Scribd
Upload
16 views

Semantics Unit 1part 2

The document discusses the difference between literal and speaker meaning in language and provides examples of sentences with implied meanings. It also examines how semantics studies meaning and some of the methods involved, such as analyzing sentences at the literal and implied levels and asking native speakers for definitions. General statements are made about different parts of speech and how semantic theory can apply across languages.

Uploaded by

Bình An Nguyễn Nguyễn
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
16 views

Semantics Unit 1part 2

The document discusses the difference between literal and speaker meaning in language and provides examples of sentences with implied meanings. It also examines how semantics studies meaning and some of the methods involved, such as analyzing sentences at the literal and implied levels and asking native speakers for definitions. General statements are made about different parts of speech and how semantic theory can apply across languages.

Uploaded by

Bình An Nguyễn Nguyễn
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 12

Semantics Unit 1

Part 2 P. 8-15 Practices 5-11


The Gap between and Sentence Meaning and Speaker Meaning
Literal VS Speaker Meaning
 (1) Tired traveler: "This suitcase is killing me" Yes / No
 (2) Assistant in a shop: "We regularly do the impossible;
miracles take a little
 longer” Yes / No
 (3) During a business meeting: "It's' a dog-eat-dog
situation“ Yes / No

 It is necessary to analyze at two levels: firstly, to show


what is ‘wrong' with such sentences, i.e. why they can't
be literally true, and secondly, how speakers nevertheless
manage to communicate something by means of them.
The Methods of Semantics – How one studies meaning
 .
 Can two people hold an ordinary conversation without knowing the
meanings of the words they are using? Yes / No

 (2) Is it reasonable to say, if I use such English words as table and hair
in the normal way in my conversation, communicating the usual
messages that one does with these and other words, that I know the
meanings of the words table and chair?
Yes /No

 (3) If one knows the meaning of a word, is one therefore
 necessarily able to produce a clear and precise definition of its
meaning? Yes / No

 (4) Conversely, if several speakers can agree on the correct definition
of a word, do they know its meaning?
Yes / No
The Study of Meaning - continued
 (5) Do you happen to know the meaning of the word ndoho
 in the Sar language of Chad, Central Africa? Yes / No

 (6) Would a sensible way to find out the meaning of ndoho


 be to ask a speaker of Sar (assuming you could find one)? Yes / No
 (j) The word ndoho in Sar means nine, so it is not a particularly rare or
technical word. Would any normal adult speaker of Sar be an appropriate
person to approach to ask the meaning of the word?
Yes / No

 (8) If a native speaker of Sar insists that ndoho means "nine (or the
number of digits on two hands, less one, or however he expresses it),
while a distinguished European professor of semantics who does not
speak Sar insists that ndoho means ten(or dix, or zehn, however he
translates it),

 who do you believe, the Sat-speaker or the professor?


Definition of a Terory
A THEORY:
 is a precisely specified, coherent, and
economical frame-work of
 interdependent statements and definitions,
constructed so that
 as large a number as possible of particular basic
facts
 can either be seen to follow from it
 or be describable in terms of it.
A complete Semantic Theory must make sense of basic facts about
meaning
Mark each of the following statements true (T) or false (F).
(l) Alive means the opposite of dead.
(2) Buy has an opposite meaning from sell.
(3) Caesar is and is not a meaningful English sentence.
(4) Caesar is a prime number is nonsensical.
(5) Caesar is a man is nonsensical.
(6) Both of John s parents are married to aunts of mine is in a sense
contradictory, describing an impossible situation.
(7) If the sentence John killed Bill is true of any situation, then
so is the sentence Bill is alive.
(8) If someone says, "Can you pass the salt?" he is normally
not asking about his hearer's ability to pass the salt, but
requesting the hearer to pass the salt.
(9) If someone says, "I tried to buy some rice", his hearer
would normally infer that he had actually failed to buy rice.

