JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE STUDIES

Polysemy in English and Kurdish Languages: Some Selected Words

Dlshad Ghali Salih

Kurdish Department, College of Education, University of Garmian

Hemn Adil Karim

Kurdish Department, College of Education, University of Garmian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25130/Lang.8.11.13

Keywords: Cyberfeminism, Cyberspace, solidarity, Emails, Rajaa Alsanea’s Girls of Riyadh

---

Abstract

This study explores the role of the internet and cyberspace, particularly through the use of emails, as a tool for feminist empowerment within Saudi Arabian society, as depicted in Rajaa Alsanea's novel Girls of Riyadh. The research aims to examine how female characters use virtual spaces to challenge and undermine patriarchal norms and expectations. By utilizing the internet's anonymity and connectivity, these women carve out a platform for self-expression, solidarity, and resistance against the oppressive structures of their society. The study finds that cyberfeminism offers a powerful means for women in conservative environments to voice their thoughts and advocate for change. Furthermore, the internet serves as a catalyst for new forms of feminist discourse and activism. The study concludes that cyberspace not only facilitates the creation of a collective feminist identity but also empowers women to redefine their roles and resist traditional societal constraints.

---

References

- Bréal, M. (1900). Semantics: Studies in the science of meaning. W. Heinemann.

- Chomsky, N. (2002). Syntactic Structures. Mouton de Gruyter. Mouton de Gruyter.

- Crystal, D. (2010, July). Semantic targeting: past, present, and future. In Aslib proceedings (Vol. 62, No. 4/5, pp. 355-365). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

- Cuyckens, H. & Zawada, B. (Eds.). (1997). Polysemy in cognitive linguistics: Selected papers from the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

- Dabrowska, E., & Divjak, D. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of cognitive linguistics. Berlín: De Gruyter Mouton.

- Dictionary, C. (2024). "Cambridge advanced learner’s dictionary." https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/nice.

- Eco, U. (1986). Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language (Vol. 398). Indiana University Press.

- Falkum, I. L., & Vicente, A. (2015). Polysemy: Current perspectives and approaches.

- Falkum, I. L. (2011). The semantics and pragmatics of polysemy: A relevance-theoretic account (Doctoral dissertation, UCL (University College London)).

- Geeraerts, D. & H. Cuyckens (Eds.) (2007), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics: 139-169. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

- Halas, A. (2016). The application of the prototype theory in lexicographic practice: a proposal of a model for lexicographic treatment of polysemy. Lexikos, 26, 124-144.

- Hazrati, Y., Yousefirad, F., Rovshan, B., & Ahmadkhani, M. R. (2016). The Study of Polysemy in the Framework of Cognitive Semantics in Azerbaijani Turkish. International Journal of English Linguistics, 6(5), 130-138.

- Israa, B. A., & Istabraq, T. J. (2017). The Ability of EFL Students to Differentiate between Homonymy and Polysemy. Journal of Language Studies, 1(1), 92-126.

- Klepousniotou, E. (2002). The processing of lexical ambiguity: Homonymy and polysemy in the mental lexicon. Brain and language, 81(1-3), 205-223.

- Johnson, M., & Lakoff, G. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago press.

- Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (2007). Polysemy, Prototypes, and Radial Categories.

- Li, Y., & Feng, Y. (2018, July). An Analysis of the Polysemy “HEAD” Based on Prototype Theory. In 4th International Conference on Arts, Design and Contemporary Education (ICADCE 2018) (pp. 386-389). Atlantis Press.

- Lopukhina, A., Laurinavichyute, A., Lopukhin, K., & Dragoy, O. (2018). The mental representation of polysemy across word classes. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 192.

- Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to theoretical linguistics (Vol. 510). Cambridge university press.

- Murphy, M. L., & Koskela, A. (2010). Key terms in semantics. A&C Black.

- Nerlich, B. (2010). Metaphor and metonymy. Historical pragmatics, 193-215.

- Pardede, H. (2016). Semantics: a view to logic of language. Pematang Siantar: FKIP Nommensen.

- Pethő, G. (2001). WHAT IS POLYSEMY?-A SURVEY OF CURRENT RESEARCH AND RESULTS¹. Pragmatics and the flexibility of word meaning, 8, 175.

- Rushdi, A. E. (2024). 4th Year EFL Iraqi Learners’ Pragmatic Failure in Polysemy. Journal of Language Studies, 8(10), 136-149.

- Sharafkandi, A. (1990). Henbaneborine, Ferheng. “Ferhengi Henbaneborine”.

- Stanojević, M. (2009). Cognitive synonymy: A general overview. FACTA UNIVERSITATIS-Linguistics and Literature, 7(2), 193-200.

- Taylor, J. R. (1989). Linguistic Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

- Vicente, A., & Ingrid L. F. (2017). "Polysemy." Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics.