Cover not available
Article published In:
Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 24:3 (1997) ► pp.349–385

Polysemy

Patterns of meaning and patterns in history

| University of Nottingham
| University of Nottingham
40 years ago Stephen Ullmann wrote that polysemy was the pivot of semantics. He was referring then to traditional synchronic and diachronic semantics. Nowadays, some 40 years later, polysemy has again become a central topic in cognitive semantics. This article traces the history of this important concept, from Antiquity to the first half of the 20th century. Bréal’s treatment of polysemy is the pivot around which the article itself turns, as it was Bréal who invented the term ‘polysemy’ a century ago.
Published online: 1 January 1997
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.24.3.07ner
References (91)
References
Abel, Carl. 1884. Ueber den Gegensinn der Urworte. Leipzig: W. Friedrich.Google Scholar
Apresjan, Jurij D. 1973. “Regular Polysemy”. Linguistics No. 1421.5–32.Google Scholar
Blank, Andreas. 1993. “Polysemie und semantische Relationen im Lexikon”. Wortschatz und Fremdsprachenerwerb, ed. by Wolfgang Börner & Klaus Vogel, 22–56. Bochum: AKS-Verlag.Google Scholar
. 1996. Prinzipien des lexikalischen Bedeutungswandels in romanischen Sprachen. Unpublished Habilitationsschrift, Freie Universität Berlin. [See chapter 7, “Die Folgen des Bedeutungswandels”.]Google Scholar
Bergouinioux, Gabriel. 1987. “Comment la sémantique se fit un nom, à propos de la Vie des mots d’Arsène Darmesteter”. Ornicar?: Revue du champ freudien 421.12–44.Google Scholar
Bologna, Maria Patrizia. 1995. “Riflessioni sui rapporto fra ricerca etimologica e teoria semantica nella linguistica tedesca del’ottocento”. Scritti Linguistici e Filologici in onore di Tristano Bolelli, 121–137. Pisa: Pacini Editore.Google Scholar
Bréal, Michel. 1924[1897]. Essai de sémantique (Science des significations). Reprint of the 4th ed. Paris: Gérard Monfort.Google Scholar
. 1964[1900]. Semantics: Studies in the science of meaning. Transl. by Mrs. H. [i.e., Nina, née Welby] Cust. With a new introduction by Joshua Whatmough. New York: Dover Publications. [The original English transl. contained a preface by John Percival Postgate. (1853–1926).]Google Scholar
. 1991[1866]. “On the Form and Function of Words”. Bréal 1991.50–62.Google Scholar
. 1991[1884]. “How Words are Organized in the Mind”. Bréal 1991.145–151.Google Scholar
. 1991[1887]. “The History of Words”. Bréal 1991.152–175.Google Scholar
. 1991. The Beginnings of Semantics. Essays, lectures and reviews. Ed. and translated by George Wolf. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Brown, Cecil H. & Stanley R. Witkowski. 1983. “Polysemy, Lexical Change, and Cultural Importance”. Man 181.72–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Condillac, Etienne Bonnot de. 1951[1760]. Dictionnaire des synonymes. Oeuvres Philosophiques ed. by Georges Le Roy, vol. 31. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Cruse, D. Alan. 1995. “Polysemy and Related Phenomena from a Cognitive Linguistic Point of View”. Computational Lexical Semantics ed. by Patrick Saint-Dizier & Evelyne Viegas, 33–49. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Darmesteter, Arsène. 1886. The Life of Words as Symbols of Ideas. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co.Google Scholar
. 1887. La vie des mots étudiée dans leurs significations. Paris: Delagrave.Google Scholar
Darmesteter, Arsène & Adolphe Hatzfeld. 1890. Dictionnaire général de la langue française du commencement du XVIIe siècle jusqu’à nos jours, précédé d’un traité de la formation de la langue par A.H. et A.D. (avec le concours de A[ntoine] Thomas). 21 vols. Paris: Delagrave. [See esp. “Introduction” and “Classement des sens”.]Google Scholar
Deane, Paul D. 1988. “Polysemy and Cognition”. Lingua 751.325–361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delesalle, Simone. 1988. “Antoine Meillet et la sémantique”. Histoire Epistémologie Langage (“Antoine Meillet et la linguistique de son temps”) 10:2.25–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delesalle, Simone & Jean-Claude Chevalier. 1986. La linguistique, la grammaire et l’école, 1750–1914. Paris: Colin.Google Scholar
Desmet, Piet & Pierre Swiggers, eds. 1995. De la grammaire comparée à la sémantique. Textes de Michel Bréal publiés entre 1864 et 1898. Introduction, commentaires et bibliographie par Piet Desmet et Pierre Swiggers. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
