Varieties of lexical variation

This paper presents the theoretical backgr ound of a large-scale lexicological research project on lexical variation that was carried out at the university of Leuven in the last three years. The project is situated in the framework of Cognitive Semantics in the sense of Lakoff (1987), Langacker (1990), Geeraerts (1989b), and Taylor (1989); it links up with the explorations of the relevance of prototype theory for lexicography as presented in Geeraerts (1985, 1987, 1989a, 1990). The empirical results of the project will not be presented in detail in this text; see Geeraerts et al. (1994). Rather, the text will concentrate on the definition of the various forms of lexical variation that have to be distinguished. In particular, it will be argued that the classical distinction between semasiology and onomasiology insufficiently distinguishes between alternative categorization as a conceptual phenomenon and formal variation involving variation of a sociolinguistic, contextual nature. Deciding what to wear is one thing but deciding how to name what you are wearing is no less a matter of choice. Suppose you are putting on a pair of trousers made of strong blue cloth, such as are worn especially for work or as an informal kind of dress. Various lexical alternatives then suggest themselves: jeans, blue jeans, trousers, pants. But the options do not have the same value. Jeans and blue jeans, to begin with, have another meaning than trousers and pants: jeans are a type of trousers, whereas trousers names all two-legged outer garments covering the lower part of the body from the waist down, regardless of the specific kind involved. (In the technical terms of lexical semantics, jeans is a hyponym, or subordinate term, of the more general, superordinate term trousers). Pants, on the other hand, represents a more complicated case than trousers, because it may be used both for the general class of trousers, and for a man"s underpants. (In this case, pants is technically speaking a synonym of underpants). The latter kind of usage, however, appears to be typical for British English. At the same time, pants in its more general reading is an informal term in comparison with trousers (but then again, this is a stylistic difference that occurs specifically in British English). All the data in this example, summarized in Figure 1, have been taken from the first edition of the Longman Lexicon of Contemporary English (1981). Precisely because they involve lexical and semantic variation, it may well be the case that the data in the figure do not adequately capture the intuitions of all native speakers of English: the variation may be even more extensive than suggested here. The point about Figure 1, however, is not to achieve Word meaning / lexical semantics 79 descriptive completeness with regard to pants and its cognates, but to illustrate the various types of variation that have to be taken into account in descriptive lexicological research. The various kinds of lexical variation involved in the example, then, may be systematically distinguished in the following way. First, there is the fact that words may mean several things, as with the more restricted and the more general reading of pants. Second, the same kind of referent may be named by various semantically distinct lexical categories, as illustrated by the choice between jeans / blue jeans and trousers /pants: even though jeans and pants are not synonyms, there are situations in which both are appropriate names for a particular garment. In fact, any time jeans is appropriate, the hyperonymous term pants will be suited as well; the reverse, of course, is not the case. Third, the same kind of referent may be named by various words, which may or may not differ from a semantic point of view; this type of variation, then, encompasses the previous one. The choice between trousers and pants (in its general reading), for instance, may be influenced by considerations of formality and stylistic appropriateness, but does not involve denotational semantic differences of the type distinguishing jeans and trousers. Even though they do not have precisely the same stylistic value (at least in British English,/?ante is more informal than trousers), trousers and pants (in its general reading) are equivalent as far as their meanings are concerned. Therefore, in a situation in which a particular garment may receive the name jeans or pants or trousers, the pairs of alternatives have a different status. In choosing between jeans and trousers, for instance, the choice is not just between words, but between different semantic categories. In choosing between trousers and pants, on the other hand, the choice is between words that are semantically equivalent, but that are invested with different stylistic values. Finally, the stylistic distinction that exists between trousers and pants is an example of a more general contextual type of variation, involving the fact that a specific lexical phenomenon (such as a preference for expressing a particular meaning by means of one item rather than another) may be subject to the influence of contextual factors, like a speech situation asking for a particular style, or geographical distinctions among groups of speakers.