Part of a series on
Linguistics
Outline History Index
General linguistics Diachronic Lexicography Morphology Phonology Pragmatics Semantics Syntax Syntax–semantics interface Typology
Applied linguistics Acquisition Anthropological Applied Computational Conversation analysis Corpus linguistics Discourse analysis Distance Documentation Ethnography of communication Ethnomethodology Forensic History of linguistics Interlinguistics Neurolinguistics Philology Philosophy of language Phonetics Psycholinguistics Sociolinguistics Text Translating and interpreting Writing systems
Theoretical frameworks Formalist Constituency Dependency Distributionalism Generative Glossematics Functional Cognitive Construction grammar Functional discourse grammar Grammaticalization Interactional linguistics Prague school Systemic functional Usage-based Structuralism
Topics Autonomy of syntax Compositionality Conservative/innovative forms Descriptivism Etymology Iconicity Internet linguistics LGBT linguistics Origin of language Orthography Philosophy of linguistics Prescriptivism Second-language acquisition Theory of language
Portal

In linguistics, troponymy is the presence of a 'manner' relation between two lexemes.

The concept was originally proposed by Christiane Fellbaum and George Miller.^[1] Some examples they gave are "to nibble is to eat in a certain manner, and to gorge is to eat in a different manner. Similarly, to traipse or to mince is to walk in some manner".^[2]

Troponymy is one of the possible relations between verbs in the semantic network of the WordNet database.

See also[edit]

• Hyponymy and hypernymy
• Hierarchy § Subsumptive containment hierarchy
• Is-a
  • Hypernymy (and supertype)
  • Hyponymy (and subtype)
• Has-a
  • Holonymy
  • Meronymy

• Lexical chain
• Ontology (information science)
• Polysemy
• Semantic primes
• Semantic satiation
• Thematic role
• Word sense
• Word sense disambiguation

References[edit]

Inline citations[edit]

Sources[edit]

• Fellbaum, C; Miller, G (1990). "Folk psychology or semantic entailment? A reply to Rips and Conrad (1989)". Psychological Review. 97: 565–570. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.97.4.565.