Lexical semantic derivation models revisited

Additional information

Author Information:

Oleh Demenchuk is Doctor of Philology, Professor, Head of the Department of Romance and Germanic Philology at Rivne State University of Humanities. His areas of research interests include contrastive and typological linguistics, cognitive linguistics, functional linguistics, and linguistic semantics.

Correspondence: oleh.demenchuk@gmail.com

Citation:

Demenchuk O. Lexical semantic derivation models revisited [Text] // Linhvistychni Studiyi / Linguistic Studies : collection of scientific papers / Vasyl' Stus Donetsk National University; Ed. by Anatoliy Zahnitko. Vinnytsia : Vasyl' Stus DonNU, 2023. Vol. 45. Pp. 16-26. ISBN 966-7277-88-7

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31558/1815-3070.2023.45

Publication History:

Volume first published online: June 01, 2023

Article received: January 13, 2023, accepted: January 28, 2023 and first published online: June 01, 2022

Annotation.

У статті робиться спроба ревізії моделей семантичної деривації лексики та способів їхньої експлікації у віддалено споріднених мовах (українській та англійській). Представлено концепції, які обстоюють ідею динамічної концептуалізації світу дискурсу (певної ситуації або її фрагмента). Основну увагу приділено вивченню стратегій семантичної деривації лексики, встановленню зв’язків між вихідним та цільовим значеннями, з’ясуванню особливостей динаміки розвитку семантичної парадигми лексики в зіставно-типологійному аспекті.

Ключові слова: семантична деривація, семантичний зсув, модель ситуації, учасник ситуації, tertium comparationis, міжмовний.

Volume 45, 2023, pp. 16-26

Lexical semantic derivation models revisited

Demenchuk Oleh

Article first published online: June 01, 2023

Abstract.

LEXICAL SEMANTIC DERIVATION MODELS REVISITED

Oleh Demenchuk

The Department of Romance and Germanic Philology, Rivne State University of Humanities, Rivne, Ukraine.

Abstract

Background: Semantic derivation is one of the aspects that reveals the dynamic potential of lexical items, the mechanisms and strategies of lexical items’ extensions, the semantic associations that underlie the development of lexical items’ semantic paradigms. As a dynamic phenomenon, semantic derivation is interpreted in relation to the notion of semantic shift, which refers to a pair of senses linked by some genetic relations, either diachronically or synchronically. Such an approach correlates with the idea of semantic derivation consistency, which provides for establishing the characteristics of a lexical item’s semantic potential in its dynamic developing.

Purpose: The study aims at elaborating on the types of lexical semantic derivation models and the ways they are explicated in distantly related languages – Slavic (Ukrainian) and Germanic (English).

Results: The analysis provided in the paper proceeds from the assumption that the development of a linguistic item’s semantic paradigm is simultaneously realised with the changes in a situation. The changes determine the type (model) of a derivational strategy that underlies the development of a lexical item’s semantic paradigm. From this viewpoint, a lexical item’s semantics is interpreted as a multidimensional phenomenon that represents the conceptualisation of the world of discourse from different cognitive (gnoseological) positions – positions of different linguistic communities. On that ground, the models of lexical semantic derivation are considered as theoretical constructs that reveal the ways the information on the changes is encoded and distributed in lexical semantics of the contrasted languages.

Discussion: There are four types of lexical semantic derivation models: componential-combinatorial (semantic shifts in semantic components and their configurations), integral-situational (semantic shifts in situation participants and their relations), topological-schematic (semantic shifts in image-schematic concepts) and complex-constructional (semantic shifts in complex constructions). The paper concludes that the contrasted languages may apply to any of the models. The differences are observed in the ways the models are explicated in the contrasted languages.

Keywords: semantic derivation, semantic shifts, model of situation, situation participant, tertium comparationis, cross-linguistic.

Vitae

Correspondence: oleh.demenchuk@gmail.com

Article.

ЛС_45_16-26.pdf

References.

1. Barcelona, A. Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective. Berlin. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2012. 368 p.

2. Croft, W. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. 416 p.

3. Cross-linguistic semantics: Explications, metalanguage, grammar. Ed. by C. Goddard. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ., 2008. 356 p.

4. Dekker, P. Dynamic semantics. Dordrecht: Springer, 2012. 127 p.

5. Demenchuk, O. «Lexical semantic modelling in cross-linguistic perspective». Naukovyi chasopys natsionalnoho pedahohichnoho universytetu imeni M.P. Drahomanova. Seriia 9. Suchasni tendentsii rozvytku mov 17, 2018: 32–42.

