What is the subject of vocabulary study. Lexicology as a branch of linguistics

The term "lexicology" is made up of two Greek elements: lexis (lexis) and logos (logos). Both meant “word” in ancient Greek. Thus, lexicology is a word about a word, or the science of words. The vocabulary of a language is the totality of all words and their equivalent phrases (phraseological units).

Sections of lexicology

1. Onomasiology - studies the vocabulary of a language, its nominative means, types of vocabulary units of a language, methods of nomination.

2. Semasiology - studies the meaning of vocabulary units of a language, types of lexical meanings, and the semantic structure of the lexeme.

3. Phraseology - studies phraseological units.

4. Onomastics is the science of proper names. Here we can distinguish the largest subsections: anthroponymy, which studies proper names, and toponymy, which studies geographical objects.

5. Etymology - studies the origin of individual words.

6. Lexicography - deals with issues of compiling and studying dictionaries.

7. The focus of the study of lexicology is the word.

Token

Having become familiar with the types of words presented in the language, one can introduce another concept presented in lexicology, namely, the concept of a lexical word, or lexeme. A lexeme is a significant word that points to objects and denotes concepts about them. A lexeme is capable of acting as a member of a sentence and forming sentences; it can be simple (lexeme is a word) and compound (lexeme is a compound name, for example: Railway, holiday home) In this understanding, function words and word forms are not included in the concept of “lexemes”.

How do the terms lexeme and word relate?

In some cases they denote the same fact of language. So a person is both a word and a lexeme; in, would. From are words, but not lexemes. The sentence “Man is a friend to man” contains three words, but two lexemes. Consequently, the term lexeme diverges from the term word. The latter names both the function word and the form of the word. Word forms that differ only in grammatical meaning are not considered separate lexemes (kot - kota - kotu - cat). They form a paradigm, that is, a system of word forms of one lexeme.

The lexical meaning of a word is the content of the word, reflecting in the mind and consolidating in it the idea of ​​an object, property, process, phenomenon, and so on. This is the correlation established by our thinking between a sound complex and an object or phenomenon of reality, which is designated by this complex of sounds.

The carrier of lexical meaning is the stem of the word. The meaning of a word reflects the general and at the same time essential characteristics of an object, learned as a result of people’s social practice. Lexical meanings can be concrete and abstract, general (common nouns) and singular (proper).

Word problems in language

Shcherba in one of his latest articles wrote: “Really, what is a word? I think that in different languages it will be different. From this it follows that the concept of a word does not exist at all."

This issue is covered differently by Smirnitsky, who in his article “On the Question of the Word” wrote that “the word acts not only as the basic unit of vocabulary, but also as the central nodal unit of language in general.” When presenting material about words, we will adhere to precisely this point of view.

In linguistic encyclopedic dictionary(M., 1990) the following definition of the concept of a word is given:

The word is the basic structural-semantic unit of language, serving to name objects and their properties, phenomena, relations of reality, possessing a set of semantic, phonetic and grammatical features specific to a given language.

The most important features of a word

A word, like any other unit of language, according to Smirnitsky, has two the most important features:

1) It has not only an external (sound) side, but also an externally expressed meaning (semantic or emotional content).

When considering the question of the two-sidedness of a word, we should dwell on the very nature of this connection between the sound of a word and its meaning.

The connection between the sound and meaning of a word is, in principle, conditional, arbitrary, or unmotivated. So, for example, there is no inherently obligatory connection between the meaning table and the sound Tisch. As is known, in different languages ​​the meaning table is associated with different sound complexes: in English. table, in Russian Table, in it. Tisch. The principle of convention applies to simple, indecomposable units; completely, actually to morphemes.

As for more complex formations, in addition to the principle of convention (since in complex formations includes simple units) the principle of motivation comes first. Correlating with the concept of motivation is the term “internal form of a word,” which refers to the motivation of the lexical meaning of a word by its word-formation and semantic structure. The internal form of the word reveals some attribute of the object on the basis of which the name originated. For example, the redstart bird once amazed a person with its unusually bright, seemingly burning tail. This symptom that struck a person was the basis for the name of this bird. Of course, the feature that forms the basis of the name is not always so bright and impressive. It is usually much calmer: a candlestick is what is under the candle, and a thimble is what is put on the finger - a finger, a snowdrop, a flower that appears in the spring, when there is still snow on the fields.

2) The word appears not as a work created in the process of speech, but as something that already exists and is only reproduced in speech.

By the way, morphemes also satisfy the requirements mentioned above, and therefore with with good reason can be considered units of language. It should also be noted that proverbs, sayings, aphorisms and generally various sayings, reproduced again and again as whole units, also act, according to Smirnitsky, as units of language, since they already exist in the language and are only reproduced in speech. But the sentence then is not, according to Smirnitsky, a unit of language.

It is necessary to dwell on the issue of the salience of a word in the flow of speech. In certain cases, certain phonetic moments serve to highlight a word, to delimit it from neighboring words. So, for example, the lack of emphasis on a full-valued unit that has a substantive meaning in Germanic languages ​​is usually an indicator that we are dealing with only part of the word, for example. English Railway, blackboard, German. Eisenbahn, Schwarzbrot, where the lack of emphasis on -way, -board, -bahn, -brot shows that these units in these cases do not represent separate words, but are only components of words. Such phonetic moments, capable of expressing the difference between a word and part of a word, should be considered only as some additional, auxiliary means of highlighting a word. Why? The fact is that with such a selection, the word is treated as if it were only a sound segment. Meanwhile, a word, as a unit of language, is a formation that has both a sound side and a semantic side. The main signs of the distinctiveness and completeness of a word should be sought based on the understanding of the word as the basic unit of the vocabulary of a language and, at the same time, a unit that is capable of grammatical change and grammatical combination into sentences, into coherent meaningful speech with other units of the same order.

The changeability of a word presupposes a certain formability: since the same word changes, something basic, actually vocabulary, lexical, stands out in it, remaining the same when various changes words, and, on the other hand, something additional, variable, belonging at the same time not to a given specific word, but to a known class or category of words, abstracted from specific words - grammatical, associated with the use of words in various works of speech. Thus, the basic, lexical meaning of the word turns out to be supplemented, complicated by certain grammatical meanings, which are materially expressed in external, sound differences between individual varieties - grammatical forms words: this gives the word a certain form.

Words turn out to be grammatically, both morphologically and syntactically, designed, in a certain way adapted to their joint functioning in coherent, meaningful speech. This formalization of the word gives it a certain completeness, which makes it quite easy to isolate it from speech.

The internal integrity of the word (whole form) of the word is revealed in comparison with the structure of the phrase. In contrast to words as completely formed formations, phrases can be defined as separately formed formations. This can be illustrated with the following examples. If we compare the language education das Schwarzbrot and the language education das schwarze Brot, which includes the same root elements as the first education, then it is easy to see that they, while denoting the same object of objective reality and not significantly different in their meaning, are fundamentally different in his attitude towards grammatical structure, according to its design. This difference lies in the fact that in the first language formation - a word - both components are formalized once, while in the second language formation - a phrase - there is an independent grammatical design for each component. In other words, the formation of Schwarzbrot is completely formed, and the formation of das schwarze Brot is separately formed.

The integrity of the word itself expresses a certain semantic integrity: it emphasizes that this item or the phenomenon is thought of as one thing, a special whole, even if the complexity of its structure is noted or its individual features are highlighted. So, speaking das Schwarzbrot, we pay main attention to the object denoted by this word, although we mean its individual aspects: a) bread, food product and b) the quality of this product in color. On the contrary, if we say das schwarze Brot, individual aspects of the designated phenomenon come to the fore, and through the perception of individual aspects of this object or phenomenon, the object or phenomenon itself as a whole is realized.

Semantic structure of a word- semantic structure of the basic unit of vocabulary (see Word). S. s. With. manifests itself in its polysemy (see) as the ability, with the help of internally related meanings, to name (denote) various objects (phenomena, properties, qualities, relationships, actions and states). The semantic structure of an unambiguous word is reduced to its seme composition (see Seme) .

The simplest unit (element) of semantic structure polysemantic word- its lexical-semantic variant (LSV), i.e. with a lexical meaning (see), associated with other lexical meanings by certain relationships, the main of which are hierarchical: an expression of the subordination of dependent lexical meanings to the main one. In S. s. With. lexical-semantic variants are related to each other due to the commonality of the internal form (see Internal form of a word), their mutual motivation, and deducibility from each other.

Therefore, in dictionaries, each preceding LSV determines the interpretation of the subsequent one, for example. circle ^ “part of the pchoskosgn, limited by the circle, as well as the circle itself” ~^- circle± “object in the shape of a circle” (rescue, rubber circle), [circle-) “closed area, within the outlined boundaries of the cut there is fulfillment and differentiation something" (range of responsibilities, interests, issues)], [circle "a group of people united by common interests, sanilamn" (circle of acquaintances, friends; in one's circle)], [circle "a social group of people primarily engaged in intellectual, creative work "(wide circles of the public, literary, journalistic circles; about diplomatic circles: in the circle of scientists, specialists)], etc. Here, hierarchically, the main LSV is the circle, the content of which is to the greatest extent the inner form appears; all other LSVs of the word circle are metaphorically connected with this LSV (by similarity of form). At<ггом представление о круге присутствует в толковании значений всех ЛСВ слова и внутренне связывает их в единое целое. Основанием для выделения главного и частных значений (или иначе: главного и частных ЛСВ) служит различный характер взаимодействия слова в таких значениях с контекстом, т. е. фрагментом текста, необходимым и достаточным для определения того или иного значения слова. Главное значение в наименьшей степени обусловлено контекстом. Слово в главном (первом в словарях) значении является семантически наиболее простым по своему содержанию (ср. вода\ "прозрачная бесцветная жидкость") и обладает в силу этого самой широкой н свободной сочетаемостью с другими лексическими единицами. Все прочие значения слова (его ЛСВ) выступают как частные. В частных значениях по сравнению с главным слово в значительно большей степени обусловлено контекстом, присоединяет к себе его элементы и является в силу этого семантически более сложным (напр., вода2 "минеральный, газированный, фруктовый напиток", т. е. вода+содержащая минеральные соли; насыщенная газом; приготовленная из фруктов), при атом характеризуется ограниченной, избирательной сочетаемостью: минеральная, сельтерская, газированная, фруктовая вода.

The main meaning is called the primary semantic function of the word, and the particular meanings are its secondary semantic functions.

Along with the usual dictionary meanings (main, particular) in S. p. With. the general meaning is distinguished as its invariant (from the Latin invarians - unchanging), opposed to variant meanings: this is a coinciding part of the content of all meanings (LSV) of a word, something constant, unchangeable in them. It stands out like a common factor in algebra: ab + ac + ad = = a(b + c + d), is an extremely generalized and semantically simple content and represents a linguistic abstraction useful for the semantic analysis of linguistic units. The relationship of the meanings of a word to its general meaning [i.e. e. to the general content of all its variants] allows us to establish their semantic hierarchy according to the degree of proximity to it: the central, dominant meanings turn out to be semantically the simplest, the peripheral ones - more complex and therefore further removed from the general (invariant) meaning of the word than the first. In S. s. With. certain values ​​(LSV) may die out. For example, the meaning of “beautiful” in the common Slavic adjective red (cf. Red Square) was historically original, the main one in the word formed from the same stem as the word beauty. In the meaning of color, the word red began to be used later, in the era of the separate existence of the Eastern Slavs. languages. This meaning has become the main one in S. s. s, leading to its partial restructuring. At the same time, S. s. With. is constantly enriched with new meanings, since a word is a unit of an “open” lexical system, for example. the meaning of “a person who swims in open water in winter” in the word walrus (cf. walrus section), “effective attacking player in football, hockey” in the word scorer (cf. best scorer of the season), etc.

