CC BY
4LANGUAGE STUDY, ART AND CULTURE SCIENCES
SEMANTIC AND PRAGMATIC CORRELATION OF COLLOQIALISMS
Abstract
The paper deals with the transformation of a lexeme semantic structure and the development of anew lexical semantic variant with the subsequent change in its pragmatics. 4 thematic groups: lexemes used to describe 1) an object/ a subject, 2) training activities, 3) leisure time and 4) forms of address, into which all the lexical items under research were classified, are analyzed. The material under research is studied in terms of word formation models and semantic fields. The thesis that word creation is a true process of nomination is proved.
Keywords
colloquialism, meaning transformation, lexical semantic variant, pragmatic potential,
youth language, English language
AUTHORS
Yuliana Nikolaevna Antyufeeva
PhD, Associate Professor, Tula State Lev Tolstoy Pedagogical University, Tula, Russia.
E-mail: josephina209@yandex.ru
Irina Vladimirovna Rodionova
PhD, Associate Professor, deputy director for Scientific Work, Tula Branch of Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Tula, Russia. E-mail: tulareu@mail.ru
Language changes all the time irrespective of whether we are aware of it or not. So the codification of the linguistic inventiveness, especially among the young and lively people, in quest of fresh, original, pungent expressions to rename ideas and actions is a very hot issue. All these juvenile qualities combine to give free reign to the impulse to play with the language, making it creative and refreshing. This phenomenon enriches the expressive potential of the language in general. As the source for our analysis we used GC&SU (Georgia College & State University) Student Slang Project.
Language economy being one of its essential characteristics makes the language avoid numerous increase of linguistic items expression. It transforms the process of direct nomination into the secondary one and leads to reinterpretation of the nominative means already existed in the language (Rodionova, 2008).
While changing the lexeme semantic structure and developing the new lexical semantic variants we can also observe the changes in its pragmatics. So within the new meaning formation of the adjective "ill" (very good, excellent; cool ("Man, your car is ill.") and the verb "to ill" - to relax; hang out, chill) there was some inner transformation in the structure of the original lexical semantic variant (to be not in full health, sick; harmful). The original meaning "to feel sick" turned into a new one "to relax". A new lexical semantic qualitative variant appeared, it has a wider range of usage because it can refer to a number of denotata to describe any object. As a result, we see the shift in the sphere of usage - the topic "health" is replaced by the topic "leisure".
Let's discuss one more example where conversion influences the inner transformation of the original lexical semantic variant. The noun "jock" means «an enthusiast or a participant in a specified activity» but the verb "to jock" is used by students in absolutely different situations: 1.
to hit on ("She's jocking him."); 2. to be extremely attracted to someone ("She's jocking him."); 3. to steal someone else's style or idea ("She just jocked your style!"). As you see the range of usage also becomes wider and the thematic shift is more connected with the description of qualitative characteristics.
All in all, changes in semantics of the word affect the changes in its pragmatics, so the situation range widens either.
It should be mentioned that the lexeme pragmatic potential includes all the possible lexical semantic variants of its structure. For example, the verb "to bomb" with its original meaning «to attack a person or a place with bombs» can be used for description of military or political actions either in mass media or in literature but among the students it has three meanings:
1. to fail. ("That movie bombed in the theatres.")
2. to be disappointing. ("That party bombed.")
3. to put graffiti on something.
The semantic shift of the pragmatic potential is obvious though some negative connotation is still present.
That is why one can say every new lexical semantic variant of the word has its pragmatic potential which defines its usage in various situations. The occurrence of a new lexical semantic variant in the word structure alters the pragmatic potential of the whole lexeme (Antyufeeva, 2009). In other words lexical items seem to be quite mobile and can easily migrate from the general usage into some definite functional style, for example, in students' colloquial speech.
It is necessary to point out that limitedness of colloquialism usage is definitely connected with meaning concept because meaning is directly motivated by the speaker and the speech act premeditation. Such lexicon reflects the speaker's taste and interests and programmes the acts, motivates the communicative goals. The goal is established by a man so it generates his conscious actions.
All the lexical items under research (taken from the Student Slang Project) we classified into 4 thematic groups: lexemes used to describe 1) an object/ a subject, 2) training activities, 3) leisure time and 4) forms of address, besides the first and the second group lexemes were represented by various semantic fields. Let's turn to the tables:
TABLE 1. COLLOQIALISMS USED BY STUDENTS TO DESCRIBE AN OBJECT/ A SUBJECT
Physical emotional state Personal characteristics Action quality Appearance Place definition
Amped Baler bling-bling busting Joint
Bumping ding-heads Doink hot Bash
Crunk Hodger mall troll D.D. Armpit
Deaded popper Inquant karena Crib
knackered quick outie Edge yummy mummy Popo
Jammed Wacko Creep knockout Office
swatching Dipstick get (one's) groove on hunk Juvy
sweet sauce freak-nasty run drag dweebette Volo
Bananas Player Ace phat
Trashed Hack Kevork swo
Colloqialisms used by students to describe training activities
College ice, School, Studation, Study, Studybot, Study horse, Teachaphile, Voltbolt, Uni;
TABLE 2. COLLOQIALISMS USED BY STUDENTS TO DESCRIBE LEISURE TIME
Music Sport Computer Food Look etc
Spin baller dot-com grindage ice Giggle water
music Racist game computa grinder kicks Doobie snack
musical fruit jock (n) geek munchies specks Dubs
sport allen computer god chocoholic kool-aid
sport stick grub Roll
Colloqialisms used by students to describe forms of address
1) bra n - a friendly greeting between males. Alternative pronunciation of "bro," which is short for "brother." ("What's up, bra!")
