MARKED AND UNMARKED TERMS:

In binary oppositions:

The terms marked and unmarked are frequently used in binary oppositions. It means that one term does not have the same weight, but the one (unmarked) is neutral or more positive in contrast to the other term. As Geoffery leech observes, when there is a contrast between two or more terms, tenses or cases, one of them is marked if it has any extra ‘fixes’ in contrast to the unmarked one which contains no marker. For example, cat is a neutral, unmarked term, while cats is marked with an -s suffix, similarly, actor is an unmarked term, while actress is a marked term with an -ess affix, also polite is a positive term in contrast to its negative term. ‘abrupt’. In general, the plural of English nouns is marked as a term (books) as opposed to the singular (book). In the French language, the feminine is usually marked and the masculine is an unmarked term, for example petit in contrast to petite; however, in English, if the sex is marked, it is done lexically, that is, giving special words to one sex and none to the other, for example, the word duck is a feminine term that is not marked, while masculinity it is marked by drake, which is absent in duck. and this word gives services for the whole species. In addition, the opposite marking is observed in the pronouns, that is, masculine as an unmarked term and feminine term as marked. For example,

One in HIS senses would not do such a thing (unmarked)

One in HIS senses would not do such a thing (marked by femininity)

It is the male sex that is marked because the first statement could refer to either of the two genders, but the second will specify it for femininity.

In polar oppositions:

The same kind of marked/unmarked distinction is also seen in the polar oppositions (which have two poles) good/bad, rich/poor, day/night, short/tall, short/long and we prefer to measure things by means of the length. instead of brevity. We prefer to ask how long is this cloth, how short is this cloth, or how tall is this building rather than how low is this building. Because the first will give a neutral expression so it can be long or short, while in the second we only have one possibility of being short. It is not only based on the measurement scale, but also can be used in such cases,

How WELL do you speak French? Very poorly

How BAD does she speak French? like a native

The first statement is neutral and different from the second one which is marked in this context, so the answer is completely different.

The brand can be defined as the relationship between form and meaning. If there is a contrast of two different shapes in a single dimension, the one that is not checked would be neutral and could apply to the entire dimension rather than a specific aspect of it. It could be argued that this phenomenon is due to the negative-positive inherent in the semantic opposition itself. Typically, unmarked is taken as positive while marked is taken as a negative term, eg happy/unhappy, complete/incomplete, stable/unstable; however, in some cases there is an invisible element of negation, as if it were easy to define dead by I dont live that I live for not dead.

Polyyanna hypothesis:

The detailed explanation of marking is given on the basis of psychological or experiential ground for which some psycholinguists have given the so-called “Pollyanna hypothesis” according to which people tend to think more positively about life and pay more attention to the brighter side of life. which provides an argument for associating good with ‘unmarked’ terms and bad with ‘marked’ suffixes and prefixes.

In relative opposition:

There is also the possibility of bias in relative oppositions, but it is better to call it ‘dominance’ rather than ‘marking’, eg in parent/child, front/back, right/wrong, the first term seems to be more dominant than the second. other. one, so we prefer to put the dominant term first (parent-child) or perhaps give both terms a name using the dominant (property). Branding and dominance seem to vary in strength, but they are deeply dependent on the psychological foundation. There is no logical meaning in giving symbols to these terms of oppositions. The distinction between ‘dead’ and ‘alive’ could receive the same logical explanation with +dead/-dead as with -alive/+dead because both are logically equivalent. This shows that the unmarked term has won the discrimination of + and the up arrow, while the dominant term of an opposition has won the right arrow.
But the distinguishing term of the marked term is never omitted and the neutralization of the opposition is still indicated (oparent, orright, ogood, etc.)

Ruth Kempson Rules:

To account for lexical ambiguities due to marking, Ruth has given a rule. For this rule we can take dog and bitch as an example.

If a) there are two words W1 and W2 that have the meanings m1 and m2, and m1 differs from m2 only in that it has an additional feature -X

And if b) there is no word like W3 with meaning m3 and m2 differs from m3 in having an extra feature of +X

It means that m3 is an additional meaning of W1. (m2 and m3 are cohyponyms of m3 and therefore W1 is an unmarked term). This rule takes into account all ambiguities that have the first term as more general containing an additional feature, while the second as more specific. There is also an explanation for other types of ambiguities, such as that it is a tautology to say that a calf is a young cow, but on the other hand it is not a tautology to say that this is a cow and not a calf. This is how ambiguity is created through the words themselves. There may also be some hierarchical structures for the same word.