All words are divided into word-formation motivated (derivatives) and unmotivated (non-derivatives)). Word-formatively motivated are words whose meaning and sound are determined in the modern language by other words of the same root (motivating, or producing). Motivated words are recognized as being formed from motivating words: table - table ‘small table’, white - belet ‘become white, whiter’. The meaning and sound of word-formative unmotivated words (table, white) are not determined in the modern language by other cognate words; they are not recognized as formed from other words.

A motivated word is connected with another word with the same root or with several words with the same root through relations of word-formation motivation. Motivation is a relationship between two words of the same root in which the meaning of one of them is either determined through the meaning of the other (house - house 'small house', strength - strong man 'man of great physical strength'), or is identical to the meaning of the other in all its components, except for the grammatical meaning of a part of speech (walk - walking, daring - daring, bold - boldly), or completely identical to the meaning of another with a difference in the stylistic coloring of these words (knee - razg. kolenka).

Words with the same root, devoid of the named properties (house and house), are not in a relationship of motivation with each other.

One of the two cognate words connected by the relations of word-formation motivation is motivating, and the other is motivated. The motivation of a word is determined by four rules that apply in the following cases:

The compared words with the same root have different lexical meanings, and in their stems, in addition to the root, a different number of sound segments are isolated (the stem of one of them may be equal to the root). In this case, the motivated word is the word whose base is longer by any sound segment, which is recognized as a word-forming affixal morph (see § 16): forest - forest-ok, stand - stand.

The compared words of the same root have different lexical meanings, and their stems contain the same number of sound segments. In this case, motivated is a word that is semantically more complex, the meaning of which is determined through another word compared with it: chemistry - chemist ‘chemistry specialist’, artist - artist ‘woman artist’.

The meanings of the compared cognate words are identical in all their components, except for the grammatical meaning of the part of speech. In this case: a) in pairs “verb - noun denoting the same action” (draw - drawing, exit - exit, creak - creak) and “adjective - noun denoting the same attribute” (brave - courage, graceful - grace , blue - blue), regardless of the length of the stems of the words being compared, the noun is motivated; b) in the “adjective - adverb” pair, the motivated word is the word whose stem is longer by any segment - the word-forming affixal morph (see paragraph 1): cf. today - today-sh-y and bold-y - bold-o, where -o is part of the stem (suffix).

Note. The exception to the rule formulated in paragraph 3a is: 1) pairs of words consisting of a noun that does not have a suffix with the meaning of action, and a verb with the suffix -nicha-, -stvova-, or -ova-/-irova-/- izirova-/-izova-: in such pairs, the verb is motivated, since in modern language, with the help of these suffixes, verbs are easily formed from nouns with the meaning of action, and nouns with the meaning of action are not formed from such verbs without the help of a suffix: focus - to play tricks, blasphemy - blaspheme, salute - salute, repair - repair, terror - terrorize; 2) pairs consisting of a noun ending in -stv(o) and an adjective in which -stv- is followed by the suffix: courage - courageous, ignorance - ignorant.

One of the words in a motivational relationship is stylistically neutral, while the other has some stylistic connotation. In this case, regardless of the length of the stems of the compared words, the stylistically colored word is motivated: ship - ship (colloquial), individual - individual (colloquial).

A motivated word differs from a motivating word by certain word-formation means. Affixal morphs (most often), as well as cutting off part of the stem, a fixed order of components and a single emphasis on one of the components in additions and splices (for more details, see § 31) act as word-forming means for motivation.

“Lexicology as a branch of the science of language Lexicology (gr. lexikos - related to tin, logos - study) is a branch of the science of language that studies the vocabulary of a language, or vocabulary. ..."

-- [ Page 1 ] --

Lexicology as a branch of the science of language

Lexicology (gr. lexikos - related to tin, logos - teaching) is a branch of science

about the language, which studies the vocabulary of the language, or vocabulary.

The vocabulary of a language is an internally organized set of lexical

units interconnected, functioning and developing according to their own characteristics

Russian language laws.

Lexicology studies 1) the word as an individual unit of language, its meaning;

2) the place of the word in the lexical system of the language; 3) history of the formation of modern vocabulary; 4) the relationship of a word to active or passive vocabulary; 5) the place of the word in the system of functional styles of the modern Russian language (neutral, scientific, business, etc.). Lexicology studies the vocabulary of a language in its temporal development, since various changes occur in the vocabulary of a language over time, and also identifies the reasons for these changes.

Synchronic (descriptive) lexicology (gr. sin - together and chronos - time) is the current state of the lexical system. Diachronic (historical) lexicology (gr. dia - through, through and chronos) studies vocabulary in a historical aspect.

One of the main sections of lexicology is semasiology (rp. stasia - meaning, logos - teaching), or semantics (gr. sta - sign), which studies all issues related to the meaning of a word, as well as changes in the meaning of a word. Onomasiology (gr.

o noma – name and logos) studies the principles and patterns of naming phenomena and objects; etymology (gr. etymon - truth and logos) - the origin of words and figures of speech; lexicography (gr. lexicon - dictionary and graph - write) - compilation of dictionaries. In a broad sense, lexicology also includes the study of stable combinations of words - phraseology.

The word as a unit of the lexical system of the Russian language. Functions of the word (nominative, generalizing).

A word is the minimum unit of speech. It has an external form - a sound shell: a sound or a complex of sounds, designed according to the laws of a given language, and an internal content - lexical meaning. The meaning (or semantics) of a word correlates it with a specific concept. Consequently, a word is a complex of sounds or one sound that has a certain meaning fixed by the linguistic practice of society. The meaning of a word must be generally recognized and mandatory for members of a given society; only in this case is mutual understanding between people possible.

The word represents the unity of lexical and grammatical meanings.

The grammatical meaning of a word is a meaning that expresses the relationship of the word to other words in a phrase and sentence: the relationship to the person, reality, time, communicated, for example, the meaning of gender, number, case, person, time, etc. (cf. I draw - I will draw: time value).

The main function of a word is its: (According to Luria)

1) denoting (nominative) role. A word denotes an object, action, quality or attitude. Thanks to this, a person’s world doubles, and he can deal with objects that are not directly perceived and are not part of his own sensory experience.

2) The word helps to analyze the properties of objects, introduces it into a system of connections and relationships.

Compare, for example, word-formation analysis of a word, establishing known connections between objects and phenomena:

Table - lay - table - capital.

3) Each word enriches things, assigns them to a certain category, being an instrument of abstraction, which is the most important operation of consciousness.

Polysemy (multiple meanings of a word). Words are unambiguous and ambiguous. Direct and figurative meaning of the word. Types of figurative meanings (metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche) The meaning of a word can be direct and figurative. The direct meaning of the word is the lexical meaning in its own sense, without the emotionally expressive shades layered on it; it is a direct nomination. The figurative meaning is secondary, derivative, arising on the basis of the similarity of objects in shape, color, character, function, association by contiguity: donkey - “animal” and “stubborn person”. The figurative meaning is always motivated.

The meaning of a word changes during the functioning of the word in speech: 1) the word acquires a new (or new) meaning: mouse (computer);

2) the meaning of the word is expanding: ace (initially only about a pilot, now about other masters, for example, an ace footballer);

3) narrowing the meaning of the word: stench (the original meaning was smell, now it’s a bad smell).

According to the presence of meanings, words are divided into single-valued and polysemantic.

An unambiguous word (monosemic) has one meaning: taxi, typhoon, whirlwind, grasshopper, etc. Nouns (taiga), adjectives (potaya), verbs (uncork), adverbs (ready), etc. can be unambiguous. A polysemic word (polysemic) has several meanings: stream – 1) “rapidly flowing body of water, river, stream”; 2) “flow production”; 3) “a group of students with whom they conduct some classes in a certain queue with the same, similar groups.”

The ability of a word to have several meanings is called polysemy, or polysemy (gr. poly smos - polysemantic). Despite the polysemy, the word represents a semantic unity, which is called the semantic structure of the word.

At the moment of its occurrence, the word is always unambiguous. A prerequisite for using a word in a figurative meaning is the similarity of phenomena or their contiguity, as a result of which all meanings of a polysemantic word are interconnected. There are two main types of figurative meaning of the word:

1) metaphorical transfer is carried out on the basis of the similarity of external features: in shape, location of objects, color, taste, as well as similarity in the functions of objects, etc. For example: caterpillar - 1) a butterfly larva, usually worm-like with several pairs of legs; 2) a wide chain put on the wheels of a tractor, tank, etc. to increase the vehicle's maneuverability;

2) metonymic transfer is the transfer of a name according to the contiguity of phenomena, their relationship (spatial, temporal, etc.): steel - 1) hard silvery metal; 2) steel products. A type of metonymy is synecdoche - a transfer of meaning when the name of a whole is used to name a part of the whole, and vice versa:

All flags will come to visit us (A. Pushkin).

Formation of figurative meanings of words By the similarity of objects By contiguity (proximity) or phenomena of objects or phenomena by form: a spruce needle, a smoke ring according to the material of products made from it:

by color: golden hair, emerald clinked steel, darkened silverware grass by action: airplane wing by action and result: received five for the essay by impression: evil wind, in whole and in part: put black thoughts in a vase jasmine quick glance, according to the assessment : according to the personality of the author and his vague response to the works: read Pushkin, bought by size: Tolstoy’s sea of ​​flowers, saw Rembrandt If the figurative meaning of a word is fixed by speech practice and becomes stable, then the transfer (metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche) is called general linguistic (the back of a chair, a scientist head, etc.). New, unexpected uses of words in a figurative meaning are called individual author’s ones. Expressions based on the figurative meaning of words and giving imagery and expressiveness to speech are called tropes: The sunset sprinkled the gray fields with liquid gold (S. Yesenin) - metaphor; ... the sickle-and-hammer Soviet passport (V. Mayakovsky) is an epithet.

Homonymy. Types of homonyms: homophones, homoforms, homographs.

Lexical homonyms (gr. homo s - identical, o puta - name) are words that have the same form (sound, spelling), but different meanings: pomegranate1 “southern tree, as well as its round fruit of sweet and sour taste”; garnet2 “semi-precious stone, predominantly dark red in color.”

Full lexical homonyms are words that coincide in all grammatical forms: kotik1 “sea pinniped mammal” and kotik2 “cat”;

peel1 “to peel something, remove the peel” and peel2 “to hit hard, pound.”

Incomplete (or partial) lexical homonyms belong to the same part of speech, but have a discrepancy in some grammatical forms: zret1 (ripe) “sing, mature” and zret2 (zrit) “look, look, see.”

Homonym words do not have any associative connection inherent in the meanings of a polysemantic word.

Phonetic homonyms (or homophones) are words that have the same sound shell, but different spellings: gin (noun) - genie (noun); beg (v.) – belittle (v.), etc. Homophones can belong to both the same and different parts of speech:

drizzle (noun) – frost (noun), in a row (noun) – in a row (adv.). Homophones can conditionally include words and phrases that have a sound match: in place - instead, that brand - Tamarka, etc.

