Synonymy as a linguistic phenomenon has different interpretations. Yu. D. Apresyan created the most consistent concept of synonymy. He explored the co-occurrence of types of differences between synonyms. The researcher proposed to consider three types of compatibility – semantic, lexical and morphosyntactic. In addition to compatibility types, synonyms differ in the degree of its coincidence – full match, inclusion, intersection and mismatch. The compatibility type can be combined with the degree of coincidence. Thus, the YUD. Apresyan identified 12 types of basic distinctions between synonyms, and the three types related to the complete coincidence, he essentially had not considered.
Semantic compatibility in the case of inclusion Yu. d. Apresyan illustrates a pair of to reach and be reached (to). The verb castigateed with the names of exact and inexact values, and to walk only with the names accurate. You can reach 40 meters and reach 40 meters, but human growth can only be achieved. It is also impossible to reach the height of domai etc.
The intersection of the semantic compatibility of verb is illustrated a pair of taken and taken. It is accepted with the designations of activity and typical object as a symbol of working activity. It is associated with the designations of the working activity, a typical object as a symbol of the working activity and a typical tool as a symbol of the working activity. Therefore, the right to sisteranimated to laugh and okay to take to laugh,to take up the oars, but the oars naprinimali.
As an example of a complete mismatch of semantic compatibility of synonyms is considered a pair of phrases in all supports in all pairs. The first is possible if the subject of the movement is a living being, and the second if the subject is a vehicle. Therefore, the horse rushes at full speed, and the train rushes at full speed.
The assumption of a complete discrepancy in the compatibility of synonyms has not become generally accepted in science.