User:Sinatra/Revision1

Semantic change is a change in the meaning, or the senses of a word, e.g. mouse 'rodent' > 'computer device'. Semantic change is one of three major processes to find a designation for a concept. The study of semantic change can be seen as part of etymology, onomasiology, semasiology and semantics.

Types of Semantic Change

A number of classifications has been suggested for semantic changes. They most current one in the English-speaking academic world is still Bloomfield's from 1933:

• narrowing (i.e. semantic change from superordinate level to subordinate level, e.g. meat 'food' > 'special type of food, namely meat')
• widening (i.e. semantic change from subordinate level to superordinate level, e.g. bird 'nestling, young bird' > 'bird')
• metaphor (= changed based on similarity of thing, e.g. bitter 'biting' > 'not sweet')
• metonymy (= changed based on nearness in space or time, e.g. jaw 'cheek' > 'jaw')
• synecdoche (= change based on whole-part relation, e.g. town 'fence' > 'city')
• hyperbole (= change from stronger to weaker meaning, e.g. astound 'strike with thounder' > 'surprise strongly')
• litotes (= change from weaker to stronger meaning, e.g. kill 'torment' > 'kill')
• degeneration (e.g. knave 'boy' > 'servant')
• elevation (e.g. knight 'boy' > 'knight')

However, Blank's (1998) categorization has been gaining more and more acceptance:

• metaphor (= change based on similarity between concepts, e.g. mouse 'rodent' > 'computer device'; Grzega (2004) paraphrases this as “similar-to” relation)
• metonymy, including, as a sub-type, synecdoche, (= change based on contiguity between concepts, e.g. horn 'animal horn' > 'musical instrument'; Grzega paraphrases metonymy as “neighbor-of” relation and synecdoche as '“part-of” relation')
• specialization of meaning (= downward shift in a taxonomy, e.g. corn 'corn' > 'wheat' (UK); Grzega paraphrases this as “kind-of” relation)
• generalization of meaning (= upward shift in a taxonomy, e.g. hoover 'Hoover vacuum cleaner' > 'any type of vacuum cleaner'; again, Grzega paraphrases this as “kind-of” relation)
• cohyponymic transfer (= horizontal shift in a taxonomy, e.g. the confusion of mouse and rat in some dialects; Grzega paraphrases this as “sibling-of” relation)
• antiphrasis (= change based on a contrastive aspect of the concepts, e.g. perfect lady in the sense of 'prostitute'; Grzega paraphrases this and the following two types as “contrast-to” relations')
• auto-antonymy (= change of a word's sense and concept to the complementary opposite, i.e. bad in the slang sense of 'good')
• auto-converse (= lexical expression of a relationship by the two extremes of the respective relationship, e.g. take in the dialectal use as 'give')
• ellipsis (= semantic change based on the contiguity of names, e.g. car 'cart' > 'automobile', due to (motor) car)
• folk-etymology (= semantic change based on the similarity of names, e.g. country dance, orig. French contredanse 'counter dance')

Blank considers it problematic, though, to include amelioration and pejoration of meaning as well as strengthening and weakening of meaning. According to Blank these are not objectively classifiable phenomena; moreover, all Blank has shown that all of the examples listed under these headings can be grouped into the other phenomena (metaphor, metonymy, cohyponymic transfer, antiphrasis, auto-converse, ellipsis, folk-etymology).

Forces Triggering Semantic Change

Blank (1997, 1999a) has tried to set up a complete lit of motives of semantic change. This list has been revised and slightly enlarged by Grzega (2004). They can be summarized as:

• linguistic forces
• psychological forces
• sociocultural forces
• cultural/encyclopedic forces

Practical Studies on Semantic Change

Apart from many individual studies, etymological dictionaries are prominent reference books for finding out about semantic changes. The internet platform Onomasiology Online shows a bibliography of etymological dictionaries of languages world-wide.

Theoretical Studies on Semantic Change

Recent overviews have been presented by Blank (1997:7-46) and Blank/Koch (1999). Semantic change has attracted academic discussions already in ancient times. The first major works of modern times are Karl Reisig (1829/1839), Arsène Darmesteter (1887), Michel Bréal (1899), Hermann Paul (1880), Gustaf Stern (1931), Leonard Bloomfield (1933) and Stephen Ullmann (1957 & 1962). Studies beyond the analysis of single words have been started with Jost Trier's word-field analyses (1931), who claimed that every semantic change of a word would also effect all other words in a lexical field. His approach that was later refined by Eugenio Coseriu (1964). Generative semantics has been introduced by Gerd Fritz (1964). More recent works including pragmatic and cognitive theories are those by Beatrice Warren (1992), Geeraerts (1983, 1997), Elizabeth Traugott (e.g. 1990) and Andreas Blank (1997).

