Semantics Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Def.: Semantics

A

‘Semantikos’ from Ancient Greek = ‘meaningful’

A sub discipline of linguistics which devotes itself directly and exclusively to the systematic study of meaning.
Chiefly concerned with the meaning at the level of the linguistic system, that is de-contextualized or Potential meaning. (Meaning in context would be pragmatics)

Semantics - meaning of propositions (abstract, de-contextualised)

(Utterance situated in discourse context)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

semasiology versus onomasiology

A

Semasiology (from Greek, “signification”) is a discipline of linguistics concerned with the question “what does the word X mean?”. It studies the meaning of words regardless how they are pronounced. Semasiology starts with a word and asks for its meanings.
It is the opposite of onomasiology.
____
Onomasiology (from Greek: ὀνομάζω (onomāzο)—to name, which in turn is from ὄνομα—name) is a branch of linguistics concerned with the question “how do you express X?” It is in fact most commonly understood as a branch of lexicology, the study of words (although some apply the term also to grammar and conversation).
____

The exact meaning of semasiology is somewhat obscure. It is often used as a synonym of semantics (the study of the meaning of words, phrases, and longer forms of expression). However, semasiology is also sometimes considered part of lexical semantics, a narrow subfield of lexicology (the study of words) and semantics.

The term was first used in German by Christian Karl Reisig in 1825 in his work, [Lectures on Latin Linguistics] (German: Vorlesungen über lateinische Sprachwissenschaft), and was used in English by 1847. Semantics replaced it in its original meaning, beginning in 1893.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Semantics

- what types of words are there?

A

proper names,
nomenclature,
function words,
lexical words

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Sign theory

A

Part of semantics

words as symbols, i.e. signs expressing an arbitrary relation between a form and its meaning(s)
a matter of convention
–> de Saussure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Semantics, sign theory

- motivation versus arbitrariness of form

A

Motivation:
The presence of some degree of necessity between the signified and siginifier of a sign. Makes the sign proper, and complete motivation makes the sign lawful. For example, a painting may resemble its subject, making it a proper sign.
Antonym: arbitrariness.

Arbitrariness:
The absence of any degree of necessity between the signified and siginifier of a sign. Makes the sign symbolic. For example, in English we say “bachelor” to refer to an unmarried man, but since we might just as well say “foobar”, therefore “bachelor” is a symbol.
Antonym: motivation.

__________
Proper Sign :
A sign which has an intermediate degree of motivation. For example, a photograph is a proper sign.
Cases: icon, index.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

the relevance of encyclopedic

knowledge

A

encyclopedic knowledge:

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

the position of semantics in linguistics

A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

the principle of relativity

A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

aspects of meaning

A

Descriptive meaning:
- sense/reference,
- intension/extension;
- connotation/denotation,
__________
First words of pairs relate to conceptual side of meaning and to the problem how to provide a def. of meaning.
- sense: descriptive meaning is independent of a particular utterance and situational context
- intension of a linguistic expression is the bundle of semantic features
- connotation are secondary meanings

Second words are contrasting and relate to the relation between language and the world.

  • reference: relations between external world (referent, if in particular context) and words
  • extension: class of potential referents (e.g. all bottles of the world)
  • denotation: Denotation is generally defined as literal or dictionary meanings of a word in contrast to its connotative or associated meanings. sometimes viewed as same as extension. But generally broader term.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Semantics

  • Ways of defining meaning
A
paraphrase,
pointing, 
sample reference, 
group of referents, 
typical features, 
prototypical member
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Semantics

- contrasts

A

complementary
(binary, exclusive opposites)

gradable
(inclusive contraries),

relational
(converses),

directional
(reversive)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

word field theory

A

Lexical field theory, or word-field theory, was introduced on March 12, 1931 by the German linguist Jost Trier. He argued that words acquired their meaning through their relationships to other words within the same word-field. An extension of the sense of one word narrows the meaning of neighboring words, with the words in a field fitting neatly together like a mosaic. If a single word undergoes a semantic change, then the whole structure of the lexical field changes. The lexical field is often used in English to describe terms further with use of different words.

Trier’s theory assumes that lexical fields are easily definable closed sets, with no overlapping meanings or gaps. These assumptions have been questioned and the theory has been modified since its original formulation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

cognitive semantics

A
  • Is one area of study of cognitive linguistics (CL)
  • CL is based on the idea that language reflects the way our brains organize meaning, the way our brains process meaning and how we perceive the world
  • in CL it’s believed that linguistic knowledge involves not only knowledge of the language but knowledge of the world; our knowledge of the world is reflected in how our language is built-up
  • cognitive semantics (CS) holds that language can only describe the world as people conceive of it
  • CS is built on the argument that lexical meaning is conceptual: meaning is not necessarily reference to the entity or relation in some real or possible world; instead, meaning corresponds with a concept held in the mind based on personal understanding
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Semantics

  • metaphor theory
A

Part of cognitve semantics.
Conceptual metaphor theory

…explains how when using a metaphor two concepts are mapped together.