Grammatical homonyms (or homoforms) are words that have the same sound and spelling only in certain grammatical forms: courts (noun ship in R.p. plural) - courts (noun court in R.p. plural .), oven (noun) – oven (chap. in n.f.), etc.

Graphic homonyms (or homographs) are words that have the same spelling, but differ in stress, due to which they are pronounced differently:

property (a distinctive feature of something) – property (relations of kinship by blood, and those that arose between relatives of spouses).

Ways to distinguish between homonyms and polysemantic words:

1) synonyms for words and comparison of synonyms with each other: platform1 - platform and platform2 - action program

2) selection of related (single-root) words and comparison of word forms: braid1 - braid, braid and braid2 - mow;

3) establishing the lexical compatibility of words, as well as their syntactic compatibility: dreaming about1 - the sky and clearing up2 - question, situation;

4) use of etymological information: tick1 “nervous disease” (from French), tick2 “wood species” (from English), tick3 “fabric” (from Dutch).

The existence of polysemy and homonymy creates certain difficulties when using words. The specific meaning of a word is revealed by the context, so the context must provide a correct understanding of the word, otherwise it may lead to ambiguity. For example, in the context of Students listened to the teacher’s explanations, the meaning of the word listened is not revealed (listened from beginning to end or ignored).

Synonymy. The concept of synonyms and synonymous series. Same root synonyms.

Types of differences between synonyms (ideographic, stylistic, emotional-evaluative synonyms, etc.). Synonyms are linguistic and contextual.

Lexical synonyms (gr. synnymos - same name) are words that are close or identical in meaning, expressing the same concept, but differing either in shades of meaning, or stylistic coloring, or both and sound differently: well-being, prosperity , prosperity, prosperity; scream, yell, yell, bawle, strain; uncertain, hesitant, unsteady.

Synonyms are combined into rows. The dominant of a synonymous series is a stylistically neutral and semantically most capacious word, which is the main, core word in the series: awkward, clumsy, clumsy, angular, awkward, awkward, clumsy; run, rush, rush, fly. The dominant determines the general interpretation of the dictionary synonymous entry and is the semantic reference point for other members of the series. The meaning of each synonym is compared with the meaning of the dominant. In terms of the number of words, the synonymous rows are not the same: assembly - installation (2), evasive - vague - diplomatic (3), sugary - sugary - unctuous - sweet - sweet - sugary - honeyed - honeyed - molasses (9), etc.

The following groups of synonyms are distinguished:

1. Semantic (ideographic) synonyms differ in shades of meaning:

hot, sultry, scorching express different degrees of intensity of manifestation of the trait;

explain, broadcast, orate emphasize a different way of performing an action.

2. Stylistic synonyms, denoting the same phenomenon of reality, have different spheres of use or different stylistic connotations: province (neutral), wilderness (colloquial), sad (neutral) – kruchinny (folk-poetic); father (neutral, literal) – father (obsolete)

3. Semantic-stylistic synonyms differ in lexical meanings and stylistic coloring: lose weight - grow thin; famous - notorious; the demand is an ultimatum.

4. Absolute synonyms (doublets) - words that have neither semantic nor stylistic differences: because - since; hippopotamus - hippopotamus, etc.

According to the word-formation composition, synonyms of the same root (consequence - investigation) and synonyms of different roots (blind - blind) are distinguished.

Synonyms may differ in lexical compatibility: a person works (works) - a machine works (but does not work!); spelling literacy - awareness of business.

Polysemantic words with different meanings are included in different synonymic series:

fresh – clean (handkerchief), cool (wind), cheerful (person), new (magazine), unsalted (cucumber).

Reasons for the formation of synonyms in Russian:

1) the desire to most fully comprehend the phenomenon of reality, discover a new one and give it a name: aerobics - shaping;

2) penetration into the language and mastery of foreign language vocabulary: saying - aphorism, enthusiastic - exalted;

3) replenishment of synonymous rows with dialect and colloquial vocabulary: recently

- nadys, just now, the other day;

4) development of the polysemy of the word: close – close (path), limited (person);

5) the emergence of synonyms as a result of word formation processes:

copy - photocopy;

6) the desire to give the statement a different emotional coloring: to die - to bend over, to hobble.

Contextual synonyms are words whose meaning is similar only in a certain context (outside the context they are not synonyms). In most cases, contextual synonyms are expressively colored, since their main task is not to name the phenomenon, but to characterize it. For example, in certain contexts the verb speak (say) can have synonyms throw, utter, drop, blurt out, chip off, freeze, give out, bend, screw in, etc.

Functions of lexical synonyms:

1) semantically distinctive - serve to differentiate meanings (scream - scream);

2) style-distinctive - indicate the style, scope of use: implement (inter-style) - materialize (book);

3) actually stylistic – express emotional and expressive meanings:

cure (neutral) – heal (book).

Lexical synonyms help to clarify, supplement ideas about objects, phenomena of reality, and characterize them more clearly and comprehensively. The richer the synonymous series, the richer the language, the richer the opportunities for the creative use of language.

The stringing of synonyms is the basis of gradation - a figure of speech in which the synonyms are arranged so that the degree of expression of the attribute in them increases (ascending gradation) or decreases (descending gradation): His voice, already weak and feeble, becomes barely audible, and then and completely indistinguishable (M. Alekseev) Antonymy. The concept of antonyms. Antonyms are linguistic and contextual. Types of antonyms according to the semantic essence of the opposite and according to structure (antonyms denoting opposite qualities, states, and antonyms denoting oppositely directed actions, properties, characteristics;

antonyms are different-rooted, single-rooted, intra-word).

Lexical antonyms (gr. anti... - against, o puta - name) are words that are opposite in meaning: straightness - curvature, dark - light, chill - warm up, long - short, etc. The antonymic series consists of words belonging to the same part of speech. Service relations can also enter into antonymic relationships (for example, prepositions: to - from, in - from, with - without). However, the following words enter into antonymic relationships:

1) in the meaning of which there is a shade of quality: high - low, straight - crooked;

2) naming emotions: smile - frown;

3) indicating the state: warm - cold;

4) denoting temporal and spatial relationships: yesterday - today, ahead - behind, there - here, north - south;

5) naming actions: speed up - slow down, stand up - sit down;

They do not have an antonymous pair:

1) words with a specific object meaning (in the literal meaning): cat, closet, etc.;

2) proper names: Moscow, Taimyr;

3) numerals: one hundred, eleventh, two thirds;

4) most pronouns: me, they, ours, etc.

According to their structure, antonyms are divided into:

1) different roots: poverty - luxury, active - passive, blame - defend, now - tomorrow;

2) cognate: happiness - misfortune, joyful - joyless, fly - fly away.

Cognate antonyms arise as a result of word-formation processes, therefore they are also called lexical-grammatical or lexical-word-formative. As a rule, they are formed as a result of attaching prefixes with the opposite meaning: in- - from-, for- - from-, on- - with-, over- - under-, under- pere- and the first parts of complex words like easy- and heavy-, micro- and macro-, mono- and poly, etc.: undereating - overeating, microcosm - macrocosm, monologue - dialogue.

Sometimes, in the process of functioning in speech, a word changes its meaning to the opposite; this phenomenon is called enantiosemy, or intrasemantic antonymy (gr. enantios - opposite, opposite): look through something - 1) “look from beginning to end” 2) “not notice , not to perceive”; make a reservation - 1) “to say by accident,” 2) “to specially note in advance.”

A polysemantic word, depending on its meaning and lexical compatibility, can be included in different antonymic series: fresh - 1) warm (wind), 2) rotten (piece of meat), 3) old, yesterday (newspaper issue), 4) dirty (handkerchief) and etc.; runs – 1) crawls (about a person), 2) stretches (about time).

Antonyms are linguistic and contextual (or speech). Linguistic antonyms are based on semantic opposition, which appears regularly and does not depend on use (nomadic - sedentary, admit - deny).

Contextual antonyms are an occasional phenomenon, limited by the context:

Soon from swallows to witches! Youth! Let's say goodbye the day before... (Color.) Antonyms are most often used in the text in pairs, expressing a wide variety of shades of meaning - comparison, opposition of opposite phenomena, properties, qualities, actions, etc.:

My faithful friend! my enemy is treacherous!

My king! my slave! native language!

(V. Bryusov)

Such figurative and expressive means as:

1) figurative comparison: My rudeness is much easier than yours, Comrade Tumanov, if I may say so, politeness. (N.A. Ostrovsky);

2) antithesis (contrast): The houses are new, but the prejudices are old... (A.S. Griboyedov);

3) oxymoron (combination of incompatible things): Only ominous darkness shone for us.

(A. Akhmatova) Paronymy.

Paronyms (gr. para - near, o puta - name) are words that are similar in sound, often the same root, but different in meaning or partially coinciding in meaning:

bony - bony, well-fed - hearty, jubilee - hero of the day, diplomat - diploma student - diploma student, etc. Paronyms can have different roots: mediocre - mediocre, escalator - excavator. The reason for the appearance of different root paronyms is the accidental convergence of words in sound, which is more often observed in borrowed words: Indian - Indian, Korean - Korean.

Similar root paronyms may differ:

1) meaning or shade of meaning: spectacular (catchy, bright) and effective (effective, effective);

2) lexical compatibility: spruce (cones, paws, forests) - Christmas trees (decorations, toys, markets); tenant (of the house) – resident (of the city);

3) syntactic compatibility: certification (of relatives, administration - of what?) - certification (of documents);

4) lexico-syntactic compatibility; put on (what: hat, coat) – dress (whom: doll, child);

5) stylistic coloring: daring (neutral) – daring (high).

Paronyms are often mixed up in speech, which leads to speech errors: bony fish, putting on a jacket, etc. To prevent such errors, paronymic pairs should be compared and the similarities and differences between paronyms should be clarified.

The rules for the normative use of paronyms and their compatibility are enshrined in paronym dictionaries.

Differentiation of vocabulary from an expressive-stylistic point of view. Vocabulary is interstyle (stylistically neutral) and stylistically colored. The modern Russian literary language is characterized by stylistic diversity, that is, it has a wide system of means that ensure verbal communication in different spheres of human activity. The system of literary language styles can be presented in the form of a diagram.

Functional styles of language book styles colloquial style scientific official-journalistic literary style business style artistic style style Styles differ in the sphere of use, the leading function of speech (communication, message, influence, etc.), the main type of speech (description, narration, reasoning), type of speech ( oral and written), but the most noticeable differences are in the use of vocabulary and phraseology. Depending on the scope of use, two groups of words can be distinguished; 1) vocabulary that is stylistically neutral, or inter-style, and 2) vocabulary that is stylistically colored (or marked), divided into book vocabulary (scientific, business, journalistic) and colloquial. Colloquial vocabulary is adjacent to colloquial vocabulary, but is outside the boundaries of the literary language.

Words can not only name objects and phenomena of reality, but also express an attitude towards these phenomena and evaluate them. According to the presence or absence of emotional or expressive evaluation, words are divided into emotionally expressive (sophisticated, sophisticated, global, patriotism, grace, etc.) and neutral (earth, study, football, rainy, sometimes, etc.). The difference in the stylistic coloring of such words is revealed by comparison: life - vegetation, go - rush, sculpture - statue, short - lapidary, etc. The scope of use of words that have an emotionally expressive coloring is limited.