As stated above, the most currently used typologies are those by Bloomfield (1933) and Blank (1998). Other typologies are listed below.

Typology by Reisig (1839)

Reisig's ideas for a classification were published posthumously. He resorts to classical rhetorics and distinguishes between

• synecdoche (shifts between part and whole)
• metonymy (shifts between shifts between cause and effect)
• metaphor

Typology by Paul (1880)

• specialization (= enlargement of single senses of a word's meaning)
• specialization on a specific part of the contents (= reduction of single senses of a word's meaning)
• transfer on a notion linked to the based notion in a spatial, temporal or causal way

Typology by Darmesteter (1887)

• metaphor
• metonymy
• widening of meaning
• narrowing of meaning

The last two are defined as change between whole and part, which would today be rendered as synecdoche.

Typology by Bréal (1899)

• restriction of sense (= change from a general to a special meaning)
• enlargement of sense (= change from a special to a general meaning)
• metaphor
• “thickening” of sense (= change from an abstract to a concrete meaning)

Typology by Stern (1931)

• “substitution” (change related to the change of an object, of the knowledge referring to the object, of the attitude toward the object, e.g. artillery ‘engines of war used to throw missiles’ > ‘mounted guns’, atom ‘inseparable smallest physical-chemical element’ > ‘physical-chemical element consisting of electrons’, scholasticism ‘philosophical system of the Middle Ages’ > ‘servile adherence to the methods and teaching of schools’)
• “analogy” (change triggered by the change of an associated word, e.g. fast adj. ‘fixed + rapid’ < faste adv. ‘fixedly, rapidly’)
• “shortening” (e.g. periodical < periodical paper)
• “nomination” (“the intentional naming of a referent, new or old, with a name that has not previously been used for it” [Stern 1931: 282], e.g. lion ‘brave man’ < ‘lion’)
• “regular transfer” (a subconscious “nomination”),
• “permutation” (non-intentional shift of one referent to another due to a reinterpretation of a situation, e.g. bead ‘prayer’ > ‘pearl in a rosary')
• “adequation” (change in the attitude of a concept, which makes the distinction from “substitution” unclear).

This classification does not neatly distinguish between processes and forces/causes of semantic change.

Typology by Bloomfield (1933)

As already listed above, Bloomfield distinguishes between the following types of semantic change:

• narrowing (i.e. semantic change from superordinate level to subordinate level, e.g. meat 'food' > 'special type of food, namely meat')
• widening (i.e. semantic change from subordinate level to superordinate level, e.g. bird 'nestling, young bird' > 'bird')
• metaphor (= changed based on similarity of thing, e.g. bitter 'biting' > 'not sweet')
• metonymy (= changed based on nearness in space or time, e.g. jaw 'cheek' > 'jaw')
• synecdoche (= change based on whole-part relation, e.g. town 'fence' > 'city')
• hyperbole (= change from stronger to weaker meaning, e.g. astound 'strike with thounder' > 'surprise strongly')
• litotes (= change from weaker to stronger meaning, e.g. kill 'torment' > 'kill')
• degeneration (e.g. knave 'boy' > 'servant')
• elevation (e.g. knight 'boy' > 'knight')

Typology by Ullmann (1957, 1962)

Ullmann dintinguishes between nature and consequences of semantic change:

• nature of semantic change
  • metaphor (= change based on a similarity of senses)
  • metonymy (= change based on a contiguity of senses)
  • folk-etymology (= change based on a similarity of names)
  • ellipsis (= change based on a conitguity of names)
• consequences of semantic change
  • widening of meaning (= raise of quantity)
  • narrowing of meaning (= loss of quantity)
  • amelioration of meaning (= raise of quality)
  • pejoration of meaning (= loss of quality)

Typology by Blank (1997)

Based on the associative principles of similarity, contiguity and contrast, Blank (1997) distinguishes the following types of semantic change:

• metaphor (= change based on similarity between concepts, e.g. mouse 'rodent' > 'computer device')
• metonymy, including, as a sub-type, synecdoche, (= change based on contiguity between concepts, e.g. horn 'animal horn' > 'musical instrument')
• specialization of meaning (= downward shift in a taxonomy, e.g. corn 'corn' > 'wheat' (UK))
• generalization of meaning (= upward shift in a taxonomy, e.g. hoover 'Hoover vacuum cleaner' > 'any type of vacuum cleaner')
• cohyponymic transfer (= horizontal shift in a taxonomy, e.g. the confusion of mouse and rat in some dialects)
• antiphrasis (= change based on a contrastive aspect of the concepts, e.g. perfect lady in the sense of 'prostitute')
• auto-antonymy (= change of a word's sense and concept to the complementary opposite, i.e. bad in the slang sense of 'good')
• auto-converse (= lexical expression of a relationship by the two extremes of the respective relationship, e.g. take in the dialectal use as 'give')
• ellipsis (= semantic change based on the contiguity of names, e.g. car 'cart' > 'automobile', due to (motor) car)
• folk-etymology (= semantic change based on the similarity of names, e.g. country dance, orig. French contredanse 'counter dance')

