英文摘要 |
This paper critically evaluates the notion of antonymous polysemy and its diachronic analysis. First, most purported cases of antonymous polysemy are argued to be more appropriately (near-)antonymous polysemy, as they are only antonymous in a broad sense and on a coarse-grained perspective on meaning.Second, the history of rǒng ‘idle; busy’ in Chinese is analyzed and contrasted with Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk’s (1998) analysis of (near-)antonymous polysemy in Cognitive Grammar, which hypothesizes that it results from the mechanism whereby the same fragment of reality can be viewed from alternative perspectives. However, more than one fragment is shown to be involved in the history of rǒng and rather than alternative perspectives, gradual meaning extensions and similar, analogy-inducing expressions are crucial. Finally, drawing on rǒng and the literature on homophony avoidance, it is hypothesized that genuine cases of antonymous polysemy (related senses that are not only opposites but also minimally different) should be rare diachronically and synchronically, because, like homophony, they are not communicatively efficient. |