In explanatory dictionaries there are special marks indicating the stylistic characteristics of words:

book – a bookish word, used for written, bookish presentation:

manuscript, illness, unshakable, omen, etc.;

high – high, gives speech a shade of solemnity, elation, characteristic of journalistic, oratorical, poetic speech: take courage, unquenchable, obstacle, time, life-giving, etc.;

official – official, characteristic of the speech of official relations:

unclaimed, non-payment, failure to appear, order, etc.;

decomposition – colloquial, used in oral, colloquial speech: master, vixen, minister, blasphemy, etc.;

simple – colloquial, characteristic of oral urban colloquial speech, and also used for stylization (“literary vernacular”): to be ashamed, manatki, in a loss, to become an expert, etc.;

disapproved – disapproving: jump, pretend, fool, etc.;

neglected – disparaging: ugly, dirty, miser, etc.;

joking – humorous: warrior, admirer, baptize (call);

iron. – ironic: muslin (young lady);

bran. – abusive language: idiot, ugly, bastard, etc.

Consequently, the stylistic coloring of a word can, on the one hand, indicate the scope of use, on the other hand, the emotional and expressive content of the word, its evaluative function. All this creates a two-dimensional stylistic coloring of the word.

Paths of development and sources of formation of the lexical system of the modern Russian language.

Forming the vocabulary of the Russian language is a long and complex process. There are words in the language that appeared in ancient times and still function today, there are words that have come into active use relatively recently, and there are those that have ceased to be in common use, but are found in literature. Thus, constantly active processes take place in the vocabulary: something dies out and something new is born.

Due to the development of political, economic, and cultural relations between peoples and states, words from other languages ​​constantly penetrate into our language.

From the point of view of origin, two layers can be distinguished in the Russian language: native Russian vocabulary and borrowed vocabulary. Borrowing of words is observed in all periods of development.

Reflection in vocabulary of processes occurring in society.

As a social phenomenon, language is the property of all people belonging to the same group. In the vast majority of cases, a collective of people speaking the same language (“linguistic community”) is an ethnic collective (nation, nationality, tribe). Every human society is heterogeneous in its composition. It is divided into layers or classes, split into small groups, within which people are united by some characteristic, for example, a common profession, the same age, level and nature of education, etc. This differentiation of society is reflected in language in the form of certain features, socially conditioned subsystems.

Language is in close interaction with the development of society. The state of the language and its vocabulary depends on the state of society. Under feudalism, each possession of a feudal lord or monastery was a kind of state, and this contributed to the emergence of small territorial dialects, which are characterized by lexical differences: the same objects can be called differently in dialects (kuren and izba). As the forms of historical community of people consolidate (tribe, union of tribes, nationality, nation), the internal organization of the language and its unity increases.

The question of the nature of the relationship between language and society is very complex, multifaceted, and there are different points of view on this matter. There is an opinion that the social character of a language is revealed only in the external conditions of its existence and depends on the conditions in which the speakers of this language live. But the most in-depth look at this problem allows us to assert that the social nature of a language is revealed not only in the external conditions of its existence, but also in the very nature of the language (in its vocabulary, in grammatical capabilities, in the level of development of styles). For example, “the changing names of fantastic artificial people and real “smart” machines - homunculus - robot - computer - seem to mark with a special linguistic mark the stage in the development of science and technology from the mythical Pandora to a real computer.” Under the influence of socio-political factors, plural forms appear, for example, in abstract nouns such as initiative (peace initiatives), reality (post-war realities, new realities), agreement (partial agreements).

The influence of society on language can be subject not only to laws of an objective nature, but also be the result of the conscious activity of people, i.e. be the result of a certain language policy. Language policy as a conscious, active and organized influence on language is manifested, for example, in the normalization activities of scientists (the creation of normative dictionaries and grammars, reference books;

improving spelling; use of mass media to promote norms, etc.).

Language reacts to and reflects all changes occurring in both public and individual consciousness. First of all, this is manifested, of course, in the vocabulary of the most popular and large-circulation publications, i.e. newspapers and magazines.

This can be illustrated by the processes that characterized the vocabulary of the media in the 80s and 90s of the 20th century - a time that was one of the turning points in the development of our social consciousness.

During these years, words that were previously extremely rare in their use and were, as it were, on the periphery of the language, became more active: charity, mercy, repentance, gymnasium, lyceum, stock exchange, share, market, etc.

The socio-economic and political transformations of the last decade have led to the addition of many borrowings to our vocabulary, mainly Anglicisms: broker, dealer, marketing, manager, speaker, sponsor, supermarket, etc.

Our vocabulary has expanded significantly due to the fact that all kinds of technical innovations have come into our lives and everyday life from the West, and with them their names: display, cartridge, pager, player, printer, fax, etc.

In the last decade, many words of religious themes have returned to active use, which for a long time were used in literary language, mostly in a figurative sense, as a means of expressing irony, disapproval of the denoted, such as: lamb, anathema, evangelize, fasting, righteous , sacred rite, perform sacred rites, etc. Currently, the words of this group increasingly act as evaluative-neutral names, even when they are not used in their direct meaning.

Reinterpretation of historical experience, revaluation of previous categories of consciousness led to changes in the evaluative properties of many words. These changes occur in three directions.

1. Words that were evaluative-neutral become evaluative words. Thus, mainly in sharply negative contexts after the start of perestroika, previously neutral words began to be used: apparatus (administrative apparatus), department, departmental (departmental interests), nomenklatura (nomenklatura workers), privileges, elite.

2. Words that had value lose it.

In completely neutral contexts, the formerly negatively evaluative words dissident and Sovietologist are now used (see, for example, newspaper headlines:

"Meeting with Sovietologists", "About Sovietologists and Americanists"). Before our eyes, they have lost their former – sharply negative – evaluation of the word opposition, faction.

3. The word changes its value to the opposite. Such a fate has been experienced in our time by words associated with communist ideology, which were previously positively evaluative, but are now increasingly used in negative evaluative contexts: Soviet, bright future.

Old and new in vocabulary. Outdated vocabulary. Types of obsolete words: historicisms, archaisms. New vocabulary (neologisms). Reasons and ways of emergence of new words.

Each period of language development is characterized by a certain ratio of active and passive vocabulary, since what was relevant for one era may lose relevance in the future, and words may become the passive vocabulary of the language.

For example, at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th century, the following names of vehicles were common: horse-drawn horse-drawn horse-drawn horse-drawn horse-drawn horse-drawn carriage, britzka (light semi-covered road carriage), drogi (long cart without a body, as well as a funeral carriage), carriage ( light open two-seater carriage), etc., and today the vocabulary includes the words limousine, sedan, hatchback, convertible (types of passenger cars depending on the body design).

The active stock also includes words that have a limited scope of use (terms, professional vocabulary), but denote concepts and phenomena that are relevant for a given period of language development: ecology, computer, design, etc.

Some words that have become obsolete may become active again and become commonly used: governor, seminary, gymnasium, lyceum, police, etc. Others are actively used for a short time, and then immediately begin to become obsolete (perestroika, voucher). Outdated words include historicisms and archaisms .

Obsolete words, historicisms, archaisms, words that have fallen out of use, words denoting concepts, objects, because objects and phenomena that currently exist have disappeared from life;

the phenomena they denoted; not suppressed from active use have synonyms in modern language: in other words; have synonyms in tavern (inn), chambermaid in modern language: kuafer (hairdresser), drovni konfekty (sweets), karla (dwarf), dshcher (room maid), (peasant sleigh). (daughter).

Thematic groups of historicisms:

1) names of ancient clothing: jacket, skull cap, epancha, shower jacket, etc.; 2) names of monetary units: imperial, polushka, five-altyn;

3) ancient titles, ranks, positions: highness, excellency, mayor, hussar, driver, orderly;

4) the name of weapons and military items: axe, flail, redoubt;

5) administrative names: volost, district, province;

6) names of phenomena of social life: farm laborer, kulak, Comintern member, svoekoshtny, duel;

7) the names of the letters of the ancient alphabet: Izhitsa, az, yat, etc.

Archaisms

–  –  –

Reasons for the transition of words to the passive stock of the language:

1) extralinguistic (extralinguistic), associated with changes in the cultural, economic, social spheres;

2) actually linguistic, associated with the presence of functional varieties of language and speech, synonymous connections (primarily with the presence of stylistic synonyms), etc.

The role of obsolete words in the Russian language is varied. Historicisms in specialized scientific literature are used to most accurately describe a certain period of a country’s development. In works of fiction they recreate the flavor of the era.

The vocabulary of the Russian language is constantly updated with new words. New words - neologisms - appear in the language to designate some new concept or phenomenon. Examples of neologisms of our time include the words summit, valeology (the doctrine of a healthy lifestyle), casting, Internet, modem, tender, supermodel, capri (short trousers), flash mob (action “instant crowd”), fast food, etc.

Terminological systems are especially actively replenished with new words:

transfer, advice note, clearing (economics), lifting, scrub, herbal milk, peeling (cosmetology). Neologisms reflect changes observed in various spheres of life: moderator, tutor, distant, bachelor's, master's (education), security, presentation, monitoring, euro (public life), etc. Many of these words become active vocabulary. For example, the terms that arose in the 50-70s of the 20th century related to the development of astronautics: cosmonaut, cosmodrome, cosmovision, telemetry, spaceship, etc., due to their relevance, very quickly became commonly used.

Ways to form neologisms:

1) from elements available in the language: snowmobile, video pair;

2) borrowing: diving, rafting;

3) the formation of words in the Russian language on the basis of borrowed ones: PR - PR, PR, PR, PR;

4) semantic transformations, development of polysemy: mole (liquid that clears clogged pipes), mouse (computer), shuttle (small dealer of imported goods), etc.

Neologisms are actually lexical, lexical-semantic, individually authored

Words that arose for words in which words created by writers, new names developed new by publicists, public meaning: collapse (sharp concepts, phenomena, actions: by figures with a certain copier, Botox, printer, depreciation of the stylistic purpose of a laptop; national currency); (perform an expressive dog function): stichocrat (M.

Words formed by (@ symbol);

touch (a means for leaderism to normative models from Gorky), (E.

vulgarly already existing in the language: corrections of recording) and Yevtushenko), (V.

missile carrier, SUV, etc. Mayakovsky), etc.

Individually authored neologisms (or occasionalisms) perform only an expressive function, rarely pass into the literary language and are widely used. Like linguistic neologisms, occasionalisms are formed according to the laws of language, according to models from morphemes present in the language, therefore, even taken out of context, they are understandable: multi-storey, fly away, chamberlain (V. Mayakovsky); prosin, sparrow (herbs), (S. Yesenin), etc.

In different periods, the activity of the appearance of neologisms of different thematic groups is not the same.

Periods of appearance of neologisms:

1) post-October period: new words with socio-political themes came into the language (Bolshevik, Leninist, party organizer, Komsomol, pioneer, oktyabryonok, fabkom, mestkom, Red Navy man, NEPman, etc.), new nomenclature names (USSR, Sovnarkom, CPSU, etc.) ;

2) during the period of industrialization and collectivization: words reflecting changes in the economic life of the country (GOELRO, food detachment, leveling, surplus appropriation, collective farm, state farm, VDNKh, five-year plan, etc.) associated with the development of science and technology (milling operator, asphalt worker, nuclear power plant, ZIL, GAZIDr.), words related to the development of culture and education (rabfak, hut-reading room, educational program, bibliophile, etc.);

3) Great Patriotic War: words associated with wartime events and naming people by occupation (blockade survivor, fire fighter, medical instructor, etc.), denoting the names of weapons and front-line household items (lighter, high explosive, funeral, Annushka (airplane), igniters etc.), names of actions (raid, buzzer, etc.);

4) post-war period: words associated with the development of sciences, included in terminological systems (narcologist, resuscitator, biogen, transplantation, etc.), associated with the process of space exploration (cosmonaut, lunar, lunar rover, cosmodrome, etc.), associated with the development sports (badminton, biathlon, karting, etc.), naming household items, clothes (jeans, Pepsi, jewelry, etc.), new colloquial words (kompashka, otkatat, treshka, etc.);

5) late XIX - early XX centuries: words related to computerization and the development of new information technologies (computer, printer, scanner, disk drive, browser, portal, etc.); economic terms (leasing, logistics, consulting, broker, barter, etc.); words on socio-political topics (GKChP, CIS, pressure, impeachment, inauguration, etc.).

