lexical fields. The vocabulary of the language and its layers

SEMANTIC FIELD, a term used in linguistics most often to refer to a set of linguistic units united by some common (integral) semantic feature; in other words, having some common non-trivial value component. Initially, the role of such lexical units was considered as units of the lexical level - words; later, descriptions of semantic fields appeared in linguistic works, including also phrases and sentences.

One of the classic examples of a semantic field is a color naming field consisting of several color ranges ( red – pink – pinkish – crimson; blue – blue – bluish – turquoise etc.): the common semantic component here is "color".

The semantic field has the following main properties:

1. The semantic field is intuitively understandable to a native speaker and has a psychological reality for him.

2. The semantic field is autonomous and can be singled out as an independent language subsystem.

3. The units of the semantic field are connected by certain systemic semantic relations.

4. Each semantic field is connected with other semantic fields of the language and together with them forms a language system.

The theory of semantic fields is based on the idea of the existence of certain semantic groups in the language and the possibility of the occurrence of language units in one or more such groups. In particular, the vocabulary of a language (lexicon) can be represented as a set of separate groups of words united by various relationships: synonymous ( brag – brag), antonymous ( talk – be silent) etc.

The possibility of such a presentation of vocabulary in the form of a combination of many particular systems of words was already discussed in the linguistic works of the 19th century, for example, in the works of M.M. Pokrovsky (1868/69–1942). The first attempts to identify semantic fields were made when creating ideographic dictionaries, or thesuruses - for example, P. Roger ( cm. DICTIONARY). The term "semantic field" itself began to be actively used after the publication of the works of J. Trier and G. Ipsen. Such a representation of the lexical system is primarily a linguistic hypothesis, not an axiom, therefore it is often used as a method for conducting language research, and not as its goal.

The elements of a separate semantic field are connected by regular and systemic relations, and, consequently, all the words of the field are mutually opposed to each other. Semantic fields can intersect or completely enter one another. The meaning of each word is most fully determined only if the meanings of other words from the same field are known. Compare two colors red – pink and red - pink – pinkish. If you focus only on the first color row, then several different color shades can be indicated by the same lexeme pink. The second color series gives us a more detailed division of color shades, i.e. The same color shades will be correlated with two lexemes - pink and pinkish.

A separate language unit can have several meanings and, therefore, can be assigned to different semantic fields. For example, the adjective red can be included in the semantic field of color designations and at the same time in the field, the units of which are united by the generalized meaning "revolutionary".

The semantic attribute underlying the semantic field can also be considered as a certain conceptual category, one way or another related to human environment reality and experience. The absence of a sharp opposition between semantic and conceptual concepts is mentioned in the works of J. Trier, A.V. Bondarko, I.I. Meshchaninov, L.M. Vasiliev, I.M. Kobozeva. This consideration of an integral semantic attribute does not contradict the fact that the semantic field is perceived by native speakers as some kind of independent association, correlated with one or another area of human experience, i.e. psychologically real.

The simplest variety of a semantic field is a field of a paradigmatic type, the units of which are lexemes belonging to the same part of speech and united by a common categorical seme ( cm. SEMA) in the meaning. Such fields are often also referred to as semantic classes or lexico-semantic groups.

As noted by I.M. Kobozeva, L.M. Vasiliev and other authors, the links between the units of a separate semantic field can differ in "breadth" and specificity. Most common types connections are connections of a paradigmatic type (synonymous, antonymic, genus-species, etc.).

For example, a group of words wood, branch, trunk, sheet etc. can form both an independent semantic field, united by the relation "part - whole", and be part of the semantic field of plants. In this case, the token wood will serve as a hypernym (generic concept) for such lexemes as, for example, Birch, oak, palm etc.

The semantic field of speech verbs can be represented as a union of synonymic series ( speak – talk – communicate – ...; scold – scold – criticize...; tease – to make fun of – joke- ...) etc.

An example of a minimal semantic field of a paradigmatic type is a synonymous group, for example, some group of the same verbs of speech. This field is formed by verbs talk, tell, to chat, rattle and others. The elements of the semantic field of verbs of speech are united by the integral semantic sign of "speaking", but their meaning is not identical. The units of this semantic field are distinguished by differential features, for example, "mutual communication" ( speak), "one-way message" ( inform, report). In addition, they differ in stylistic, usual, derivational and connotative components of meaning. For example, the verb scold, besides the seme "speaking", also has an additional connotative meaning ( cm. CONNOTATION) - negative expressiveness.

A common semantic attribute that unites elements of a particular semantic field can act as a differential one in other semantic fields of the same language. For example, the semantic field of "verbs of communication" will include the field of verbs of speech along with such lexemes as telegraph, write and others. The integral semantic feature for this field will be the feature of "information transmission", and the "information transmission channel" - oral, written, etc. - will act as a differential feature.

To identify and describe semantic fields, the methods of component analysis and associative experiment are often used. Groups of words obtained as a result of an associative experiment are called associative fields.

The term "semantic field" itself is now increasingly being replaced by narrower linguistic terms: lexical field, synonymic series, lexico-semantic field, etc. Each of these terms more clearly specifies the type of language units included in the field and / or the type of relationship between them. Nevertheless, in many works both the expression "semantic field" and more specialized designations are used as terminological synonyms.

Attention to macro-paradigms such as semantic fields is associated with an emphasis on "active" lexicology, i.e. speaker's lexicology. In addition, they help to understand and convey the idea of the continuity of the semantic space in the lexicon, when, with the help of multi-step semantic analysis, it is possible to connect words from different semantic fields, seemingly incompatible with each other. Groupings of words according to semantic fields, for all their seeming objectivity, nevertheless convey a human (anthropocentric) view of the world. semantic field is a combination of words different parts speech. But within semantic fields, groupings of words into parts of speech appear as a kind of global paradigms. These groupings underlie the creation of the Explanatory Ideographic Dictionary of Russian Verbs. So, for example, it separates the verbs of action and activity into a separate grouping. semantic field is a hierarchical structure of a set of lexical units united by a common invariant meaning and reflecting a common conceptual sphere in the language. From the point of view of ideographic description, we can talk about the path from meaning to concept, to means of expression. Thus, vocabulary can be represented as a system of interacting semantic fields that form a picture of the world specific to each language. Sem-th fields are established according to the spheres of human existence, according to the spheres of consciousness (for example: material existence, space and time, movement, etc.). Trier singles out a field of paradigmatic type, Korzig - a field of syntagmatic type. The number of units in the seventh field can be relatively limited or VERY large. The researchers compare the structure of the SP with the field in physics: it has a nuclear part, a substance and a wave part. SP is homogeneous, so heterogeneous semantic units are distributed over different semantic fields. FOR EXAMPLE: cut your hair - 1. cut (cut) your hair; 2. become a monk. different meanings polysemantic words fall into different semantic fields. The conceptual field, as an ordered set of names, is based primarily on hyper-hyponymic or genus-species relations. Semantically homogeneous units of the thematic field are combined into lexico-semantic groups (LSG), or elementary microfields, relatively closed rows of words of one part of speech, etc. Subclasses, classes, class classes, semantic macrospheres form a hierarchical system of interrelated conceptual fields. The following are distinguished in the structure of the joint venture: 1. core, i.e. words containing a common meaning in its “pure form (color - d / color field). 2 center (perinuclear zone) - a number of layers enveloping the core, specialized words with semantically more complex relationships (white, blue, etc.) 3. the periphery of the joint venture includes secondary names that enter with their primary meanings into adjacent joint ventures. They implement the semantics of a given field in specific contextual conditions. FOR EXAMPLE: chocolate (color). Various types of relations are synthesized in the joint venture: - synonymous (give - hand); - antonymous (give - take); - relations of polysemy (transmit: a message on the radio / book); - conversion ratios, i.e. the situation is assessed from the point of view of its participants (give - receive); - hyponyms

(49) Hyponyms in relation to the joint venture are established primarily through the relation to the nearest hypernym and through the relation to the name of the joint venture. SP are multidimensional. SP units are included in three types of relations: paradigmatic (hand-foot-head); syntagmatic (touch-grab-wave); Shmelev also points to associative-derivational relations, i.e. relations within the word-formation nest (head of parliament - head of the book; forest - forest - forester). It is necessary to distinguish between system-linguistic and text fields. They do not coincide, although the basis of any textual sem-th field is one or another element of the system-linguistic field. ( 49 ) Hyper-hyponymic relations are typical for SP. Hyponymy- this is a type of paradigmatic relations in vocabulary, which underlies its hierarchical organization. These are relations of subordination, i.e. inclusive relationships. Hyponymy is relative concept, because a word can alternately be a hyponym and a hypernym depending on other words. This makes it possible to sequentially distinguish classes and subclasses of lexical units. FOR EXAMPLE: plant -> flower -> rose. Hyponymy - either the relationship of words of one part of speech, or different (color - red, yellow). However, for example, in the Russian language there is no hypernym for the words "square", "round", etc., which indicates the existence of gaps, uncertainty. Within the framework of the joint venture, there may be incompatibility relations, i.e. There are no direct connections between words. The category of cohyponyms exists within the framework of hyponymy. These are words that are in a relationship of incompatibility with each other, and they cannot refer to the same object of extralinguistic action (rose and tulip, table and chair). Hyponyms are words that name objects, properties, signs, as elements of a set and are in a hyponymic relationship with the word - the name of this class (hyperonym). A hypernym is a word with a broad meaning, expressing a general generic concept, while a hyponym is a word with a narrower meaning. The hyponym has a narrower scope of the concept, but richer in the number of semantic features. The hypernym, together with its constituent hyponyms, forms the so-called privative opposition, in which one of the members is unmarked, and the other is marked with some semantic feature. fragment.

(7) SP is the most global lexical paradigm. It is the joint ventures that are presented in ideographic dictionaries. Within the framework of the SP, the most peculiar types of relationships are distinguished. The types of paradigms in the SP are described by Fillur: Classical paradigms (man - woman). Contrastive sets, whose elements are not conceivable outside of the opposition itself (high - low). Taxonomy is a set of words connected by relations of domination (tree - oak, maple). Partonomy - lexical associations based on the "part-whole" relationship (a person and his body parts: head, hand). Cycle: a) natural (morning, afternoon, evening, night); b) artificial (days of the week). Network - a set united on the basis of several relationships (terms of kinship). Frame - a set of words, each of which denotes a certain part of some conceptual or actional whole; the frame includes other types of relationships. The most interesting in terms of reflection from. field is an associative dictionary, because his dictionary entries reflect the following relationships, derived from the meju relationship by the stimulus word and the reaction: , leaves; forest - forest, grove). Syntagmatic - all kinds of possible phrases (for example: forest - dense, green, Russian, cut down). Derivative (for example: forest - forestry, logging). Cultural (for example: forest - Russian forest, Shishkin, “Green oak near the seashore”).

Lexico-semantic field

A set of lexemes denoting a certain concept in the broad sense of the word: according to modern concepts, the field includes words various parts speech, with the assumption of the inclusion of phraseological units and lexical materials various forms the existence of a national language, not only literary, but also vernacular, dialects, jargons), with an appeal to historical lexical materials with a focus on diachronic research. The lexico-semantic field is characterized by a number of signs of consistency both in the synchronous plan (the semantic correlation of lexemes that “divide” the field among themselves, the presence of hyponyms and hypernyms), and in the genetic-diachronic plan (a certain set of repeatedly implemented motivational models, the repetition of word-formation models, the repetition producing etymological nests that generate vocabulary of the field)

However, due to the close connection with extralinguistic realities, the field is an open unit of vocabulary organization and therefore differs significantly from systems of other language levels (phonological, morphological)

The lexical level of the language is organized by complex correlations of lexico-semantic fields, both adjacent and intersecting, and subordinate. Wed fields "disease", "suffering", "harm", "witchcraft", "treatment", "health".

Brief conceptual and terminological guide to etymology and historical lexicology. - Russian Academy Sciences, Institute of the Russian Language. V. V. Vinogradov RAS, Etymology and history of Russian words. J. J. Warbot, A. F. Zhuravlev. 1998 .

