The problem of polysemy in the English language

8 August 2017





Bachelor paper

presented by

a 4th & # 8212 ; twelvemonth pupil

Galyna Tsvyk

Supervised by

Drofyak N.I.

Teacher of English

Lviv – 2011

Table of Contentss


Chapter I. Wordss as Meaningful Unit of measurements

1.1 Polysemy as the Source of Ambiguities in a Language

1.2 Historical Development of the Polysemy

1.2.1 The Diachronic Approach to Studying Polysemy

1.2.2 The Synchronic Approach to Studying Polysemy

1.3 Polysemy and its Connection with the Context

Chapter II. Practical Use of Polysemy in Teaching English

2.1 Polysemy in Teaching English on Intermediate Level

2.2 Polysemy in Teaching English on Advanced Level

2.3 Lesson Plan


List of Mentions


Language is defined as a human system of communicating that uses arbitrary signals, such as voice sounds, gestures, or written symbols. But frankly speech production, linguistic communication is far excessively complicated, fascinating, and cryptic to be adequately explained by a brief definition.

We will write a custom essay sample on
The problem of polysemy in the English language
or any similar topic specifically for you
Do Not Waste
Your Time

Only $13.90 / page

The organic map of the linguistic communication is to transport intending. Most of the jobs in lingual scientific discipline are closely bound to inquiry of cognitive semantics and call for scientific analysis of communicating in words. The survey of words is non entirely a survey of roots and stems, of prefixes or postfixs. The cryptic universe of words is an object of scientific probe [ 13 ; 25 ] .

Theoretical jobs of lingual signifier and significance as relevant to the progressive development of linguistic communication have attracted the attending of bookmans, philosophers and syntacticians since the times of Plato and Aristotle. From those times sameness of significance was non really easy to cover with but there seemed nil inherently hard about difference of significance. The state of affairs is the same presents. Not merely different words have different significances ; it & # 8217 ; s besides the instance that the same word may hold a set of significances. This phenomenon is called lexical ambiguity.

Polysemy is the coexistence of many possible significances for a word or phrase. Most words of the English linguistic communication are polysemous. Highly developed lexical ambiguity is one of the characteristic characteristics of the English linguistic communication. The system of significances of any polysemous word develops bit by bit, largely over the centuries, as more and more new significances are either added to old 1s, or out some of them. We say that the word is polysemous when it has many significances. In the word the chief and the secondary significances are distinguished. Therefore, the word is polysemous in the linguistic communication but in existent address it is ever monosemantic, that is, it has merely one significance. It is in the context that makes the polysemous word monosemantic. The researches of lexical ambiguity are besides important in grammar, as most grammatical signifiers are polysemous. Even a individual grammatical signifier can be made to show a whole assortment of structural significances.

The semantic construction of a polysemous word is treated as a system of significances. Some semantic constructions are arranged on a different rule. In the undermentioned list of significance of the adjectival dull one can barely trust to happen a generalised significance covering and keeping together the remainder of the semantic construction.

The researches of the multiplicity of significances began in 18th century and were continued in the 19th century. The most of import investing in this century was made by Bre & # 769 ; Als whose research into lexical ambiguity marked a new get downing point: he shifted the survey of lexical ambiguity off from lexicography and etymology and investigated lexical ambiguity as the ever synchronous form of intending environing a word is itself he of all time altering consequence of semantic alteration [ 6 ; 154 ] .

The of import researches in the domain of lexical ambiguity were made by Lyon who considers lexical ambiguity and homonymy as two types of lexical ambiguity and present some standards for make up one’s minding when it is polysemy and when it is homonymy. One standard is etymological information about the lexical point in inquiry. Lexical points with the same beginning are considered as polysemous, whereas if they have evolved from distinguishable lexemes in some earlier phase of the linguistic communication so they are regarded as homonymic [ 15 ; 123-124 ] .

Lexical significance of every word depends upon the portion of address to which the word belongs. Every word may be used in a modification set of syntactical maps, and with the definite valency. It has a definite set of grammatical significances, and a definite set of signifiers.

Every lexico-grammatical group of words or category is characterized by its ain lexico-grammatical significance, organizing, as it were, the common denominator of all the significances of the words which belongs to this group. The lexico-grammatical significance may be besides regarded as a characteristic harmonizing to which these words are grouped together. Many recent probes are devoted to set uping word categories on the footing of similarity of distribution.

In the lexical significance of every separate word the lexico-grammatical significance common to all the words of the category to which this word belongs is enriched by extra characteristics and becomes particularized [ 6 ; 205-206 ] .

In summing up this point, we note that the complexness of the impression is determined by the relationships of the extra-linguistic world reflected in human consciousness. The construction of every separate significance depends on the lingual syntagmatic and paradigmatic relationships because significance is an built-in constituent of linguistic communication. The complexness of every word significance is due to the fact that it combines lexical significance with lexico-grammatical significance and sometimes with emotional colouring, stylistic distinctive features and intensions born from old use.

The importance of analyzing the phenomenon of lexical ambiguity is obvious because it is the object of confusion and in order to supply a quantitative and qualitative growing of the linguistic communication & # 8217 ; s expressive resources it is highly of import to look into the semantic alterations in the system of significances in the English linguistic communication. To understand a text, scholars need to cognize words and cognizing a word involves cognizing: its spoken and written contexts of usage its forms with words of related significance. When learning vocabulary it is so necessary to see facets like indication, lexical ambiguity, intension and sociocultural facets when learning a 2nd or foreign linguistic communication so that scholars are able to acquire intending from texts.

The purpose of research is to do an analysis of the chief rules of word significance and its jobs in learning English.

The aim of this research is the probe of lexical ambiguity in historical and synchronous dimensions. Harmonizing to the aim there are following undertakings:

1 ) to demo historical background of the lexical ambiguity ;

2 ) to depict semantic construction of polysemous words ;

3 ) to detect the impact of the context on the significance of polysemous words ;

4 ) to depict the practical use of the lexical ambiguity.

To work out all these undertakings my diploma paper was designed.

Chapter I. Wordss as Meaningful Unit of measurements

1.1 Polysemy as the Source of Ambiguities in a Language

Polysemy is a semantic inherent in the cardinal construction of the linguistic communication. All linguistic communications have polysemy on several degrees. A wide-spread lexical ambiguity in English is justly considered as one of its characteristic characteristics conditioned by the distinctive features of its construction.

