Volume 02 Issue 11-2022
14
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
(ISSN
–
2771-2834)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
11
Pages:
14-20
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.914
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
ABSTRACT
This article is about syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations of the vocabulary which are effective in teaching process.
Moreover, it investigates the pedagogical procedure of teaching new words and the relationship of lexical items in
explaining and presenting new words.
KEYWORDS
Lexical item, paradigmatic and syntagmatic approach, synonyms, antonyms, polysemy, semantic link, brainstorming
and natural language.
INTRODUCTION
The different versions of the semantic field theory have
one general feature in common: lexical items are
grouped in certain fields under various criteria.
According to Zhao, things in the objective world are in
disorder, so in order to fully understand them, our
human mind must deposit and memorize them
through analyzing, judging and classifying. As far as
vocabulary learning is concerned, learners remember
words by sound clot or by semantic links. Adult college
students have already had an existing schema about
the world and language. When new second language
words appear, what they should do is to find a suitable
place for the words in this schema by certain links. It
seems that a semantic interrelationship is an effective
choice. Therefore, it seems feasible to enlarge
vocabulary gradually and deepen the understanding of
vocabulary items on the basis of the semantic field.
Research Article
THE ROLE OF SEMANTIC FIELD THEORY IN VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
Submission Date:
November 01, 2022,
Accepted Date:
November 05, 2022,
Published Date:
November 15, 2022
Crossref doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/ijll/Volume02Issue11-03
Karimova Iroda
Teacher Of Linguistics Faculty, Uzbekistan
Journal
Website:
https://theusajournals.
com/index.php/ijll
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
Volume 02 Issue 11-2022
15
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
(ISSN
–
2771-2834)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
11
Pages:
14-20
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.914
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
The discussion of semantic relations leads to semantic
fields grouped under certain unifying features. In this
paper, both paradigmatic relations of synonymy,
antonym, hyponymy and syntagmatic relations of
collocation, polysemy and metaphorical meaning will
be studied. It is predicted that constructing semantic
fields by paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations can
be a teaching approach that is effective in helping
learners
develop
an
interrelated
system
of
vocabulary.[1:47]
When it comes to English vocabulary, learners usually
go through the following five essential steps proposed
by Brown & Payne:
-encountering the new words; -getting a clear image,
either visual or auditory or both, for the forms of the
new words;
-learning the meaning of the words;
-making a strong memory connection between the
forms and meanings of the words;
-using the words.
It appears that each step represents something
learners must do, at least at some basic level in order
to achieve full productive knowledge of words.
This section discusses an application of the semantic
field theory in vocabulary instruction. It presents a
synthetically pedagogical procedure of teaching new
words as: pre-reading brainstorming of the words in
the same field; getting the pronunciation, spelling and
meaning of the new words; constructing semantic
fields
based
on
various
semantic
relations;
consolidation during passage analysis; and revision of
the word knowledge. The topic of this unit is Romance.
In the first step of vocabulary instruction, learners are
asked to do the brainstorming concerning romance.
The result of this pre-reading activity is as follows.
love flowers wedding kiss candlelight
poem dance
fairy tale ROMANCE Feb.14
Titanic song
music rose valentine chocolate beach
Figure 1. Brainstorming of “romance” [2:87]
Learners take an active part in this task and get a better
understanding of the topic, thus becoming more
interested in reading the passage. This helps to
improve the reading efficiency. In this step, learners
also form a basic semantic field related to romance.
Meanwhile, the encounter with words in context helps
increase learners’ knowledge about tho
se words and
Volume 02 Issue 11-2022
16
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
(ISSN
–
2771-2834)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
11
Pages:
14-20
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.914
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
their meanings. Learners may need various encounters
with the same word in multiple contexts rather than in
just one context, so this is just the beginning of
vocabulary instruction of this unit. Learners first
encounter words in this simple way before they learn
them in the passage. [3:149].
In getting the pronunciation, spelling and meaning of
the new words, learners read the passage and guess
the meaning of new words from the context in which
they are used. Then they underline or copy the words
that are new or difficult for them and mark out the
pronunciation, spelling and meaning of the new words.
Learners are asked to get familiar with the
pronunciation and spelling of the new words because
many errors seem to come from confusing words
similar in pronunciation and form. For the meaning of
the new words, in this step, learners largely learn these
words respectively. They will study them in relation to
other words in the next step.
The essential step of the application of the
semantic field theory in vocabulary instruction is the
construction of semantic fields. In order for learning to
occur, new information must be integrated with and be
built upon what learners already know. In other words,
instruction should guide learners to use words and
ideas they already know to help them associate
meaning with words they do not know. Therefore,
words in the same semantic field can be taught
together. In this step, the teacher should find
appropriate words to set up semantic fields of the new
items, and at the same time make the presentation
procedure an interesting learning process for the
learners.
Semantic field construction uses features to identify
the relationship of lexical items within a field, with the
goal of discovering how terms within the field or
domain are similar to each other. In semantic feature
analysis, by contrast, the primary goal is to find those
features that are distinctive, that have consequences
for the grammar of the language, and that help to
clarify the various meanings of a single word. Teachers
may first check the glossary and pick out words
belonging to the same semantic field, because the
words or phrases of the same semantic field usually
share part of the meaning or the same structure which
will be easier to learn as a group than as separate
items. [4:68] Teaching vocabulary in this way saves
time and energy and achieves better results at the
same time.
When the phrase make one’s way is being taught,
other phrases of the same semantic field can also be
discussed,
such as force one’s way, feel one’s way,
shoulder one’s way, elbow one’s way, worm one’s way,
which share the same component one’s way and same
semantic feature go. This is a type of hyponymy, in
which make one’s way is a co
-hyponym of the other
phrases mentioned above. While teaching them,
teachers can point out the pattern of these phrases,
that is, verb + one’s way. Thus, applying the semantic
field theory to teaching can not only stimulate learners’
interest and creativity but also help them bridge the
newly acquired knowledge with previously acquired
knowledge.
Semantic feature analysis is used to analyze the pair of
synonyms policeman and cop in this unit.
Policeman = [man] - [slang] + [member of a police
force]
Cop = [man] + [slang] + [member of a police force]
Volume 02 Issue 11-2022
17
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
(ISSN
–
2771-2834)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
11
Pages:
14-20
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.914
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
The semantic feature [+ SLANG] distinguishes this pair
of synonyms. Also when teachers are discussing the
word slim, they may compare it with its synonyms such
as thin, slender, slight, skinny and bony.
As for polysemy, teachers can start with t
he word’s
core meaning or a best example.
Take pursue as an example. The core meaning of
pursue is to follow somediv, usually in order to catch
them, and the prototypic pursue can be found in
phrases like pursue a fox, or pursue a thief. Based on
the core meaning or prototypic examples, teachers can
continue with extended meanings and more examples
of pursue, such as pursue one’s own interest, pursue
economic reform and democracy, pursue a topic, etc.
In this way, word meanings will be demonstrated and
learners may find it comfortable to learn and
understand these items one after another. Another
polysemous word, delicate in this unit can be explained
by finding out different synonyms or antonyms of its
different meanings.
Words are basic units of a passage, and the formation
of a passage is a process of putting words into
sentences, sentences into paragraphs and paragraphs
into a passage. However, this process is not a simple
one of gathering words, but a process of semantic
choice of paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations
between different words. Through making this kind of
choice, a coherent chain of words is established
through the passage. By analyzing the paradigmatic
and syntagmatic relations between words in the
passage, the semantic fields constructed previously
can be consolidated. Consider the following example:
“A young woman was coming toward me, her figure
long and slim. Her golden hair lay back in curls from her
delicate ears; her eyes were blue as flowers. Her lips
and chin had a gentle firmness, and in her pale green
suit she was like springtime come alive.”[4:44]
In this paragraph, words and expressions like slim,
golden, delicate, as flowers, gentle, like springtime and
alive belong to one semantic field. They are chosen to
show readers the attractiveness of the hostess Hollis
Maynell to the host John Blanchard. These words
strengthen the coherence of the passage not by any
systematic semantic relations but by their co-
occurrence in the same passage. They shape a
semantic chain in the passage. The following
paragraph provide another example:
“Suppose I’m beautiful. I’d always be haunted by the
feeling that you had been taking a chance on just that,
and that kind of love would disgust me.
Suppose I’m plain. Then I’d fear that you were going on
writing to me only because you were lonely and had no
one else.”[5:62]
In this paragraph, beautiful and plain are a pair of direct
antonyms that show a contrast, which gives a vivid
description of the lady’s thought.
Learners should be provided chances to sort out their
learned vocabulary in their own ways, using semantic
maps or categorizations. The exercise can be used to
consolidate learners’ command of the newly learnt
words. These words serve as stimulus words; below
each stimulus word there is a box containing four
words. Among the four words in the box on the left,
one to three words can be a synonym, an antonym, a
co-hyponym or a superordinate, whereas among the
four words in the box on the right, there can be one to
three words that collocate with the stimulus word.
Volume 02 Issue 11-2022
18
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
(ISSN
–
2771-2834)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
11
Pages:
14-20
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.914
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
1.
beneficial
profitable, fruitless, favorable, slim
result, book, hoop, emotion
2. intricate
elaborate, simple, complicated, splendid
plot, stove, jaw, jerk
3. irritated
vexed, calm, outer, angry
thief, mower, hush, kneel
4. joyful
glad, sorrowful, portable, happy
swim, lawn, concern, crash
5. observant
alert, slow, diligent, polish
porch, plug, precise, assistant
We must now determine what mechanisms a semantic
theory employs in reconstructing the speaker’s ability
to interpret sentences. We have seen that this ability is
systematic in that it enables the speaker to understand
sentences he has never heard before and to produce
novel sentences that other speakers understand in the
way that he understands them. To account for this
ability a semantic theory must be so formulated that its
output matches the interpretive performance of a
fluent speaker. In this section, we describe the form of
semantic theories. It is widely acknowledged and
certainly true that one component of a semantic
theory of a natural language is a dictionary of that
language. The reason for including a dictionary as a
component of a semantic theory is based on two
limitations of a grammatical description. First, a
grammar cannot account for the fact that some
sentences which differ only morphemically are
interpreted as different in meaning (e.g. The tiger bit
me and The mouse bit me) while other sentences
which differ only morphemically are interpreted as
identical in meaning (e.g. The oculist examined me and
The eye doctor examined me). Second, a grammar
cannot account for the fact that some sentences of
radically different syntactic structure are synonymous
(e.g. Two chairs are in the room and There are at least
two things in the room and each is a chair) while other
syntactically different sentences are not. In each case,
the interpretation of the sentences is deter- mined in
part by the meanings of their morphemes and by
semantic relations among the morphemes[7:54]. The
reason for including a dictionary as a component of a
semantic theory
is precisely to provide a
representation of the semantic characteristics of
morphemes necessary to account for the facts about
sentences and their interrelations that the grammar
leaves unexplained. What has always been unclear
about a semantic theory is what components it
Volume 02 Issue 11-2022
19
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
(ISSN
–
2771-2834)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
11
Pages:
14-20
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.914
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
contains besides a dictionary, and how the
components of a semantic theory relate to one
another and to the grammar. We can find this out by
asking in what respects a dictionary and grammar
alone are not sufficient to match the fluent speaker’s
interpretations of sentences. Let us imagine a fluent
speaker of English presented with the infinite list of
sentences and their structural descriptions generated
by a grammar of English. Given an accurate dictionary
of English which he applies by using his linguistic ability,
the fluent speaker can semantically interpret any
sentence on the list under any of its grammatical
derivations. He can determine the number and content
of the readings of a sentence, tell whether or not a
sentence is semantically anomalous, and decide which
sentences on the list are paraphrases of each other.
Now contr
ast the fluent speaker’s performance with
the performance of a machine which mechanically
applies an English dictionary to a sentence in the list by
associating with each morpheme of the sentence its
dictionary entry. It is clear that the dictionary usually
supplies more senses for a lexical item than it bears in
almost any of its occurrences in sentences. But the
machine will not be able to select the senses which the
morpheme actually bears in a given sentence context,
except so far as the selection is already determined by
the grammatical markers assigned to the morpheme in
the derivation of the sentence. Thus the machine will
be able to choose the correct sense of seal in Seal the
letter so far as the choice is determined by the fact that
in this sentence seal is marked as a verb, and the
correct sense of seal in The seal is on the letter so far
as the choice is determined by the fact that in this
sentence seal is marked as a noun. But the machine will
not be able to distinguish the correct sense of seal in
one of the oil seals in my car is leaking from such
incorrect senses as a device bearing a design so made
that it can impart an impression or an impression made
by such a device or the material upon which the
impression
is
made
or
an
ornamental
or
comme
morative stamp’ and so forth, since all of these
senses can apply to nominal occurrences of seal.
What the machine is failing to do is to take account
of or utilize the semantic relations between
morphemes in a sentence. Hence it cannot determine
the correct number and content of readings of a
sentence. Nor can it distinguish semantically
anomalous sentences from semantically regular ones.
Since the machine will associate a dictionary entry with
each morpheme in a sentence, it does not distinguish
cases in which the sense of a morpheme or string of
morphemes in a sentence precludes other morphemes
in the sentence from bearing any of the senses that the
dictionary supplies for them. (E.g. the machine cannot
distinguish The wall is covered with silent paint from,
The wall is covered with fresh paint.)[6:98]
Finally, the machine cannot tell which sentences in the
list are paraphrases of each other in any case except
the one in which the sentences are of exactly the same
syntactic structure and the corresponding words are
either identical or synonymous. The comparison
between a fluent speaker and a machine reveals the
respects in which a grammar and dictionary by
themselves do not suffice to interpret sentences like a
speaker of the language. What the fluent speaker has
at his disposal that a machine has not are rules for
applying the information in the dictionary rules which
take account of semantic relations between
morphemes and of the interaction between meaning
and syntactic structure in determining the correct
semantic interpretation for any of the infinitely many
sentences which the grammar generates. Thus, a
Volume 02 Issue 11-2022
20
International Journal Of Literature And Languages
(ISSN
–
2771-2834)
VOLUME
02
I
SSUE
11
Pages:
14-20
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2021:
5.
705
)
(2022:
5.
705
)
OCLC
–
1121105677
METADATA
IF
–
5.914
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
semantic theory of a natural language must have such
rules (which we shall call projection rules) as one of its
components if it is to match
the speaker’s
interpretations of sentences. The central problem for
such a theory is that a dictionary usually supplies more
senses for a lexical item than it bears in an occurrence
in a given sentence, for a dictionary entry is a
characterization of every sense that a lexical item can
bear in any sentence. Thus, the effect of the projection
rules must be to select the appropriate sense of each
lexical item in a sentence in order to provide the
correct readings for each distinct grammatical
structure of that sentence.
REFERENCES
1.
Brown, C. & Payne, M. E.. Five essential steps
of processes in vocabulary learning, p-47.
2.
Chen, Luoyu. A survey of English vocabulary
instruction. 2003, p. 87
3.
Hall, T., & Strangman, N. (2002). Graphic
organizer. National Center on Accessing the
General Curriculum. Retrieved May 25, 2013
from http: // www.cast.org/ publications/
ncac/ncac-go.html
4.
Hatch, E. (1983). Psycholinguistics: A second
language
perspectives.
Rowley,
MA:
Newberry House. p-44,68
5.
Huckin, T, Haynes, M., & Coady, J. (1992)
Second Language Reading and Vocabulary
Learning. New Jersey: Albex Publishing
Corporation. p-62
6.
Jeffries, L. & Mikulecky, B. (2006). Reading
Power 2. Pearson Education, Inc. p-98
7.
L. Wittgenstein. Philosophical Investigations.
The Macmillan Company, New York. 1995, p.
54-67
8.
www.google.com
