Synonimy, antonymy and hyponymy

 

What it is Synonimy, Antonymmy and Hyponymy?

Definition Synonym, Antonym, hyponym

Synonyms

Synonyms are words that have the same or very similar meaning. All words can have a synonym. Nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs and prepositions can have a synonym as long as both words are the same part of speech.

Examples of Synonyms

Adjectives: beautiful, lovely, gorgeous, stunning, striking

Nouns: House, home, dwelling, residence, abode, quarters

Verbs: jump, bound, leap, hop, skip

Prepositions: in, inside, within

Antonyms

Antonyms are words that have opposite meanings. For example, the antonym of long is short. Often words will have more than one antonym but as with synonyms it depends on the context. For instance, the word warm could have the antonym cool or chilly. In order to choose the correct antonym, you have to look at all the meanings and how the word is used. Cool can mean stylish as well as chilly so the word cool may not be the best choice.

Types of Antonyms

1.      Graded antonyms are word pairs that have variations between the two opposites. For example, big and little are antonyms but there are a lot of changes before you get to the opposite meaning. Like this:

Big, huge, bulky, full-size, slight, petite, little Other examples are:

a.       Sane and crazy

b.      Rich and poor

c.       Cool and hot

d.      Wet and dry

e.       Late and early

f.       Ignorant and educated

2.      Relational antonyms are pairs that have a relationship. Each word wouldn’t exist without the other. There can’t be a parent without a child or it’s either all or nothing. Other examples include:

a.       Servant and master

b.      Borrow and lend

c.       Come and go

d.      Toward and away

e.       Divisor and dividend

f.       Parent and child

3.      Complimentary antonyms are word pairs that have no degree of meaning. There are only two opposite possibilities. Example  :

a.       Leave and arrive

b.      Pre and post

c.       Question and answer

d.      Single and married

e.       Hired and fired

f.       Brother and sister

g.      Before and after

4.      Adding a Prefix

Sometimes, an antonym can be easily made by adding a prefix.
Examples of antonyms that were made by adding the prefix “un” are:

a.        Likely and unlike

b.      Able and unable

By adding the prefix “non” you can make these pairs:

a.       Entity and nonentity

b.      Conformist and nonconformist

Lastly, adding the prefix “in” can make the following pairs:

a.       Tolerant and intolerant

b.      Decent and indecent

c.       Discreet and indiscreet

d.      Excusable and inexcusable

Homonym

Two or more words that have the same sound or spelling but differ in meaning. Generally, the term homonym refers both to homophones (words that are pronounced the same but have different meanings, such as pair and pear) and to homographs (words that are spelled the same but have different meanings, such as "bow your head" and "tied in a bow").
Accordingly homonym divided into two :

1.      Homophone

Homophone is a words that are pronounced the same but have different meanings. Example:

§  patience/patients

§  some/sum

§  knap/nap

§  knead/kneed/need

§  knead/kneed/need

§  knight/night

§  desert /dessert

2.      Homograph

Homographs are words with different pronunciation, meanings and origins but the same spelling. 

Example :

§  wave – move the hand in greeting OR sea water coming into shore

§  wound – past tense of wind OR to injure

§  fine - very good/sharp or keen/delicate or subtle/a sum of money paid to settle a matter

§  refuse - waste or garbage/to reject or decline to accept

§  contract - an agreement/to get, acquire or incur

                §  learned – past tense of learn OR knowledgeable

Simile

 

What it,s Smile?

 DEFINITION OF METAPHOR

A metaphor is a figure of speech that refers to something as being the same as another thing for rhetorical effect. It may provide clarity or identify hidden similarities between two ideas. Where a simile compares two items, a metaphor directly equates them, and does not use "like" or "as" as does a simile.

METAPHOR EXAMPLES

1. The detective listened to her tales with a wooden face.
2. She was fairly certain that life was a fashion show.
3. The typical teenage boy’s room is a disaster area.
4. What storms then shook the ocean of my sleep.
5. The children were roses grown in concrete gardens, beautiful and forlorn.
6. Kisses are the flowers of love in bloom.
7. His cotton candy words did not appeal to her taste.
8. Kathy arrived at the grocery store with an army of children.
9. Her eyes were fireflies.
10. He wanted to set sail on the ocean of love but he just wasted away in the desert.
11. I was lost in a sea of nameless faces.
12. John’s answer to the problem was just a Band-Aid, not a solution.
13. The cast on Michael’s broken leg was a plaster shackle.
14. Cameron always had a taste for the fruit of knowledge.
15. The promise between us was a delicate flower.
16. He’s a rolling stone, and it’s bred in the bone.
17. He pleaded for her forgiveness but Janet’s heart was cold iron.
18. She was just a trophy to Ricardo, another object to possess.
19. The path of resentment is easier to travel than the road to forgiveness.
20. Katie’s plan to get into college was a house of cards on a crooked table.
21. The wheels of justice turn slowly.
22. Hope shines–a pebble in the gloom.
23. She cut him down with her words.

 

Metaphor

DEFINITION OF METAPHOR

A metaphor is a figure of speech that refers to something as being the same as another thing for rhetorical effect. It may provide clarity or identify hidden similarities between two ideas. Where a simile compares two items, a metaphor directly equates them, and does not use "like" or "as" as does a simile.

METAPHOR EXAMPLES

1. The detective listened to her tales with a wooden face.
2. She was fairly certain that life was a fashion show.
3. The typical teenage boy’s room is a disaster area.
4. What storms then shook the ocean of my sleep.
5. The children were roses grown in concrete gardens, beautiful and forlorn.
6. Kisses are the flowers of love in bloom.
7. His cotton candy words did not appeal to her taste.
8. Kathy arrived at the grocery store with an army of children.
9. Her eyes were fireflies.
10. He wanted to set sail on the ocean of love but he just wasted away in the desert.
11. I was lost in a sea of nameless faces.
12. John’s answer to the problem was just a Band-Aid, not a solution.
13. The cast on Michael’s broken leg was a plaster shackle.
14. Cameron always had a taste for the fruit of knowledge.
15. The promise between us was a delicate flower.
16. He’s a rolling stone, and it’s bred in the bone.
17. He pleaded for her forgiveness but Janet’s heart was cold iron.
18. She was just a trophy to Ricardo, another object to possess.
19. The path of resentment is easier to travel than the road to forgiveness.
20. Katie’s plan to get into college was a house of cards on a crooked table.
21. The wheels of justice turn slowly.
22. Hope shines–a pebble in the gloom.
23. She cut him down with her words.

Ambiguity

AMBIGUITY

A word, phrase, or sentence is ambiguous if it has more than one meaning. The word 'light', for example, can mean not very heavy or not very dark. Words like 'light', 'note', 'bear' and 'over' are lexically ambiguous. They induce ambiguity in phrases or sentences in which they occur, such as 'light suit' and 'The duchess can't bear children'. However, phrases and sentences can be ambiguous even if none of their constituents is. The phrase 'porcelain egg container' is structurally ambiguous, as is the sentence 'The police shot the rioters with guns'. Ambiguity can have both a lexical and a structural basis, as with sentences like 'I left her behind for you' and 'He saw her duck'.
The notion of ambiguity has philosophical applications. For example, identifying an ambiguity can aid in solving a philosophical problem. Suppose one wonders how two people can have the same idea, say of a unicorn. This can seem puzzling until one distinguishes 'idea' in the sense of a particular psychological occurrence, a mental representation, from 'idea' in the sense of an abstract, shareable concept. On the other hand, gratuitous claims of ambiguity can make for overly simple solutions. Accordingly, the question arises of how genuine ambiguities can be distinguished from spurious ones. Part of the answer consists in identifying phenomena with which ambiguity may be confused, such as vagueness, unclarity, inexplicitness and indexicality.


1. Types of ambiguity
2. Ambiguity contrasted
3. Philosophical relevance


1. Types of ambiguity

Although people are sometimes said to be ambiguous in how they use language, ambiguity is, strictly speaking, a property of linguistic expressions. A word, phrase, or sentence is ambiguous if it has more than one meaning. Obviously this definition does not say what meanings are or what it is for an expression to have one (or more than one). For a particular language, this information is provided by a grammar, which systematically pairs forms with meanings, ambiguous forms with more than one meaning (see MEANING and SEMANTICS).
There are two types of ambiguity, lexical and structural. Lexical ambiguity is by far the more common. Everyday examples include nouns like 'chip', 'pen' and 'suit', verbs like 'call', 'draw' and 'run', and adjectives like 'deep', 'dry' and 'hard'. There are various tests for ambiguity. One test is having two unrelated antonyms, as with 'hard', which has both 'soft' and 'easy' as opposites. Another is the conjunction reduction test. Consider the sentence, 'The tailor pressed one suit in his shop and one in the municipal court'. Evidence that the word 'suit' (not to mention 'press') is ambiguous is provided by the anomaly of the 'crossed interpretation' of the sentence, on which 'suit' is used to refer to an article of clothing and 'one' to a legal action.
The above examples of ambiguity are each a case of one word with more than one meaning. However, it is not always clear when we have only one word. The verb 'desert' and the noun 'dessert', which sound the same but are spelled differently, count as distinct words (they are homonyms). So do the noun 'bear' and the verb 'bear', even though they not only sound the same but are spelled the same. These examples may be clear cases of homonymy, but what about the noun 'respect' and the verb 'respect' or the preposition 'over' and the adjective 'over'? Are the members of these pairs homonyms or different forms of the same word? There is no general consensus on how to draw the line between cases of one ambiguous word and cases of two homonyous words. Perhaps the difference is ultimately arbitrary.
Sometimes one meaning of a word is derived from another. For example, the cognitive sense of 'see' seems derived from its visual sense. The sense of 'weigh' in 'He weighed the package' is derived from its sense in 'The package weighed two pounds'. Similarly, the transitive senses of 'burn', 'fly' and 'walk' are derived from their intransitive senses. Now it could be argued that in each of these cases the derived sense does not really qualify as a second meaning of the word but is actually the result of a lexical operation on the underived sense. This argument is plausible to the extent that the phenomenon is systematic and general, rather than peculiar to particular words. Lexical semantics has the task of identifying and characterizing such systematic phemena. It is also concerned to explain the rich and subtle semantic behavior of common and highly flexible words like the verbs 'do' and 'put' and the prepositions 'at', 'in' and 'to'. Each of these words has uses which are so numerous yet so closely related that they are often described as 'polysemous' rather than ambiguous.
Structural ambiguity occurs when a phrase or sentence has more than one underlying structure, such as the phrases 'Tibetan history teacher', 'a student of high moral principles' and 'short men and women', and the sentences 'The girl hit the boy with a book' and 'Visiting relatives can be boring'. These ambiguities are said to be structural because each such phrase can be represented in two structurally different ways, e.g., '[Tibetan history] teacher' and 'Tibetan [history teacher]'. Indeed, the existence of such ambiguities provides strong evidence for a level of underlying syntactic structure (see SYNTAX). Consider the structurally ambiguous sentence, 'The chicken is ready to eat', which could be used to describe either a hungry chicken or a broiled chicken. It is arguable that the operative reading depends on whether or not the implicit subject of the infinitive clause 'to eat' is tied anaphorically to the subject ('the chicken') of the main clause.
It is not always clear when we have a case of structural ambiguity. Consider, for example, the elliptical sentence, 'Perot knows a richer man than Trump'. It has two meanings, that Perot knows a man who is richer than Trump and that Perot knows man who is richer than any man Trump knows, and is therefore ambiguous. But what about the sentence 'John loves his mother and so does Bill'? It can be used to say either that John loves John's mother and Bill loves Bill's mother or that John loves John's mother and Bill loves John's mother. But is it really ambiguous? One might argue that the clause 'so does Bill' is unambiguous and may be read unequivocally as saying in the context that Bill does the same thing that John does, and although there are two different possibilities for what counts as doing the same thing, these alternatives are not fixed semantically. Hence the ambiguity is merely apparent and better described as semantic underdetermination.
Although ambiguity is fundamentally a property of linguistic expressions, people are also said to be ambiguous on occasion in how they use language. This can occur if, even when their words are unambiguous, their words do not make what they mean uniquely determinable. Strictly speaking, however, ambiguity is a semantic phenomenon, involving linguistic meaning rather than speaker meaning (see MEANING AND COMMUNICATION); 'pragmatic ambiguity' is an oxymoron. Generally when one uses ambiguous words or sentences, one does not consciously entertain their unintended meanings, although there is psycholinguistic evidence that when one hears ambiguous words one momentarily accesses and then rules out their irrelevant senses. When people use ambiguous language, generally its ambiguity is not intended. Occasionally, however, ambiguity is deliberate, as with an utterance of 'I'd like to see more of you' when intended to be taken in more than one way in the very same context of utterance.


2. Ambiguity contrasted

It is a platitude that what your words convey 'depends on what you mean'. This suggests that one can mean different things by what one says, but it says nothing about the variety of ways in which this is possible. Semantic ambiguity is one such way, but there are others: homonymy (mentioned above), vagueness, relativity, indexicality, nonliterality, indirection and inexplicitness. All these other phenomena illustrate something distinct from multiplicity of linguistic meaning.
An expression is vague if it admits of borderline cases (see VAGUENESS). Terms like 'bald', 'heavy' and 'old' are obvious examples, and their vagueness is explained by the fact that they apply to items on fuzzy regions of a scale. Terms that express cluster concepts, like 'intelligent', 'athletic' and 'just', are vague because their instances are determined by the application of several criteria, no one of which is decisive.
Relativity is illustrated by the words 'heavy' and 'old' (these are vague as well). Heavy people are lighter than nonheavy elephants, and old cats can are younger than some young people. A different sort of relativity occurs with sentences like 'Jane is finished' and 'John will be late'. Obviously one cannot be finished or late simpliciter but only finished with something or late for something. This does not show that the words 'finished' and 'late' are ambiguous (if they were, they would be ambiguous in as many ways as there are things one can be finished with or things one can be late for), but only that such a sentence is semantically underdeterminate--it must be used to mean more than what the sentence means.
Indexical terms, like 'you', 'here' and 'tomorrow', have fixed meaning but variable reference. For example, the meaning of the word 'tomorrow' does not change from one day to the next, though of course its reference does (see DEMONSTRATIVES AND INDEXICALS).
Nonliterality, indirection and inexplicitness are further ways in which what a speaker means is not uniquely determined by what his words mean (see SPEECH ACTS). They can give rise to unclarity in communication, as might happen with utterances of 'You're the icing on my cake', 'I wish you could sing longer and louder', and 'Nothing is on TV tonight'. These are not cases of linguistic ambiguity but can be confused with it because speakers are often said to be ambiguous.


3. Philosophical relevance

Philosophical distinctions can be obscured by unnoticed ambiguities. So it is important to identify terms that do doubtle duty. For example, there is a kind of ambiguity, often described as the 'act/object' or the 'process/product' ambiguity, exhibited by everyday terms like 'building', 'shot' and 'writing'. Confusions in philosophy of language and mind can result from overlooking this ambiguity in terms like 'inference', 'statement' and 'thought'. Another common philosophical ambiguity is the type/token distinction. Everyday terms like 'animal', 'book' and 'car' apply both to types and to instances (tokens) of those types. The same is true of linguistic terms like 'sentence', 'word' and 'letter' and to philosophically important terms like 'concept', 'event' and 'mental state' (see TYPE/TOKEN DISTINCTION).
Although unnoticed ambiguities can create philosophical problems, ambiguity is philosophically important also because philosophers often make spurious claims of it. Indeed, the linguist Charles Ruhl has argued that certain ostensible ambiguities, including act/object and type/token, are really cases of lexical underdetermination. Saul Kripke laments the common strategem, which he calls 'the lazy man's approach in philosophy', of appealing to ambiguity to escape from a philosophical quandary, and H. P. Grice urges philosophers to hone the 'Modified Occam's Razor: senses are not to be multiplied beyond necessity'. He illustrates its value by shaving a sense off the logical connective 'or', which is often thought to have both an inclusive and exclusive sense. Grice argues that, given its inclusive meaning, its exclusive use can be explained entirely on pragmatic grounds (see IMPLICATURE). Another example, prominent in modern philosophy of language, is the ambiguity alleged to arise from the distinction between referential and attributive uses of definite descriptions (see DESCRIPTIONS). Less prominent but not uncommon is the suggestion that pronouns are ambiguous as between their anaphoric and their deictic use (see PRONOUNS AND ANAPHORA). So, for example, it is suggested that a sentence like 'Oedipus loves his mother' has two 'readings', i.e., is ambiguous, because it can be used to mean either that Oedipus loves his own mother or that Oedipus loves the mother of some contextually specified male. However, this seems to be an insufficient basis for the claim of ambiguity. After all, being previously mentioned is just another way of being contextually specified. Accordingly, there is nothing semantically special in this example about the use of 'his' to refer to Oedipus.
Claims of structural ambiguity can also be controversial. Of particular importance are claims of scope ambiguity, which are commonly made but rarely defended. A sentence like 'Everybody loves somebody' is said to exhibit a scope ambiguity because it can be used to mean either that for each person, there is somebody that that person loves or (however unlikely) that there is somebody that everybody loves. These uses may be represented, respectively, by the logical formulas '("x)(Ey)(Lxy)' and '(Ey)("x)(Lxy)'. It is generally assumed that because different logical formulas are needed to represented the different ways in which an utterance of such a sentence can be taken, the sentence itself has two distinct logical forms (see LOGICAL FORM). Sustaining this claim of ambiguity requires identifying a level of linguistic description at which the sentence can be assigned two distinct structures. Some grammarians have posited a level of LF, corresponding to what philosophers call logical form, at which relative scope of quantified noun phrases may be represented. However, LF of this kind does not explain scope ambiguities that philosophers attribute to sentences containing modal operators and psychological verbs, such as 'The next president might be a woman' and 'Ralph wants a sloop' (see SCOPE). An utterance of such a sentence can be taken in either of two ways, but it is arguable that the sentence is not ambiguous but merely semantically underdeterminate with respect to its two alleged 'readings'.
Notwithstanding the frequency in philosophy of unwarranted and often arbitrary claims of ambiguity, it cannot be denied that some terms really are ambiguous. The nouns 'bank' and 'suit' are clear examples, and so are the verbs 'bank' and 'file'. Philosophers sometimes lament the prevalence of ambiguity in natural languages and yearn for an ideal language in which it is absent. But ambiguity is a fact of linguistic life. Despite the potentially endless supply of words, many words do double duty or more. And despite the unlimited number of sentences, many have several meanings, and their utterance must be disambiguated in light of the speaker's likely intentions

Denotation,conotation and implication

 

Denotation, conotation and implication

what is Denotation?

 Denotation 

The language consists of a large number of words and each word has a direct correlation with something outside language. And if we communicate with each other through language we all must be the same ' idea ' or ' concept ' associated with each word.

Ogden and Richard mentioned the bond between the object and the word meaning. When we hear or read the word, we often form a mental picture of what that word represents, and equate "concept" with a mental picture

The reference is the relationship between the expression language like this door, both doors, the dog, another dog and anything else related to expression in certain situations when the use of language, including what the speaker might imagine. Denoted is the potential of words like door or dog to enter into the expression language like that. The reference was the way the speaker and the listener using the expression work.
 Denoted is the knowledge that they have that makes them use successfully.

The problem with the theory of mentalistik meaning, first, that not all words can be associated with a mental image. the example Sentence "The dog bit a man ' and ' The man bit a dog ', using ordinary instance, contain the same words but they do not express the same meaning.

 

 

What is Conatition?

 

 
CONNOTION

 

The connotations are affective or emotional Association of menthol, which obviously doesn't need to be the same for all those who know and use the word. Identify the central aspects of denoted meaning of the word, where every people generally agree about. The connotation of referring to the personal aspect of meaning, evoke emotional Association said. Connotation varies according to experience, some words have the connotation of sharing.

 

 

What is Impllication?

Implication

An implication is something that is suggested, or happens, indirectly. When you left the gate open and the dog escaped, you were guilty by implication.

Implication has many different senses: Usually used in the plural, implications are effects or consequences that may happen in the future. You might ask, "What are the implications of our decision?" Implication is also the state of being implicated, or connected to something bad: "Are you surprised by their implication that you were involved in the crime?"

Examples of implication in a sentence

1. … but whereas Updike and Roth work to establish connection and coherence in the face of time's chaos, DeLillo is an artist of diffusion and dispersal, of implication and missing information. —A. O. Scott, New York Times Book Review, 21 May 2006
2. … the power of ideas to transform the world is itself accelerating. Although people readily agree with this observation when simply stated, very few people truly appreciate its profound implications. —Ray Kurzweil, Curious Minds, (2004) 2005
3. … the astronomer Edwin Hubble found that the universe is expanding, and by implication must have originated a finite time ago in an explosion popularly called the big bang. —Paul Davies, The New Physics, 1989
4. I'm offended by his implication that women can't be good at mathematics.
5. He condemned the court and, by implication, the entire legal system.
6. He was shocked by the implication of his partner in the theft.

 

 

 

EuphemisM

EUPHEMISM

What is EUPHEMISM?

A euphemism is used on polite expressions are words or phrases that might be considered rude or distasteful to be heard. Euphemism used regularly, and there are many examples of the use of euphemism in everyday language.

Replacement of offensive expressions (such as "just passed away") to replace the word deemed objectionable ("dead").

In his Oxford Dictionary of euphemism (2007), the record Holder in the speech that the RW or writing "we use the euphemism for dealing with things that are taboo or touchy subjects. That is the language of the embezzlement, hypocrisy, coquettishness, and lies.

Examples of the use of the Figure of Speech and Euphemism Sense

This type of euphemism

To Soften Expression

Some euphemism used to make truth the less fun it looks softer.

Euphemism examples that are included in this category include:

Using just Passed away than died to declare death

Use Correctional facility rather than jail to State prison

Use the Departed than died to declare dead

Use Differently-abled instead of handicapped or disabled to reveal defects

Use Fell off the back of a truck than to reveal the stolen stolen

Using Ethnic cleansing rather than genocide to State Tribes

Use Turn a trick rather than engage in prostitution to declare prostitution

Using Negative patient outcomes than dead to declare dead

Use the Relocation center rather than the prison camp to State prison

Use the Collateral damage than accidental deaths to State killing

Use Letting someone go rather than firing someone for stating a win

Use a Put to sleep rather than euthanize to declare perkosa

Use Pregnancy termination "approach than abortion" to declare abortion

Use On the streets than homeless bum to declare

Euphemisms used to be Polite

Another Euphemism used to replace words or phrases that you might not want to say in polite form.

Euphemism examples that are included in this category include:

Using Adult entertainment than pornography to declare pornography

Using Adult beverages than beer or liquor to state liquor

Using Au natural than naked to reveal her naked

Using a Big-boned than heavy or overweight to declare obesity

Use the Portly than heavy or overweight to declare obesity

Using Chronologically-challenged rather than late to declare late

Using the Comfort woman rather than a prostitute for suggesting a slut

Use Use the rest room rather than go to the bathroom to reveal the bathroom

Using Break wind rather than pass gas to declare fart

Using Economical with the truth than to say liar liar

Use Powder your nose rather than use the rest room to declare the bathroom

Using The birds and the bees than sex to reveal an intimate relationship

Use Between jobs rather than unemployed to State unemployment

Using Go all the way rather than have sex to declare sex

Using a Domestic engineer rather than a maid to declare a helper

Using Sanitation engineer rather than the garbage man to reveal the Dustman

Using a Vertically-challenged than short to declare short

Using Sleep together rather than have sex to declare sex

Euphemisms used to be disrespectful

In some cases, a euphemism intentionally made more or less fun to menjijikkkan something to say. This is typically used when the person being sarcastic or trying to explain a subject.

Examples include:

Use the Batting for the other side than to declare a Gay homosexual

Using Bit the big one instead of died to declare death

Using bits of the farm than died to declare death

Use the Cement shoes than dead to declare death

Using Bit the dust than to declare death died

Using Croaked than dead to declare death

Use the Kick the bucket rather than die for stating the death

Using Blow chunks rather than vomited for States vomiting

Using Hide the sausage than sex to reveal an intimate relationship

Using Making whoopee than sex to reveal an intimate relationship

Using Well-hung rather than having a large penis to reveal the huge genitals

Read Also

Use, differences and examples of "Live vs. Life" Dala