Semantic Relationships Between Contextual Synonyms

ARTICLE REVIEW 

Title	Semantic Relationships Between Contextual Synonyms
Article	Linguistic
Volume & Page	Volume 4, No.9 (Serial No.33-37)
Year	2007
Author	ZENG Xian-mo
Reviewer	Jhon Piter Ndruru  1688203028
Date	25 March 2018

	Dont forget give your :
	comment
	suggestion
	question
	bullying

 

this is my ppt article review link.

you may check it...↴

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o39kznWRBg1ZjP3dT46u6qDURInhJP_S/view

 Article review

Semantic Relationships between Contextual Synonyms

Title	Semantic Relationships Between Contextual Synonyms
Article	Liguistict
Volume & Page	Volume 4, No.9 (Serial No.33-37)
Year	2007
Author	ZENG Xian-mo
Reviewer	Jhon Piter Ndruru  1688203028
Date	25 March 2018

The Purpose of  this Article	To help language learners to comprehend better in their reading and do better in their writing. Might help us understand which words in what circumstances can be used as contextual synonyms.
Methodology	Use qualitative method
Finding	The researcher use the term “ context” in its narrow meaning. It merely refers to the linguistic units Preceding and/or following the particular linguistic unit in question in the same text. All extra-linguistic situations and knowledge are excluded in this meaning of context. Although this understanding of context is different from  the concept of context of many linguistics researchers, we take this narrow meaning in order to make our discussion easier and clearer.
Definition	1. Contextual synonym     In  this paper, we define words that are not synonymous with each other in semantics, but are synonymously used in certain specific texts as contextual synonyms. For the sake of a clearer contrast between contextual synonym and the term “synonym” commonly used, in this paper, we redefine words that are semantically synonymous as semantic synonyms. There are some obvious, important differences between contextual synonyms and semantic synonyms, which we should make clear.       2. Text      In  this paper, we do not distinguish “text” from “discourse”, as many linguists do, but we  only use the word “text”. A text here is a sequence of linguistic units, spoken or written, of whatever length, which forms a unified hole.         3. Context     In   this paper, the term “context” is used in its narrow meaning. It merely refers to the linguistic units Preceding and/or following the particular linguistic unit in question in the same text. All extra-linguistic situations and knowledge are excluded in this meaning of context. Although this understanding of context is different from  the concept of context of many linguistics researchers, we take this narrow meaning in order to make our discussion easier and clearer.
Semantic relationships between contextual synonyms	The relationships of two-word pairs can represent the characteristics of the relationships between multi-word groups. To simplify our discussion, we discuss only the relationships of two-word pairs in the following analyses. Words that might be used as contextual synonyms should have, between each other, one of the three semantic relationships discussed as follows.     1.      Embedment     2.      Intersection     3.      Non-coherence
The Three Semantic Relationships Discussed	1 Embedment       There are some groups of words in which the meaning of one word (hereinafter referred to as W1) is totally embedded in the meaning of the other word (hereinafter referred to as W2). There are two typical different types of word groups which take this relationship between each other. One type is that W2 refers to a collective group of something, while W1 refers to an individual division in that group.
	2 Intersection            The relationship of intersection refers to the relationship that the meaning of one word (W1) intersects with the meaning of the other word (W2) to a certain extent (see Figure 3). In this case, the two words are at the same level. There is no upper term, nor lower term, which is the case in the previous relationship. Accurately speaking, most semantic synonyms are also in this relationship. The difference between intersected semantic synonyms and intersected contextual synonyms lies in the fact that the intersected part of semantic synonyms is the whole part of one meaning of the synonymous words, whereas the intersected part of contextual synonyms is only a part of one meaning of the synonymous words.
	3. Non-coherence In some cases, people may use one word (W1) as a contextual synonym of another word (W2) in their texts, although, semantically speaking, the two words are not even intersected in any part of their meanings. We regard the relation between W1 and W2 as the relationship of non-coherence. When W1 and W2 are used as contextual synonyms, they become totally the same meaning in the text. But this meaning will be different from at least the meaning of one of them. Only in the following two conditions can W1 and W2 be used as contextual synonyms of each other.
Result	1.In some texts, the meanings of both W1 and W2 can be narrowed to   refer only to their intersected part (S in Figure 3) and used as synonymously interchangeable words. For example, the meanings of the words “fight” and “strive” are intersected at the reference of “using all resources available for something”. They can be used as contextual synonyms when they both are narrowed to mean “trying to gain something to one’s best ability”
	2. If for some reason, it is universally recognized that a special concept  can refer to the same as another semantically different concept, when a writer/speaker wants to refer to that concept, he/she can use the two words as contextual synonyms of each other in his/her text. We also refer this condition as cultural reasons. Today, when people are mentioning the word “green”, more often than not, they refer to environmental protection. In an article, the title uses the word “green accountant” while in the body of that article, “environmental auditor” is used. Evidently, they are the same meaning in that article. (Jones-Macziola, 1994) The relationship of non-coherence is the most typical type of contextual synonyms, taking consideration into the differences between contextual synonyms and semantic synonyms. The use of antonomasia and metonymy is rather similar to this kind of contextual synonyms, for instance, in English, we can use “Foggy Bottom” to refer to “US State Department” (metonymy) and “Daniel” to refer to “a wise and fair judge” (antonomasia). What distinguishes them from contextual synonyms is that contextual synonyms are used in the same text while in metonymy or antonomasia the two words (groups of words) are usually not interchangeably used in the same text.
The strangeness The weakness Conclusion	I can find the points of  This article easily  because it complete with the figures  of analysis from this article. I have the trouble to interpreted of some the terms this article. Because the terms from this article is different with the Indonesian terms.      1.      Words which are not synonymous with each other in semantics can be used as contextual synonyms under one of the conditions above discussed;     2.      These conditions are only requirements for contextual synonyms. Words meeting these requirements may not be necessarily used as contextual synonyms.