CC BY-NC-ND
0CrossMark
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195 (2015) 948 - 956
World Conference on Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Ambiguity in English and Albanian Sentences
Majlinda Nuhiua*, Suzana Ejupia
aState University of Tetovo Ilindenska nn, 1200, Tetovo, Republic of Macedonia
Abstract
The concept of ambiguity as a semantic complex category is very little dealt in English language and almost none in Albanian language even though its importance is increasing every day in Modern Linguistics. This was one of the reasons that made us convey a comparative and contrastive semantic analysis on the concept of ambiguity in Albanian language and observe it in through the prism of English language. We hope that with this research we will help Albanian students understand better the process of translating ambiguous sentences from Albanian to English language. Our corpus is consisted of translation paradigms (Levenston, 1965) of ambiguous sentences that are identified and observed in Albanian language and how are they translated in English language. The main task of this research is to find out do ambiguous sentences continue to be ambiguous after translation process or they are disambiguated by the translators and what helps this process. Except the main question we will try to find out similarities and differences regarding the concept of definition and classification of ambiguity in English and Albanian language. The methods used in this research are descriptive (we have tried to describe in details the phenomena of metaphors in English and Albanian language), modelling method (with this method we have tried to link theoretical issues with practical examples, ambiguous sentences taken from translated books from Albanian to English language), comparative method (the phenomena of ambiguity in sentences is compared and contrasted in order to find similarities and differences concerning the concept and classification of ambiguity in Albanian and English language) and analytical method (we will try to give suggestions regarding the problems that came up during our analysis).
© 2015Publishedby ElsevierLtd. Thisisanopenaccess article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.Org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul Univeristy.
Keywords: ambiguity; definition; classification; translation paradigms; disambiguation.
* Corresponding author. Tel:
E-mail address: majlindanuhiu@gmail.com
1877-0428 © 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of Istanbul Univeristy.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.431
1. Methodology of the Research
Ambiguity as a phenomenon is analyzed in Lexical Semantics and it mainly depends on people. The main role in understanding ambigous words and sentences by the part of the listener and the reader has the context. Taking into consideration the fact that you cannot be sucsesful by using only one method , we have tried to combine different methods and techniques. We have used descriptive, modelling, comparative and analytical methods in order to describe the notion of ambiguity as well as link the theories related to ambiguity with the corpus of our research thus, try to compare and contrast it in both of the languages, English and Albanian in order to come up with suggestions regarding the problems found in this research. We have also tried to combine two techniques and that is subjective and objective techniques, working with the corpus and that is one way translation and Gjorgjevic's group test (Gjorgjevic, 1982).
In this semantic research we have tried to identify ambiguous sentences in Albanian language and then observe how they are translated in English language. Our semantic comparison is based on the question do ambigous sentences cointinue to be ambigous after they are translated into English language. Our corpus of analysis is consisted of 40 translated ambigous paradigms (Leventson, 1965) from Albanian to English language. Firstly, the corpus is being identified and than it is classified in Albanian language into: lexical and structural. With the help of componential analysis (Nida, 1975) we have tried to analyze the semantic components of lexemes in the ambiguous sentences in order to understand and differentiate the meanings of ambiguous sentences in Albanian language and then try to understand how they are translated in English language; did the translator disambiguate them or they continued to be ambigous.
2. Defining Ambiguity as a Notion and a Concept
It is very hard to define a notion which by itself has more than one explanation; a word that has doubtful and uncertain meaning and a word that can be understood in two or more ways. Ambiguity as a complex notion is very hard to describe and understand but it is an essential part of human language and it is incorporated in all areas of language. By defining ambiguity itself you can realize how complex the language can be.
There are a lot of attempts to define what ambiguity is but the word ambiguity comes from French ambiguïté, originating from the Latin word ambiguus. This word is a compound of the stems ambi- ('on both sides') and agere ('travel' or 'drive'), which taken together mean 'to wander about' or to 'drive on both sides' (Mish, 1984: 205) However, after the incorporation of the word ambiguity into English, the word has lost its reference to journeys and paths. The word has become literal. Literally according to Webster, M. (1984) ambiguous means 'doubtful or uncertain especially from obscurity or indistinctness...capable of being understood in two or more possible senses or ways'.. According to Oxford English Dictionary (1989), 'ambiguity is the state of simultaneously admitting plausible interpretations or explanations, thus permitting double meanings that 'drive both ways'. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary defines ambiguity as the state of having more than one possible meaning. Secondly it defines it as a word or statement that can be understood in more than one way and lastly as a state of being difficult to understand or explain because of involving many different aspects.
Discussing from a linguistic point of view McArthur (1992:36) defines ambiguity as an actual or potential uncertainty of meaning, especially when a word, phrase or sentence can be understood in two ways. While, Cruse (2000:108) argues that ambiguous words have multiple senses that exhibit the phenomenon that he calls antagonism; you cannot focus your attention on two or more readings at the same time. He adds that "the speaker will have one reading in mind, and the hearer will be expected to recover that reading on the basis of contextual
clues: the choice cannot normally be left open".
When the boundaries are not limited we should signify that ambiguity is different from vagueness. Pinkal (1995:19) considers the two phenomena to be related, however declares that they refer to different things. "Ambiguous expressions can assume an arbitrarily but finitely large number of readings, whereas vague expressions allow infinitely many precisifications". Pinkal (1995:52). While, Hirst (1992:131) declares that if a word is categorically ambiguous, a sentence containing it can be structurally ambiguous. A modified and more accurate definition is provided by Pehar (2005:163) who studied diplomatic ambiguity that arose from language ambiguity. He claims that "in order to qualify as an ambiguity an expression must generate not only at least two different meanings, but also two incompatible and unrelated meanings. It is only then that an expression is truly ambiguous". While, Kreidler (1998) demonstrates that when homonyms are be put into identical positions in utterances, lexical ambiguity occurs. Linguistics professor in Harvard, George Zipf (1949:56), claims that ambiguity is a compromise between the speaker's desire to limit the number of words he or she needs to choose from to express a certain meaning (to minimize the effort in production), and the hearer's desire to limit the number of meanings he or she needs to choose from to understand a word (to minimize the effort in comprehension).
The famous semanticist Katz (1977:56) sees ambiguity as a relation between many semantic representations and an expression corresponding to them in natural language. While, Scheffler (1979:13) notes that a word is ambiguous if its denotation on one occasion of its use diverges from its denotation on another occasion of its use. Another definition of ambiguity, which is essentially sentential definition, has been discussed by Kempson (1977: 40/ 28). It states: 'A sentence is ambiguous if the sentence can be true in very different states of affairs'.
According to Generative Transformational Grammar where the understanding of ambiguous sentences is done through phrase markers. Ambiguity is defined as an expression which can accommodate more than one structural analysis. (Gillon,1990:397). Crystal (Crystal, 1987:377) thinks that ambiguity is a result of complexity in documents such as forms, insurance policies, contracts, etc., which due also to their complexity are then not filled in correctly, are misunderstood or misinterpreted.
When it comes to Albanian linguists ambiguity has been defined only in recent works mainly in paper works and dictionaries. The word 'ambiguity' in Albanian like in English comes from Latin wordMAmbigu - atis'. Ambiguity in Albanian means "doubt, uncertainty, double meaning". (Lacaj, H. and Fishta ,F. 2004:44). While, according to Kfiku, R. (2009:19) ambiguity is defined as - words with dual sense. A university professor, Nesimi (2006:36) states that the majority of words, except the main meaning could posses other lexical meanings. Regarding Bahri Beci (2005:51) words in different contexts usually receive different meanings and names these words as polysemantic words. While, Thomai (2006:218) indentifies that some words are bisemantical so it means that they have direct meaning and figurative meaning. According to Stefi (1961:22) -"Ambiguity is word's ability to have more than one meaning.
During our research we got very surprised with the fact that even though the most common words in English as well as in Albanian are ambiguous, Albanian language linguists haven't done much research on this phenomena. The crucial difference that we found out between English and Albanian language regarding definition of ambiguity as a phenomena is related to naming the concept itself. In Albanian language ambiguity is named as bisemanticism-'dykuptimsi' and sometimes as polysematicism and is mostly related to dual meaning and only sometimes to multiple meanings, while in English is usually related to multiple meanings. But in both languages 'ambiguity' is used to express something that is uncertain or doubtful. But many scholars in both of the languages use ambiguous words or sentences when the message they want to provide is unclear or when they unconsciously utilize words or
sentences from which more than one meaning arises. For what we have seen so far ambiguity happens more in the written language because the readers misunderstand the meaning being unaware of the context that an expression is used. In spoken language ambiguity is not very common to happen because the speaker and the hearer know the context and if ambiguity occurs they can disambiguate each other by adding other words to explain.
3. Classifying Ambiguity
Different authors in English and Albanian language have classified the phenomena of ambiguity in different ways. When it comes to the traditional approach to identifying ambiguity they usually distinguish only lexical ambiguity. For some authors (Radford 1999), the categorical status of a particular phrase would belong to the simple case of structural ambiguity. Others (Pinkal 1995:75) claim that lexical ambiguity includes only instances of homonymy and polysemy. While, Bucaria (2004:281) for instance, maintains that there is lexical ambiguity, syntactic ambiguity and phonological ambiguities. When it comes to Kaufer (1983: 210) he is the one that identifies more types of ambiguites: syntactic, lexical, ambiguity of illocution, ambiguity of perlocution, and ambiguity of use/mention.
Another classification of ambiguity is made by Kreidler (Kreidler, 1998:330) who divides ambiguity into three main types: lexical ambiguity, referential ambiguity and syntactic ambiguity (syntactic ambiguity then is also divided into two sub-types: deep structure ambiguity and surface structure ambiguity).
When it comes to Radford (Radford, 1999:66) ambiguity relates to the scope of the negative particle so for this reason this type is commonly known as scope ambiguity. Ullmann (1977:128) divides the ambiguity into three types: phonetic, lexical and grammatical ambiguity. Deementer, K (1998:15-36) divided the semantic level of ambiguity into three categories. Lexical ambiguity is manifested in lexical homonymy and polysemy. On the other hand, syntactic ambiguity refers to a certain utterance that can yield two or more syntactically feasible readings, whereas contextual is mostly attributed to anaphoric expressions and transitional signals.
Albanian linguists have not given a certain classification of ambiguity because this linguistic phenomenon hasn't been studied very much until now. But some linguists mention that words except the main meaning possess and the figurative meaning. However, while doing our research we have come across with lexical and structural ambiguity in Albanian language which furthermore could be divided into surface and deep structure ambiguity. In Albanian language the most frequent ambiguity was the ambiguity in the level of words (lexical ambiguity) and that of structural level (surface and deep structural ambiguity) was less frequent. Lexical ambiguity is easier to disambiguate whereas structural ambiguity needs deeper analyses and seeks more time to resolve.
4. The Research
4.1. Lexical Ambiguity
The reason why do we start our research with lexical ambiguity is related to the fact that the most common type of ambiguity which is found in both of the languages, English and Albanian is lexical ambiguity. This is due to the fact that many words in English and Albanian language have multiple semantic signs which could be seen in the English and Albanian language dictionaries. The first edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, for instance, records 154 sense divisions under the word 'set'. What is remarkable is that such a number of words can be applied similarly for a large number of common lexical items and can be tolerated in everyday usage without ambiguity. Among the 500 most used words in English have an average of 23 meanings, (Gray: 2000). When it comes to
Albanian language such a research on the issue of the number of common words with multiple meanings it hasn't been done so far.
Lexical ambiguity occurs when a word has several interpretations. According to Kreidler (Kreidler: 1998), when homonyms occur in the same position in utterances the result is lexical ambiguity'. While, according to the Albanian linguist Thomai (2009:137), lexical ambiguity or as he names it "bisemantism'- 'dykuptimsi' are words that can have two meanings, so ambiguity is part of polisemy of the words and further expansion does not affect them.
We will start with some example sentences with lexical ambiguities which were identified in Albanian language and we will further observe how they are translated in English language.
Albanian language English language
1) Ti kujton se do te na kerkojne vertet eshtrat? (Kadare, 2007:33) Do you really imagine they'll bother to look for our remains? (Coltman, 2012:16)
The first example sentence in Albanian language is ambiguous due to the verb 'kerkoj' which possess two semantic signs and represents the notion which is very often named in Albanian language as "dykuptmsi" -bisemanticisms. The word possesses the following meanings: a) 'to look for' and b) 'search or ask'. That's why there are two ways that you can understand this sentence. The first sentence could be a) Do you really think that they will look for our bones? And the next sentence that could be understood is b) Do you really think that they will search our bones? The translator has disambiguated the sentence with the help of the context.
Albanian language English language
2) Pastaj i panjohuri kishte ikur dhe gjenerali as qe e kishte marre vesh f'pune bente dhe f'emer kishte. (Kadare, 2007:49) 3) He took his leave without the general having even asked him his identity or his profession. (Coltman, 2012:35)
The Albanian verb 'ik' has two meanings except the literal it also has idiomatic meanings as: 'to leave' and 'to escape' causing the sentence example ambiguous. The author in English has correctly provided the sentence with other grammatical forms like the verb phrase 'took his leave' in order to disambiguate the sentence.
Albanian language English language
3) Por nuk ishte e lehte te behej kjo leter. (Kadare, 2007:76) 4) Writing a letter could be such a difficult thing to do. (Coltman, 2012:65)
Beside the examples previously mentioned where the words had two semantic signs in the example three the sentence is an example of lexical ambiguity where the word possess more than two meanings and according to Albanian linguists they would present polysemy. The lexeme 'bej' which it is a verb possesses the following semantic signs: a) make, b) create, c) become etc. However the author in English has found its precise meaning and substituted it with a concise meaning 'write'. It is the context that helped the translator to disambiguate the sentence and translate it correctly by adding a new word, the verb 'write'
Albanian language English
4) Duart iu thyen nga deshperimi dhe e la penen. (Kadare, 1999:79) 5) He was in such despair the pen fell from his nerveless hand. (Bray, 2014:84)
Ambiguity in Albanian language may also appear as a result of the idiomatic expressions like in this example four. Different languages have different idioms and they are considered as the hardest part when it comes to translations. The English translator has found the closest expression that fits the Albanian 'duart iu thyen' and also added words to disambiguate the sentence. It is the context that helped the translator to disambiguate the sentence since taken literally it would be that he broke his hands but with the help of the context the translator realized that in the first place we are talking about a male and secondly the person is in great despair.
Albanian English
5) Ishte i vetmi vend ku Mark-Alemit i takonte te kembente ndonje bisede me njerez te njohur apo te panjohur. (Kadare, 1999:83) 6) It was the only place where you had the opportunity to exchange a few words with people you knew, or even with people you didn't. (Bray, 2014:88)
The word 'takoj' is the reason that the example sentence five is ambiguous. Albanian lexeme 'takoj' means 'meet', 'belong' and 'happen'. When the English translator disambiguated the sentences from Albanian language into English he used the method of providing grammatical environment by adding new words like 'had the opportunity' but again it was the context which made the message clear to the translator.
From the examples below we could see that lexical ambiguity as it is present in English language is also present in Albanian language and it is formulated as a result of multiple or dual meaning of a word, in our cases nouns, verbs, verb phrases and idiomatic expressions. The ambiguity appears as a result of lexemes which possess more than one semantic signs which in Albanian language is named as 'dykuptimsi' - 'bisemanticism', when lexemes possess only two meanings and polysemy more than one meaning. While in English language both of the cases are named as ambiguity. The translators had disambiguated the ambiguous sentences with the help of the context, providing grammatical environment, or providing the closest expression which is again understood from the context itself or adding new words.
4. 2. Structural (surface and deep structure) Ambiguity
A sentence is structurally ambiguous if words or phrases in it can play several grammatical roles and thus can be put together in several ways to form a correct sentence. According to Kreidler (1998:169) syntactic ambiguity as he may happen in the surface structure of a sentence because words are arranged together in different possible constructions. Also structural ambiguity may happen in the deep structure because one sequence of words may have more than one interpretation, generally because the rules of sentence construction allow ellipsis, the deletion of what is 'understood.'
Albanian language English language
1) Gjenerali e kuptoi se nuk kishte asgje per t'i thene dhe ndezi nje cigare. (Kadare, 2007:23) 1) The general felt he had nothing to say to him and lit a cigarette. (Coltman, 2012:5)
This example sentence one is structurally ambiguous because the subject in Albanian 'the general' can be the doer or the receiver of the action. The ambiguity in English is resolved by providing grammatical environment making the sentence active.
Albanian language English language
2) Mbi paketën e cigareve nisi të bënte planin. (Kadare, 2007:136) 2) He began making tiny-sketch plans on his cigarette packet. (Coltman, 2012:129)
The example sentence two in Albanian is also structurally ambiguous because we are not sure if 'someone' started to make the plan sitting on cigarette packet or 'someone started drawing the plan on the cigarette packet or 'during smoking the whole packet of cigarettes he wrote the plan'. In the translated version in English the author uses the method of providing grammatical environment, adding new words 'tiny-sketch' to disambiguate the sentence.
Albanian language English language
3) Sa mirë që fole! (Kadare, 2007:149) 3) It's good that you talked. (Coltman, 2012:134)
The example sentence three is an example of deep structure ambiguity. The meaning of this sentence has two different interpretations in English as: a) How good you talked! and the other is b) It's good that you talked. The English translator has used the context in order to disambiguate the deep structure ambiguity of the sentence three.
Albanian language English language
4) Sa mirë që e gatove peshkun! (Kadare, 1980:22) 4) You cooked the fish very well! (Koltman:2000: 37)
The sentence four is again an example of deep structure ambiguity and has two different interpretations: the first interpretation is when you want to compliment someone about the cooking meaning a) 'You cooked the fish very well' and the other interpretation is when you describe a situation when the fish is cooked before rotting and you say b) 'It's good you cooked the fish'. The translator has used the context to disambiguate the example sentence four.
As we can see from the analyzed corpus of our research the sources of structural ambiguity are very difficult to discover in English and Albanian language. The most common sources that cause structurally ambiguity results mostly from: modifiers; especially prepositional phrases, relative clauses, conjunctions, and ellipses. Structurally ambiguity takes more time to analyze and disambiguate and it is usually more complicated than other types of ambiguities. The disambiguation of structural ambiguity is mostly done with the help of the context by which the translators add new words or provide grammatical environment.
5. Conclusions
In this semantic research one of our crucial tasks was finding out similarities and differences regarding defining and classifying the concept of ambiguity in English and Albanian language. When it comes to defining ambiguity as phenomena we found out that in Albanian language there are different concept which are related to the notion of ambiguity as bisemanticism-'dykuptimsi' related to dual meaning and polysematicism related to multiple meanings. While in English language ambiguity is always related to multiple meanings. Generally speaking in both languages
'ambiguity' is used to express something that is uncertain or doubtful. But many scholars in both of the languages use ambiguous words or sentences when the message they want to provide is unclear or when they unconsciously utilize words or sentences from which more than one meaning arises.
Ambiguity in English language was generally classified into: lexical, syntactic and structural. However we haven't found any serious efforts in Albanian language regarding the classification of ambiguity except the one which notes that the meaning of the lexeme could be classified into: the main meaning and the figurative meaning. In the identification process of the ambiguous sentences in Albanian language we came across with lexical ambiguity and structural ambiguity which could be further broken down into surface structural ambiguity and deep structural ambiguity. The first lexical ambiguity happens in the lexical level of words but also may lead to the ambiguity of sentences. Lexical ambiguity is the most common kind of ambiguity in both languages English and Albanian. The sources of lexical ambiguity are words that are homonyms, homophones and polysemic words in English and Albanian language. Lexical ambiguity arises from different words but usually nouns and verbs are the ones that lead to ambiguity and that is more than other parts of speech. The second, syntactic ambiguity is sometimes called the structural ambiguity and occurs because of different parses that a sentence can have. As we can see from the analyzed sentences in English and Albanian, sources that cause syntactic or structural ambiguity as we have seen from our analysis it mostly results from: modifiers; especially prepositional phrases, relative clauses, conjunctions, and ellipses. Structural ambiguity takes more time to analyze and disambiguate and it is usually more complicated than other types of ambiguities.
During our research we saw that all the ambiguous sentences that were identified during the translation process they were all disambiguated by the translator. As we already know the disambiguation process of lexemes and sentences should basically depend on the principle of immediacy and the phenomenon of garden paths. But from collected corpus we have seen that usually the main sources of disambiguation is done by contextualizing the sentence and the other is by providing grammatical environment by adding other language items to the sentence.
List of the corpus books:
K1 = Kadare, I. (1980). Ura me tri harqe. Prishtine: Rilindja.
H1 = Hodgson, J. (1997). The three arched bridge. New York: Arcade Publishing House
K2 = Kadare, I. (1980). Gjenerali i ushtrise se vdekur. Prishtine: Rilindja.
C 1 = Coltman, D. (1980). The general of the dead army. London: Harvill Press.
K3 = Kadare, I. (1980). Prilli i thyer, Prishtine: Rilindja.
D = Dee, I. R. (1990). Broken April, Chicago: Ivan R. D., Publisher.
K4 = Kadare, I. (2005). Kenge zie per Kosoven. Tirane: Onufri.
C = Constatine, P. (2011). Elegies for Kosovo. New York: Arcade Publishing.
References
Beci, B. (2010). Gramatika e Gjuhes Shqipe, Tirana, Botime EDFA.
Beci, B. (2005). Gramatika e Gjuhes Shqipe, Shkup, Prishtine,Tirane, Logos -a.
Bucaria, C. (2004). Lexical and syntactic ambiguity as a source of humour the case of newspaper headlines. Humor. 17. Church, K. & Patil, R. (1982). Coping with syntactic ambiguity. American Journal of Computational Linguistics, 8, 139-149. Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical Semantics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Cruse, D. A. (2000). Meaning in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Qeliku, M. (2004). Gramatika praktike e gjuhes shqipe, Tirana, Toena.
Dane, Francis C. 1990. Research Method. California: Brooks/ Cole Publishing Company.
Deemter, K. (1998). Ambiguity and idiosyncratic interpretation. Journal of Semantics. 15, 5-36.
Domi, M. (2002). Gramatika e gjuhes shqipe 2 , Sintaksa, Tirane.
Empson, W. (2004). Seven Types of Ambiguity. London: Pimlico.
Palmer, F. (1982). Semantics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fodor, J.D. (1998). Learning to parse?, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 285-319.
Frazier, L. (1987). Theories of sentence processing. In Garfield, J., editor, Modularity in knowledge representation and natural language understanding. Cambridge.
Frazier, L. & Rayner, K. (1987). Resolution of syntactic category ambiguities: Eye movements in parsing lexically ambiguous sentences. Journal
of Memory and Language, 26, 505-526. Gillon, B.S. (1990). Truth Theoretical Semantics and Ambiguity, Analysis 50. Gorgevic, R (1982). Uvod u kontrastiranje jezika, Beograd: Filoloshki Fakultet.
Hirst, G. (1987). Semantic interpretation and the resolution of ambiguity. Studies in Natural Language Processing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hirst, G. (1992). Semantic Interpretation and the Resolution of Ambiguity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Housel, D. (2009). Writing Sentences (Grade 2), Teacher Created Resources, Inc.
Hurford, J. & Heasley, B. (1983). Semantics: A Course book. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kaufer, David. 1983. Metaphor and Its Ties to Ambiguity and Vagueness. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 13, 209-220.
Katz, J. (1977). Semantic Theory, Harper and Row, New York.
Kempson, R. (1977). Semantic Theory, Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
Kreidler, Ch. (1998). Introducing English Semantics, London, Rutledge.
Leech, G. (1981). Semantics, Harmondsworth, Penguin Books.
Leech, G. (1987). Meaning and the English Verb.2nd London: Longman.
Levenston, E. A. (1965). The Translation Paradigm, A technique for Contrastive Syntax. IRAL 3 (3),: 221-225. Lloshi, Xh. ( 2005). Stilistika e gjuhes shqipe dhe pragmatika, Shtepia Botuese e Librit Universitar, Tirana Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, J. (1995). Linguistic Semantics: An introduction. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Lyons, J. (1981). Language and Linguistics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lyons, J. (1968), Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics, London, Cambridge University Press.
MacDonald, M. Just, M. & Carpenter, P. (1992).Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 56-98.
MacDonald, M. Pearlmutter, N. & Seidenberg, M. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676703.
MacDonald, M. Pearlmutter, N. & Seidenberg, (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676-703. McArthur, T. (1992). The Oxford Companion to the English Language, Oxford University Press. Merriam-Webster, (1984), Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 1984 Edition.
Milnor, J. (1954). Games Against Nature," in R.M. Thrall, C.H. Coombs, R.L. Davis (Eds.). Decision Processes. New York: Wiley. Mish, F.C. (1984). Webster's ninth new collegiate dictionary. Sprignfield. MA. Merriam Webster. Mujaj, H. (2004). Gjuhesia e tekstit, Faik Konica, Prishtina.
Nesimi, R. (1992). Gramatika e gjuhes shqipe per shkollat e mesme. Skopje. Prosvetno Dello. Nesimi, R. (2006). Fonetika, Leksikologjia dhe Morfologia. Skopje. Prosvetno Dello. Nida, E. (1975). Componential Analysis of Meaning. (the Hague).
Nuhiu, M. (2012). Bilingual Homonyms in English and Albanian Language. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences. ELSEVEIER 70, 25 January. 1686-1690.
Ogden, C. & Richards, I. (1965). The Meaning of Meaning. 10th edition. London: Routledge and Kegan.
Oxford English Dictionary. (1987). 2nd Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Palmer, F. (1981). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pehar, D. (2005). Diplomatic ambiguity: Language, power and law, UK- Keele University.
Pinkal, M. (1995). Logic and lexicon, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 75.
Radford, A, Atkinson, M, Britain, D, Clahsen, H, & Spencer, A. (1999). Linguistics: an Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Saeed, J. (2003) Semantics, 2nd edition, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Scheffler, I. (1979). Beyond the Letter. A Philosophical Inquiry into Ambi-guity, Vagueness and Metaphor in Language. London ;Boston;
Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Schutze, C. (1996). The Empirical Base of Linguistics. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press. Stefi, J. (1961). Leksikologjija shqipe. Prishtine.
Thomai, J. (2009). Prejardhja kuptimore e Gjuhes Shqipe,Tirana, Botimet EDFA.
Thomai, J. (2006). Leksikologjia e Gjuhes Shqipe. Tirane, Shqiperi: Toena.
Thomai, J. (2011). Leksikologjia e Gjuhes Shqipe, Botimet Toena, Tirana.
Ullman, S. (1977). Semantics: An introduction to the science of meaning, Oxford, Blackwell.
