2.Explanations of Word Meaning, Semantic Theory Ruth M. Kempson 1977

University of Babylon
College of Education for Humanities
Department of English

BY
A’mer Sagheer Allwan Al-A’mery
amer.amery@Yahoo.com
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1000047

Supervised by
Asst. Prof. Dr. Qassim Abbas
qassimdhayf@Gmail.com
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001523273930&ref=br_rs
10-10-2016

Semantic Theory
Ruth M. Kempson
1977

2.Explanations of Word Meaning2.Explanations of Word Meaning
What is semantics?
Some views concerning the study of meaning
Meaning and Reference,
The Image Theory of Meaning,
Meaning and Concepts.

What is semantics?What is semantics?
 Semantics is the study of meaning.
 Meaning is central to the study of communication
 Linguistic-philosophy, the study of relations
between linguistic expressions and what they refer
to in the real world and the truth value of
linguistic expressions.
 Linguistic-psychology, the study of the workings
of the mind through language.
 Semantics, the study of meaning from linguistic
point of view.

Some Views Concerning theSome Views Concerning the
Study of MeaningStudy of Meaning
 It is assumed that the relationship between a word
and what it is used to imply and that between a
sentence and what is used to imply presented no
problems, and weren’t a matter of debate at all.

ButBut
An explanation of these relationships of linguistic
item(s) and what they refer to…
What we mean when we refer to the meaning of a
word of a sentence>>> the Classical Problem of
Semantics.

Philosophers & LinguistsPhilosophers & Linguists
There are three ways in which linguists and
philosophers have attempted to construct
explanations of Meaning in natural
language.>>>

Philosophers & LinguistsPhilosophers & Linguists
1. Defining the nature of WORD meaning.
2. Defining the nature of Sentence
Meaning.
3. Explaining The Process of
COMMUNICATION?

1. Word meaning1. Word meaning
Word Meaning is taken as the construct in
terms of which sentence meaning and
communication can be explained.

2. Sentence Meaning2. Sentence Meaning
It is taken as basic, with words
characterized in terms of the systematic
contribution they make to sentence
meaning.

3. Communication Process3. Communication Process
Both sentence and word meaning are
explained in terms of the ways in which
sentences and words are used in the act of
communication

Words & ObjectsWords & Objects
There is a relationship between words and
Objects, Actions
We use words to refer to Objects,
Actions…

SentenceSentence
Sentences are used to describe events,
beliefs, opinions.
Semantics explains the nature of the relation
between sentences and the state of affairs
they describe.

It is unquestionably the task of semantics to
explain the nature of the relation between
sentences and the state of affairs those
sentenced describe.

CommunicationCommunication
Since language is the vehicle by means of
which we effect communication, so the
interpretation of language should be
explained in terms of its role in
communication.

MeanMean
Supererogatory means superfluous.
Spinster means “unmarried woman”.
The sentence James murdered Max means
that someone called James deliberately
killed someone called Max.
.

Starting PointsStarting Points
We have at least three possible starting
points from which to construct an
explanation of meaning.
They are>>>>

1. The signification of words.
2. The Interpretations of Sentences.
3. The speaker’s intention to convey in acts
of meaning.

Of these three uses, most traditional
explanation of meaning constitute an
attempt to explain meaning in terms of the
naming relation which holds between a
word and its object.

Some Views Concerning theSome Views Concerning the
Study of MeaningStudy of Meaning
 .

The naming TheoryThe naming Theory
Reference Theory.Reference Theory.
It proposed by Plato --- An ancient Greek
scholar.
The linguistic forms / symbols or the words
used in a language are simply labels of the
objects they stand for. therefore, words are
just names or labels for things.

There is One to One correspondence
between name and object.
It perhaps the simplest theory of meaning is
to claim that Semantics is Reference, i.e, to
give the meaning of words one shows what
it denotes.

In its simplest form, this theory would claim
that reference picks out elements in the real
world.

Reference TheoryReference Theory
This relationship between words and
objects is called the relationship of
Reference.

According to this view, known as
extensionalism because of its treatment of
meaning in terms of the objects, called
Extensions, to which the items of the
language refer, the meaning of a word can
be explained in terms of the relation
between that word and object to which it
refers.

Proper Names>>>> Individuals.
Common Names>>> sets of Individuals.
Verbs >>>> Actions.
Adjectives>>> Properties of Individuals.
Adverbs>>> Properties of Actions.

This theory is imperfect, obviously. It is only
applicable to physical objects, but not to
abstract notions.>>> imagination.
dragon, think, hard, joy , slowly

The meaning of :
and, but, what, very.
Many Words have no meaning, i.e., it is
very difficult to find a real world referent.

Non-Existent Objects
Many expressions used by speakers do not
have a referent that exists or has ever
existed.
Pterodactyl, Unicorn, World War Three,
Batman.

A further problem is that even we are
talking about things in the real world, there
is not always a one-to-one correspondence
between a linguistic expression and the item
we want to refer.
The Iraqi Prime minister.>>Mr. Al Ebbady.
Venus>>> the morning/evening star.

Even Proper Names have no meaning in
spite that there is one to one
correspondence between word and object.
What is the meaning of Noam Chomsky???

So >>>
There is more to meaning than
Reference.

It was proposed as a solution to the
problems of explaining the nature of word
meaning, which has an equally long
tradition.
The Image Theory of MeaningThe Image Theory of Meaning

The conceptualist viewThe conceptualist view
This theory aims at explaining the meaning
of a word in terms of the image in the
speaker’s (hearer’s) brain.
The problem is to know what form the
images take.
They can not be visual.

One simple and very old idea is that these
mental entities are “images”. Presumably
the relationship between the mental
representation(the image) and the real world
entity would then be one of resemblance.

The typical example is the example of
Triangle.
Is it equilateral??
Isosceles??
Scalene??

Problems
One may have more than an
image for a single expression.

Dog

Problems
Two expressions may have the
same meaning.

A tired child.
Boy or Girl???
A child curled up and nearly asleep.
A child stamping his foot and screaming.

But
According to an account of meaning which
equates the meaning of a word has with an
image, any word which relates to more than
one image is predicted to be ambiguous.

According to the image theory of meaning,
these two expressions are synonymous.

But
Many expressions have the same image.
 A tired child.
 An unhappy child.
 An angry child.
As they evoke the same image of child
stamping his foot and screaming

The Problem of Speaker Variation.
From occasion to occasion.
Depending on Personal Experience.
e.g. Lecture, house, dog.
>>> so there will be differences in details.

There are many words with which it is
impossible to associate any image at all.
and, or, because, therefore…
love, justice, democracy…

Meaning & ConceptsMeaning & Concepts
The theory assumes a new level between
words and the world. i.e.,
“A Level of Mental Representation”
A noun gains its ability to denote because it
is associated with something in the
speaker’s/hearer’s mind.

Held by some ancient philosophers and
linguists with Ogden and Richards as
its representatives.
.

-What is the link between the symbol and
the concept?
-What does “thinking of the concept”
mean?
-People do not actually see the image of
something in their mind’s eye every time
they come across a linguistic symbol.

Words are referent to things through
mediation of concepts of the mind. That
is, there is no direct link between a
linguistic form and what is refers to;
rather, in the interpretation of meaning
they linked through the mediation of the
concepts in the mind.

The semantic triangle.
Triangle of significance.

The semantic triangleThe semantic triangle
or triangle of significance.or triangle of significance.
 Thought/Reference
 Symbol/Form Referent
The dog over there looks unfriendly.
The symbol: the dog
The concept: what a dog is like
The referent: the dog over there

Meaning and ConceptsMeaning and Concepts
It assumes that images are not visual.
E.g. House…
It is the symbol, first and foremost, not of a
single perception, nor even of the notion of
a particular object, but of a concept.

It is of a convenient capsule of thought that
embraces thousands of distinct experiences
and that is ready to take in thousands more.

