Definition of lexical homonymy. The concept of homonymy

In scientific and linguistic literature, the essence of homonymy is not understood unambiguously.

The main work on this issue is an article in the journal "Problems of Linguistics" by V.V. Vinogradov "On homonymy and related phenomena" 1968. In this article, V.V. Vinogradov. gives a definition of homonymy and distinguishes between phenomena adjacent to it. In the future, I will constantly refer to this article.

And Rosenthal D.E. agrees with the point of view of V.V. Vinogradov that lexical homonyms are words that sound the same, but have completely different meanings. He defines homonymy - the sound and grammatical coincidence of language units that are not semantically related to each other.

Greek homos - same, onima - name.

Fomina M.I. offers a more extensive definition: lexical homonyms are two or more words of different meanings that coincide in spelling, pronunciation and grammatical design.

In lexicology, two types of homonym words are distinguished - complete and incomplete (or partial) (see Appendix No. 2)

By structure, lexical homonyms can be divided into root and derivative. (see Appendix No. 3)

Fomina M.I. offers other names: simple, or non-derivative, and derivatives. Non-derivative homonyms are most often found in the circle of nouns. In the derivative homonymy of nouns and verbs, researchers, following V.V. Vinogradov usually distinguish the following varieties:

homonymous derived stems each consist of two (or more) homomorphemes of the same type: lezginka (cf. lezgin) and lezginka (dance)

homonymous derived stems consist of morphemes that do not match in sound design.

wallet (paper industry worker) and wallet (paper purse)

in a homonymous pair of words, the derivative of the stem is felt only in one of the words, while the other (or others) undergoes a morphological process of simplification.

besiege - besiege (besiege, that is, surround with troops)

besiege - besiege (separate an integral part of the sediment)

to rein in - to rein in (to force to slow down at full gallop, to lean back, crouching a little)

one of the homonymous bases has a derivative character, the other is non-derivative.

mink (reduced from burrow) and mink (animal and animal skin)

O.S. Akhmanova calls such types of derived homonyms "words with a pronounced morphological structure" and distinguishes among them 5 subtypes:

homonymy of bases

caustic (look, grass, mockery) and caustic (sugar, firewood)

affix homonymy

finca (to finn) and finca (knife)

homonymy with varying degrees of articulation

straighten (galley) and straighten (passport)

homonymy with different internal structure

crossbow (a type of weapon that shoots itself) and crossbow (one who shoots himself)

homonymy from different parts of speech

oven (noun) and oven (verb infinitive)

Derivative homonymy among verbs (the most active process in the modern language) occurs in such cases when, in one verb, the prefix merges with the stem, losing its morphological separability or separability, and in another, homonymous with the first, it retains its semantic functions of a separate morpheme.

call "call someone what" (cf. name) and name (many people)

speak "talk teeth" (cf. conspiracy) and speak (speak, start talking)

Homonymous words are characterized, first of all, by the fact that they correlate with one or another phenomenon of reality independently of each other, therefore, there is no associative conceptual and semantic connection between them, which is characteristic of different meanings of polysemantic words, when implementing the lexical meaning of homonyms, their mixing is almost impossible . For example, no one will think that we are talking about the key as a "spring, source" if, standing at the door, they ask for a key, that is, "a device for activating the lock." The conceptual and thematic correlation of words is completely different, and the use of one of the homonymous words in the text (or live speech) excludes the use of the other.

So, lexical homonymy is observed among words of the same parts of speech. At the same time, two or more lexical homonyms (full or partial) are characterized by the absolute identity of the sound and spelling complex, that is, the external structure (defend - stand to the end, defend - be at some distance, defend - protect) and all (or parts) grammatical forms (initial change in cases, the presence of the same number forms in three words that are full lexical homonyms: bank - vessel, bank - shallow, bank - special transverse seat in a boat).

There are also phenomena similar to lexical homonymy. They are homoforms - words that coincide only in one grammatical form; homophones are words that sound the same but are spelled differently and homographs are words that are spelled the same but are pronounced differently.

Kamkina Olga

The paper gives a clear concept of the category of homonyms in the Russian language, their types, classification.

Download:

Preview:

Municipal state educational institution

"Ingalinskaya secondary school"

NOU "Dawn"

Educational and research work on the Russian language

Homonyms and their types

Head Sysova Valentina

Aleksandrovna teacher

Russian language and literature

Ingaly 2012

Introduction 3

§ 1. History of the question. five

§ 2. The concept of homonymy. Lexical homonymy 6

§ 3. Language phenomena similar to lexical homonymy 10

§ 4. The emergence of homonyms in the Russian language…………………………….12

§ 5. Use in speech…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… § 5 § 5 § 5 § 5 § 5 § 5 § 5

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….19

References……………………………………………………………20

Annex 1………………………………………………………………….21

Annex 2………………………………………………………………….23

Introduction

Between the words that form the vocabulary of the Russian language, certain relationships are found both in the nature of the meanings they express, and in their phonetic design, that is, the similarity of their sound composition.

In the vocabulary of the Russian language, there are three types of relationships between words:

homonymous (according to sound correspondence)
synonymous (according to the proximity of the expressed values)
antonymous (by opposition of expressed meanings)

The presence of these relations allows us to speak about a certain organization of words in the vocabulary, about the existence of a lexical system of the language. The essence of the phenomena of homonymy, synonymy and antonymy is as follows: with homonymy, there is an identity (that is, coincidence) of sounding with a difference in the meaning of words, with synonymy - identity or similarity of meaning with a complete difference in sounding (that is, sound composition), with antonymy - the opposite meaning with a difference in the sound of the words.

In this paper, we consider the phenomenon homonymy. The phenomenon of homonymy is a topic that has been covered in linguistic literature for a very long time. It is considered by such scientists as V.V. Vinogradov, Fomina M.I., Popov R.N., Akhmanova O.S., Lipatov A.T., Rakhmanova L.I. and others. Their disputes concern the understanding of the essence of homonymy, its occurrence in the Russian language, its use in speech, the distinction between homonymy and polysemy, homonymy and related phenomena. Based on the foregoing, we believe that until the controversy on this issue stops, it should be considered relevant.

The purpose of this work– based on the analysis of linguistic literature, to give an idea of how the phenomenon of homonymy is covered in modern science. With this goal in mind, we are faced with the following tasks:

Analyze different approaches in the definition of homonymy;

To get acquainted with the history of coverage of this issue;

Create didactic material for Russian language lessons on homonymy.

Subject of study: lexical-linguistic analysis of the category of words.

Object of study: phenomenon of homonymy.

Research methods: analysis of scientific literature, generalization and systematization of the obtained information; methods of continuous sampling of observation and analysis.

4. Homonymy as a manifestation of formal relations, the problem of distinguishing between homonymy and polysemy. Phenomena similar to homonymy.

From polysemantic words, which in different contexts have partially different, but at the same time interrelated meanings, words that are identical in form, but do not have common components of semantics, should be distinguished.

homonymy is the ratio of words that match in form and differ in content.

The meanings of these words are not connected by common semantic components and associative relations. The absence of associative relations, common components between the meanings of homonyms is their difference from the variants of a polysemantic word. For example, in the meanings of lexical units put out(vegetables) - put out(fire) common components can be identified: water, fire, heat, but their coincidence is coincidental. Components are built into different semantic structures. Associatively, these verbs are also not connected in any way.

Homonymy, unlike polysemy, is characterized by the uniqueness of meaning relationships. Homonymy seems to be a negative category, and the relations of homonyms themselves are irregular and exclusive: braid- "hair braided together" braid- "agricultural implement" and braid- "shoal", combustible- "capable of burning" and combustible- "bitter".

Homonymy is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. When systematizing homonymous units, researchers delimit lexical homonyms from adjacent units. The task of such a distinction was set by V.V. Vinogradov in the article "On homonymy and related phenomena" (1960). V.V. Vinogradov proceeds from the fact that lexical homonyms are “different in their semantic structure, and sometimes in morphological composition, but identical in sound structure in all forms of the word” [V.V. Vinogradov. Selected works. Studies in Russian grammar. M., 1978. S. 299].

In homonymy as a lexico-semantic category, it is advisable to single out the center (lexical homonyms (full and partial)), and the periphery (homoforms, homophones, homographs). The characteristic features and patterns of certain categorical relations are most clearly manifested in the central part of the classifying structure, "fading away" towards its periphery.

Lexical homonyms- words that have the same sound, but do not have common elements (semes) of lexical meaning and are not associated associatively ( outfit- clothes and outfit- "instruction").

Depending on the degree of coincidence of word forms, full and partial homonyms are distinguished.

Full homonyms match in all grammatical forms ( key(spring) - key(door), pen(chair) - pen(diminutive for the word hand).

The completeness/incompleteness of homonyms is determined by whether they are wholly or partially included in the grammatical paradigm. For nouns, the completeness of the paradigm is determined by a set of word forms in the categories of number and case; for verbs - the ability to form the infinitive, personal forms, participles and participles while maintaining the specific and collateral meaning.

Partial homonyms coincide only in a number of grammatical forms, for example, fist"hand with clenched fingers" - fist“a rich peasant owner who exploits the labor of others”, these lexical units do not have a match in the form of the accusative case, singular and plural; units onion"garden plant" onion"weapons" coincide only in singular forms.

Along with lexical homonyms, phenomena adjacent to lexical homonymy, incomplete homonyms, are distinguished:

1. homoforms- these are words that coincide only in separate word forms: a noun verse"poem" in singular, nominative-accusative and verb subside"to become quiet" past tense, indicative, singular, masculine verse; technique"a set of means of labor" and technology - the genitive case of the singular from the word technician.

2. Homophones words that sound the same but have different spellings fruit - raft, cat - code).

3. homographs words that have the same spelling but differ in pronunciation agonybut themat ka, cowardAnd t and trat sit).

Homonyms may arise as a result of historical processes taking place in the language:

1) The collapse of polysemy- gradual loss of the associative connection between the meanings of a polysemantic word, for example, shop"piece of furniture" shop"trading establishment" light"radiant energy" light"world, universe" Most often, such phenomena are observed in chain polysemy: the disappearance of one LSV from the chain leads to the destruction of the semantic connection between the meanings of a polysemantic word. For example, paper(cotton fabric) and paper(material for writing) in the modern language - semantic homonyms. In the 19th century paper was an ambiguous word having the following LSV: 1 Cotton cloth. 2. Cotton writing material. 3. Wood writing material. Extralinguistic reasons - a change in papermaking technology - led to the fact that an intermediate value (2 LSV) fell out, the polysemantic word fell apart. This led to the emergence semantic homonyms. The collapse of polysemy is the result of a long historical process. In each historical period of the development of a language, we find a certain stage in the development of the word. Hence the possible multiplicity of interpretations of the same lexical unit. The same words can be interpreted in one dictionary as homonyms, in another as a polysemantic word. For example, the word the consignment(political) and party (playing) in the dictionary of S.I. Ozhegova (1952) - homonyms; in the dictionary of 1960 - one word, as in the dictionary of D.N. Ushakov.

2) Sound shell changes words for historical reasons, for example, onion: "plant" from other Russian. LUK and onion"weapon" from LOUK. Such homonyms are called etymological.

3) The result of word formation processes leads to the appearance derivational homonyms:

a) the first subtype includes derivative words that are formed from homonymous stems ( to melt - to melt(bake) - to melt - to melt(person); prickly - prick(firewood) - prickly - prick(needle)

b) the second type includes derivative lexemes formed with the help of homonymous affixes, for example, the appearance of homonyms settlement"big city" and settlement“the place where the city used to be” are due to the action of two word-formation models with the suffix - search(es) in the meaning of "place", cf. conflagration, and in a magnifying sense, cf. hands, house.

4) Borrowing a foreign language words:

a) as a result of borrowing a foreign word, there may be a formal coincidence in the sound and spelling of the word “alien” and the original Russian word, for example, a word borrowed from the German language marriage"flaw, lack" coincided with the original Russian marriage " matrimony." In the same way, English came into our language club"public organization" homonym for Russian club(smoke), from Finnish mink"predatory animal" homonymous with the Russian word mink "animal dwelling".

b) words that come from different source languages may turn out to be consonant in Russian, for example, tap from Dutch - "shutter in the form of a tube for the release of liquid or gas" and tap from German - "a mechanism for lifting and moving goods", mat from German - "soft bedding made of durable material" and mat from Arabic - "defeat in a chess game."

c) words that sound the same are borrowed from the same language. So, homonyms are borrowed from French mine- "explosive projectile" and mine- "facial expression".

Homonymy and polysemy: ways to distinguish between phenomena

The emergence of homonyms in the language is a rather complicated and lengthy process, especially when there is a break in the meanings of a polysemantic word. The difficulty lies in the fact that the loss of common elements of meaning occurs gradually, as a result of which it is difficult to find the line between the completed and unfinished process of the decay of meanings. As objective criteria for finding this edge, i.e. The following are most often put forward to distinguish between the phenomena of polysemy and homonymy:

1. Semantic criterion. The loss of the meanings of a polysemantic word of their mutual linguistic motivation. The meanings of a polysemantic word necessarily have a meaning component (the seme) or an associative feature that unites all the meanings included in it. For example, M uranium: 1. "The dwelling of ants." 2. "The collection of ants." 3. "People, residents of a densely populated house." 4. "A house that looks like an anthill."

Homonyms do not have such a connecting seme ( interfere"to be a nuisance" and interfere"stir").

word-formation criterion. A polysemantic word and homonyms differ in the nature of word-formation processes.

Homonyms are characterized by a divergence of word-formation series created on their basis and caused by the difference in the original meanings of words. For example, braid"agricultural tool", its derivational series: mow, mowing, mowing And braid"hairstyle" with a derivational row: pigtail, pigtail.

LSV of a polysemantic word form new words with the help of the same suffixes. For example, a noun bread"cereal" forms an adjective breadn th shoots, noun bread"a food product baked from flour" forms an adjective breadn oh smell- also with the suffix –n.

Syntagmatic criterion. In contrast to the multi-valued word d For homonyms, as a rule, mismatched compatibility is characteristic. Wed the consignment"union of people" left, democratic, reactionary And the consignment"a game": unfinished, productive, delayed.

Synonymous. Members of the synonymic series of the LSV of a polysemantic word can intersect. For example, root(a citizen): original, main, but root(question) has a synonym main. Words basic And main synonyms, therefore root(resident) and root(question) retain semantic proximity, are the LSV of a polysemantic word.

Homonyms are characterized by the absence of synonymous relations between their synonyms, i.e. words are homonyms if their synonyms do not form a synonymous series. For example, the word marriage"flaw" has a synonymous series: deficiency, flaw, imperfection, and the noun marriage"marriage": matrimony. Synonyms do not intersect, so marriage(flaw) and marriage(marriage) homonyms.

Researchers have developed a number of criteria for distinguishing between polysemy and homonymy (antonymic, etymological, etc.)

____________________________________________________________

So, E. Kurilovich proposed to attribute LSV to one lexeme, if they are non-unique, repeated in opposition. For example, two uses of the noun audience in different sentences: Auditorium is empty. The audience roared in disapproval. are combined into one lexeme, since the semantic opposition "room" - "people in the room" is not unique .

Yu.D. Apresyan proposed the following as a criterion for referring to a polysemantic word. . The common part of a polysemantic word must be non-trivial, there must be semantic similarity. In this case, the opposition of homonymy and polysemy is gradual, there are types of polysemy more or less remote from homonymy. From this point of view, homonyms braid(hairstyle) - braid(instrument) - braid(a strip of land) are not pure homonyms, since there is a certain external similarity: “ something narrow and long».

The use of homonyms in speech. Used expressively to create puns. Pun: I am able to take a wife without a fortune, but I am not able to go into debt for her rags. They are used in proverbs and sayings for an unexpected convergence of meanings: a bow is good both in battle and in cabbage soup.

Homonyms are words that have the same sound and spelling, but differ in lexical meaning and compatibility with other words.

Homonyms are divided into complete and incomplete.

Full homonyms coincide in all their grammatical forms. For example: key (source,) - key (rod for unlocking locks); block (building material) - block (sports technique).

Incomplete homonyms do not match in their individual grammatical forms. Examples: bow (weapon) - bow (garden plant). The word "onion" in the meaning of "plant" does not have a plural form.

Types of homonyms

In addition to lexical homonyms, there are quite a few phenomena close to them. There are the following types of homonyms:

1) - words that are spelled the same, but completely different. Examples: castle - castle; Atlas - atlas; Iris - iris; on the street soars - an eagle soars;

2) Homophones are words that are pronounced the same but are spelled differently. Examples: company - campaign; lead - lucky; rinse - caress; ink - ink; guarded -; Roman - novel; arson - arson;

3) homoforms - words that coincide in their individual forms. Examples: I am treating a patient - I am flying on an airplane; young man - taking care of a young mother.

Thus, homonymy is such a lexical-semantic unit that serves as a means of creating expressiveness of speech.

The Russian language has a unique lexical structure, so many words and individual phrases are not always clear to a foreigner who seeks to correctly translate each word separately. For example, the same word can mean completely different concepts, often having nothing in common with each other.

Among the groups of words of the Russian language, which are combined due to common features, homonyms stand out. How to answer the question, homonyms and why do they cause difficulties not so much for native speakers of the Russian language as for foreigners? The very concept of "" comes from the Greek word "homōnyma", which stands for "identical names". And indeed, by definition, homonyms are separate words that are spelled and read in exactly the same way, but are completely different in their meaning. The main characteristic is the absence of common semantic elements in such pairs of words.

At the same time, syntactic and word-formation indicators are by no means any significant objective criteria that could clearly separate the category of homonyms from the concept of polysemy of words. As a rule, they are the result of several reasons. Firstly, they arise due to the identical sound coincidence of lexical units of different origin. For example, the word "lynx" can mean both a kind of horse running and a wild feline order. Secondly, homonyms often arise as a result of a complete divergence of several meanings of one polysemantic word. So, the word "peace" is associated with the absence of war, and the vast universe.

Thirdly, homonyms in the Russian language often appear due to parallel word formation from one concept. For example, the word "troika" is understood both as a satisfactory school mark and as a trio of frisky horses. And if understanding the correct meaning of a homonym for a native speaker of the Russian language is absolutely no problem, then a foreigner will be able to understand the desired version of the word thanks to the context. Despite the similarity with polysemantic words, homonyms, due to the lack of a common semantic core, do not have combined meanings.

Studying the varieties of homonyms, one can distinguish homographs, homophones and homoforms. Homographs resemble graphic homonyms, they coincide in the style of the letters, but differ not only in meaning, but also in pronunciation due to different accents. An example of such a pair is the word "flour" - suffering or a food product. Homophones are phonetic homonyms, they are only pronounced similarly, but are written a little differently, for example, at the end of one word there is a voiceless consonant, and the other one is voiced. Homoforms are grammatical homonyms that sound the same only in different verb forms.

Definition of homonyms

Homonymy is the sound coincidence of different words, the meanings of which are in no way related to each other.

This is what homonymy categorically differs from ambiguity. Homonyms differ from polysemous words in the following characteristics:

1) homonyms have no semantic connection;

2) homonyms have different word-formation connections;

3) homonyms have different lexical compatibility;

4) homonyms have different phraseological environment.

Reasons for the emergence of homonyms in Russian

Homonyms arise in the language as a result of the following reasons:

1) the sound coincidence of words that used to differ phonetically.

Examples: bow (plant) - bow (cold weapon); peace (lack of war) - peace (light).

The word "peace" in the meaning of "absence of war" until 1918 was written through i: peace. After the spelling reform of 1918, the letter "and decimal" was abolished, the spelling of the two words coincided;

2) borrowing words from . As a result, the word may coincide in form and sound with the original Russian word. Examples: marriage (, from the word "take") - marriage (flaw, defect; came from German through Polish); raid (sea berth; from Dutch) - raid (hike; from English);

3) the collapse of polysemy, i.e. if one of the meanings of a polysemantic word completely loses its semantic connection with its other meanings, then it breaks away from this word and turns into an independent lexical unit.

This is one of the most productive, but also the most difficult ways to form homonyms.

Examples: Wednesday (day of the week) - Wednesday (what surrounds us); light() - light(world);

4) the formation of derivative words from one base and according to one word-formation model, but with different meanings. Examples: drummer (performs actions with blows, drummer) - drummer (advanced worker); raincoat (cloak) - raincoat (mushroom).

1.introduction 2

2. History of the issue. 4

3. The concept of homonymy. Lexical homonymy 5

Full lexical homonyms 5

Incomplete (partial) homonyms 5

root 6

derivatives 6

4. Language phenomena similar to lexical homonymy 8

5. Homonymy and polysemy in Russian (review). 12

The emergence of homonyms in the Russian language. 13

Use in speech. 16

1. Introduction

In the vocabulary of the Russian language, there are 3 types of systemic relationships between words:

homonymous (according to sound correspondence)

synonymous (according to the proximity of the expressed values)

antonymous (by opposition of expressed meanings)

These relationships between words in the lexical system of the language in the textbook Valkova D.P., Popova R.N. and others are presented in the following table  6 :

In this paper, we will consider the phenomenon homonymy. The phenomenon of homonymy is a topic that has been covered in linguistic literature for a very long time and is considered by such scientists as V.V. Vinogradov, Fomina M.I., Popov R.N., Akhmanova O.S., Lipatov A.T., Rakhmanova L.I. and others. Their disputes concern the understanding of the essence of homonymy, its occurrence in the Russian language, its use in speech, the distinction between homonymy and polysemy, homonymy and related phenomena. As a result, we can conclude that until the controversy on this issue stops, it should be considered relevant.

The purpose of this work– based on the analysis of linguistic literature, to give an idea of how the phenomenon of homonymy is covered in modern science.

Work tasks:

analyze different approaches in the definition of homonymy;

get acquainted with the history of coverage of this issue;

show how this issue is covered in the school curriculum and textbooks;

create didactic material for lessons on the specified topic;

2. History of the issue.

The problem of homonymy, the multifaceted aspects of its semantics have attracted the close attention of researchers for a long time. This problem had its ebb and flow, ups and downs, but at each new stage of increasing interest in it, new facets, new aspects of this linguistic phenomenon were opened.

It is known that for a long time, research in the field of homonymy focused on lexical homonymy, which, because of this, received the most complete semasiological and lexicographic interpretation. With regard to lexical homonymy, there are clearly 3 points of view.

According to the first, the earliest, only etymological (heterogeneous) homonyms that arose as a result of a random coincidence of sound complexes are recognized. This theory was followed by J. Gilleron, R.I. Menner, J. Orr, V.I. Abaev.

According to another, lexical homonymy has two initial sources:

phonetic convergent evolution of different words or forms (including borrowings)

semantic divergent evolution of one word

(Bulakhovskiy L.A., Budagov R.A., Nyurop K., Ulman S.)

And according to the third, the formation of homonyms is possible as a result of word-formation processes.

(Vinogradov V.V., Smirnitsky A.I., Stepanov Yu.S., Bally Sh.) 6

3. The concept of homonymy. Lexical homonymy

In scientific and linguistic literature, the essence of homonymy is not understood unambiguously.

The main work on this issue is an article in the journal "Problems of Linguistics" by V.V. Vinogradov "On homonymy and related phenomena" 1968. In this article, Vinogradov V.V. gives a definition of homonymy and distinguishes between phenomena adjacent to it. In the future, I will constantly refer to this article.

And Rosenthal D.E. agrees with the point of view of V.V. Vinogradov, that lexical homonyms are words that sound the same but have completely different meanings. He defines homonymy - sound and grammatical coincidence of language units that are not semantically related to each other.

Greek homos- the same onyma- name.

Fomina M.I. offers a broader definition: lexical homonyms two or more words of different meanings are called, coinciding in spelling, pronunciation and grammatical design.

In lexicology, two types of homonymous words are distinguished - complete and incomplete (or partial).

By structure, lexical homonyms can be divided into:

Fomina M.I. suggests other names: simple, or non-derivatives, and derivatives. Non-derivative homonyms are most often found in the circle of nouns. In the derivative homonymy of nouns and verbs, researchers, following V.V. Vinogradov usually distinguish the following varieties:

homonymous derived stems each consist of two (or more) homomorphemes of the same type.

lezgin-to -but(cf. Lezgins) and lezgin-to -but(dance)

homonymous derived stems consist of morphemes that do not match in sound design.

paper-Nick (paper industry worker) and paper-Nick (purse for papers)

in a homonymous pair of words, the derivative of the stem is felt only in one of the words, while the other (or others) undergoes a morphological process of simplification.

siege-it - besiege(to besiege, that is, to surround with troops)

besiege - besiege(separate the component of the sediment)

besiege - besiege(make slow down at full gallop, lean back, crouching a little)

one of the homonymous bases has a derivative character, the other is non-derivative.

nor-to -but(reduced from burrow) and mink(animal and animal skin)

O.S. Akhmanova calls such types of derived homonyms "words with a pronounced morphological structure" and distinguishes among them 5 subtypes:

homonymy of bases

pungent(look, grass, mockery) and pungent(sugar, wood)

affix homonymy

Finnish(to Finn) and Finnish(knife)

homonymy with varying degrees of articulation

straighten(galley) and straighten(the passport)

homonymy with different internal structure

crossbow(type of weapon that fires itself) and crossbow(one who shoots himself)

homonymy from different parts of speech

bake (noun) And bake(verb infinitive)

name"call someone what" (cf. name) and call(many people)

start talking"talk your teeth" (cf. conspiracy) and to speak(to speak, start speaking)

