Roaches to а semantic structurel

The <stablished senses of а polysemous word, which are minimal nominative lexicai units, ша, coexist happily, but they are not equal in their status. Some of them appeared earlier and аде appeared later, воле meanings are frequently used and some are not, some ае~ ев are contextually or phraseologically bound and some of them are contextually and geologically free, some of them are stylistically marked and limited in use and Some ar< neutral and widely used, some easily occur to our mind and some do not.

Sii rtteanings of а polysemantic word, or its lexlcal-semantic variants (the term was offered Ъу Professor АЛ. Smirnitsky), are believed to be organized in а semantic ц~п ~1иге, where each of them takes а certain place both ш the semantic place and in the й1 ~,опав entry, as ш go '1. to move on а course: PROCEED — compare ВТОР, 2. 1о д р out of or away from а place, 3. to take place: HAPPEN, etc.'. Each of these lexical-

ап1|с variants though having the ваше form, has а different meaning, derivational p>teiitiaI, lexical and grammatical combinability and frequency of usage. In fact, they are different nominative units, and each of them should be enlisted ш lexicon.

1оп1й also be noticed that the term 'semantic structure' has become polysemantic |1® Ij, and nowadays it may be used to denote а semic, or componential structure of word rtiealiing, as well as а conceptual structure.

~апаше structure of а word is not stable and may be different at different periods of 1~ еааце development. Over time new meanings may be derived and some meanings may

оте archaic and finally disappear &om the lexical system when denoted by them уп objects or concepts cease to exist (bier arch. 'а framework for carrying') or when

the name of а concept happens to be replaced by some other name (as the primary rhe>ning of the adjective candid 'white, glistening' or two derived meanings of the noun ~е,~~~е: arch. 'COFFIN' and obs. 'BIER'). Semantic structure may also change due to QjyQrgence or convergence of meaning development, as were the cases wi

th уЬюег or у„~~/г described above.

11,а(is why а word's semantic structure it is studied either synchronically, at а certain, а11у current, репой of time, or diachronlcally, in the process of its historical

tlevelopment.

irpuic approacii to а word's semantic structure aims to register various г~геап,ngs tiantic words, their value and character of their relations.

iing that first occurs to our mind, or is understood without а special сок~ее~ ~

сап be representative of the whole semantic structure of а word, is c~IIе 1 atral, or major meaning. It is placed first in synchronical dictionary~ 0 ~, are called peripheral, or minor.

be mentioned, however, that an individual does not know all the ~пеап~гг~

t exist in а language or registered by dictionaries. Апй then, in the гп „~ 1 of different people meanings may have different structures. То ее~а~|; ~, ~, ю rms of meanings organization into semantic structures at а certain tirrtQ ред.,~

fr

xperiments should be carried out or more objective principles of ге<р~епс

ge should be applied.

tic structure is viewed diachronically, then its historical development, с~а~ ~ becomes central.

ming first registered in the language is called primary, and it is pI

~ dictionari~ first. 0th~ makings ые seconds y. Or denved, md же placed primary one.

istorical changeability of semantic structure, the primary meaning of а word

г ш the course of time or may not be perceived as the most representative г ructure, ап4 one of the secondary, or derived meanings may become гпа~ г

For example, the primary meaning of the adjective siveet was 'pleasant г„

6 the meaning 'опе of гпе four basic sensations, like that of sugar' щ

е, while in modern English the latter has become central and is placed д

ies of current English. (See also nice, fuir).

•п аем of sciuautic structure iu diKcrcut!аиаиаае4

ent languages semantic structures of correlative polysemantic words (words „;и, irimary or central meanings), the actual number of meanings, Же|г с~агасге

sually 4о not coincide. Cases of coincidence of semantic structures in correlative;е extremely гаге.

~оп for these differences is accidental meaning development and use of na~,.п

)о we may speak about arbitrariness of semantic structure in different!апнц

people in different language communities may use different naming means for со„

асср< 1еыса!ization. Рог example, they may use lexical-semantic mean 1П one language

affixation in the other (cf.: Russian подножие for English |оо1 'the lower part pf „ mountain'), borrowing or syntactic naming for correlated concepts (cf.: Russ фрега,„

с l and сторожевой корабль for Е frigate escort-ship).

Even if they use the ваше type of naming, for example, lexical-semantic one

different language communities may choose different Геатпгеа of 1}|е сопсер1 ая the, representative, and accordingly, different words wottId Ье пяес1 for semantic шо1;

(сумка кен.уру — а /гапдагоо роасй, шумью в сердце йеау~ тает

леере — ушко иголки, глухой как пень — ав а4~а/ ав а post р„/. „, г

мокрый как курица).