Source domain --> target domain
(Vocab from source mapped on to target domain)
EXAMPLE:
"An Argument Is War"
- we are fighting
- win the argument
- lash out
- etc.

unidirectionality

  • typical directions
  • -> source concrete and target abstract?

Types of metonymies?

Conceptual blending, mental spaces

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Lexical semantics

A

The study of meaning of individual words

Strictly speaking the unit of semantic description is the lexeme, the abstract entity subsuming the various inflectional forms of a word

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Def.: Lemma

A

In lexicography, the Lexeme is often present as the lemma, i.e. the headword of an entry.

Thus, we would not expect a diff entry for boys and boy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Difference between semantics, lexicology and lexicography

A

Lexicology covers aspects of lexical semantics but in addition studies the morphological form and structural status of words

Lexicography could be said to be an applied branch of lexicology as it chiefly concerned with appropriate ways of representing meaning in dictionaries for various types of users. In that Sense it is a branch of applied linguistics

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Structural and cognitive semantics

- where’s the difference?

A

Structural semantics exclusively focuses on the sense relations of the words and expressions that exist within a language system. It looks at language like a network of semantic relations with each word constituting a node in this network. The meaning of a word is defined by what it has in common with other expressions and by what distinguishes it from them. Structural semantics describes and analyzes meaning.

Cognitive semantics focuses on how our perception of the world influences the way our language is built up. Furthermore, it’s based on the idea that meaning is linked to how we group phenomena into conceptual categories. Cognitive semantics explains meaning.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Connotation - Denotation

Semantics

A

Semantics

Connotation secondary meaning, but can also be generalized (encyclopedic meaning?)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Sense - Reference

Semantics

A

Sense of an expression is its descriptive meaning, which - in contrast to reference - is independent of a particular utterance and the situational context in which the utterance was made.

Philosopher Gottlob Rege first introduced difference between ‘sense’ and ‘reference’..

Why useful?

  • linguistic expressions with diff. meanings (senses) may very well have the same referent(s).
    e. g. noun phrase: ‘the Leader of the Labour Party’ which may also refer to the phrase ‘the Prime Minister of Great Britain’
  • also useful for words which lack referent but do have sense
    e. g. unicorn, dragon

_____
reference:
designates the relation between entities in the external world and the words which are used to pick out these entitites (e.g. persons, objects, events, places, points in time, etc.)
example:
a) Take the bottle and put it in the dustbin.
b) He took a bottle and put it in a dustbin.

c) A bottle is not a dustbin. –> non-referring sense!

21
Q

Intension - Extension

Semantics

A
Extension designates the class of objects to which a linguistic expression can be applied, i.e. the class of its portential referents.
(e.g. in the sentence: A bottle is not a dustbin.
the class of all bottles and the class of all dustbins)

A referent of a linguistic expression is always a member (or subset) of the class of objects that constitutes the word’s extension.
The term “denotation<2 is often used synonymously with “extension” but sometimes is understood in a broader sense which covers not only the relation between nouns or noun phrases and groups of individuals or objects, but also the relation between words belonging to other word classes and the extra-linguistic phenomena they relate to.
Thus,
verbs denote situations
adjectives denote properties of individuals and objects
adverbs denote properties of situations

22
Q

dictionary meaning vs. encyclopedic meaning

A

encyclopedic meaning of a lexeme as a opposed to its dictionary meaning, that is its descriptive meaning, the much more rigid definition we find in dictionaries.

23
Q

structural semantics

A

In sum, the principal goal of structural semantics is to show that the vocab of a lg is a structured whole in which nothing happens in isolation and where various recurrent semantic structures can be identified.
The 2 most important types of such structures (or: networks) are lexical fields and lexical (or sense) relations.

24
Q

Componential analysis

A

Componential analysis
= feature analysis or contrast analysis

  • the analysis of words through structured sets of semantic features, which are given as “present”, “absent” or “indifferent with reference to feature”
  • a method typical of structural semantics (analyzes the components of a word’s meaning
  • -> reveals the culturally important features by which speakers of the language distinguish different words in a semantic field or domain (Ottenheimer, 2006, p. 20).
  • valuable approach to learning another language and understanding a specific semantic domain of an Ethnography
  • method departs from the principle of compositionality.
Example:
man = [+ MALE], [+ MATURE] or 
woman = [– MALE], [+ MATURE] or 
boy = [+ MALE], [– MATURE] or 
girl = [– MALE] [– MATURE] or 
child = [+/– MALE] [– MATURE].

