Volume 9, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



A quantitative analysis of the Italian lexicon has been made, focusing on the semantic relationships of meronymy/holonymy and hyponymy/hypernymy. The study used two lexicographical sources, together representing one of the largest structured Italian datasets. Within the theoretical debate on the interface, the aforementioned semantic relationships can be particularly interesting, assuming their closeness to crucial aspects of cognition. In this framework, the collected evidence legitimates some hypotheses on the pathways that underlie lexical and semantic neology: the direction from holonym to meronym(s) appears more productive than the opposite, suggesting that the conceptualization of an object as a whole is more likely to stimulate further conceptualization of parts, members or substance. The same top-down direction from species to genus (genera), prevails in hypernyms/hyponyms. Recurring trends of use rates, first attestation dates, and correlation rates can be exploited further to discuss the issue of cognitive economy and the ways in which it manifests itself in language.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Adamo, G., & Della Valle, V.
    (Eds.) (2006) Che fine fanno i neologismi? A cento anni dalla pubblicazione del Dizionario moderno di Alfredo Panzini [What happens to the neologisms? One hundred years after the publication of Alfredo Panzini’s Modern Dictionary]. Firenze: Olschki.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Basile, G.
    (2001) Le parole nella mente. Relazioni semantiche e struttura del lessico [Words in the mind. Semantic relations and lexicon structure]. Roma: Franco Angeli.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bauer, A. J., & Just, M. A.
    (2017) A brain-based account of “basic-level” concepts. NeuroImage, 1611, 196–205. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.08.049
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.08.049 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bo, C.
    (2015) Social constructivism of language and meaning. Croatian Journal of Philosophy, 15(1), 87–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Cavallini, G.
    (1995) La formazione dei concetti scientifici. Senso comune, scienza, apprendimento [The formation of scientific concepts. Common sense, science, learning]. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. De Mauro, T.
    (1965) Introduzione alla semantica [Introduction to semantics]. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. (1999) Grande dizionario italiano dell’uso [Great Italian Dictionary.of Use]. Torino: UTET.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (2009) Basi di conoscenze e banche dati lessicali [Knowledge bases and lexical databases], inEnciclopedia dell’italiano, Treccani, www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/basi-di-conoscenze-e-banche-dati-lessicali_%28XXI-Secolo%29/
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (2010) Grande Dizionario dei Sinonimi e Contrari [Great Dictionary of Synonyms and Antonyms]. Torino: UTET.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. (2014) Nuovo De Mauro [The “Nuovo De Mauro” Dictionary]. Roma: Internazionale S.p.a., https://dizionario.internazionale.it/
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (2019) Guida all’uso delle parole [Guide to the use of words]. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fellbaum, C.
    (1998) WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database, Cambridge: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/7287.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7287.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  13. Ferreri, S.
    (2005) L’alfabetizzazione lessicale. Studi di linguistica educativa [Lexical literacy. Studies of educational linguistics]. Roma: Aracne.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. (Ed.) (2013) Lessico e lessicologia. Atti del XLIV Congresso Internazionale di studi della Società di Linguistica Italiana (SLI) (Viterbo, 27–29 settembre 2010) [Lexicon and lexicology. Proceedings of the XLIV International Study Congress of the Italian Linguistic Society (SLI)]. Roma: Bulzoni.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Kuzmenka, N.
    (2015) Meronymic structures for names denoting parts of living beings in English. Białostockie Archiwum Językowe, 151, 291–303. 10.15290/baj.2015.15.19
    https://doi.org/10.15290/baj.2015.15.19 [Google Scholar]
  16. Kwak, J. A., & Yong, H. S.
    (2010) Ontology matching based on hypernym, hyponym, holonym, and meronym sets in WordNet. International journal of Web & Semantic Technology (IJWesT), 1(2), 1–14. 10.5121/ijwest.2010.1201
    https://doi.org/10.5121/ijwest.2010.1201 [Google Scholar]
  17. Lyons, J.
    (1977) Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Prévot, L., Huang, C-R., Calzolari, N., Gangemi, A., Lenci, A., & Oltramari, A.
    (2010) Ontology and the Lexicon: A Multidisciplinary Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P.
    (1976) Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8(3), 382–439. 10.1016/0010‑0285(76)90013‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-X [Google Scholar]
  20. Rosch, E., & Lloyd, B. B.
    (Eds.) (1978) Cognition and Categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Vetere, G., Oltramari, A., Chiari, I., Jezek, E., Vieu, L., & Zanzotto, F. M.
    (2012) Senso comune, an open knowledge base of Italian language. Traitement Automatique des Langues, 52(3), 217–243.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Vossen, P.
    (Ed.) (1998) Eurowordnet: A Multilingual Database with Lexical Semantic Networks. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 10.1007/978‑94‑017‑1491‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1491-4 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): holonymy; hypernymy; hyponymy; meronymy; neology
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error