Homonymous words are characterized primarily by the fact that they correlate with one or another phenomenon of reality independently of each other, therefore, there is no associative conceptual and semantic connection between them, which is characteristic of different meanings of polysemantic words. when realizing the lexical meaning of homonyms, their mixing is practically impossible. For example, no one will think that we are talking about vein as about a “spring, source”, if, standing at the door, they ask for key, i.e. "device for actuating the lock". The conceptual and thematic correlation of words is completely different, and the use of one of the homonymous words in the text (or live speech) excludes the use of the other. (Unless, of course, there is a special collision with a certain stylistic task. See ____)

So, lexical homonymy is observed among words of the same parts of speech. At the same time, two or more lexical homonyms (full or partial) are characterized by the absolute identity of the sound and spelling complex, that is, the external structure ( defend 1 - stay until the end defend 2 - be at some distance defend 3 - protect) and all (or parts) of grammatical forms (initial change in cases, the presence of the same number forms in three words that are full lexical homonyms: jar 1 - vessel jar 2 - shallow, jar 3 - spec. transverse seat in the boat).

4. Language phenomena similar to lexical homonymy

Homonymy as a linguistic phenomenon is observed not only in vocabulary. In the broad sense of the word, homonyms are sometimes called different language units that coincide in sound. Unlike proper lexical (or absolute) homonyms, all other consonances and various kinds of coincidences are called relative, although here it would be more correct to speak not about homonymy in the broad sense of the word, and not even about relative homonymy, but about the homonymous use of various types in speech homophones, which, as V.V. Vinogadov, includes "all kinds of unanimities or consonances - in whole constructions, and in conjunctions of words or their parts, in separate segments of speech, in separate morphemes, even in adjacent sound combinations"  _ .

Such scientists as Rosenthal D.E., Shmelev D., Vinogradov V.V. are of the opinion that homoforms, homographs and homophones are phenomena adjacent to homonymy, since they relate to the grammatical, phonetic and graphic levels of the language.

Rosenthal D.E. believes that “strict differentiation of linguistic phenomena requires limiting proper lexical homonymy from homoforms, homophones, homographs.” _

homoforms- words that coincide only in one grammatical form (less often in several).

three 1 - counts. in I. p. (three friends)

three 2 - verb in command. incl., units h., 2 l. (three carrots on a grater)

The grammatical forms of words of the same part of speech can also be homonymous.

adjective forms big, young may indicate:

I.p., unit, m.p. (great success, young professional)

R.p., s.ch., w.r. (great career, young woman)

D.p., s.ch., w.r. (to a great career, to a young woman)

etc., sing. (with a big career, with a young woman)

The reason for recognizing these forms as different forms, although coinciding in sound, is that they agree with nouns that appear in different cases (moreover, the same adjectives with noun m.r. and cf.r. here have different forms - big village, big villages, big village).

Homoforms by their nature go beyond the vocabulary, as they belong to a different level of the language and should be studied in the morphology section  _

Homophones Words that sound the same but are spelled differently.

meadow - bow, hammer - young, lead - carry

These words coincide in pronunciation due to the stunning of voiced consonants at the end of a word and before voiceless consonants. Changing vowels in an unstressed position leads to the consonance of words rinse - caress, lick - climb, sharp - islands, brother - brother. Therefore, the appearance of homophones is associated with the operation of phonetic laws.

Homophones are the subject of study not of lexicology, but of phonetics, since they manifest themselves at a different linguistic level - the phonetic one.

homographs Words that are spelled the same but pronounced differently. they usually have stress on different syllables:

mugs - mugs, fell asleep - fell asleep

There are more than a thousand pairs of homographs in modern Russian. Homography is directly related to the graphic system of the language.

Fomina M.I. offers a broad concept of homophony (Greek homos - the same, phone - voice, sound), which covers the consonance of a variety of language units:

coincidence of pronunciation of words (the so-called proper homophones, or phonetic homonyms)

flu - mushroom, dock - dog, labor - tinder

coincidence of words and phrases (a kind of homophony)

dumb - not mine, skidding - by the nose, for days - with ducks

coincidence of separate forms of the word (the so-called homoforms, or grammatical homonyms)

saw(n.) - saw(ch. in pr.v.) , I'm flying(from fly) - I'm flying(I'm flying) ,

young man - caring for a young mother

the same spelling of words, but the difference in pronunciation, in particular stress ( homographs):

lexical: atlas - atlas

lexico-grammatical: village(verb) - village(n.)

grammar: addresses - addresses

stylistic: compass(lit.) - compass(maritime)

But Fomina M.I. agrees with V.V. Vinogradov that lexical homonymy proper (full or partial) “cannot be confused or even brought together” with homophony in the broad sense of the word, that is, with all consonances and similarities that occur in speech.

And the linguist Rakhmanova L.I. considers homophones and homoforms as types of homonyms, but recognizes that not all scientists attribute homographs to homonyms, since the main feature - different sounding contradicts the general definition of homonyms.

Rakhmanova L.I. identifies a special group of homoforms - these are words that have moved from one part of speech to another.

directly(adverb) - directly(enhanced particle)

The words of this group are distinguished from other homoforms by the fact that when they are declined as units. hours, and in the plural. in all case forms they have the corresponding homoform - adjective.