The chief beginning of the development of regular lexical ambiguity is the metaphoric and metonymic transference, which is platitude and appears to be cardinal in life linguistic communication.

Polysemic words make up a considerable portion of the English vocabulary. Potential lexical ambiguity of words is the most fertile beginning of ambiguities in linguistic communication.

In a limited figure of instances two significances of the same English words are differentiated by certain formal agencies, as, for case, by spelling: born & # 8212 ; borne, bill of exchange & # 8212 ; draught ; by word-order: embassador extraordinary & # 8212 ; extraordinary embassador ; by inflection: hanged & # 8212 ; bent. The differentiations between thing-words ( countables ) and mass-words ( uncountables ) is easy plenty if we look at the thought that is expressed in each individual case. But in practical linguistic communication the differentiation is non carried through in such a manner that one and the same word stands ever for one and the same thought [ 9 ; 112 ] .

On the contrary, a great many words may in one connexion base for something denumerable and in the other for something uncountable. Comparison:

1 ) Have an ice.

2 ) There is no ice on the pool.

In the first illustration ice & # 8212 ; any frozen sweet, particularly one incorporating pick, as a H2O ice, sherbert or frappe & # 769 ; . In the 2nd illustration ice & # 8212 ; H2O frozen frosting icing, any substance looking like ice.

In the huge bulk of instances the context, lingual or situational will contract down all irrelevant senses [ 11 ; 97-98 ] .

Wordss frequently marks non of one but of several things. The lingual mechanism works of course in many waysto prevent ambiguity and supply the hint to separate the necessary significance. It & # 8217 ; s besides of import to take into consideration the significance of the context, lingual or non-linguistic ; many ambiguities are ne’er noticed because the assorted possible significances are excluded by the state of affairs. Important observations in this country of the vocabulary have been made by contextual, distributional and transformational analysis [ 16 ; 185 ] .

The job of lexical ambiguity, in other words, the usage of the same word in two or more distinguishable significances in relevant to a figure of other of import inquiries. These are: the development of different types of equivalent word, as a consequence of semantic heterotaxies of lexical units and homonymy.

Specifying lexical ambiguity as a lingual development, Charles Bally made differentiation between its two facets: foremost, when one lingual mark has several significances, and so, when significance is expressed by several lingual marks.

Wordss may turn in connotative power in conformity with the nature with the significances connected with them. In the power of intension lies the modesty force of linguistic communication. Without this linguistic communication would lose much of its expressivity and flexibleness.

The frequence of lexical ambiguity in different linguistic communications is a variable depending on assorted factors. Languages where derivation and composing are meagerly used tend to make full the spreads in vocabulary by adding new significance to bing footings.

Polysemy more frequently occurs in generic words than in specific footings whose significances are less capable to fluctuation [ 3 ; 214-215 ] .

It is highly of import non to lose sights of the fact that few words have simple significances. Practically most words have, besides their direct significance, a periphery of associated significances. As a affair of fact, linguistic communication owes really much of its expressive power to the thoughts and emotions associated with words. There are normally a assortment of associated significances which appear in changing grades of prominence determined by the context.

The class followed by words used in different context and the displacements of intending nowadayss a major involvement in incompatible lexicology and typological survey of linguistic communications.

In analysing the semantic construction of words we have already seen that some significances constantly come to the bow when we hear the word in existent address or see in written. Other significances make themselves apparent merely when the word is used in certain contexts. The context makes the significance explicit, in other words, brings them out. This is non to state that polysemic words have significances merely in context. As has already been decidedly stressed the semantic construction of the word is a dialectic entity and involves dialectical permanence and evenness [ 14 ; 126-127 ] .

Meaning should ever be understood as affecting the relation of linguistic communication to the remainder of the universe and such meaningfulness is an indispensable portion of the definition of linguistic communication.

The distributional analysis of intending makes it possible to uncover a great trade about the entire operation and usage of words in a linguistic communication. It gives sufficient grounds to acknowledge that portion of the entire significance of many words in all linguistic communications is to be determined by their dealingss with other words in both the basic dimensions of lingual analysis, syntagmatic and paradigmatic. Wordss as single lexical points are structurally related to each other [ 14 ; 129 ] .

A particular involvement is presented by the polysemic words whose significance is based on a broad fanciful footing. Such lexical units can be used as map words uncovering the tendence to partial or complete semantic depletion.

The first to be mentioned here are the verbs to be, to make, to acquire, to hold, to do, to put, to take. The semantic value and functional usage of these polysemic verbs offers troubles in linguistic communication acquisition and lexicography.

As it has been pointed out, componential analysis presupposes the disclosure of differential and built-in semantic characteristics of lexical units and their variant significances, in other words, semantic resistances on the lexico-grammatical degree.

Compare, for illustration, the semantic group of verbs which, besides the verb to be in its locative significance & # 8216 ; & # 1073 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1080 ; , & # 1079 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1093 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1076 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1100 ; & # 8217 ; , includes at least such verbs as: to populate, to remain, to brood, to shack.

The typical characteristics of the members of the group observed in their significance reveal themselves in the information which they carry about the continuance of the action.

The verbs to populate and to brood, for case, do non demo any particular contrast in this regard. In spoken English & # 8216 ; dwell & # 8217 ; is now normally replaced by & # 8216 ; live & # 8217 ; .

But if we compare such verbs as to be, to remain and to populate, we shall see that they differ basically in showing the durative character of the action and are non ever interchangeable. For illustration,

She is in the house.

She stays in the house.

She lives in the house.

The verb to shack is stylistically pronounced member of the synonymic group characterized by its usage in formal English.

It is of involvement to observe that transferred significances of words in different linguistic communications do non ever co-occur. By the manner of illustration:

1 ) back & # 8212 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1087 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1072 ; ;

2 ) the dorsum of a chair & # 8212 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1087 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1110 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1100 ; & # 1094 ; & # 1103 ; ;

3 ) the dorsum of a manus & # 8212 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1080 ; & # 1090 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1100 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1072 ; & # 1087 ; & # 1086 ; & # 1074 ; & # 1077 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1093 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1103 ; & # 1088 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1080 ; ;

4 ) the dorsum of a ship & # 8212 ; & # 1082 ; & # 1110 ; & # 1083 ; & # 1100 ; & # 1089 ; & # 1091 ; & # 1076 ; & # 1085 ; & # 1072 ; .

