synonyms and their challenges for first-year students at the english department, university of languages and international studies = từ đồng nghĩa và những thách thức của nó đối với sinh viên

7 The scarcity of absolute synonyms is justified with different words as uneconomical, unnecessarily redundant, wasteful, luxurious, etc. We do not need a completely free choice between two words for a particular context because we can well do it with only one. 1.1.4.2. Non- absolute synonyms: Non-absolute synonyms (or partial synonyms) should be distinguished from near synonyms, as Lyon proposed. Near synonyms are words which are more or less similar, but not identical in meaning. Some examples are mist and fog, stream and brook, dive and plunge, ask and beg, etc. Partial synonyms are synonyms which fail to satisfy all the three conditions for absolute synonyms. The failure of any of those three conditions makes a pair of synonyms non-absolute. Take big and large as an example. They are partial synonyms because not all their meanings are identical. Besides, they have different collocational ranges. Big can collocate with house, sister, mistake, etc. Large can also collocate with house and sister but it does not collocate with mistake. Another classification of synonyms makes it easier for us to follow. Apart from absolute synonyms, there are five other types, but only three of them are mentioned here because the other two types do not serve the aim of this thesis: Semantic synonyms are synonyms which differ in denotation (like near synonyms described above). Stylistic synonyms are synonyms which differ in connotation. For example, while thin is neutral, skinny is pejorative and slender is flattering. Semantic stylistic synonyms are synonyms which differ in both denotation and connotation. This type makes up the majority of synonyms in English. 1.2. Factors distinguishing synonyms: As indicated in the scope of the study, there are many factors underlying the use of synonyms, but for the purpose of the study, only the factors which cause difficulties for freshmen at university are mentioned and investigated in this part of the research. Hence, such factors as dialect difference (or geographical distribution) and syntactic behavior or pragmatic value are neglected. 8 1.2.1. Connotation: In addition to literal, dictionary meanings, words often have implied, emotional meanings known as connotations. These connotations play an important role in the search for the right words because they sometimes clash with the writers intended meaning or view. Distinguishing between two words that seem to mean the same but have different colors and shapes and suggestions, this is essential to the art of writing, and also of speaking. The dictionary can tell you only what a word points to, it cannot tell you what it feels like. Unspeakable in the dictionary means the same as unutterable but the former is always used to mean something base or vile, while the latter usually means some rapturous or divine thought or emotion. Another example is that in the following sentence, the word pushy conflicts with the meaning in the rest of the sentence The pushy citizen patiently waited for his turn at the microphone before confidently expressing his concerns about the city councils recent decision to staff the fire station with volunteers. A pushy individual probably wouldnt have waited patiently for his turn to speak, but rather would have barged in whenever he felt emotionally led to do so. Perhaps, a more appropriate descriptive word for an individual who patiently waited before confidently expressing his concerns might be assertive. Two words may largely share a denotation, in referring to a particular entity, but they may have divergent associative and emotive meaning. Therefore, it is very important for a writer to choose words which have appropriate connotations; otherwise, it might cause offence to the readers, or at least make the writer misunderstood. Moreover, connotations can help the description become not only more exact but also more lively and vividly. Push and shove may serve as an example here: their denotation largely overlaps, that is forceful propulsion forward; but shove connotes roughness or haste, which push does not. So The bus was so crowded that I was shoved forward and back again ad again sounds more descriptive than The bus was so crowded that I was pushed forward and back again and again. 9 The following table lists some group of words which have similar dictionary meanings but are different in connotative meanings Favorable Neutral Unfavorable 1. relaxed inactive lazy 2. prudent timid cowardly 3. modest shy mousy 4. time-tested old out-of-date Favorable Neutral Unfavorable 5. dignified reserved stiff-necked 6. persevering persistent stubborn 7. up-to-date new newfangled 8. thrifty conservative miserly 9. self-confident proud conceited 10. inquisitive curious nosy Some other examples are: (all the words on the left are neutral) Ambiguous equivocal (deliberately) Famous notorious (disreputably) Hate loathe (with repugnance or disgust) Misuse abuse (of privilege or power) New novel (strikingly) Obtain procure (with effort) 1.2.2. Formality of the context: Language cannot be used in isolation from the context. When something is said or written, vocabulary needs to be chosen carefully basing on who is saying, to whom, when, where and why. It is the relationship between the content of a message, its sender and receiver, 10 its situation and purpose, and how it is communicated, which altogether make up register. In terms of register, Halliday proposes three key components which restrict the selection of