Homonymy is a fairly common phenomenon in almost every language. It is characterized by the presence of identical words, which, however, have different meanings. The lexical ones deserve special attention, they show that this particular type is the most common and active. This phenomenon enriches the language, making it more artistic and figurative.

concept

Homonyms are the same morphemes, words and other lexical units that have different meanings. Such a term is often confused with polysemantic words or paronyms, however, in terms of their functions and characteristics, these are completely different categories.

The term is of Greek origin and was introduced by Aristotle. Literally, the concept means “same” and “name”. Homonyms can both be present within the framework of one part of speech, and appear in different ones.

Homonymy and polysimy

In linguistics, in relation to the same words of one part of speech, there are two different concepts. We are talking about polysemy and homonymy. The first concept implies the presence of identical words with different meanings, however, which have a common historical origin. For example, if we consider the word "ether" in its two meanings. The first one is organic matter, and the second is television or television broadcasting. The meaning of the words is different, but it was formed from one common lexical unit, namely from the Greek term, which literally means “mountain air”.

As for homonymy, here we are also talking about different meanings of words, however, there is no historical connection between them, and identical spelling is a coincidence. For example, the word "boron", which has two meanings: chemical element and There is no connection between these words, and even the lexical units themselves came to the Russian language in different ways. The first is Persian, and the second is Slavic.

Some linguists, however, see it differently. In accordance with this, polysimy is if two words have a common semantic connotation and lexical meaning. Homonyms have no such meaning. It does not matter the historical origin of the word. For example, the word "braid". The connecting element is that the two lexical items describe something long and thin.

Classification

Taking into account vocabulary, morphology and phonetics, homonymy can be as follows:

• Lexical homonyms. Examples of words: key (as a spring and as a tool for opening doors), peace (no war and the whole planet), etc.
• Homonyms of morphological or grammatical type, which are also known as homoforms.
• Phonetic or homophones.
• Graphic, or homographs.

There are also full and incomplete homonyms. In the first case, the words coincide in all their forms, and in the second - only in some.

Differences between lexical homonyms and other types

Lexical homonyms are often confused with other types of this category, however, they have distinctive characteristics and their own specifics:

• As for homoforms, they have the same spelling or sound only in a few specific forms. For example, the word "dear", which denotes an adjective of masculine and female: "expensive textbook" and "give flowers to a dear woman."
• Homophones are distinguished by identical pronunciation, but different spelling of lexical units, which lexical homonyms do not have. Examples: eye - voice, wet - could, etc.
• Differences are also characteristic of homographs. This refers to words that have the same spelling but different pronunciation. This is not the case for lexical homonyms. Example sentences with the word “lock”: 1. She opens the door lock. 2. The king and queen went to their castle.

These phenomena in the language are used for a variety of lexical purposes, starting with expressiveness and richness artistic speech and ending with puns.

Features of lexical homonyms

This type of homonymy is characterized by coincidence in all their forms. In addition, belonging to one part of speech is required attribute, which lexical homonyms have. Examples: graphic - as a plan and as an artist.

There are two types of such lexical homonyms:

• Complete or absolute. They are characterized by the coincidence of all morphological and grammatical forms. For example, a cage (bird and nervous), a shop (trading and a bench), etc.
• Partial or incomplete lexical homonyms. Examples: measure (as a sense of proportion and as a musical unit).

Regardless of the type, this phenomenon appears due to certain reasons.

Appearance methods

Lexical homonyms appear in the language for various reasons:

• The discrepancy between the meanings of one lexical unit is so far that it is no longer perceived as one word. For example, a month (part of the year and a celestial body).
• Coincidence of national vocabulary and borrowings. For example, a club (in Russian - a mass of dust or smoke; in English - social organization or a gathering of people).
• Matching words that were borrowed from different languages. For example, a tap (from the Dutch language - a tube that allows you to pour liquid; from German - a special mechanism for lifting loads).

Homonyms in the language do not appear immediately. Most often, this takes a lot of time, as well as certain historical conditions. On the initial stage words may be slightly similar in sound or spelling, however, due to changes in the structure of the language, in particular its morphology and phonetics, lexical units may become homonyms. The same applies to the splitting of the meanings of one word. In the process historical development the connecting semantic element between interpretations of the word disappears. Because of this, homonyms are formed from polysemantic lexical units.

Homonymy is an active phenomenon in almost any language in the world. It is characterized by the presence of words with the same spelling or sound, but with different meanings. Homonyms, in particular their lexical types, change the language, making it more figurative and artistic. This phenomenon arises for various reasons, most often historical or structural, and has its own characteristics and characteristics in each particular language.

4. Homonymy as a manifestation of formal relations, the problem of distinguishing between homonymy and polysemy. Phenomena similar to homonymy.

From polysemantic words, which in different contexts have partially different, but at the same time interrelated meanings, words that are identical in form, but do not have common components of semantics, should be distinguished.

homonymy is the ratio of words that match in form and differ in content.

The meanings of these words are not connected by common semantic components and associative relations. The absence of associative relations, common components between the meanings of homonyms is their difference from the variants of a polysemantic word. For example, in the meanings of lexical units put out(vegetables) - put out(fire) common components can be identified: water, fire, heat, but their coincidence is coincidental. Components are built into different semantic structures. Associatively, these verbs are also not connected in any way.

Homonymy, unlike polysemy, is characterized by the uniqueness of meaning relationships. Homonymy seems to be a negative category, and the relations of homonyms themselves are irregular and exclusive: braid- "hair braided together" braid- "agricultural implement" and braid- "shoal", combustible- "capable of burning" and combustible- "bitter".

Homonymy is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. When systematizing homonymous units, researchers delimit lexical homonyms from adjacent units. The task of such a distinction was set by V.V. Vinogradov in the article "On homonymy and related phenomena" (1960). V.V. Vinogradov proceeds from the fact that lexical homonyms are “different in their semantic structure, and sometimes in morphological composition, but identical in sound structure in all forms of the word” [V.V. Vinogradov. Selected works. Studies in Russian grammar. M., 1978. S. 299].

In homonymy as a lexico-semantic category, it is advisable to single out the center (lexical homonyms (full and partial)), and the periphery (homoforms, homophones, homographs). The characteristic features and patterns of certain categorical relations are most clearly manifested in the central part of the classifying structure, "fading away" towards its periphery.

Lexical homonyms- words that have the same sound, but do not have common elements (semes) of lexical meaning and are not associated associatively ( outfit- clothes and outfit- "instruction").

Depending on the degree of coincidence of word forms, full and partial homonyms are distinguished.

Full homonyms match in all grammatical forms ( key(spring) - key(door), a pen(chair) - a pen(diminutive for the word hand).

The completeness/incompleteness of homonyms is determined by whether they are wholly or partially included in the grammatical paradigm. For nouns, the completeness of the paradigm is determined by a set of word forms in the categories of number and case; for verbs - the ability to form the infinitive, personal forms, participles and participles while maintaining the specific and collateral meaning.

