component and is included in the subject of designation. For example, money-grubber– derog. a person who is determined to gain money, often by dishonest means; sensible– reasonable, having or showing good sense;

disrepute– loss or lack of people’s good opinion, bad reputation; unfair– not just, reasonable or dishonest.

Emotional-evaluative information conveys the speaker’s attitude to the subject of the statement and can be presented as a positive emotional evaluation and its modifications (approval, affectionate attitude, admiration, etc.) and a negative emotional evaluation and its modifications (disapproval, neglect, contempt, rude and soft ridicule). Examples: bull- headed(reckless, reckless) brute(Cruel person), stinker(disgusting person) shark(sharpie), topeacock(to put on airs) potato- crap(mouth), meathead(idiot).

The speaker, using any evaluative word, is under the influence of two factors: the objective ideal norm established for various aspects of the subject in a given society, and the subjective ideal norm, his personal idea of ​​​​the normative features of this subject.

The emotional-evaluative component of connotation, expressing the attitude of the subject of speech to the signified, is closely related to the stylistic component, which characterizes the conditions of speech activity, the communicative situation, social and cultural information about the participants in the communicative act.

Evaluativeness, emotionality, stylistic reference, integrated in a specific lexical unit create expressiveness , which is understood as the property of lexical units to create the expressiveness of a narrative in order to increase the impressive impact on the listener (some authors consider expressiveness as an independent component of connotation along with emotional-evaluative and stylistic components). Only the method of expression, the form can be expressive/non-expressive. Expressiveness is not a special semantic category; it is a category of the expression plane. Connotations are a means of creating expressiveness; they ensure the expressiveness of the speech use of a given lexical unit, marking it against the background of a neutral environment.

Some works also consider pragmatic aspect of meaning – communicative component of lexical meaning. Pragmatics studies the behavior of signs in real communication processes. Linguistic pragmatics does not have clear contours; it includes a set of issues related to the speaking subject - the addresser, the addressee, their interaction in communication, the communication situation.

Due with the addressee studied:

Explicit and hidden purposes of the statement, for example, communicating some information or opinion, question, order, request, advice, promise, apology, greeting, complaint, etc.;

Speech tactics and types of speech behavior;

Rules of conversation, subject to the so-called principle of cooperation, which recommends building verbal communication in accordance with the accepted purpose and direction of the conversation, for example, reporting only true information and reasonable assessments, making speech clear, unambiguous and consistent;

The attitude of the speaker, or the pragmatic meaning of the statement: indirect meanings of the statement, hints, allegory, circumlocutions, etc.;

The speaker's reference, i.e. the attribution of linguistic expressions to objects of reality, resulting from the intentions of the speaker;

Pragmatic presuppositions: the speaker’s assessment of the general fund of knowledge, specific awareness, interests, opinions and views, psychological state, character traits and ability to understand the addressee;

The speaker's attitude towards what he is communicating:

b) bringing into focus the interest of one of those persons about whom the speaker is talking, or empathy;

c) organizing the statement in accordance with what is given the most importance in the message.

Due with the addressee studied:

Interpretation of speech, including rules for deducing indirect and hidden meanings from the direct meaning of a statement;

The impact of the statement on the addressee: expansion of the addressee’s awareness, changes in the emotional state, views and assessments of the addressee;

Types of speech response to the received stimulus (direct and indirect reactions, for example, ways of avoiding a direct answer to a question).

Due with relationships between communication participants studied:

Forms of verbal communication (informative dialogue, friendly conversation, argument, quarrel);

Social and etiquette side of speech (forms of address, style of communication);

The relationship between participants in communication in certain speech acts (compare request and order).

Due with the communication situation studied:

Interpretation of deictic signs (“here”, “now”, “this”);

The influence of the speech situation on the topics and forms of communication (compare typical topics and forms of conversations at a party, at banquets, in hospitals, in doctors’ and lawyers’ waiting rooms).

Types of lexical meanings

General characteristics of the morphological structure of the Russian language at the beginning of the historical period. Parts of speech in the Old Russian language of the late 19th century Icenturies Main trends in the development of the morphological system of the Russian language. According to “Historical Grammar” by V.V. Ivanova

The system of parts of speech in the original system of the Old Russian language was generally the same as in the modern one. In it, the name and the verb were completely opposed to each other. In terms of content, they were contrasted as a class of words denoting objects and their attributes, with a class of words denoting an action or state. In terms of expression, they were contrasted as words having the categories of gender, number and case, with words having the categories of tense, aspect, mood, person and number. At the same time, the common category of number for names and verbs characterized their quantitative side; for verbs, number forms were determined by syntactic connection with the speaker

action or sign. The number forms of one name or verb constituted the paradigm of one word. Verbal categories of time, aspect, mood and person in terms of content denoted the relationship of an action or state to the moment of speech (present, past, future tense), to its completeness or incompleteness (perfect - imperfect form), to reality, convention or motivation (indicative, conditional and imperative moods), and in terms of expression they were characterized by forms of inflection or word formation.