In other words, the word ‘girl’ can have three basic factors (or semantic properties):
human, young, and female.
Another example, being edible is an important factor by which plants may be distinguished from one another (Ottenheimer, 2006, p. 20).
To summarize:
- one word can have basic underlying meanings that are well established depending on the cultural context. It is crucial to understand these underlying meanings in order to fully understand any language and culture.

25
Q

meaning relations

- common terms

A
  • polysemy
  • ambiguity
  • vagueness
  • homonymy
  • synonymy
  • hyperonymy
  • meronymy (holonym and meronym)
26
Q

synonymy

A

Part of Semantics - sense/meaning relations.

the concept is used to describe semantic equivalence or rather extensive semantic similarity between two or more lexemes.

  • descriptive synonyms may be interchangeable in man but not all contexts
  • may differ with regard to their connotations, sylistic register, regional or social variety

–> total synonyms (are interchangeable in all contexts) are very rare

27
Q

atonomy

A

Part of Semantics - sense/meaning relations.

Contrasts with synonymy and covers various types of semantic opposites.

a) complementary or binary atonyms:
- either-or relationship between the two terms
- ‘oppositeness’

b) gradable atonyms:
- two expressions merely consitute opposite poles of a continuum
- also called ‘contraries’ or simply ‘antonyms’

c) relational opposites (converses)
- antonyms which describe the same situation from diff. perspectives (e.g. teacher - pupil; employer - employee; older - younger; give - take)

d) directional oppositeness
- involves a change of direction, especially motion in different directions
- e.g. open - shut; leave - return, etc.

28
Q

markedness

A

markedness is the state of standing out as unusual or divergent in comparison to a more common or regular form.
In a marked–unmarked relation, one term of an opposition is the broader, dominant one.

EXAMPLE
old - young

the term with the
WIDER RANGE OF USES
is called UNMARKED.
(as in: How old are you?, rather than how young are you?)

The term with a more limited range is called marked. (young, short, etc.) –> ‘stands out more’ when used

  • the modern concept of markedness originated in the Prague School structuralism of Roman Jakobson and Nikolai Trubetzkoy as a means of characterizing binary oppositions.
29
Q

hyponymy, hyperonymy, heteronymy

A

sense or meaning relation which involves hierarchies in the vocabulary, i.e. super- and subordination.
_______
hyponym refers to words like rose, tulip, daisy, and lily, which stand in a reationship of subordination to a more general expression like flower.
Flower is the superordinate or hyperonym of the terms above.

Hyponyms have all the semantic features of the hyperonym plus some additional ones, which destinguish them from the hyperonym on the one hand, and from the other hyponyms situated on the same hierarchical level on the other.
_______
Heteronyms:
are hyponyms relating to the same hierarchical level. They are also called co-hyponyms

30
Q

meronymy

A

Semantics - sense relations/meaning relations.

refers to part-whole relationships (e.g. finger - hand; toe - foot, etc.)

Meronymy, as opposed to hyponymy, is not necessarily a transitive relationship.

31
Q

Give a brief overview of different sense or meaning relations.

A
meaning relations:
a) non-hierarchical
  i) synonymy
  ii) oppositions
    - complementary atonymy
    - contrariness (gradable atonymy)
    - converseness
    - directional opposition
   (- heronymy)

b) hierarchical
i) hyponymy
ii) meronymy

32
Q

Lexical ambiguity

A

as opposed to structural ambiguity.
meaning of lexeme alone is unclear, ha to be put into context.
e.g. ‘match’

structural ambiguity: meaning of sentence or clause is ambiguous
e.g. ‘visiting relatives can be boring’

Lexemes with only one descriptive meaning are called “monosemous”. Many lexemes, however, have several descriptive meanings and are thus
(a) members of more than one lexical field, and
(b) nodes in a network of sense relations contracted by monosemous lexemes.
Such ambiguous words can be divided into two major types:
polysemous and
homonymous items (homonymy).
_________
polysemy: single lexeme having several meanings
- often metaphorically or metonymically connected.

homonymy: different lexemes that happen to have the same form.
- usually synchronically or also diachronically, therefore impossible to establish a connection between diff. meanings. (race; horse race - human race)

33
Q

polysemy versus homonymy

A

Semantics - lexical ambiguity.

polysemy: single lexeme having several meanings
- often metaphorically or metonymically connected.

homonymy: different lexemes that happen to have the same form.
- usually synchronically or also diachronically, therefore impossible to establish a connection between diff. meanings. (race; horse race - human race)

___
total hymonymy: identical with regard to their grammatical properties

partial hymonymy: not identical with regard to grammatical properties

34
Q

homophones, homographs

A

homophones:
see - sea; sight - site, etc.
–> sound same, spelling and meaning different

homographs:
lead /led/ (type of metal)
lead /li:d/ (to lead)
–> look the same, meaning and sound different

35
Q

ambiguity versus vagueness

A

Terms used in cognitive semantics referring to different instances of plurality of meaning.

