This Firthian principle will guide the following corpus-based study which investigates how the words to beg, to beseech, to supplicate, to importune, to entreat, and to implore, which are similar in meaning, differ in semantic patterns.
Analysing and comparing the words in terms of their linguistic environment will reveal how the specific word is used naturally. Its idiomatic use might be surprising as language is always changing and developing, so one might find out new and unexpected aspects of a words use.
Chapter 2 explains the Lexical Priming approach by Michael Hoey and its significance regarding this study. Furthermore, the four categories collocation, colligation, semantic preference and semantic prosody will be defined in order to lay the groundwork for the analysis in chapter 4. In the following 3rd chapter, corpora will be defined as well as the Neo-Firthian tradition of using corpora for lexical analysis and information about the source corpus for this study, Sketch Engine for Language Learning, will be provided. The chapter then concludes explaining the limitations of this study. Chapter 4 will state a few conditions and limitations of the analysis and will then continue to present the qualitative analysis of the target words modelled after Sinclair’s model of extended lexical meaning. The 5th chapter will compare the results of chapter 4 to give an efficient overview of the semantic similarities and differences of the words. Lastly, chapter 6 will provide a concluding statement of whether they differ from each other at all or if they can substitute each other seamlessly. A final outlook will give additional ideas on how to expand this study.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. HOEY’S LEXICAL PRIMING APPROACH
2.1. Collocation
2.2. Colligation
2.3. Semantic Preference
2.4. Semantic Prosody
3. CORPUS LINGUISTICS
3.1 Neo-Firthian Approach to Corpus Linguistics
3.2. Sketch Engine for Language Learning
3.3. Limitations of the Study
4. CORPUS ANALYSIS
4.1 Analysis of to beg
4.2 Analysis of to beseech
4.3 Analysis of to supplicate
4.4 Analysis of to importune
4.5. Analysis of to entreat
4.6. Analysis of to implore
5. COMPARISON
6. CONCLUSION
Research Objectives and Themes
This study investigates the semantic patterns and linguistic environment of six English verbs that are similar in meaning: to beg, to beseech, to supplicate, to importune, to entreat, and to implore. By utilizing the corpus-based Lexical Priming approach, the research aims to determine whether these verbs function as seamless synonyms or if they possess distinct nuances shaped by their specific contexts of usage.
- Application of Michael Hoey’s Lexical Priming theory to analyze word associations.
- Examination of collocations, colligations, semantic preferences, and semantic prosodies.
- Utilization of the Sketch Engine for Language Learning (SkELL) corpus for data analysis.
- Comparison of the qualitative semantic differences between the six target verbs.
- Investigation into how linguistic context influences natural word usage.
Excerpt from the Book
4.1 Analysis of to beg
The Verb to beg appears in 25% of the instances with the noun question. This construction is well known as the idiom to beg the question, which means that an obvious fact is omitted from the particular discourse. But as this fact is important, one discourse partner is stating the obvious need for clarification. Other frequently found nouns that collocate with to beg are personal pronouns or (named) persons in 57,5% of the examples and words expressing that people are begging for money. The collocation of begging for money appears in 37,5% of the instances. Some of these examples depict a converse opinion on begging, which states that it is shameful and illegal.
A prominent colligation of to beg can be seen in the construction of beg to + lexical verb which occurs 20% in the examples. Through this constellation another meaning of to beg is displayed. Next to the already above mentioned meanings, one can beg their discourse partner for a certain action. In 10% of the examples to beg the question appears in an interrogative clause. 60% of the instances demonstrate that to beg favours to appear in the middle part of the sentence.
To beg displays two distinct meanings. With preferring semantic sets concerning money, a clear negative connotation is made, as money also collocates with instances of either legal or social disapproval. The idiom to beg the question displays a preference for appearing in interrogative sentences connected to a preceding discourse, thus it connotes clarification. A further, but less prominent meaning depicts that one can not only beg for money/physical items, but also for actions. These actions, though, would need further context to assign them a clear connotation.
Summary of Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION: Presents the study's scope, the Firthian guiding principle, and the organizational framework of the following chapters.
2. HOEY’S LEXICAL PRIMING APPROACH: Explains the theoretical framework of lexical priming and defines key concepts like collocation, colligation, semantic preference, and semantic prosody.
3. CORPUS LINGUISTICS: Discusses the function of corpora, the Neo-Firthian tradition, and the specific tool used, the Sketch Engine for Language Learning.
4. CORPUS ANALYSIS: Provides a detailed qualitative analysis of the six target verbs, examining their collocations, colligations, and prosodic meanings based on concordance data.
5. COMPARISON: Synthesizes the individual analyses to highlight shared semantic qualities and distinguish the specific nuances between the verbs.
6. CONCLUSION: Summarizes the findings, confirming that the verbs cannot be substituted seamlessly due to their distinct contextual influences.
Keywords
Lexical Priming, Corpus Linguistics, Collocation, Colligation, Semantic Preference, Semantic Prosody, to beg, to beseech, to supplicate, to importune, to entreat, to implore, Sketch Engine, Neo-Firthian, Discourse Analysis
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
This work explores the semantic differences between six synonyms—to beg, to beseech, to supplicate, to importune, to entreat, and to implore—by analyzing their usage in natural language corpora.
What are the primary thematic fields covered?
The paper covers lexical semantics, the theory of Lexical Priming, corpus linguistics methodology, and the contextual analysis of language through electronic text collections.
What is the main research question?
The research asks whether these six verbs, which are often considered synonyms, are truly interchangeable, or if their meanings are shaped differently by their specific linguistic environments.
Which scientific method is employed?
The study uses a corpus-based approach, applying Michael Hoey’s Lexical Priming theory and Sinclair’s model of extended lexical meaning to evaluate qualitative data from the SkELL platform.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body examines the theoretical background of lexical priming, introduces corpus linguistics tools, and provides a comparative analysis of the target verbs through concordance lists.
How would you characterize this paper with keywords?
The study is defined by terms such as Lexical Priming, Semantic Prosody, Corpus Linguistics, and the detailed comparative linguistic analysis of specific target verbs.
What distinction does the author make for the verb 'to importune'?
The author identifies 'to importune' as having a distinct connotation of aggressive, unwelcome bothering within legal, political, or educational contexts, rather than a simple plea.
How does the context of 'religion' affect the usage of these verbs?
The analysis shows that verbs like 'to beseech', 'to supplicate', and 'to entreat' frequently collocate with religious entities, regardless of specific faith, which imbues the request with a sense of high importance or unattainability.
Why are concordance lists central to this study?
Concordance lists provide the descriptive real-world examples required to observe the specific linguistic 'company' a word keeps, which is necessary for understanding its natural usage patterns.
Does the study conclude that these verbs are synonyms?
No, the study concludes that while they share basic features, their specific contexts, lexical fields, and semantic prosodies are different enough to prevent them from being seamless substitutes for one another.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Hannah Koch (Autor:in), 2017, A corpus study on words similar in meaning, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/1027154