2) home slice n - 1. a good friend. ("See you later, home slice!")
whodi n - 1. friend. Pronounced "whoa-dee." ("See that dude? He's my whodi.")
3) dude - 1.(noun) Person, especially male; 2.(interjection) A greeting or salutation. 3.(interjection) An indication of surprise.
4) dawg n - Friend. He's my dawg. You dawg.
5) dog n - An unattractive person or a friend, usually used with a greeting, What's up dog?' Friend or pal
6) son n - Buddy, friend Can't be doing that, son.
7) yikes interj - Expression of mild fear or surprise. Look out for that car! Yikes!
8) parental unit n - Parents. Chow, parental units!
9) peeps n, pl - People. Let me introduce you to some of my peeps. Closer than my peeps, you are to me, baby.
Such forms of address are used in speech to create some stylistic effect. The essence of the effect is influenced by many factors including extra linguistic ones. These addresses represent the unlimited abilities of speech enrichment, they create the atmosphere of unconstraint and innovation.
As the examples proved, the thematic range of students' colloquial speech is diverse enough. We analyzed the material in terms of word formation models and semantic fields. As a result we identified 4 types of word formation models (where R=root):
1) R + R u R + R, but with the reduces base (baggravation, campos, funkenetics, mallrats, spork);
2) R + suf (cometised. Jordanesque, losingest);
3) R + R + suf (cross-trainer, shopgrifting;
4) pref + R (interquel, Mcjob)
There were observed the following types of word formation - composition, affixation (derivation), conversion and shortenings. Due to the results we found out the tendency towards the language economy. We consider the fact being influenced and justified by age and social peculiarities because it is not typical for youth to use descriptive means in speech, they are more oriented towards both quick-thinking and quick-speaking.
The semantic field division of lexical items introduced the most frequent spheres' usage, these are object/ subject description (physical emotional state, personal characteristics, action quality) and leisure time description. The lexicon demonstrates how the young spend their leisure time, all the activities undergo the process of nomination. The great amount of items covering the emotional state is connected with the age differences, at the age of 18-24 people just start to accumulate experience, they feel in a new way.
It must be mentioned that colloquialisms are common expressive means and no doubt they obtain some communicative status and language value. That is why we consider it to be necessary to identify such lexicon in accordance with 2 main features: concreteness and figurativeness. The first feature is mainly observed among the words nominating various realities (such as clothing, everyday objects, means of transport).
Kicks - trainers (Check out my new Kicks.)
Cans - earphones (These cans sound great).
Celly - mobile phone (Just call me up on my celly).
Specks - glasses (Mom, grab my specks!)
As for figurativeness, it is realized in the lexical items describing appearance and action characteristics:
Baldwin n 1. an attractive male. ("He is such a Baldwin.") attractive male
Barney n 1. an unattractive male. ("He is such a Barney.") unattractive male .
Batman and Robin adj 1. inseparable. May also mean that one person is the leader and the other is the sidekick. ("Those two are so Batman and Robin.") inseparable duo.
Benjamin n 1. a $100 bill. 2. any money. ("It's all about the Benjamins." -- Lauryn Hill.) money (related to) one hundred dollars.
bogart v 1. to steal or hog. ("Don't bogart my cookies!") Origin: possibly during the 1960s as a drug reference. The band Fraternity of Man has a song called "Don't Bogart Me." Lyrics include: "Don't bogart that joint, my friend, pass it over to me." It has been theorized that the term is an allusion to Humphry Bogart, an American actor who always had a cigarette hanging from his lips. To "bogart" a joint, then, would be letting it hang from one's lips without passing it on.
kevork v 1. to kill. Etymology: from the last name of Jack Kevorkian, a doctor in the United States who helps patients commit suicide.
In the covered examples we come across the processes of metaphor (Baldwin, Barney, Batman and Robin) and metonymy (Benjamin, bogart, kevork) where the essence is not the paradigmatic content but the associative marker. From the speaker's point of view, the associative marker serves as the motivation for a new content search and development, the main aim here is to give another name to the have-already-existed nomination, to sound more impressive, although the process of metonymy is less popular among the students. Nevertheless the development of the pragmatic potential is interconnected with the process of metaphorization and affected by the implicit components actualization.
As the analysis proved, full reinterpretation is achieved only through interpretation of the items existed because only after that new words acquire their colloquial slant. Therefore word creation is not a simple renaming but a true process of nomination.
REFERENCES
1. Antyufeeva, Y.N. (2009) Colloquial Strata of the English Language Vocabulary in the Aspect of Social Differentiation. In O.G. Vronskiy (Ed.), the Role of Universities in Support of Humanitarian Research: Proceedings of the IV International Scientific-practical Conference (pp.143-145). Tula, Russia: Tula State Lev Tolstoy Pedagogical University.
2. Rodionova, IV. (2008) Semantic Structure of Phyto-, Zoo- and Abio-morphisms and their Significance in the Portrait Structure. In O.G. Vronskiy (Ed.), the Role of Universities in Support of Humanitarian Research: Proceedings of the III International Scientific-practical Conference (pp. 296-299). Tula, Russia: Tula State Lev Tolstoy Pedagogical University.
