1C. There are several sections of lexicology:
Onomasiology – studies the way in which names are built. The starting point here is the meaning, patterns of word-building, motivation.
Semasiology – starts with the word and investigates the meanings that are attached to it.
Phraseology – studies se expressions and idioms.
Etymology – studies the origin and development of words.
Lexicography – is the science of compiling dictionaries.
2. The notion of lexical system
The course of English lexicology falls into two main parts: the treatment of the English word as a structure and the treatment of English vocabulary as a system.
The present status of the lexical system is an abstraction, a sort of scientific fiction which in some points can facilitate linguistic study: the actual system of the language is in a state of constant change. Knowing the difference between the synchronic, involving also social and place variations, and diachronic approach we shall not tear them asunder, and, although concentrating mainly on the present state of the English vocabulary, we shall also have to consider its development.
The English vocabulary is a system, with specific peculiarities of its own, constantly developing and conditioned by the history of the English people and the structure of the language.
A language vocabulary has a systematic nature. The term system denotes not merely the sum total of English words, but it denotes a coherent homogeneous whole, constituted by interdependent elements of the same order related in certain specific ways. Lexicology studies this whole system by determining the properties of its elements, the different relationships of contrast and similarity existing between the elements within a language, as well as the ways in which they are influenced by extra-linguistic reality.
What are these elements? Each science identifies the unit which it’s going to study. The unit of lexicology is the word.
3. The general properties of vocabulary units in English
The definition of every basic notion is a very hard task; the definition of a word is one of the most difficult in linguistics because the simplest word has many different aspects. It has a sound form because it is a certain arrangement of phonemes; it has its morphological structure, being also a certain arrangement of morphemes; when used in actual speech, it may occur in different word-forms, and signal various meanings. Being the central element of any language system, the word is a sort of focus for the problems of phonology, lexicology, syntax, morphology and also for some other sciences that have to deal with language and speech, such as philosophy and psychology, and probably quite a few other branches of knowledge. All attempts to characterize the word are necessarily specific for each domain of science and are therefore considered one-sided by the representatives of all the other domains and criticized for incompleteness.
The eminent French linguist A. Meillet combines the semantic, phonological and grammatical criteria and advances a formula which underlies many subsequent definitions, both abroad and in our country, including the one given in the beginning of this book: "A word is defined by the association of a particular meaning with a particular group of sounds capable of a particular grammatical employment."-
This definition does not permit us to distinguish words from phrases because not only child, but a pretty child as well are combinations of a particular group of sounds with a particular meaning capable of a particular grammatical employment.
We can, nevertheless, accept this formula if we add that a word is characterized by positional mobility within a sentence and indivisibility, and that the word is the smallest significant unit of a given language, capable of functioning alone. This addition is necessary because it permits us to create a basis for the oppositions between the word and the phrase, the word and the phoneme, and the word and the morpheme: their common feature is that they are all units of the language, their difference lies in the fact that the phoneme is not significant, and a morpheme cannot be used as a complete utterance.
But how is it identified?
The word is identified by its form and its meaning. Obviously the phoneme must be excluded here as it doesn’t posses a meaning of its own, unless it forms a word by itself. Thus the phoneme “i” occurs in the words “time”, “wise”, but: I, eye (a phoneme may form a word).
Morphemes can not be regarded as words because they can not make words by themselves but they are regarded as parts of the words. They are not capable of grammatical employment.
The word is a unit of language and a unit of speech. It can form an utterance by itself.
e. g. Look! There! Which? Go!
As a unit of the language it makes part of the inventory of a certain language.
Vocabulary units can be listed. They form groupings of all kinds: synonyms, antonyms, semantic fields.
Vocabulary units ready-made. They possess a morphemic integrity (цельнооформленность) and each vocabulary unit is socially recognized by the language community. In writing they are recognized by their solid and hyphenated spelling.
Some phrases are also recognized as vocabulary units. Those are set expressions and phraseological units. They are readymade and associated with a certain meaning.
e. g. to skate on thin ice
Another structural aspect of the word is its unity. The word possesses both external (or formal) unity and semantic unity. Formal unity of the word is sometimes inaccurately interpreted as indivisibility. The example of post-impressionists has already shown that the word is not, strictly speaking, indivisible. Yet, its component morphemes are permanently linked together in opposition to word-groups, both free and with fixed contexts, whose components possess a certain structural freedom, e. g. bright light, to take for granted (see Ch. 12).
The formal unity of the word can best be illustrated by comparing a word and a word-group comprising identical constituents. The difference between a blackbird and a black bird is best explained by their relationship with the grammatical system of the language. The word blackbird, which is characterized by unity, possesses a single grammatical framing: blackbird\s. The first constituent black is not subject to any grammatical changes. In the word-group a black bird each constituent can acquire grammatical forms of its own: the blackest birds I've ever seen. Other words can be inserted between the components which is impossible so far as the word is concerned as it would violate its unity: a black night bird.
The same example may be used to illustrate what we mean by semantic unity.
In the word-group a black bird each of the meaningful words conveys a separate concept: bird — a kind of living creature; black — a colour.
The word blackbird conveys only one concept: the type of bird. This is one of the main features of any word: it always conveys one concept, no matter how many component morphemes it may have in its external structure.
A further structural feature of the word is its susceptibility to grammatical employment. In speech most words can be used in different grammatical forms in which their interrelations are realized.
So far we have only underlined the word's major peculiarities, but this suffices to convey the general idea of the difficulties and questions faced by the scholar attempting to give a detailed definition of the word. The difficulty does not merely consist in the considerable number of aspects that are to be taken into account, but, also, in the essential unanswered questions of word theory which concern the nature of its meaning.
All that we have said about the word can be summed up as follows.
The word is a speech unit used for the purposes of human communication, materially representing a group of sounds, possessing a meaning, susceptible to grammatical employment and characterized by formal and semantic unity.
Nowadays there are two different levels of study of words: syntagmatic and paradigmatic.
On the syntagmatic level, the semantic structure of the word is analysed in its linear relationships with neighbouring words in connected speech. In other words, the semantic characteristics of the word are observed, described and studied on the basis of its typical contexts.
On the paradigmatic level, the word is studied in its relationships with other words in the vocabulary system. So, a word may be studied in comparison with other words of similar meaning (e. g. work, n. — labour, п.; to refuse, v. — to reject v. — to decline, v.), of opposite meaning (e. g. busy, adj. — idle, adj.; to accept, v. — to reject, v.), of different stylistic characteristics (e. g. man, n. — chap, n. — bloke, n. — guy, п.). Consequently, the main problems of paradigmatic studies are synonymy, antonymy, functional styles.