Demyanchuk Yuliya
Foreign Languages and Translation Studies Department, Lviv State University of Life Safety
This paper discusses the lexical-semantic opposition EMPTY/FULL in the corpus of legal, military and medical texts. The study analyzes 130 official business texts, in which we examined the problem of defining and constructing the lexical-semantic opposition EMPTY/FULL. The analysis promoted the construction of quantitative sampling, which demonstrates the weight of the lexemes in the corpus of official business texts. The purpose of the proposed analysis was to determine the distribution of the lexical-semantic opposition EMPTY/FULL, especially to find out the total number of occurrences, the average number of occurrences and the edge limits of the lexeme EMPTY and the lexeme FULL in the corpus of texts. The main results of the study outline the diversity of the lexical-semantic opposition EMPTY/FULL in different contexts, that underlines the functional diversification of the lexeme EMPTY and lexeme FULL. The results showed that in legal texts lexemes EMPTY/FULL nominate a legal concept; in medical texts they perform the function of medical conditions assessment; within the limits of military texts, they establish an associative connection between the nomination and semantic components (military actions, targets and objects of military use, consequences of war). Another important finding was the determination of the dominant lexeme in the corpus of legal texts and the dominant lexeme in the corpus of military texts. The similarities between EMPTY and FULL are primarily due to their antonymy. However, their differences are fixed in their distinct core meanings, contextual usage, pragmatic significance and connotations. These differences make them adaptable in various contexts of military, legal and medical texts to convey precise and often contrasting information about the state of objects and concepts.
Bird S (2006). NLTK: The natural language toolkit. In: Proceedings of the COLING/ACL 2006 Interactive Presentation Sessions; Sydney, Australia. pp. 69-72.
Bliznyuk K (2017). Analysis of oppositions as a method of researching lexical semantics. Grammatical Studies: Collection of Scientific Papers, 3, 70-74.
Bowen G (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. doi: 10.3316/qrj0902027
Boyko JV (2022). Constructing a cognitive-discursive model of diachronic multiplicity of translations as an interpretative-heuristic activity. Visnyk Universitetu imeni Alfreda Nobelya.
Cabré Castellví MT (2003). Theories of terminology. Terminology/International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized Communication, 9(2), 163–199. https://doi.org/10.1075/term.9.2.03cab
Coffey SJ (2022). English adjectives of very similar meaning used in combination: An exploratory, corpus-aided study. Lexis, 19. https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.6440
Fadlallah R, El-Jardali F, Nomier M, et al. (2019). Using narratives to impact health policy-making: a systematic review. Health Research Policy and Systems, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-019-0423-4
Farahani M, Dastjerdi H (2021). Corpora and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications. Journal of Language and Translation, 11(3), 215-223.
Farr F, O’Keeffe A (2019). Using corpus approaches in English language teacher education. The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teacher Education, 268–282. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315659824-22
Fellbaum C (2019). How flexible are idioms? A corpus-based study. Linguistics, 57(4), 735–767. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2019-0015
Grisot C (2018). Cohesion, Coherence and Temporal Reference from an Experimental Corpus Pragmatics Perspective. In: Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96752-3
Goldman E (2008). Strategic communications. Theory and application. Washington, DC: Department of Defense.
Hasselgren A (2002). Learner corpora and language testing. Computer Learner Corpora, Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching, 143–173. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.6.11has
Janez D, Erjavec A (2013). Orange: data mining toolbox in Python (PDF). Journal of Machine Learning Research, 14(1), 2349-2353.
Jaworska S (2017). Corpora and corpus linguistics approaches to studying business language. In: Mautner G, Rainer F (editors). Handbook of Business Communication: Linguistic Approaches. Handbooks of Applied Linguistics. De Gruyter, Berlin. pp. 583-606.
Machniewski M (2006). Analysing and teaching translation through corpora: Lexical convention and lexical use. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 41, 237-255.
McEnery T, Xiao R, Tono Y (2006). Corpus-based language studies: an advanced resource book. Taylor & Francis. p. 386.
Munger A (2019). Steps to Success: Crossing the Bridge Between Literacy Research and Practice. Available online: https://milnepublishing.geneseo.edu/steps-to-success/ (accessed on 16 September 2023).
Oripova KE (2022). Lexical and semantic analysis of antonyms in artistic discourse. Journal NX—A Multidisciplinary Peer Reviewed Journal, 8(5), 106-111.
Pats LI (2016). Verbal semantic oppositions in the system of paradigmatic relations. Scientific Notes of the National University “Ostroh Academy”. Series: Philological, 60, 209-212.
Pérez-Paredes P (2010). Corpus linguistics and language education in perspective: Appropriation and the possibilities scenario. In: Harris T, Jaén MM (editors). Corpus Linguistics in Language Teaching. Peter Leng. pp. 53-57.
Quran M, Mohammad M (2008). Loss and gain in technical military translation. International Journal of Translation, 20(1-2), 107.
Renouf A (2007). Corpus development 25 years on: from super-corpus to cyber-corpus. Corpus Linguistics 25 Years On, 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401204347_004
Samuel G (2019). What is the Impact of Culture on Legal Theory? Droit et Société, N° 101(1), 179. https://doi.org/10.3917/drs1.101.0179
Tebogo M (2014). Understanding Critical Discourse Analysis in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, 1(7), 104-113.
Teubert W, Cermakova A (2007). Corpus linguistics: A short introduction. London: Bloomsbury Academic. p. 153.
Tognini-Bonelli E (2001). Corpus Linguistics at Work (Studies in Corpus Linguistics). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Toplak M, Birarda G, Read S, et al. (2017). Infrared Orange: Connecting Hyperspectral Data with Machine Learning. Synchrotron Radiation News, 30(4), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/08940886.2017.1338424
Tymbay A (2022). Prominence and Melody Mistakes in the Spontaneous Speech of Czech Learners of English. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 2022, 19(2).
Ugwu C, Eze V (2023). Qualitative Research. pp. 20-35.
Walker C, Baxter J (2019). Method Sequence and Dominance in Mixed Methods Research: A Case Study of the Social Acceptance of Wind Energy Literature. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 160940691983437. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919834379
Wulff DU, De Deyne S, Jones MN, Mata R (2019). New Perspectives on the Aging Lexicon. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(8), 686–698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.05.003
Copyright © 2024 Demyanchuk Yuliya
This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
