Term vocabulary(gr. lexikos- verbal, dictionary) serves to designate the vocabulary of a language. This term is also used in narrower meanings: to define a set of words used in a particular functional variety of language ( bookvocabulary ), in a separate work ( vocabulary "Tales about Igor's Campaign"); we can talk about the writer's vocabulary ( vocabulary Pushkin) and even one person ( The speaker has a richvocabulary ).

Lexicology(gr. lexis- word + logos- teaching) is a branch of the science of language that studies vocabulary. Lexicology can be descriptive, or synchronous (gr. syn- together + chronos- time), then it explores the vocabulary of the language in its modern state, and historical, or diachronic (gr. dia- through + chronos- time), then its subject is the development of the vocabulary of a given language.

The course of modern Russian language examines descriptive lexicology. Synchronic study of vocabulary involves studying it as a system of interconnected and interdependent elements at the present time.

However, the synchronous system of language is not immobile and absolutely stable. There are always elements in it that go back to the past; There are also just emerging, new ones. The coexistence of such heterogeneous elements in one synchronic slice of language indicates its constant movement and development. Descriptive lexicology takes into account this dynamic balance of language, which is a unity of stable and mobile elements.

The tasks of lexicology include the study of the meanings of words, their stylistic characteristics, description of the sources of formation of the lexical system, analysis of the processes of its renewal and archaization. The object of consideration in this section of the modern Russian language course is the word as such. It should be noted that the word is in the field of view of other sections of the course. But word formation, for example, focuses attention on the laws and types of word formation, morphology is the grammatical study of words, and only lexicology studies words by themselves and in a certain connection with each other.

2. Lexical system of the Russian language

The vocabulary of the Russian language, like any other, is not a simple set of words, but a system of interconnected and interdependent units of the same level. Studying lexical system language reveals an interesting and multifaceted picture of the life of words, connected to each other by various relationships and representing “molecules” of a large, complex whole - the lexical-phraseological system of the native language.

Not a single word in a language exists separately, isolated from its general nominative system. Words are combined into different groups based on certain characteristics. Thus, certain thematic classes are distinguished, which include, for example, words that name specific everyday objects, and words that correspond to abstract concepts. Among the first, it is easy to single out the names of clothing, furniture, dishes, etc. The basis for such a combination of words into groups is not linguistic characteristics, but the similarity of the concepts they denote.

Other lexical groups are formed on purely linguistic grounds. For example, the linguistic features of words make it possible to group them into parts of speech according to lexical-semantic and grammatical characteristics.

Lexicology establishes a wide variety of relationships within the various lexical groups that make up the nominative system of a language. In the most general outline systemic relations in it can be characterized as follows.

In the lexical system of a language, groups of words are distinguished that are related by common (or opposite) meanings; similar (or contrasting) in stylistic properties; united by a common type of word formation; connected by a common origin, features of functioning in speech, belonging to an active or passive stock of vocabulary, etc. Systemic connections also cover entire classes of words that are uniform in their categorical essence (expressing, for example, the meaning of objectivity, attribute, action, etc.). Such systemic relationships in groups of words united by common features are called paradigmatic(gr. paradeigma- example, sample).

Paradigmatic connections between words underlie the lexical system of any language. As a rule, it is divided into many microsystems. The simplest of them are pairs of words connected by opposite meanings, i.e. antonyms. More complex microsystems consist of words grouped together based on similar meanings. They form synonymous series, various thematic groups with a hierarchy of units, compared as species and generics. Finally, the largest semantic associations of words merge into extensive lexical and grammatical classes - parts of speech.

Lexico-semantic paradigms in each language are quite stable and are not subject to changes under the influence of context. However, the semantics of specific words can reflect the features of the context, which also reveals systemic connections in the vocabulary.

One of the manifestations systemic relations words is their ability to connect with each other. Compatibility words is determined by their subject-semantic connections, grammatical properties, and lexical features. For example, the word glass can be used in combination with words ball, glass; combinations possible glass jar (bottle, glassware), even glass saucepan (frying pan)- made of fireproof glass. But impossible - "glass book", "glass cutlet" and so on, since the subject-semantic connections of these words exclude mutual compatibility. You can't put words together either glass And run, glass And far: their grammatical nature opposes this (an adjective cannot be combined with a verb, an adverbial adverb). Lexical feature of the word glass is its ability to develop figurative meanings, which allows you to construct phrases hairglass smoke(Es.), glass sight. Words that do not have this ability ( fireproof, metal-cutting and below), do not allow metaphorical use in speech. The possibilities of their compatibility are already.

System connections that manifest themselves in the patterns of combining words with each other are called syntagmatic(gr. syntagma- something connected). They are revealed when words are combined, i.e. in certain lexical combinations. However, reflecting the connection between the meanings of words, and therefore their systemic connections in paradigms, syntagmatic relations are also determined by the lexical system of the language as a whole. The combinability features of individual words largely depend on the context, therefore syntagmatic connections, to a greater extent than paradigmatic ones, are subject to changes due to the content of speech. Thus, lexical syntagmatics reflects changes in realities (cf., for example, glass frying pan), expanding our understanding of the world around us ( walk on the moon), figurative energy of language ( glass hair smoke).

The systemic connections of words, the interaction of different meanings of one word and its relationships with other words are very diverse, which indicates the great expressive power of vocabulary. At the same time, we must not forget that the lexical system is an integral part of a larger language system, in which certain relationships have developed between the semantic structure of a word and its formal grammatical features, phonetic features, and also a dependence of the meaning of the word on paralinguistic(gr. para- about, near + linguistic, linguistic) and extralinguistic(lat. extra- super-, extra- + linguistic) factors: facial expressions, gestures, intonation, operating conditions, time of consolidation in the language, etc.

The general language system and the lexical system, as its component parts, are identified and learned in speech practice, which, in turn, influences changes in the language, contributing to its development and enrichment. The study of systemic connections in vocabulary is a necessary condition for the scientific description of the vocabulary of the Russian language. The solution of theoretical problems receives immediate practical application in the compilation of various dictionaries, and in the development of literary and linguistic norms of word usage, and in the analysis of techniques for the individual author’s use of the expressive capabilities of the word in artistic speech.

The vocabulary of any language is a system of interdependent and interconnected lexical units one level. There is no language in which any word exists separately from others - they are all part of a single lexical system.

The concept of a lexical system

All words form groups of words that denote an identical phenomenon. For example, there are groups of words that we use to describe pieces of furniture, the appearance of people, the weather, etc.

From this we can conclude that the basis of such groups is the thematic factor. There are groups of words that are combined according to grammatical and lexical-semantic characteristics. In the lexical system of the Russian language, groups of words are distinguished that are related by the following characteristics:

Generality or opposite of meaning;

Similarity or opposition of stylistic properties;

General type of word formation;

Functions in speech;

Belonging to an active or passive vocabulary.

Lexical micro and macro systems

Systemic relationships of words in joint groups of words are called paradigmatic. It is precisely paradigmatic connections that represent the basis of the lexical system of the Russian language. As a rule, within each lexical group of words there are lexical micro and macro systems.

A striking example of a microsystem in the lexical system of the Russian language are antonyms - words that have opposite meanings in the lexicon. Synonymous series form a macrosystem of vocabulary.

The largest semantic units in the Russian language are parts of speech and extensive lexical and grammatical classes.

Main characteristics of the lexical system of the Russian language

The main factor in the lexical system of the Russian language is the ability of words to be combined with other words, based on subject-specific semantic connections. In this case, the lexical features and grammatical properties of a particular word are taken into account.

So we can use the word “glass” in relation to the word glass. We cannot use the word glass in combination with the word book, cutlet, cat, since the phrase “glass cutlet” excludes the semantic and grammatical content of both words.

Such phrases are acceptable in an artistic context in a figurative sense, when it is necessary to emphasize the properties of a noun, for example: glass look, glass heart.

Incompleteness of utterances in the lexical system

The lexical system of the Russian language allows for incomplete statements in neutral, expressive and inter-style stylistic terms. This phenomenon contributes to the formation of words of functional colloquial style in the lexical system.

