ATLAS OF LANGUAGE

AT-HAR2-0026 · ATLAS 260

Synonymia

A sequence of expressions with similar meanings used to reinforce or expand upon a concept.

Part of the subject path Rhetoric and Style

Why is this entry in the Atlas?

F · Figure / procedure R1 · Distinct contribution to understanding

Synonymia explains how near-equivalent expressions can intensify or unfold one thought through the differences retained within their semantic proximity. Lexical synonymy is a relation that can exist without the rhetorical sequence of expressions examined here.

Colours and admission grounds

The rectangular label identifies the entry function: F – linguistic figure or procedure; A – analytical concept; G – foundational concept; E – selected concrete case. The rounded badge indicates the admission ground: R1 – distinctive contribution; R2 – necessary foundation; R3 – justified illustrative case. This editorial rationale explains the current selection rather than claiming an undocumented original selection history.

Explanation

Synonymia is the rhetorical sequence of several near-synonymous expressions for the same object or communicative claim. The words do not simply repeat identical content: differences in register, imagery, intensity, or perspective unfold the object and may create emphasis, abundance, or emotional heightening. As a figure, synonymia depends on sequential arrangement, whereas synonymy is a lexical-semantic relation among expressions that may exist outside any particular sequence. Complete interchangeability is neither required nor common. The figure may approach pleonasm when recurrence lacks a perceptible function or form a climax when its members increase in an ordered way. The concept reveals how several incomplete approximations can give an object more contour than a supposedly single exact word.

Movement of thought

1. An object or judgment is first named, but the initial formulation does not exhaust the desired evaluation or vividness. 2. Further near-synonymous expressions enter and maintain reference while subtly changing register, intensity, or perspective. 3. The sequence produces emphasis, fullness, or movement through conceptual approximations and guides audience expectation. 4. A counter-test examines shared reference and functional difference and separates synonymia from lexical synonymy, repetition, pleonasm, accumulation, and climax. 5. The object returns as a multiply determined figure: no expression fully replaces the others, while their proximity condenses the statement.

Scientific use case

Rhetoric, stylistics, and lexical semantics study sequence, collocation, register, and semantic distance. Corpus analysis tests when clustering intensifies, differentiates, or merely repeats.

Example

“She was tired, depleted, empty” keeps the same person in view while shifting from physical fatigue toward comprehensive inner absence.

Counterexample

A dictionary lists “begin” and “start” on separate pages as near equivalents. This demonstrates synonymy but, without rhetorical sequencing, not synonymia.

Distinction

Distinguish it from synonymy as a lexical relation, repetition of one form, accumulation of heterogeneous aspects, pleonasm, climax, enumeratio, congeries, and paraphrase alone.

Effect on thought and perception

Synonymia increases emphasis and semantic density, activates several perspectives of naming, and may progressively give an object emotional or conceptual contour.

Resonance

Several words circle the same object; each reaches it differently, and their overlapping lines produce a denser shape.

Cite this entry

Reich, Michael (Hrsg./ed.): „Synonymia“. Atlas der Sprache, AT-HAR2-0026. ATLAS 260, data model 1.6.0. https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-HAR2-0026

https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-HAR2-0026

The address remains stable; editorial content may evolve. Editorial reading state: 2026-10-15. Include your access date for precise references.

Historical background

Bullinger's 1898 synonymia uses emphatic repetition of words similar in meaning but different in sound and origin. He explicitly denies that the mere presence of synonyms constitutes the figure. His evaluation contrasts empty human repetition with divinely purposeful emphasis; that asymmetry is attributable to his historical theology. The passage supports a rhetorical category of use rather than a complete history of lexical synonymy.

How conceptual history changes the analysis

Lexical relatedness and rhetorical emphasis are two levels that require separate justification.