Theories of Semantics

Theories of Semantics The structural linguists were of the view that meanings cannot be studied as part of the linguistics since linguistics studies language as hierarchical structure of systems such as phonology, morphology and syntax. However, they describe meaning in a scientific manner by breaking up the meanings of words into distinct element. Meanings can be studies as part of linguistics since meaning is a part of language not independent of language. There is no escape from language and it is fundamental tool for expression of meaning. Thus, a semanticist is concerned with a description of the meanings of the words and sentences and in which manner the meanings of the words and sentences are used or understood. The native speaker of a language has semantic competence. A native speaker's "semantic competence" refers to their inherent ability to understand and appropriately use the meaning of words and phrases in their native language, including recognizing subtle nuances, identifying relationships between words, and judging whether a sentence is semantically coherent, even if it is grammatically correct; essentially, it's their deep knowledge of how meaning is conveyed within their language. A semanticist also helps to understand why some utterances are meaningless. An utterance is meaningless Because it is not logical in some way Because it violates some rules of lexical or grammatical combinations There is close connection between language and logic. Monday came before the day which followed it. (Circular statement) A "tautological statement" in semantics refers to a statement that is always true by virtue of its logical structure, essentially repeating the same meaning using different words, making it redundant and providing no new information; it's considered "true by definition" regardless of the context or truth values of its components. 1.At that moment in time, the stars dimmed. 2.This is a new innovation. 3.The vote was totally unanimous. (It is always a moment in time. The concept of time is inherent in the word "moment.") Innovations are always new. The concept of new is inherent in "innovation.") (The word "totally" doesn't add anything. "Totally" is inherent in "unanimous.") 1.The reason is because he left during the dinner. . 2.He was the reason why I left the job. 3.In our assessment, we think he is alive. 4.Of course, everybody's thinking evolves over time. (The word "because" doesn't add anything. It means "for the reason that.") (This example can be corrected by removing "the reason" or "why." They do the same job. "Why" means "for what reason." ) ("In our assessment" and "we think" do the same job.) (The words "over time" could be removed, but the emphasis on time would be lost.) There are some contradictory statements which are false in meaning e.g, My unmarried sister is married to a bachelor. In semantics, "contradictory statements" refer to two or more sentences or propositions that cannot be true simultaneously, meaning they directly oppose each other and logically cannot coexist; essentially, they express conflicting ideas that make it impossible for both to be true at the same time. 1. My sister is jealous of me because I am an only child. 2. John is alive and dead at the same time. 3. If a teacher asks, “Is the Earth round or flat?” and a student answers, “Yes,” 4. I always tell lies. (If the speaker always tells lies, then this statement must be a lie, meaning they sometimes tell the truth. But that contradicts the original statement) Factual Absurdity My uncle always sleeps standing on one toe. It cannot be true because it does not correspond to what we know about the real world. The Componential Theory of Meaning The componential theory of meaning, also called "componential analysis," is a linguistic approach that explains the meaning of a word by breaking it down into its basic, fundamental components called "semantic features" or "semantic primitives," essentially suggesting that a word's meaning is a combination of these smaller, more elementary units; this allows for the analysis of how different words relate to each other based on their shared features and distinctions. Key points about componential theory: •Semantic features: These are the basic building blocks of meaning, often represented as binary features (e.g., +human, -human) that indicate whether a particular characteristic is present or absent in a word's meaning. •Analyzing relationships: By comparing the semantic features of different words, linguists can identify semantic relationships like synonymy (sharing all features), antonymy (opposite features), and hyponymy (a word with a more specific meaning containing all the features of a broader term). Application to specific domains: This theory is particularly useful for analyzing specialized vocabulary where precise distinctions between concepts are crucial, like kinship terms or biological classifications. Example: •Consider the words "man" and "woman": • "Man": [+human, +male] • "Woman": [+human, -male] Criticisms of componential theory: Oversimplification: Not all meanings can be neatly divided into simple binary features, especially when dealing with complex concepts or figurative language. Cultural dependence: The selection of semantic features can be influenced by cultural interpretations and may not be universally applicable. Limited scope: This theory primarily focuses on the denotative meaning of words, neglecting aspects like connotation and pragmatic meaning. A "truth