Most often, incomplete statements are allowed in a conversational style. Such reduced syntactic constructions are quite common in dialogues.

The vocabulary of the Russian language, like any other, is not a simple set of words, but a system of interconnected and interdependent units of the same level. Not a single word in a language exists separately, isolated from its general nominative system. Words are combined into different groups based on certain characteristics. Thus, certain thematic classes are distinguished, which include, for example, words that name specific everyday objects, and words that correspond to abstract concepts. Among the first, it is easy to single out the names of clothing, furniture, dishes, etc. The basis for such a combination of words into groups is not linguistic characteristics, but the similarity of the concepts they denote.

Other lexical groups are formed on purely linguistic grounds. For example, the linguistic features of words make it possible to group them into parts of speech according to lexical-semantic and grammatical characteristics.

Lexicology establishes a wide variety of relationships within the various lexical groups that make up the nominative system of a language. In the most general terms, systemic relations in it can be characterized as follows.

In the lexical system of a language, groups of words are distinguished that are related by common (or opposite) meanings; similar (or contrasting) in stylistic properties; united by a common type of word formation; connected by a common origin, features of functioning in speech, belonging to an active or passive stock of vocabulary, etc. Systemic connections also cover entire classes of words that are uniform in their categorical essence (expressing, for example, the meaning of objectivity, attribute, action, etc. ). Such systemic relationships in groups of words united by common features are called paradigmatic (gr. paradeigma - example, sample).

Paradigmatic connections between words underlie the lexical system of any language. As a rule, it is divided into many microsystems. The simplest of them are pairs of words connected by opposite meanings, i.e. antonyms. More complex microsystems consist of words grouped together based on similar meanings. They form synonymous series, various thematic groups with a hierarchy of units, compared as species and generics. Finally, the largest semantic associations of words merge into extensive lexical-grammatical classes - parts of speech.

One of the manifestations of the systemic relationships of words is their ability to connect with each other. The compatibility of words is determined by their subject-semantic connections, grammatical properties, and lexical features. For example, the word glass can be used in combination with the words ball, glass; combinations are possible: a glass jar (bottle, dishes), even a glass pan (frying pan) - made of fireproof glass. But “glass book”, “glass cutlet”, etc. are impossible, since the subject-semantic connections of these words exclude mutual compatibility. It is also impossible to connect the words glass and run, glass and far: their grammatical nature opposes this (an adjective cannot be combined with a verb, an adverbial adverb). The lexical feature of the word glass is its ability to develop figurative meanings, which makes it possible to construct combinations of hair glass smoke (Yesenin), glass look. Words that do not have this ability (fireproof, metal-cutting, etc.) do not allow metaphorical use in speech. The possibilities of their compatibility are narrower. Systemic connections, manifested in the patterns of combining words with each other, are called syntagmatic (gr. syntagma - something connected). They are revealed when words are combined, that is, in certain lexical combinations.

The lexical system is an integral part of a larger language system, in which certain relationships have developed between the semantic structure of the word and its formal grammatical features, phonetic features, and also formed the dependence of the meaning of the word on paralinguistic (Gr. para - near, near + linguistic, linguistic) and extralinguistic (Latin extra - super-, extra- + linguistic) factors: facial expressions, gestures, intonation, operating conditions, time of consolidation in the language, etc.

Rosenthal D.E., Golub I.B., Telenkova M.A. Modern Russian language - M., 2002.

Since the object of this study is the thematic group “movement,” it is fundamentally important for us to define the terminology and outline the range of units included in this semantic association.

The vocabulary of a language is an ordered set of elements connected by certain relationships. Despite the fact that the lexical system is quite open, and the sheer number of elements is disproportionately large compared to the elements of other systems, vocabulary is still a relatively stable and observable system at any given period of language development. All words of a language are included in its lexical system, and there are no words that are outside this system and are perceived in isolation. This obliges us to study words only in their systemic connections, as nominative units, one way or another connected with each other.

A huge number of works are devoted to the description of lexical structure. Among the lexicologists and linguists dealing with issues of semantics and semasiology who have made a significant contribution to the study of the Russian language system, one can highlight such scientists as Yu.D. Apresyan, E.V. Kuznetsova, V.V. Vinogradov, D.N. Ushakov, N.M. Shansky, N.Yu. Shvedova, G.N. Sklyarevskaya and many others.