See what the "Lexico-semantic field" is in other dictionaries:

The same as the lexico-semantic field... Handbook of etymology and historical lexicology

semantic field- The largest lexico-semantic paradigm that combines words from different parts of speech, correlated with one fragment of reality and having a common feature (common seme) in the lexical meaning ...

Functional-semantic field- Functionally, the semantic field is a system of multi-level means of a given language (morphological, syntactic, derivational, lexical, as well as combined lexico-syntactic, etc.), interacting on the basis of their commonality ... ...

semantic field

semantic field- Onomasiological and semantic grouping of words, their hierarchical organization, united by one generic meaning and representing a certain semantic sphere in the language. The onomasiological property of the semantic field is the presence in it ... ... Dictionary of linguistic terms T.V. Foal

Field- The field is a set of linguistic (mainly lexical) units united by a common content (sometimes also by a common formal indicators) and reflecting the conceptual, subject or functional similarity of the designated phenomena. On the… … Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary

Field (Feld, field, champ) is semantic, a set of words united by semantic links according to similar features of their lexical meanings. For example, the P. of the German verb fehlen covers 7 verbs, united by the attribute "absent": fehlen ...

I Field 1) a vast, flat, treeless space. 2) B agriculture plots of arable land into which the crop rotation area is divided, as well as non-rotational (field) plots used for growing with. X. plants. 3)… … Great Soviet Encyclopedia

field semantic lexico-grammatical- One of the structural types of the field, which includes words of different parts of speech ... Terms and concepts of linguistics: Vocabulary. Lexicology. Phraseology. Lexicography

field semantic lexical-derivational- Structural type of the field, including single-root derived words ... Terms and concepts of linguistics: Vocabulary. Lexicology. Phraseology. Lexicography

2.1 The specifics of the concept of "field"

The concept of "field" goes back to the definition of language as a system. The systematic nature of the language, which was theoretically substantiated by I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay and F. de Saussure, was recognized by both domestic and foreign linguists. The concept of the field principle of the systemic organization of linguistic phenomena is considered one of the most significant achievements of linguistics of the 20th century. According to G. S. Schur, the founders of field theory are German scientists, since the concept of "field" is most widely used in the light of the work of G. Ibsen, where it was defined as a set of words that have general meaning. I. Trier introduced the terms "lexical (semantic) field" and "conceptual field" into use, dividing their meanings.

This point of view is reflected in linguistic dictionaries and encyclopedias. OS Akhmanova defines the field as "a set of meaningful units (concepts, words) covering a certain area of human experience." Subsequently, works appeared where a variety of syntactic complexes were treated as fields. The German scientist W. Portzig introduced the term "syntactic field", which originally denoted phrases and syntactic complexes, where the possibility of semantic compatibility of components was traced. Another German scientist, L. Weisgerber, considered the syntactic field as a set of structural models of a sentence, which are united by a common semantic task.

The concept of "syntactic field" was also used by domestic linguists. So, for example, N. I. Filicheva by this term denotes a grouping of syntactic models based on the proximity of the syntactic meanings expressed by them, which are a generalized reflection of objective reality.

V. I. Kodukhov, emphasizing the systemic nature of the language, noted the integrity of the system and the interdependence of its elements: “The systemic nature of its<языка>manifests itself in the fact that various linguistic phenomena are mutually connected with each other, they function as a single whole. In Russian linguistics, of considerable interest is the concept of V. G. Admoni about the field structure of grammatical phenomena, where he singles out the center, concentrating all the matching features, and the periphery, where there is an absence of one or more features.

There is another interpretation. Thus, the researcher V. S. Yurchenko introduces the concept of “linguistic field” and gives the following definition: “A linguistic field is a semantic field that forms an invariant sentence structure with all its connections: extralinguistic (person, reality, real time) and intralinguistic (thought, parts of speech, word, utterance). Thus, the author believes that this phenomenon (“linguistic field”) can be viewed from two sides: both as a functional-semantic field (A. V. Bondarko), on the one hand, and as a “house of being” (M. Heidegger) , with another. With this understanding, the "field" is both the subject of linguistics and the subject of philosophy.

A peculiar classification of functional-semantic fields was proposed by prof. P. V. Chesnokov. The scientist distinguishes three types of FSP: ontological-ontological (the unifying factor here is the objective (ontological) content, and the difference in this content acts as a factor that delimits microfields); ontological-epistemological (here the unifying factor is also the objective content, but the factor separating the MT is the form of reflection, the form of thought) and epistemological-epistemological (both the unifying and separating factor of fields of this type is the cognitive moment, the form of thought). Since the fields of the second and third types differ in the form of thought, and the analysis of individual word forms and syntactic structures included in the studied FSP is carried out from the point of view of embodying semantic forms of thinking in them, it is advisable to touch on the issue of semantic forms of thinking, the doctrine of which was also developed by Professor PV Chesnokov Yu. S. Nadolinskaya Functional-semantic field of the direct object in modern Russian. Abstract of the dissertation for the competition degree candidate of philological sciences. Rostov-on-Don - 2009. S. 7-9.

A complex of system features of nicknames (semantic, structural and functional), modern Russian anthroponymic lexicography

Proper names in the lexical system of the Russian language form a special, unique subsystem with its inherent backbone factors, as well as patterns of development and functioning in various historical periods...

Lexico-grammatical field of politeness in modern English

Consideration of the language from the point of view of fields is not only theoretical, but also of great importance. practical value, since such an approach to the language corresponds to natural conditions speech communication when grammatical, lexical...

Lexico-semantic field "decision" in modern English

Back in the last century, the Russian semasiologist M.M. Pokrovsky drew attention to the fact that “words and their meanings do not live a life separate from each other” (tele-conf.ru), but are connected in our soul, regardless of our consciousness, into various groups ...

False friends translator

Modal verbs German language and their translations into Russian

Field. 1. A set of content units covering a certain area of human experience: an associative field, a conceptual field, a conceptual field, a modal field. 2. A set of language units ...

Features of the representation of the lexical-semantic field "wein" on the material of the novels by E.M. remark

“The lexico-semantic field is a very capacious concept. Here the main problems of lexicology intersect - the problems of synonymy, antonymy, polysemy, the problem of the relationship between the word and the concept. Problem solving...

Features of the representation of the lexical-semantic field "wein" on the material of the novels by E.M. remark

The idea of studying vocabulary in terms of semantic (conceptual) fields is associated in linguistics with the name of J. Trier, although the term itself in linguistics was first used by G. Ipsen, who defined a field as a collection of words...

Problems of legal terminology in English language

Semantic field (according to other terminology, lexico-semantic group) is a collapsible functional system-structural unit of lexical-semantic level. The elements of the semantic field are words...

Public speaking

Public speaking is a communicative interaction between a speaker and an audience of listeners...

Semantic field of the word "dwelling" in Russian and English

Learning lexical items as parts big system helps to reveal semantic structures. The word, being a reflection of reality, is the subject of study of semantics. The study of lexico-semantic groups...

The vocabulary of the language and its layers. Lexical field

Vocabulary is a collection of private systems, or subsystems, called semantic fields, within which words are connected by associative or structural relationships, among which, in particular ...

When describing a language, modern linguistic science is based on the system-functional principle, which involves the use of complex units. Currently, the semantic field is considered the most universal of them...

The Specificity of Color Semantics in Russian and English Languages (Based on a Free Associative Experiment)

Colors play an important role in human perception of the world. From the point of view of linguistics, it is interesting that among different peoples the list of linguistic designations of primary colors and their shades often does not match: there ...

Phraseosemantic field with a somatism component in English and Russian languages (comparative analysis)

1.1 The field principle of describing the phenomena of language The field approach to describing the phenomenon of language has become widespread in modern linguistics. Born in semasiology and associated with the names of J. Trier and W. Porzig...

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

lexical fields. The vocabulary of the language and its layers

See what the "Lexico-semantic field" is in other dictionaries:

2.1 The specifics of the concept of "field"

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents