REVIEW JOURNAL ABOUT BRANCH OF SEMANTICS
post by : Chumming Gao, school from Foreign Language, Chungchun university of Science and Technology, China
Pages : 6
CLASSIFICATIONS OF SEMANTIC FIELD
The semantic field theory was brought into its puberty by German scholar J. Trier in the 1930s, whose version is seen as
a new phase in the history of semantics. Wu (1988, p.94-95) summarized Trier’s semantic field theory as follows:
1. The vocabulary in a language system is semantically related and builds up a complete lexical system. This system is
unsteady and changing constantly.
2. Since the vocabulary of a language is semantically related, we are not supposed to
study the semantic change of individual words in isolation, but to study vocabulary as an integrated system.
3. Since
lexemes are interrelated in sense, we can only determine the connotation of a word by analyzing and comparing its
semantic relationship with other words. A word is meaningful only in its own semantic field.
Trier’s semantic field is generally considered paradigmatic. It deals with paradigmatic relations between words such
as hyponymy, synonymy and antonymy. (Guo, p.51) This study follows this classification.
A. Hyponymy
Hyponymy is the most common branch of semantic field theory. It contains all objects that belong to the same category.
The most fundamental category is dualistic, for example, paddy field and upland field, autorotation and revolution, etc.
Another category is diversified, for example, navy, marine, air force, etc. Hyponymy can be multileveled, which means
the basic level could be divided into more specific levels, and even more specific ones. For instance, we could divide
animalsinto human being and birds and beasts, yet birds and beasts could be further divided into birds, fishes, insects and
mammals, etc. And the mammals could also be specifically divided into pigs, dogs, cows, wolves and horses, etc. And
finally, for example, horses can be further divided into broncos, stallions, ponies and so on. These divisions implicate the
system of hyponymy, which is basically the superordinate-hyponym semantic field, also called general terms and specific
terms.
Take the example above for instance, if animals are the superordinate, human being, birds and beasts will be the
hyponyms. On the other hand, if birds and beasts are taken as the superordinate, then birds, fishes, insects and mammals
will be the hyponyms.
Hyponymy is featured as being relative. The relativity of this semantic field has two-fold meanings. On the one hand, it
means that the superordinate-hyponym relations are not relative instead of absolute or unchanged.
As the graph listed above, to food, meet is a hyponym and it locates at a lower level; while to beef, pork and mutton,
meat is a superordinate and locates at a higher level. The same way works with vegetable, it is a superordinate towards
celery, spinach and cabbage, yet it is a hyponym towards vegetable. On the other hand, when a semantic field was
applied to describe different objects, the consulting standards are different and relative. For example, among the semantic
field of big and small, the size is relative because sometimes the small ones are bigger than the big ones. For example, a
small elephant is much bigger than a big mouse, and a small dog is bigger than a big butterfly.
B. Antonymy
Antonymy is another branch of semantic field which is formed by words with the same roots and range. Antonymy is
usually formed with opposed, inconsistent and opposite meanings and therefore could be divided into three categories as
follows:
(1) Polar Antonymy
Polar antonymy refers to the semantic field formed with the words of opposed and polar meanings. For example,
hot-cold, rich-poor, etc. This type of semantic field has two features, semantic polarity and semantic relativity, which
indicates that the semantic polarity only exists on the base of the semantic relativity. For example, we might say, A man
may be rich or very rich. One man may be richer than another. On the other hand, semantic relativity is gradual, which
means we can insert words with different degrees between the two polars of the polar antonymy to show the hierarchy of
the semantic relativity. For example, between hot and cold, we can insert warm, tepid, lukewarm and cool. Also, we can
change the polar words from a polar semantic field to other words with different degrees to show the hierarchy of the
semantic relativity. Take the same example; we could change hot or cold to boiling, sweltering, chilly or freezing. (Zhou,
2001)
(2) Complementary Antonymy
Complementary antonymy refers to the semantic field formed by words with complementary meanings. For example,
dead-alive, If he is not dead, he is alive. / If he is not alive, he is dead. There are other such complementary antonymies,
such as male-female, single-married, present-absent, etc. Differentiated with polar antonymy, normally speaking, there
are no words which could be inserted between the pair of complementary words.
(3) Transpositional Antonymy
Transpositional antonymy is formed by a pair of words with both opposed and dependant meanings, the two words
combined into an opposed unit which exists based on each other’s existence. For example, buy-sell, lend-borrow,
husband-wife, employer-employee, etc. Hence, If A lends $100 to B, then we can say B borrows $100 from A; If A is B’
wife, then B is A’s husband.
C. Synonymy
Synonymy refers to the semantic fields which are formed by the words with relatively same meanings so that they
could be inter-changed in some degree yet irreplaceable in most cases. Synonymy could be further classified into absolute
synonymy and relative synonymy. Absolute synonymy is relatively rare, and it mainly indicates the word groups with
absolute same meaning and could be replaced with each other in any contexts. For instance, mother tongue and native
language, malnutrition and undernourishment, breathed consonant and voiceless consonant, etc. While compared to
absolute synonymy, relative synonymies are more affluent. It refers to the synonymies which are formed by words with
relatively same meaning yet are different in degrees, emotions, styles and collocations. Thus, in reference to what Zhang
yunfei (2004) made in her book An Introduction to Modern English Lexicology, relative synoynym could be further
classified into such categories as following.
(1) Synonymy with Different Degrees
Words that constitute this type of semantic fields have same extended meanings yet different in degrees. For example,
anger, rage and fury are all about the emotional excitement induced by intense displeasure, while anger is used normally
without definite degree of intensity; rage focuses on a loss of self-control; and fury emphasizes a rage is so violent that it
may approach madness.
(2) Synonymy with Different Emotions
This type of synonymy is mainly formed by words with basically same meaning yet with different emotions. For
example, philanthropist and do-gooder can both means charity and sympathy, while philanthropist usually means
charitarians who aid people in sufferings and donate for the poor, yet do-gooders refer to those unrealistic humanists who
would dream of doing good recklessly and vainly. Another example, statesman and politician both means people who
take part in social politics, while statesman refers to those who could do well in controlling and governing the sates yet
politician mainly means people who play political tricks for their own interests. In both of the examples, the formers are
all commendatory; the latters derogatory.
(3) Synonymy with Different Styles
This type of semantic field mainly consists of the words with relatively same meaning yet different styles. American
linguist Martin Joos (1962) listed five different styles of words in his book Five Clocks as frozen, formal, consultative,
casual and intimate. According to these five styles, we can label the word horse with five different tags, charger is frozen,steed is formal, horse is consultative, nag is casual, and plug is intimate.
(4) Synonymy with Different Collocations
This type of synonymous semantic field is formed by words with relatively same meaning yet different collocations.
For example, the words that could indicate the meaning of accuse are charge, rebuke, reproach and accuse itself. While
the prepositions that collocate with them are different. That is to say, accuse collocates with of, charge collocates with
with, rebuke collocates with for, and reproach with for or with.
THE APPLICATION OF SEMANTIC FIELD THEORY TO VOCABULARY LEARNING
A. The Application of Hyponymy
Semantic fields are obviously hierarchical. They could be observed from the top to the bottom. The higher level of a
semantic field is more general, the lower level is more specific. For example:
The hierarchy of semantic field is based on the systematization of objective substances. Meanwhile, it also reflects the
consequences of the cognition of human being towards nature. Obviously, hierarchy is mostly seen in hyponymy. With
this characteristic, we could learn new words more easily by studying the hyponyms or superordinates of the word we
learn from a certain semantic field.
Another feature of semantic field is transitivity. That is to say, if A belongs to B, and B belongs to C, we can say that A
belongs to C. Transitivity is mainly reflected from two aspects, one of which could be found in the
superordinate-hyponym semantic field that if B is one type of A, and C is one type of B, then we can say that C is one type
of A. For example, animal is one of the living things, and dog is one of the animals, then we can say dog is one of living
things. On the other hand, transitivity could be found in part/whole relationship that if B is part of A, C is part of B, and
then we can say C is part of A. For example, season is a part of a year, month is a part of season, that makes month a part
of a year.
Semantic fields usually tend to be complicated, that is why they have crisscross as one of the features. It mainly reflects
from two aspects. On the one hand, a word with just one meaning could form different semantic fields with different
words. For example, parent could form a hyponymy with father or mother; it could also form an antonymy with child. On
the other hand, a word with different meanings could form various semantic fields with various words. For example, fast
could form an antonymy with slow; meanwhile, it could also form a synonymy with words like quick, rapid and speedy,
etc. and form another synonymy with firm and fixed. Another example, the word cow could not only refer the generic term
of the semantic field of cattle in the higher level, but also could refer to simply the female cattle at a lower level in the
same semantic field.
From the characteristics listed above, we can say that we could use the superordinates to sum up the words that belong
to the same hyponymy and describe all other words that belong to the same hyponymy with the superordinates to make the
context concise and clear as it is necessary. This approach also applies when it is unnecessary to list all the hyponyms. For
example, we can use stationery to cover pens, pencils, rulers and paper, etc. when it is not necessary to list all these words.
We can also use furniture to include chairs, tables, desks and beds, etc.
When learning about Jupiter, one of the planets of the solar system, English learners could expand the learning list to
other names of planets of the solar system, such as Mars, Mercury, Saturn, Venus and so on. In an interestingly similar
way, when learn about Mars, we might also learn that it is also the name of god of the war in ancient Roman legendaries,
and Jupiter is the name of the king of all gods in the same system. This way, English learners could remember words
much easily and systematically.
B. The Application of Antonymy
Generally, antonyms are used to indicate contrast and highlight the features of objects. Successful writers even use
antonymy in the titles of their writings. Jane Austen is particularly fond of adopting this technique in her novels, such as
Sense and Sensability, Pride and Prejudice. Antonymy helps form a sharp contrast and makes the works fascinating so
that readers could continue reading with great interest.
Meanwhile, antonymy is often used to explain lexical meanings. Some words are difficult to explain directly, however,
it will be easier to paraphrase using its antonym. For example, muscular, disgraceful, mediocre, and impoverishment
might be unfamiliar to most students and make it difficult to explain in English, yet we can use not weak, not honored, not
outstanding, and enrichment to directly explain them. Also, antonymy could be used to enlarge the vocabulary through
covering pairs of semantically opposed antonyms. For example, when learning about employer, trainer and sender, we can
simultaneously memorize employee, trainee and recipient.
G. Leech (1981) recognizes seven types of meaning in his Semantics. One is collocative meaning referring to what is
communicated through association with words which tend to occur in the environment of another word. Linguistic context is just the collocation of one word with another. Some words are of polesemy. In different contexts, they have
different meanings. Therefore, these words have different collocations respectively. Meanwhile, each word has different
antonyms when its collocation changes.
Take fresh for example. The basic meaning of fresh is “newly coming out”. Its antonym is “old”. That is, the antonym
of “fresh problem” is “old problem”. When the meaning of fresh turns to “newly-made”, its antonym turns to “state”, that
is, “no longer fresh”. The antonym of “fresh bread” is “state bread”. “Fresh fruit” means “newly gathered fruit”, the fruit
that are “not preserved” and “not dried”. In this situation, the antonym of fresh becomes “preserved” or “dried”. When
fresh collocates with “flower”, it means “newly gathered”. The antonym of “fresh” is “faded” or “withered” accordingly.
And when fresh collocates with “air”, it refers to “clean and refreshing”. Accordingly, its antonym is “foul” or “polluted”.
It is self-evident how vocabulary is easily enlarged from a single word “fresh” to about ten words or phrases by way of
putting words in their semantic field of antonymy.
C. The Application of Synonymy
Seeing from a historical perspective, any language is always changing as time passes. Among all the changes of a
language, the change of vocabulary is spectacular. It does not only indicate the vanishing of old words and the emergence
of new words, but also could represent the change of the lexical meaning. Thus this change must have caused the change
of semantic field. For example, the word nice used to mean stupid, which made it possible to form a synonymy with
foolish and moronic; while in modern English, nice changes its meaning into good and fine, which makes them a new
synonymy. Another example, the word bird used to mean squab, while nowadays becomes a generic term of all birds.
Due to the change of meaning, a word would transfer from one semantic field to another.
Vagueness is another characteristic of semantic field. It indicates that due to the uncertain cognition of some objects or
concepts from the external world of modern people and makes them vague. For example, it is still vague to decide whether
to put the word olive in the semantic field of fruits or vegetables. Also, it is uncertain whether to put the word sled into the
semantic filed of transportation or sport equipment.
In general, the application of synonymy could be used in describing the unfamiliar words. We could use the relativity
and synonymy semantic field to enlarge vocabulary like what hyponymy and antonymy do; besides, vagueness of
semantic fields could also help English learners distinguish different synonymy. As for synonymy itself, during learning
process, there are a lot of words that are difficult to explain directly in English, in that case, we can use the synonyms to
paraphrase them and acquire an easier access to learning their meanings. For example, we could use native language to
directly paraphrase mother tongue.
During the vocabulary learning process, we can list up and compare the words that have similar semantic meaning and
slight difference in general usage. For example, when learning about the word raise, we can list rise and arise as well. The
three words share basic same meaning yet they are slightly different in grammar usage. Through this way, English
learners could memorize both the spellings and specific usage of similar yet different words.
Conclusion
Vocabulary is one of the important elements in a language. English language is no exception. The efficiency of
vocabulary learning greatly determines the success of language learning. English words are over a million in number
and they constitute the core of language learning. The size of one’s vocabulary directly affects the development of
his/her linguistic competence. Therefore, the first task of vocabulary instruction is to enlarge learners’ vocabulary. (Guo,
2010) Thus lots of vocabulary learning strategies have been recommended. However, the most systematic and scientific
strategy should be the one based on semantic field theory.
This paper studies English vocabulary learning based on semantic field theory. In introduction, the paper presents the
significance of the study and the theoretical review of semantic field. Words do not stand alone, rather, they form
numerous dependently interrelated networks, either superordinate-hyponym, or antonymous, or synonymous, etc. Thus,
the paper classifies the semantic field theory into three major categories, i.e., hyponymy, antonymy and synonymy, each
of which are illustrated with abundant examples. Then the body of the paper is to apply each category of semantic
relations to English vocabulary learning respectively with detailed elaboration. Meanwhile, the characteristics of each
semantic field are summarized during the illustration, which include hierarchy, transitivity, crisscross, relativity,
variability, vagueness, etc.
In conclusion, the paper only covers three major semantic relations, hyponymy, antonymy and synonymy. As for
other semantic relations like polysemy, homonymy, taxonymy, partonymy, they do play vital roles in semantic field
study as well as in vocabulary learning and teaching.