Dirven, René. 1985. “Metaphor as a Basic Means for Extending the Lexicon”. The Ubiquity of Metaphor, ed. by Wolf Paprotté & René Dirven, 85–119. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Marsais, [César Chesneau]. 1977[1730]. Traité des Tropes ou des différents sens dans lesquels on peut prendre un même mot dans une même langue. Postface de Claude Mouchard, suivi de Jean Paulhan, Traité des Figures ou La Rhétorique décryptée. Paris: Le Nouveau Commerce.Google Scholar
Erdmann, Karl Otto. 1910[1900]. Die Bedeutung des Wortes. Aufsätze aus dem Grenzgebiet der Sprachpsychologie und Logik. 21. Aufl. Leipzig: Eduard Avenarius. (1st ed., Leipzig: Haessel; 3rd ed., 1922, 4th ed., 1925.)Google Scholar
Fass, Dan. 1991. “Metonymy, Case Role Substitution and Sense Ambiguity”. Proceedings of the IJCAI Workshop on Computational Approaches to Non-Literal Language: Metaphor, metonymy, iiom, speech acts and implicative, held at the Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 24 August 1991, Sydney, Australia, ed. by Dan Fass, Elizabeth Hinkelman & James Martin, 42–51. Boulder, Colo.: Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Colorado.Google Scholar
Firth, John Rupert. 1957[1935]. “The Use and Distribution of Certain English Sounds”. Papers in Linguistics 1934–1951, 34–46. London: Oxford Univ. Press. (First published in English Studies 17:1.34–46.)Google Scholar
Gardiner, (Sir) Alan Henderson. 1951[1932]. The Theory of Speech and Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press. (2nd ed., with additions [pp. 328–344], 1951; repr., 1963.)Google Scholar
. ms. [1933]. Discussion on Linguistic Theory at the Philological Society, 1 December 1933. Unpublished paper kept at the Griffith Institute, Oxford: AHG/45.
Geeraerts, Dirk. 1988. “Cognitive Grammar and the History of Lexical Semantics”. Topics in Cognitive Linguistics, ed. by Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn, 647–678. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1994. “Polysemy”. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics ed. by R. E. Asher & J. M. Y. Simpson, 3227–3228. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
. 1997. Diachronic Prototype Semantics. A contribution to historical lexicology. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W. 1994. The Poetics of Mind. Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Gilliéron, Jules Louis. 1918. Généalogie des mots qui désignent l’ABEILLE d’après l’Atlas Linguistique de la France. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Girard, Abbé Gabriel. 1718. La Justesse de la langue françoise, ou les Différentes significations des mots qui passent pour synonymes. Paris: L. d’Houry. [Reedited, extended, etc. by abbé d’Olivet, Beauzée, et al. until 1855; Adaptation to the English language, 1776.]Google Scholar
Guiraud, Pierre. 1972. La Sémantique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
HaBler, Gerda. 1991. Der semantische Wertbegriff in Sprachtheorien vom 18. zum 20. Jahrhundert. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
Hey, O[skar]. 1898. Review of Bréal 1897. Archiv für Lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik 101.551–555.Google Scholar
Hiorth, Finngeir. 1955. “Arrangements of Meanings in Lexicography”. Lingua 41.413–424. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Householder, Fred W. 1995. “Plato and His Predecessors”. Concise History of the Language Sciences ed. by E. F. K. Koėrner & R. E. Asher, 90–93. Oxford & New York: Pergamon. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Husserl, Edmund. 1970[1913]. Logical Investigations. 21 vols. Transl. by, J. N. Findlay from the second German edition. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Jaberg, Karl. 1901, 1903, 1905. “Pejorative Bedeutungsentwicklung im Französischen, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung allgemeiner Fragen der Semasiologie”. Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 251.561–601; 271.25–71; 291.57–71. (Diss., Univ. of Bern.)Google Scholar