Within a name, a noun and an adjective were opposed, but this opposition was less clear than in modern language. The fact is that along with pronominal (or full) adjectives in the Old Russian language there were also nominal (or short) adjectives, which changed in the same way as nouns. Although pronominal adjectives, as well as nominal ones, arose in the pre-literate era, they nevertheless arose later than nominal adjectives, and originally there were only short adjectives that could act simultaneously as nouns without any change in form. In terms of content, nouns and adjectives were contrasted as names of objects with names of features. In terms of expression, they were equally characterized by the categories of gender, number and case, but if for nouns these categories were independent, then for adjectives they were determined by a syntactic connection with the nouns.

Within the name, pronouns were identified that denoted references to a person or object and had specific features in grammatical categories; These features in the Old Russian language of this period of history had personal pronouns of the 1st and 2nd persons (they did not have a gender category) and a reflexive (which did not have gender and number categories).

A feature of the Old Russian language in comparison with the modern one was the absence of numerals as a special part of speech, which is in the modern Russian language (we are talking about cardinal numerals). The point is that if there is a language

words expressing numerical concepts, numerals were not allocated to a special grammatical class with their own categories inherent only to them. The names of numbers up to four were similar in grammatical properties to adjectives, and from five to nouns. The formation of numerals as a special part of speech took place during the historical period of development of the Russian language, albeit in a relatively early era.

Finally, the Old Russian language also had adverbs, but the class of this part of speech in the 11th century. was limited, since the formation of adverbs in most cases occurred at a relatively late time. The above does not mean that in the Old Russian language the composition

adverbs were limited both in terms of their meanings and in terms of the methods of their formation. On the contrary, adverbs already in the original Old Russian morphological system could express various adverbial characteristics of an action (place, time, reason, purpose, etc.) and differ in structural features - the Old Russian language had its own specific suffixes that formed adverbs. However, along with

However, throughout the history of the language, the class of adverbs experienced a number of changes: some of them were lost, but most importantly, new adverbs arose, formed in new ways and, probably, on the basis of other parts of speech. These questions are: how adverbs arose in the history of the Russian language, what parts of speech were the basis of these adverbs, in what ways and by what means new adverbs were formed - these questions remain largely unresolved, controversial, and debatable. Different scientists offer different solutions, but the problem of the history of the formation of Russian dialects still requires new research.

2. Lexical meaning of the word – this is a reflection in the word of the phenomena of reality (V.V. Vinogradov). LLS is a correlated sound complex of a linguistic unit fixed in the minds of speakers with one or another phenomenon of reality; most words name objects, their characteristics, quantities, actions, processes and act as full-meaning independent words, performing a nominative function in the language. The meaning of a word reflects only various characteristics, i.e. those with which you can distinguish objects from each other.

Structure of lexical meaning:

Symeological aspect. Meaning as a reflection of linguistic reality in it as a sign.

Structural-semantic. Meaning as the semantic organization of a word.

Functional-style aspect. Meaning as a reflection of the sociolinguistic attitude to the word.

Denotation– the objective meaning of a word, denotes the volume (class) of serial (or unique) phenomena of reality and serves as the name of the objective correlation of the word. Denotation characterizes a class of homogeneous objects in the broad sense of the word (table - a type of furniture) and covers the scope of the concept.

Significate– reveals essential features, phenomena of reality, constitutes the content of the concept.

Connotation– this is an additional meaning to the main lexical one. (Brother - the son of parents, in relation to other children of these parents; Brother - with tenderness, affection; Bro - ...). Connotation includes 4 aspects:

emotional;

expressive;

stylistic;

evaluative.

All 4 aspects, or maybe just one, can be realized in a word.

LEXICAL MEANING AND CONCEPTS.

Words in the language are divided into significant and non-significant.

Non-nominal ones are particles, prepositions and conjunctions.

The object of lexicology is only significant words.