“Words and their meanings do not live a life separate from each other, but are combined into different groups, and the basis for grouping is similarity or direct opposition in basic meaning,” pointed out one of the founders of the systematic study of vocabulary M.M. Pokrovsky [Pokrovsky 1959: 82].

It is obvious that it is impossible to adequately understand the essence of a word without turning to the entire lexical-semantic system, just as it is impossible to study the lexical-semantic system as a whole, “ignoring the word as its main unit” [Ufimtseva 1986: 45].

The same word is included in paradigmatic, syntagmatic, and derivational relations. Grammar should also be taken into account. structural relations words according to which it is included in different grammatical categories of words and lexico-grammatical groupings. In this regard, it should be noted that the lexical composition of the language is permeated with multidirectional and multidimensional connections. D.N. Shmelev, for example, considers the main dimensions of the lexical system to be syntagmatic, paradigmatic and derivational [Shmelev 1973: 129]. Approximately the same measurements are identified by V.M. Solntsev (syntagmatic, paradigmatic, hierarchical) [Solntsev 1977]. In the concept of G.S. Shchur's vocabulary is organized according to three principles: invariant, functional, associative. Invariant groupings are understood as synonymous series [Shchur 1974: 55].

Word class concept

Despite the differences among scientists in understanding the structure of the lexical system of a language, the concept of “class” in lexicology is generally accepted.

Word classes are the maximum forms of manifestation of lexical paradigmatics. Classes exist in the form of more or less broad associations of words, representing semantic paradigms that are larger and more complex than the verbal oppositions that are included in such paradigms as constituent parts. The basis of any association (class) of words is the principle of similarity of words in some common components. The types of word classes are extremely diverse and interrelated.

Word classes can be characterized depending on which components - formal or semantic - are common to the words combined in a given class. From this point of view, three types of word classes can be distinguished: formal, formal-semantic and semantic.

The formal class unites words that are similar in affixal morphemes, behind which no common semantic features are hidden. The formal class is formed by verbs belonging to the same type of conjugation and nouns of the same type of declension. With certain reservations, all one-prefix verbs or all verbs with the postfix -sya can also be included in the formal class.

The most typical for a language is the formal semantic class of words. It is a collection of words that are similar in both form and meaning. These include parts of speech, nests of words with the same root (carry, carry, carry, carry, porter, burden, transfer, figurative, etc.), sets of words formed according to the same word-formation model (reader, writer, dreamer, teacher, educator , applicant, etc.).

Purely semantic classes are rare in language. They can be represented by synonymous rows of words that do not have formal (morphemic) similarity, for example: steal - steal - abduct - pull - steal or shine - sparkle - shine - burn.

The second, most significant distinction between the types of word classes is their distinction by volume, which is organically related to the quantity and quality of common semes present in the meanings of all words included in a given class. This distinction concerns only the semantic and formal semantic classes of words.

The broadest classes of words in this sense are parts of speech. They combine words whose similarity is minimal, that is, in the meanings of these words there is only one common seme of a categorical and grammatical nature: “objectivity” in nouns, “action” in verbs, “attribute of an object” in the meanings of adjectives. The listed semes are repeated in thousands of Russian words, which determines the maximum breadth of grammatical classes. Grammatical words are not real words in their entirety of content, but abstract “constructs” abstracted from more specific (material) parts of content represented by lexical semes. Lexical words are words with full content. Within the framework of lexical-semantic groups they are necessarily opposed to each other. There is a contrast necessary condition the existence of language as a sign system.

Ordered in a certain way, brought into a system. This follows not only from common device language as a system (and vocabulary is an integral part of language, one of its “levels”), but also from the practice of communication. talking man spends searching the right word some fractions of a second. But his memory contains thousands, perhaps even tens of thousands of words. How does the lexical system work? Distinctive feature lexical system - its multidimensionality. This means that a word is at the same time connected by different, heterogeneous and multidirectional (paradigmatic, syntagmatic, derivational) relationships with many other lexemes. General model of relationships between lexical groupings can be presented as follows (V.G. Gak): the semantic structure of a language includes a set of structures at four levels: the dictionary as a whole, the lexical-semantic group, single word and the individual meaning of the word.