Ambiguity, Polysemy and Vagueness
“form a gradient between total semantic identity” (vagueness) “and total semantic distinctness”(ambiguity)

______

–> Ambiguity:
Usually only one particular meaning of an ambiguous word fits a given context. Ambiguous words are disambiguated by contextual selection of one of their (descriptive) meanings.
Common test:
- two cases with diff. contexts.

Such tests help find out if word is either ambiguous or merely vague.

–> Vagueness:
involves “a lexeme with a single but nonspecific meaning”

Typical examples of vagueness are kinship terms, e.g. child, as well as lexemes with flexible boundaries, e.g. gradable adjectives like tall

36
Q

structural semantics

A
  • examines language as a static system of interconnected units
  • is based on the idea that language is a complex system of relations
  • according to structural semantics, the meaning of an expression is defined by what it has in common with other expressions and by what distinguishes it from them
  • supports the idea that the vocabulary of a language is structured according to lexical fields (networks) and lexical relations (sense relations)
  • internal focus on the language system
37
Q

prototype semantics (vs. componential semantics)

A

How is our knowledge about a certain entity or activity, which helps us to categorize it, organized?

Traditional view (componential semantics):

  • categorization is achieved (a) by means of “necessary conditions” = features which are indispensable for an entity to qualify as a member of a given category & (b) by means of “sufficient conditions” = when all of the various necessary criteria apply
  • The traditional view of categorization implies that categories have clear-cut boundaries

In prototype semantics:

  • rejection of classical view of categorization; view that categorization in everyday life is much more flexible and fuzzy than suggested in componential semantics; we can assign an entity to a category if it shares at least some central features with the category prototype, and (in most cases) looks physically similar to it
  • Some ducks have no wings, others cannot quack, even though they have all other properties associated with ducks, and are therefore spontaneously categorized as ducks because they do, after all, come very close to our idea of a prototypical duck, or at least correspond much more to the prototype of a duck than to the prototype of a rivalling category (e.g. goose)
  • assumption that all knowledge which is accessed in a particular situation is relevant to the process of categorization (dictionary knowledge as well as encyclopaedic knowledge
38
Q

dictionary knowledge (or: expert knowledge); encyclopaedic knowledge

A

dictionary knowledge: knowledge of what is essential, pertaining to what speakers know in virtue of their command of a language

encyclopaedic knowledge: additional knowledge pertaining to what speakers know in virtue of their acquaintance with the world

39
Q

fuzziness of category boundaries (prototype semantics)

A

Not all category members are equally good representatives of the category

  • There are different degrees of representativeness
  • Categories have a core consisting of the prototypes (= the best representatives), which serve as reference points in the process of categorization, and which are surrounded by increasingly peripheral areas of members that are more and more different from the prototye(s)
  • In cognitive semantics: emphasis of fuzziness of category boundaries = it is often not possible to give a clear answer to the question whether or not an entity belongs to a category; there are grey areas of transition between neighboring categories where we are not capable of unambiguously assigning an entity to one category rather than another; different speakers might even classify the same entity differently on different occasions
40
Q

models of category structure: classical theory vs. family resemblances (prototype semantics)

A

classical theory:

  • categorization is achieved by necessary and sufficient conditions (componential semantics)
  • categories have a core consisting of the best representatives (prototypes), which serve as reference points in the process of categorization, and which are surrounded by increasingly peripheral areas of members that are more and more different from the prototype(s) (prototype semantics)

family resemblances:

  • A category can be held together by nothing more than a complex web of overlapping and crisscrossing similarities among its members
    Wittgenstein makes an analogy between categories and families = family members resemble each other: some have a similar nose, others the same eyes etc.; the same goes for individual members of a category
41
Q

What is a metaphor?

