SEMANTICS

(Week 1)

In its pre-scientific period (before it became a science), semantics dealt with three issues:

The meaning of the word

The structure of the vocabulary

Semantics and grammar (word order)

Linguistics is the SCIENTIFIC study of language. The question is; how scientific semantics can
be?

Semantics is a technical term to refer to the SCIENTIFIC study of meaning.

In English it can simply mean meaning.

Where do we find meaning? In phonology, morphology, syntax and lexis (lexicology).

We first find meaning in words; languages may change its phonology, syntax, but they never
lose meaning.

The traditional levels of analysis involved in the study of meaning are

Phonetics

Phonology
Morphology
SEMANTIKA
Syntax
Lexis

Semantics is relatively new, its development came much later.

Phonetics is more concerned with voice/sound and not language so much. That is why it is
divided.

Lexis can be replaced with lexicology, which deals with words and the structure of
vocabulary (semantics in the narrow sense!).

1
Lexeme is also a technical term. Lexicology also deals with lexemes which can have only one
meaning (the term is used to avoid ambiguity of what word can mean).

This traditional list has changed, instead of lexis now theres semantics both on the list and
on the side, but its the same discipline.

The one on the list is the one dealing with the 3 topics from the top (the meaning of the
word, the structure of the vocabulary, semantics and grammar).

The one on the side deals with meaning in relation to other branches on the list (there is an
interrelationship between meaning and various other linguistic disciplines).

THE MEANING

-phonology: the meaning is established through minimal pairs. It is necessary to prove what

a phoneme is.

-morphology: the meaning is established through bound and free morphemes.

Bound morphemes have a very active relationship with the nouns they appear with.
Morphology is very much connected with meaning because without it the distinction is
impossible.

the pencil/ a pencil what are a and the ? They DO mean something so they cannot be

grammatical morphemes. But they arent lexical morphemes, either.

The grammatical/lexical distinction is, therefore, not good.

A better distinction is bound/free morphemes.

-syntax: the meaning is very important.

The dog bit the postman. / The postman bit the dog.

The subject position is the doer of anything that follows. English is morphologically
poor and has a fixed word order. Meaning is off if the word order is wrong, whereas
WO in Croatian is quite free.

SYNTACTIC SLOTS CARRY MEANING!

2
 Chomsky and his TG (transformational generative grammar) introduce major
changes into syntax.

1957- Syntactic structures: this is where it all began; Chomsky comes up with a vision
of how syntax in English functions but he excluded meaning from syntactic
structures.

(Fun fact he could not find a publisher for his book in the USA and eventually
found it Netherlands; Europe made a fortune out of him; a huge number of reprints
of the book)

1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax: he tried to incorporate meaning but came up
with surface and deep structures and performance and competence/ competence
and performance.

You cannot have syntax without a content and semantics. Form does not exist
without content!

Chomsky based all his theoretical thinking on English which is rapidly approaching analytical
languages. Chinese is, for example, an analytic language without morphology- they
communicate by tones.

When English lost its rich morphology, it strengthened its syntax.

The efficiency of a language has to be maintained so the balance is kept.

BEGINNINGS:

Karl Reisig (1839) a book on Latin verbs, chapter on semasiology

He realised the importance of meaning. He claims that a new science should be set up
semasiology which is a precursor of semantics.

Michel Bral first coined the term smantiquie in 1883 (from Greek semainein to mean,
to signify)

1897 Essai de smantique

1900 English translation (Semantics: studies in the science of meaning)

He is the father of semantics because he coined the term. He does not do semantic analysis,
he just says it should be done.

Ogden and Richards (1923), The Meaning of Meaning, analytical rigour (the most important
contribution)

3
They werent linguists, they were semiologists (analyse sings of all kinds). They introduced
the notion that meaning can be analysed from scientific perspective (semantics must
become scientific!).

Semantics is central to the study of the human mind and semantics is central to the study of
human communication.

WITHOUT MEANING, THERE IS NO LANGUAGE!!!

SEMANTICS AND OTHER RELATED DISCIPLINES

Etymology belongs to the times of philology, but has also become different because it
analyses the meaning of the word. It deals with the origin of words, in the past it dealt with
how the form developed through time and it was the predecessor of historical linguistics.

Its contemporary approach is analysing the changes in the meaning. Today it analyses
change both in form and meaning.

-philology dealt with the scholarship of TEXTS, can be studied in more language-
oriented view.

Lexicology is the part of linguistics which studies words. This may include their nature and
function as symbols,[1] their meaning, and the rules of their composition from smaller
elements (morphemes and phonemes as basic sound units).