Yu.N. Karaulov distinguishes in the lexical system:

1) Lexico-semantic (thematic) groups - groups of words united according to a paradigmatic principle, the units of which are lexemes belonging to the same part of speech and united by a common categorical seme (seme is a unit of meaning) in meaning.

In lexico-semantic (thematic) groups, words can be related by gender and type (wood - oak, spruce, aspen...), functional (dwellings - hut, yurt, hut, hut etc.), whole and part (dress - sleeve, collar, button...), situational (shop - seller, product, counter...), associative (cow - milk, grass, milkmaid, farm...). For example, token freezing included in a certain thematic group- names of climatic and, more broadly, natural phenomena: it forms a single row with the words cold, snow, ice, wind, blizzard, winter, December, January, February, Christmas, Epiphany, New Year, temperature, climate, season, north, pole... In addition to nouns, the same group obviously includes adjectives, verbs, and adverbs: snowy, February, frosty, freeze, chilly, get cold, cold etc. When a person chooses the word he needs during speech, he already knows what topic, that is, the area of ​​life, will be discussed. And the entire vocabulary in his head breaks down into approximately the following associations: “person”, “dwelling”, “clothing”, “art”, “sport”, “animal and flora"(of course, with further subdivision), etc.

2) Semantic fields - sets of linguistic units united by some common (integral) semantic feature; having some common non-trivial value component. Initially, the role of such lexical units was considered to be units of the lexical level - words; Later, in linguistic works, descriptions of semantic fields appeared, which also included phrases and sentences. Connections between units of a separate semantic field may vary in “breadth” and specificity. Most common types connections are connections of a paradigmatic type (genus-species, synonymous, antonymic, etc.). One of the classic examples of a semantic field is a field of color terms, consisting of several color series ( red- pink- pinkish- crimson; blue- blue- bluish- turquoise etc.): the common semantic component here is “color”. Group of words tree, branch, trunk, sheet etc. can form both an independent semantic field, united by the “part - whole” relationship, and be part of the semantic field of plants. In this case, the lexeme tree will serve as a hypernym ( generic concept) for lexemes such as, for example, birch, oak, palm etc.

The semantic field has the following basic properties:

· it is intuitively understandable to a native speaker and has a psychological reality for him;

· it is autonomous and can be identified as an independent subsystem of the language;

· units of the semantic field are connected by one or another systemic semantic relationships;

· each semantic field is connected with other semantic fields of the language and, together with them, forms a language system.

A separate linguistic unit can have several meanings and, therefore, can be classified into different semantic fields. For example, adjective red can be included in the semantic field of color terms and at the same time in the field, the units of which are united by the generalized meaning “revolutionary”.

3) Synonymous and antonymic series - Ideomatic groups that combine words related to the same subject area.

Synonymy - the phenomenon of complete or partial coincidence of the meaning of linguistic units with different sounds and spellings. Lexical synonyms - These are words that sound differently, but have similar or coinciding denotative meanings, differing in connotation or scope of use. In most cases, synonyms, denoting the same thing, characterize it from different points of view. Words denoting genus-species relationships are not synonymous: flower - chamomile. Words denoting related concepts are not synonymous either: house - apartment. Synonyms may vary:

1) components of lexical meaning(For example, greedy - stingy: the general component of the meaning is ‘obsessed with a passion for money’, but greedy also has the component ‘seeking to seize someone else’s’, and stingy- ‘reluctantly giving his own’);

2) style of use: stylistically neutral word there may be bookish, high or, conversely, reduced synonyms, for example: sleep - rest - take a nap, eat - eat - eat, hello - hello - great;

3) both at the same time(For example, talk And chatter: word chatter has an evaluative component meaning ‘empty, frivolous’, not contained in the word talk, while the word chatter has a reduction compared to the word talk color);