The origin of Russian vocabulary. The concept of original Russian vocabulary. Originally Russian vocabulary from the point of view of the time of its origin. Borrowed vocabulary.

Reasons for borrowing it into another language.

Original Russian vocabulary Based on the similarity of words, roots, affixes, phonetic and grammatical features, and proximity of origin, the kinship of languages ​​is established. A single early Slavic ethnic community used a common Slavic (proto-Slavic) language (circa 7th century AD), which dates back to an even earlier Indo-European proto-language, which gave rise to the modern Indo-European language family. The Indo-European family includes the Slavic group: East Slavic (Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian), West Slavic, South Slavic languages. In the Russian language, one can distinguish layers of native Russian vocabulary that are different in origin and time of appearance: Indo-European, Common Slavic, East Slavic, and Russian proper.

The Russian language has many words that appeared in antiquity and form a layer of native vocabulary.

Vocabulary of the Russian language Original Russian vocabulary Borrowed vocabulary

–  –  –

common Slavic words Indo-European words Original Russian vocabulary (words that arose after the division of the Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian languages ​​in the 16th century)

Formed by the suffixes –schik-, -chik- (drummer), Names

Ovk(a) (strike), -sh(a) (major), -nost nouns (high ground), -shchin(a) (corvée)

Compound abbreviations: head teacher, savings bank, physical education

On -ost-: impressionability, entertaining

Formed from verbs without the help of suffixes:

transition, scream

With suffixes -chat-, -chiv-: ciliated, accommodating Names sweet and sour, adjectives - compound adjectives:

Northern Russian Verbs - formed from verbs using the prefix and postfix -sya: burst into tears, see each other Adverbs - formed from adjectives using the prefix po- and suffixes -i, -om, -em: in a comradely way, in an English way, in a summer way, in a way to yours all derivative conjunctions and prepositions: because, in the Service parts continued, instead of speech, Indo-European words were inherited by the ancient languages ​​of the Indo-European language family after the collapse of the Indo-European language community (until the 3rd - 2nd centuries BC).

The similarity of similar words is found in many Indo-European languages: Russian. three, Ukrainian three, S.-Croatian three, Czech. ti, English, three, Lat. tres, Spanish tres. This is the oldest layer in the original Russian vocabulary. Words of Indo-European origin include:

some kinship terms: brother, daughter, mother, sister, son;

names of animals: bull, wolf, sheep;

names of plants, food products, various kinds of vital concepts: willow, water, meat, day, firewood, smoke, name, month;

numerals: two, three, ten;

names of actions: take care, be (is), carry, command, believe, twirl, see, give, divide, wait, live, have, carry;

names of signs and qualities: barefoot, shabby;

prepositions: without, before, etc.

Common Slavic (proto-Slavic) vocabulary is the words inherited by the Old Russian language from the language of the Slavic tribes (the period from the 3rd – 2nd centuries BC, when the Indo-European proto-language, or base language, collapsed, until the 6th century AD) .

Common Slavic words show phonetic and semantic similarities in the South, West and East Slavic languages: Russian. banner, Bulgarian Zname, Czech, zname, Polish. znami.

Common Slavic words make up a relatively small part of the modern dictionary, but they form its core, since they are the most commonly used. Common Slavic vocabulary includes:

names of tools of rural labor and other tools of production: harrow, rake, scythe, hoe, sickle, plow; needle, hammer, knife, saw, axe, awl, as well as spear, bow, arrow, bowstring;

names of agricultural products, plants, etc.: wheat, cereals, flour; birch, wood, viburnum, cabbage, maple, cranberry, flax, linden, wheat, rye, apple, barley;

names of animals, fish, birds, insects: otter, hare, mare, cow, fox, elk;

snake, snake, lizard; tench, eel; woodpecker, magpie, swift; mosquito;

names of parts of the human body: thigh, eyebrow, head, tooth, hand, skin, knee, face, forehead, leg, nose, shoulder, arm, body, ear;

kinship terms: grandson, godfather, mother-in-law, father-in-law, aunt;

names of dwellings, utensils and many other vital concepts: door, house, road, hut, porch, bench, stove, floor, ceiling, canopy; spring, winter, summer, autumn; clay, iron, gold; kalach, porridge, jelly; evening, night, morning; century, hour; oak grove, frost, spark, forest, hole;

abstract vocabulary: excitement, grief, deed, good, evil, thought, happiness, etc.

East Slavic (Old Russian) vocabulary is words that arose approximately from the 6th to the 14th – 15th centuries. only in the language of the Eastern Slavs. These are words common to Russian, Belarusian and Ukrainian languages. East Slavic names include names of various qualities, properties, actions: lively, brown, vigilant, dark;

buzz, wander, excite, sway, excuse, beckon;

kinship terms: uncle, nephew;

everyday names: strap, samovar, hook, twine, basket;

animal names: squirrel, viper, bullfinch, cat, finch;

units of counting: forty, ninety; thirteen;

words with a temporary meaning: today, now.

Actually, Russian vocabulary is words that arose from the moment of the formation of the Russian (Great Russian) nationality (from the 14th century) and are born (and not appearing, because words can also appear by borrowing) in the language at the present time. The actual Russian names include the names of actions: to shine, to fawn, to thin out, to swagger, to somersault, to button up, to clown around, to make a mistake;

names of household items, food products: tub, wallpaper, tiles, pendulum, cabbage rolls, jacket;

natural phenomena, plants, birds, fish, animals: ice, rooster, honey fungus, dodder, seal, reed;

names of signs of objects, signs of actions, states: ordinary, shy, gloomy, cautious, wholesale, headlong, poke;

names of persons by occupation: boyfriend, pilot, fireman, racer;

names of abstract concepts: pleasure, caution, outcome;

expressive-evaluative names for a person: pigalitsa, okhalnik, golytba, ostolop;

abbreviations: GOST, CPSS, university, etc.

As part of the Russian vocabulary proper, new words appear in the following ways:

1) in the process of word formation: navigate - from the word landmark (borrowed);

2) as a result of semantic transformations of words that already existed in the language (the emergence of homonyms as a result of the collapse of polysemy, the formation of a new, figurative meaning): class, party, pioneer, etc.

At any stage of language development, it inevitably includes vocabulary from other languages. Borrowing is one of the ways to develop the lexical system of the Russian language. The borrowing of foreign language vocabulary occurs as a result of the development of political, economic, cultural, and scientific ties between peoples and states. A morpheme can also be borrowed: prefixes a-, super-, counter-, post-, etc.;

suffixes -ism, -ist, -tion, etc.

Getting into the Russian language, foreign words can undergo complete assimilation, so that they are perceived by native speakers as Russian: croutons, school, beets, etc., or they can retain signs, often phonetic, of their native language: pcs in the root morphemes of words borrowed from German or Dutch languages ​​(German:

curtain, standard, assault, fitting; Dutch: storm, helm); combination j - from English (jam, jumper, jeans). If, in the process of borrowing, foreign language vocabulary is assimilated and Russified, then the foreign word undergoes graphic, phonetic, grammatical, and semantic changes. This process is called assimilation. Graphic development - the transmission of a foreign word in writing using the Russian alphabet - is observed in words borrowed from languages ​​that have a different graphics system: English. feetness – Russian. fitness. Phonetic development is a change in the sound appearance of a word as a result of its adaptation to new phonetic conditions: overcoat - pronounced [n'e] like Russian words. Grammar mastery

- this is the adaptation of a foreign word to the grammatical system of the Russian language:

for example, in English cakes are plural, and in Russian keks are singular. When borrowing, it is possible to change the part of speech: Russian. out (noun) - English out (adv.).

Borrowings are divided into two groups: 1) from Slavic languages ​​(Old Church Slavonic, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Czech, Polish, etc.); 2) from non-Slavic languages ​​(Greek and Latin, Western European, Turkic, etc.

languages). According to the time of appearance in the Russian language, borrowings are divided into early (the period of existence of the Common Slavic and Old Russian languages) and later (borrowings that replenished and are supplementing the Russian vocabulary itself). The most ancient borrowings include words that came into the Russian language, in particular, from Old Church Slavonic, Finnish, Tatar and Greek. Borrowings from different languages ​​are active at different periods: after the adoption of Christianity - from the Old Church Slavonic language, in the Petrine era - from German and Dutch); Single borrowings are also possible (Japanese geisha, sakura, etc.).

From the Scandinavian languages, a few words related to business and everyday vocabulary have entered Russian: brand, hook, tiun, sneak, anchor; names of fish: shark, herring, stingray;

personal names: Askold, Igor, Oleg, Rurik, etc.

The names of fish, natural and plant phenomena, national dishes, etc. were borrowed from the Finno-Ugric languages: flounder, sprat, smelt, navaga, herring, salmon; blizzard, tundra; fir; dumplings; sledges, etc.; geographical names:

Kandalaksha, Kineshma, Klyazma, Kostroma, Totma, Sheksna (the Finnish origin of the toponym is indicated by the word-forming element -ma).

Similar works:

“The scientific and practical journal was founded in 1996 SCIENTIFIC NOTES of the St. Petersburg branch named after V.B. Bobkov No. 3 (47) APEC: ISSUES OF ANTI-CORRUPTION Fedorov A.V. The article examines the anti-corruption component of the activities of the Intergovernmental Forum of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation APEC, the history of the formation of the anti-corruption policy of this economic forum and its current state. The article deals with the...”

“Issue 2 SPIRITUAL-MORAL AND HEROIC-PATRIOTIC EDUCATION IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS OF PATRIOIC UNIONS Not for the sake of glory, for the good of the Fatherland! Issue 2 SPIRITUAL-MORAL AND HEROIC-PATRIOTIC EDUCATION IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS OF PATRIOIC UNIONS When implementing the project, state support funds are used, allocated as a grant in accordance with the order of the President of the Russian Federation dated March 29, 2013 No. 115-rp and on the basis of a competition held.. ."

"A. I. Sobolevsky ANCIENT COMEDY, POLITICS, HISTORY A Christophan and HIS TIME CLASSICS OF PHILOLOGY Moscow Lab irint Sergei Ivanovich SOBOLEVSKY. Aristophanes and his time. (Series “Ancient Heritage.”) - Moscow, Labyrinth, 2001. - 416 p. Editorial Board of the series “ANTIQUE HERITAGE” L. S. Ilyinskaya, A. I. Nemirovsky, O. P. Tsybenko, V. N. Yarkho Editors: G. N. Shelogurova, I. V. Peshkov Artist: V. E. Graevsky Computer set: N. E. Eremin Famous Russian classical philologist Sergei Ivanovich Sobolevsky...”

