COMPONENTIAL ANALYSIS AS A METHODOLOGY IN LINGUISTIC SEMANTICS
Keywords:
Componential analysis, semantic features, structural semantics, lexical field theory, semes, binary matrices, computational lexicography, cognitive semantics.Abstract
This article provides a rigorous epistemological and methodological investigation into Componential Analysis (CA) within the paradigm of structural and lexical semantics. The research evaluates the historical development, structural mechanics, operational algorithms, and empirical validity of decomposing lexical meanings into atomic semantic features, conventionally termed semes or semantic components. By operationalizing binary algebraic matrices across distinct closed-class and open-class semantic fields (kinship, culinary lexemes, and motion verbs), this study contrasts the North American anthropological onomasiological tradition with the European semasiological approach. The findings confirm that while CA yields high mathematical precision, objective systematicity, and optimal utility for computational lexicography, its classic binary formulation encounters distinct empirical boundaries when confronted with non-discreet, fuzzy, and culturally shifting boundaries. The study argues for an integrated structural-cognitive framework to maximize the descriptive adequacy of modern semantic models.
References
Goodenough, W. H. Componential Analysis and the Study of Meaning. Language, 1956, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 195–216.
Geeraerts, D. Theories of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 68–81.
Hjelmslev, L. Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1963, pp. 65–78.
Olatayo, M. D. A. A. The Role of Componential Analysis in Modern Semantic Theory: Strengths and Limitations. ResearchGate / International Journal of Business Humanities and Linguistics, 2025, pp. 1–12.
Pottier, B. Vers une sémantique moderne. Travaux de linguistique et de littérature, 1964, vol. 2, pp. 107–137.
Nida, E. A. Componential Analysis of Meaning: An Introduction to Semantic Structures. The Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1975, pp. 32–64.
Kreidler, C. W. Introducing English Semantics. London: Routledge, 2002, pp. 85–94.
Coseriu, E. Lexikalische Solidaritäten. Poetica, 1967, vol. 1, pp. 293–303.
Lounsbury, F. G. A Semantic Analysis of the Pawnee Kinship Usage. Language, 1956, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 158–194.
Katz, J. J., Fodor, J. A. The Structure of a Semantic Theory. Language, 1963, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 170–210.
Leech, G. Semantics: The Study of Meaning. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1981, pp. 89–110.
Rosch, E. Principles of Categorization. Cognition and Categorization, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1978, pp. 27–48.
Lakoff, G. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 56–73.
Cruse, D. A. Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986, pp. 265–288.






Azerbaijan
Türkiye
Uzbekistan
Kazakhstan
Turkmenistan
Kyrgyzstan
Republic of Korea
Japan
India
United States of America
Kosovo