Popov R.N. notes that “paronymy is considered to be one of the close phenomena to homonymy. But at the same time, it must be taken into account that paronymy takes place only in oral speech and has nothing to do with the lexical system of the language.  _

Paronyms- words that are close, but not identical in sound, different in meaning and erroneously used in speech one instead of the other.

Fact- "a real, non-fictional event, phenomenon."

Factor- "the driving force, the cause of any process or phenomenon, which determines its characteristic features."

Phonetically, paronyms differ from each other in that they have a different pronunciation or the beginning of a word ( president - resident), or end ( set - complex).

Among paronyms, a significant place is occupied by a noun. Paronyms expressed by other parts of speech are less common ( single - ordinary; to grind - to grind).

In grammatical literature, the so-called functional homonyms. These are similar in sound, etymologically related words related to different parts of speech. Kolykhanova E.B. writes about this. And

Shiryaeva T.G. in his work “Functional homonyms in the lexical system of the Russian language”.  _

Kolkhoz fieldsmooth . (cr. adj.)

The letters are writtensmooth . (adverb)

I will comesmooth at five.(particle)

Functional homonyms are words that are used in speech as a result of transition from one part of speech to another. In such cases, several words belonging to different parts of speech are hidden behind a single sound complex.

The formation and existence of functional homonyms allows cases of double, triple (sometimes more) use of the same sound complex.

The formation of functional homonyms is carried out under certain syntactic conditions, which should be understood as a change in the syntactic function of a word, the order of words in a sentence, compatibility with other words, the nature of the connection between the members of the sentence, the ellipsis of the word being defined.

In modern research, a tendency has been established to use double names for those phenomena that are built on various kinds of coincidences, consonances. For example: homophones are phonetic homonyms, homoforms are grammatical homonyms, homomorphemes are morphological homonyms (or derivational homonyms). Sometimes such terms are used: omosyntagms - syntactic homonyms, omostylemes - stylistic homonyms. It seems that, despite the critical attitude of researchers to this kind of double terminology, in particular to terms-phrases like "syntactic homonymy" and the like, its use does not cause confusion, but, on the contrary, makes it possible to more clearly define one or another linguistic phenomenon. _ 

5. Homonymy and polysemy in Russian (review).

The distinction between different homonymous words and one word with many meanings, as already noted, causes many difficulties and cannot always be carried out unambiguously.

The difficulty of distinguishing between these phenomena and the complexity of their clear, consistent definition is also indicated by modern lexicographic practice. So, many words that are given as polysemantic in one dictionary are considered in another (or others) as different words, homonymous to each other.

Ways to distinguish between homonymy and polysemy:

Substituting synonyms for each homonym or for all meanings of the polysemantic, and then comparing the selected synonyms with each other. If they turn out to be semantically close to each other, we have a polysemantic word, if not - homonyms.

Comparison of the word forms of each of them, the selection of related (single-root) words, that is, the establishment of their derivational connections. if the word forms are the same or similar and there are related words that are identical in terms of the type of formation, and there is a semantic proximity between them, we can talk about polysemy.

Finding out the origin of words, that is, etymological information about words.

Comparison of the translation of Russian homonyms into other languages. This noticeably refines the idea of real homonymization.

Identification of the thematic relation of the word and the definition of typical models of lexical compatibility, as well as the semantics of the entire context as a whole.

Thus, in order to reasonably distinguish homonymy from polysemy, it is necessary to use as much comparative data as possible, which will make it possible to identify which features prevail: similar over distinctive ones, or vice versa - distinctive over similar ones. However, the decisive features for the stages of analysis are still actually semantic ones. It is they, as modern researchers note, that should be recognized as the main ones in distinguishing homonymy from polysemy, it is they that should be present in all other distinctive comparisons.  _

The emergence of homonyms in the Russian language.

In the process of the historical development of the dictionary, the appearance of lexical homonyms was due to a number of reasons.

Rosenthal D.E. offers a clear distribution of these causes:

As a result of borrowing foreign words, there may be a formal coincidence in the sound and spelling of the word "alien" and native Russian.

marriage 1 in Russian is related to the verb take(cf: to marry oneself), its modern meaning is “family relations between a man and a woman; marital relationship."

marriage 2 - “spoiled, poor-quality, defective items of production”, borrowed from it. language brack- flaw

club 1 – eng. "public organization"

club 2 smoke - Russian swirl

Words that entered the Russian language from different languages may turn out to be consonant.

tap 1 – Dutch a closure in the form of a tube for the release of a liquid or gas »

tap 2 – German "mechanism for lifting and moving goods"

mat 1 – German "soft bedding made of durable material"

mat 2 - Arab. "defeat in a game of chess"

mat 3 - French "absence of gloss, roughness of the smooth surface of the object."