“Parveen Darabadi. Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the Department of International Relations at Baku State University, author of more than 100 scientific, educational, methodological and popular science works on issues of military-political history, geopolitics, and conflictology. These include monographs: Military problems of the political history of Azerbaijan at the beginning of the twentieth century (1991), Geopolitical rivalry in the Caspian region and Azerbaijan (2001), Geohistory of the Caspian region and geopolitics...”

“Alexey Sidorov Course of Patrolology Introduction Patrology as a Science The term patrolology (i.e. the doctrine of the Fathers of the Church) was first used by the Protestant scientist J. Gerhard (d. 1637), who wrote an essay called Patrology, or a work about life and works of teachers of the ancient Christian Church, which saw the light after his death in 1653. Already in this name, the characteristic features of the emerging science are outlined, which is both a church historical science and a science...”

“HISTORY OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY I.A. Golosenko PITIRIM SOROKIN AS A HISTORIAN OF SOCIOLOGY One of the currently fashionable theorists of the “world system”, the American sociologist I. Wallerstein, speaking in 1996 at one of the St. Petersburg branches of the Russian Academy of Sciences, thoughtlessly threw out the phrase that there has never been a sociological science in Russia . However, later, without noticing the anecdotal nature of the situation, he mentioned that his very first scientific article was devoted to the sociology of Pitirim...”

“HISTORY OF THE EAST in six volumes Main Editorial Board R.B. Rybakov (chairman), L.B. Alaev, K.Z. Ashrafyan (deputy chairmen), V.Ya. Belokrenitsky, D.D. Vasiliev, G.G. Kotovsky , R.G. Landa, V.V. Naumkin, O.B. Nepomnin, Yu.A. Petrosyan, K.O. Sarkisov, I.M. Smilyanskaya, G.K. Shirokov, V.A. Yakobson Moscow Publishing House firm "Oriental Literature" RAS HISTORY OF THE EAST The East at the turn of the Middle Ages and modern times XVI-XVIII centuries. Moscow Publishing company “Oriental Literature” RAS UDC 94/99 BBK 63.3(0)4+63.3(0)5...”

“Grigory Ayvazyan Chairman of the NGO “Assembly of Azerbaijani Armenians”, lecturer at Yerevan State University ON SOME ASPECTS OF THE ISSUE OF COVERING THE HISTORY OF THE ETHNIC ORIGIN OF THE ARMENIANS OF KARABAKH In Azerbaijani historiography, the question of the ethnic origin of the Armenians of Karabakh, the historical Armenian provinces of Utica and Artsakh , was, is and will remain for a long time one of the defining . Interest in the question of the ethnic origin of the Armenians of Karabakh and the Armenians of Eastern Transcaucasia in general, as well as Zangezur and Tavush in..."

“Legal and actual situation of national minorities in Latvia. Demography, language, education, historical memory, statelessness, social problems Collection of articles edited by Vladimir Buzaev Latvian Human Rights Committee Riga, 20 The collection was published with the assistance of the Foundation for the Support and Protection of the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad. Editor: Vladimir Buzaev Publisher: Averti-R, SIA Layout: Vitaly Drobot ISBN 978-9934-8245-8-6 © Averti-R, SIA, 20 Editor's Preface..."

“No. 1(18) Series “Philology. Theory of language. Language education" Moscow No. 1(18) Philology. Theory linguisTics. of linguisTic educaTion Moscow Editorial Board: Ryabov V.V. Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Chairman of the Rector of Moscow State Pedagogical University Atanasyan S.L. Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Vice-Rector of Moscow State Pedagogical University Pishchulin N.P. Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Vice-Rector of Moscow State Pedagogical University Rusetskaya M.N. Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor, Vice-Rector of Moscow State Pedagogical University Editorial Board: Radchenko O.A. Doctor of Philology..."

"D. Anastasin, I. Voznesensky THE BEGINNING OF THREE NATIONAL ACADEMIES The external reason that prompted the authors to stand up for facts were recent anniversaries - celebrated and silent: the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences turned 60 years old, the Belarusian - 50, and the first (soon liquidated) Academy of Sciences of Georgia and Estonia - 50 and 40. The topics of our article are the beginning of the Academy of Sciences of the BSSR (1928 - 31), the failed Georgian (1930 - 31) and “bourgeois” Estonian (1938 - 40) academies. The special responsibility and significance of the Ukrainian topic force..."

“Trimingham J. S. Sufi orders in Islam J. S. Trimingham J. S. Trimingham Sufi orders in Islam Translation by Aza Staviskaya SUFI BROTHERHOODS: A COMPLEX KNOT OF PROBLEMS A significant and interesting study of the modern English scholar J. S. Trimingham (d. March 6, 1987 in age 83 years old) Sufi orders in Islam, brought to the attention of readers in Russian translation, already by its name leads to a vast labyrinth of problems. The author is the first in Islamic studies...”

“RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND NS TITU T OF SCIENTIFIC AND INFORMATION ON SOCIAL SCIENCES THE PATRIOTIC WAR OF 1812 IN MODERN HISTORIOGRAPHY COLLECTION OF REVIEWS AND ABSTRACTS MOSCOW BBK 63.3(2)47 O Series “History of Russia” Center for Social Scientific Information Research Department of History Responsible Editor – Ph.D. ist. Sciences O.V. Bolshakova Responsible for the release – Ph.D. ist. Sciences M.M. Mints Patriotic War of 1812 in modern ISO 82 toriography: Sat. reviews and referrals / RAS. INION. Center..."

“Igor Vasilyevich Pykhalov Why they were imprisoned under Stalin. How they lie about “Stalinist repressions” Series “Dangerous History” Text provided by the publishing house http://www.litres.ru/pages/biblio_book/?art=12486849 Igor Pykhalov. Why they were imprisoned under Stalin. How they lie about “Stalinist repressions”: Yauza-press; Moscow; 2015 ISBN 978-5-9955-0809-0 Abstract 40 million dead. No, 80! No, 100! No, 150 million! Following Goebbels’s behest: “the more monstrously you lie, the sooner they will believe you,” “liberals” overestimate the real ones...”

“SPEECH by the Chairman of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation S.V. Stepashin at a ceremonial meeting dedicated to the 350th anniversary of the establishment of state financial control in Russia and the 15th anniversary of presidential control (Moscow, Kremlin, October 12, 2006) Dear Dmitry Anatolyevich! Dear colleagues, friends! First of all, I want to congratulate everyone on our common, great professional holiday. 350 years of state financial control in Russia and 15 years since the establishment of control..."

“ACT of the state historical and cultural examination of scientific and design documentation: Section Ensuring the safety of cultural heritage objects as part of the project Construction of the 500 kV overhead line Nevinnomyssk Mozdok-2 under the title “500 kV overhead line N^vinnomyssk Mozdok with the expansion of the 500 kV Nevinnomyssk substation and the 330 kV Mozdok substation (construction of a 500 kV outdoor switchgear)" in the Prokhladnensky district of the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic. State experts in conducting state historical and cultural ex:hertiza: State Autonomous Institution of Culture...”

“Kabytov P.S., Kurskov N.A. THE SECOND RUSSIAN REVOLUTION: THE STRUGGLE FOR DEMOCRACY IN THE MIDDLE VOLGA IN RESEARCH, DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS (1917 - 1918) Samara State University 2004 Kabytov P.S., Kurskov N.A. _ 3 THE SECOND RUSSIAN REVOLUTION: THE STRUGGLE FOR DEMOCRACY IN THE MIDDLE VOLGA IN RESEARCH, DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS (1917 – 1918) 3 Samara State University 2004 _ 3 P.S. Kabytov, N.A. Kurskov* Samara zemstvo, land committees and preparation of agrarian reform in 1917 _ 14 From the biography...”

“Scientific, methodological and theoretical journal SOCIOSPHERE No. 3 2010 FOUNDER LLC Scientific Publishing Center “Sociosphere” Editor-in-Chief – Boris Anatolyevich Doroshin, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor Editorial Board Doroshina I. G., Candidate of Psychological Sciences, Associate Professor (responsible for issue), Antipov M. A., Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Belolipetsky V. V., Candidate of Historical Sciences, Efimova D. V., Candidate of Psychological Sciences, Saratovtseva N. V., Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor...."

“State budgetary educational institution of the city of Moscow Moscow International Gymnasium ANALYSIS OF THE WORK OF THE STATE BUDGET EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OF THE CITY OF MOSCOW MOSCOW INTERNATIONAL GYMNASIUM FOR THE 2013/2014 SCHOOL YEAR Moscow 2013 – 2014 academic year PEDAGOGICAL PERSONNEL OF THE GYMNASIUM In the 2013/2014 academic year, the teaching staff of the gymnasium included 109 people. In order to improve the scientific and methodological support of the educational process, the following worked in the gymnasium...”
The materials on this site are posted for informational purposes only, all rights belong to their authors.
If you do not agree that your material is posted on this site, please write to us, we will remove it within 1-2 business days.

Lexicology is a branch of the science of language that studies the vocabulary and vocabulary of a language.

The problem of the word as the basic unit of language is studied in the general theory of the word. The category of lexical units includes (the main lexical unit is the word):

individual words (solidly formed units)

stable phrases (analytical, or compound, units).

Since a word is a unit characterized by the correlation of form and content, the problem of the word as a unit of language is considered in three aspects:

Structural aspect (word emphasis, its construction). In this aspect, the main task of the lexicological theory of a word is to establish criteria for its isolation and identity (2, p. 38).

In the first case, a word is compared with a phrase, signs of its integrity and individuality are identified, and the problem of the analytical form of the word is developed;

In the second case, we are talking about establishing the invariant of a word, which underlies both its grammatical forms (in this regard, the category of word form is determined) and its variants - phonetic, morphological, lexical-semantic (in this regard, the problem of word variant is being developed).

Semantic aspect (lexical meaning of a word). Semantic analysis of lexical units is the subject of the study of lexical semantics, semasiology, which studies the correlation of a word with the concept it expresses (significant) and the object it denotes in speech (denotation). Lexicology studies the semantic types of words, highlighting lexicological categories that reflect the semantic features of lexical units (2, p. 75):

monosemy and polysemy;

general and special;

abstract and concrete;

wide and narrow (hyperonym and hyponym);

logical and expressive;

direct and figurative meanings of lexical units.

Particular attention is paid to:

semantic structure of a polysemantic lexical unit;

identifying types of word meanings and criteria for their delimitation;

ways of changing and developing the meaning of words.

The phenomenon of desemantization is analyzed - the loss of a word’s lexical meaning and its transition to grammatical formants.

Functional aspect (the role of words in the structure of language and speech). The word as a unit of language is considered from the point of view

its role in the structure and functioning of language as a whole;

its relationships with units of other levels.

The interaction of vocabulary and grammar is especially significant: vocabulary imposes restrictions on the use of grammatical categories, grammatical forms contribute to the differentiation of the meanings of words. Lexical and grammatical means with a common meaning form lexico-grammatical fields (expression of quantity, time, etc.).

When studying vocabulary in its functioning, the following problems are considered (6, p. 49):

frequency of vocabulary in texts

vocabulary in speech, in text, its nominative function, contextual shifts in meaning and features of use (many of the lexicological categories are uniquely refracted in speech, and therefore linguistic and speech synonyms and antonyms are distinguished; lexical polysemy and homonymy in speech are usually eliminated or take the form puns miles of semantic syncretism

compatibility of words. They differ:

Free combinations;

Related combinations (idioms differ within, which is the subject of the study of phraseology).

