Semantics Flashcards
definition of semantics
semantics concern the study of meaning in terms of what conceptual contents (= information) we take words to encode
it is the conventional aspect of language, and it is determined by the language system and not by its use in context
is Saussure’s theory helpful to characterise meaning ?
it just states the conventional (= shared) nature of language, but it does not inform us on the notion of reference, which is the relationship between a word and the world
definition of meaning
what a language expression refers to
> person
> conditions that need to be met in order for the sentence to be true
in semantics, meaning is often construed as referential meaning, in relation with the concepts of denotation and reference
definition of denotation
it has to do with the human capacity of representing concepts and using words to name such concepts : it has to do with knowing the contant that the words used are associated with, and being able to identify world objects which correspond to it
so denotation is also construed as a property of words
definition of reference
it is an operation by which we signal that we are pairing a given linguistic unit with an actual object in the world
the actual person about whom we are talking is the referent
in order to talk about them, i use the words that are associated with them
what if semantics was reference ?
problems :
1. some words would have no meaning
2. some words which do not correspond to actual referents
3. many unique referents correspond to different expressions and have different meanings, and there is no one-to-one correspondence
therefore, we can conclude that there are different dimensions in semantic meaning
what did Frege talk about ?
distinction between sense and reference
fundamental distinction we need in order to talk about meaning
Frege’s paradox of identify statements
> a and b are either names or descriptions that denote individuals
a = a is true only if object a is identical to object a
a = b is true only if object a is identical to object b
a = a is a self-evident truth, while a = b is not. so there is a difference between the meaning of a = a and a = b. but if the two previous statements were true, they should have the same meaning
> so why is there a difference ?
the two cases are the same case, and that does not explain the difference in meaning between the two identity sentences
Frege’s paradox of substitution
if a name x appears in a true sentence and the identity statement x = y is true, then the substitution of x by y does not affect the truth if the sentence
the problem comes with belief reports
> but why aren’t the two sentences true if all we have done is change the name by which we refer to the same writer ?
Frege’s findings
meaning = sense + denotation
names and descrptions have a denotation (ex. they allow us to refer to objects in the world), but they also express a sense
the sense of an expression accounts for its cognitive significance. it is the way by which one conceives the denotation of the term
> so sense concerns a relationship inside the language
solution to the paradox of identity statements
in addition to reference, names and descriptions have a sense. it is the mode of presentation = the way we talk about the referent and how we describe and construe it
> in addition to reference, there is sense involved in meaning
different sense, because the way we construe and access the referent is different
> as a consequence, we should expect a different in meaning between identity statements of the form a = a and a = b
solution to the paradox of substitution
when names follow prepositional attitude verbs, they no longer denote what they ordinarily denote. instead, in those contexts, the name denotes its ordinary sense
these are two different thoughts, which correspond to different senses, so both sentences are different in meaning
what Frege gave us
a way of dealing with the facts that meaning has to do with a relationship between words and the world (= reference), and that meaning also has to do with some conceptual knowledge (= sense)
words which we can use to refer to things have both a sense and a denotation, and it is BECAUSE they have a sense that they can have a denotation
with sense and denotation, we have two different ways of describing the meaning of a given expression
extension in semantics
set of objects of the world to which the term can apply = set of possible referents
it supposes that we can list those objects : reference, denotation, range of applicability
intention in semantics
set of features shared by all objects denoted by the term = set of predicates belonging to a concept
it is linked to the process of understanding and construing, and also to a mental operation which consists in characterising and describing -> “internal” content, idea, concept