Partial homonyms coincide only in a number of grammatical forms, for example, fist"hand with clenched fingers" - fist“a rich peasant owner who exploits the labor of others”, these lexical units do not have a match in the form of the accusative case, singular and plural; units onion"garden plant" onion"weapons" coincide only in singular forms.

Along with lexical homonyms, phenomena related to lexical homonymy, incomplete homonyms:

1. homoforms- these are words that coincide only in separate word forms: a noun verse"poem" in singular, nominative-accusative and verb subside"to become quiet" past tense, indicative, singular, masculine verse; technique"a set of means of labor" and technology - the genitive case of the singular from the word technician.

2. Homophones words that sound the same but have different spellings fruit - raft, cat - code).

3. homographs words that have the same spelling but differ in pronunciation agonya themat ka, cowardand t and trat sit).

Homonyms may arise as a result of historical processes taking place in the language:

1) The collapse of polysemy- gradual loss of the associative connection between the meanings of a polysemantic word, for example, shop"piece of furniture" shop"trading establishment" light"radiant energy" light"world, universe" Most often, such phenomena are observed in chain polysemy: the disappearance of one LSV from the chain leads to the destruction of the semantic connection between the meanings of a polysemantic word. For example, paper(cotton fabric) and paper(material for writing) in the modern language - semantic homonyms. In the 19th century paper was an ambiguous word having the following LSV: 1 Cotton cloth. 2. Cotton writing material. 3. Wood writing material. Extra-linguistic reasons - a change in paper manufacturing technology - led to the fact that an intermediate value (2 LSV) fell out, the polysemantic word fell apart. This led to the emergence semantic homonyms. The collapse of polysemy is the result of a long historical process. In each historical period of the development of a language, we find a certain stage in the development of the word. Hence the possible multiplicity of interpretations of the same lexical unit. The same words can be interpreted in one dictionary as homonyms, in another as a polysemantic word. For example, the word the consignment(political) and party (playing) in the dictionary of S.I. Ozhegova (1952) - homonyms; in the dictionary of 1960 - one word, as in the dictionary of D.N. Ushakov.

2) Sound shell changes words for historical reasons, for example, onion: "plant" from other Russian. LUK and onion"weapon" from LOUK. Such homonyms are called etymological.

3) The result of word formation processes leads to the appearance derivational homonyms:

a) the first subtype includes derivative words that are formed from homonymous stems ( to melt - to melt(bake) - to melt - to melt(person); prickly - prick(firewood) - prickly - prick(needle)

b) the second type includes derivative lexemes formed with the help of homonymous affixes, for example, the appearance of homonyms settlement"big city" and settlement“the place where the city used to be” are due to the action of two word-formation models with the suffix - search(es) in the meaning of "place", cf. conflagration, and in a magnifying sense, cf. hands, house.

4) Borrowing a foreign language the words:

a) as a result of borrowing a foreign word, there may be a formal coincidence in the sound and spelling of the word "alien" and the native Russian word, for example, borrowed from German language word marriage"flaw, lack" coincided with the original Russian marriage " matrimony." In the same way, English came into our language club"public organization" homonym for Russian club(smoke), from Finnish mink"predatory animal" homonymous with the Russian word mink "animal dwelling".

b) words that come from different source languages ​​may turn out to be consonant in Russian, for example, tap from Dutch - "shutter in the form of a tube for the release of liquid or gas" and tap from German - "a mechanism for lifting and moving goods", mat from German - "soft bedding made of durable material" and mat from Arabic - "defeat in a chess game."

c) words that sound the same are borrowed from the same language. So, homonyms are borrowed from French mine- "explosive projectile" and mine- "facial expression".

Homonymy and polysemy: ways to distinguish between phenomena

The emergence of homonyms in the language is a rather complicated and lengthy process, especially when there is a break in the meanings of a polysemantic word. The difficulty lies in the fact that the loss of common elements of meaning occurs gradually, as a result of which it is difficult to find the line between the completed and unfinished process of the decay of meanings. As objective criteria for finding this edge, i.e. The following are most often put forward to distinguish between the phenomena of polysemy and homonymy:

1. Semantic criterion. The loss of the meanings of a polysemantic word of their mutual linguistic motivation. The meanings of a polysemantic word necessarily have a meaning component (the seme) or an associative feature that unites all the meanings included in it. For example, M uranium: 1. "The dwelling of ants." 2. "The collection of ants." 3. "People, residents of a densely populated house." 4. "A house that looks like an anthill."

Homonyms do not have such a connecting seme ( interfere"to be a nuisance" and interfere"stir").

word-formation criterion. A polysemantic word and homonyms differ in the nature of word-formation processes.

Homonyms are characterized by a divergence of word-formation series created on their basis and caused by the difference in the original meanings of words. For example, braid"agricultural tool", its derivational series: mow, mowing, mowing and braid"hairstyle" with a derivational row: pigtail, pigtail.

LSV of a polysemantic word form new words with the help of the same suffixes. For example, a noun bread"cereal" forms an adjective breadn th shoots, noun bread"a food product baked from flour" forms an adjective breadn oh smell- also with the suffix –n.

Syntagmatic criterion. In contrast to the multi-valued word d For homonyms, as a rule, mismatched compatibility is characteristic. Wed the consignment"union of people" left, democratic, reactionary and the consignment"the game": unfinished, productive, delayed.

Synonymous. Members of the synonymic series of the LSV of a polysemantic word can intersect. For example, root(a citizen): original, main, a root(question) has a synonym main. The words basic and main synonyms, therefore root(resident) and root(question) retain semantic proximity, are the LSV of a polysemantic word.

Homonyms are characterized by the absence of synonymous relations between their synonyms, i.e. words are homonyms if their synonyms do not form a synonymous series. For example, the word marriage"flaw" has a synonymous series: deficiency, flaw, imperfection, and the noun marriage"marriage": matrimony. Synonyms do not intersect, so marriage(flaw) and marriage(marriage) homonyms.

Researchers have developed a number of criteria for distinguishing between polysemy and homonymy (antonymic, etymological, etc.)

____________________________________________________________

So, E. Kurilovich proposed to attribute LSV to one lexeme, if they are non-unique, repeated in opposition. For example, two uses of the noun the audience in different sentences: Auditorium is empty. The audience roared in disapproval. are combined into one lexeme, since the semantic opposition "room" - "people in the room" is not unique .

Yu.D. Apresyan proposed the following as a criterion for referring to a polysemantic word. . The common part of a polysemantic word must be non-trivial, there must be semantic similarity. In this case, the opposition of homonymy and polysemy is gradual, there are types of polysemy more or less remote from homonymy. From this point of view, homonyms braid(hairstyle) - braid(instrument) - braid(a strip of land) are not pure homonyms, since there is a certain external similarity: “ something narrow and long».

The use of homonyms in speech. Used expressively to create puns. Pun: I am able to take a wife without a fortune, but I am not able to go into debt for her rags. They are used in proverbs and sayings for an unexpected convergence of meanings: a bow is good both in battle and in cabbage soup.

