Sources and criteria of Synonimity

The quest for synonyms demands precision, ensuring that the chosen alternatives align accurately with the intended meaning and adhere to the standards of literature and correct speech. In the realm of linguistics, the treatment of synonyms varies significantly based on their contextual applications.
J. Lyons delineates three distinct approaches to synonymy. He classifies the words and expressions listed as synonymous in dictionaries as "near-synonyms," asserting that while they may exhibit varying degrees of similarity, they do not share identical meanings [1, p. 61]. These near-synonyms should not be conflated with partial or absolute synonyms. Lyons introduces the concept of absolute synonymy as exceedingly rare, positing that true synonyms are virtually nonexistent in language, as they would entail complete interchangeability across all contexts without exception. Anything falling short of this criterion he designates as a partial synonym. This approach to synonymy permits the compilation of separate lists of synonymous words, allowing for their evaluation across diverse contexts before categorizing them as absolute or partial synonyms.
Consequently, Lyons distinguishes between two types of synonyms, labeling them as complete and absolute synonyms. He asserts that lexemes can be considered completely synonymous within a specific range of contexts only if they share identical descriptive, expressive, and social meanings within that range. They attain absolute synonymy if they demonstrate identical distribution and meaning across all contexts of occurrence.
W. Quine introduces a dichotomy of synonyms - complete and partial. Complete synonyms are posited as words possessing identical meaning components, sharing all essential ingredients with each other [3, p. 70]. However, Quine suggests that true complete synonymy is unattainable due to the inherent variability of word meanings, which evolve constantly in both monolingual and multilingual settings. Partial synonymy, on the other hand, occurs when words share most but not all necessary components of meaning.
For instance, consider the words "finish" and "terminate," which may share many characteristics but differ subtly in their implications. "Finish" implies the final stage of an activity, while "terminate" suggests reaching a limit.
F. Palmer offers a test for synonymy by proposing the substitution of one word for another [2, p. 90]. Absolute synonyms, being mutually interchangeable across all contexts, are exceedingly rare in language.
However, it is commonly argued that true or absolute synonyms do not exist for any word, except perhaps within scientific terminology, where technical terms may act as genuine synonyms in highly specific contexts. Nonetheless, when two words are considered absolute synonyms, speakers tend to prefer one over the other and agree upon its exclusive use to describe the intended concept.
Absolute synonymy, therefore, denotes a scenario where all contextual relations and meanings between two terms are identical, allowing for complete interchangeability across all linguistic contexts without any discernible difference in meaning. However, demonstrating absolute synonymy can be challenging due to its restrictive criteria.