It is significant words that have a nominative function, i.e. a word is the minimum unit of language capable of highlighting a separate thought. Based on the definition that a word is a sound unit of human speech, denoted by the phenomena of reality, in their dismemberment, grammatically formulated and equally understood by the number of people speaking the same language, it can be argued that the main function of a word is the naming function.

All significant words have this function except pronouns. Pronouns have a demonstrative function.

Each word correlates with certain concepts; it is this correlation that is usually called LZ. An important ability of a word is the ability to generalize; this is an important function of generalization. To generalize, whole groups and classes are called. Concepts are formed in our minds under the influence of the surrounding world. Objects and phenomena are named according to the characteristic that distinguishes them from other objects.

A feature placed in the category of distinctive or differentiated is characteristic not only of specific objects, which is why the general differentiated feature performs the function of generalization.

We must remember that an equal sign cannot be put between a word, its meaning and concept, i.e. the meaning of the word and the concept are not the same. A concept can be expressed by a combination of words. For example, a railway, a globe. One concept can be expressed in different words (synonyms) (hand - arm). One word can express several concepts. The meaning of a word may have additional features; the meaning can be broader than concepts.

Comparison of various words and their meanings allows us to distinguish several types of meanings in the Russian language:

According to the method of nomination, direct and figurative meanings of words are distinguished. DIRECT is a meaning that directly correlates with the phenomena of objective reality: does not depend on the context and on the nature of the properties with another word. PORTABLE is a meaning that arises as a result of transferring a name from one object to another. Direct and figurative meanings are defined within one word. Different meanings of the same word are called lexical-semantic variants (LSV).

Based on the degree of semantic motivation, motivated and unmotivated meanings are distinguished. UNMOTIVATED - these are meanings that are not determined by the meaning of morphemes in the word. MOTIVATED - these are meanings that are derived from the meaning of the derived stem and word-forming affixes. The degree of motivation for the same word can be more than one.

If possible, lexical compatibility is divided into free and non-free. FREE - are based only on subject-logical connections of words, but cannot be combined with words such as stone. Lexical compatibility is called valence in the scientific literature. There are monovalent words (limited combinations). Words with monovalent combinability are called collocations. Collocations tend to be stable, but in the category of stable combinations, i.e. phraseological units are not included yet. UNFREE words are characterized by limited possibilities and lexical compatibility, which in this case are also determined by subject matter.

3.Historical changes in the paradigm of names (the process of unification, the loss of the dual number, the relationship between the full and short forms of adjectives). Principles of identifying types of declension in ancient times. Unification of types of declension of nouns, reasons for this process and result. Ist.gram. Ivanov V.V.

The nouns of the Old Russian language in its original system were generally characterized by the same categories that are inherent in them in the modern language, i.e. the categories of gender, number and case. However, only the first category, which determined the distribution of nouns into three genders - masculine, feminine and neuter, was in principle the same in the Old Russian language as it is now. As for the category of number, in contrast to the modern Russian language, in the ancient Russian era there were not two - singular and plural - but three numbers, because there was also a dual number. Finally, in addition to the six case forms, i.e. nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, instrumental and local (modern prepositional) cases, there was also a vocative form, which, however, had special inflections not in all numbers and not in all nouns.

Throughout the development of the Russian language, various changes occurred in the forms of expression of grammatical categories, gradually leading to the establishment of those forms that are observed in the modern language. However, the greatest changes in

The history of nouns has undergone types of declension, which in ancient times had a different character compared to the modern Russian language.

In the Old Russian language, by the time of the beginning of writing, there was a multi-type declension, which was expressed in the fact that the same cases of nouns of different types of declension had different endings. In the early period of the Proto-Slavic language, each type of declension was characterized by the last sound of the stem, depending on which vowel or consonant the stem ended with (later, the final sound moved to the ending, i.e., the morphemes were re-decomposed in favor of the ending).

1. Words with a stem in *o had hard and soft (*jo and words like otts, where there was no *j, and the original soft consonant arose from the back lingual consonant after the front vowel according to the third palatalization) varieties of declension. This type of declension included words of the masculine and neuter gender, having in Im. respectively, the endings -ъ, -о after a hard consonant – table, village and -ь, -е after a soft consonant – horse, field, as well as masculine words such as edges, robberies.

2. Words with a stem in *a had hard and soft (*ja and words like maiden, where there was no *j, and the original soft consonant arose from the back lingual field of the front vowel as a result of the third palatalization) varieties of declension. This type of declension included a) feminine nouns having in Im. n. endings -a, -'a (water, earth), b) some masculine nouns ending in –a, -'a (servant, governor, young man), c) masculine nouns ending in –ii (judges, helmsmen), d) feminine nouns in –yn (knyagyn, slave).

