What is Paradigmatic Lexical Relation? A paradigmatic relation is a relation that holds between elements of the same category, i.e. elements that can be substituted for each other. (http://www.glottopedia.de/index.php/Paradigmatic_relation ) Paradigmatic relations hold between items which can occupy the same position in a grammatical structure.( A Glossary ofSemantics and Pragmatics)
A paradigmatic lexical relation is a culturally determined pattern of association between lexical units that: lexical units share one or more core semantic componentssemantic components belong to the same lexical categorylexical category fill the same syntactic position in a syntactic construction have the same semantic function.
Paradigmatic relations are divided into 2 classes: 1- sense relations of identity and similarity of sense, which includes hyponymy, meronymy and synonymy. 2- sense relations of opposition and dissimilarity of sense and ambiguity consisting of antonymy.
1- sense relations of identity and similarity of sense, which includes hyponymy, meronymy and synonymy.
The word comes from Ancient Greek syn (σύν) ("with") and onoma (ὄνομα) ("name"). (Cruse)Ancient Greekσύνὄνομα Synonyms are different phonological words which have the same or very similar meanings. (Saeed,2009:69) Synonymy is the case where two constituents are as similar as possible, where there is no difference in meaning between a sense of one and a sense of the other (Katz 1972: 48). Synonymy is held to be sameness of meaning of different expressions (Harris 1973: 11).
Alan Cruse (2000:169) says “if we interpret synonymy simply as “sameness of meaning”, then it would appear to be a rather uninteresting relation, but if, we say that “synonyms are words whose semantic similarities are more salient than their differences, ”then a potential area of interest opens up.
Examples: - Couch / sofa - Boy / lad -Large / big Examples for sentence: The thief tried to CONCEAL / HIDE the evidence. I am going to PURCHASE / BUY a new coat. It is a very WIDE / BROAD street.
Synonyms can be any part of speech (e.g. nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs or prepositions), examples:part of speechnounsverbsadjectives adverbsprepositions noun –"student" and "pupil“ verb –"buy" and "purchase“ adjective –"sick" and "ill“ adverb –"quickly" and "speedily“ preposition –"on" and "upon"
Properties of synonymy: symmetric applies only to lexical items of the same word class applied at the sense or lexical item-level. Cruse, 1986; Miller et al., 1990; Fellbaum, 1998; Widdows, 2005
Degrees of synonymy 1. Absolute synonymy (complete identity of meaning): requires the possibility of substituting one word for another in any conceivable context without the least change of meaning (including style, register, attitude, etc). (Cruse,2002:8). She looks almost Chinese. (more normal) She looks nearly Chinese. (less normal) She was quite calm just a few minutes ago. (more normal) She was quite placid just a few minutes ago. (less normal)
Maja Stanojević (2009:194) claims that it is unnatural for a language to have absolute synonyms or lexemes with exactly the same meaning because: -Firstly, the function or use of one of them would gradually become unnecessary or unmotivated and, as a result, it would soon be abandoned or dropped. -Secondly, their interchangeability in all the contexts can neither be demonstrated nor proved, for, on one hand, the number of contexts is infinite, and, on the other hand, the exceptions from absolute interchangeability are inevitable. Therefore, the lexicons of natural languages do not have absolute synonymy as their feature. 1. Absolute synonymy
Degrees of synonymy 2- Cognitive synonymy: is the identity of cognitive (descriptive) meaning and it is also known as descriptive synonymy, propositional synonymy or referential synonymy. (Maja Stanojević 2009:195) -Cognitive synonymy is sometimes described as incomplete synonymy (Lyons, 1981) -or nonabsolute or partial synonymy (Lyons, 1996).
-Cognitive synonyms: imply sentences with equivalent truth-conditions and propositions which are mutually entailing. This is a semantic or logical definition of synonymy. It is introduced by Kempson and Palmer. (Murphy,2003:150) -Cognitive synonyms are described as words with the same cognitive meaning. (Lyons 1995:63). -Examples: -liberty/freedom - statesman/politician - hide/conceal
Degrees of synonymy - A proposition containing one synonym is mutually entailed by the same proposition containing the other. e.g; John bought a fiddle. ↔ John bought a violin. -I heard him tuning his fiddle. entails and is entailed by - I heard him tuning his violin. - She is going to play a violin concerto. entails and is entailed by She is going to play a fiddle concerto. Notice that fiddle is less normal in the last example, while leaving truth conditions intact, which shows that fiddle and violin are not absolute synonyms." (Cruse, 2000, 158)
Degrees of synonymy 3- near-synonymy: no simple correlation between semantic closeness (scale of semantic distance) and degree of synonymy. near-synonyms must share the same core meaning and must not have the primary function of contrasting with one another in their most typical contexts. (For instance, collie and spaniel share much of their meaning, but they contrast in their most typical contexts.) Example: kill, murder, assassinate and execute; they show crucial meaning differences in their selectional restrictions and other features.
Degrees of synonymy 4- Complete synonyms: have identical descriptive, expressive and social meaning in the range of the given contexts. (Lyons1981:148). Murphy (2004:146) introduces : 5- logical synonyms: includes - full synonyms: Denotationally equivalent words whose all senses are identical. - sense synonyms: share one or more senses, but differ in others, i.e. they have at least one identical sense (sofa/couch).
During distinction between near-synonymy and non-synonymy there are two possible solutions:- Firstly, since speakers of a language can judge synonymy as language users, they should intuitively know whether or not certain lexemes are synonymous. Secondly, in order to consider lexemes as synonymous, they shouldn't stand in contrast with one another.
Some lexicographers claim that no synonyms have exactly the same meaning.lexicographers As palmer (1981) notes, the synonyms often have different distributions along a number of parameters, they may have belonged to different dialects and then become synonyms for speakers familiar with both dialects. e.g; Press in Irish English Cupboard in British English it is now commonly agreed that the scale of synonymity is continuous (Cruse 2002: 488) and that a strict categorisation of types of synonymy is problematic because in many contexts it is difficult to determine the exact degree of dissimilarity.
- synonyms can be distinguished in different ways. According to Jackson & Amvela (2007: 110-112): 1- Some synonym pairs differ in that they belong to different dialects of English. e.g., bonnet/hood caravan/trailer [British vs. American English]. farm/ranch 2- A second general way in which synonyms may be distinguished relates to the style or formality of the context in which a word may be used. e.g., argument/disputation die/decease praise/eulogy western/occidental.
Synonyms can be distinguished in different ways. 3- A third way in which synonym pairs may be distinguished is where connotations differ. Two words may largely share a denotation, in referring to a particular entity, but they may have divergent associative or emotive meanings. e.g., ambiguous/equivocal (deliberately) famous/notorious (disreputably) hate/loathe (with disgust) misuse/abuse (of privilege or power) new/novel (strikingly).
Inclusion: Class C1 is said to include class C2 if everything that is a member of C2 is also a member of C1, but not vice versa. for instance, - The class of animals includes the class of dogs, the class of aardvarks, etc. - The set of dogs is described as a subclass of the set of animals, and the set of animals as a superclass of the set of dogs. (Cruse,2009:35)
is not an entry into another, the ability to transpose oneself into another situation. This can all too easily entail the losing of oneself. Rather it is the extension of oneself. (Kalman Yaron 1994)
Inclusion can manifest itself in one of two ways: First, the meronym may be more general than the holonym, in that without ambiguity it stands in the same relation to at least one other holonym. e.g; - Nail and toe - A toe has a nail is normal, but A nail is a part of a toe is not, because nail might equally be a finger-nail: So nail is more general than toe. we may say that nail is a super-meronym of toe, which entails that toe is a hypo-holonym of nail
second possibility is for the holonym to be the more inclusive term in a mis-matched pair. sepal and flower -At first sight this may appear to be a case of optionality a flower may or may not have sepals, sepals are either canonically present, or canonically absent. Thus, flower is more inclusive than sepal.
2- sense relations of opposition and dissimilarity of sense and ambiguity consisting of antonymy.
Opposites are words that lie in an inherently incompatible binary relationship, as in the opposite pairs; male : female long : short up : down precede: follow The notion of incompatibility here refers to the fact that one word in an opposite pair entails that it is not the other pair member.entails E.g, something that is long entails that it is not short. It is referred to as a 'binary' relationship because there are two members in a set of opposites. -The relationship between opposites is known as opposition. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Are the following words have the degree of opposites? tea : coffee gas : electricity Yes, but only in situations where they represent a two-way choice.
-Directional opposites The main types of directional opposite are: Opposite directions Antipodals Reversives. Converses
1. Opposite directions: are adverbial pairs such as up: down forwards: backwards north: south in: out - Or potential orientations or paths of movement in contrary directions.
2. Antipodals : represent extreme points along a certain axis within some entity. Purely spatial examples include: top: bottom front: back floor: ceiling head: toe - the relationship can also be seen in non-spatial domains beginning: end introduction : conclusion
3. Reverses: involve movement or change (or cause of movement or change) in opposite directions between two states. (Saeed,2009:69) e.g; Push / pull (in a swing door) Like antipodals they may involve literal motion, as in rise: fall (e.g. in water level) advance: retreat arrive : depart
3. Reverses: In a reversive relation it is not necessary for the path of change to be the same for both items as long as the initial and final states are reversed. For instance, the action of untying a knot is not normally the exact reversal of the action of tying it.
Basic types of lexical opposite 1- Complementary: Are pairs that express absolute opposites, like mortal and immortal. Complementarity is a type of oppositeness. Complementary terms divide a domain into two mutually exclusive sub- domains: if something belongs to the domain, then it must fall under one or other of the terms. Complementaries have a contradictory relation. for example, if something is not dead it must be alive, and if it is not alive then it must be dead, and it is anomalous to say of an organism that it is neither dead nor alive.
Complementary: The complementary relation ship between dead and alive only appears if what they are applied to belongs to the appropriate domain, in this case, the domain of organisms. E.g, The table is not alive does not entail The table is dead.
1- Complementary: -Complementarity more typically occurs with nouns. e.g; pairs of terms for persons of opposite such as: Member / non- member Official / non- official -complementary adjectives are not gradable, they do not permit the comparative, superlative, equative form or modification with very, etc.
How can we recognize complementaries? We can recognize it by the fact that if we deny that one term applies to some situation, we effectively commit ourselves to the applicability of the other term; and if we assert one term, we implicitly the other,, Thus John,is not dead entails and is entailed by John is alive Complementarity can also be diagnosed by the anomalous nature of a sentence denying both terms: The door is neither open nor shut. The hamster was neither dead nor alive.
Sources Maja Stanojević, 2009. COGNITIVE SYNONYMY:A GENERAL OVERVIEW. Alan Cruse, 2000. Meaning in Language. An introduction to semantics and pragmatics. F. F. Palmer, 1976. Semantics A new out line. D.A. Cruse, 1986. Lexical semantics. John I. Saeed, 2009. Semantics. Sebastian Lobner, 2002. understanding semantics Free wekipedia.