Lexico-semantic field

The totality of the lexemes denoting a certain concept in the broad sense of the word: according to modern ideas, the field includes the words of various parts of speech, with the assumption of the inclusion of phraseological and lexical materials of various forms of the national language of the national language not only literary, but also spacious, dialects, jargons) , with an appeal to historical lexical materials when orienting a diachronic study. The lexico-semantic field is characterized by a number of signs of systemic, both in a synchronous plan (semantic correction of the lexemes, "dividing" the field between them, the presence of hyponims and hyperonyms) and in the genetic-diachronic plan (a certain set of repeatedly implemented motivational models, repeatability of word formation models, repeatability producing etymological nests that generate field vocabulary)

However, due to the close relationship with unsatuctive realities, the field is an unlocked unit of organization of vocabulary and therefore significantly different from systems of other language levels (phonological, morphological)

The lexical level of the tongue is organized by the complex relations of lexico-semantic fields as related and intersecting, and coinled. Cf. Fields "Disease", "suffering", "harm", "witchcraft", "treatment", "Health".

A brief conceptual and terminological reference book on etymology and historical lexicology. - Russian Academy of Sciences, Russian Language Institute. V. V. Vinogradova RAS, Etymology and the history of the words of the Russian language. J. J. Warbot, A. F. Zhuravlev. 1998 .

Watch what is a "lexico-semantic field" in other dictionaries:

The same thing that the lexico semantic field ... Directory for these etymology and historical lexicology

semantic field - the largest vocabulary semantic paradigm, uniting the words of different parts of speech, correlated with one fragment of reality and having a general feature (general one) in the lexical meaning ...

Functional and semantic field - functionally semantic field system of multi-level means of this language (morphological, syntactic, word-formative, lexical, as well as combined vocabulary syntactic, etc.), interacting on the basis of their community ... ...

semantic field

semantic field - Onomasiological and semantic grouping of words, their hierarchical organization united generic meaning and representing a certain semantic sphere in the language. Onomasiological property of the semantic field - the presence in it ... ... Dictionary of linguistic terms T.V. Jerebilo

Field - A combination of linguistic (mainly lexical) units combined with the generality of content (sometimes also with the generality of formal indicators) and reflecting the conceptual, subject or functional similarity of the denoted phenomena. On the… … Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary

Field (Feld, Field, Champ) Semantic, combination of words united by semantic bonds at similar signs of their lexical values. For example, P. German verb Fehlen covers 7 verbs united by a sign "absent": FEHLEN ...

I Field 1) Extensive, smooth, flame space. 2) In agriculture, the pieces of arable land, which are divided by the area of \u200b\u200bcrop rotation, as well as contributing (crack) sites used for growing with. x. Plants. 3) ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

semantic lexico-grammatical field - One of the structural types of the field, which includes in its composition of different parts of speech ... Terms and concepts of linguistics: vocabulary. Lexicology. Phraseology. Lexicography

semantic lexico-word field - Structural field type, including single-roof derivatives ... Terms and concepts of linguistics: vocabulary. Lexicology. Phraseology. Lexicography

The concept of a lexic field (which a lot of attention was paid in their diachronic studies, German linguists Trier and Weiss Gerber) was proposed for the separation of a lexicon on the associated subsystems.

The lexical field has properties relating to it with thesaurus (cf. Thesaurus Roger), and differences from ordinary dictionaries, consisting in the fact that it establishes a number of semantic, cognitive, estimated and conceptual spheres within the lexicon; The dictionary, on the contrary, is organized by the usual alphabetical principle. Gartmann (Hartmann 1970) lists the studied lexical fields, to the number of which include: misconduct, joy, visual perception, sounds, facial expression, colors, food, verbs of speech, body parts, transport, cooking, seating furniture, pipe connections, and This is not all.

Most recently, the interesting example of the verbs of speech gave Leman (Lehmann 1977). Speech verbs are a conceptual verb class, moreover, the class is natural from the point of view of intuition. Their function is in the designation of speech acts, which are uniformly asked as follows: and says x V. Selection of one of the class members: say 'say', Speak 'talk', talk 'talk', Tell 'telling' - is determined by a more accurate description. . In other words, the choice of one of these four lexical implementations depends on the selected values \u200b\u200bof variables A, X, V. Some verbs of speech, for example, Answer 'answer', deny 'deny', etc., cannot be analyzed with this formula, It requires a more complex formula, which includes additional variables such as the preceding speech act and suspended spelling. Lehman establishes a number of differences between the four mentioned English verbs and their German "equivalents" Sagen, Sprechen, Erzahlen, Reden.