3. Words with a stem in *i included words of masculine and feminine gender, having in Im. n. ending -ь. Feminine nouns could have either a semi-soft consonant (bone) or a native soft consonant (night) at the end of the stem, while masculine nouns could only have a semi-soft consonant and not a native soft consonant before the ending. It is the semi-soft consonant in Im. and V. cases and allows you to distinguish masculine words with stems in *o and *i: cf. the word put, where the stem ends in a semi-soft consonant (if *j had been present here, then *tj would have given [ch’] in Old Russian); Wed also dove, where at the end of the stem there is a semi-soft consonant (if there were *j here, then *bj would give [bl’]), therefore, these are words with the stem on *i.

4. Words with a stem in *u included several masculine nouns with the ending -ъ in Im. n. after a solid consonant: son, house, vyrkh, vol, pol ‘half’, ice, honey, perhaps also the words ryad, dar, rank, feast and some others.

5. Nouns with a stem ending in *u included several feminine words ending in -ы in Im. etc.: fathers-in-law, churches, lovers, etc.

6. Nouns with a stem in a consonant are divided into several groups depending on the consonant stem, which appears in indirect cases or words with the same root: a) with a stem in *n (m.r.) – d'en and root; b) with a base on *n (av. p.) – im., shm. (cf. name, seed); c) with a base on *s (cf. r.) - miracle, sky (cf. miracles, heavenly); *n (m. r.) – kama, rema (cf. stone, belt), d) with a base on *r (f. r.) – mother, d’achi (cf. mother, daughter); e) with a base on *t (cf. r.) – tel., goat. (cf. in the proverb “To catch a calf and a wolf”).

The history of nouns is that instead of six types of declension, three types of declension were established (productive declension became the basis of this unification). If initially the division of words into types of declension was based on a semantic feature, then the beginning of the change in types of declension was laid by the influence of generic differentiation of words. In the Old Russian language, initially words of different genders were included in many types of declensions. This can be represented as the following diagram:

Feminine words

* a - productive

*i - productive

*u - unproductive

on a consonant *r - unproductive.

Masculine words

*o - productive

*a - unproductive

*u - unproductive

*i - unproductive

on a consonant *n - unproductive.

Neuter words

*o - productive

on a consonant *n, *s, *t - unproductive

In the modern Russian literary language there are three productive declensions - first, second, third, which united the following former types of declensions:

The I declension includes words with a former stem of *a (water, maiden) and *u (letter); in the II declension - with the former stem on *o (wolf, father, window, sea), *u (son), *i (guest) and on the consonant *n (stone), *s (miracle), *t (calf) ); in the III declension - with the former stem on *i (night), *u (church), *r (daughter).

In some cases, words did not immediately pass from the unproductive to the productive declension, but had an intermediate stage in their history. Thus, the word day was originally in declension with the consonant * n. This is the only masculine noun in the word forms of which, not only in the literary language, but also in dialect speech, the old endings were retained for a long time (cf. R.–M. pad. dne). This word very early takes on the form -en and coincides in phonetic appearance and morphological structure with masculine words with the former stem on *i, and then, together with these words, it became a stem on *o.

When characterizing a particular noun, for each word form you need to indicate whether it is original or new. In the original forms, the ending that was originally in the Old Russian language or has undergone a phonetic change is preserved (for example, the sound [m] coincided with [e]). Forms that have undergone grammatical changes are called new.

TYPES OF CLOSEMENT OF NOUNS

TYPES OF LEXICAL MEANINGS OF A WORD

1. Semantic structure of the word, lexical meaning of the word.

2. Types of lexical meanings of a word: subject-logical, contextual,

nominative, connotative.

Like other linguistic disciplines, stylistics deals with the lexical, phraseological, grammatical and phonetic data of a language. However, a significant difference between stylistics and other linguistic disciplines is that stylistics studies not individual linguistic units, but their stylistic function. Stylistics is interested in the expressive potential of these units and their interaction in the text to express thoughts and emotions. Stylistics interprets the relationship (opposition) between the contextual meaning of a word and its basic, denotative meaning. Accordingly, stylistics is primarily concerned with the study of connotative meaning.

The semantic structure of a word consists of its grammatical meaning (verb, noun, adjective) and its lexical meaning. Many stylistic devices are based on the unique use of lexical meanings. The term “lexical meaning” of a word combines: 1) subject-logical meaning;

2) nominative; 3) connotative. There is one more thing - contextual meaning, which is given to a word by context, i.e. individual use, but which is not part of the semantic structure of the word.

