UKRAINIAN AND BELARUSIAN INTERLINGUAL HOMONYMS WITH THE RELATION OF SEMANTIC INCLUSION

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to study the semantic features of Ukrainian and Belarusian interlingual homonyms with the relation of semantic inclusion. Methods: theoretical method (definition of interlingual homonyms), component analysis (splitting of word meanings into separate semes, depending on differential features), contrastive method in combination with methods of mathematical set theory (selection, classification and systematization of factual material), structural-semantic method (determining of the type of semantic transformation of interlingual homonyms), descriptive method (description of the semantic features of selected Ukrainian and Belarusian homonyms. Results. In the course of the research, it was found out that Ukrainian and Belarusian interlingual verb homonyms with the relation of semantic inclusion most often denote various actions (physical, emotional), less often, they express a state or a transition from one state to another. Nonderivative noun homonyms, covered by semantic inclusion, describes mostly objects, their components, substances and places. The polysemy of nouns denoting beings is caused by the combination of several semes in one word or the development of figurative meanings. Nouns that form verbs or derive from them principally describe a state, a consequence of an action, a process or an object. Correlated homonymous adjectives connected by semantic inclusion mainly describe external and internal characteristics. Adverbs derived from adjectives usually also retain the relation of semantic inclusion and form homonymous pairs. Conclusions. Having analyzed the semantic features of Ukrainian and Belarusian interlingual homonyms characterized by semantic inclusion, we can state that it arises as a result of the asymmetric development of the semantic structure of etymologically related words and is observed in cases when either Ukrainian monosemantic word corresponds to Belarusian polysemantic one, or Belarusian monosemantic word corresponds to Ukrainian polysemantic one, so compared polysemantic words differ in number of lexical-semantic variants and figurative meanings, as well as when one of the lexemes has a broader meaning, or the meaning of one of them is specific and the meaning of the other is generic (provided that the lexeme with a narrower or specific meaning does not have others semes inherent only to it).