[Demenchuk, O. «Lexical semantic modelling in cross-linguistic perspective». Науковий часопис національного педагогічного університету імені М.П. Драгоманова. Серія 9. Сучасні тенденції розвитку мов 17, 2018: 32–42.]

6. Demenchuk, O. «Modelling semantic derivation: Semantic shift strategies of irrational vocabulary in English». Advanced Education 12, 2019: 120–126.

7. Demenchuk, O. «Towards a typology of lexical semantic derivation models: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects». PSYCHOLINGUISTICS 28(2), 2020: 8–23.

8. From polysemy to semantic change. Towards a typology of lexical semantic association. Ed. by M. Vanhove. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ., Co., 2008. 404 p.

9. Goldberg, A. E. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995, 265 p.

10. Johnson, M. «The philosophical significance of image schemas». From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics. Ed. by B. Hampe. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2005, 15–34.

11. Juvonen, J. «Making do with minimal lexica. Light verb constructions with make/do in pidgin lexica». The lexical typology of semantic shifts. Ed. by P. Juvonen, M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm. Berlin; Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2016, 223–248.

12. Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. «The lexical typology of semantic shifts: An introduction». The lexical typology of semantic shifts. Ed. by P. Juvonen, M. Koptjevskaja-Tamm. Berlin; Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2016, 1–20.

13. Lakoff, G. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. 632 p.

14. Levin, B. «Semantics and pragmatics of argument alternations». Annual Review of Linguistics 1, 2015: 63–83.

15. Lewandowka-Tomaszczyk, B. «On semantic change in a dynamic model of language». Historical Semantics: Historical Word-Formation. Ed. by J. Fisiak. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1985, 297–323.

16. Lyons, J. Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968. 519 p.

17. Mel’čuk, I. «Semantic description of lexical units in an Explanatory Combinatorial Dictionary: Basic principles and heuristic criteria». International Journal of Lexicography 1.(3). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988: 165–188.

18. Mel’čuk, I. «Explanatory Combinatorial Dictionary». Open Problems in Linguistics and Lexicography. Ed. by G. Sico. Monza: Polimetrica, 2006, 225–355.

19. Mel’čuk, I. Semantics. From meaning to text. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ., 2015. Vol. 3, 546.

20. Multidimensional models of perception and cognition. Ed. by F.G. Ashby. New York; London: Taylor & Frencis Group & Psychology Press, 1992. 544 р.

21. Narrog, H. Modality, subjectivity, and semantic change. A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. 333 p.

22. OED: Oxford English Dictionary: Second Edition on CD-ROM. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Vers. 4.0.

23. Pustejovsky, J. The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA; London: The MIT Press, 1996, 298 p.

24. Radden, G., Kӧvecses, Z. «Towards a theory of metonymy». Metonymy in language and thought. Ed. by K-U. Panther, G. Radden. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ., 1999, 17–60.

25. RHWUD: Random House Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary. Electronic dictionary of American English. Seattle, WA: Random House, Inc.; Multimedia 2000, Inc. Vers. 3.0.

26. SUM: Slovnyk ukrainskoi movy: v 11 t. Redkolehiia: I. K. Bilodid (holova), L. S. Palamarchuk (zast. holovy), A. A. Buriachok ta in. Kyiv: Naukova dumka, 1970-1980. T. 1–11.

[Словник української мови: в 11 т. Редколегія: І. К. Білодід (голова), Л. С. Паламарчук (заст. голови), А. А. Бурячок та ін. Київ: Наукова думка, 1970-1980. Т. 1–11.]

27. Sweetser, E. E. From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. 188 p.

28. Sweetser, E. E. «Compositionality and blending: Semantic composition in a cognitively realistic framework». Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, Scope, and Methodology. Ed. by T. Janssen, G. Redeker. Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1999, 129–162.

29. Taylor, J. Linguistic categorization. Prototypes in linguistic theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. 312 p.

30. Therriault, D., Rinck, M. «Multidimentional situation models». Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes. Ed. by F. Schmalhofer, C. Perfetti. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2007, 311–328.

31. Traugott, E. C., Dasher, R. B. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 341 p.

32. Van Valin, R .D., Jr., LaPolla, R. J. Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997, 744 p.

33. Wierzbicka, A. Semantics, culture, and cognition: Universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1992, 496 p.

34. Wierzbicka, A. Semantics: Primes and universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996, 512.

35. Zalizniak, Anna A. «A catalogue of semantic shifts. Towards a typology of semantic derivation». From polysemy to semantic change. Towards a typology of lexical semantic association. Ed. by M. Vanhove. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ., 2008, 217–232.