A assortment of associated significances which appear in changing grades of prominence determined by the context may be illustrated by the semantic value of the adjectival great which implies & # 8216 ; being much above the norm in size & # 8217 ; , magnitude or strength ; in certain contexts of its usage great comes to intend: eminent, of import: great authors, great bookmans, great instrumentalists. In conversational usage great frequently suggests differentiation of proficiency [ 11 ; 102-103 ] .

The job of lexical ambiguity in grammar is one of the most of import, the one which is really complex and seems to be relevant to a figure of facets. Like words which is really complex and seems to be relevant to a figure of facets. Like words which are frequently marks non of one but of several things, a individual grammatical signifier can besides be made to show a whole assortment of structural significances. This appears to be natural and is a reasonably common development in the construction of any linguistic communication. This linguistics mechanism works of course in many ways to forestall ambiguity in forms of grammatical construction. Orientation towards the content will by and large demo which of the possible significances is to be attached to polysemous grammatical signifier [ 7 ; 236 ] .

Most grammatical signifiers are polysemous. On this degree of lingual analysis differentiation should be made between synchronous and possible lexical ambiguity. Therefore, for case, the primary denotive significance of the Present Continuous is characterized by three semantic elements:

1 ) present clip ;

2 ) something progressive ;

3 ) contact with the minute of address.

The three elements make up its synchronous lexical ambiguity. So therefore, we can clearly see importance of researches of lexical ambiguity in grammar.

1.2 Historical Development of the Polysemy

The modern term lexical ambiguity was popularized by Bre & # 769 ; Al in 1887. Most modern linguistics covering with the subject of lexical ambiguity refer to the important day of the month, but they seldom look farther back into the yesteryear.

The & # 8220 ; roots & # 8221 ; of the construct of lexical ambiguity prevarication in the Grecian doctrine, that is, the argument environing the job of naturalness or flightiness of marks as debated in Plato & # 8217 ; s ( 429-347B.C. ) Cratylus. In his history of Plato & # 8217 ; s part to linguistics, Fred Householder points out that Democritus ( 460-mid-4th century B.C. ) offered four statements in favor of flightiness:

1 ) homonymy or lexical ambiguity & # 8212 ; the same sequence of phonemes may be associated with two or more unrelated significances ;

2 ) polyonymy or isorrophy & # 8212 ; the being of equivalent word ;

3 ) metonymy & # 8212 ; the fact that words and intending alteration ;

4 ) nonymy & # 8212 ; the non-existence of individual words for simple or familiar thoughts.

Polysemy meant chiefly what was subsequently to be called & # 8220 ; homonymy & # 8221 ; , mentioning to the multiple, but unrelated significance of a word. Bre & # 769 ; Als still subsumed homonymy under the header of lexical ambiguity [ 18 ; 25 ] .

The term polyonymy was besides used by the Stoics analyzing how one and the same object may have many different names, how it can go & # 8220 ; manynamed & # 8221 ; or polyonomous.

During the Middle Ages the reading by the Holy Scriptures came up against the job of lexical ambiguity that was acknowledged, but one that had been tampted ( by the theory of four senses ) .

The first who used the tern polysemantic in a comparatively modern sense was Dante, who wrote approximately polysemantic character of a verse form: & # 8220 ; Istius operis non est simplex sensus, immo dici potest polysemum, hoc est plurium sensum & # 8221 ; ( & # 8220 ; this work doesn & # 8217 ; t have one simple significance, on the contrary, I say that it can be polysemantic, that is can hold many significances & # 8221 ; ) [ 22 ; 176 ] .

When showing his verse form to Cangrante della Scala, Dante makes instantly clear that it has to be read as a & # 8220 ; polysemantic & # 8221 ; ( & # 8220 ; polysemous & # 8221 ; ) message. One of the most famed illustrations of what Dante means of lexical ambiguity is given in his analyses of some poetries of Psalm, in & # 8220 ; Exit Israel de Aegypto & # 8221 ; . Following the mediaeval theory, Dante says refering the fierst poetry of the Psalm: & # 8220 ; If we look at the missive it means the hegira of the boies of Israel from Egypt at the clip of Moses ; if we look at the fable, it means our salvation through Christ ; if we look at the moral sense it means the conversation of psyche from the wretchedness of wickedness to the province of grace ; if we look at the mystical sense it means the going of consecrated spirit from the servitude of his corruptness to the freedom of ageless glorification & # 8221 ; [ 22 ; 192-193 ] .

Thinking about significance, linguistic communication and it & # 8217 ; s relation to the existent and nonliteral word advanced tremendously during the Renaissance, but existent research into the multiplicity of intending merely began in the eighteenth century, with the survey of neologies, equivalent word and the figures of address.

Bre & # 769 ; al observed modern significance of the word, yesterday & # 8217 ; s and today & # 8217 ; s significance, with which we foremost go familiar & # 8212 ; something late rediscovered in England. In 1985, the section of English at the Birmingham ran of computing machine analysis of words as they are really used in English and came up with the surprising consequences. The primary dictionary significance of words are frequently far from the sense in which they were really used. Keep, for case, is normally defined as to retain, but in fact the word is much more frequently employed in the sense of go oning, as in & # 8220 ; maintain cool & # 8221 ; and & # 8220 ; maintain smiling & # 8221 ; . See is merely seldom required in the sense of using one & # 8217 ; s eyes, but much more frequently used to show the thought of cognizing, as in & # 8220 ; I see what you mean & # 8221 ; [ 12 ; 83 ] .

Language apprehension and linguistic communication acquisition follow the opposite path of linguistic communication alteration. I both instances, the last, non the first or crude significance of a word is a basic significance.

In Anglo-American universe, lexical ambiguity was rediscovered with the coming of cognitive semantics in 1980s. Cognitive linguists began to reconnect synchronous and historical research into significance.

Bre & # 769 ; al knew that, diachronically, polysemy stems from the fact that the new significance or values that words get in usage do non automatically extinguish the old 1s & # 8212 ; lexical ambiguity is hence the consequence of semantic invention. The new and the old significance exist in the analogue. And yet, synchronically, or in linguistic communication usage, lexical ambiguity doesn & # 8217 ; t truly be & # 8212 ; sense choice in the comprehension procedure is non a job at all. In the context of discourse a word has one significance & # 8212 ; except, one should indicate out, in gags and wordplaies. The most of import factor that brings about the generation of intending diachronically and that helps to & # 8220 ; cut down & # 8221 ; the multiplicity of intending synchronically is the context of discourse. We understand polysemantic words because the words are ever used in the context of a discourse and a state of affairs, which eliminate all the bordering significance in favor of merely one in inquiry [ 12 ; 91 ] .

However, in the changeless dialectical relation between synchronism and historical linguistics, and between intending and understanding incremental alterations in the significance of words occur holding understood a word in a certain context in a somewhat divergent manner, become themselves talkers and might utilize a word in the freshly understood manner in yet another context, which once more bring about different types of apprehension, and so on. In the long tally, these somewhat fluctuations in usage and consumption may take to major semantic alterations.

Bre & # 769 ; Al was fascinated by the fact that when speaking to each other we neither get confused by the multiplicity of intending that a word may hold, nor are we bothered with the etymological lineage of a word, traced by historical lexicons. The scientist was acutely cognizant of the fact that semantic, cognitive and developmental side of the linguistic communication was non yet on a par with the progresss made in the survey of phonetics, of the more physiological side of linguistic communication. With Bre & # 769 ; al semantics as a lingual subject made a first measure into the hereafter, the hereafter in which we are still take parting and to which we are still lending beyond the terminal of the twentieth century [ 17 ; 63 ] .

There followed a period of polysemantic latency, so to talk, after the coming of transformational productive grammar with its focal point on sentence structure and subsequently characteristic semantics. Polysemy was illustrated by the research undertaken by Hans Blumerberg, Uriel Weireich, Harald Weireich, James McCawley, Charles Fillmore.

Modern linguists besides pay great attending to the probes in the semantic domain. The traditional differentiation between lexical ambiguity and homonymy is based on whether there is one or two lexical points involved.

1.2.1 The Diachronic Approach to Studying Polysemy

Polysemy is built-in in the very nature of words and constructs as every object and every impression has many characteristics and a construct reflected in a word ever contains a generalization of several traits of the object.

A word which has more than one significance is called polysemous. Different significances of a polysemous word may come together due to the propinquity of impressions which they express e.g. the word & # 8220 ; cover & # 8221 ; has the undermentioned significances: a woollen covering used on beds, a covering for maintaining a Equus caballus warm, a covering of any sort ( a cover of snow ) , covering all or most instances used attributively, e.g. we can state & # 8220 ; a cover insurance policy & # 8221 ; . There are some words in the linguistic communication which are monosemantic, such as most footings, equivalent word, some pronouns ( this, my, both ) , numbers. There are two procedures of the semantic development of a word: radiation and concatenation. In instances of radiation the primary significance bases in the Centre and the secondary significances proceed out of it like beams. Each secondary significance can be traced to the primary significance. E.g. in the word & # 8220 ; face & # 8221 ; the primary significance denotes & # 8220 ; the front portion of the human caput & # 8221 ; Connected with the front place the significances: the front portion of a ticker, the front portion of a edifice, the front portion of a playing card were formed. Connected with the word & # 8220 ; face & # 8221 ; itself the significances: look of the face, outward visual aspect are formed. In instances of concatenation secondary significances of a word develop like a concatenation. In such instances it is hard to follow some significances to the primary 1. E.g. in the word & # 8220 ; crust & # 8221 ; the primary significance & # 8220 ; difficult outer portion of staff of life & # 8221 ; developed a secondary significance & # 8220 ; difficult portion of anything ( a pie, a bar ) & # 8221 ; , so the significance & # 8220 ; harder bed over soft snow & # 8221 ; was developed, so & # 8220 ; a dark glooming individual & # 8221 ; , so & # 8220 ; cheek & # 8221 ; were developed. Here the last significances have nil to make with the primary 1s. In such instances homonyms appear in the linguistic communication. It is called the split of lexical ambiguity. In most instances in the semantic development of a word both ways of semantic development are combined [ 2 ; 19-21 ] .

In polysemous words we are faced non with the job of analysis of single significances, but chiefly with the job of interrelatedness and mutuality of the assorted significances in the semantic construction of the same word. The job may be approached from two different angles. If lexical ambiguity is viewed diachronically, it is understood as the growing and development or, in general, a alteration in the semantic construction of the word.

The term & # 8220 ; historical & # 8221 ; is composed of the Greek morphemes dia intending & # 8220 ; through & # 8221 ; chromos intending & # 8220 ; clip & # 8221 ; . Therefore, the historical attack in footings of particular lexicology trades with alterations and the development of vocabulary in the class of clip. The two attacks in lexicology ( synchronous and historical ) should non be contrasted or put one against the other ; in fact, they are interconnected and mutualist: every lingual construction and system exist in a province of a changeless development so that the synchronous province of a linguistic communication system is a consequence of a long procedure of lingual rating, the consequence of the historical development of the linguistic communication [ 16 ; 176-177 ] .

The historical attack in footings of particular lexicology trades with the alterations and the development of vocabulary in the class of clip. The two attacks shouldn & # 8217 ; t be set one against the other. In fact, they are interconnected and interrelated because every lingual construction and system exists in a province of changeless development so that the synchronous province of a linguistic communication system is a consequence of a long procedure of lingual rating, of its historical development.

A historical attack is one that analyzes the development of something over clip, leting one to measure how that something alterations throughout history. You would utilize this attack to analyse the effects of variable alteration on something.

Polysemy in a historical footings implies that a word may retain its old significance or significances and at the same clip get one or several new 1s. Then the job of interrelatedness and mutuality of single significances of a polysemous word may be approximately formulated as follows: did the word ever possess all its significances or did some of them appear earlier than the others? If so what is the nature of this dependance? Can we detect any alterations in the agreement of the significances?

In the class of a historical semantic analysis of the polysemous word tabular array we find that of all the significances it has in Modern English, the primary significance is & # 8220 ; a level slab of rock or wood & # 8221 ; which was proper to the word in the Old English period ( OE. tabule from L. tabula ) ; all other significances are secondary as they are derived from the primary significance of the word and appeared subsequently than the primary significance. The footings & # 8220 ; secondary & # 8221 ; and & # 8220 ; derived & # 8221 ; intending are to a certain extent synonymous. When we describe the significance of the word as & # 8220 ; secondary & # 8221 ; we imply that it could non hold appeared before the primary significance was being. When we refer to the significance as & # 8220 ; derived & # 8221 ; we imply non merely that, but besides that it is dependent on the primary significance and somehow subsidiary to it. In the instance of the word tabular array, for example, we may state that the significance & # 8220 ; the nutrient put on the tabular array & # 8221 ; is derived through metonymic transportation we can besides depict it as secondary and metonymic [ 8 ; 203 ] .

It follows that the chief beginning of lexical ambiguity is a alteration in the semantic construction of the word. As can be seen from the above, in historical analysis of lexical ambiguity we can utilize many constructs and footings discussed in the paragraphs devoted to the alteration of significance. We can talk, for illustration of metaphoric or metonymic significances if we imply the nature of dependance of the significances, of extended or restricted significances, if we are connected with the interrelatedness of significances as a consequence of semantic alteration.

Polysemy may besides originate from homonymy. When two words become indistinguishable in sound-form, the significances of the two words are felt as doing up one semantic construction. Therefore, the human ear and the ear of maize are from the historical point of position two homonyms. One is etymologically related to Latin auris, the other to Latin acus, aceris. Synchronically, nevertheless, they are perceived as two significances of one and the same word. The ear of maize is felt to be a metaphor of the usual type ( californium. the oculus of the acerate leaf, the pes of the mountain ) and accordingly as one of the derived or, synchronically, minor significances of the polysemous word ear. Cases of this type are relatively rare and, as a regulation, illustrative of the vagueness of the boundary line line between lexical ambiguity and homonymy.

Semantic alterations result as a regulation in a new significances being added to the 1s already bing in the semantic construction of the word. Some of the old significances may go disused or even disappear, but the majority of English words tend to increase in a figure of significances [ 18 ; 43 ] .

To reason we may state that, lexical ambiguity viewed diachronically is a historical alteration in the semantic construction of the word ensuing in a new significances being added to the 1s already bing and in the rearrangement of these significances in its semantic construction. As the semantic construction is ne’er inactive the relationship between the diachronic and synchronous rating of single significances of the same word may be different in different periods of the historical developments of linguistic communication.

1.2.2 Synchronous Approach to Studying Polysemy

The synchronous attack analyzes a peculiar something at a given, fixed point in clip. It does non try to do tax write-offs about the patterned advance of events that contributed to the current province, but merely analyzes the construction of that province, as it is.

The synchronous attack surveies linguistic communication as a theoretical & # 8220 ; point & # 8221 ; in clip. It refers to descriptive lexicology as subdivision of linguistics trades with the vocabulary and vocabulary units of linguistic communication at a certain clip. Synchronically we understand polysemy as the coexistence of assorted significances of the same word at a certain historical period of the development of the linguistic communication. In that instance the job of interrelatedness and independency of single significances doing up the semantic construction of the word must be investigated along different lines.

In connexion with the polysemous word tabular array discussed above we are chiefly concerned with the undermentioned jobs: are all the nine significances every bit representative of the semantic construction of this word? Does it reflect the comparative value of single significances, the topographic point they occupy in the semantic construction of the word tabular array? Intuitively we feel that the significance that is really representative of the word, the significance that first occurs to us whether we hear or see the word tabular array, is & # 8220 ; an article of furniture & # 8221 ; . This emerges as the basic or the cardinal significance of the word and other significances are minor in comparing.

It should be noted that whereas the basic significance is representative of the word tabular array in isolation its minor significances are observed merely in certain contexts, e.g. & # 8220 ; to maintain the tabular array amused & # 8221 ; , & # 8220 ; a piece of contents & # 8221 ; etc. Thus we can presume that the significance & # 8220 ; a piece of furniture & # 8221 ; occupies the cardinal topographic point in the semantic construction of the word tabular array. As to other significances of this word it & # 8217 ; s difficult to rate them in order of their comparative value. Some may, for illustration, see the second and the 3rd significances ( & # 8220 ; the individuals seated at the tabular array & # 8221 ; and & # 8220 ; put nutrient on the tabular array & # 8221 ; ) as every bit & # 8220 ; of import & # 8221 ; , some may reason that the significance & # 8220 ; put nutrient on the tabular array & # 8221 ; should be given precedence [ 21 ; 253-254 ] . As viewed synchronically there is no nonsubjective standard to travel by, it may be found hard in some instances to individual out even the basic significances as two or significance of the word may be felt as every bit & # 8220 ; cardinal & # 8221 ; in its semantic construction. If we analyse the verb to acquire, e.g. , which of the two significances & # 8220 ; to obtain & # 8221 ; ( acquire to London, to acquire into bed ) shall we see as the basic significance of this word?

A more nonsubjective standard of the comparative value of single significances seems to be the frequence of their happening in the address. There is a inclination in a modern linguistics to construe the construct of the cardinal significance in footings of the frequence of happening of this significance. It a survey of five million words made by a group of lingual scientists it was found that the frequence value of single significances is different.

Of great importance is the stylistic stratification of significances of a polysemous word as non merely words but single significances to may differ in their stylistic mention. Stylistic ( or regional ) & # 8212 ; position of monosemantic words is easy perceived. For case, the word dada can be referred to the conversational stylistic bed, the word parent to bookish. The word film is recognizably American and barnie is Scotish. Polysemous words as a regulation can non be given any such restrictive labels. To make it we must province the significance in which they are used. There is nil conversational or slangy or American about the word yellow denoting coloring material, dork in the significance of & # 8220 ; a sudden or halting motion & # 8221 ; every bit far as these peculiar significances are concerned. But when yellow Is used in the significance of & # 8220 ; sensational & # 8221 ; or when dork is used in the significance of & # 8220 ; an uneven individual & # 8221 ; it & # 8217 ; s both slang and American [ 10 ; 47-48 ] .

Stylistically impersonal significances are of course more frequent. The polysemous words worker and manus, for illustration, may both denote & # 8220 ; the adult male who does manual work & # 8221 ; . But whereas this is the most frequent and stylistically impersonal significance of the word worker, it is observed merely in 2.8 % of all happenings of the word manus, in the semantic construction of which the significance & # 8220 ; a adult male who does the manual work & # 8221 ; ( to engage mill custodies ) is one of its fringy significances characterized by conversational stylistic mention. Broadly talking the mutuality of manner and frequence in significances is correspondent to that bing in words.

It should be noted that the significance of the highest frequence value is the one representative of the whole semantic construction of the word. This can be illustrated by analysing the two words under treatment. The intending representative of the word worker is doubtless & # 8220 ; a adult male who does manual work & # 8221 ; [ 21 ; 258 ] .