Kacmarek, Ludger. 1994. “Repräsentation und Simulation: Theoretische Konzeptionen und historische Rückgriffe”. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft 4:2.183–212.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam. 1992. Polysemy. Ph.D. thesis, School of Cognitive & Computing Science, Univ.of Sussex, Brighton.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam & Gerald Gazdar. 1995. “Polysemous Relations”. Grammar and Meaning: Essays in honour of Sir John Lyons ed. by Frank R. Palmer, 1–25. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knobloch, Clemens. 1988. Geschichte der psychologischen Sprachauffassung in Deutschland von 1850 bis 1920. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1991. “Introduction”. Wegener 1991[1885].xi–li. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lamy, Bernard. 1699. La Rhétorique, ou l’ art de parler. Quatrième éd., revuё & augmentée d’un tiers. Amsterdam: Paul Marret. (Facs.-repr., Brighton: Univ. of Sussex Library, 1969.)Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Vol. II1. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1921. Linguistique historique et linguistique générale. [Vol. I1]. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Menner, Robert. 1945. “Multiple Meaning and Change of Meaning in English”. Language 211.59–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mercier, Louis-Sébastian. 1801. Néologie ou Vocabulaire de mots nouveaux, à renouveler ou pris dans des acceptions nouvelles. 21 vols. Paris: Moussard.Google Scholar
Müller, Friedrich Max. 1877[1864]. The Science of Language. 9th ed. in 21 vols. Vol. II1. London: Longmans, Green & Co.Google Scholar
Nerlich, Brigitte. 1990. Change in Language. Whitney, Bréal and Wegener. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 1992. Semantic Theories in Europe, 1830–1930. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nerlich, Brigitte & David D. Clarke. 1996. Language, Action, and Context. The early history of pragmatics in Europe and America, 1780–1930. Ibid.Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R. 1981. Semiotic Principles in Semantic Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, George. 1979. “The Non-uniqueness of Semantic Solutions: Polysemy”. Linguistics and Philosophy 31.143–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nyrop, Kristoffer. 1913. Sémantique. [= Vol. IV of his Grammaire historique de la langue française .] Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel Nordisk Forlag.Google Scholar
The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. Prepared by J. A. Simpson & E. S. C. Weiner, vol. XII1: Poise-Quilt. Oxford. Clarendon Press, 1989.Google Scholar
Ostler, Nick & Steven Atkins. 1991. “Predictable Meaning Shift: Some linguistic properties of lexical implication rules”. Lexical Semantics and Knowledge Representation ed. by James Pustejovsky & Sabine Bergler, 87–100. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Paul, Hermann. 1975[5 1920, 1 1880]. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. 9th ed. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. (2nd enl. ed., 1886.]Google Scholar
. 1891[1886]. Principles of the History of Language. Transl. from the second edition of the original by Herbert A. Strong. New and revised ed. London & New York: Longman, Green & Co.Google Scholar
Pott, August Friedrich. 1833–1836. Etymologische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der Indo-Germanischen Sprachen, mit besonderem Bezug auf die Lautumwandlung im Sanskrit, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Littauischen und Gothischen. 21 vols. Lemgo: Meyer’sche Hofbuchandlung.Google Scholar
. 1859–1876. Etymologische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der indogermanischen Sprachen unter Berücksichtigung ihrer Hauptformen: Sanskrit; Zend-Persisch; Griechisch-Lateinisch; Littauisch-Slawisch; Germanisch und Keltisch. 6 Bde. 2. Aufl. in völlig neuer Umarbeitung. Erster Theil: Präpositionen. Zweiter Theil erste Abtheilung: Wurzeln; Einleitung. Lemgo & Detmold: Meyer’sche Hofbuchhandlung. [Vols. 2–51 have added titlepage: Wurzel-Wörterbuch der indogermanischen Sprachen.]Google Scholar
. 1861. Etymologische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der Indo-Germanischen Sprachen, unter Berücksichtigung ihrer Hauptformen, Sanskrit; [etc.] 2nd. ed. Zweiten Theiles erste Abtheilung: Wurzeln; Einleitung. Lemgo & Detmold: Meyersche Hofbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
. 1880[1876]. Wilhelm von Humboldt und die Sprachwissenschaft 2nd. ed. Berlin: Calvary. [Einleitung to republication of Humboldt, Über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaus (1836).]Google Scholar
. 1884. “Einleitung in die allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft”. Internationale Zeitschrift für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft 11.1–68.Google Scholar
. 1886. Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft und Carl Abels aegyptische Sprachstudien. Leipzig: W. Friedrich.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, Mass. & London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1996. Interview with Dutch student magazin on computational linguistics. Ta! [URL]