Lexicography is very related to semantics. It is the art and science of dictionary making.

There is an important distinction between monolingual, bilingual and conceptual

dictionaries.

Monolingual dictionaries are extremely important because they provide additional

information. For example, Webster dictionaries have encyclopaedic approach, they explain
entries in specific details; they also include drawings. Other examples: Oxford dictionaries,
Collins dictionaries (done on a corpus!).

Bilingual dictionaries dont usually provide additional details, just the translation of a word.

Conceptual dictionaries (for example Rogets Thesaurus) work on the base of concepts. They
are specialized dictionaries. For one entry they provide the whole concept of it, and they are
not structured alphabetically like mono and bilingual dictionaries.

4
There is also a difference between historical and encyclopaedic approach to making
dictionaries.

An encyclopaedic dictionary typically includes a large number of short listings, arranged

alphabetically, and discussing a wide range of topics. Encyclopaedic dictionaries can be
general, containing articles on topics in many different fields; or they can specialize in a
particular field, such as Art, Biography, Law, Medicine, or Philosophy. They may also be
organized around a particular academic, cultural, ethnic, or national perspective.

A historical dictionary... ?

Stylistics is a discipline of literary studies. It entered linguistics in early 70s.

The Anglo-American term is discourse analysis, and the European term is text linguistics.

It analyses both SPOKEN and written.

Spoken is much more analysed in Anglo-American world and less in continental Europe.

Language contains different registers, we speak differently in different contexts.

Language is a system and we have to know how, when and where to use it.

Terms in traditional semantics:

Lexeme definition: Lexemes are vocabulary words which may take on different forms
depending on the context they find themselves in. (Lyons 1977). It is one meaning of a
certain word.

Cruse 1986 family of lexical units, pairing of a meaning and a form

WORD ambiguous, one word can have many meanings.

to run (one verb) all its meanings are lexemes of the word run. Lexemes, not words!!!

- He ran across the field. = tri

- He runs the motorshow. = he is in charge; void
- He runs for Hampshire. = to be a political candidate
- The road runs from Manchester to Birmingham. = protee se, void
- The car is running well. = radi

Types of meaning- Pre-scientific approach to different kinds of meanings

5
Primary (conceptual) meaning is fundamental for communication.

Leechs definition is that conceptual meaning is the central factor in linguistic

communication.

Contemporary approach specifies knowledge and defines it as something that encompasses

all the essential KNOWLEDGE necessary in order to USE OR UNDERSTAND a certain form
correctly.

To use or understand language stands for communication.

The definition of a woman according to Dr. Johnsons 18th century dictionary:

Capable of speech, prone to tears, gentle, compassionate, skirt or dress wearing, cowardly,
emotional, irrational, able to speak (!)...

Contemporary definition: female (biological), human, adult, has the capacity to give birth

Conceptual meaning - the knowledge of the world that defines a concept can change
radically and concepts change from age to age.

Concepts are never ending lists of elements, but despite that open endlessness, conceptual
meaning is still the basic one.

For example: dogs were working animals in the past (used for hunting and guarding) but
today they are pets. The word is the same, the animal is the same but the concept has
changed.

Secondary types of meaning

Stylistic meaning: what is communicated of the SOCIAL circumstances of language use.

Language provides different words that we use in different contexts and we have to know
the rules. Different contexts and registers dictate the choice of words. Language provides
different words with different connotations.

Something colloquial can become amazingly widespread and can become a standard.

Dialectal forms can enter the standard language if it doesnt have an adequate word for it.

Even with stylistic meaning, nothing is fixed. (brijati, leati, frka...)

The social circumstances change and so does the stylistic meaning.

6
Affective meaning: what is communicated of the feelings and attitudes of the
speaker/writer; we use different intonation for the same words and it can change the
meaning completely.

The way we pronounce sentences affects the meaning.

Youre a vicious tyrant and I hate you for it.

You can pronounce this utterance (=izriaj) in an angry or sarcastic way, but the utterance is
the same.

Reflected (not reflective!!!!) meaning: has to do with when one sense of a particular word
affects the understanding and usage of all the other senses of the word

-taboo words differ from language to language.

The Comforter vs The Holy Ghost- part of its meaning was reflected through

The Comforter

Taboo words reflect meanings that are not socially accepted and are generally avoided

and taboos which are expressed through euphemisms.

intercourse: it used to mean to speak but it became sexually tainted, the meaning
is reflected into sexual sphere
erection: used to mean building zdanje
ejaculation: used to mean pushing something out, but it had to be something liquid

the word sex stopped being a taboo.