I. Subject-logical meaning- this is the expression in a word of a general concept about an object or phenomenon through one of the signs, which has become a “representative” of the entire concept. This type of meaning is called in linguistic literature by the terms denotative, basic meaning, direct meaning or nominative meaning.

In the process of its historical development, a word can acquire additional derived subject-logical meanings. For example, heavy the main subject-logical meaning of which is “heavy”, also has the meaning “strong” -

heavy rain “thick” about matter – heavy cloth; “difficult” - heavy task, “high, big” - heavy price, etc. This is the phenomenon of polysemy (polysemy), when a word has, in addition to the main subject-logical meaning, a number of subject-logical meanings, connected by a single semantic core and distinguishable in a word by the nature of its use in context. Thus, each polysemantic word has a basic and derivative subject-logical meaning. Together they form the semantic structure of a given word.

Portable (figurative) the meaning of the word, if it is widely used, is also considered as a special case of polysemy: fox- “cunning person.”

Subject-logical meaning can change along with a change in the concept of an object or phenomenon. For example, the word deer meant “animal in general”, later received the name “deer”; word citizen used to mean “city dweller”, and then “citizen”, and the word clerk, which previously had only one meaning “priest,” then consistently meant “scholar, literate, official, employee.”

Subject-logical values ​​can be free or bound. Available- exist in a word regardless of the combination of this word with other words, e.g . room- room. Related- appear as derivatives of the main meaning only in certain combinations: move and make room for me (meaning “place”), there is always room for improvement (meaning “opportunity”).

The subject-logical meanings of a word (basic, free and connected) represent a constant and stable semantic structure of the word at a given stage of development of the lexical system.

However, in language there is a need to express a new concept and therefore either a new word appears, or the old one acquires a new meaning. If this new meaning is very close in content to the already established meaning of a given word, then it does not form a new meaning, but only communicates a new one. shade meanings. Yes, word collaborator(“collaborator”) after the 2nd World War acquired the connotation of “traitor to the motherland” due to the fact that this word was used to designate those who collaborated with the Hitlerite administration.

Shades of meaning– these are additional subject-logical meanings that have not yet been fully established in the vocabulary and are closely related to the main meaning. They are part of the semantic structure of the word.

At the same time, many words, due to special conditions of use, acquire meanings in context that are not included in their semantic structure. These meanings are transitory and are only possible in a given context. They're called contextual. E.g. at the door of each job(job – ‘office, institution’); the dawn of her new life seemed to break cold and gray (the word dawn takes on a new metaphorical meaning ‘beginning’). Contextual meanings are more often found in the style of artistic speech.

II. Nominative meaning. There is a significant difference between words like pen, distance, i.e. common nouns, on the one hand, and words like Harry, Thomas, London, i.e. proper names, on the other. A common noun contains, in addition to the particular, the individual, a general concept of an object or phenomenon. A proper name contains only the concept of singularity. Hence the difference in functions. Common nouns are used to designate; proper names are only named.

Words that name one object, person or

a geographical concept, defining it from a number of similar objects, persons, etc.

As a rule, nominal meanings are assigned to words as a result of a complex process of development of language and society.

Often the subject-logical meaning turns into a nominative one: Smith - from smith (“blacksmith”); Chester – from castra ( lat. "camp"); examples from the Russian language: Kuznetsov, Vera, Nadezhda, Lyubov, Pyatigorsk, Chelyabinsk (“chelyaba” in Bashkir means “hole”).

There is also a reverse process. Words that have a nominal meaning can also acquire a subject-logical meaning: dunce (“stupid”) - from Duns Scotus; hooligan - from Hooligane (the surname of a London family); boycott - on behalf of the proper Boycott;

quixotic (“quixotic”) - from Don Quixote; sandwich – from Sandwich (last name of a gambler); makintoch - from Makintosh (the name of the inventor).

III. Connotative meaning. It is related to the conditions and participants of communication. This includes emotional, evaluative, expressive and stylistic components of meaning. Connotation is optional. All its components can appear together or in different combinations or be absent altogether.

Emotional connotation realizes in a word the expression of emotions, sensations, subjective assessment. It can exist independently in a word, or it can exist along with the subject-logical meaning.

When comparing words with the same or similar subject-logical meaning, their emotional connotation is especially clearly manifested. For example, take a series of words: to pass away – to die – to join the silent majority – to kick the bucket. Here, all lexical units have the same subject-logical meaning (“to die”), however, the first phrase expresses official solemnity, the second is emotionally neutral, the third conveys familiarity, the fourth is close to abuse.