In decision, lexical ambiguity viewed synchronically is understood as co-existence of assorted significances of the same word at a certain historical period and the agreement of these significances in the semantic construction of the word.

lexical ambiguity linguistic communication context

1.3 Polysemy and its Connection with the Context

In modern linguistics context is defined as the minimum stretch of address necessary to signal significance for words. This is non to connote that polysemous words have significances merely in context. The semantic construction of the word has an nonsubjective being as a dialectical entity which embodies dialectical permanence and variableness. The context individualises the significances, brings them out. It is in this sense that we say that significance is determined by the context. The significances representative of the semantic construction of the word and least dependent on context are sometimes described as free or denominative significances.

Against the background of lingual idea as it has developed in modern linguistics we define context as the minimum stretch of address necessary to signal single significance of words. There are several types of context:

lingual and extra-linguistic ( non-verbal ) contexts.

Linguistic context include lexical and grammatical context. These two types of contexts are differentiated depending on whether lexical or grammatical facet is prevailing in doing the significance of the word explicit. The interaction between lexical and grammatical facets in the semantic construction of the word is most complex and needs particular remarks.

1 ) Lexical context is best illustrated by the fact that there are groups of words in any linguistic communication that are semantically compatible merely with certain categories of agents. Lexical incongruousness of words frequently serves to do the necessary significance clear contracting down the assorted possible significances of the word, and no ambiguity arises.

The verb to run, for case, has chiefly the significance & # 8216 ; to travel fleetly or with speedy action & # 8217 ; , as a watercourse, waggon, individual ; with words denoting something written, inscribed, worded, or the like the verb tally means to sound ( eg. This is how the poetry runs ) ; with agents denoting assorted workss the verb tally is synonymically correlated to turn & # 8212 ; to go bigger ; with agents denoting engines or machines by which physical power is applied to bring forth a physical consequence, the verb to run agencies & # 8212 ; to turn off the engine ( to go forth the engine running ) .

In all the illustrations given above the significance of the verb to run is signaled by the lexical significances of the nouns in the place of the topic. The predomination of the lexical contexts in finding the significance of the verb in such utilizations is rather apparent.

Examples of lexical contexts which operate to convey the necessary significance of a polysemic word may be given in Numberss. Resolution of structural ambiguity by lexical chance is a frequent happening.

Compare besides the undermentioned variant significances of the adjective viridity which has chiefly the significance & # 8216 ; of the coloring material green & # 8217 ; : green walls, green lesion, green memories & # 8212 ; fluctuation in significance in each instance is signaled by the lexical significance of the noun involved in a given syntagma. The adjectival heavy in its primary sense means & # 8216 ; weighty, non easy to raise, of great weight & # 8217 ; [ 4 ; 126-127 ] .

In combination with words denoting natural phenomena heavy agencies violent: heavy storm, heavy rain, heavy snow. Not less characteristic are such utilizations of the adjectival as: heavy work, heavy manner, a heavy sky, with a heavy bosom & # 8212 ; the significance of the adjectival in each instance is signaled by the lexical significance of the noun with which it occurs.

Further typical illustrations of lexical context finding the word significance will be found in the distribution of assorted categories of adjectives.

Observe, for case, the usage of the undermentioned phrases with the adjectival warm whose significance in each instance is signaled by the lexical significance of the noun involved: warm milk, warm clime, warm vesture, warm welcome, warm pique, warm support, warm imaginativeness, warm colors.

As can be seen from above illustrations, the lexico-semantic fluctuation of the adjectival warm makes it synonymous with such words as mild, heated, affable, enthusiastic, eager, acute, antiphonal.

2 ) Grammatical context. Cases are non few when the single lexical significance of a polysemic word is determined by the grammatical construction in which it occurs, syntactic forms in the chief. Familiar illustrations of grammatical context will be found in instances like the followers:

1 ) The Equus caballus stopped imbibing.

2 ) The Equus caballus stopped to imbibe.

In the first illustration stop+ing & # 8212 ; complete making something, in the 2nd & # 8212 ; stop+to+ infinitive & # 8212 ; halt temporarily in order to.

Highly declarative in this regard are verbs of generic force, such as do, do and the verbs of the & # 8216 ; move and alteration & # 8217 ; category: travel, come, turn, acquire, fall, run, take, bend.

In grammatical contexts it is the grammatical construction of the context that serves to find assorted single significances of a polysemous word. One of the significances of the verb to do, eg. & # 8220 ; to coerce, to enduce & # 8221 ; , is found merely in the grammatical context possessing the construction to do person make something or in simpler footings this practical significance occurs merely if the verb brand is followed by a noun and the infinitive of some other verb ( to do person laugh, work, etc. ) [ 5 ; 182-183 ] .

In a figure of contexts, nevertheless, we find both the lexical and grammatical facets should be taken into consideration. The grammatical construction of the context although declarative mood of the difference between the significance of the word in this construction and the significance of the same word in a different grammatical construction may be deficient to bespeak in which of its single significance the word in inquiry is used.

Covering with lingual contexts we consider merely lingual factors: lexical groups of words, syntactic construction of context, etc. There are instances, nevertheless, when the significance of the word is finally determined non by this lingual factors, but by the existent address state of affairs.

The noun ring may possess the significance & # 8220 ; a circle of cherished metal & # 8221 ; or & # 8220 ; a call on the telephone & # 8221 ; ; the significance of the verb to acquire in this lingual context may be interpreted as & # 8220 ; possess & # 8221 ; or & # 8220 ; understand & # 8221 ; depending on the existent state of affairs in which these words are used. It should be pointed out, that such instances, though possible, are non really really legion. The lingual context is by far a more powerful factor in finding the word-meaning.

It is of involvement to observe that non merely the denotational but besides the connotative of constituent of significance may be affected by the context. Any word which as a linguistic communication unit is emotively impersonal may in certain context get affectional deductions. Compare, e.g. , fire in to guarantee one & # 8217 ; s belongings against the fire and Fire! as a call for a aid. So the curious lexical context histories for the possibility of affectional overtones which are made expressed by the context of state of affairs [ 10 ; 16-17 ] .

Cases are non few when the significance of a word is signaled by the context much larger than a given sentence or by a whole state of affairs of the vocalization, in other words, by the existent state of affairs in which this word occurs. Numerous illustrations of such vocalization will be found in syntactic constructions including parlances of different types.

Another of import facet to see is sociocultural group which refers to the fact that the linguistic communication used by a sociocultural group is closely connected with its values, attitudes and beliefs. Consequently, larning a linguistic communication involves understanding and construing the civilization of which it is portion. It is of import, hence, for students to develop the ability to construe texts from perspectives other than their ain. Some of the activities to cover with sociocultural context are the undermentioned: inquiring students to compare words and looks used in assorted English-speaking contexts with those used in their ain linguistic communication context ; pupils remark on the sociocultural associations of lexis in a given text ; quizzes ; true or false inquiries ; explicating newspaper headlines, advertizements, graffito.

The two or more less universally recognized chief types of lingual contexts service to find single significances of words are the lexical and grammatical contexts. These types are differentiated depending on whether the lexical or grammatical facet is prevailing in finding the significance.

Meaning should ever be understood as affecting the relation of linguistic communication to the remainder of the universe and such meaningfulness is an indispensable portion of the definition of linguistic communication.

Chapter II. Practical Use of Polysemy in Teaching English

2.1 Polysemy in Teaching English on Intermediate Level

Practicing lexical ambiguity is separating between the assorted significance of a individual word signifier with several but closely related significances ( caput: of a individual, of a pin, of an organisation ) . In my sentiment the most of import facet of vocabulary instruction for intermediate scholars is to further learner independency so that scholars will be able to cover with new lexis and spread out their vocabulary beyond the terminal of the class. Therefore guided find, contextual guessing and utilizing lexicons should be the chief ways to cover with detecting significance. Teachers can assist pupils with specific techniques and pattern in contextual guessing, for illustration, the apprehension of discourse markers and placing the map of the word in the sentence.

In my sentiment the most of import facet of learning lexical ambiguity for scholars is to further independency so that scholars will be able to cover with new lexis and spread out their vocabulary beyond the terminal of the class. Therefore guided find, contextual guessing should be the chief ways to cover with detecting significance.

Intermediate degree includes the 5th & # 8212 ; 9th signifier students. They already have some basic cognition in analyzing a foreign linguistic communication. If students have had good accomplishments in linguistic communication acquisition, they are normally interested in the topic and work volitionally both in category and at place. The desire to larn depends to the full on the instructor & # 8217 ; s ability to affect each student in linguistic communication activities during the lesson. Pupils give penchants to those exercisings which require believing [ 1 ; 61 ] .

Exercise 1

Give all the significances you know to the undermentioned verbs, exemplifying them with illustrations: to acquire ; to travel ; to convey ; to do ; to make ; to allow ; to purchase ; to get down ; to experience.

Exercise 2

The noun leg has several significances: 1 ) one of the long parts of your organic structure that your pess are joined to ; 2 ) one of the series of games in a football competition played between two squads ; 3 ) one of the unsloped parts that support a piece of furniture ; 4 ) the portion of your pants that covers your leg ; 5 ) one portion of a long journey or race.

Match the significances of the word face with the sentences given below:

1 ) One of the legs on the tabular array was a spot wobbly.

2 ) Here, draw up your pant legs and allow me see if your articulatio genuss are hurt.

3 ) The legs of my denims were covered in clay.

4 ) Leeds will hold to win the 2nd leg if they are to travel frontward to the finals.

5 ) The work forces looked brooding as the passenger car approached the concluding leg of the trip to the large house on the hill.

6 ) When this can spread out no farther, it splits and is rolled off, like a nylon carrying from a leg.

7 ) Raise the leg a fraction higher and reiterate this bantam motion 15 times, keeping each rise for 1 2nd.

8 ) Officers so hit Mao in the leg several times and he collapsed.

9 ) Breathing through his oral cavity, he manipulated his investigation between her legs.

10 ) Another shouting animal collapsed on broken hind legs.

Exercise 3

Specify the significance of the noun caput as used in the sentences at a lower place. How many different significances did you happen?

1 ) Harmonizing to Rice, the caput of the planning commission, the undertaking is 25 % completed.

2 ) Collins suffered terrible caput hurts in the accident.

3 ) He turned his caput to snog her.

4 ) I picked up a cock and hit the caput of the nail every bit difficult as I could.

5 ) Hwang is caput of the local Communist Party, and is besides a husbandman.

6 ) People traveling out in conditions like this need their caputs examined.

7 ) She was outside cutting the dead caputs off the roses.

8 ) She saw her male parent, a caput above the remainder of the crowd.

9 ) Keep weaponries hanging, head down and cervix and shoulders relaxed.

Exercise 4

How many significance of the undermentioned words do you cognize? Name them:

caput, bench, to experience, to dress, manus, leg, power.

Exercise 5

Match the idiomatic looks of the noun caput with their significance.

1 ) heads up!

2 ) caputs will turn over ;

3 ) to be/fall caput over heels in love ;

4 ) to be/stand caput and shoulders above person ;

5 ) to give person their caput ;

6 ) to keep up your caput ;

7 ) to travel over person ‘s caput ;

8 ) to maintain your caput above H2O ;

9 ) to set your caputs together ;

10 ) to turn/stand something on its caput ;

a ) to discourse a hard job together ;

B ) to be excessively hard for person to understand ;

degree Celsius ) to pull off to go on to populate on your income or maintain your concern working when this is hard because of fiscal jobs ;

vitamin D ) to be much better than other people ;

vitamin E ) to demo pride or assurance, particularly in a hard state of affairs ;

degree Fahrenheit ) to do people think about something in the opposite manner to the manner it was originally intended ;

g ) to give person the freedom to make what they want to make ;

H ) to love or all of a sudden get down to love person really much ;

I ) used to state that person will be punished badly for something that has happened ;

J ) used to warn people that something is falling from above.

2.2 Polysemy in Teaching English on Advanced Level

This phase includes 11th & # 8212 ; 12th signifiers. Students can recognize the importance of analyzing linguistic communication more exhaustively. However, their attitude to foreign linguistic communication depends on the accomplishments they have attained during the old old ages of analyzing the topic. While explicating the stuff, instructor should take into history everything: pupils age, the stuff they deal with, their old cognition, etc.

So, the exercising should be of assorted sorts, they have to be originative and develop students critical thought and memory. Teacher should promote his/her students, acquire them interested in larning the linguistic communication on deeper degree [ 1, 62 ] . Below, there are exercising, which are suited for this degree of linguistic communication larning. They will assist students to follow more material, to be able to distinguish polysemous significances of the words through the context of the sentences.