From a completely innocent meaning (to speak, building, push out...) you get words that
became taboos.

TABOOS ARE CULTURALY BASED!!!

7
-religious examples can have different connotation depending on when and where they are
used;

-political ideas can also be taboos

-the whole sphere of meaning moves very fast

Collocative meaning:

It is the second most important type of meaning and is of exceptional importance.

A collocation functions as an unit, it is not as fixed as an idiom. It is a narrower concept and

includes an adjective and a noun. (Red wine=crno vino)

- pretty girl, boy, woman, flower, garden, colour, village, etc.

- handsome boy, man, car, vessel, overcoat, airliner, typewriter, woman

Women can be handsome, but then there is an exceptional restriction in meaning. A

handsome woman is elegant, has a fancy style of wearing, usually middle-aged or older, she
has posture. (For example: Angela Merkel would be a handsome woman. Or maybe Milena
ic-Fuchs? ) However, a girl cannot be handsome!!!

Cows can wander, but cannot stroll. People stroll because they decide to do it. Cows dont
decide to do it. Collocative meaning works on a sentence-level, it is a wider term than
collocation!

(tremble quiver) You tremble from fear, because you are afraid and you quiver out of
excitement or pleasure.

Snarl words: words whose conceptual meaning becomes irrelevant because whoever is
using them is capitalizing on their unfavourable connotations in order to give forceful
expression to his own hostility

Nigger, boy (an implication of the status of niggers)

-swear words of different kinds do not belong in this category

-now the ultimate euphemism is African-American

Euphemisms: greek well-speaking; the practice of referring to something offensive or

indelicate in terms that make it sound more pleasant or becoming that it really is accepted in
a certain culture or society. (Example: gay).

8
Leech:

disease and indisposition for illness

privy, water-closet, toilet, cloakroom, rest room (in public in the US), comfort station
(appearing more and more in modern novels), loo, bathroom (in private homes in the
US) for lavatory
countries are not backward or undeveloped, but developing, less developed,
emergent nations, third world nations etc.
- invalids: disabled, challenged, handicapped
- prostitute: sex-worker, street walker

Conceptual and secondary meanings are prone to social and diachronical changes, they are
highly dynamic, culture-depending and socially affected, they can change overnight and
depend on the cultural factors.

(Week 2)

-again pre-scientific notions

Functions of language refer to universal approach to what we use language for.

Roman Jakobson (big name, great contribution) emphasized these:

1. Informational function

It is related to conceptual meaning which is a primary type of meaning and second hand
version, especially in LEECH, is the notion that the language conveys information.

It is assumed that it is the most important. (for Jakobson)

2. Expressive function

We use language to express our feelings and attitudes. It correlates with the effective
meaning.

3. Directive function

It is very important. Leech portraits Jakobsons thoughts: we use it in order to influence the
behaviour and the attitude of others.

How do we do this? Natural assumption: we have imperatives, but we use them very rarely
because we use more polite options such as requests, questions, etc.

9
Its hot in here meaning Open the windows.
This politeness is social factor in this function.
Speech acts, however, are complicated with children. You learn them later as you grow up.
Children cannot recognize it. (Razgovor na telefonu: Je li ti mama doma? Odgovor: Da. Ali
dijete nee pozvati mamu jer ne prepoznaje da pitanjem Je li ti mama doma zapravo
elimo da nam proslijedi mamu na telefon.)
We influence people in a very roundabout way, we dont transfer just information.

4. Aesthetic function

Jakobson wrote a lot about it. It has the effect of art and is the least important one for our
purposes.

5. Phatic function (phatic communion)

This is a social and a psychological phenomenon.

We keep our communication lines open.

This function is the most fascinating one; Jakobson took it over from an anthropologist
Bronislaw Malinowski who lived with people on Trobriand Islands at the end of the 19th and
the beginning of the 20th century.
He wrote papers about linguistic specific nature of these islands.

American anthropologist Franz Boas lived with Indians in northern America.

They both emphasized the necessity of close proximity for the study of language.
They noticed that people there had their ritual speech and named it phatic communication.

A: Hi!
B: Hi!
A: Warm enough for you?
B: Sure is. Looks like rain though.
A: Well, take care.
B: Ill be seeing you.
A: So long.
B: So long

-A and B exchange a kind of information, but not hard core information.

10
If a communication line breaks (a fight), it is very difficult to start again.

Ogden and Richardson were right- the meaning is central for communication.

Remember: this is still pre-scientific

END OF DAY 1

Saussurean dichotomies

Ferdinand de Saussure made first steps toward making linguistics a scientific science of
language. He is the father of structuralism. Structuralism appears wherever theres
structure.

His book Course in General Linguistics came out in 1916. It was a work of his students and
is fundamental for understanding language as a system and the way a structure works.

1. Langue vs. Parole

language vs. speech
Parole is a concrete linguistic output the stuff we say, the actual realization of
language.
Aorist is the generic past tense; it is still part of the system.
Parole has changed in nature.
Language is a system, its alive and its in our head.
The system is different in different parts, it is arbitrary.
It takes centuries to change phonology and morphology.
Saussure stresses two things:
a) The social character of language
b) The phonological aspect of language.

The third term he uses is LANGUAGE. This is the term for both langue & parole, the
whole language phenomena. The language is an unity of both language and parole
and it should always be looked at as a whole. Language is what keeps all the stuff
together and is extremely important.

2. The linguistic sign: basic unit of communication.

The signifier and signified form and content plan izraza i plan sadraja
This distinction is important.
The link between them is obligatory, they are always interrelated, there is no way of
separating them.

form
11
 content

3. Diachronical and synchronical research

Diachronical is historical perspective of some languages development.
Synchronical research can be whats happening right now or at a certain point in
time.
Every point at which we stop at diachronical research is a synchronic research.
Again, they form unity, a combination of both.
A dichotomy should be always viewed as an entity.

4. Syntagmatic vs. Pragmatic level of language organization

This is related to langue and parole.
Syntagmatic level: in the domain of parole; the organization is linear, refers to what
we actually produce. There are rules, it is not random.
Paradigmatic level: language functions as a system within which there is a
relationship between units as parts of that system. In order to make a choice you
have to know how they are related. They are not separate, they function as a whole.
One has to know the relationships on both paradigmatic and syntagmatic level in
order to speak a language.

HOMONYMY

One form, but different meanings

Meanings are not related in any way! this is the traditional definition of true homonymy

bank1 financial institution

bank2 bank of a river

-there is no connection in meaning

ABSOLUTE vs PARTIAL homonymy

Absolute homonymy appears between two lexemes/words that are not related in meaning,
and they have to conform to the following three criteria:

1. Their forms must be unrelated in meaning

2. All their forms must be identical
3. Identical forms must be syntactically equivalent
(2. and 3. are basically the same thing)

pupil1 a part of an eyeball

pupil2 a student

12
-there is no relatedness

sole1 bottom surface of foot/shoe

sole2 flat fish

-the notion of flatness is what they have in common not the best example of absolute
homonymy

bat1 a small animal

bat2 a wooden stick

-no relatedness of meaning; absolute homonymy, a great example

Partial homonymy

ex. sharing a grammatical category

find (nai) vs. found (osnovati)

They found hospitals and charitable institutions. ambiguous because they have the same
form here

The bell was rung at midnight. - verb

A rung of the ladder was broken. noun

This is partial because they belong to different grammatical categories.

POLYSEMY

Usually called multiple meaning, i.e. single word (form) with several meanings

neck part of the body / of a bottle / of a shirt / a narrow piece of land (a neck of land
between a lake and the sea)

They are related in meaning which is not the case in homonymy (the existence of
relatedness!). The meanings are related according to the principle called metaphorical
extension. This relatedness is simple. Metaphors are important in the way humans think and
conceptualise.

foot part of the body / of a mountain/hill

hands of the body / of the clock

We recognize it on the basis of popular etymology (a native speaker can vouch for the
relatedness of meaning).

SYNONYMY

Traditional definitions: expressions with the same meaning; one meaning but different
forms.

13
absolute (istoznanice) vs. partial synonymy (bliskoznanice)

Does the absolute synonymy exist?

Lyons claims there is no such thing as absolute synonymy. He belongs to Anglo-American

tradition.

Criteria for what would be absolute synonyms (practically impossible to achieve):

1. Synonyms are fully synonymous if and only if all their meanings are identical.
2. Synonyms are totally synonymous if and only if they are synonymous in all contexts.
3. Synonyms are completely synonymous if and only if they are identical in all relevant
dimensions of meaning.

radio vs. wireless In Australia, there is a difference of meaning. They were the
absolute synonyms during the WWII. However, languages are economical systems
and absolute synonyms are actually useless. In this example, there is a denotational
difference in meaning.
airfield (not commercial, can be rough, military use them, have no facilities) vs.
airport (has a lot of facilities) vs. aerodrome (technical term used in military
textbooks, stylistically marked and not used on regular basis)
pneumonia vs. inflammation of the lungs (descriptive synonymy)
(bachelor unmarried man: you cannot call the Pope a bachelor; there is a range of
applicability)
There is a discrepancy of usage.
Not only phonological system has rules that prevents you from doing what you want,
semantic system has them too.