Words denoting feelings almost always, along with a subject-logical meaning, also carry an emotional meaning (love, anger, hatred, etc.).

Some lexical units do not express a concept, but only have an emotional meaning. These are interjections: alas, oh, ah, gosh (“god!”, “damn it!”), gee (“that’s how it is!”, “that’s great!”, “wow!”, “wow!”), pooh (indifference, mockery).

Certain formal and structural elements also convey only emotional meaning. These include: - y, - ie (girlie, birdie, sonny), - let (ringlet, streamlet) with the meaning of diminutive..

Some subjective-evaluative adjectives of broad semantics can approach interjections in their meanings: dreadful, terrible, wonderful, awful, nice, great, horrible, etc. For example, in the sentence “He classified him as a man of monstrous selfishness” the subject-logical meaning of the adjective monstrous is obscured by the emotional meaning of this word.

In addition to adjectives of broad semantics, words that tend to lose their subject-logical meaning and acquire a strong emotional meaning also include swear words, curses, oaths : damn (“damn”), bloody (“damned”), hell, upon my word (“word of honor”), etc.

Context, as a rule, reveals both denotative and basic types of connotative meaning, with the exception of stylistic connotations. The role of context in the field of stylistic connotation is small, since the word has an absolute stylistic connotation, which is assigned to the word due to the frequent use of the word in a certain functional area, and already in the dictionary you can find the marks vulg., arch., sci., etc. A word has a stylistic connotation if it is associated with a specific functional style. The main function of the stylistic component of meaning– inform the reader about the scope of the word. Thus, the stylistic part of the lexical meaning of a word is additional information about the speech situation and the purpose of communication.

The absolute stylistic coloring of a word forms a series of stylistic synonyms in a language, namely, words (or phrases) that are close in meaning, but used in different styles of speech. For example:

Neutral enemy nonsense -

Book adversary bombast -

Official opponent - -

Poetic foe - -

Specialist. term - - legality

Spoken - rot, bosh, stuff fair play

Familiar - fiddlesticks square deal

Vulgar - wish-wash -

Series of stylistic oppositions can form not only individual words, but also individual syntactic constructions, for example.

In this article we will look at the types of lexical meanings of words and present their most famous classification, created by

What is lexical meaning?

As you know, a word has two meanings - grammatical and lexical. And if the grammatical meaning is abstract and inherent in a large number of words, then the lexical meaning is always individual.

Lexical meaning is usually called the correlation of objects or phenomena of reality with a specific sound complex of a language unit, fixed in the mind of a native speaker. That is, lexical meaning denotes the content inherent in a certain word.

Now let’s look at the basis on which types are distinguished. And then we’ll look at one of the most popular classifications.

Types of lexical meanings

Semantic correlation of various words of the Russian language allows us to identify different types of lexemes. Today there are many systematizations of such meanings. But the most complete classification is considered to be the one proposed in his article entitled “Basic types of lexical meanings of words.” We will analyze this typology further.

By correlation

Based on nomination (or correlation), it is customary to distinguish two meanings of a lexeme - direct and figurative.

Direct meaning, also called main or basic, is a meaning that reflects the phenomenon of reality, the real world. For example: the word “table” means a piece of furniture; "black" is the color of coal and soot; “boil” means to bubble, seethe, evaporate from heating. Such semantics is permanent in nature and is subject only to historical changes. For example: “table” in ancient times meant “reign,” “throne,” and “capital.”

The main types of lexical meanings of a word are always divided into smaller ones, which we proved in this paragraph, talking about literal and figurative meanings.

Returning to the main topic, we can add that words in their literal meaning are less dependent than others on the context and other words. Therefore, it is believed that such meanings have the least syntagmatic coherence and the greatest paradigmatic conditionality.

Portable

Types of lexical meanings of words were identified on the basis of living Russian speech, in which language games are very often used, part of which is the use of words in figurative meanings.

Such meanings arise as a result of the transfer of the name of one object of reality to another on the basis of common features, similarity of functions, etc.

The word has the opportunity to have several meanings. For example: “table” - 1) in the meaning of “piece of equipment” - “machine table”; 2) in the meaning of “food” - “get a room with a table”; 3) in the meaning of “department in an institution” - “round table”.

The word “boil” also has a number of figurative meanings: 1) in the meaning of “manifestation to a high degree” - “work is in full swing”; 2) excessive manifestation of emotions - “seething with indignation.”

