1.1 Semantic change. Definition of Meaning The subject of semantic change is mainly studied by historical semantics, historical-philological semantics, historical linguistics, semasiology, etymology, onomasiology and other branches of linguistics. Bloomfield, one of the most famous and influential scholars in field of linguistics, defines semantic change as ‘innovations that change the lexical meaning rather than the grammatical meaning of a form’ (Bloomfield, 1933). In order to understand this definition properly it is necessary to introduce another term – the definition of meaning. All definitions of meaning may be subdivided in three main categories (Зыкова, 2007): - referential or analytical definitions of meaning; - functional or contextual definitions of meaning; - operational or information-oriented definitions of meaning. The essential characteristic of the referential or analytical definition is that meaning is representing relations between the three points in the basic triangle. It implies that meaning is a relation which exists between the sound-form of the word, the referent (or a concrete object it denotes) and the underlying concept (the representation of an object which occurs in human mind and singles out pivotal features of the object). This definition of meaning was introduced by O. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards in 1923 in their book “The meaning of meaning”. We will not focus on this approach to definition of meaning because from my point of view this definition is not applicable if we talk about semantic change and try to understand its nature. The functional approach suggests that meaning of any linguistic unit can be studied only in relation to other words. This definition highlights dependence of meaning of any lexical unit on the context it is used in, mainly the lexical context. Consequently, this approach is often called contextual. Through analysis of the distribution of the word (the position of the word in relation to other words) we acquire knowledge about the functions of a particular word in speech. For example, if we analyze the meaning of the verb ‘to take’ in different contexts we will observe definite differences: ‘to take a seat’ (‘to sit down’) is opposed to ‘to take to smb’ (‘to begin to like something or someone’). In this approach, meaning is understood as a function of a lexeme. I suppose that this definition is mostly applicable if we talk about linguistic reasons of semantic change as it is based on the analysis of the lexical context of the word. Operational or information-oriented definitions of meaning focus on the process of communication. This approach studies how the meaning functions in specific situation of communication rather than what meaning really is. Operational approach appeared later than the other two approaches and as a result of growing interest to the communicative aspect of the language. Information-oriented approach distinguishes between meaning and sense. According to this definition meaning is the direct information given by the constituents of the utterance and sense is the information added to the extralinguistic situation. Thus, the sentence ‘Mark came too late’ gives direct information about Mark’s late arrival. However, besides the direct information the sentence might imply that ‘Mark failed to keep his promise’, ‘Mark happened to be in accident’, ‘Mark did not want to come’, etc. Operational definition intersects with perspective on semantic change as it is provided by cognitive linguistics and we will go back to this definition later discussing extralinguistic causes of semantic change. According to Geeraerts before making classifications of semantic changes, it is important to consider some other categories connected with the definition of meaning. These categories are some factors that help us to classify semantic changes and to attribute them to particular groups. The basic distinction is a distinction between semasiological and onomasiological mechanisms. Giving a short overview of the history of study of semantic change in the 20th century Traugott highlights that these two approaches – ‘semasiological’ and ‘onomasiological’– dominate in linguistics. The semasiological approach is a perspective from form to function: scholars try to answer, how new meanings occur, how these meaning are correlated and how do they change over time while the form of the word remains relatively constant. The second one is a perspective from function to form: scholars study which words are used for expression of particular concepts. Onomasiological (or lexicogenetic) mechanisms involve changes through which a concept comes to be expressed by a new lexeme or an alternative one. This approach intersects with works on vocabulary change a lot as in the course of history the same concepts may be expressed by nonrelated, completely different forms (Traugott, 2017; Зыкова, 2007). It should be mentioned that extension of meanings of one word studied by semasiological approach is itself one of the major mechanisms that trigger onomasiological change (change of the word form while the concept stays the same). Some of the new meanings of the word whose semantics has changed might get a new lexicalization and this will be an illustration of an onomasiological change. Therefore, some of the scientists suppose that semasiological approach should be regarded as more comprehensive one and in this particular sense encompassing the onomasiological approach (Geeraerts, 2009). In this work we will be predominantly concerned with analysis within the frames of the semasiological approach and will study how different words change their meaning without changing their outer form. In order to classify the variety of semantic changes properly it is essential to make a further distinction within the range of diverse semasiological mechanisms. This distinction involves changes of denotational (or referential), connotational and pragmatic aspects of meaning (Geeraerts, 2009). Aspects of meaning are the basic factor for classification of semantic changes. Many linguists classify semantic changes according to what aspects of meaning change. The denotational aspect of meaning is the part of lexical meaning which represents a correlation between the name and the object, phenomenon, process or characteristic feature of concrete reality (or thought as such), which is denoted by the given word (Зыкова, 2007). The term ‘denotational’ originates from the English word ‘to denote’, which means ‘be a sign of, indicate, stand as a name or symbol for’. Providing an example, denotational meaning of the word ‘lifeboat’, which can be found in Collins Dictionary, is ‘a small boat that is carried on a ship, which people on the ship use to escape when the ship is in danger of sinking’. During communication significant amount of information is conveyed through the denotational aspect. The connotational aspect is the part of lexical meaning which reflects feelings, emotions, attitudes of a speaker to the topic he is talking about. Connotational aspect of meaning provides additional information during the process of communication. Types of attitude to the subject a person speaks about may also differ. Four main types may be outlined based on: 1) the emotive charge. An example might be a pair of words ‘mother’ and ‘mom’. Emotive charge is documented in dictionaries. We can see it in form of remarks ‘formal’ or ‘informal’; 2) evaluation, which may be negative or positive. Change of positive attitude to negative one or vice-versa causes such semantic changes as amelioration or deterioration of meaning. For example, from c. 1100 the word ‘knight’ had a meaning ‘military follower of a king or other superior’ (Online Etymology Dictionary). But in 500 years the meaning changed having gained more importance and in 16c. in became a rank in nobility. 3) intensity (or expressiveness), for example the verbs ‘love’ and ‘adore’ have the same denotational component but impression made by these words in the course of speech would be very different; 4) imagery, e. g. ‘to wade’ means ‘to walk with great effort’ (through mud, water). However, this word may be also used figuratively: ‘to wade through the book’). The pragmatic aspect of meaning is a part of lexical meaning that somehow provides information about the situation of communication. Pragmatic aspect may give information about ‘time and space’ relationship of the participants, information about participants and language communities they originate from, information about the tenor of discourse and register of communication. As we can see already from this definition, scholars traditionally divide the study of semantic change (change in sense) from study of vocabulary change (change in lexis) (Traugott, 2017). However, it is obvious that some overlaps between these two phenomena exist. Semantic change itself may be classified in many different ways and in the next parts of this paper Over the last 35 years or so cognitive approach is gaining strength. This approach highlights pragmatics and importance of the speaking subject as well as his hearer. According to many studies, semantic change is a product of a constant process of human communication and is defined by it. Cognitive linguistics say that there is no firmly fixed meaning of the word, the words are guides for creating meanings in our minds with help of context (Traugott, 2017). Simply put, when we speak about an apple everybody has his own picture in his mind whether this apple is red or green. Even when the context restricts this mark (e. g., it is clear that we speak about the red apple), people still may imagine differently whether this apple is big or not. So, semantic change is a change in the use of words and other speech-forms that are semantically related to them (Bloomfield, 1933). Majority of the scholars are unanimous on the issue that semantic change is a long-term process. To be exact, this change in meaning occurs very quickly in mind of a speaker or writer but years may pass till this innovation becomes part of the language. According to Bloomfield, there are three main ways to identify semantic change. Firstly, contexts of the word in the previous records. Occurrence of the word in different contexts through times gives a reason to presume that the meaning has been changed. Secondly, comparison of the meanings of the same word in several cognate languages may show some differences in meaning what indicates its change in some of these languages through times, again. The third way would be to analyze the structure of the word. This way is less obvious but if we can find some parts in the word the sum of meanings of which does not give the present meaning of the word then it would mean that the meaning changed (Bloomfield, 1933) The semantic change itself is a result in change of the use of a particular word and semantically related forms in the speech (Bloomfield, 1933). 1.2 Types of semantic change 1.3 Context 1.4 Influence of the linguistic context 1.5 Influence of the extralinguistic context
