Lexical Semantics An Introduction Boris Iomdin Russian Language

Lexical Semantics. An Introduction Boris Iomdin Russian Language Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences iomdin@ruslang. ru

Lecture 7. Plan Lexicon as a system Lexicographic type Example: Russian verbs of iterative locomotion occupations actions Lexicographic portraits Types of information in a dictionary entry Lexicographic type vs. lexicographic portrait: unification and individualization principles

Lexicon as a system (Apresjan) The set of lexical meanings in any human language is organized in a systematic way (although less systematically than the grammar) The lexical system has the classificational and the operational aspects As a classifying system, the lexicon is a nonrigorous hierarchy with many intersecting classes and subclasses As an operational system, the lexicon contains rules for interaction of meanings in the text

Unification principle If several lexemes have common semantic components which occupy the same position in their structure of meaning, than these lexemes are likely to have several or many common properties In this case, all these lexemes are considered together as a lexicographic type

Lexicographic type a more or less compact group of lexemes which have shared semantic, pragmatic, syntactic, combinatorial, prosodic, communicative, morphological, or other linguistically significant properties and therefore need homogenous dictionary descriptions

Lexicographic type The more interesting LT have many shared properties and a number of linguistic rules which refer to them LT display motivated connections between the different aspects of the lexemes within the same type LT reflect the nationally specific NPW embodied in a given language A set of LT is the most natural and reliable basis on which any systematic dictionary should be compiled

LT vs. semantic classes All words in one LT have the same part of speech LT can be marked out not only for semantic properties Describing LT makes sense only within an integrated description of dictionary and grammar LT do not form an hierarchy, but represent classes with many intersections: a lexeme can belong to several classes according to its properties

LT: an example (Apresjan) Verbs of locomotion: progressive (determinate) vs. iterative (indeterminate) idti – xodit’ ‘go, walk’ exat’ – ezdit’ ‘go, travel, drive’ bezhat’ – begat’ ‘run’ letet’ – letat’ ‘fly’ plyt’ – plavat’ ‘swim’ polzti – polzat’ ‘crawl’ gnat’ – gonjat’ ‘chase’ etc.

Progressive vs. iterative Segodnja ja idu v shkolu peshkom. Dnes jdu do školy pěšky. Today, I am going to school by foot. Ja chasto xozhu v shkolu pershkom. Často chodím do školy pěšky. I often go to school by foot. Segodnja ja lechu v Evropu Aeroflotom. Dnes letím do Evropy Aeroflotem. Today I am flying to Europe with Aeroflot. Ja chasto letaju v Evropu Ljuftganzoj. Často létám do Evropy Lufthansou. I often fly to Europe with Lufthansa.

Iterative: occupation vs. action Occupation: xodit’ po gorodu ‘to be walking in the city’ plavat’ v bassejne ‘to be swimming in the pool’ polzat’ po polu ‘to be crawling on the floor’ Action: Oni kazhdyj den’ xodili kupat’sja ‘Every day, they went swimming’ On s utra ezdil za molokom ‘Every morning, he drove to buy milk’

Two LTS differ semantically… Occupation: several movements in one space into several directions simultaneous with the moment of speech (described while observed) Action: two movements with opposite directions: from one space into another, and back not connected with the moment of speech

…and grammatically: process Occupation: usually described as a process: Posmotri, kak deti begajut po beregu. ‘Look how the kids are running about at the beach’ Action: can be described as a result: Ty kogda-nibud’ ezdil v Pragu? ‘Have you ever traveled to Prague? ’ cannot be described as a process: *Posmotri, kak on ezdit v Pragu. ‘Look how he is traveling to Prague’

…and grammatically: aspect Occupation: no perfective aspect Action: can have the perfective form: On uzhe sxodil <sbegal, sletal, splaval> za molokom ‘He already went <run, flew, swam> to buy milk’

…and grammatically: syntax Occupation: On vse vremja xodil po komnate ‘He was constantly walking about at the room [space of locomotion] ’ Action: On chasto xodil iz universiteta v biblioteku zanimat’sja ‘He often went from the university [starting point] to the library [destination] to study [objective]’

…and collocationally Occupation: On bystro xodil po komnate ‘He was walking about at the room in prompt steps’ On medlenno xodil po komnate ‘He was walking about at the room in slow steps’ Action: On bystro xodil za molokom i uezzhal na rabotu ‘He went to buy milk, returned quickly and drove off for work’ *On medlenno xodil za molokom ‘He slowly went to buy milk’

…and derivationally Occupation: can derive nouns denoting processes: begotnja ‘the running about’, xod’ba ‘the walking’, ezda ‘the driving’, plavanie ‘the swimming’, … can derive verbs with delimitative meaning: pobegat’ ‘have a run’, poxodit’ ‘have a walk’, … Action: no such derivates: *xod’ba za molokom ‘the walking for milk’, *ezda za produktami ‘driving for groceries’, *pobegat’ za gazetoj ‘to have a run to buy a newspaper’

Lexicographic portraits Term portrait: first used in Zholkovsky 1964 Lexicographic portrait defined by Apresjan in 1986: a description of all the linguistically relevant properties of a lexeme within the framework of an integrated description of a language

Types of information Morphological Stylistic Semantic Pragmatic Communicative Syntactic Collocational Phraseological

Morphological information type of paradigm (may be shown by a number of key forms): know, knew, known constraints on tense, mood, person, number, etc. : know cannot be used in progressive tense *I am knowing it variant forms: shine – shined / shone analytic vs. synthetic forms: clear – clearer – the clearest, brilliant – more brilliant – the most brilliant

Stylistic information elevated standard colloquial slang terminological pejorative …

Semantic information an analytical explication assertions presuppositions modal frames different uses within the same lexeme permissible combinations of lexical and grammatical meanings possibility of semantic contrast between variants semantic links between the given lexeme and other lexemes (synonyms, analogues, antonyms, etc. )

Pragmatic information pragmatic features (see next lectures) non-trivial functions of a lexeme the relative status of speaker and addressee in social, age, educational or other hierarchy (example: ty, toi, Du vs. vy, vous, Sie) connotations

Communicative information whether it is necessary, possible, or impossible to place the phrasal stress on the given lexeme whether the lexeme is rhematic (can only be rheme), thematic (can only be theme), or both (see examples in Lecture 5)

Syntactic information the semantic valencies of a lexeme (main participants of the proptypical situation described by the lexeme) the syntactic ways of expressing semantic valencies (case, preposition, etc. ) optionality (obligatoriness) of valencies compatibility of valencies transformations of different patterns with the same meaning more in lectures on Syntax

Collocation information Constraints on co-occurrence: morphological stylistic semantic lexical pragmatic communicative syntactic

LP vs. traditional dictionary LP includes certain fundamentally new types of information never previously included in a dictionary The traditional types of information are considerably expanded All linguistic information in the dictionary is recorded in the same formal language as in the grammar Motivated links between the different properties of a lexeme are demonstrated and explained The lexicographic portrait is compiled against the background of a lexicographic type

LT vs. LP Each dictionary entry should reflect equally those properties of the lexeme which are shared with other lexemes (lexicographic types, the principle of unification) those properties that distinguish it from other lexemes (lexicographic portraits, the principle of individualization)

Next lecture Production dictionaries. Consistency and individualization principles