Figurative meanings are based on the rapprochement of two concepts with the help of various kinds of associations that are easily understood by native speakers. Very often, indirect meanings have great imagery: black thoughts, seething with indignation. These figurative phrases quickly become fixed in the language, and then end up in explanatory dictionaries.

Figurative meanings with pronounced imagery differ in their stability and reproducibility from metaphors invented by writers, publicists and poets, since the latter are strictly individual in nature.

However, very often figurative meanings lose their imagery for native speakers. For example, “handles of a sugar bowl”, “bend of a pipe”, “chime of a clock” are no longer perceived by us as figurative phrases. This phenomenon is called extinct imagery.

Types of lexical meanings of words by origin

Depending on the degree of semantic motivation (or origin), the following are distinguished:

• Motivated words (secondary or derivative) - are derived from word-forming affixes and meanings of the word-derived stem.
• Unmotivated words (primary or underivative) - they do not depend on the meaning of the morphemes included in

For example: unmotivated words include “build”, “table”, “white”. Motivated ones include “construction”, “desktop”, “whitewash”, since these words were formed from unmotivated ones, in addition, the primary source words help to understand the meaning of the newly formed lexemes. That is, “whiten,” derived from “white,” means “to make white.”

But not everything is so simple; the motivation of some words does not always manifest itself so clearly, since the language changes, and it is not always possible to find the historical root of the word. However, if you conduct an etymological analysis, you can often find an ancient connection between seemingly completely dissimilar words and explain their meanings. For example, after etymological analysis we learn that the words “feast”, “fat”, “cloth”, “window”, “cloud” come from “drink”, “live”, “knot”, “eye”, “drag” respectively. Therefore, it is not always possible for a non-specialist to distinguish an unmotivated word from a motivated one the first time.

Types of lexical meanings of words by compatibility

Depending on their meanings, words can be divided into:

• Free - they are based only on subject-logical connections. For example: “drink” can only be combined with words that denote liquid (tea, water, lemonade, etc.), but can never be used with words like “running,” “beauty,” “night.” Thus, the combination of such words will be regulated by the subject compatibility or incompatibility of the concepts that they denote. That is, “freedom” in the combination of such words is very conditional.
• Non-free - such words are limited in their ability to be lexically combined. Their use in speech depends on both the subject-logical factor and the linguistic factor. For example: the word “downcast” can be combined with the words “eyes”, “look”, “eyes”, while these words cannot be correlated with other lexemes - they do not say “put your foot down”.

Non-free types of lexical meanings of words in Russian:

• Phraseologically related - are implemented exclusively in stable (or For example: sworn enemy - sworn friend is not used, unless this is the author's language game.
• Syntactically conditioned - implemented only in cases where a word is forced to perform a function unusual for it. For example, the words “hat”, “oak”, “log” become predicates, characterizing a person as narrow-minded, stupid, bungled, insensitive, and lacking initiative. Playing such a role, the word always acquires figurativeness and is classified as a type of figurative meaning.

Syntactically determined meanings also include those vocabulary constructions that can only be realized under certain syntactic conditions. For example: “whirlwind” acquires a figurative meaning only in the form gender. n. - “whirlwind of events.”

By function

Types of transfers of the lexical meaning of words can be distinguished depending on the nature of the functions performed:

• Nominative - the name comes from the word “nomination”, and means the naming of objects, phenomena and their qualities.
• Expressive-semantic - in such words the predominant seme becomes connotative (emotional-evaluative).

An example of a nominative word: “tall man” - this phrase informs the listener that the person being described is tall.

An example of an expressive-semantic word: in the same case as described above, the word “tall” is replaced with the word “lanky” - this is how a disapproving, negative assessment of this growth is added to information about high growth. Thus, the word "lanky" is an expressive synonym for the word "tall".

By the nature of the connection

The main types of lexical meanings of Russian words, depending on the nature of the connection in the lexical system of one meaning with another:

• Correlative meanings are words that are opposed to each other on some basis: good - bad, far - close.
• Autonomous meanings are relatively independent words denoting specific objects: chair, flower, theater.
• Deterministic meanings are words determined by the meaning of other words, since they are expressive or stylistic variants of them: the word “nag” is determined by the word “horse”, “beautiful”, “magnificent” - “good”.

conclusions

Thus, we have listed the types of lexical meanings of words. Briefly we can name the following aspects that formed the basis of the classification we presented:

• Subject-conceptual connections of words or paradigmatic relationships.
• Syntagmatic relationships or the relationship of words to each other.
• Derivational or word-formation connections of lexemes.