Main questions of the topic

1. The essence of lexical homonymy in the understanding of different scientists.

2. Sources of Russian lexical homonymy.

3. Criteria for delimiting homonymy from polysemy.

4. Problematic issues in the study of lexical homonymy.

5. Terminological minimum.

7. Practical task.

The word homonyms consists of two parts: Greek onuma - “name”, Greek. homos - "same". Consequently, homonyms are words that are identical in appearance, twin words, according to the terminology of D.N. Shmelev.

Think about whether the following pairs of words are homonyms: club - "a public organization that brings together people of a certain circle, professions for joint recreation, entertainment, sports" and club - "a mass of something moving, flying, taking the form of a ball"; meadow - bow, oven - oven, castle - castle? To check the correctness of your answer, see the material below (p. 80).

The beginning of the study of homonymy in our linguistics was laid by the works of L.A. Bulakhovsky (see his work “From the Life of Homonyms”, 1928) and V.V. Vinogradov (see his work “On grammatical homonymy in modern Russian”) . However, in modern linguistics, the essence of the phenomenon of homonymy is revealed ambiguously. Most extreme points of view are, on the one hand, the recognition as homonyms of only random sound and / or spelling coincidences such as tour (in dance) and tour (animal) - an approach to the essence of the phenomenon from the point of view of the origin of words; on the other hand, homonymy is considered widely, including numerous cases where it is very difficult to draw the line between homonymy and polysemy. For example, satin - “smooth surface” and satin - “type of embroidery”. Therefore, there is inconsistency in the definition of the very concept of lexical homonymy. Some researchers consider as homonyms words that are identical in sound, but different in meaning (Suprun N.I. and others). Others, along with the identity of sound, also name the identity of spelling as a sign of homonymy (Shmelev D.N. and others). Still others speak only of graphic identity, while the phonetic form of words is not taken into account by them (Sergeeva M.D. and others). L.V. Malakhovsky, considering that homonymy permeates all levels of the language, defines the essence of homonymy as follows: these are linguistic signs that have identical signifiers, but different signifiers. In terms of expression, words can be compared with each other either by phonetic composition (meadow - bow), or by graphic composition (castle - castle), or by both (lay - send). In terms of content, words can be compared both in terms of their lexical meanings and grammatical ones (for example, a sheet (of paper) - a sheet (on a branch), I fly on an airplane and I treat patients; or by both (for example, a shelf for books - a shelf In the works of V.V. Vinogradov, the necessity of delimiting lexical homonymy from homoformy, homophony, homography is proved, the latter, from the point of view of the researcher, have nothing to do with homonymy.He also owns the development in Soviet linguistics of the theory of the development of polysemy into homonymy. In the further presentation of the material, we will proceed from the position of Academician V.V. Vinogradov, according to which lexical homonymy covers words in the language that sound the same, have the same graphic design, refer to the same part of speech and have nothing in common in their meaning. For example, club1 and club2 (see above for the meanings of words).This point of view on the essence of lexical homonymy is shared by many scientists (Shmelev D.N., Shansky N.M., Iva new V.V. and etc.). It is reflected in many textbooks and teaching aids for universities (for example, in the textbook "Modern Russian language", part 1. Authors - Shansky N.M., Ivanov V.V.; in the textbook D.N. Shmelev "Modern Russian language. Vocabulary", etc.).

Based on the point of view of V.V. Vinogradov, it is necessary to delimit the phenomena adjacent to it from lexical homonymy. This is a homography that covers words that are spelled the same but pronounced differently (Greek homos - "same"? grapho - "I write"). For example, a castle is a castle, an atlas is an atlas, etc. This is a homophony that covers words that sound the same, but are spelled differently and have nothing in common in their meaning (Greek homos - “same”, phone - “sound” ). For example, mok (in the rain), could (do it); onion (ate) - meadow (graze in the meadow), etc. This is homoformity, which covers words that are spelled the same, pronounced, but related to different parts of speech. For example, to become (beautiful), to become (big), etc.

The question of considering homography, homophony and homoformy in relation to lexical homonymy in modern linguistics is debatable. So, for example, in the textbook "Modern Russian language", part 1 / ed. L.Yu. Maksimov, these phenomena are considered as varieties of homonymy. The ambiguous solution in science of the issue under consideration is associated with the complexity of the linguistic material itself, as well as with the different starting positions of scientists. So, from the position of V.V. Vinogradov, the pairs of words given at the beginning should be qualified as follows: club1 - club2 as homonyms, meadow - onion as homophones, castle - castle as homographs, oven - oven as homoforms.

Consider the sources of lexical homonymy in modern Russian literary language. 1. The disintegration of polysemy, that is, the loss of semantic connection between different meanings of the same word. Such homonyms are called semantic. For example, two homonyms shop1 - "an item for sitting" and shop2 "shopping space" were formed as a result of the collapse of a polysemantic word: a bench for sitting - a bench, a table for laying out goods - a trading room. Note that the semantic threads connecting meanings into one bundle can be of different strength, which primarily determines the objective difficulty in distinguishing between homonymy and polysemy. In addition, from a historical point of view, the entire set of homonyms that have developed from one semantic unit can be considered as a branching, as its historical variants, if one can establish a direct genetic connection between different values ​​and show the continuity of their development. Thus, the content of the concepts of homonyms and different meanings of the same word in the field of historical and lexicological research is different than when they are considered synchronously, that is, wider. Therefore, the longest and most acute disputes occur between etymologists and contemporary linguists. In the future, we will proceed from the fact that lexical homonymy is a fact of linguistic synchrony.

The disintegration of ambiguity is not a one-act, but a gradual process. Therefore, for example, in SU the word "conclude" is given as polysemantic, as noted above, and in the SO and in O.S. Akhmanova's Dictionary of Homonyms of the Russian Language, two homonyms are indicated. In the last dictionary, for the first time, an attempt was made to separate the “completed” and “incomplete” processes of the disintegration of polysemy.

For homonyms formed as a result of the breakdown of polysemy (type 111 or type 111 in combination with other types), an asterisk is placed if the homonymization process cannot be considered completed. For example, white* ( White snow) - white* ( white army) and etc.

2. Lexical homonyms are formed as a result of word-formation processes. Such homonyms are called derivational. For example, when forming words from different generating bases with the help of homonymous suffixes: shelf1 - “a board horizontally mounted on a wall or in a cupboard for dishes, books”. Wed dialect police, all-Russian gender; shelf2 - "garden shelf" from the verb weed and the suffix -to-. Homonyms can appear as a result of the formation of words from the same root using different suffixes. For example, striker1 - “part of the bolt of a firearm” from the word strike with the suffix -nick; drummer2 - "production leader" from the adjective shock with the suffix -ik. Some derivational homonyms arose long ago from different generating bases. Wed weasel1 - “a manifestation of tenderness”, weasel2 - “a predatory animal”. AT modern language these words with a non-derivative basis: common Slav. bald ("gentle") plus -to-; common slav. lasa (“predatory animal”) plus -ък, thus the word weasel was formed2.

3. Lexical way of forming homonyms. It consists in replenishing the vocabulary of the Russian language with borrowings from other languages ​​and adapting borrowings to the peculiarities of the Russian language. At the same time, homonyms appear either as a result of an accidental coincidence of the sound of foreign and Russian words, or as a result of the subordination of borrowed words to the phonetic and grammatical laws of the Russian language. For example, a club1 (from the English klub) is “a public organization that brings together people of a certain circle, professions for joint recreation, entertainment, sports”; club2 (Russian) - "a mass of something moving, flying, taking the form of a ball." Or: patron1 ("in firearms") from German, where die Patrone; patron2 - ("patron, protector") from Latin, where patronus. Adapting to the grammatical structure of the Russian language, borrowed words acquire the ending -a, which in some cases leads to the emergence of homonyms. For example, bank1 - “glass or metal vessel” (from gol.bank); bank2 - "sandbank" (from German bank). In some cases, homonyms are the result of new word formations based on borrowed words. For example, the dialect word lyulka - "pipe for smoking tobacco" (derived from the Persian lula with the suffix -k-) is a homonym for the Russian word lyulka - "cradle".

Homonyms formed lexically are called lexical.

4. Homonyms can be formed as a result phonetic processes, that is, due to changes in the phonetic system of the Russian language. For example, onion1 is a “garden plant” (from louk), onion2 is an “ancient weapon” (from LHK). Homonyms formed in this way are called phonetic.

Above, the material on the sources of the formation of homonyms was arranged in the sequence of their productivity in the Russian language.

As noted above, one of the ways to form homonyms is the disintegration of the ambiguity of a word, therefore, not only theoretically, but also practically important is the question of the criteria for distinguishing homonymy from ambiguity.

In the history of Russian and foreign linguistics, separate methods for distinguishing between homonymy and polysemy gradually took shape. For a long time, the main criterion was considered semantic. Its essence lies in the search for the presence or absence of an intermediate semantic link. For example, cf. the tongue of a man, the tongue of a bell, the tongue of a flame. In all cases, the word language denotes, although miscellaneous items, but similar in function (human tongue and bell tongue) or similar in shape (human tongue and flame tongue). Therefore, the word language has many meanings. The words wednesday1 (“third day of the week”) and wednesday2 (“environment”) are homonyms, since the word environment has lost the intermediate meaning “middle”, which led to the semantic delimitation of words. This criterion can be used only if the homonyms were formed in a semantic way.

2. Therefore, the word-formation criterion for delimiting homonymy from polysemy has become widespread. Its essence lies in the formation of derivative words from the bases of 2 phonetically and graphically identical units and in determining the nature of the semantic nests to which the derivatives belong. For example, from the word world1 the words world, world, etc. are formed, from the word world2 - peaceful, put up, etc. The words formed from homonyms belong to different word-formation and semantic nests. Wed also: class1 ("social group") - class; class 2 ("training room") - classroom. However, in some cases, homonyms are not generating words, so scientists began to develop a new method.

3. Transformational method of delimiting homonymy from polysemy. Its essence lies in the selection of synonyms for consonant words. If the selected synonyms are not in synonymous relations with each other, then we have homonyms. For example, excerpt 1 is self-control, excerpt 2 is a quote. The selected synonyms are not synonymous with each other - the original words are homonyms. Wed a bird's nest is a dwelling, a man's nest is a house. The words dwelling and house are synonyms, therefore, the original word is polysemantic. The French linguist Ch. Bally presented this method in a different form: in replacing consonant words with antonyms, the presence of different antonyms indicates homonymy. However, such a replacement is not always possible, since not all words enter into synonymous and antonymous relations. Therefore, scientists began to develop the following method.

4. Distribution method. Its essence lies in checking the lexical environment of consonant words. If it is heterogeneous, then the original words are homonyms; if it is of the same type, then the original word is polysemantic. For example, "Give an excerpt from the work of V.V. Vinogradov" and "He had endurance in a difficult situation." It is impossible to rearrange the words excerpt1 and excerpt2, therefore, the given contexts are of different types, and the analyzed words are homonyms.

5. Seed method. It manifests itself in the fact that the meaning of each of the consonant words is decomposed into semes using the method of component analysis, then the semes of one and the other word are compared. If the semes do not intersect, then the original words are homonyms. For example, using the seme method, we will prove that the words dot1 (“action on the verb sharpen”) and dot2 (“punctuation mark”) are homonyms. The first seme of the word dot1 is “action”, since this seme opposes the analyzed word to other words, not having this seme (for example, a table, a chair, etc.). The second seme of the same word “according to the verb to sharpen” contrasts the word dot1 with words like forging - from forging, cutting - from cutting, etc. The first seme of the second word dot2 is “sign”, on the basis of this seme the analyzed word is opposed to such words as drawing, map, etc. The second seme "punctuation" of this word contrasts the word dot2 with the word spelling. A comparison of these semes shows that they do not intersect at any level of interpretation, which proves the homonymy of the words dot1 and dot2. This method makes it possible to approach the distinction between homonymy and polysemy from a systemic standpoint. But the development of this method began recently, so there are many controversial issues in science. For example, whether all the semes of consonant words should not coincide or only some. The question arises due to the fact that in the language there are syncretic phenomena that combine the signs of homonymy and ambiguity. For example, let's look at the seme composition of the word beetroot - "1) a dish, 2) cold, 3) cooked from boiled beetroot leaves and leaves of other vegetables and water, 4) used instead of soup" (see the System Dictionary of subject-everyday dialects of the Talitsky district Sverdlovsk region) and beetroot - "1) a pie, 2) from wheat flour, 3) stuffed, 4) from steamed beets, 5) baked in the oven." The numbers indicate the semes in the semantic structure of the two words given. Comparison of the semes of these words shows that they intersect at the first level of interpretation, at all other semes they do not coincide, do not intersect.

AT modern science many unresolved, problematic issues related to the study of homonymy in the language. Let us indicate only some of them: 1) definition of the essence of homonymy (see the material above); 2) the study of homonymy in the aspect of paradigmatics and syntagmatics (there is a systematic approach to homonymy). The systematic approach to homonymy was first formulated in 1959 by A.Ya. Shaikevich, but then it did not become widespread in the linguistic literature. Only in the 60s of the twentieth century, homonymy began to be studied in a paradigmatic aspect (works by O.S. Akhmanova, D.N. Shmelev, etc.). But there is still no unity in the views of scientists on the question of whether homonymy is a systemic or asystemic phenomenon in the language. In the works of Professor L.V. Malakhovsky, a homogroup is considered as the main unit of homonymy - this is a group of words of the same language in the same period of its existence, identical to each other phonetically and in spelling in all or some of their grammatical forms, but differing according to their lexical meanings. Each individual homogroup forms an independent microsystem, since the words in it are in certain formal semantic relationships to each other. What does the researcher see as a systematic homogroup? As noted above, the main features of the system are the integrity and the presence of communication between the components. In a homogroup, integrity is manifested in the common form of words, that is, in their phonetic and graphic similarity. The second feature of the homogroup system is the presence of a connection between the components. Relations between objects in the system can be of two types: 1) interaction; 2) similarity or difference. In the homogroup, relations of the second type are observed - relations of formal similarity and semantic difference between elements.

A syntagmatic study of homonymy has not been carried out for a long time. And only at the end of the 70s of the twentieth century, several works appeared that analyzed the compatibility possibilities of homonymous words (the works of N.I. Suprun, T.D. Sergeeva, etc.), as mentioned above.

3. The question of the criteria for delimiting homonymy from polysemy (see above).

4. Questions of the typology of homonyms. The basics of the classification of homonyms are different for different researchers, which is primarily due to the general concept of the linguist on the essence of the phenomenon of homonymy. So, V.V. Vinogradov in lexical homonymy distinguishes full and partial homonymy. With complete homonymy, all forms of words coincide: for example, patron1 (“in firearms”) and cartridge2 (“protector, patron”). With partial homonymy, only a part of the grammatical forms coincide with the words: for example, world1 (“universe”), world2) (“consent”), the first word has forms plural, the second one does not have them. L.V. Malakhovsky, believing that homonymy permeates all levels of the language, puts the features of the content plan as the basis for the typology of homonyms. Based on this, he distinguishes three main types of homonyms: lexical homonyms (differ in their lexical meaning, their incompatibility), grammatical homonyms (they differ from each other grammatical meaning), lexical and grammatical homonyms (they differ in both ways). For example, article1 - article2 (the first word is a noun, the second word is a verb - grammatical homonyms); shelf1 - shelf2 (the first word is a verbal noun, the second is also a noun, but with substantive meaning– lexical and grammatical homonyms); world1 - world2 - lexical homonyms.

The third group of scientists identifies etymological homonyms (these are words of completely different origin, which, as a result of phonetic changes, have acquired the same pronunciation, and sometimes the same spelling); for example, see club1 and club2, tour1 and tour2 above) and semantic homonyms formed by the breakdown of a polysemantic word (for example, world1 - world2). There are other classifications as well.

The phenomenon of lexical homonymy is also presented in school textbooks. They reflect the point of view of VV Vinogradov on the essence of homonymy.

What are the main goals of studying lexical homonymy at school?

1. Show one of the ways to form new words (the formation of homonyms is one of the ways to replenish the vocabulary of the language with new words).

2. The material of the school textbook makes it possible to answer the question of why homonyms exist in the language, since textbooks provide material on different ways of forming homonyms: dot1 - dot2 - word-building source of homonyms, bor1 - bor2 - lexical source, bow1 - bow2 - phonetic source , par1 - par2 - semantic source.

3. In homonymous words there are great figurative and expressive possibilities, since there is a contradiction in form and content in them. Therefore, they can be used as a means of word play, to create puns and various stylistic effects. That is why in the school textbook "Russian Language" for the 5th grade, ed. N.M. Shansky in exercise 309 notes that homonyms are sometimes used in comic poems. An excerpt from a poem by Kozlovsky is given: “The gopher jumped out of the mink

And he asked the red mink:

Where have you been?

At the fox.

What did you eat there?

Chanterelles.

Observe the use of homonyms in the poetry of Blok, Bryusov, Mayakovsky, S. Kirsanov and others and draw a conclusion about the purpose of their use.

1.introduction 2

2. History of the issue. four

3. The concept of homonymy. Lexical homonymy 5

Full lexical homonyms 5

Incomplete (partial) homonyms 5

root 6

derivatives 6

4. Language phenomena similar to lexical homonymy 8

5. Homonymy and polysemy in Russian (review). 12

The emergence of homonyms in the Russian language. 13

Use in speech. 16

1. Introduction

Between the words that form the vocabulary of the Russian language, certain relationships are found both in the nature of the meanings they express, and in their phonetic design, that is, the similarity of their sound composition.

In the vocabulary of the Russian language, there are 3 types of systemic relationships between words:

homonymous (according to sound correspondence)

synonymous (according to the proximity of the expressed values)

antonymous (by opposition of expressed meanings)

The presence of these relations allows us to speak about a certain organization of words in the vocabulary, about the existence of a lexical system of the language. The essence of the phenomena of homonymy, synonymy and antonymy is as follows: with homonymy, there is an identity (that is, coincidence) of sounding with a difference in the meaning of words, with synonymy - identity or similarity of meaning with a complete difference in sounding (that is, sound composition), with antonymy - the opposite meaning with a difference in the sound of the words.

These relationships between words in the lexical system of the language in the textbook Valkova D.P., Popova R.N. and others are presented in the following table  6 :

In this paper, we will consider the phenomenon homonymy. The phenomenon of homonymy is a topic that has been covered in linguistic literature for a very long time and is considered by such scientists as V.V. Vinogradov, Fomina M.I., Popov R.N., Akhmanova O.S., Lipatov A.T., Rakhmanova L.I. and others. Their disputes concern the understanding of the essence of homonymy, its occurrence in the Russian language, its use in speech, the distinction between homonymy and polysemy, homonymy and related phenomena. As a result, we can conclude that until the controversy on this issue stops, it should be considered relevant.

The purpose of this work– based on the analysis of linguistic literature, to give an idea of ​​how the phenomenon of homonymy is covered in modern science.

Work tasks:

analyze different approaches in the definition of homonymy;

get acquainted with the history of coverage of this issue;

show how this issue is covered in the school curriculum and textbooks;

create didactic material for lessons on the specified topic;

2. History of the issue.

The problem of homonymy, the multifaceted aspects of its semantics have attracted the close attention of researchers for a long time. This problem had its ebb and flow, ups and downs, but at each new stage of increasing interest in it, new facets, new aspects of this linguistic phenomenon were opened.

It is known that for a long time, research in the field of homonymy focused on lexical homonymy, which, because of this, received the most complete semasiological and lexicographic interpretation. With regard to lexical homonymy, there are clearly 3 points of view.

According to the first, the earliest, only etymological (heterogeneous) homonyms that arose as a result of a random coincidence of sound complexes are recognized. This theory was followed by J. Gilleron, R.I. Menner, J. Orr, V.I. Abaev.

According to another, lexical homonymy has two initial sources:

phonetic convergent evolution of different words or forms (including borrowings)

semantic divergent evolution of one word

(Bulakhovskiy L.A., Budagov R.A., Nyurop K., Ulman S.)

And according to the third, the formation of homonyms is possible as a result of word-formation processes.

(Vinogradov V.V., Smirnitsky A.I., Stepanov Yu.S., Bally Sh.) 6

3. The concept of homonymy. Lexical homonymy

In scientific and linguistic literature, the essence of homonymy is not understood unambiguously.

The main work on this issue is an article in the journal "Problems of Linguistics" by V.V. Vinogradov "On homonymy and related phenomena" 1968. In this article, Vinogradov V.V. gives a definition of homonymy and distinguishes between phenomena adjacent to it. In the future, I will constantly refer to this article.