Say may have as a grammatical subject, "Text" or Organization:

'My mother'

'Brochure' -\u003e 'says ...'

'Scotland Yard'

Sagen prefers as a subject of a person and does not allow "text":

* Ihre Broschiire Sagt ...

'Her brochure says ...'

SPEAK denotes the ability and quality of oral communication:

NOT SPEAKS SIX LANGUAGES. He's a french speaker.

'He speaks six languages. " 'He speaks French. NOT SPEAKS WELL. He's a good speaker.

'He says well. He's a good speaker.

Talk, however, indicates the number:

He's a Great Talker.

'He is terrible Boltun'.

Reden combines Speak and Talk properties:

Er IST EIN GUTER REDNER.

He's a good speaker.

Er Redet Zu Viel.

'He says too much'.

Tell reports the fact that the addressee received information, the disposal or that it was entertained:

The Smoke Told US A New Pope Had Been Found.

'Smoke brought a message that the new Pope was elected'.

Not TOLD THE KIDS TO MAKE LESS NOISE.

'He told the children to behave trough. "

NOT TOLD HER A DIRTY JOKE.

'He told her a dirty joke. "

Sagen corresponds to Tell in its informative and imperative features:

Sein Gesicht Sagte Uns, Dafi Errgerlich War.

"According to his face it was clear that he was angry."

Er Sagte Den Kindern, Ruhig Zu Bleiben.

'He told the children to behave quietly. "

While the entertainment feature is performed by the verb of Erzahlen: Erzahl'uns Mal Eine Geschichte.

'Tell me some story.'

Not so long ago, another interesting contrasting study was performed: the lexical field of symbols of physical pain in English and Romanian languages \u200b\u200bwas analyzed (in A P C І 1 A 1974). The English part is presented with nouns: Pain 'Pain, ACHE' Pain, Headache ' headache', Stitch' Acute Pain ', Sting' Bite ', Cramp' Spasm ', Heartburn' Heartburn ', Twinge' Singing Pain, ', Sore' Sorry ', Smart' Burning Pain, Earache 'Bear Ear, Sore Throat 'sore throat'. Adding adjectives and communities, of course, would expand the list, however, limited to one grammatical class, we use a legitimate way to reduce the field volume. Insofar as german It is more famous for us than Romanian, I will use them to illustrate intersective compliances.

1) Pain, Ache, Smart, Headache, the Schmerz 'pain or schmerzen' pain with the corresponding definitions. So, for the transfer of Headache and Sore Throat, the words kopf- 'head and hals-' throat are going on; According to the form kopfschmerzen 'and halsschmerzen' headache, and halsschmerzen 'pain in the throat' (in both cases, the multiple morphem is added). The SMART word is transmitted using the Schmerz word with the definition: Heftiger Schmerz 'Strong Pain' (in the singular).

2) STITCH, TWINGE, STING, PRICK words are transmitted by the word Stich 'Cross' with an occasional name definition, Stitch is often transmitted as seitenstich - 'College in Side', Sting - Through the name of a terrible insect: Wespenstich 'Orsine bite'.

3) CRAMP is KRAMPF (EN) 'spasm (s)', a Heartburn 'heartburn' is a complex word consisting of morphemes that designate boiling and burning, - Sodbrennen.

The first impression of this type is a somewhat artificial nature of restrictions on it imposed. What are the objective principles for choosing a lexical field? The basis of such a choice may be as follows in the field of human and education human behavior of concepts. Even if we assume that it is permissible, and find that our idea of \u200b\u200bthe "sphere of human manifestations" coincides with the ideas of other people, we still have to solve the problem that to include and what not to include in the lexical field. We can agree that the word Depression 'Depression does not belong to the field of physical pain, but what to do with the words Lumbago' Stroke ', Neuralgia' Neuralgia ', Piles' Hemorrhoid', Constipation 'Stop'? Maybe it is not illness, but malaise? Maybe this is not the pain actually, but the causes of pain? All these are philosophical issues, and linguistics are at least not able to give them clear answers. The description tool that is available at the disposal of linguistic semantics is a component analysis to which we turn.

1. Pokrovsky fields - stand out on the basis of joint use of three criteria: a) thematic group (words refer to the same circle of representations); b) synonymy; c) Morphological relations - groupings on the principle of activities, tools, ways of activity, etc. (words are grouped in such a way that they have general indicators in their form - suffixes, etc. or express more complex relationships, for example, the uniform names of nouns and verbs) .

2. Fields y. Trill - divided into lexical and conceptual. The conceptual field is an extensive system of interrelated concepts organized around the central concept, for example, "Mind, Mind." The lexical field is formed by any one word and his "family of words". A certain lexical field covers only a part of the conceptual field, the other part of the latter is covered with another lexical field, etc. The conceptual field is in the form of an expression composed like a mosaic. Trier divides the whole dictionary to the fields of the highest rank, then dismembers them on the fields of lower rank, until it reaches separate words. The word plays a subordinate role in his system. The entered triral principle emphasized contrasted with the study of vocabulary in connection with the subjects of the material world. This concept was subjected to a sharp criticism of researchers from different directions. The named principle of fields retains a certain meaning when studying the phenomena of spiritual culture and their expressions in the language.

3. PORSIGA fields - "elementary semantic fields", the core of which is either a verb, or adjective, as they can be a surehead, "perform a predicative function". The word "grab" necessarily implies in the presence of the word "hand". But the reverse attitude of the place has no place. Using the method of portion fields, the semantic combination of the word is studied (for example, this noun with all verbs and adjectives).

4. Associative type fields (for example, "flakes - snow"). One of the fields of associative type is, in particular, the semantic field of the concept "Music5 in the work of A. Blok. We will analyze this field in more detail.

The vocabulary is a combination of private systems, or subsystems, called semantic fields, within which the words are associated with associative or structural relations, among which, in particular, one can allocate the relations of mutual opposition of Kobzev, I.M. Linguistic semantics [Text]: Tutorial / I.M. Kobzev. - M.: Aiditaryant URSS, 2000 .. According to the theory of I. Trira, for each "conceptual field", corresponding to a certain sphere of concepts, as it should be superimposed by words membering without residue and forming a "verbal" field. At the same time, each word gets meaning only as part of the corresponding field. The native speaker fully knows the meaning of the word only if it is known for the values \u200b\u200bof other words from the same field. The initial theoretical understanding of the concept of the field in the language was kept in the works of I. Trira, the city of Ipsen, where it received the name of the "lexico-semantic field" Kronhauses, M.A. Semantics [Text]: Textbook for universities / MA Kronhauses. - M.: Ros. State Humanite. University, 2001 ..

The lexico-semantic field is characterized by the following main properties:

1) the presence of semantic relations (correlations) between the components by him;

2) the systemic nature of these relationships;

3) interdependence and mutually definition of lexical units;

4) relative autonomy of the field;

5) the continuity of the designation of its semantic space;

6) the interconnection of semantic fields within the entire lexical system (total dictionary) Kobzev, I.M. Linguistic semantics [Text]: Tutorial / I.M. Kobzev. - M.: Editorial Urals, 2000 ..

The study of the lexico-semantic language system in modern linguistics often occurs with the involvement of the analysis of words built in the form of lexico-semantic fields.

The field description of the vocabulary, widespread in linguistics, takes in semyasiology and is associated, first of all, with the names of J. Trier, the city of Ipsen (in the works of which the name "Senthetic field"), V. Porciga, E. Rosernna, . Duhachek, L. Weisgerbera, H. Hekkeler, etc. Ebert, T.V. Semantics and valence of verbs of the lexico-semantic field Lieben: author. dis. ... Cand. philol. Science / T.V. Ebert. - Tambov, 2003 .. Later, this approach began to be used to describe lexical groups and paradigms, paradigmatic fields, grammatical fields, syntactic fields, grammatical and lexic fields, etc. Murals, R.Z. Lexico-grammatical discharges in grammar and word formation / R.Z. Morayov // Questions of Linguistics. - 1999. - № 4 ..

Under the field it is understood as a "a set of language (mainly lexical) units, combined with the generality of content (sometimes the duty of formal indicators) and reflecting the conceptual, subject or functional similarity of the indicated phenomena" Linguistics: Big Encyclopedic Dictionary / Ch. ed. V.N. Yartseva. - 2nd ed. - M.: Large Russian Encyclopedia, 2000. P. 380.

The lexico-semantic field and the lexico-semantic group are not homogeneous lexico-semantic systems. Field in contrast

the group is a system consisting of formations, inhomogeneous by the nature of the links between the components of them with elements (LSGs, synonymic rows, etc.).

According to A.A. Ufimtseva, "As part of lexico-semantic fields, the lexical values \u200b\u200bof individual words are combined on the basis of at least one common seed, the same mechanism for combining the lexical meaning of words belonging to the same part of speech is applied in the composition of the lexico-semantic groups. those. characterized by a certain generality of them grammatical values ("Subject" - for nouns, "sign" - for the names of adjectives, "action" or "state" - for verbs, etc.) "Ufimtseva, A.A. Word in the lexical and semantic language system /

A.A. Ufimseva. - M., 1968.S.58.

Special lexical association is a synonymous series. It should be noted that the group, the subgroup and the synonymic range are allocated to different bases. In order to combine words into a group, it is enough for one common semantic sign in their meaning. The volume of lexical association depends on what characteristic or sem. The practical admission of the establishment of synonymous relationship is to receive replacement in the context of one word to others. Therefore, the synonymic row may include lexemes belonging to different lexico-semantic groups and are located on the periphery in the zone of intersection of the series, subgroups, lexico-semantic groups of Korsakov Yu. S. The possibilities of a systemic approach in the analysis of lexical material // Questions modern science and practices. - No. 4. - 2006. P. 114-115 ..

Thus, under the field it is understood as the "a set of language units, combined with the general content (sometimes also the responsibility of formal indicators) and reflecting the conceptual, subject or functional similarity of the denoted phenomena." The lexico-semantic field and the lexico-semantic group are not homogeneous lexico-semantic systems. The field, in contrast to the group, is a system consisting of formations inhomogeneous by the nature of the links between the components of them with elements (LSGs, synonymic rows, etc.).

The field approach to the description of the language phenomena received widespread in modern linguistics. Binding in Semyasiology and binding to the names of I. Trira and V. Porciga, this approach has spread to a wide range of phenomena - lexical groups or paradigms, paradigmatic fields (triger, Gudenaf, Launsbury, cosque), syntactic fields (Porcig, Weisgerber), grammatical fields (Adgmonti), grammatical lexical fields (Gulga, Shendels), functional and semantic fields (Bondarko) and others.

In modern linguistics, both separate language fields and the field nature of the language as a whole are intensively investigated. The conducted studies show the fruitfulness of the field model of the language system, which represents the language system as a continuous set of fields, passing into each other with their peripheral zones and have a multi-level character.

The field concept of the language allows you to solve a number of questions that are intractable in the framework of the traditional stratification and level concept (Popov, Sternor,). It has sufficient explanatory force - on the one hand, and methodological value - on the other: confirmation in practical studies of the field organization of the language can be extrapolated to the field of the method, i.e., the field principle can be applied as a general reception of analyzing language phenomena and categories, Including the lexical meaning of the word.

As shown by the main works in this area (Admenoni, 1964; Gulga, Shendels, 1969; Bondarko, 1971, 1972, 1983; Kuznetsova, 1981), the main provisions of the field concept of the language are the following:

• 1. The field is an inventory of elements related to the system relationship.
• 2. The elements forming the field have semantic communities and perform a single function in the language.
• 3. The field combines homogeneous and heterogeneous elements.
• 4. The field is formed from component parts - micropoles, the number of which should be at least two.
• 5. The field has a vertical and horizontal organization. The vertical organization is the structure of the micropoles, horizontal - the relationship of the micropoles.
• 6. The field of fields are allocated nuclear and peripheral constituents. The kernel is consolidated around the dominant comp co.
• 7. Nuclear constitues perform the field function most unambiguously, most frequently compared to other constituents and are required for this field.
• 8. There is a distribution of the functions performed between the core and the periphery: part of the functions fall on the kernel, part of the periphery.
• 9. The boundary between the core and the periphery is blurred.
• 10. Constitutions of the field can belong to the kernel of one field and the periphery of another field or fields.
• 11. Equal fields Partly superimposed on each other, forming the zones of gradual transitions, which is the law of the field organization of the language system.

Thus, the field is of great interest for linguists. When describing language phenomena, the field approach is very fruitful because it helps to identify the system organization of the language. It optimally corresponds at the present stage of the development of a linguistic theory to the tasks of illumination of the object of study in its universal and specific language characteristics with equal, mutual consecutive discreteness of the components of its "units" and the continuality of the language system is one of the most important leaders of its integrity. The idea of \u200b\u200ba field organization of links between language phenomena, originally developed in relation to lexical material in the works of German scientists (IPSEN, Y. Trier, V. Porcig) was then rethought into the general principle of the structure of the language system.

