Die vorliegende Arbeit setzt sich aus einer pragmatischen Perspektive mit dem sprachlichen Phänomen der Synonymie im heutigen Amerikanischen Englisch auseinander. Mithilfe des Corpus of Contemporary American English, bekannt als COCA, sollen quantitative und qualitative Unterschiede zwischen Wörtern mit gleicher oder zumindest sehr ähnlicher denotativer Bedeutung im Sprachgebrauch untersucht werden.
Dazu werden in einer synchronischen Studie, die den Zeitraum von 2005 bis 2009 zugrunde legt, elf Gruppen mit jeweils zwei bis drei Synonymen, z.B. maybe/perhaps, analysiert. Zum einen sollen die Synonyme einer Gruppe hinsichtlich ihrer Gesamthäufigkeit im Corpus miteinander verglichen werden, zum anderen hinsichtlich ihrer quantitativen Verteilung über fünf sprachliche Register: Gesprochene Sprache, Fiktion, Magazine, Tageszeitungen und akademische Texte. Im Anschluss an die einzelnen Analysen werden Analogien und Unterschiede zwischen den Ergebnissen der Gruppen im Hinblick auf die unten genannten zentralen Thesen der Arbeit interpretiert.
Die Studie soll zum einen nachweisen, dass es in einer Gruppe von Synonymen in der Regel ein Lexem gibt, das viel häufiger verwendet wird als die anderen Lexeme und demnach als alltäglicher bzw. weniger formell angesehen werden kann. Weiterhin sollen die Ergebnisse Hinweise für einen Zusammenhang zwischen der angeblichen (In-)Formalität eines Wortes und seiner bevorzugten Verwendung in bestimmten Registern liefern. Dabei gehe ich davon aus, dass informellere Lexeme besonders in informelleren Registern gebraucht werden, formellere Lexeme dagegen in formelleren. Als untergeordneter Faktor wird der etymologische Ursprung der Synonyme hinzugezogen, wobei das Augenmerk auf der Opposition von germanischer und romanischer Abstammung liegt.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1 Synonymy
2.1.1 Degrees of Synonymy
2.1.2 Foreign Loans as a Source of Synonymy in English
2.2 Register
2.2.1 Components of a Register
2.2.2 Register and Formality
2.2.3 The Registers in COCA
3 Study
3.1 Finding Sample Synonyms
3.2 Method
4 Analysis
4.1 Couch vs. Sofa
4.2 Enemy vs. Foe
4.3 Noon vs. Midday
4.4 Start [V], Begin, and Commence
4.5 Stroll, Amble, and Saunter as Verbs
4.6 Annual vs. Yearly as Adjectives
4.7 Adept vs. Skillful/Skilful
4.8 Maybe vs. Perhaps as Adverbs
4.9 Synonymous Adverbs Referring to Frequency and Infrequency
4.10 Probably vs. likely [ADV]
5 Discussion
5.1 Preference for One Synonym over Another
5.2 Patterns of Register-based Distribution
5.3 Origin as a Constraint
6 Conclusion
Objectives and Research Themes
This study investigates synonymy from a pragmatic perspective by analyzing eleven groups of synonymic lexemes using a corpus-based approach. The primary research goal is to determine whether quantitative and qualitative differences between supposed synonyms—specifically regarding register-based distribution and etymological origin—reflect varying degrees of formality within the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA).
- The influence of register on the frequency and choice of synonymous expressions.
- The relationship between etymological origin (Germanic vs. Romance) and register distribution.
- Quantitative analysis of synonym groups across five distinct registers (spoken, fiction, magazine, newspaper, academic).
- The potential correlation between formality levels and specific synonym usage patterns.
Excerpt from the Book
4.1 Couch vs. Sofa
Skimming the examples of couch in COCA, it is evident that in nearly all cases it means the same as sofa, namely ‘a long upholstered seat several person can sit on’ (cf. MW). Different meanings of couch such as ´bed´ or ´the lair of a wild animal´ are indicated as archaic, and can therefore be disregarded (cf. MW, TDF). Couch and sofa are both loans, the first from French, the second from Arabic.
According to the total figures from 2005 to 2009, couch is the synonym preferred in AmE. It is used 2,625 times, sofa at least 1,361 times. The results of the register-based study support the assumption that the more common lexeme is much more usual than its synonym in spoken language but not necessarily in more formal registers, especially academic texts. The difference of numbers per million words is 8.85 in spoken, but only 2.16 in academic contexts. Hence, in spoken language sofa is quite uncommon compared to couch. By contrast, in academic prose and magazines the choice between the synonyms is fairly open. The favorite register of the two synonyms is clearly fiction, presumably for the topics covered in this register: novels and short stories rather deal with concrete objects than academic texts which tend to focus on abstract matters. Generally, both couch and sofa are quite common in AmE, but the former is the more common and the latter the more formal of the synonyms.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: Introduces the linguistic phenomenon of synonymy, outlines the motivation for a corpus-based investigation of formality, and defines the scope regarding the chosen synonyms and the COCA corpus.
2 Background: Surveys theoretical concepts of synonymy, register, and formality, while explaining the impact of etymological origin (French/Latin vs. Germanic loans) on vocabulary.
3 Study: Details the criteria for selecting the eleven synonym groups and explains the methodology of utilizing the COCA corpus to examine quantitative and qualitative differences.
4 Analysis: Provides a granular, data-driven examination of each of the eleven synonym groups, analyzing their frequency distributions across five registers.
5 Discussion: Synthesizes findings regarding synonym preferences, register-based distribution patterns, and the role of etymological origin as a constraint on synonym choice.
6 Conclusion: Summarizes the study’s findings, suggesting that synonymy is an asymmetrical relationship influenced by register and origin, while acknowledging that other factors like collocation and dialect also play a significant role.
Keywords
Synonymy, Corpus linguistics, COCA, Register, Formality, American English, Etymology, Germanic, Romance, Frequency, Lexemes, Pragmatics, Denotation, Connotation, Linguistic variation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research?
The work examines whether supposed synonyms in American English exhibit distinct distribution patterns across different registers (spoken, fiction, magazine, newspaper, and academic) and how these patterns relate to formality and etymological origin.
What are the central thematic fields covered?
The study covers semantic synonymy, the concept of register in sociolinguistics, the history of the English vocabulary concerning Latin/French versus Germanic roots, and corpus-based quantitative analysis.
What is the core research objective?
The goal is to determine if differences in register-based usage frequencies for synonymous terms act as markers for varying degrees of formality.
Which scientific method is applied?
The author performs a corpus-based analysis using data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) for the period 2005-2009, measuring normalized frequencies per million words for eleven selected synonym groups.
What does the main part of the paper contain?
The main section consists of a detailed empirical analysis of specific synonym pairs, such as "couch vs. sofa," "enemy vs. foe," and "start vs. begin vs. commence," supported by statistical data and frequency charts.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include synonymy, register, corpus linguistics, COCA, etymology, formality, and linguistic distribution.
How is the "Register" concept defined for this study?
The study relies on a situational approach to register, drawing on Biber and Conrad, characterizing varieties based on their specific communicative context, such as the difference between spoken conversation and academic prose.
Why are "Germanic" and "Romance" origins significant here?
The author tests the hypothesis that English words of Germanic origin tend to be more informal and common, while those of Romance or Latinate origin are more specialized, formal, and restricted to academic or literary contexts.
What conclusion does the author reach regarding absolute synonymy?
The author concludes that absolute synonyms are extremely rare and that synonymy is typically an asymmetric relationship where one term is preferred based on context, register, or frequency.
- Citar trabajo
- Claus Arnold (Autor), 2012, Synonymy and Register. A Corpus-based Study in American English, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/287190
