1. What is synonymy? What is the difference between partial and absolute synonymy?

Is it
possible to find examples of absolute synonymy? Have you found any?

The definition of synonymy, even though many times appears as clear and hardly
subjected to any objection, entails a number of issues which are not easy to solve under any
respect. Then, the discussion over this concept historically had covered two aspects, namely:
provide a thorough description of the phenomena, and provide a universal definition of the
concept. Thus, this notion has been recently defined by authors as Yule (2010:117) as two or
more words with very closely related meaning. The author points out that the idea of sameness
in meaning does not refer necessarily to a total sameness, providing examples to illustrate this
point. Following Yules examples, it can be said that there are instances in which one word is
accurate in a sentence, but its synonym is odd. For example, when someones offering you
something more to drink in a familiar celebration, an answer like No, thanks. I have drink enough
is absolutely accurate to the context in which is uttered. However, if the word enough is changed
for a word like sufficient, which fit perfectly in the definition given by the author, even though the
meaning of the sentence is not affected, the first option seems much more casual, and therefore
accurate to its context than the second, which is much more formal.

However, the principle underlying the distinction made by Yule is not new. Ullman
(1972) made the distinction between partial synonyms and absolute synonyms. Partial synonyms
refers to those words can be substituted only in some contexts as well as those words which are
interchangeable semantically, but not emotionally, i.e. help and aid differ in what they convey.
While help can refer to any sort of support, aid is a term that refer to non-human support.

Absolute synonymy, on the other hand, is a more well known notion since it refers to the
traditional idea of synonymy; words interchangeable in all contexts as well as those ones in
which their cognitive and affective value is preserved. Ullmann admits that only few words are
interchangeable in any context without the slightest alteration in objective meaning, feeling-
tone or evocative value (1972) but states that it is occasionally possible to find such words. To
exemplify this point, he mentions the adverbs almost and nearly as examples of absolute
synonymy, additionally he points out technical nomenclature as an example of this phenomena.

However, this seems to be an exception that confirms a general tendency. It may be
inferred, anyways, that there are no words with exactly the same meaning. In spite of this fact,
the discussion aiming to provide a universal definition of the concept has led to tackle the issue
about absolute synonymy. Authors as Cruse (1986) had established that two lexical units would
have identical meanings (i.e. would be absolute synonyms) if and only if they were identical in
all their contextual relations. Two units would be absolute synonyms in accordance with this
definition after checking all their relations in all their imaginable contexts. The author introduces
the notion of relative normality in which provides the distinction made in the previous
example with the words enough and sufficient.

If we consider an example that includes a group of words such as skinny, thin and
slender, the focus of the discussion is set in what their connotation convey and how they can be
used to show positive or negative values instead of the mere descriptive meaning of words. As
stated by Kreidler (1998:98) they mean the same thing (...) but they differ in connotation. He
adds, thin is neutral, skinny is somewhat pejorative, and slender is flattering.

Contextual differences are also important in order to distinguish instances of synonymy.
Kreidler states that words that have the same meaning in a given context are synonyms.
However, it is likely possible that dialectal differences within the language affect the choice of a
speaker. The occurrences of words such as biscuit or cookie in the same predicate, for example,
are not instances of synonymy since both reflects dialectal differences.

Along the same line, pragmatic values are also important when talking about synonymy.
The level of occurrence of a word in a language, as well as collocational restrictions, will
determine any answer around this subject. For instance, words with essentially the same meaning
such as hide and conceal cannot be used randomly. As Kreidler (1998:98) illustrates, sentences
as We hid the treasure in the attic or We hid in the attic are perfectly possible in the English
Language, but that is not the case of We conceal in the attic, because the collocational context of
the word is odd.

In the light of what has been discussed, it can be said that synonymy in its strict and
traditional definition is a very rare, tangential phenomenon in language. As the provided
examples had proven, it is impossible to find two words in a language with same range of
occurrence, and even though such words can be encountered, it is likely possible that they differ
in what they convey.