logo
Kovalenko_lexicology

Electronic Resources:

  1. Arora Sh. The Perception Of Proverbiality [Електронний ресурс] / Shirley Arora // De Proverbio: An Electronic Journal of International Proverb Studies. – 1995. - Vol. 1. - No. 1. http://www.utas.edu.au.flonta/

  2. Charteris-Black J. Still Waters Run Deep - Proverbs About Speech And Silence: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective [Електронний ресурс] / Jonathan Charteris-Black // De Proverbio: An Electronic Journal of International Proverb Studies. - 1995. - Vol. 1. - No. 2.

http://www.utas.edu.au.flonta/

6. VOCABULARY STRATIFICATION

Native vocabulary / Criteria of vocabulary classification / Semantic fields / Nonce words and neologisms / Archaisms /Loaded lexicon / Regional dialects / World Englishes /Social stratification of vocabulary / Political correctness and gender issues

At the core of the English language there is what is called native vocabulary: “Many lexemes have always been there – in the sense that they arrived with the Germanic invaders, and have never fallen out of use. The Anglo-Saxon lexical character continues to dominate everyday conversation, whether it be grammatical words (in, on, be, that), lexical words (father, love, name), or affixes (mis-, un-, -ness, -less). Although Anglo-Saxon lexemes comprise only a relatively small part of the total modern lexicon, they provide almost all the most frequently used words in the language. In the million-word Brown University corpus of written American English, the 100 most frequently used items are almost all Anglo-Saxon. The exceptions are a few. Scandinavian loans (such as they and are); there is nothing from Romance sources until items 105 (just) and 107 (people)” (Crystal, 1995, p. 124). The other words have been either derived or borrowed.

The vocabulary stock of any language can be classified using plenty of different criteria and dimensions. One can speak about semantic and thematic fields, neologisms and archaisms, stylistically marked and stylistically neutral vocabulary, neutral and emotionally charged words, professional and social jargons, colloquialisms and bookish vocabulary, regional and international dialects and various other ‘lects’ (sociolects, idiolects, age-lects).

A fruitful notion in investigating lexical structure is the semantic or lexical field – a “named area of meaning in which lexemes interrelate and define each other in specific ways” (Crystal, 1995, p. 157). Think, for example, of all the lexemes we know to do with 'fruit', or 'parts of the body', or 'vehicles’ or 'buildings', or 'colour'. We shall have no difficulty assigning banana, nostril, lorry, town hall, and scarlet to their respective fields. To what extent is it possible to assign all the lexemes in English to a semantic field in an unambiguous way?

The task is not as straightforward as it might appear, for several reasons. Some lexemes seem to belong to fields which are very difficult to define, or which are vague – to what field should noise or difficult belong? Some seem to belong to more than one field –­ does orange belong to 'fruit' or 'colour'? There is also the question of how best to define a semantic field: shall we say that tractor belongs to the field of 'agricultural vehicles', 'land vehicles', or just 'vehicles'? Is flavour part of the semantic field of 'taste', or taste part of the semantic field of ‘flavour', or are both members of some broader semantic field, such as 'sensation'?

These are typical of the problems which semanticists come up with. At the same time, the existence of these difficulties must not hide the fact that a very large number of lexemes can be grouped together into fields and subfields in a fairly clear-cut way. The notion of semantic fields has proved to be useful in such domains as foreign language teaching and speech therapy, where it is helpful to present learners with sets of related lexemes, rather than with a series of randomly chosen items. And young children, too, learn much of their vocabulary by bringing lexemes together in this way (Crystal, 1995, p. 424).

One of the commonest is chronological vocabulary stratification. Besides up-to-date vocabulary which forms the basis of the language word-stock, there are archaisms and neologisms – words that are no more used in everyday language and those that are only beginning to be used and haven’t yet found their way to the dictionaries.

Anglo-Saxon forms, borrowings, and the use of affixes account for most of what appears within the English lexicon, but they do not tell the whole story. The general term for a newly ­created lexeme is a coinage, but in technical usage a distinction can be drawn between nonce words and neologisms.

A nonce word (from the 16th-century phrase for the nonce, meaning ‘for the once') is a lexeme created for temporary use, to solve an immediate problem of communication. D. Crystal describes an incident he evidently witnessed in person: “Someone attempting to describe the excess water in a road after a storm was heard to call it a fluddle. ­She meant something bigger than a puddle but smaller than a flood. The newborn lexeme was forgotten (except by a passing linguist) almost as soon as it was spoken. It was obvious from the jocularly apologetic way in which the person spoke that she did not consider fluddle to be a 'proper' word at all. There was no intention to propose it for inclusion in a dictionary. As far as she was concerned, it was simply that there seemed to be no word in the language for what she wanted to say, so she made one up for the nonce” (Crystal, 1995, p. 132).

