Direct and figurative meanings.

The word and its meaning. The word and the image.

The word is a linguistic unit of major significance. A word names, qualifies and valuates the micro- and macrocosm of the surrounding world. It expresses the concept of a thing, process, phenomenon. Doing so, it names (denotes) them. This is the most essential feature of a word.

When examining a word one can see that its meaning though closely connected with the underlying concept is not identical with it. To begin with, concept is a category of human cognition. Concept is the thought of the object that singles out the most typical, the most essential features of the object. So all concepts are almost the same for the whole of humanity in one and the same period of its historical development. The meanings of words, however, are different in different languages. That is to say, words expressing identical concept may have different semantic structures in different languages. E.g. the concept of “a building for human habitation” is expressed in English by the word “house”, in Russian – “дом”, but their meanings are not identical as “house” does not possess the meaning of “fixed residence of family or household”, which is part of the meaning of the Russian word “дом”; it is expressed by another English word home. The difference between meaning and concept can also be observed by comparing synonymous words and word-groups expressing the same concept but possessing linguistic meaning which is felt as different in each of the units, e.g. big, large; to die to pass away, to join the majority, to kick the bucket; child, baby, babe, infant. Concepts are always emotionally neutral as they are a category of thought. Language, however, expresses all possible aspects of human consciousness. Therefore the meaning of many words not only conveys some reflection of objective reality but also the speaker’s attitude to what he is speaking about, his state of mind. Thus, though the synonyms big, large, tremendous denote the same concept of size, the emotive charge of the word tremendous is much heavier than that of the other word. Meaning is a certain reflection in our mind of objects, phenomena or relations that makes part of the linguistic sign – its so-called inner facet, whereas the sound form functions as its outer facet.

Types of meaning

Grammatical meaning is defined as the expression in speech of relationships between words. The grammatical meaning is more abstract and more generalised than the lexical meaning. It is recurrent in identical sets of individual forms of different words as the meaning of plurality in the following words students, windows, compositions.

The definitions of lexical meaning given by various authors, though different in detail, agree in the basic principle: they all point out that lexical meaning is the realisation of concept or emotion by means of a definite language system. The conceptual content of a word is expressed in itsdenotative meaning. To denote is to serve as a linguistic expression for a concept or as a name for an individual object. It is the denotational meaning that makes communication possible. Connotationis the pragmatic communicative value the word receives depending on where, when, how, by whom, for what purpose and in what contexts it may be used. There are four main types of connotations stylistic, emotional, evaluative and expressive or intensifying. Stylistic connotations is what the word conveys about the speaker’s attitude to the social circumstances and the appropriate functional style (slay (умерщвлять) vs kill), evaluative connotation may show his approval or disapproval of the object spoken of (clique (банда) vs group), emotional connotation conveys the speaker’s emotions (mummy vs mother), the degree of intensity (adore vs love) is conveyed by expressive or intensifying connotation. The interdependence of connotations with denotative meaning is also different for different types of connotations. Thus, for instance, emotional connotation comes into being on the basis of denotative meaning but in the course of time may substitute it by other types of connotation with general emphasis, evaluation and colloquial stylistic overtone. E.g. terrific which originally meant 'frightening' is now a colloquialism meaning 'very, very good' or 'very great': terrific beauty, terrific pleasure. The orientation toward the subject-matter, characteristic of the denotative meaning, is substituted here by pragmatic orientation toward speaker and listener; it is not so much what is spoken about as the attitude to it that matters.

Fulfilling the significative and the communicative functions of the word the denotative meaning is present in every word and may be regarded as the central factor in the functioning of language. The expressive function of the language (the speaker’s feelings) and the pragmatic function (the effect of words upon listeners) are rendered in connotations. Unlike the denotative meaning, connotations are optional. Connotation differs from the implicational meaning of the word. Implicational meaning is the implied information associated with the word, with what the speakers know about the referent. A wolf is known to be greedy and cruel (implicational meaning) but the denotative meaning of this word does not include these features. The denotative or the intentional meaning of the word wolf is “a wild animal resembling a dog that kills sheep and sometimes even attacks men”. Its figurative meaning is derived from implied information, from what we know about wolves – “a cruel greedy person”, also the adjective wolfish means “greedy”. Polysemy is very characteristic of the English vocabulary due to the monosyllabic character of English words and the predominance of root words. The greater the frequency of the word, the greater the number of meanings that constitute its semantic structure. A special formula known as “Zipf's law” has been worked out to express the correlation between frequency, word length and polysemy: the shorter the word, the higher its frequency of use; the higher the frequency, the wider its combinability , i.e. the more word combinations it enters; the wider its combinability, the more meanings are realised in these contexts. The word in one of its meanings is termed as lexico-semantic variant of this word. For example the word table has at least 9 lexico-semantic variants: 1. a piece of furniture; 2. the persons seated at a table; 3. sing. the food put on a table, meals; 4. a thin flat piece of stone, metal, wood, etc.; 5. pl. slabs of stone; 6. words cut into them or written on them (the ten tables); 7. an orderly arrangement of facts, figures, etc.; 8. part of a machine-tool on which the work is put to be operated on; 9. a level area, a plateau. The problem in polysemy is that of interrelation of different lexico-semantic variants. There may be no single semantic component common to all lexico-semantic variants but every variant has something in common with at least one of the others. All lexico-semantic variants of a word taken together form its semantic structure or semantic paradigm. The word face, for example, according to the dictionary data has the following semantic structure: 1.The front part of the head: He fell on his face, 2.Look, expression: a sad face, smiling faces, she is a good judge of faces. 3.Surface, facade: face of a clock, face of a building, He laid his cards face down. 4.fig. Impudence, boldness, courage; put a good/brave/ bold face on smth, put a new face on smth, the face of it, have the face to do, save one's face. 5.Style of typecast for printing: bold-face type.