In the domestic and foreign scientific literature there are many field theories. Researchers of Flebenza, Pokrovsky, Meyer, Schperberg, IPSEN allocated some patterns of semantic ties between units of language, as well as types of semantic fields.

R. Meyer allocates three types of semantic fields:

• 1) Natural (titles of trees, animals, parts of the body, sensual perceptions, etc.)
• 2) Artificial (names of military ranks, components of mechanisms, etc.)
• 3) Heather-fulfilling (terminology of hunters or fishermen, ethical concepts, etc.)

The semantic class it defines as "ordering of a certain number of expressions from one or another point of view, i.e. From the point of view of any one semantic sign, which the author calls a differentiating factor. According to R. Meira, the task of semyasiology is "to establish the belonging of each word to a system or another and identify the system-forming, differentiating factor of this system." .

Further study of vocabulary from the point of view of semantic fields is associated with the name J. Trier, who used the term "semantic field", first appeared in the works of Ipsen. In its definition, the semantic field is a set of words with a common meaning.

Trill Theory is closely related to the teachings of V. Humboldt on the inner form of the language and the provisions of F. de Sosurira about language significance. Trier comes from understanding the synchronous state of the language as a closed stable system, which determines the essence of all its components. According to Trill, "the words of this or that language are not separate media of the meaning, each of them, on the contrary, makes sense only because they also have other, adjacent words with him." Trier divided the concepts of "lexical" and "conceptual" field and introduced these terms in everyday life. According to the theory of Trill, the field consists of elementary units - concepts and words. In this case, the composite components of the verbal field completely cover the sphere of the corresponding concept field.

Trier implies full parallelism between conceptual and verbal fields. It is believed that the recognition of the absolute parallelism between verbal and lexical fields led to the main mistake of y.rir. In this case, it means the position according to which the inner form of the language affects, or rather, causes a linguistic picture of the carriers.

Triral theory criticized in several parameters: for the logical, and not the language character of the fields allocated to them; for an idealistic understanding of the ratio of language, thinking and real reality; For the fact that Trier considered the field of a closed word group; For the fact that Trier actually ignored polishemia and specific ties of words; for allowing full parallelism between verbal and conceptual fields; for rejected the meaning of the word as an independent unit (Trier believed that the meaning of the word is determined by its environment); For the fact that he studied only names (mainly nouns and adjectives), leaving the verbs and sustainable combinations of words.

But, despite such tough criticism, the trira works became an incentive for further research on the field structure.

Thus, there are two ways in the study and development of the theory of semantic fields. Some scientists (L.V.Visberg, K. Tining, etc.) studied paradigmatic relations between lexical units of the language, i.e. paradigmatic fields. Others (V.Torchig) were engaged in the study of syntagmatic relations and fields. Integrated fields were also studied - these are classes of words related and paradigmatic, and syntagmatic relations.

Paradigmatic fields include the most diverse classes of lexical units identical in one way or another semantic signs (semam); Lexico-semantic groups of words (LSGs), synonyms, antonyms, aggregates associated with each other of the values \u200b\u200bof the polishamantic word (semanthemia), word-forming paradigms, parts of speech and their grammatical categories.

How LSG interpret language fields (although not all of them are so called) L.Vesherberber, Iipsen, K. Tining, E. Skar, O. Duhachek, K.Heiz, A.A.Ufimtseva, V.I.Kodukhov and many Others.

So, for example, K. Tining, exploring modern German and English, recognizes the existence of intersecting groups. He analyzes along with the names of other parts of speech, including prepositions, unions and grammatical means of expressions of joy.

In principle, the approach of the room (who studied a group of words with the meaning of joy) of joy is not much different from the approach of Y.Trir (he studied a group of words with the meaning of the mind), since both approaches have a certain extent an extralynguistic nature. In Y.Trir, he has a logical, and K. Trojnang is a psychological color. K. Tining believes that words from the point of view of semantics are included in different groups, and their semantics depends on the context, while y.r. the word and its characteristic depend on the place in the system or from the place in the field. But both of them believe that the field characteristic is the presence of the general values \u200b\u200bof the lexing included in it.

The most deep theory of LSG was developed in research L. Weisgerbera, F.P. Filina and S.D. Chancelson.

The concept of verbal fields of L. Weisgerbera is very close to the concept of J. Trill. L. Weisgerber also believes that the meaning of the word is not an independent unit of the field, but a structural component. "The verbal field lives as a whole, it indicates," therefore, to understand the value of its separate component, you must submit to the entire field and find the place of this component in its structure. "

Each people have their own principles of the membership of the outside world, their surrounding reality, so semantic systems of different languages \u200b\u200bdo not coincide. Therefore, it is necessary to look for the principles of dividing the vocabulary on the fields in the very language.

