ANTONYMS IN PARADOXICAL DEFINITIONS WITH HYPERNYMIC, ENUMERATIVE, DESCRIPTIVE, SYNONYMIC, AND NEGATIVE INTERPRETATIONS
This article presents an analysis of the functioning of antonyms combined for the maximally concise and vivid expression of opposite features in aphorisms-definitions and paradoxical definitions created using the basic, traditional (but of the contaminated type) dictionary methods for interpreting words. The following was revealed: 1) in the hypernymic method of interpretation, usually contaminated with the descriptive, enumerative, and enumerative and/or negative methods, antonyms are included in the explanatory part of the interpretation and are introduced into the text of the definition in syntactically different ways: as part of a complex word combination or participial phrase, in a row of homogeneous parts, and as part of the subordinate parts of a compound sentence or a multicomponent complex sentence with the combination of homogeneous and consecutive collateral subordination; 2) in the enumerative-descriptive method, contrary antonyms are usually used; 3) in the descriptive method, we can see complex cases of contamination with all traditionally distinguished types of interpretation;4) in the synonymic method, which is very rarely used, the interpretation is done with the help of nonce synonyms; 5) in the negative method, negation is introduced into the text of aphorisms lexically and morphologically using the lexeme “negation”, particle/prefix ne (not) or the prepositions/prefixes bez (without) and vmesto (instead). It was found that in aphorisms having the interpretations under study antonyms with the same root or different roots can syntactically: a) join different or the same lexeme; b) stay within a complex (multinuclear) word combination or a row of homogeneous parts joined withthe help of conjunctions or asyndetically; be part of a participial phrase or part of a complex sentence.