And Rosenthal D.E. agrees with the point of view of V.V. Vinogradov, that lexical homonyms are words that sound the same but have completely different meanings. He defines homonymy - sound and grammatical coincidence of language units that are not semantically related to each other.

Greek homos- the same onyma- name.

Fomina M.I. offers a broader definition: lexical homonyms two or more words of different meanings are called, coinciding in spelling, pronunciation and grammatical design.

In lexicology, two types of homonymous words are distinguished - complete and incomplete (or partial).

By structure, lexical homonyms can be divided into:

Fomina M.I. suggests other names: simple, or non-derivatives, and derivatives. Non-derivative homonyms are most often found in the circle of nouns. In the derivative homonymy of nouns and verbs, researchers, following V.V. Vinogradov usually distinguish the following varieties:

homonymous derived stems each consist of two (or more) homomorphemes of the same type.

lezgin-to -a(cf. Lezgins) and lezgin-to -a(dance)

homonymous derived stems consist of morphemes that do not match in sound design.

paper-Nick (paper industry worker) and paper-Nick (purse for papers)

in a homonymous pair of words, the derivative of the stem is felt only in one of the words, while the other (or others) undergoes a morphological process of simplification.

siege-it - besiege(to besiege, that is, to surround with troops)

besiege - besiege(separate the component of the sediment)

besiege - besiege(make slow down at full gallop, lean back, crouching a little)

one of the homonymous bases has a derivative character, the other is non-derivative.

nor-to -a(reduced from burrow) and mink(animal and animal skin)

O.S. Akhmanova calls such types of derived homonyms "words with a pronounced morphological structure" and distinguishes among them 5 subtypes:

homonymy of bases

pungent(look, grass, mockery) and pungent(sugar, wood)

affix homonymy

Finnish(to Finn) and Finnish(knife)

homonymy with varying degrees of articulation

straighten(galley) and straighten(the passport)

homonymy with different internal structure

crossbow(type of weapon that fires itself) and crossbow(one who shoots himself)

homonymy from different parts of speech

bake (noun) and bake(verb infinitive)

Derivative homonymy among verbs (the most active process in the modern language) occurs in such cases when, in one verb, the prefix merges with the stem, losing its morphological separability or separability, and in another, homonymous with the first, it retains its semantic functions of a separate morpheme.

name"call someone what" (cf. name) and call(many people)

start talking"talk your teeth" (cf. conspiracy) and to speak(to speak, start speaking)

Homonymous words are characterized primarily by the fact that they correlate with one or another phenomenon of reality independently of each other, therefore, there is no associative conceptual and semantic connection between them, which is characteristic of different meanings of polysemantic words. when realizing the lexical meaning of homonyms, their mixing is practically impossible. For example, no one will think that we are talking about vein as about a “spring, source”, if, standing at the door, they ask for key, i.e. "device for actuating the lock". The conceptual and thematic correlation of words is completely different, and the use of one of the homonymous words in the text (or live speech) excludes the use of the other. (Unless, of course, there is a special collision with a certain stylistic task. See ____)

So, lexical homonymy is observed among words of the same parts of speech. At the same time, two or more lexical homonyms (full or partial) are characterized by the absolute identity of the sound and spelling complex, that is, the external structure ( defend 1 - stay until the end defend 2 - be at some distance defend 3 - protect) and all (or parts) of grammatical forms (initial change in cases, the presence of the same number forms in three words that are full lexical homonyms: jar 1 - vessel jar 2 - shallow, jar 3 - spec. transverse seat in the boat).

4. Language phenomena similar to lexical homonymy

Homonymy as a linguistic phenomenon is observed not only in vocabulary. In the broad sense of the word, homonyms are sometimes called different language units that coincide in sound. Unlike proper lexical (or absolute) homonyms, all other consonances and various kinds of coincidences are called relative, although here it would be more correct to speak not about homonymy in the broad sense of the word, and not even about relative homonymy, but about the homonymous use of various types in speech homophones, which, as V.V. Vinogadov, includes "all kinds of unanimities or consonances - in whole constructions, and in conjunctions of words or their parts, in separate segments of speech, in separate morphemes, even in adjacent sound combinations"  _ .

Such scientists as Rosenthal D.E., Shmelev D., Vinogradov V.V. are of the opinion that homoforms, homographs and homophones are phenomena adjacent to homonymy, since they relate to the grammatical, phonetic and graphic levels of the language.

Rosenthal D.E. believes that “strict differentiation of linguistic phenomena requires limiting proper lexical homonymy from homoforms, homophones, homographs.” _

homoforms- words that coincide only in one grammatical form (less often in several).

three 1 - counts. in I. p. (three friends)

three 2 - verb in command. incl., units h., 2 l. (three carrots on a grater)

The grammatical forms of words of the same part of speech can also be homonymous.

adjective forms big, young may indicate:

I.p., unit, m.p. (great success, young professional)

R.p., s.ch., w.r. (great career, young woman)

D.p., s.ch., w.r. (to a great career, to a young woman)

etc., sing. (with a big career, with a young woman)

The reason for recognizing these forms as different forms, although coinciding in sound, is that they agree with nouns that appear in different cases (moreover, the same adjectives with noun m.r. and cf.r. here have different forms - big village, big villages, big village).

Homoforms by their nature go beyond the vocabulary, as they belong to a different level of the language and should be studied in the morphology section  _

Homophones Words that sound the same but are spelled differently.

meadow - bow, hammer - young, lead - carry

These words coincide in pronunciation due to the stunning of voiced consonants at the end of a word and before voiceless consonants. Changing vowels in an unstressed position leads to the consonance of words rinse - caress, lick - climb, sharp - islands, brother - brother. Therefore, the appearance of homophones is associated with the operation of phonetic laws.

Homophones are the subject of study not of lexicology, but of phonetics, since they manifest themselves at a different linguistic level - the phonetic one.

homographs Words that are spelled the same but pronounced differently. they usually have stress on different syllables:

mugs - mugs, fell asleep - fell asleep

There are more than a thousand pairs of homographs in modern Russian. Homography is directly related to the graphic system of the language.

Fomina M.I. offers a broad concept of homophony (Greek homos - the same, phone - voice, sound), which covers the consonance of a variety of language units:

coincidence of pronunciation of words (the so-called proper homophones, or phonetic homonyms)

flu - mushroom, dock - dog, labor - tinder

coincidence of words and phrases (a kind of homophony)

dumb - not mine, skidding - by the nose, for days - with ducks

coincidence of separate forms of the word (the so-called homoforms, or grammatical homonyms)

saw(n.) - saw(ch. in pr.v.) , I'm flying(from fly) - I'm flying(I'm flying) ,

young man - caring for a young mother

the same spelling of words, but the difference in pronunciation, in particular stress ( homographs):

lexical: atlas - atlas

lexico-grammatical: village(verb) - village(n.)

grammar: addresses - addresses

stylistic: compass(lit.) - compass(maritime)

But Fomina M.I. agrees with V.V. Vinogradov that lexical homonymy proper (full or partial) “cannot be confused or even brought together” with homophony in the broad sense of the word, that is, with all consonances and similarities that occur in speech.

And the linguist Rakhmanova L.I. considers homophones and homoforms as types of homonyms, but recognizes that not all scientists attribute homographs to homonyms, since the main feature - different sounding contradicts the general definition of homonyms.

Rakhmanova L.I. identifies a special group of homoforms - these are words that have moved from one part of speech to another.

directly(adverb) - directly(enhanced particle)

The words of this group are distinguished from other homoforms by the fact that when they are declined as units. hours, and in the plural. in all case forms they have the corresponding homoform - adjective.

Popov R.N. notes that “paronymy is considered to be one of the close phenomena to homonymy. But at the same time, it must be taken into account that paronymy takes place only in oral speech and has nothing to do with the lexical system of the language.  _

Paronyms- words that are close, but not identical in sound, different in meaning and erroneously used in speech one instead of the other.

Fact- "a real, non-fictional event, phenomenon."

Factor- "the driving force, the cause of any process or phenomenon, which determines its characteristic features."

Phonetically, paronyms differ from each other in that they have a different pronunciation or the beginning of a word ( president - resident), or end ( set - complex).

Among paronyms, a significant place is occupied by a noun. Paronyms expressed by other parts of speech are less common ( single - ordinary; to grind - to grind).

In grammatical literature, the so-called functional homonyms. These are similar in sound, etymologically related words related to different parts of speech. Kolykhanova E.B. writes about this. and

Shiryaeva T.G. in his work “Functional homonyms in the lexical system of the Russian language”.  _

Kolkhoz fieldsmooth . (cr. adj.)

The letters are writtensmooth . (adverb)

I will comesmooth at five.(particle)

Functional homonyms are words that are used in speech as a result of transition from one part of speech to another. In such cases, several words belonging to different parts of speech are hidden behind a single sound complex.

The formation and existence of functional homonyms allows cases of double, triple (sometimes more) use of the same sound complex.

The formation of functional homonyms is carried out under certain syntactic conditions, which should be understood as a change in the syntactic function of a word, the order of words in a sentence, compatibility with other words, the nature of the connection between the members of the sentence, the ellipsis of the word being defined.

In modern research, a tendency has been established to use double names for those phenomena that are built on various kinds of coincidences, consonances. For example: homophones are phonetic homonyms, homoforms are grammatical homonyms, homomorphemes are morphological homonyms (or derivational homonyms). Sometimes such terms are used: omosyntagms - syntactic homonyms, omostylemes - stylistic homonyms. It seems that, despite the critical attitude of researchers to this kind of double terminology, in particular to terms-phrases like "syntactic homonymy" and the like, its use does not cause confusion, but, on the contrary, makes it possible to more clearly define one or another linguistic phenomenon. _ 

5. Homonymy and polysemy in Russian (review).

delimitation different words-homonyms and one word with many meanings, as already noted, causes many difficulties and cannot always be carried out unambiguously.

The difficulty of distinguishing between these phenomena and the complexity of their clear, consistent definition is also indicated by modern lexicographic practice. So, many words that are given as polysemantic in one dictionary are considered in another (or others) as different words, homonymous to each other.

Ways to distinguish between homonymy and polysemy:

Substituting synonyms for each homonym or for all meanings of the polysemantic, and then comparing the selected synonyms with each other. If they turn out to be semantically close to each other, we have a polysemantic word, if not - homonyms.

Comparison of the word forms of each of them, the selection of related (single-root) words, that is, the establishment of their derivational connections. if the word forms are the same or similar and there are related words that are identical in terms of the type of formation, and there is a semantic proximity between them, we can talk about polysemy.

Finding out the origin of words, that is, etymological information about words.

Comparison of the translation of Russian homonyms into other languages. This noticeably refines the idea of ​​real homonymization.

Identification of the thematic relation of the word and the definition of typical models of lexical compatibility, as well as the semantics of the entire context as a whole.

Thus, in order to reasonably distinguish homonymy from polysemy, it is necessary to use as much comparative data as possible, which will make it possible to identify which features prevail: similar over distinctive ones, or vice versa - distinctive over similar ones. However, the decisive features for the stages of analysis are still actually semantic ones. It is they, as modern researchers note, that should be recognized as the main ones in distinguishing homonymy from polysemy, it is they that should be present in all other distinctive comparisons.  _

The emergence of homonyms in the Russian language.

In the process of the historical development of the dictionary, the appearance of lexical homonyms was due to a number of reasons.

Rosenthal D.E. offers a clear distribution of these causes:

As a result of borrowing foreign words, there may be a formal coincidence in the sound and spelling of the word "alien" and native Russian.

marriage 1 in Russian is related to the verb take(cf: to marry oneself), its modern meaning is “family relations between a man and a woman; marital relationship."

marriage 2 - “spoiled, poor-quality, defective items of production”, borrowed from it. language brack- flaw

club 1 – eng. "social organization"

club 2 smoke - Russian swirl

Words that entered the Russian language from different languages ​​may turn out to be consonant.

tap 1 – Dutch a closure in the form of a tube for the release of a liquid or gas »

tap 2 – German "mechanism for lifting and moving goods"

mat 1 – German "soft bedding made of durable material"

mat 2 - Arab. "defeat in a game of chess"

mat 3 - French "absence of gloss, roughness of the smooth surface of the object."

Words that sound the same are borrowed from the same language

French mine 1 - "explosive projectile"

mine 2 - "facial expression"

latin. note 1 - musical sound

note 2 - Diplomatic appeal from one government to another

When new words are formed from the roots and affixes available in the language, homonyms also appear.

settlement 1 - site of an ancient settlement

settlement 2 - magnifier of a word city

daddy 1 - a form of subjective assessment from dad

daddy 2 - a form of subjective assessment from folder

The appearance of homonyms as a result of the coincidence of the newly formed abbreviation with a long-known full-value word.

stork 1 - "migratory bird"

STORK 2 – automatic information station

Mars 1 – planet

MARS 2 – automatic registration and signaling machine

Homonyms become native Russian words that have undergone various changes as a result of phonetic and morphological processes that took place in the language.

onion 1 - an ancient weapon (once had a nasal vowel, which eventually began to sound like  u)

onion 2 - garden plant

flying 1 - treat (e - b "yat")

flying 2 - fly

The source of the appearance of homonyms may be a break in the semantic structure of polysemantic words, in which individual meanings diverge so much that they are no longer perceived as belonging to one word.

light1- Universe

light2- dawn, sunrise

"I wanted to go around the whole light, and did not travel around a hundredth of a share ... "-" A little light- already on your feet! (Griboedov A.S.)