-appear for a very short period of time because languages economise!

-synonyms may be collocationally restricted:

- a big house vs. a large house (bigger in space) there is a semantic difference
- my big sister vs. my large sister shed be offended, it doesnt work

a big mistake vs. a large mistake? (unusual, collocational range both these
adjectives have a range of nouns they can appear with legitimately!)

flaw product, personality, argumentation

blemish skin (complexion)
defect psychological things, argument

-overlap of meaning, but you wouldnt use them with same things/words

14
Flaw/blemish/defect dont denote just physical but also psychological

huge/enormous/gigantic/colossal/humongous find nouns to show collocational range!

These adjectives are restricted by their collocational range. They show a larger quantity of
expressive meanings than big and large.

statesman (positive meaning) politician (semantically marked, can even be used

metaphorically for people who are not politicians and if we use it in that way, it has a
negative connotation)
stingy (negative meaning) economical (a positive connotation)
fragrance smell; fragrance has a positive meaning while smell is ambiguous and
usually has a negative connotation
stench (sth rotten) stink (people); both have negative connotation.

These examples differ in positive or negative aspect of meaning.

Conclusion: it is very delicate and complex to talk about synonyms, but this might be our
essay question.

Week 3

Is semantic scientific? traditional semantics (prescientific) vs. scientific semantic theories.

There is no semantic theory that would be accepted by all semanticists.

Can semantics be regarded as science?

Sciences explain phenomena.

Anglo-American approach: the word science used to pertain to natural sciences, then to
medical and technical and then to social sciences and humanities. The division of the last
two differs from country to country.

Interdisciplinarity and transdiciplinarity

When it comes to research, fundamental things are

1. subject of study for semantics it is language and meaning
2. methodology how you do it

In a methodology called mentalism, shared knowledge (in a linguistic community) is very

important. Shared knowledge is different from culture to culture. Not all concepts are
identical among speakers.

15
If it werent for the unity of mental images, we wouldnt be able to communicate.

Science can be EMPIRICAL and based on research on concrete data through observation,
corpora, and in mental domain: interviews, surveys.

Lyons, 1977: empirical implies that you are dealing with a certain subject matter not on the
basis of speculation and intuition but are operating with publicly verifiable data obtained by
observation and experiment (=corpora).

The subject matter can be accessed on the basis of speculation, intuition and observable
context.

In corpora it can be frequencies of occurrence.

The first corpus ever compiled was in 1967 Brown Corpus (Francis and Kuera) they
worked out a methodology how to produce a corpus and it had a million words.

British National Corpus (BNC) has over a billion words.

Croatian corpuses:

1. Marko Tadi: Croatian National Corpus (1990) printed matter, we do not have a
corpus of spoken language
2. Institute of Croatian language and linguistics: Riznica hrvatskog jezika

4 requirements (criteria) that we could call the ideal for a theory of language:

1. EXPLICITNESS (self-evident)
2. OBJECTIVITY
3. SIMPLICITY OF EXPLANATION
4. COMPLETENESS OF DESCRIPTION

The contextual view of meaning

Types of context:

1. immediate linguistic context (John is my ally) on syntagmatic level, depending on

what surrounds a certain linguistic element
2. context of situation Malinovski 1910 meaning realized in the context of the
situation; the context of culture, depending on where you are, you speak differently,
it is imbedded in the context of culture; was taken over by Firth and Bloomfield.
3. ic Fuchs: a context of culture chrysanthemum is culturally dependent, if you use
them in the wrong context, you could offend someone.

J.R. Firth stuck to the distinction between the first two contexts.

16
L. Bloomfield 1933, Language
Before his book, scientists had a psychological approach to language.
He was Sapirs student and was influenced by Weiss (behavioural psychologist).
Because of behaviourism, people were regarded as intuitive beings just like animals, and
as having no emotions. According to Weiss, linguistics function in the same way on the
principles of physical, emotional and intellectual stimuli.
Linguistics had to attain to analytical rigour.

For Bloomfield (the father of American structuralism), MEANING only comes from
natural sciences, not from anything that is mentalistic. His famous example is NaCl
sodium chloride as the definition of salt.

According to Bloomfield, the definition of salt is NaCl. But what about people who dont
know the chemical formula for salt and still use it every day? People are able to describe
salt even though they dont know the formula.

He stressed that abstract notions such as love and hate cannot be defined according to
analytical rigour.