The compatibility of words is considered at the levels:

semantic (compatibility of concepts denoted by these lexical units: “stone house”, “fish swims”);

Lexicology explores ways to replenish and develop the vocabulary of a language, distinguishing four ways of creating nominations:

creation of new words;

the formation of new meanings (polysemy, transfer of meanings, and the patterns of filiation of meanings are studied);

formation of phrases;

borrowings (lexical borrowings and calques) (factors and forms of integration of borrowed words are studied).

The first three methods are based on using the internal resources of the language, and the fourth is on attracting the resources of other languages.

An important aspect of lexicology is the study of words in their relation to reality, since it is in words, in their meanings, that the life experience of a collective in a certain era is most directly fixed. In this regard, issues such as:

vocabulary and culture;

the problem of linguistic relativity (the influence of vocabulary on the “vision of the world”);

linguistic and extralinguistic components in the meaning of the word;

background vocabulary, etc.

The connection between lexicology and other branches of linguistics.

Subject of lexicology.

Subject of lexicology. The word as a unit of lexicology.

2. The connection between lexicology and other branches of linguistics.

3. The word as the basic unit of the Russian language.

The branch of language science that studies the lexical system is called lexicology(from the Greek lexikos - vocabulary and logos - teaching). The study of the lexical system as a form of organization of the interaction of words is carried out by descriptive, or synchronous(from Greek syn - together and chronos - time), and historical, or diachronic(from Greek dia - through and chronos - time), lexicology. The subject of descriptive lexicology is vocabulary in its modern state. Historical lexicology examines vocabulary in its emergence and development. Both of these aspects of the study of the lexical system are closely related, since for a correct understanding of the vocabulary of a modern language, information on the history of its formation is necessary, and the current state of the vocabulary is one of the important sources for studying its history.

Tasks of lexicology.

The subject of lexicology is the word, with which all other units of language are in one way or another connected: phonemes, morphemes, phrases, sentences. For this reason, the word is studied not only in lexicology, but also in other sections of linguistics (phonetics, word formation, morphology, syntax), but it is considered differently in these sections.

Phonetics studies the sound side of words and its meaning. Word formation studies the patterns of word creation. The object of morphology is grammatical meanings, grammatical forms and grammatical categories. In syntax, a word is considered from the perspective of its participation in the construction of phrases and sentences.

Lexicology studies the word as a linguistic element of the lexical system.

Hence, her tasks include:

a) clarifying the semantic structure of a word (polysemy - homonymy);

b) identifying the relationships between different semantic series of words (synonymy and antonymy);

c) determining the place of a word in the lexical system of the language from the point of view of functional-stylistic (stylistically neutral, book and colloquial vocabulary), sphere of use (national, dialect, special, vernacular and slang vocabulary), origin (original Russian, Old Church Slavonic and foreign language vocabulary) , active and passive stock (archaisms, historicisms and neologisms).

Lexicology is closely related to other linguistic disciplines: semasiology, etymology, dialectology, stylistics and lexicography.

Semasiology (Greek semasia - meaning and logos - teaching) studies the meanings of words, as well as the change in these meanings. In the first case, semasiology is included in descriptive lexicology, and in the second - in historical lexicology.

Etymology(Greek etumo1ogia - truth, original meaning) studies the origin of words and their significant parts and, therefore, is a branch of historical lexicology.

Dialectology(Greek dialectos - dialect and 1оgos - teaching) analyzes local dialects, including their vocabulary. Data from dialectology are used by lexicology to clarify the areas of functioning of vocabulary.

Stylistics(French Greek stylas - writing stick of the ancient Greeks) studies the ways of using linguistic means to accurately express thoughts and achieve communication goals in a certain area, under certain conditions. This section of linguistics is directly related to lexicology, since it studies all the means of expression available in the language, including vocabulary.

Lexicography(Greek lexilcon - dictionary and grapho - write) deals with the theory and practice of compiling dictionaries that contain a description of vocabulary. Therefore, there is a connection between lexicology and lexicography.

Let us illustrate what has been said about the connection between lexicology and other branches of the science of language with a specific example.

Yes, in a word soar semasiology will determine the following meanings:

a) stay, be: And here there are birds and insects swarming through the air (Hold);

b) live, dwell somewhere : Furry animals hover in the depths of dense forests (Kar.);

c) be in a dreamy state, not noticing your surroundings: Soaring in the clouds, in the empyrean, between the sky and the earth.

Etymology will reveal that this word came into the Russian language from the Old Church Slavonic language, where it sounded vitati, and related to words inhabit, - abode, vital -"hotel". Stylistics will indicate that this word in the first meaning is outdated, and in the second it is stylistically colored (bookish); the characteristics of a given word are recorded in dictionaries: all meanings and stylistic notes are indicated in explanatory and phraseological dictionaries, the origin is in etymological dictionaries. Lexicology will consider all the above characteristics of a given word: its meaning, stylistic functions, areas of use, origin. A comprehensive description of a word helps to determine the literary norms of its use.

Consequently, in lexicology, words are studied from the point of view of their semantic meaning, place in the general system of vocabulary, origin, usage, scope of application in the process of communication and their stylistic coloring.

3. The word as the basic unit of the Russian language.

Like any other language, Russian as a means of communication is a language of words. From words, acting separately or as components of phraseological units, sentences are formed using grammatical rules and laws. Words in language designate concrete objects and abstract concepts, express human emotions, will, call “general, abstract categories of existential relations,” etc. Thus, the word acts as the basic unit of language.

Despite the undoubted reality of the word as a separate linguistic phenomenon, despite the bright features inherent in it, it is difficult to define. This is explained primarily by the variety of words from structural, grammatical and semantic points of view (cf.: table, goodwill, write, black; sofa bed, five hundred; at, since, only, probably; scat! Oh!; they say, look, it’s getting light and so on.).

It is possible to give a correct definition of a word only if all the main differential features of the word are organically reflected, sufficient to distinguish it from other linguistic units.

The word differs from phonemes two-dimensionality , since it always acts as an organic unity of sound and meaning. Words are necessarily differentiated from phrases (including stable phrases, i.e. phraseological units) accentologically : they are either unstressed or have only one main stress.

A word is distinguished from morphemes (significant parts of a word) primarily by its lexico-grammatical reference , i.e. belonging to a certain part of speech. Words differ from prepositional-case combinations primarily in their impenetrability.

One of the main properties of words existing in a language is their reproducibility , which consists in the fact that they are not created in the process of communication, but are extracted from memory or any speech context in the form of a single structural-semantic whole.

1) reproducibility is also characteristic of morphemes and phraseological units and, moreover, even for sentences, as long as their composition coincides with a word or phraseological unit,

2) in the process of speech, words can arise that are not reproducible, but created morphemic combinations.

The word is characteristic phonetic design (and also, of course, graphic if the given language has, in addition to an oral form, a written form). A word always represents a specific sound, consisting of at least one phoneme.

There are very few single-phonemic words in the Russian language, except for the names of existing phonemes and six letters (a, u, o, y, uh, s), this includes: unions a, u, particles a, u, pretext y, interjections a, u, o, y, uh, and also prepositions o, in, to, c (in certain cases they can act as two-phonemic about, in, to, with). The particle b, particle can also act as monophonemic and, union and, particle l, in its basic form used as two-phonemic. All other words are one or another sound complexes.

The only case of the absence of phonetic design in the Russian language is observed in the designation of one of the forms of the copula, in other forms acting as materially expressed (cf.: Father is a teacher; Father was a teacher; The father will be a teacher). In this case, the salience of the materially unexpressed (it is called the zero) copula as a significant unit of language, the reality of its existence as a linguistic fact, is realized against the background of materially expressed formations that are homogeneous in their function and use.

The phonetic design characteristic of a word is expressed in the fact that any lexical unit (if it does not represent a completely unlearned foreign language word or a neologism created without taking into account orthoepic norms) always acts as a sound structural unity that corresponds to the phonological norms of a given language system.” A characteristic feature of the phonetic design of the Russian word is non-two-accent , since it is this property that allows one to clearly distinguish related phenomena of vocabulary and phraseology. A word, in contrast to a phraseological phrase, always appears either as unstressed or as having one main stress. If we have before us a unit (even if it is semantically and grammatically undivided and unified) that has two main stresses, then this is obviously not a word, but a more complex formation: a phraseological phrase or a free combination of words.

No less important is another property of the word - its semantic valence . There is not a single word in the language that has no meaning. Every word has not only a certain sound, but also a particular meaning. This is precisely what distinguishes a word from a phoneme - a sound that can distinguish the sound shell of words and morphemes, but does not have meaning.

A property of a word that is absent from a morpheme, which is its distinctive feature, is lexico-grammatical relation . Morphemes, existing as a further indivisible meaningful whole in a word, do not have a lexical-grammatical relationship. They act as significant parts, deprived not only of any morphological design, but also of any attachment to a specific lexical-grammatical category. As parts of a word, morphemes are completely incapable of syntactic use and, when used in a sentence, immediately turn into words, acquiring bright and undoubted morphological features of a noun. Function words are closest to morphemes; their meanings are very “formal”; they have no grammatical structure. However, function words (including prepositions) appear before us as undoubted words.

Indirectly and reflectedly (but very effectively) in distinguishing function words (especially prepositions) from morphemes, the property helps the researcher impenetrability words, which are one of the most striking features of a word, in contrast to prepositional combinations, free combinations of words and certain categories of phraseological units that are semantically equivalent to the word. After all, if the word as a morphemic whole is impenetrable, then the significant units between which free verbal “insertions” are possible are words, and only words, but in no case morphemes. And vice versa, significant units, between which free verbal insertions are impossible, are not separate words, representing either parts of a word, that is, morphemes, or parts of a phraseological phrase.

The property of impenetrability is characteristic of absolutely all words: it is impossible to insert words (and especially combinations of words) inside words in the Russian language.

To clarify the essence of a word as a specific linguistic unit, no less important than solving the problem of the individuality of a word is also solving the question of its identity. It is important to establish not only what a word is in relation to other units of language, but also where we have the same word and where there are different words. Here, first of all, a clear line should be drawn between such concepts as: 1) words and word forms and 2) word forms and word variants.

By forms of a word, it is most expedient to understand those varieties of it that differ from each other only in grammatical features and are related as dependent, secondary to the same one, which acts as the main, initial one. All other varieties of the word are better (and, I think, more accurate) characterized as different variants of the word.

Naturally, only such formations are varieties of a word, the basis of which necessarily consists of the same morphemes. It is impossible to classify such formations as varieties of the same word: palatalize - palatalize, seminar - seminary, idiomatic - idiomatic, fox - fox, laughter - laughter, sunflower - sunflower, purification - purification, girlish - girlish, weaken - weaken, unbearable - unbearable, sorry - sorry etc. All such formations are in relation to each other single-root synonyms, i.e., although related, but different words.

In all cases, if a word has several forms, one of them acts as the main, initial one, and all the others are dependent on it. Such basic, initial forms are forms of the nominative case in names, the infinitive in a verb, etc. Their “general” character in relation to other forms correlative with them is manifested in the fact that they act, firstly, as nominative forms, representing the name of some phenomenon of reality, and secondly, as producing forms, on the basis of which, with rare exceptions, the production of new lexical units is carried out using the morphological method of word formation.