conditional theory of meaning" in semantics refers to a theory that defines the meaning of a sentence based on the conditions under which it is considered true, essentially stating that a sentence's meaning is equivalent to its truth conditions; this concept is primarily associated with philosopher Donald Davidson and is often considered a central approach in understanding sentence meaning within linguistics. Central idea: The meaning of a sentence is determined by when it is true, meaning the conditions in the real world that would make the sentence true. Application: By analyzing the truth conditions of a sentence, we can understand its meaning. Example: "The cat is on the mat" is true if and only if there is a cat physically located on a mat. Why is it important? Formalizing meaning: It attempts to provide a precise and logical way to represent the meaning of natural language sentences. Compositionality: Truth conditional semantics often incorporates the idea that the meaning of a sentence is built up from the meanings of its individual words and their syntactic arrangement. Potential limitations: Context dependence: •Some argue that truth conditions alone might not capture the full complexity of meaning, as context and pragmatic factors can influence interpretation. Ambiguity: •Dealing with sentences that have multiple possible interpretations can be challenging within a purely truthconditional framework. Presupposition is what a speaker assumes to be true before speaking, while entailment is what logically follows from what is said. Both are important in language use and social interaction. Presupposition •The speaker assumes the listener knows something •The speaker expects the listener to understand the presupposition •Examples include implicit meanings conveyed through language Entailment •A logical consequence that follows from what is said •Inferred from the sentence itself, not dependent on context •Examples include semantic entailments, which are logical consequences of an utterance Examples •"The dog no longer barks at the mailman" presupposes that the dog once barked at the mailman •"The chief constable arrested three men" semantically entails "The chief constable arrested two men" A "transformational generative model of grammar" refers to a linguistic theory, primarily developed by Noam Chomsky, that explains language structure by positing a "deep structure" representing the core meaning of a sentence, which is then transformed by rules ("transformations") to produce the surface structure, the actual spoken or written sentence we hear or read; essentially, it describes how a single underlying meaning can be expressed in various grammatical forms through transformation rules. Surface structure (sign) is one of two elements (the other element is deep structure) in Chomsky's theory called transformational grammar. Surface structures are the versions of sentences that are seen or heard, while deep structures (signified) contain the basic units of meaning of a sentence. Deep structure vs. surface structure: The core concept is that sentences have a deeper, underlying meaning (deep structure) which is then manipulated by transformation rules to create the final, observable sentence structure (surface structure). Transformational rules: These are the rules that map a deep structure to a surface structure, allowing for the generation of a wide range of sentences from a limited set of underlying structures. Importance of transformational generative grammar: •Explaining language creativity: By allowing for transformations, the model accounts for how humans can generate an infinite number of grammatically correct sentences from a finite set of rules. •Understanding sentence ambiguity: The deep structure can help explain how a single surface sentence can have multiple interpretations depending on the underlying meaning. Generative theory of meaning In semantics, it refers to a linguistic approach, often associated with "generative semantics," which aims to establish rules that predict which word combinations create grammatical sentences by directly linking meaning (semantics) to syntactic structures, essentially generating meaning from the underlying grammatical components of a sentence; this theory emphasizes the idea that meaning is not solely derived from surface structure but is actively constructed through a set of semantic rules applied to deep structures. Key points about generative theory of meaning: Deep structure focus: Unlike earlier models, generative semantics argues that the initial representation of a sentence is a deep structure which directly reflects the meaning, not just the syntactic arrangement. Semantic rules: This theory proposes a set of rules that operate on these deep structures to generate meaning, allowing for the analysis of how different word combinations create different meanings. Relationship to syntax: Generative semantics suggests that syntax is derived from semantics, meaning the structure of a sentence is determined by its underlying meaning. Semantic Field A semantic field refers to a group of words that share a common theme or are related by meaning. These words collectively contribute to a particular subject, concept, or idea within a text. For example, words like rain, thunder, clouds, and storm form a semantic field related to weather. Semantic field can be also called lexical field or domain. In linguistics, a semantic field is a lexical set of words grouped semantically (by meaning) that refers to a specific subject.