He thought meaning was unattainable and destroyed the study of meaning, for 30 years
anthropologists were the only people who studied meaning.

Bloomfield was an anti-mentalist.

British school of contextualism: Michael Haleday and Firth.

Chomsky, Syntactic Structure, 1933-1957: meaning was not dealt with in mainstream
linguistics; it went to the field of anthropology.

How do we deal with context?

-recent work in semantics has returned to mentalism against which Firth, Bloomfield
and their contemporaries reacted.

In cognitive semantics mentalism is different today because cognitive semantics

interacts with neuroscience and psychology.
Concepts are shared by the members of a community (if they werent, we wouldnt be
able to communicate), they represent common knowledge of the world and
fundamental features. De Saussure was right about mental images we all have it in our
heads.
However, mentalism as an approach DOES NOT ELIMINATE CONTEXT!

In spite of criticism, context is an important factor in communication.

Mental side and the contextual side; the context of culture; languages are embedded in
culture.

17
 Meaning is often predictable by context:

SPLASH! UPSIDE DOWN! Newspaper titles that mean nothing without the context

ITS OFF

JANET! DONKEYS!

Context narrows down the communicative possibilities of the message as it exists in

abstraction from context; this takes place in the following ways:

1. Context eliminates ambiguities or multiple meanings (ex. page- boy attendant vs. a
piece of paper)
2. Context indicates referents of certain words we call DIECTIC words ex. here (where
the speaker is), there (anything away from the speaker), this, that, now, then, hrv.
Evo, eto, eno, taj, ovaj, onaj; other expressions of definite meaning, ex. him (personal
pronouns), John, it
Deixis is a phenomenon which cannot be explained without context, either sentential
context or the meaning of situation. Every context possible is needed for the analysis
of the deictic words. These kinds of words change relatively often.
Spatial deixis: yonder (ondje) in literature and some dialectal forms.
Hrv. Ovdje (place of the speaker), tu (relatively close, where your listener is), ondje
(far away from both the speaker and the hearer) based on the contextual situation
of the speaker and the listener and give information about the distance.
Ondje is used less in big cities because of the urban dialects (rural tokavian speakers
use it).
The urban speeches are very powerful and with media, they make the mechanism
behind changes.
3. Context supplies information which the speaker has omitted through ELLIPSIS (that
are very important in SPOKEN language).
Spoken language abounds in ellipsis. We usually leave out the last part of the
utterance. This doesnt hinder communication because we retrieve the information
from the situational context. Context is extremely important for multitude of
reasons.

Mentalism and Intuition + introspection

18
Mentalism is used as a cover term for the whole thing. It refers to any scientific attempt
which relies on introspection (systematically going through knowledge of the world).
Mentalism is an alternative to contextualism.

Noam Chomsky supports mentalistic approach and claims that data about language can be
supplied by direct resort to intuition of the native speaker which means that a theory can be
based on the judgment a native speaker can make on the language (s)he speaks.

Chomsky put language back in the brain.

Bloomfield had that animalistic approach, but Chomsky reintroduced the human and
cognitive capabilities that humans have. Chomsky sees language as one of the centres of
the left hemisphere which has the capacity to enable you to use language and is completely
independent of all other human cognitive capabilities like learning, memory, perception in
the most general way possible. So, there is one centre for language in the brain, but it is
disconnected of all other parts.

Cognitive linguistics consists of knowledge of language and knowledge of the world.

Its indebted to Noam Chomsky, but the difference from his approach is that cognitive
linguistics puts language as an integral part of the human cognitive capability.

In order to use language effectively, you have to have the knowledge of the world and one
without the other does not function.

Triangles of meaning

THOUGHT OR REFERENCE (concept)

(ne znam ba crtat trokutove)

SYMBOL REFERENT

This is a triangle of meaning by Ogden and Richards (The Meaning of Meaning) who
introduced the term analytical rigor. The triangle represents a mentalistic approach.

The most important relationship is that between SYMBOL and THOUGHT. It is the dominant
relationship.

REFERENT is an entity outside of human being, the real world around us.

19
THOUGHT or REFERENCE is actually the mental concept.

SYMBOL is understood in a wider sense.

The relationship between SYMBOL and REFERENT is an IMPUTED relationship that is

arbitrary. Its not god-given, for speakers of a language this relationship is real conceptually.
The dotted line implies arbitrariness.

Ogden and Richards were semioticians. They claimed that the meaning doesnt reside only in
language.