Pustejovsky, James & Pierrette Bouillon. 1995. “Aspectual Coercion and Logical Polysemy”. Journal of Semantics 12:2.133–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, James & Branimir Boguraev, eds. 1997. Lexical Semantics. The problem of polysemy. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Reisig, Christian Karl. 1890[1839]. Vorlesungen über lateinische Sprachwissenschaft. Mit den Anmerkungen von Friedlich Haase. Unter Benutzung der hinterlassenen Manuskripte neu bearbeitet von Hermann Hagen. Zweiter Bd.: Lateinische Semasiologie oder Bedeutungslehre. Neu bearbeitet von Ferdinand Heerdegen. Berlin: Calvary.Google Scholar
Ricken, Ulrich [ et al.]. 1983. Französische Lexikologie: Eine Einführung. (Von einem Autorenkollektiv unter Leitung von Ulrich Ricken). Leipzig: VEB Verlag.Google Scholar
Ritter, Joachim & Kailfried Gründer, eds. 1995. Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, vol. IX1: Se-Sp. Basel: Schwabe & Co.Google Scholar
Robins, Robert H. 1987. “Polysemy and the Lexicographer”. Studies in Lexicography ed. by Robert Burchfield, 52–75. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Rudskoger, Arne. 1952. Fair, Foul, Nice, Proper: A contribution to the study of polysemy. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
. 1970. Plain: A study in co-text and context. Ibid.Google Scholar
Schlegel, August Wilhelm von. 1832. Réflexions sur l’étude des langues asiatiques adressées à Sir James Mackintosh, suivies d’une lettre à M. Horace Hayman Wilson. Bonn: Weber; Paris: Maze.Google Scholar
Schmitter, Peter. 1995. “Von der Hermeneutik zur Semasiologie: Aspekte der Entwicklung von semantischen Forschungsprogrammen in der Zeit um 1800”. Panorama der Lexikalischen Semantik: Thematische Festschrift aus Anlaß des 60. Geburtstags von Horst Geckeier ed. by Ulrich Hoinkes, 589–603. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Sommerfelt, Alf. 1954. “Sémantique et lexicographie”. Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap 171.485–489.Google Scholar
Steinthal, Heymann. 1860. “Ueber den Wandel der Laute und Begriffe”. Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie 11.416–432.Google Scholar
Stern, Gustaf. 1931. Meaning and Change of Meaning. With special reference to the English language. Göteborg: Elanders Boktryckeri Aktiebolag. (Repr., Bloomington & London: Indiana Univ. Press, 1968.)Google Scholar
Stock, Penelope F. 1984. “Polysemy”. LEXeter’83 Proceedings. Papers from the International Conference on Lexicography at Exeter, 9–12 September 1983 ed. by R. R. K. Hartmann, 131–140. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swiggers, Pierre. 1995. “L’étymologie: Les transformations de l’étude historique du vocabulaire aux Temps Modernes”. Sprachtheorien der Neuzeit II. Von der Grammaire de Port-Royal (1660) zur Konstitution moderner linguistischer Disziplinen ed. by Peter Schmitter, 352–385. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Turgot, [Anne Robert Jacques, baron de l’Aulne]. 1967[1756]. “Etymologie”. Encyclopédie, ou Dictionnaire Raisonné des Sciences, des Arts et des Métiers. Tome Sixième. Nouvelle impression en facsimilé de la première édition 1751–1780, 98a–111b. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Friedrich Frommann (Günther Holzboog).Google Scholar
Ullmann, Stephen. 1951. The Principles of Semantics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell; Glasgow: Jackson, Sons & Co.Google Scholar
Warren, Beatrice. 1992. Sense Developments. A contrastive study of the development of slang Senses and novel standard snses in English. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Wegener, Philipp. 1991 [1885]. Untersuchungen über die Grundfragen des Sprachlebens. New ed., with an English introduction by Clemens Knobloch, prepared by Konrad Koerner. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Lu, Huaguo, Ya Zhang & Xia Hao
2020. The Contribution of Cognitive Linguistics to the Acquisition of Polysemy: A Dictionary Entry-Based Study with Chinese Learners of English. International Journal of Lexicography 33:3 ► pp. 306 ff. DOI logo
Jansegers, Marlies, Clara Vanderschueren & Renata Enghels
2015. The polysemy of the Spanish verb sentir: A behavioral profile analysis. Cognitive Linguistics 26:3 ► pp. 381 ff. DOI logo
Bertels, Ann & Dirk Speelman
2012. La contribution des cooccurrences de deuxième ordre à l’analyse sémantique. Corpus :11 DOI logo
Nerlich, Brigitte
2000.  Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft in Deutschland: Vom Mittelalter bis ins 20. Jahrhundert. By Andreas Gardt. Historiographia Linguistica 27:1 ► pp. 155 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.