vocabulary. They are field, tenor, and mode: Field: the subject matter and purpose of a message (travels brochure, etc.) Tenor: the relationship between sender and receiver (boss to employee, friend to friend, etc.) Mode: the channel of communication (phone call, written report, notice, etc.) Basing on these three components, contexts are often divided in such types as formal vs. informal/slang/colloquial, written vs. spoken, technical vs. non-technical. As a result, one word in a pair of synonyms may be used in a more formal context than the other; or one of the pair may belong to slang or colloquial English, while the other is in more general use. The level of formality you write should be determined by the expectations of your audience and your purpose. For example, if you are writing a cover letter for a job application or a college academic essay, you should write in a formal style. If you are writing a letter to a friend, something personal, or even something for a humorous or special interest magazine when informal writing is expected, you would use a more informal style. Formality exists on a scale, from formal to semiformal, and to informal. Formality of the context is very important in writing in the sense that if the writer writes in a wrong style, it may cause offence or create a distance between the writer and the readers. For instance, if the writer uses colloquial language or slang in an application form, the reader may feel that they are offended. Consequently, the applicant is likely to be refused. On the contrary, while writing to a close friend, if the writer uses too formal words, the reader will think that the writer stands on ceremony with him/her, and so keeps a distance from the writer. Following are some examples of synonym pairs, the ones on the left are usually used in an informal or less formal context while the ones on the right in a more formal context: Informal/ less formal Formal Argument Disputation Die Decease 11 Informal/ less formal Formal Give up Renounce Letter Missive Western Occidental Stuff Many Put out Extinguish 1.2.3. Collocation: According to Howard Jackson (2000), collocation refers to a structural or syntagmatic relations that a word contracts with other words occurring in the same sentence or text. It is concerned with the meaning arising from co-occurrence, more specially to meaning arising from predictable co-occurrence. Two things should be marked in Jacksons idea. Firstly, collocation is not only about synonyms. It is structural or syntagmatic relation held between a word and any word that can co-occur with it in a sentence. Besides, collocation most clearly occurs in specified syntactic relation, e.g. S + V (kettle + boil), or V + O (boil + kettle), or A + N (red + wine). These should be called grammatical collocation, in order to differentiate it from lexical collocation, which is the subject of this study. Secondly, collocation is predictable. It is a relation of mutual expectancy or habitual association. The occurrence of one word predicts the greater than chance likelihood that another word will occur in the context. The statistical terms greater than chance likelihood suggest that the mutual expectancy of two words could be stronger or weaker, depending on both the direction of expectancy and the number of alternative predictable words. For example, between kettle and boil, the collocation from kettle to boil is stronger than that from boil to kettle because the number of verbs that regularly co-occur with kettle is less than the number of nouns that regularly co-occur with boil. Similarly, wreak has a stronger collocational relation with its object nouns than does settle because wreak occur predominantly with only two nouns (havoc and revenge) whereas settle occurs with a whole range of nouns: dispute, argument, stomach, nerves, child, etc. 12 In agreement with H. Jackson, Michael McCarthy (1997) claims that there is a binding force or a marriage contract between words, and some words are more firmly married to each other than others. He takes example of blond and brown. Both can co-occur with hair, but the relationship between blond and hair is stronger than that between brown and hair (given blond, there is hardly anything else to think of besides hair, but given brown, we can think of a large number of other nouns). McCarthy gives high opinion of collocation, saying that it is fundamental in the study of vocabulary, and it deserves to be a central aspect of vocabulary study. An example taken from McCarthys book Vocabulary illustrates the influence of collocation on word choice. Some everyday words denoting size are considered to see how they collocate with a random selection of single nouns: Problem Amount Shame Man Large ? v x v Great v v v v Big v v v v Major v ? x x v= collocates ?= questionable x= does not collocate One remarkable thing about collocation is that until relatively recently, the intuitive method was the only one possible for lexicologists to discover it, and it is the method that is reflected in the content of most dictionaries. Adult native speakers also have a good intuitive knowledge of typical collocations. However, it is not a reliable method for investigating a statistical probability, which implies a degree of accuracy. This, fortunately, have been cured by todays corpora of a hundred million words. Computers scanning huge amounts of text can confirm and augment those intuitions, or can make explicit what we use automatically in our everyday language. Vietnamese learners, unfortunately, have not been familiar with these corpora. The traditional way of learning still have influence on them, so they often learn just