By studying the classification of lexical meanings, one can better understand the semantic structure of words and understand in more detail the systemic connections that have developed in the vocabulary of the modern language.

Lexical meaning of the word- its plan of content, that is, fixed in the minds of the speakers, a reflection in the word of the phenomena of reality.
Lexical meanings are heterogeneous phenomena.

Types of lexical meanings:

1) in connection with reality(direct and figurative meanings. Direct meanings are opposed to figurative ones. Figurative meanings arise on the basis of direct meanings and are secondary in relation to them. They name objects indirectly, through the names of other objects and phenomena. Examples: stale bread, stale person; precious metal, metal in the voice; the water is boiling, the work is boiling;

2) by lexical compatibility(free and non-free meanings. Free meanings are not limited in their compatibility to certain types of words or syntactic constructions, that is, their lexical connections coincide with the connections of phenomena and objects of reality. Non-free meanings are so called because their compatibility is limited by relationships with other words, that is linguistic relations.

Unfree relationships are divided into 2 types:

· phraseologically related meanings - realized in combination with a certain range of words (examples: bosom is combined only with the word friend; burning only with the word question; disgust only with words of negative meaning)

· syntactically conditioned relations - are realized when they appear in a certain syntactic function (examples: hat - if in the function of a predicate, then the meaning will characterize the person; mattress, crow, etc.). Among the syntactically determined meanings, constructively limited ones are also distinguished. They are so called because they are used only in certain syntactic constructions (examples: whirlwind + gender noun).

3) nominative meanings- are contrasted with expressive-synonymous meanings. Nominative meanings - meanings for naming phenomena, objects, etc. In addition to words that have naming functions, there are their synonyms, which are characterized by an emotionally expressive coloring (examples: poet and rhymer; horse and nag; tall and lanky; put on and put on/put on; retribution and retribution)

4) by degree of motivation there are unmotivated meanings, which are not determined by the meanings of the morphemes in the word, and motivated (derivatives), which are derived from the meaning of the generating stem and the word-forming affix (examples: rain and rain; white and whitish). In these examples, motivation followed from the word structure of the word. But in addition to this word-formation motivation, there is also semantic motivation; we can observe it in figurative meanings. Figurative meanings arise on the basis of direct ones, and semantic ones are derived from them (examples: beast is an animal; beast is a cruel person).

Connotation(equestrian from Latin - adding meaning) - additional, evaluative, emotional or stylistic coloring. Connotation complements the subject-conceptual meaning (examples: talk and chat; walk and trudge).

Semantic components. Meanings of the word.

Objects and phenomena of objective reality are classified according to the similarities and differences of essential features. By similarity they are united, by difference they are opposed (examples: deciduous trees - oak, birch, maple; they are contrasted with coniferous trees - fir, pine, spruce).

The meanings of a word can be broken down into its component parts. These components or “atoms” of meaning are called semantic components or semes (from the Greek word sema, which means sign).

Elements of meaning common to different words are called integrating semes or archisemes. Such semantic components combine lexical meanings and allow words to be grouped according to meaning (examples: cake, pastry, candy - general seme - confectionery product; eagle, nightingale, magpie, sparrow - general seme - birds).

There are also differentiating semes. These are elements of meaning that are characteristic of individual words. They separate lexical units and contrast them with each other (examples: cake and cake - differentiating seme - size). Semantic components appear by contrasting words; only words that have something in common, that is, a common semantic component, can be contrasted. Only if there is similarity are differentiating semes identified (examples: father, son, mother, daughter, nephew - common seme - kinship; oppositions are possible based on a variety of characteristics. For example, son and father. General semes: male sex, direct kinship. Differentiating semes: age, etc.; son and nephew - common semes: younger generation, male gender, differentiating semes: direct relationship). This selection of “atoms” of meaning is called component analysis of the lexical meaning of a word.

Semes differ from each other in the scope of generalization (examples: musical and stringed musical instrument). Semantic components are located at different levels of generalization, forming a family hierarchy. Hierarchy- elements or parts of a whole, arranged in a certain order: from the highest level to the lowest). The hierarchy of semes is that a seme of a lower level specifies a seme of a higher level (examples: the highest level - kinship - all relatives; the older generation of direct kinship - father, mother; the lowest level - the male sex of the older generation of direct kinship - father) . Thus, the semantic structure of the word reflects the actual relations between the particular and the general, gender and species.