A neologism is a newly coined word that may be in the process of entering common use, but has not yet been accepted into mainstream language. Neologisms are often directly attributable to a specific person, publication, period, or event. A neologism stays new until people start to use it without thinking, or alternatively until it falls out of fashion, and they stop using it altogether. But there is never any way of telling which neologisms will stay and which will go.

Blurb, coined in 1907 by the American humorist Gelett Burgess (1866-1951), proved to meet a need, and is an established lexeme now. On the other hand, his coinage of gubble, 'to indulge in meaningless conversation', never caught on. Lexical history contains thousands of such cases. In the 16th century, a great age of neologisms, we find disaccustom and disacquaint alongside disabuse and disagree. Why did the first two neologisms disappear and the last two survive? We also find effectual, effictuous, effictful, effectuating, and effective. Why did only two of the five forms survive, and why those two, in particular? The lexicon is full of such mysteries.

Here is an approximate list of the 20th-21st centuries’ coinages and their sources (Wikipedia, 2009):

Many neologisms have come from popular literature and tend to appear in different forms. Most commonly, they are simply taken from a word used in the narrative of a book; a few representative examples are: grok (to achieve complete intuitive understanding), from Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert A. Heinlein; McJob, from Generation X: Tales for an Accelerated Culture by Douglas Coupland; cyberspace, from Neuromancer by William Gibson; nymphet from Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov.

Sometimes the title of a book becomes the neologism, for instance, Catch-22 (from the title of Joseph Heller's novel). Alternately, the author's name may become the neologism, although the term is sometimes based on only one work of that author. This includes such words as Orwellian (from George Orwell, referring to his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four) and Ballardesque or Ballardian (from J.G. Ballard, author of Crash). Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle was the container of the Bokononism family of nonce words.

Lewis Carroll has been called ‘the king of neologistic poems’ because of his poem, Jabberwocky, which incorporated dozens of invented words. The early modern English prose writings of Sir Thomas Browne are the source of many neologisms as recorded by the OED.

An archaism is a feature of an older state of the language, which continues to be used while retaining the aura of its past. Grammar and the lexicon provide the chief examples, though older pronunciations will from time to time be heard, and archaic spellings seen. The clearest cases are those which are separated by a substantial time-gap, notably those dating from Middle and Early Modern English.

“The hunter of archaisms will find them in an unexpectedly diverse range of contexts. Most obviously, they are used in many historical novels, plays, poems, and films about such topics as King Arthur or Robin Hood. Novelists who have used archaic language in a careful way include Walter Scott in Ivanhoe and William Thackeray in Esmond. In poetry, Spenser and Milton were influential in maintaining an archaic tradition of usage. Children's historical stories also tend to use them, albeit in a somewhat stereotyped manner. Archaisms can be found in religious and legal settings, in nursery rhymes and fairy tales, and (if the product warrants it) in trade names and commercial advertising. Rural dialects often retain words which have gone out of use in the standard language. And many older elements, such as thorpe ('village') and lea ('wood'), are preserved in place names” (Crystal, 1995, p. 173).

Emotionally charged words are opposed to the emotionally neutral vocabulary. Another term for the emotional words is loaded lexicon, which implies being charged with connotation. Here belong taboo words, language of abuse (invective) and swear words.

A few dozen lexemes comprise the special category of taboo language – items which people avoid using in polite society, either because they believe them harmful or feel them embarrassing or offensive. The possibility of harm may be genuinely thought to exist, in the case of notions to do with death and the supernatural, or there may be merely a vague discomfort deriving from a half-believed superstition. Embarrassment tends to be associated with the sexual act and its consequences.

“Offensiveness relates to the various substances exuded by the body, and to the different forms of physical, mental, and social abnormality. Words associated with certain other topics may also be called taboo, from time to time, because society is sensitive to them. During the recession of the early 1990s, newspapers would talk about 'the R word', and after the 1991 Maastricht conference would refer to the proposed federalism of the European Community as 'the F word'. For some people, indeed, all jargon is taboo” (Crystal, 1995, p. 174).

The prohibition on use may be explicit, as in the law courts ('contempt of court'), the Houses of Parliament ('unparliamentary language'), and the broadcasting media (words officially banned until after a certain time in the evening, so that children are less likely to be exposed to them). More commonly, it is a tacit understanding between people, which occasionally becomes explicit in the form of a comment, correction, or sanction (such as a parental rebuke). The comment may be directed to oneself ('Pardon my French') or to others ('Ladies present'), and may be jocular ('Wash your mouth out') or serious ('God forgive me for sweating').

There are various ways of avoiding a taboo item. One is to replace it by a more technical term, as commonly happens in medicine. Another, common in older writing, is to part-spell the item. The everyday method is to employ an expression which refers to the taboo topic in a vague or indirect way – a euphemism.

English has thousands of euphemistic expressions, of which these are a tiny sample: ­casket (coffin), fall asleep (die), push up the daisies (be dead), the ultimate sacrifice (be killed), under the weather (ill), after a long illness (cancer), not all there (mentally subnormal), little girl's room (toilet), spend a penny (urinate), be economical with the truth (lie), adult video (pornography), let you go (sack), industrial action (strike), in the family way (pregnant), expectorate (spit), tired and emotional (drunk).

We need to draw a clear distinction between the language of taboo, the language of abuse (invective), and the languag­e of swearing. T­he three may overlap or coincide: “to call someone a shit is to use a taboo word as term of abuse, and if said with enough emotional force would be considered an act of swearing. But there is no necessary identity. Piss is a taboo word which is not usually employed on its own as invective or a swearword. Wimp is a term of abuse which is neither a taboo word nor a swear word. And heck is a swear word which is neither taboo nor invective. Yet other distinctions are often drawn, some being given legal definition, and invoking sanctions in certain circumstances. Probably the commonest notions are obscenity, which involves the expression of indecent sexuality – 'dirty' or 'rude' words; blasphemy, which shows contempt or lack of reverence specifically towards God or gods; and profanity, which has a wider range, including irreverent reference to holy things or people (such as, in Christianity, the cross or the saints). However, despite these distinctions, the term swearing is often used as a general label for all kinds of 'foul-mouthed' language, whatever its purpose” (Crystal, 1995, p. 173).

Regiolal variation of language brings to the appearance of dialects. It is inevitable that people traditionally think of dialects as a purely intranational matter – local to the country to which they belong. Historically, the English language was restricted to a single geographical area – the British Isles – and for centuries, until the growth of urban populations, the only regional variation which most people would encounter would be associated with neighbouring communities and the occasional visitor from further afield.

Today the study of local dialects has come to be supplemented by an international approach to dialectology – the study of ‘world Englishes’.

The regional variation is not as strong in the regional written English, but in the informal spoken language the differences between regional varieties dramatically increase. Due to the influence of TV and mass media the borders between regional variants are becoming blurred, some words from American English are beginning to be used in Britain (ex., mail), the reverse pattern is less obvious, but British films and TV programmes are seen sufficiently in the USA to mean that a growth in awareness of UK vocabulary should not be discounted.The differences between regional variants are most obvious on the lexical level. Thus, a dictionary by David Grote has some 6.500 entries, and deals only with British English for American readers.

Awareness in regional variation in English is evident from the 14th century, seen in the literature of the time (Chaucer). Extensive lexical variation is found in the British English dialects: “There are nine chief variants noted for threshold and a further 34 alternatives. In the case of headache there is a fairly clear picture. The standard form is used throughout most of the country, but in the North and parts of East Anglia there is a competing regional form, scull-ache. The variant form head-wark is found in the far North, with a further variant, head-warch, mainly in S Lancashire Northumberland opts for a more prosaic sore head, with bad head used in adjacent localities to the South. There is also a regional difference between the use of article – some people say ‘a headache’, while others prefer to say ‘the headache’.” (Crystal, 1995, p. 318-325).

Among the major dialects of British English Scottish, Welsh and Irish English should be mentioned.

British vs American Vocabulary. In describing the lexicon of the two regions, there are three distinctions which have to be made: some words are found only in American English, some only in British English, and some (from either source) have become established throughout the world as part of Standard English. While Congress and Parliament originated in their respective countries, it is no longer very useful to call one American English (AmE) and the other British English (BE), from a linguistic point of view. They are now part of World Standard English (WSE).

Among the World Englishes, beside American English one should mention Canadian English, Caribbean English, Australian English, New Zealand English, South African English.

There is also a term New Englishes, referring to the English language of the countries where it has an official status as the second language (such as India and Nigeria) and also the countries where English is recognized as an important international medium, but has not received any special status (such as Japan and Brazil).

Social variation of language. While the regional language variation answers the question “Where are you from?” social language variation provides an answer to a question “Who are you in the eyes of the English-speaking society to which you belong?” Age, sex and socio-economic class are the main factors that influence social variation of language.

RP – received pronunciation, the most ‘prestige’ accent in Britain. It was first established 400 years ago as the accent of the court and the upper classes. In due course, RP came to symbolize a person's high position in society. Today, with the breakdown of rigid divisions between social classes and the development of the mass media, RP is no longer the preserve of a social elite. It is at best described as an ‘educated’ accent.