In addition, the “general” nature of the basic, initial form of the word (and this is especially important for understanding the essence of the word and formulating its definition) is also reflected in the fact that in the Russian language there is not a single word whose basic, original form would be analytical, that is, it would consist of two. It is this circumstance that makes it possible to clearly determine the accentological differences between a word and a phrase and phraseological unit, since in its original form a word never has two main stresses.

Taking into account the “general” nature of the original, basic form in a number of other forms of the word makes it possible to easily solve, in particular, the problem of such formations in the Russian language as I will write, the best one etc., clearly demonstrating (as well as words like sofa bed) the failure of the criterion of completeness for Russian words in all their structural and grammatical diversity. Indeed, in such cases, we are faced with words that consist not of structurally and grammatically unformed morphemes, but of two separately formed words.

What has been said above about the word as a linguistic unit allows us to give a working definition of the word in the following formulation: word - this is a linguistic unit that has (if it is not unstressed) in its original form one main stress and has meaning, lexico-grammatical relevance and impenetrability.

Lexicology (from the Greek lexikos - related to the word and logos - teaching) is a section of linguistics that studies the vocabulary of a language, its vocabulary. The subject of lexicology is the word. And its object is the definition of the word as the basic unit of language.
The main objectives of lexicology are:
- clarifying the connection between the meaning of a word and a concept, identifying different types of word meanings;
- characteristics of the lexical-semantic system, i.e. identification of the internal organization of linguistic units and analysis of their connections (semantic structure of a word, specificity of distinctive semantic features, patterns of its relations with other words, etc.);
In lexicology, stable combinations of words are also studied, which are dissected names of individual objects and phenomena of reality and are equivalents of words. These combinations relate to phraseology, which is included in lexicology as one of its sections (by some researchers, however, it is considered an independent section of the science of language). Lexicology is divided into general, particular, historical and comparative. The first is a section of general linguistics that studies the vocabulary of any language, that which relates to lexical universals. General lexicology deals with the general patterns of the structure of the lexical system, issues of the functioning and development of the vocabulary of the world's languages. Private lexicology studies the vocabulary of a particular language. Thus, general lexicology can consider, for example, the principles of synonymous or antonymic relations in a language, while private lexicology will deal with the peculiarities of English, Russian, German, etc. synonyms or antonyms.
Both general and specific problems of vocabulary can be analyzed in various aspects. First of all, any phenomenon can be approached from a synchronic or diachronic point of view. The synchronic approach assumes that the characteristics of a word are considered within a certain period or one historical stage of their development. This study of vocabulary is also called descriptive, or descriptive. Diachronic, or historical, lexicology is the study of the historical development of the meanings and structure of words. The subject of research in historical lexicology is the history of words, the formation and development of vocabulary, and changes in various groups of words. Comparative lexicology deals with the comparison of lexical phenomena of one language with facts of another or other languages. Comparative lexicology reveals similarities and differences in the division of objective reality by lexical means of different languages. Both individual words and groups of words can be matched. Lexicology as the science of the vocabulary of a language is primarily divided into onomasiology and semasiology. Further, more specific sections are highlighted - phraseology, onomastics, etymology. Lexicography occupies a special place. Semasiology (from the Greek semasia - meaning, sense and logos - word, teaching) - in a broad sense, is the science of the meanings of linguistic units in general, i.e. semasiology is the same as semantics, and in a narrow sense - an aspect of semantics, a branch of linguistics that studies the meanings of linguistic units, in contrast to onomasiology, which studies the methods of linguistic designation of objects and concepts. Thus, if semasiology studies the meaning of vocabulary units of a language, types of lexical meanings, and the semantic structure of a word, then the subject of onomasiology is the nominative means of the vocabulary of a language, types of vocabulary units of a language, and methods of nomination. Semasiology goes from the means of expression to the expressed meaning, onomasiology is based on the movement from the designated object to the means of its designation, i.e. from content to form. Phraseology studies the phraseological composition of a language in its current state and historical development. A phraseological unit (phraseological unit, phraseological unit) is a lexically indivisible, stable in its composition and structure, complete in meaning, phrase, reproduced in the form of a ready-made speech unit. Etymology studies the origin of words. The subject of etymology as a branch of lexicology is the study of the sources and process of formation of the vocabulary of a language, including the reconstruction of the vocabulary of the most ancient (usually preliterate) period. The subject of onomastics is proper names. Onomastics is traditionally divided into sections in accordance with the categories of objects bearing proper names: anthroponymics studies the names of people, toponymy - the names of geographical objects, zoonymics - the names of animals, astronomy - the names of individual celestial bodies, etc. The object of onomastics research is the history of the origin of names and the motives for nomination, their formation, territorial and linguistic distribution, and functioning in speech. Onomastics studies phonetic, morphological, word-formation, semantic, etymological and other aspects of a proper name.
Lexicography is a branch of lexicology that studies the theory and practice of compiling dictionaries.

33) Word. The word is the central unit of language. This is the main nominative and cognitive unit of language, used for naming and communicating about objects, features, processes and relationships. A word is a structural-semantic two-way unit of language, having a form (plane of expression) and meaning (plane of content). A word is a minimal, relatively independent meaningful unit of language; the relative independence of a word - greater than that of a morpheme - is most consistently manifested in its lack of a rigid linear connection with neighboring words (in the presence, as a rule, of a rigid connection between parts of the word), and, in addition, in the ability of many words to function syntactically - as a minimal (one-word) sentence or as a member of a sentence. Like all other linguistic units, a word acts in the language system as an abstract unit - an invariant and, at the same time, as a rule, also in the form of a set of its variants; in speech (in a speech act and in a text) it is realized in the form of a specific instance, i.e., a “speech word”. An invariant of a word is called a lexeme. As for the linguistic variants of a word, since a word is a unit much more complex than a phoneme, the linguistic variation of this unit is also more complex. This variation may be a purely phonetic variation of the exponent (cf. variants such as overshoes and overshoes), sometimes associated with differences in styles or professional sublanguages ​​(report among sailors - report in other cases) or with phonetic conditions of the surrounding context (English indefinite article a before consonant and an before a vowel: a thought"thought" - an idea"idea"). A variation of a word can be (irrelevant for the meaning) a variation in the morphemic composition of the word (read - read) in combination with one or another stylistic differentiation (as in potato - potato) or without it. Variation of a word can, on the contrary, concern only its content side (semantic variants of a polysemantic word, for example, the audience “classroom” and the audience “composition of listeners,” which will be discussed below). In a language such as Russian, and in very many others, a very important type of linguistic variation of a word is its grammatical variation, i.e. the formation of its grammatical forms, or word forms (write, write, write, etc.), including and analytical (I will write, I would write). The most important part of the lexical meaning of a word, its core is, in most significant words, a mental reflection of a particular phenomenon of reality, an object (or class of objects) in a broad sense (including actions, properties, relationships, etc.). d.). The object denoted by the word is called the denotation, or referent, and the display of the denotation (class of denotations) is the conceptual meaning of the word. In addition to the core, the lexical meaning includes so-called connotations, or co-meanings - emotional, expressive, stylistic “additives” to the main meaning, giving the word a special coloring. In every language there are such significant words for which not an additional, but the main meaning is the expression of certain emotions (for example, interjections like wow! pah! or brr!) or the transmission of commands - incentives for certain actions (stop! away! throw! on! in the sense of “take”, etc.). In the lexical meaning of a word, three sides or facets are distinguished: 1) relation to the denotation - this is the so-called subject attribution of the word; 2) attitude to the categories of logic, and above all to the concept - conceptual reference; 3) relation to the conceptual and connotative meanings of other words within the framework of the corresponding lexical system - this aspect of meaning is sometimes called significance. The main properties of a word:

1. Phonetic design (presence of main stress).

2. Semantic design (the presence of lexical, grammatical, structural meaning).

3. Nominative function (the name of a phenomenon of reality and its representation in the form of a lexical meaning).

4. Syntactic independence (the ability to be used as a separate statement; relative freedom of arrangement of words in a sentence).

5. Impermeability of the word (impossibility of breaking the unit by any elements). Exceptions: no one - from no one and so on.

6. Complete design.

7. Valence (the ability to combine with other words according to certain semantic and grammatical laws).

34) Lexical meaning. The word performs a nominative function, i.e. the outer shell names any phenomenon of reality. Based on this, a connection is established between such a unit and the subject, fixed by the practice of speech use. However, most often a word is associated not with a specific subject, but with the concept that the representatives of a given nation have developed about a given subject, due to which the word has a subject-conceptual relationship, which is called LZ. According to V.V. Vinogradov, lexical meaning is objective-material content, formalized according to the laws of Russian grammar. This can be visually represented in the form of a triangle or trapezoid, which reflects the connection between an object, concept, LZ and sign (word).

concept meaning

object sign

A separate object is a “piece” of reality, but the word does not name a specific piece, but an idea of ​​the totality of similar elements that has been formed in the human mind over the centuries.

A concept is a logical category, it is a mental unit (a form of thinking) that reflects the essential features of an object or objects, the result of its knowledge. The functions of cognition are the identification of the general, which is achieved by abstracting from all the features of objects. Therefore, the concept is devoid of any evaluation or expressiveness.

Meaning is a linguistic unit; it is not equal to concept. Although the concept is the semantic core of a word, the concept does not exhaust its meaning: after all, in addition to the conceptual component, the structure of meaning can also include various expressive connotations. Being an integral part of a word, the meaning is associated with a sign - the image of a given word in speech. As we see from the diagram, there is no direct connection between a sign and an object; it is mediated by our thinking and language, its national characteristics.

When considering many issues related to the semantics of a word, significative, denotative and connotative meanings are distinguished.

The significative meaning (Greek significatio “meaning, significance, meaning”) of a lexical unit is a specifically linguistic reflection of reality. This is the meaning that forms the basis of the concept. In explanatory dictionaries it is presented in the form of interpretations: man - an adult male; tree is a perennial plant with a solid trunk and branches extending from it that form a crown. Significative meaning can be decomposed into separate elements, semes - “peculiar pieces of meaning.” For example, the word man consists of the following semes: “person”, “male”, “adult”. If we compare the words woman or child with the LS, we will see that they have common semes - “person”, but there are also differential ones - “sex”, “childhood / adulthood”. A common seme often unites words of the same class or gender, therefore it is also called hyperseme (archiseme, generic seme). Differential seme distinguishes objects of the same class (genus) and is called hyposeme (species seme). Semes are internally organized and form a certain semantic structure. Denotative meaning (Greek denotatum “subject”) is the specific meaning of a word in relation to a specific situation. In linguistics, denotation is understood as a separate phenomenon, an object of reality that is to be named. Denotative meaning is a subject meaning that characterizes the connection of a lexical unit with the designated subject, therefore it can be greater in content than significative. For example, Birch belongs to the class of deciduous trees. White birch under my window. In the first sentence, the structure of the word birch has a significative meaning, in the second – a denotative one. They have had a parrot for a long time (connection with a specific subject). How long can a parrot live? (connection with the concept).

The structure of the LP may also contain an emotional-evaluative component (emotive) or connotation. Connotative meaning (Latin con “together”, noto “note, designate”) is an additional meaning to the conceptual one, expressing the speaker’s different attitude towards the subject of speech. Wed. The man approached the car. Petrov is a real man (courteous, gallant). The connotative meaning appears most clearly when comparing words with the same significative meaning, but different in emotional and expressive coloring, i.e. stylistic synonyms: eat, gobble up (“eat quickly, with appetite”); Get out! Get out of here! Drive away, drive out, kick out.