Each of the true statements here (and the negation of the false ones) is a
statement of some particular basic fact falling within the scope of semantics.
To discover some system and pattern it is obviously necessary to try to move
from particular facts, such as those mentioned above, to generalizations, i.e.
statements about whole classes of items.
Think carefully about each of the following general statements,
to say whether it is true (T) or false (F).

(l) Proper names (like English John or German Hans or French Jean) have a different kind of meaning
from common nouns. (like English man, or German Mann or French homme).
T/F

(2) Prepositions (like English under, or German unter, or French sous) have a different kind of meaning
from both proper names and common nouns. T / F

(3)Conjunctions (like English and or German und, or French et) have yet a
further kind of meaning from both proper names and common nouns, and
prepositions. T/F

(4) Articles (e .g. English the, German der, or French le) have a different kind of
meaning from proper names, common nouns, prepositions, and conjunctions.

T/F
The statements just considered are general in several ways. Firstly, they
deal with whole classes of words, e.g. the whole class of prepositions,
and not just with the individual examples actually mentioned. Secondly, they apply not just to English,
but to human languages in general – to Arabic and Russian no less than to German and French.
We take up this point about semantic theory being applicable to all
languages below. Notice that many of the particular basic facts about meaning
in English mentioned in the last practice but one have clear counterparts in
other languages, e.g. German and French.

This practice assumes a knowledge of French and German: do as much as you


can. Mark each of the following statements true (T) or false (F).

(1) In German, lebendig means the opposite of tot. T / F

(2) In German if the sentence Hans hat Willi getotet is true of any situation, then
so is the sentence Willi ist tot. T/F

(3) If a German speaker says, "Konnen Sie mir das Salz


reichen?", he is normally not asking about his hearer's ability
to pass the salt, but requesting the hearer to pass the salt. T/ F

Many basic facts about English have exact parallels in other languages.
No theory be it chemical theory, phonetic theory,
mathematical theory, semantic theory, or
whatever, is complete. That is, no matter how
many facts a theory actually succeeds in
explaining or predicting, there are always further
facts in need of explanation, other facts about
which the theory as yet makes no prediction (or
possibly about which it makes a false
prediction), and facts which do not seem to be
readily describable in the terms provided by the
theory.
Look at Hecataeus' map of the world below (after Grosser historischer
Weltatlas,ed. H. Bengston, ] 972), originally drawn about 520 B.C.;
then answer the questions.

(1) Is there enough similarity between this map and a modern map to
conclude that they are both attempts to represent the same thing? Yes / No
(2) In what areas would a modern map coincide most closely with this?
(3) In what areas would a modern map diverge most from this?

(4) Does it seem reasonable to assume that a modern map is generally a better
representation of the actual geographical facts?
(5) Is it conceivable that a modem map could be wrong in some respects?
Yes /No
(6) How must the correctness of a map ultimately be checked?

(7) Are climatic conditions or geological facts represented on a typical modem


map?
(8) Are there new techniques, invented outside the immediate domain of the
map-maker, available to the modern mapmaker, but unavailable to the
ancient mapmaker?
(9) Have the actual geographical facts changed in any way since 520 B.C.?
The analogy between the development of semantics and the development
of other areas of knowledge can be pressed quite far. Aristotle can be
regarded as a forerunner of modern semantics, just as Hecataeus was
forerunner of modern geography. Aristotle was clearly concerned with
the same general areas that concern modem semanticists.

Today's semanticists have at their disposal certain modern techniques


(e.g. symbolic logic, generative grammar) not available to the ancients.
As far as we can tell, although individual languages have changed
(Modem Greek is very different from Ancient Greek), the basic ways
in which language is used to convey meaning have not changed at all.

Take a positively critical attitude to the ideas being put forward. If you
disagree with the 'feedback' to some exercises, try to work out why,
and discuss the problem with your tutors and fellow students.
Semantics is not cut-and-dried in its final state. You can contribute to
its development by active discussion of the ideas
in this book, many of which may be as imperfect as Hecataeus' map.
Assignment for Wednesday:
Unit 2: Sentences, Utterances, and
Propositions

Pages 16 – 19
Practice Exercises 1-4

You might also like