Cockney is known to be the language of London working-class.

Estuary English. The term was coined in the 1980's to identify the way features of London regional speech seemed to be rapidly spreading throughout the counties adjoining River Thames (essentially Essex and Kent) and beyond. It is something of a misnomer, for the influence of London speech has for some time been evident well beyond the Thames estuary, notably in the Cambridge – Oxford – London triangle and in the area of the South and the East of London as far as the coast.

The spread of this variety was mainly governed by the influence of TV and media. Estuary English is the result of the confluence of two trends: an up-market movement of originally Cockney speakers, and a down-market trend towards 'ordinary' (as opposed to 'posh') speech by the middle class and the trend to avoid the 'establishment' connotations of the Received Pronunciation.

Estuary English has specific grammar features:

Estuary English is rather an accent than a dialect. It is described as a continuum of pronunciation possibilities, with Cockney at one end and Received Pronunciation at the other.

Social variants of vocabulary include such phenomena as jargons, slang and occupational varieties (religious English, scientific English, legal English, political English, news media English (journalese, the English of broadcasting, the English of sports commentary), advertising English).

New varieties of English include: computer-mediated communication, language of headlines, language of electronic conversations, answerspeak (Hello, I'm sorry we're not here at the moment... Answerphone conversation: delayed single-exchange pseudo-dialogue).

Jargon is the technical vocabulary or idiom of a special activity or group. It is an essential part of the network of occupations and pursuits which make up society. All jobs present an element of jargon, which workers learn as they develop their expertise. All hobbies require mastery of a jargon. All sports and games have their jargon. Each society grouping has its jargon. It is the jargon element which, in a job, can promote economy and precision of expression, and thus help make life easier for the workers. It is also the chief linguistic element which shows professional awareness ('know-how') and social togetherness ('shop-talk'). An example of jargon is NASA-speak, with such items as countdown, all systems go, and lift-off.

Slang is defined by The Oxford English Dictionary as 'language of a highly colloquial type, considered as below the level of educated standard speech, and consisting either of new words or of current words employed in some special sense'. In a related definition, it also describes slang as 'language of a low or vulgar type' and 'the special vocabulary or phraseology of a particular calling or profession'. There is upper-class slang alongside lower-class slang, the slang of doctors and of lawyers, the slang of footballers and philatelists, as well as the slang which cuts across social class and occupation, available to anyone as the most colloquial variety of language.

Political correctness. Some of the most loaded words in the language are those associated with the way society talks about itself, and especially about groups of people whom it perceives to be disadvantaged or oppressed. The most sensitive domains are to do with race, gender, sexual affinity, ecology, and (physical or mental) personal development. During the 1980s, an increasing number of people became concerned to eradicate what they thought to be prejudice (especially language prejudice) in these areas.

The whole idea of political correctness is to avoid using language that might be construed as offensive. The word black, for example, was felt to be offensive if used for the people of African origin, and was substituted by a more neutral Afro-American. The term ‘mentally handicapped people’ was substituted by ‘people with learning difficulties’. Disabled people were to become differently abled. Third World countries have become developing nations.

The trend has been largely criticized for certain exaggerations, e.g., it was suggested that unhandsome people should be called aesthetically challenged, people shorter than average – vertically challenged, and overweight people – horizontally challenged.

People first language is a semantic technique used when discussing disabilities to avoid perceived and subconscious dehumanization of the people having the disabilities. The basic idea is to take the emphasis away from a disability, stressing the fact that it is just a singular feature of a human being, which does not necessarily define his or her identity. The technique is to replace, e.g., disabled people with people with disabilities, deaf people with people who are deaf or individuals who are deaf, etc., putting the handicap quality into a rear position, emphasizing in this way that they are people first (hence the concept's name) and anything else second. Further, the concept favours the use of having rather than being, e.g. she has a learning disability instead of she is learning-disabled.

Gender Issues. Since the 1960s an awareness has developed of the ways in which language covertly displays attitudes towards men and women. English vocabulary has been found biased, reflecting predominantly male-oriented view of the world. Recently, there has been a tendency to replace ‘male’ words by more neutral equivalents: chair or chairperson instead of chairman; sales assistant instead of salesman; headmaster instead of headteacher. Some traditionally female names of professions have also been replaced by neutral terms: flight attendant instead of Stewardess.

The terms of marital status (Miss and Missis) have received their neutral alternative Ms. The form (s)he is widely used, his for a mixed gender group tends to be replaced by their, him – by them, someone, anyone.

⁂