In 1972, for the first time, the homonymy of words was recognized and recorded in the Ozhegov Dictionary duty- duty and duty- borrowed. In the 1950s, these words were considered as variants of the same word with different meanings. This indicates the duration of the process of splitting a polysemantic word and the transformation of its meanings into independent homonyms, the inevitability of the appearance of intermediate, transitional cases when it is difficult to give an unambiguous semantic description of the word. For example, words are treated differently in different dictionaries to knit(tighten with rope) and to knit(knitting needles, crochet); wave(something) and wave(go somewhere)

Fomina M.I. He also notes the discrepancy between the meanings of a polysemantic word in the language, not only in native Russian words, but also in words borrowed from any one language. Interesting observations are given by comparing the homonymy of etymologically identical words:

agent 1 - ruler of a state

agent 2 - an active cause of certain phenomena

(both words from lat. ages, agentis  from agere - to act)

openwork 1 - see-through mesh fabric

openwork 2 – maintaining accounting books, documents until the last day

(from French ajour - through, summarized)

It should be noted that there is no consensus in modern lexicology on the role of the disintegration of a polysemantic word in the formation of homonyms. So, V.I. Abaev in his article "On the submission of homonyms in the dictionary" (see: Questions of Linguistics, 1957, No. 3) expressed the idea that new homonyms, their "reproduction is mainly due to polysemy." EAT. Galkina-Fedorchuk in the article “On the issue of homonyms in the Russian language” (see: Russian language at school, 1954, No. 3) and Z.A. Tolmachev in the article “The formation of homonyms through the collapse of polysemy” (see: Russian Language at School, 1959, No. 4) also considered “separation of the meaning of words” as one of the productive ways of forming homonyms. However, V.V. Vinogradov noted the unproductiveness of this method of formation, believing that “even fewer homonyms owe their formation to the semantic disintegration of a single lexeme into several homonymous lexical units of the type light is the universe, and light- lighting. A.A. Reformatsky argued that in the Russian language "the most homonyms that arose due to borrowings", although he also recognized the fact that the process of derivative homonymy is active. A.I. Smirnitsky called random sound coincidences the main source of replenishment of the language with homonyms. O.S. Akhmanova, recognizing the sufficient activity of homonyms arising as a result of dispersed polysemy, at the same time pointed out the great difficulties associated with the search for objective criteria for evaluating the completion of the homonymization process. These articles served as a stimulus for the ongoing discussion on the issues of homonymy.  10

Use in speech.

In the modern Russian language, a significant number of homonyms have been recorded, and with the development of the language, they become more. The question arises: does homonymy prevent correct perception in speech?

The functioning of homonyms in speech, as a rule, does not cause any particular difficulties. First of all, the context clarifies the semantic structure of such words, excluding inappropriate interpretation. In addition, homonyms belong to different areas of use and have an ambiguous expressive coloring, different functional attribution, as a rule, do not collide in speech. Nevertheless, the combination of the meanings of homonymous words is possible. However, in this case it is due to a certain stylistic goal, and this goal is different in different styles of speech.

The intentional clash of homonyms has always been an indispensable means of witty puns.

Kozma Prutkov also wrote: “It’s nice caress child or dog, but most necessary rinse mouth".

Similar homophones are used in folk jokes:

"I in the forest, and he got in, I per elm, and he stuck» W. Dahl

Often there is a collision of lil even a combination in one text of both homonymous words and words that accidentally coincide in sound (homophones, homoforms, etc.) it is interesting to compare the intentional collision of partial homonyms there is- "to be, to be" and there is- “to take food”, translated by S.Ya. Marshak "Zazdravny toast" by Robert Burns:

Which there is, what there is- sometimes they can't there is,

And others may there is, yes they sit without bread,

And we have here there is, what there is, yes at the same time there is, how there is, -

So, we have to thank the sky!

Combines consonant words, a writer, poet, publicist, as it were, brings together those objects, concepts that they designate. This technique is a means of actualization, it performs the task of communicating additional artistic information.

Do you hear how to smell like gunpowder become

Editorials and poetry?

Feathers are stamped from the same become,

Which tomorrow will go on bayonets.

(K. Simonov "Winner")

Poets use homonymous rhymes, which often give the poem a special attraction.

You puppies! Follow me!

Will you on kalachu,

Look, don't talk

But not that I'll beat you!

(A.S. Pushkin)

Snow said: - When I flock,

There will be a river of doves,

Will flow, shaking flock

Reflected doves.

(Y.A. Kozlovsky)

Alena is good braid.

And the grass in the meadow is for her braid.

Soon the meadow will pass braid.

Lexical homonyms are combined into rows, each of which includes at least two words belonging to the same part of speech. There are two types of lexical homonyms: complete and incomplete (partial). Full homonyms- these are words that coincide in all grammatical forms, for example: Lavka (1) - “bench” and Lavka (2) - “a small room for trading”.

These words in all cases will appear in the same forms, and the plural forms will also be the same. Incomplete homonyms- these are words belonging to the same part of speech, in which the system of grammatical forms does not completely coincide, for example:
Shelf - "a device for storing something", can be in the form of units. and many others. hours (shelf - shelves, many shelves);
Shelf - "destruction of weeds" (a verbal noun formed from the verb weed), exists only in the form of units. h.

So, from the first word, the singular and plural forms are formed, from the second word it is impossible to form the plural form. Both full and partial (incomplete) homonyms are studied by lexicology. They should be distinguished from phenomena that lexicology does not study, although it mentions them, comparing them with homonyms. In other words, other types of homonymy should be distinguished from lexical homonyms, both full and partial. In modern Russian, these types of homonymy are represented as follows.
1) Phonetic homonymy- the coincidence of words only in sound:
Pond - rod, Carry - lead, Code - cat
Such words are called homophones.
2) Graphic homonymy- coincidence of words only in spelling while maintaining differences in sound:
for "mok (storm) - lock" to (close); steam "rite (vegetables) - bet" bet (in the clouds); a "tlas (geographical) - atla" s (type of fabric). Such words are called homographs.
3) Morphological homonyms- the coincidence of words belonging to different parts of speech, in one or more grammatical forms: three (numeral) - three (command, adv. from the verb to rub); oven (infinitive verb) - oven (noun in I.p.); simple (adjective) - simple (noun). Such words are called homoforms.

One more series of words should be distinguished from homonyms, which are called paronyms. Paronyms(from the Greek Para - about and Onyma - name) - these are words that are similar in sound and morphemic structure, but have a different meaning. Usually paronyms are words formed from the same root, but with the help of different affixes (suffixes, prefixes). For example: Put on (a coat on yourself) - dress (a child); Economical (person) - economical (mode) - economic (crisis); Escalator (movable ladder) - excavator (digger); Toast (toast, congratulations) - a health resort (sanatorium).

The proximity of paronymic words in sound and the common root in them is the main source of errors in their use. Paronyms are sometimes mixed in speech, although they denote different phenomena. For example, they say "put on a coat" instead of "put on a coat." Meanwhile, the verbs to put on and put on differ in meaning: they put on what, but they put on whom (put on a coat, hat, mittens - put on a child, a sick person). This example shows that paronyms differ not only in meaning, but also in compatibility with other words.