[Lexicog] Re: lexical relation for boar - sow?

[fogunkeye at YAHOO.COM]

fogunkeye at yahoo.comfogunkeye@yahoo.com
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Litkowski <ken at clres.com>
Sender: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 17:04:58 
To: <lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Lexicog]  Re: lexical relation for boar - sow?

While this discussion has focused on just this one lexical relation, 
there are many similar cases in a dictionary where, for example, there 
will be a complementary pair of adjectives attached to a head noun. I 
would suggest two sources of great interest, the work of Igor Mel'cuk on 
lexical functions and all the "relations in the lexicon" work of Martha 
Evens and her students over the years.

     Ken

On 2/27/2012 3:18 PM, lengosi wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation of different kinds of antonyms, Richard. I found that helpful. I guess it works to a certain extent for the pair boar and sow. But on the other hand: if not sow then {boar | barrow (neutered male) | gilt (female that has not given birth)}... There seem to be too many options for them to be complementary antonyms (which you described as a 'pair' relationship). As I think of it 'gender pair' also seems to be limited in this regard. Ron, you're right--this is a mess! Is 'counterpart' too loose to describe their relationship? It seems to have the advantage of not being limited to a pair.
>
> Paul
>
> --- In lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com, "Richard Gravina"<Richard-Sue_Gravina at ...>  wrote:
>> Complementary antonyms express oppositions where the denial of one member of the pair implies the assertion of the other member. If not X then Y. Some examples in English are: alive and dead, male and female, open and shut, relinquish and retain. If a person is not dead they are alive; if a person is not male they are female, and so on. Other types of antonyms are Gradable antonyms (big and small) and Converse (buy and sell).
>>
>>
>> Boar and sow fit well as Complementary antonyms, as Robert says.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> From: Robert Hedinger
>> Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 3:58 PM
>> To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: Re: [Lexicog] lexical relation for boar - sow?
>>
>>
>>
>> Some linguists call these Complementary antonyms.
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> From: lengosi
>> Sent: Saturday, 25 February, 2012 5:29
>> To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: [Lexicog] lexical relation for boar - sow?
>>
>>
>> Is there a widely accepted lexical relation to describe male-female pairs of animals (e.g., boar and sow)? They seem to be (co)hyponyms of some sort; probably not antonyms. Specifics of a Generic (pig)?
>>
>> Well, I'll make an end of showing my ignorance. ;-) Thanks for any guidance,
>>
>> Paul
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

-- 
Ken Litkowski                     TEL.: 301-482-0237
CL Research                       EMAIL: ken at clres.com
9208 Gue Road                     Home Page: http://www.clres.com
Damascus, MD 20872-1025 USA       Blog: http://www.clres.com/blog


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lexicography/attachments/20120228/ed3655e3/attachment.htm>