ibed in terms of such features as, e.g., form and function (cf. horn of an animal and horn as an instrument), process and result (to run-move with quick steps and a run-act of running).more objective criterion of distribution suggested by some linguists is criteria: undoubtedly helpful, but mainly increase-distribution of lexico - grammatical and grammatical homonymy. In the homonymic pair paper n-(to) paper v the noun may be decided by the article and followed by a verb; (to) paper can never be found in identical distribution. This formal criterion can be used to discriminate not only lexico-grammatical but also grammatical homonyms, but it often fails the linguists in cases of lexical homonymy, not differentiated by means of spelling. Some linguists hold that the basic and elementary units at the semantic level of language are the lexico-semantic variants of the word, i.e. individual word-meanings. In that case, naturally, we can speak only of homonymy of individual lexico-semantic variants, as polysemy is by definition, at least on the synchronic plane, the co-existence of several meanings in the semantic structure of the word. The criticism of this viewpoint cannot be discussed within the framework different semantic structure. The problem of homonymy is mainly the problem of differentiation between two different semantic structures of identically sounding words.
. Homonymy of words and homonymy of individual word-forms may be regarded as full and partial homonymy. Cases of full homonymy are generally observed in words belonging to the same part of speech. Partial homonymy is usually to be found in word-forms of different parts of speech.
. Homonymous words and word-forms may be classified by the type of meaning that serves to differentiate between identical sound-forms. Lexical homonyms differ in lexical meaning, lexico-grammatical in both lexical and grammatical meaning, whereas grammatical homonyms are those that differ in grammatical meaning only.
. Lexico-grammatical homonyms are not homogeneous. Homonyms arising from conversion have some related lexical meanings in their semantic structure. Though some individual meanings may be related the whole of the semantic structure of homonyms is essentially different.
. If the graphic form of homonyms is taken into account, they are classified on the basis of the three aspects - sound-form, graphic form and meaning - into three big groups: homographs (identical graphic form), homophones (identical sound-form) and perfect homonyms (identical sound- and graphic form).
. The two main sources of homonymy are:
) diverging meaning development of one polysemantic word, and
) convergent sound development of two or more different words. The latter is the most potent factor in the creation of homonyms.
. The most debatable problem of homonymy is the demarcation line between homonymy and polysemy, i.e. between different meanings of one word and the meanings of two or more phonemically different words.
. The criteria used in the synchronic analysis of homonymy are:
) the semantic criterion of related or unrelated meanings;
) the criterion of spelling;
) the criterion of distribution, and
) the criterion of context.grammatical and lexico-grammatical homonymy the reliable criterion is the criterion of distribution. In lexical homonymy there are cases when none of the criteria enumerated above is of any avail. In such cases the demarcation line between polysemy and homonymy is rather fluid.
. The problem of discriminating between polysemy and homonymy in theoretical linguistics is closely connected with the problem of the basic unit at the semantic level of analysis.applied linguistics this problem is of the greatest importance in lexicography and also in machine translation. Homonyms are words different in meaning but identical in sound or spelling, or both in sound and spelling. Homonyms can appear in the language not only as the result of the split of polysemy, but also as the result of leveling of grammar inflexions, when different parts of speech become identical in their outer aspect, e.g. care from care and care from careen. They can be also formed by means of conversion, e.g. to slim from slim, to water from water. They can be formed with the help of the same suffix from the same stem, e.g. reader - a person who reads and a book for reading.can also appear in the language accidentally, when two words coincide in their development, e.g. two native words can coincide in their outer aspects: to bear from beran /to carry/ and bear from bera /an animal/. A native word and a borrowing can coincide in their outer aspects, e.g. fair from Latin feria and fair from native fagen /blond/. Two borrowings can coincide e.g. base from the French base /Latin basis/ and base /low/ from the Latin bas /Italian basso/.can develop through shortening of different words, e.g. cab from cabriolet, cabbage, cabin. A more detailed classification was given by I.V. Arnold. He classified only perfect homonyms and suggested four criteria of their classification: lexical meaning, grammatical meaning, basic forms and paradigms.to these criteria I.V. Arnold pointed out the following groups:) homonyms identical in their grammatical meanings, basic forms and paradigms and different in their lexical meanings, e.g. board in the meanings a council and a piece of wood sawn thin;) homonyms identical in their grammatical meanings and basic forms, different in their lexical meanings and paradigms, e.g. to lie - lied - lied, and to lie - lay - lain;) homonyms different in their lexical meanings, grammatical meanings, paradigms, but coinciding in their basic forms,.g. light / lights/, light / lighter, lightest/;) homonyms different in their lexical meanings, grammatical meanings, in their basic forms and paradigms, but coinciding in one of the forms of their paradigms, e.g. a bit and bit (from to bite).I. V. Arnolds classification there are also patterned homonyms, which, differing from other homonyms, have a common component in their lexical meanings. These are homonyms formed either by means of conversion, or by leveling of grammar inflexions. These homonyms are different in their grammar meanings, in their paradigms, identical in their basic forms, e.g. warm - to warm. Here we can also have unchangeable patterned homonyms which have identical basic forms, different grammatical meanings, a common component in their lexical meanings, e.g. before an adverb, a conjunction, a disposition. There are also homonyms among unchangeable words which are different in their lexical and grammatical meanings, identical in their basic forms, e.g. for - для and for - и6o. Nowadays methods of distinction of homonymy and polysemy were worked out. This helps us to differ the meaning of the same word and homonymy which formed in a result of the complete gap of polysemy. Below let us study the methods of studying of synonymy and homonymy.
. The lexical method of distinction of homonymy and polysemy. This method is concluded in revealing the synonymic connection of polysemy and homonymy. If consonant units are get in one synonymic row when different meanings of words remain still the semantic intimacy and, there fore, it is early to say that polysemy is transferred in to homonymy. If the consonant words are not get in one synonymic row that words are homonymy.and polysemy are different categories in polysemy we deal with the different meanings of the same word. In homonymy we have different words which have their own meanings. For example, the word "man" has ten meanings in Modern English:
1 - человек; 2 - мужчина; 3 - адвокат; 4 - мужественный человек;5-человечество; 6 - слуга; 7 - рабочий; 8 - муж; 9 - вассал; 10 - пешка.
As the all meanings are connected with the major meaning "чeлoвeк". But homonyms are different words which have nothing in common between themselves. For example "bark1 - "лай собаки" and "bark2" - "плывущий корабль". In this example we can see that homonymy words coincide only in pronunciation and writing.
. Some scientists say that the substitution of different meanings of words by the synonyms may help to differ the homonyms from polysemantic words. This way of distinction of polysemy and homonymy gets its name in literature as etiological criterion. For example "voice1 - "sounds uttered in speaking" (sound); "voice2" - "mode of uttering sounds in speaking" (sound); "voice3" - the vibration of the vocal cords in sounds uttered (sound); "voice4" - "the form of the verb that excises the relation of the subject to the action". "Voice1" - "voice2" - "voice3" are not homonymic in their character although they have different meanings because of the reason that they can be substituted by the synonymic word "sound". As far as "voice4" is concerned as homonymic to the devious three meanings because the fourth meaning of the word sound can not be substituted by the word common to the devious three meanings of the word voice (i.e. the analyzed meaning of the wo