ULLMANN 1963 (the triangle on the left)

IC FUCHS 1991 (the triangle on the right; she has better terminology)

sense lexical concept

NAME THING lexeme denotatum

He tried to argue the previous triangle. Even though the relationships are pretty much the
same, names are, however, worse! He changed the terminology. In his mind, the
relationship between NAME and SENSE is the most important. Instead of SYMBOL, he uses
NAME. However, NAME evokes a personal name, its not exact. Instead of REFERENT he
uses THING, but not all referents are things; it is too concrete. Because of this he was widely
criticized.

BUT, he did get 2 things right:

1. He put the arrows

2. Instead of THOUGHT and REFERENCE he uses SENSE which is an alternative term for
MEANING and represents something mentalistic.

All three triangles dont belong to empirical but mentalistic approach.

(Triagles indicate meaning is a 3-part concept!!!)

20
Even de Saussures
form
(linguistic sign) implies MENTALISM.
content

IC FUCHS, ZNANJE O JEZIKU I ZNANJE O SVIJETU

-what do we have to know about the word were using?

-2 major factors: syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations
These are the fundamentals that determine the knowledge of the language.
The knowledge of the world is organized in the same way (on the same fundamentals) the
language is organized.
The triangles are about the activation of the knowledge (=meaning).

(sad u handoutima pogledajte onaj Milenin trokut, ne mogu ga sad crtat, ivot e mi proi!)

ic Fuchs uses leksiki koncept instead of thought. Koncept is the key word because it
relates to lexemes in question. People within a specific linguistic community share concepts.

Do we have concepts in our head that we dont lexicalize?

She uses lexeme instead of word because word is ambiguous and lexeme is more
specfic.

She uses denotatum (technical term from Latin) instead of thing because a referent can
be abstract. This has to do with the knowledge of the world it refers to. This term avoids
concrete objects (can also mean something abstract, does not have to be physical). Its
important for triggering a concept and giving it a name.

Meaning is a process and an activation of 2 kinds knowledge (the language and the
knowledge of the world). This process is instantaneous.

Week 4

21
Mentalism vs. the notion of analytical rigour- how do you balance these two?
The first attempts of serious rigorous analysis of meaning started around 1950s in Europe.
Two big theoretical events were generative -Chomsky (US)- and cognitive linguistics (US).
US military force after WWII invested huge amounts of money in cognitive science for
military purposes.
Cognitive science is interdisciplinary.

COMPONENTIAL ANALYSIS

Def: the analysis of word meanings is often seen as a process of breaking down the sense of
a word into its minimal distinctive features, i.e. into components which contrast with other
components.

The first attempts appeared before WWII in Europe.

The meaning of each word

Whenever there are + and the analysis

is TRADITIONAL COMPONENTIAL
man +HUMAN +ADULT +MALE
ANALYSIS.
woman +HUMAN +ADULT -MALE
The components are words in capitals.
boy +HUMAN -ADULT +MALE
This analysis wanted to attain analytical
girl +HUMAN -ADULT -MALE
rigour

words derive part of their meaning

from paradigmatic relationships

The components give us the meaning of each word.

They took four words and not one because words derive part of their meaning from their
paradigmatic relationships.
However, the definitions are not adequate (ex. man has a generic meaning, putting
CHILDBEARING in the definition of a woman would make it lose its rigour and there wouldnt
be an opposition).

The opposition is the only way to derive at + and -

S1 with a back
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S2 raised above the ground
chair + + + + - + S3 for one person
armchair + + + + + + S4 to sit in or on
stool - + + + - + S5 with arms
sofa + + - + + +
S6 with solid material
puffe - + + + - -

22
S4 doesnt really have a point since all the examples have + (steady plus, it is unnecessary to
put it as a separate component).

These examples provide analytical rigour for semantics in a reductionist manner and make it
more scientific.

However, they dont provide true definition or what one has to know about these examples.
It doesnt provide the knowledge of the world.
This kind of analysis is very close to Bloomfield (NaCl for salt).
Despite the lack of what meaning is, the componential analysis exists as a methodology.

There has to be the minimum of 2 lexemes involved because it functions on the basis of
contrast/opposition.

Generic (unmarked) vs. marked terms

MAN
DOG

-generic terms, they refer to both sexes.

woman
bitch - provides metaphorical terms with different meaning

-marked terms

COW bull
DUCK- drake without relatedness of meaning, there is no componential analysis.

J. Lyons: componential analysis leaves unexplained at least as much as it succeeds in

explaining this is a very critical remark, but he is right.

Relations between related meanings of different terms

Nida- 1975 his claim that componential analysis shows different kind of relationships into
which lexemes can enter.