Researcher F.P. Filin with the membership of the language system uses the concept of "lexico-semantic groups". Under the LSG he understands "lexical associations with homogeneous values \u200b\u200bcompared", representing a "specific phenomenon of the language due to its historical Development” .

The varieties of LSGs, as it believes, are synonymic rows, antonyms and even lexical groups with Rhodovidal relations. From LSG F.P. Filin limits the wordwork ("socket") to combine words, grammatical classes, complexes of meaningful words and thematic groups (for example, the names of the parts of the human body, the terms of cattle breeding). These thematic groups are usually crossed and even sometimes completely coincide with LSGs.

The gradation of thematic groups from other lexical groups is associated with certain difficulties. However, researchers of the 20th century were identified criteria for the selection of thematic groups and their distinctive features:

Disabled conditionality of relations between its elements. In contrast, for example, from LSP, which is an ordered multiple verbal signs, thematic group It is a combination of material or ideal denotates denoted by verbal signs - this is the diversity of relations between its members or their complete absence.

Similar or identical, at first glance, a group can form different lexical groups. If it is necessary to consider the structural and semantic relations between the terms of kinship in the same language or different languages, We get a lot of verbal signs: Father, mother, brother, sister, son, daughter, etc., forming the field. The title (name) of the thematic group is, as a rule, words (and not artificial education) - "Transport", etc. It follows from this that the concept of "thematic group" is closely in contact with the concept of "semantic field".

Along with the interpretation of the field as a paradigmatic phenomenon, more and more works appear in which the most different syntactic complexes are interpreted as fields and in which an attempt is made to combine the analysis of paradigmatic and syntagmatic fields.

The term "syntagmatic field" (or the syntactic field) was introduced by Porcig. V. Under the term "syntagmatic field" was understood as phrases and syntactic complexes, which clearly appeared the possibility of semantic compatibility of components.

Syntagmatic fields reflect the groupings of two types:

• 1) the words combined in syntagma only on the basis of the generality of their syntagmatic seven, i.e. Semantic combination. Such, for example, include groups of type "Land + predicate", "Subject + predicate + object", "subject + predicate + attribute";
• 2) the words combined in syntagma on the basis of the generality of their regulatory valence properties (lexical and grammatical compilation). Such includes groups of type "noun + adjective", "verb + adverb."

Russian Linguist Vasilyev L.M. It highlights another type of fields - complex. He suggests that when adding paradigmatic and syntagmatic semantic fields, complex fields are formed. Such fields are, for example, word-forming rows, including words of different parts of speech together with their paradigmatic correlates (for example, teacher / teacher ... / teaches (instructs ... / student / student ... /).

So, for example, the field "Fashion" in english language refers to complex fields, because It consists of a wide variety of classes of lexical units, identical on the semantic basis and combined with a syntactic value.

The term "Associative Field" received a large distribution in the linguistics, introduced by S. Balli. This term, thanks to new research in the field of psychology, is sometimes used as a synonym for the term "semantic field".

The most attention to this issue began to be given at the beginning of the twentieth century. This was originally engaged in physics and psychologists, especially in the US and Germany. One of the most influential experiment of the city of Bank and A. Rosanova (1910), conducted on 1000 informants with a real psyche. Since that time, the list of words - stimulants, compiled by G. Bente and A. Rosanov, is based on the lists of words - incentives of other researchers who want not only to study the nature of mental associations, but also consider lexical associations as an indicator of linguistic development and the formation of concepts from the subjects .

This approach makes it possible to detect the dependence of lexical associations from various factors, such as age-related, gender, geographical, etc.

Sometimes instead of the term "associative field" uses the term "semantic field". The peculiarity of semantic fields of this kind is that when they are established, the word-stimulus and its associates are consciously used, and the establishment of the field volume occurs as a result of the experiment with the subject, therefore relies on the analysis of not the text, but the psyche of people participating in the experiment.

Thus, depending on the basis for the basis of the classification, linguistic scientists allocate different types Fields: lexico-semantic fields, lexico-semantic groups, thematic series, syntagmatic, complex and associative fields, etc. There are currently no uniform type of groupings and generally accepted criteria for their allocation.

However, it was the vocabulary-semantic field that is the most convenient unit for consideration of vocabulary on thematic groups.