Words that sound the same are borrowed from the same language

French mine 1 - "explosive projectile"

mine 2 - "facial expression"

latin. note 1 - musical sound

note 2 - Diplomatic appeal from one government to another

When new words are formed from the roots and affixes available in the language, homonyms also appear.

settlement 1 - site of an ancient settlement

settlement 2 - magnifier of a word city

Daddy 1 - a form of subjective assessment from dad

Daddy 2 - a form of subjective assessment from folder

The appearance of homonyms as a result of the coincidence of the newly formed abbreviation with a long-known full-value word.

stork 1 - "migratory bird"

STORK 2 – automatic information station

Mars 1 – planet

MARS 2 – automatic registration and signaling machine

Homonyms become native Russian words that have undergone various changes as a result of phonetic and morphological processes that took place in the language.

onion 1 - an ancient weapon (once had a nasal vowel, which eventually began to sound like  u)

onion 2 - garden plant

flying 1 - treat (e - b "yat")

flying 2 - fly

The source of the appearance of homonyms may be a break in the semantic structure of polysemantic words, in which individual meanings diverge so much that they are no longer perceived as belonging to one word.

light1- Universe

light2- dawn, sunrise

"I wanted to go around the whole light, and did not travel around a hundredth of a share ... "-" A little light- already on your feet! (Griboedov A.S.)

In 1972, for the first time, the homonymy of words was recognized and recorded in the Ozhegov Dictionary duty- duty and duty- borrowed. In the 1950s, these words were considered as variants of the same word with different meanings. This indicates the duration of the process of splitting a polysemantic word and the transformation of its meanings into independent homonyms, the inevitability of the appearance of intermediate, transitional cases when it is difficult to give an unambiguous semantic description of the word. For example, words are treated differently in different dictionaries to knit(tighten with rope) and to knit(knitting needles, crochet); wave(something) and wave(go somewhere)

Fomina M.I. also notes the discrepancy between the meanings of a polysemantic word is observed in the language not only among native Russian words, but also among words borrowed from any one language. Interesting observations are given by comparing the homonymy of etymologically identical words:

agent 1 - ruler of a state

agent 2 - an active cause of certain phenomena

(both words from lat. ages, agentis  from agere - to act)

openwork 1 - see-through mesh fabric

openwork 2 – maintaining accounting books, documents until the last day

(from French ajour - through, summarized)

It should be noted that there is no consensus in modern lexicology on the role of the disintegration of a polysemantic word in the formation of homonyms. So, V.I. Abaev in his article "On the submission of homonyms in the dictionary" (see: Questions of Linguistics, 1957, No. 3) expressed the idea that new homonyms, their "reproduction is mainly due to polysemy." EAT. Galkina-Fedorchuk in the article “On the issue of homonyms in the Russian language” (see: Russian language at school, 1954, No. 3) and Z.A. Tolmachev in the article “The formation of homonyms through the collapse of polysemy” (see: Russian Language at School, 1959, No. 4) also considered “separation of the meaning of words” as one of the productive ways of forming homonyms. However, V.V. Vinogradov noted the unproductiveness of this method of formation, believing that “even fewer homonyms owe their formation to the semantic disintegration of a single lexeme into several homonymous lexical units of the type light is the universe, and light- lighting. A.A. Reformatsky argued that in the Russian language "the most homonyms that arose due to borrowings", although he also recognized the fact that the process of derivative homonymy is active. A.I. Smirnitsky called random sound coincidences the main source of replenishment of the language with homonyms. O.S. Akhmanova, recognizing the sufficient activity of homonyms arising as a result of dispersed polysemy, at the same time pointed out the great difficulties associated with the search for objective criteria for evaluating the completion of the homonymization process. These articles served as a stimulus for the ongoing discussion on the issues of homonymy.  10

Use in speech.

In the modern Russian language, a significant number of homonyms have been recorded, and with the development of the language, they become more. The question arises: does homonymy prevent correct perception in speech?

The functioning of homonyms in speech, as a rule, does not cause any particular difficulties. First of all, the context clarifies the semantic structure of such words, excluding inappropriate interpretation. In addition, homonyms belong to different areas of use and have an ambiguous expressive coloring, different functional attribution, as a rule, do not collide in speech. Nevertheless, the combination of the meanings of homonymous words is possible. However, in this case it is due to a certain stylistic goal, and this goal is different in different styles of speech.

The intentional clash of homonyms has always been an indispensable means of witty puns.

Kozma Prutkov also wrote: “It’s nice caress child or dog, but most necessary rinse mouth".

Similar homophones are used in folk jokes:

"I in the forest, and he got in, I behind elm, and he stuck» W. Dahl

Often there is a collision of lil even a combination in one text of both homonymous words and words that accidentally coincide in sound (homophones, homoforms, etc.) it is interesting to compare the intentional collision of partial homonyms eat- "to be, to be" and eat- “to take food”, translated by S.Ya. Marshak "Zazdravny toast" by Robert Burns:

Which eat, what eat- sometimes they can't eat,

And others may eat, yes they sit without bread,

And we have here eat, what eat, yes at the same time eat, how eat, -

So, we have to thank the sky!

Combines consonant words, a writer, poet, publicist, as it were, brings together those objects, concepts that they designate. This technique is a means of actualization, it performs the task of communicating additional artistic information.

Do you hear how to smell like gunpowder become

Editorials and poetry?

Feathers are stamped from the same become,

Which tomorrow will go on bayonets.

(K. Simonov "Winner")

Poets use homonymous rhymes, which often give the poem a special attraction.

You puppies! Follow me!

Will you on kalachu,

Look, don't talk

But not that I'll beat you!

(A.S. Pushkin)

Snow said: - When I flock,

There will be a river of doves,

Will flow, shaking flock

Reflected doves.

(Y.A. Kozlovsky)

Alena is good braid.

And the grass in the meadow is for her braid.

Soon the meadow will pass braid.