A

Greek “metaphora” = a transfer from “meta” = over, across + “pherein” = to carry, bear

  • refers to a figure of speech which is based on a relationship of similarity or analogy between two terms from different cognitive domains
  • this similarity may be objectively given or merely subjective; it enables metaphors to ‘transport’ one or more properties of a usually relatively concrete source domain (or: vehicle) to a typically more abstract target domain (or: tenor)
42
Q

difference between metaphor and metonymy

A

Metonymies do not involve a transfer from one cognitive domain to another; they are rather based on an objectively existing connection between two ‘contiguous’ phenomena, such that one phenomenon stands for the other. Metonymies are not based on the relationship of similarity but on contiguity. The phenomena or entities concerned are part of the same situation or the same conceptual structure.

43
Q

prototypes, metaphors and polysemy

A
  • prototypes and metaphors are both relevant to investigating polysemy at the level of word meaning
  • prototypes are crucial to explaining polysemy because polysemous expressions can be described as prototype categories in that they have one or more central meanings (the prototypes), each of which can have increasingly peripheral sub-senses, and all of which are connected by different kinds of family resemblances
  • there is a close connection between polysemy and metaphor as a central cognitive mechanism for grasping and classifying new entities with the help of familiar ones, and abstract things with the help of concrete ones
44
Q

Sapir-Whorf hypothesis

A

= is a principle claiming that the structure of a language affects its speakers’ world view or cognition, and thus people’s perceptions are relative to their spoken language.

Also known as “The hypothesis of linguistic relativity”, part of relativism.
____________

— The STRONG version says that language determines thought and that linguistic categories LIMIT and DETERMINE cognitive categories.

— The WEAK version says that linguistic categories and usage only INFLUENCEthought and decisions.

45
Q

What are basic level (category) words?

–> important for foreign language learning!

A

Eleanor Rosch - Prototype Theory

  • superordinate level [furniture]
  • basic level [chair]
  • subordinate level [dentist’s chair]

Linguist Eleanor Rosch defines the basic level as that level that has the highest degree of cue validity (the conditional probability that an object falls in a particular category given a particular feature or cue).
[So the basic level is highest no. of cues that would allow it to fall into category?]
Thus, a category like [animal] may have a prototypical member, but no cognitive visual representation. On the other hand, basic categories in [animal], i.e. [dog], [bird], [fish], are full of informational content and can easily be categorized in terms of Gestalt and semantic features.

  • are the most culturally salient and have most basic cognitive functions
  • difference between entities are perceived bc the categories provide recognizable gestalts
  • -> at this level the most common idealization of features of a category are found, or rather the most relevant conceptual information relating to a category is stored at the basic level

____
- the words used more often
- less marked (more in use), children learn these first (adults use those when talking to kids)
- Rosch had ppl draw e.g. a chair > almost all the same
then had draw ‘furniture’ > all different

46
Q

What does family resemblance and Wittgenstein have to do with Semantic Linguistics?

A

Family resemblance is a philosophical idea made popular by Ludwig Wittgenstein.
It argues that things which could be thought to be connected by one essential common feature may in fact be connected by a series of overlapping similarities, where no one feature is common to all of the things.
Famous EXAMPLE: Games
- as an example to explain the notion, has become the paradigmatic example of a group that is related by family resemblances.
–> ‘games’ have common features but no one feature is found in all of them.

–> Prototype theory (recent development in cognitive science) has explored this idea.

47
Q

What is prototype semantics?

A

= a mode of graded categorization in cognitive science, where some members of a conceptual category are more central than others.

In this theory, any given concept in any given language has a real world example that best represents this concept:
Prototype = the most central member of a category

  • defines concepts by necessary and sufficient conditions

–> Rather than defining concepts by features, the prototype theory defines categories based on either a specific artifact of that category or by a set of entities within the category that represent a prototypical member.
Contrary to the classical view, prototypes and gradations lead to an understanding of category membership not as an all-or-nothing approach, but as more of a web of interlocking categories which overlap.

EXAMPLE: when asked to give an example of the concept furniture, a couch is more frequently cited than, say, a wardrobe.

Prototype theory has also been applied in linguistics, as part of the mapping from phonological structure to semantics.

48
Q

Common Q:
Name approaches to lexical semantics.

Where are their limits?
Their advantages?

A
  • structural semantics/feature/check list
  • -> limited bc only binary features work
  • -> but helps to define lexical fields
  • cognitive: prototype theory
    –> limited bc culture dependant, e.g. game
    solution –> family resemblance?
    –> pro: advantage that you can use the theory to describe lg change
    e.g. through prototype changes w/ meaning (e.g. box used to be out of wood)
    e.g. new members join (e.g. game –> computer game)
49
Q

How do German and English differ in terms of Semantics?

A
  • false friends
  • one lg has larger concept, other has more categories
    Karte –> card, menu, map
    fruit –> obst, Frucht Früchte
  • also diff. connotations
  • gaps