Direct and figurative meanings.

In polysemy we are faced with the problem of interrelation and interdependence of various meanings in the semantic structure of one and the same word. No general or complete scheme of types of lexical meanings as elements of a word's semantic structure has so far been accepted by linguists. There are various points of view. The following terms may be found with different authors: direct / figurative, other oppositions are: main / derived; primary / secondary; particular/ abstract; central/ peripheral; general/ special; narrow / extended and so on. Meaning is direct when it nominates the referent without the help of a context, in isolation; meaning is figurative when the referent is named and at the same time characterised through its similarity with other objects, e.g. tough meat – direct meaning, tough politician – figurative meaning. Similar examples are: head – head of a cabbage, foot – foot of a mountain, face – put a new face on smth. Differentiation between the terms primary / secondary main / derived meanings is connected with two approaches to polysemy: diachronic and synchronic. If viewed diachronically polysemy, is understood as the growth and development (or change) in the semantic structure of the word. The meaning of the word table in Old English was the meaning “a flat slab of stone or wood”. It was its primary meaning, others were secondary and appeared later. They had been derived from the primary meaning. Synchronically polysemy is understood as the coexistence of various meanings of the same word at a certain historical period of the development of the English language. In that case the problem of interrelation and interdependence of individual meanings making up the semantic structure of the word must be investigated from different points of view, that of main/ derived, central /peripheric meanings. An objective criterion of determining the main or central meaning is the frequency of its occurrence in speech. Thus, the main meaning of the word table in Modern English is “a piece of furniture”. Polysemy is a phenomenon of language, not of speech. But the question arises: wouldn’t it interfere with the communicative process?

As a rule the contextual meaning represents only one of the possible lexicosemantic variants of the word. So polysemy does not interfere with the communicative function of the language because the situation and the context cancel all the unwanted meanings, as in the following sentences: The steak is tough – This is a tough problem – Prof. Holborn is a tough examiner. By the term “context” we understand the minimal stretch of speech determining each individual meaning of the word. The context individualises the meanings, brings them out. The two main types of linguistic contexts which serve to determine individual meanings of words are the lexical context and the grammatical context. These types are differentiated depending on whether the lexical or the grammatical aspect is predominant in determining the meaning. In lexical context of primary importance are lexical groups combined with the polysemantic words under consideration. The adjective ‘heavy’ in isolation possesses the meaning “of great weight, weighty”. When combined with the lexical group of words denoting natural phenomena as wind, storm, etc. it means “striking, following with force, abundant”, e.g. heavy rain, wind, storm, etc. In combination with the words industry, arms, artillery and the like, heavy has the meaning “the larger kind of something as heavy industry, artillery”. In grammatical context it is the grammatical (mainly the syntactic) structure of the context that serves to determine various individual meanings of a polysemantic word. Consider the following examples: 1) I made Peter study; He made her laugh; They made him work (sing, dance, write...) 2) My friend made a good teacher 3) He made a good husband. In the pattern “to make + N(Pr)+ V inf” the word make has the meaning “to force”, and in the pattern “to make + A + N” it has the meaning “to turn out to be”. Here the grammatical context helps to determine the meaning of the word “to make”. So, linguistic (verbal) contexts comprise lexical and grammatical contexts. They are opposed to extra linguistic contexts (non-verbal). In extra-linguistic contexts the meaning of the word is determined not only by linguistic factors but also by the situation itself in which the word is used. Extension (widening of meaning). The extension of semantic capacity of a word, i.e. the expansion of polysemy in the course of its historical development, e.g. manuscript originally “smth hand-written”. Narrowing of meaning. The restriction of the semantic capacity of a word in the historical development, e.g. meat in Old English meant “food and drink”. Elevation (or amelioration). The semantic change in the word which rises it from humble beginning to a position of greater importance, e.g. minister in earlier times meant merely “a servant”. Degradation. The semantic change, by which, for one reason or another, a word falls into disrepute, or acquires some derogatory emotive charge, e.g. silly originally meant “happy”. The change in the denotational component brings about the extension or the restriction of meaning. The change in the connotational component may result in the degradation – pejorative or ameliorative development of meaning.