It represents the most usual modification of
the image theory by hypothesizing that the
sense of some words, while mental, is not
visual but a more abstract element
A CONCEPT.

If this is a retraction from an image theory
of meaning, as it is, then it is a retraction
from a specific, false claim to one that is
entirely testable and hence vacuous.
It is no more than substitute for the problem
term meaning the equally opaque term
concept.

So, if meaning to be explained in terms of
concepts, it is essential that the term
Concept itself be given a rigorous
definition.

This has the advantage that we can accept
that concept might be able to contain the
non visual features which make:
a Dog a dog, and
Democracy a democracy.

Another Advantage for linguists is that they
might be able to pass on some of the labour
of describing concepts to psychologists
rather than to do it all themselves.

Some concepts might be simple and relaed
to perceptual stimuli >>sun-water…
Others will be complex such as Marriage
and Retirement which involve whole
theories and cultural complexes.

This theory avoids many of the problems
the naming theory has encountered, but it
also raises a completely new problem of its
own.

What is precisely the link between the
symbol and the concept remains unclarified.
People do not actually try to see the image
of something in their mind’s eye every time
they come across a linguistic symbol.

Componential analysisComponential analysis
 Componential Analysis (known as CA):
meaning is composed of meaning
components called semantic features.
Plus and minus signs are used to indicate
whether a semantic feature is present or
absent in the meaning of a word. e.g.

Linguists adopted componential Analysis to
give an explicit representation of the
systematic relations between words.

The meaning of words are analyzed not as
unitary concepts but as complexes made up
of components of meaning which are
themselves semantic primitives.

man >>>>
(semantic component, markers, feature)
+HUMAN, +ADULT,
+ANIMATE, +MALE.

CA is applied to kinship terms as well as
many areas of vocabulary.
Kill >>> intention, causation, death.

The main value of CA lies in the economy
of statements of these relationships which it
allows.

Analysing words in terms of CA into their
semantic primitives or components means
transferring the burden of semantic
explanation from word meaning onto the
components which together, in different
combinations, constitute word meanings.

Criticisms

It has been claimed that semantic features
are not defined in terms of “physical
properties and relations outside the human
organism” but are symbols “for the internal
mechanism by means of which such
phenomena are conceived and
conceptualized.

ConclousionsConclousions
i. Differing accounts of the nature of
meaning make different claims about what
constitute the proper domain of semantics.
And the setting up of a formal semantic
theory as one component of the general
linguistic theory, presupposes a solution on
this question>>> ????

ConclusionsConclusions
ii. Thus any such theory must be implicitly
presenting some claim as to the nature of
meaning- and if this claim is unfalsifiable,
then the theory itself becomes unempirical.

iii. In defining meaning in terms of mental
constructs, any theory has no apparent place
for an explanation of the relation between a
word and some objects that it may be used
to refer to, or of the relation between a
sentence and the state of affairs it describes

Each of these relations has been merely
reduced to an untestable relation between
an expression and a mental construct.

Such as in the word “Human”, there is no
one-to-one correspondence between the
word and the semantic component which
gives no explanation but a bald statement as
concept represented by [HUMAN].

iv. Characterising meaning merely in terms of
concepts is unexplanatory, and characterising
meaning in terms of reference seems to enter
into too many problems to be a convincing
solution.

This is not of course to suggest that
problems in the analysis of reference can be
dismissed, but merely that the relationship
of reference does not provide an adequate
basis for an explanation of word meaning.

2.Explanations of Word Meaning, Semantic Theory Ruth M. Kempson 1977

2.Explanations of Word Meaning, Semantic Theory Ruth M. Kempson 1977

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à 2.Explanations of Word Meaning, Semantic Theory Ruth M. Kempson 1977

Similaire à 2.Explanations of Word Meaning, Semantic Theory Ruth M. Kempson 1977 (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

2.Explanations of Word Meaning, Semantic Theory Ruth M. Kempson 1977