FAQ

A Comparative Analysis of Functions of Accidental Binary Oppositions from Different Semantic Levels: Functions of the Word Pairs chrześcijanin/muzułmanin and katolik/protestant in Sentences from the National Corpus of Polish

Publication date: 02.2025

Studies in Polish Linguistics, Volume 19 (2024), Vol. 19, Issue 2, pp. 85-104

https://doi.org/10.4467/23005920SPL.24.004.21186

Authors

Nawoja Mikołajczak-Matyja
Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
ul. Wieniawskiego 1 61-712 Poznań, Poland
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2282-8960 Orcid
All publications →

Download full text

Titles

A Comparative Analysis of Functions of Accidental Binary Oppositions from Different Semantic Levels: Functions of the Word Pairs chrześcijanin/muzułmanin and katolik/protestant in Sentences from the National Corpus of Polish

Abstract

The article presents a comparative analysis of two pairs of words regarded as accidental semantic binary oppositions, belonging to different levels of generality: chrześcijanin ‘Christian’ and muzułmanin ‘Muslim’ (the names of followers of two major religions) and katolik ‘Catholic’ and protestant ‘Protestant’ (hyponyms of the word chrześcijanin as the names of the main denominations within the Christian religion). The analysis sought to identify the functions performed by pairs of words connected by the relation of semantic opposition, co-occurring within a sentence. The analysis covered a set of 538 sentences selected from the balanced sub-corpus of the National Corpus of Polish. In the analysed sentences, it was possible to identify most of the functions from the sets proposed in earlier studies on inherent binary semantic oppositions. The percentage share of most functions is similar for both analysed pairs. The three most common functions are the same; moreover, they have similar or even the same relative frequence. The relations between the denotations of the members of a given pair, shown in sentences with the two most common functions, are also similar for both analysed pairs.

References

Download references

Benzine Rachid (2007). Islam. In Religie świata. Henri Tincq (ed.), 204–249. Wrocław: Larousse.

Chivot Dominique (2007). Katolicyzm. In Religie świata. Henri Tincq (ed.), 114–165. Wrocław: Larousse.

Cruse David Alan (1995). Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cruse David Alan (2000). Meaning in Language. An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Davies Matt (2012). A new approach to oppositions in discourse: The role of syntactic frames in the triggering of noncanonical oppositions. Journal of English Linguistics 40(1), 41–73.

Davies Matt (2013). Oppositions and Ideology in News Discourse. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Gheltofan Daniela (2013). Functional categories of antonymy in Romanian. In Proceedings of the Second International Colloquium Communication and Culture in European Romania (CICCRE II), 328–341. Szeged: Jatepress.

Górski Rafał L., Łaziński Marek (2012). Reprezentatywność i zrównoważenie korpusu. In Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego. Adam Przepiórkowski et al. (ed.), 25–36. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. [http://nkjp.pl/settings/papers/NKJP_ksiazka.pdf ; accessed 1 December–20 December 2023].

Hassanein Hamada (2018). Discourse functions of opposition in classical Arabic: The case in Ḥadīth genre. Lingua 201, 18–44.

Hassanein Hamada, Mahzari Mohammad (2021). A taxonomy of antonymy in Arabic: Egyptian and Saudi proverbs in comparison. Open Linguistics 7(1), 200–222.

Hsu Chan Chia (2015). A syntagmatic analysis of antonym co-occurrences in Chinese: Contrastive constructions and co-occurrence sequences. Corpora 10(1), 47–82.

Jones Steven (2002). Antonymy: A Corpus Based Perspective. London/New York: Routledge.

Jones Steven (2006). A lexico-syntactic analysis of antonym co-occurrence in spoken English. Text & Talk 26(2), 191–216.

Jones Steven (2007). ‘Opposites’ in discourse: A comparison of antonym use across four domains. Journal of Pragmatics 39(6), 1105–1119.

Jones Steven, Murphy M. Lynne (2005). Using corpora to investigate antonym acquisition. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 10(3), 401–422.

Jones Steven, Murphy M. Lynne, Paradis Carita, Willners Caroline (2012). Antonyms in English: Construals, constructions and canonicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jones Steven, Paradis Carita, Murphy M. Lynne, Willners Caroline (2007). Googling for ‘opposites’: A web-based study of antonym canonicity. Corpora 2(2), 129–154.

Kolczyńska Joanna (ed.) (2003). Religie świata. Tablice porównawcze. Warszawa: Muza SA., Bauer-Weltbild Media.

Kostić Natasza (2011). Antonymous frameworks in Serbian written discourse: Phrasal contexts of antonym co-occurrence in text. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 47(3), 509–537.

Kostić Natasza (2015). Antonymy in language use: From core members to ad hoc couplings. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 51(1), 133–161.

Information

Information: Studies in Polish Linguistics, Volume 19 (2024), Vol. 19, Issue 2, pp. 85-104

Article type: Original article

Titles:

English:
A Comparative Analysis of Functions of Accidental Binary Oppositions from Different Semantic Levels: Functions of the Word Pairs chrześcijanin/muzułmanin and katolik/protestant in Sentences from the National Corpus of Polish

Authors

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2282-8960

Nawoja Mikołajczak-Matyja
Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
ul. Wieniawskiego 1 61-712 Poznań, Poland
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2282-8960 Orcid
All publications →

Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
ul. Wieniawskiego 1 61-712 Poznań, Poland

Published at: 02.2025

Article status: Open

Licence: CC BY  licence icon

Percentage share of authors:

Nawoja Mikołajczak-Matyja (Author) - 100%

Article corrections:

-

Publication languages:

English

A Comparative Analysis of Functions of Accidental Binary Oppositions from Different Semantic Levels: Functions of the Word Pairs chrześcijanin/muzułmanin and katolik/protestant in Sentences from the National Corpus of Polish

cytuj

pobierz pliki

RIS BIB ENDNOTE