See also

• etymology
• historical linguistics
• language change
• lexicology
• onomasiology
• semantics

External Links

• Onomasiology Online (internet platform by Joachim Grzega, Alfred Bammesberger and Marion Schöner, including a list of etymological dictionaries)

References

• Blank, Andreas (1997), Prinzipien des lexikalischen Bedeutungswandels am Beispiel der romanischen Sprachen, [Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 285], Tübingen: Niemeyer.
• Blank, Andreas (1999a), “Why Do New Meanings Occur? A Cognitive Typology of the Motivations for Lexical Semantic Change”, in: Blank/Koch 1999a: 61-90.
• Blank, Andreas / Koch, Peter (eds.) (1999a), Historical Semantics and Cognition, [Cognitive Linguistics Research 13], Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Blank, Andreas / Koch, Peter (1999b), “Introduction: Historical Semantics and Cognition”, in: Blank/Koch 1999a: 1-16.
• Bloomfield, Leonard (1933), Language, New York: Allen & Unwin.
• Bréal, Michel (1899), Essai de sémantique, 2nd ed., Paris: Hachette.
• Coseriu, Eugenio (1964), “Pour une sémantique diachronique structurale”, Travaux de Linguistique et de Littérature 2: 139-186.
• Darmesteter, Arsène (1887), La vie des mots, Paris: Delagrave.
• Fritz, Gerd (1974), Bedeutungswandel im Deutschen, Tübingen: Niemeyer.
• Geeraerts, Dirk (1983), “Reclassifying Semantic Change”, Quaderni di semantica 4: 217-240.
• Geeraerts, Dirk (1997), Diachronic Prototype Semantics: A Contribution to Historical Lexicology, Oxford: Clarendon.
• Grzega, Joachim (2000), “Historical Semantics in the Light of Cognitive Linguistics: Aspects of a New Reference Book Reviewed”, Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 25: 233-244.
• Grzega, Joachim (2004), Bezeichnungswandel: Wie, Warum, Wozu? Ein Beitrag zur englischen und allgemeinen Onomasiologie, Heidelberg: Winter.
• Grzega, Joachim / Schöner, Marion (2007), English and General Historical Lexicology: Materials for Onomasiology Seminars, Eichstätt: Universität.
• Koch, Peter (2002), “Lexical Typology from a Cognitive and Linguistic Point of View”, in: Cruse, D. Alan et al. (eds.), Lexicology: An International Handbook on the Nature and Structure of Words and Vocabularies / Lexikologie: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Natur und Struktur von Wörtern und Wortschätzen, [Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 21], Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, vol. 1, 1142-1178.
• Paul, Hermann (1880), Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte, Tübingen: Niemeyer.
• Reisig, Karl (1829/1839), “Semasiologie oder Bedeutungslehre”, in: Haase, Friedrich (ed.) (1839), Professor Karl Reisigs Vorlesungen über lateinische Sprachwissenschaft, Leipzig: Lehnhold.
• Stern, Gustaf (1931), Meaning and Change of Meaning with Special Reference to the English Language, [Göteborgs Högskolas Årsskrift 38], Göteborg: Elander.
• Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (1990), “From Less to More Situated in Language: The Unidirectionality of Semantic Change”, in: Adamson, Silvia et al. (eds.), Papers from the Fifth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, 496-517, Amsterdam: Benjamins.
• Trier, Jost (1931), Der deutsche Wortschatz im Sinnbezirk des Verstandes, Diss. Bonn.
• Ullmann, Stephen (1957), Principles of Semantics, 2nd ed., Oxford: Blackwell.
• Ullmann, Stephen (1962), Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning, Oxford: Blackwell.
• Warren, Beatrice (1992), Sense Developments: A Contrastive Study of the Development of Slang Senses and Novel Standard Senses in English, [Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis 80], Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
• Wundt, Wilhelm (1912), Völkerpsychologie: Eine Untersuchung der Entwicklungsgesetze von Sprache, Mythus und Sitte, vol. 2,2: Die Sprache, Leipzig: Engelmann.

Notes

[[Category:historical linguistics]] [[Category:lexicology]] [[Category:semantics]]