Exercise 1

Remark on the significance of the following adjectives in the given phrases.

Bad & # 8212 ; behavior, male child, instance, twenty-four hours, debt, dream, experience, religion, cat, wont, thought, fortune, temper, name, intelligence, imperativeness, promotion, form, state of affairs, get down, gustatory sensation, pique, thing, things, clip, manner, conditions.

Bitter & # 8212 ; statement, onslaught, conflict, blow, cold, struggle, argument, letdown, difference, terminal, enemy, experience, battle, spirit, sarcasm, laugh, memory, opposition, pill, challenger, smiling, battle, gustatory sensation, tear, air current, winter.

Fresh & # 8212 ; air, attack, basil, blood, staff of life, zephyr, election, grounds, face, fish, flower, nutrient, fruit, herb, thought, expression, meat, Petroselinum crispum, produce, salmon, start, thyme, H2O, weight.

Good & # 8212 ; opportunity, status, twenty-four hours, trade, illustration, religion, luck, friend, wellness, thought, occupation, life, fortune, adult male, intelligence, dark, portion, public presentation, topographic point, place, pattern, quality, ground, sense, service, form, start, thing, clip, usage, value, manner, work.

Green & # 8212 ; bean, belt, bottle, card, field, signifier, grass, hill, leave, light, onion, paper, grazing land, Piper nigrum, revolution, room, salad, shoot, infinite, tea, H2O.

New & # 8212 ; epoch, coevals, authorities, place, thought, occupation, jurisprudence, statute law, life, member, proprietor, merchandise, school, system, engineering, town, version, universe, twelvemonth.

Old & # 8212 ; age, boy, brother, kid, girl, twenty-four hours, friend, coevals, twenty-four hours, lady, adult male, people, school, sister, boy, adult female.

Round & # 8212 ; face, figure, caput, cervix, redbreast, tabular array, trip.

Thick & # 8212 ; rug, cloud, fog, forest, glass, hair, tegument, skull, fume, soup, wall.

Thin & # 8212 ; air, cotton, face, finger, forest, ice, line, lip, mist, sheet, tegument, piece, paper, yarn, veneer, voice.

Exercise 2

Paraphrase the italicized words and phrases by those given below the sentences:

1. From the tower, you can see for stat mis.

2. Having a kid makes you see things otherwise.

3. He could see a great hereafter for her in music.

4. I do n’t cognize. We ‘ll merely hold to see how it goes on Sunday.

5. I have to see my instructor about my classs.

6. I merely ca n’t acquire her to see ground!

7. I ‘ll be seeing her tomorrow dark.

8. I ‘ll name him and see how the occupation interview went.

9. I saw Jane while I was out.

10. I see what you mean.

11. It will be interesting to see if he makes it into the squad.

12. Leave the documents with me and I ‘ll see what I can make.

13. More money must be invested if we are to see an betterment in services.

14. Mr. Thomas is seeing a client at 2:30.

15. Please see that the visible radiations are switched off before you leave.

16. See imperativeness for inside informations.

17. See you Friday – your topographic point at 8:30.

18. The minute we saw the house, we knew we wanted to purchase it.

19. The consequences are shown in Table 7a ( see below ) .

20. We ‘re traveling to see ‘Romeo and Juliet ‘ tonight.

to detect or analyze person or something, utilizing your eyes ; to detect that something is go oning or that something is true ; to be able to see ; to happen out information or a fact ; to happen out about something in the hereafter ; to see how things go ; used to state you where you can happen information ; see above/below ; to understand something ; to see reason/sense ; to watch a telecasting programme, movie ; to see something ; used to state that you will seek to assist person ; used to state adieu ; to see or run into person ; to run into person by opportunity ; to hold an ordered meeting with person ; to see person to discourse something ; to conceive of that something may go on in the hereafter ; to do certain.

Exercise 3

Supply the losing words by utilizing those given at the terminal:

1. She didn & # 8217 ; t want to acquire & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; . .

2. More and more people are acquiring & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; to e-banking.

3. I don & # 8217 ; t want to acquire & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; in some drawn-out statement about who is to fault.

4. He was the last individual I would anticipate to acquire & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; .. & # 8230 ; .. in something like this.

5. Most adolescents would instead acquire & # 8230 ; .. and & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; . with their friends.

6. I hate summer holiday. The kids get & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; my pess all twenty-four hours long.

7. I do the dishes every twenty-four hours, so I & # 8217 ; m & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; .. it.

8. The package must hold got & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; in the station.

9. Why doesn & # 8217 ; t she & # 8230 ; .. a & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; . ? They even don & # 8217 ; t speak.

10. He merely took the occupation to acquire & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; in the pension fund.

11. We got & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; .. to working together.

12. Don & # 8217 ; t & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; .. & # 8212 ; I like Jenny.

13. Paul ever & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; .. whenever he has to give a presentation.

14. We get in & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; . by electronic mail.

15. I was still in New York seeking to & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; . a & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; . to Paris.

16. Take an umbrella or you will & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; . & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; .. .

17. I… … & # 8230 ; & # 8230 ; . Because he hadn & # 8217 ; t told me his programs.

Fired ; hip ; involved ; lost ; mixed up ; out & # 8230 ; about ; under ; used to ; contact ; vested ; accustomed ; acquire me incorrect ; gets nervous ; acquire moisture ; acquire a divorce ; acquire a visa ; got angry.

Exercise 4

Match the undermentioned definitions of the word brand by the phrases given below:

1. to do encouraging noises ;

2. a lucifer made in Eden ;

3. to do a luck ;

4. to do a life ;

5. to do believe ;

6. to do or interrupt ;

7. to do a comparing ;

8. to be of your ain devising ;

9. to be made of rock ;

10. to do a engagement.

a ) to gain a batch of money ;

B ) to gain money one & # 8217 ; s need to populate on ;

degree Celsius ) to conceive of that something is true when it is non so ;

vitamin D ) to be really successful or to neglect wholly ;

vitamin E ) to state things which suggest what your attitude is ;

degree Fahrenheit ) to demo similarities between two individuals or things ;

g ) a matrimony between two pe

How to cite this essay

Choose cite format:
The problem of polysemy in the English language. (2017, Aug 08). Retrieved April 20, 2019, from
A limited
time offer!
Get authentic custom
ESSAY SAMPLEwritten strictly according
to your requirements