4) compatibility with in different words : compatibility may not partially coincide ( open your eyes, mouth, book, etc. - open your mouth) or completely ( positional synonyms- words with the same conceptual content, but with a complete mismatch of lexical compatibility): a set of animals in a language is called differently depending on which animals are being referred to we're talking about: herd of cows; flock of sheep; a flock of birds, wolves; school of fish; a pack of dogs; herd of horses;

5) degree of modernity: neck - neck, fisherman - fisherman;

6) sphere of use: cook - cook(prof.), parents - ancestors, laces(jarg.). Some researchers do not consider words that differ in the degree of modernity and sphere of use to be synonymous;

7) control: characteristic for whom/what - peculiar to whom/what.

Synonyms between which there are no specified differences are called full (absolute) synonyms, or doublets ( linguistics - linguistics, throw - throw, extinguish - extinguish, during - in continuation, hippopotamus - hippopotamus). There are not very many complete synonyms in the language.

Synonyms are combined into synonymous rows, for example: doctor - doctor - healer - doctor. As part of a synonymous series, a dominant stands out - a word that, in comparison with other members of the series, has the most general meaning, stylistically neutral, having the most free compatibility (in this synonymous series this word doctor). Synonymous series can vary in the number of words: from two or three to a dozen or more. Words can have stable combinations synonymous with them - phraseological units: to die - to give up your soul to God. Phraseologisms can enter into synonymous relationships not only with words, but also with each other: give your soul to God - go to the next world - play in the box - throw away your skates.

In addition to the linguistic synonyms mentioned above, there are also contextual synonyms- words that enter into synonymous relationships only in a certain context (for example, say - blurt - bark - stutter).

The main functions of synonyms are clarification, substitution, euphemization and opposition. The clarification is based on the incomplete coincidence of the meanings of synonymous words: synonyms allow you to “add” missing meanings and reveal new aspects in the denoted ( He ran, or rather rushed.). Substitution is based on the fact that in a number of contexts the differences between synonyms are erased, and this makes it possible to avoid repetitions of the same words ( He made a mistake, but his mistake was not noticed). Euphemization is a deliberately inaccurate designation of reality ( the boss is delayed(= is late), he's not far off(= stupid). Opposition synonyms emphasizes the differences between synonyms ( She didn't walk, she walked). Synonyms are recorded in special dictionaries - dictionaries of synonyms.

Antonyms - combining words that are opposed by denotative meaning. For example: young - old, friendship - enmity, good - bad, leaving - coming, from - to.

It is important to note that:

1) antonyms are words of the same part of speech;

2) antonyms must have meanings that are correlated with each other. This means that Antonyms are words denoting logically compatible concepts that have a common part in their meanings, in relation to which a number of features are opposed. So, for example, antonyms get up And get down have common element meaning ‘to move along an inclined or vertical plane’. These words are contrasted with the elements meaning ‘up’ and ‘down’.

There are several types of antonyms:

1) gradual antonyms- indicating a difference in the degree of expression of a characteristic: the denial of one of the antonyms does not mean the affirmation of the other, for example, ‘dislike’ does not mean ‘hatred’;

2) congruent antonyms- complementary opposites: the denial of one of the antonyms presupposes the affirmation of the other, for example, ‘peace’ - ‘war’;

3) conversion (reversible) antonyms- denoting one phenomenon, but considering it from different angles, for example, ‘buy’ - ‘sell’.

Words that do not have a common component of meaning are not contrasted in language. Thus, not all words have antonyms, but only those that have a qualitative or quantitative attribute in their meaning. The most common antonymic relationships among qualitative adjectives and qualitative adverbs, less among verbs and nouns. There are no antonyms among nouns with a specific meaning ( door, TV), numerals, most pronouns. Proper names do not have antonyms.

The meanings of antonyms are opposite. It follows from this that antonyms are mutually exclusive when characterizing the same object: an object cannot simultaneously be, for example, hot And cold, big And small, true And false.

In structure, antonyms can be single-rooted ( come - leave) and multi-rooted ( good - evil).

Some words can enter into antonymic relationships only in a certain context, without being language antonyms, without being realized as words with opposite meaning outside of this context. Such antonyms are called contextual.