1. INCLUSION (simplest one)

In many instances the meaning of one word may be said to be included within the
meaning of another

Animal dog poodle

23
 Bitch cocker spaniel etc.
-without the bitch the example would be much better (not a good fit)

Color red vermillion royalty these two can be included

scarlet - pigeon blood into dark red
dark red - ?
blue

move walk amble the way people walk

stroll conscious act, done for pleasure

all verbs of motion are related to it

2. OVERLAPPING (ok, Word me ljuti, nacrtajte si dio ovog drugog kruga )

They are not identical in meaning, but they do overlap in that they can be
substituted one for the other in at least certain contexts without significant changes
in the conceptual content of an utterance.
-absolute synonymy
-the diagrams can differ in the quantity of overlapping the degree of overlap varies!

Give vs. bestow : you bestow honours is there some kind of inclusion?
Possess vs. own : possess refers physical and psychological world.
Ill vs. sick : the difference is in duration, intensity
Answer vs. reply: physical difference reply; answer is more informal

3. COMPLEMENTATION
Meanings complementary to each other involve a number of shared features of
meaning but show marked contrasts and often opposite meanings
(nacrtajte dijagram!!)

Good bad : opposite

24
 High low : opposite
Beautiful ugly : opposite
Buy sell : contrast (they belong to the same scene)
Lend borrow: contrast (they are not the same thing)

4. CONTIGUITY
(dijagram )

These relations can be found between closely related meanings occupying a well
defined, restricted semantic domain and exhibiting certain well marked contrasts.
-a bunch of lexemes belong to the same domain.

COLORS
Violet-blue-green-yellow-red etc. they share a semantic domain
Walk-jump-hop... they are connected in a loose way, they are verbs of
motion (remember: marked contrast!) and the
relationships between walk, amble and stroll are much
closer; they are related in meaning

American linguistics: componential analysis is not a theory but a methodology: a

mechanism to try to comprehend meaning.

(predzadnja stranica u handoutu, onaj neki dijagram o semantikim teorijama i glagolima

kretanja)

Eugene Nida 1970s American

This analysis shows the loosening of analytic rigour because it doesnt use just + and -, it
includes words and numbers.
RUN: at one point, both of your legs are in the air.
WALK: at least one of your legs is always on the ground.
DANCE: sticks out, some kind of music is a necessity, for others it is not. It usually includes
other people, community. This example was criticized as a different motion, the question
was how related must the example be?

Anna Wierzbicka went to Australia and studied Aboriginal languages.

She thought about meaning of a lexeme.

25
Doesnt belong to any theoretical circle, shes an individual brought up in European
structuralism.
Her book from 1985 is called Lexicography and conceptual analysis.
She thought about the knowledge of the world and claimed that it depends on specialised
knowledge (potato-plant).
What comprises the meaning of any lexeme? What comprises the knowledge of the world?
(What do we have to know?)
She is referring to the knowledge that life brings, her examples are ordinary implements.
When describing these things, we go into minute details.
Descriptive components componential analysis goes into minute details for the purpose of
the usage of a particular word.
There is no end to components, her analysis shows that analytical rigour is not + and -, it is
going into minute details.
Her minute analysis of cups and mugs shows that lexemes are interrelated.
People later used the same examples because it is easier to show differences in opinions on
the same examples.
She doesnt consider herself to be a cognitive semanticist.
The difference between her examples and the others is that she doesnt use + and but
high level descriptive components minute descriptions.
The main feature of the components is that every single component is interlinked.
However, these objects are identical neither in appearance nor in purpose.

MATERIAL: porcelain (cups) and ceramics (mugs) fragile

USAGE: cups have saucers in order to prevent them from overturning; we use theam at a
table!
Mugs are thicker, flat at the bottom, more stable and keep liquids warm. We carry them
around!
She is trying to show that every single physical aspect of cups and mugs is interrelated.
In principle, these components are considered to be necessary.

Cultural differences about cups and mugs:

Cups set: 6 (Croatia) families are bigger (grandparents usually live with the family)
4 (UK) 2 parents, 2 kids
-the number is related to the way of living!
-Slavic tribes and the concept of a family (sojenice)
-contemporary social concept individualized mugs for friends, decorated in a specific way
- standardized cups are posh, more fancy

The difference stems from physical appearance and usage to social concepts.

26
Componential analysis has to reflect the knowledge of the world in minute details and this is
done by very detailed components for the purpose of establishing what knowledge of the
world is necessary or is not that necessary in using a particular word.
The list of components is never-ending. Meaning is a list of never-ending list of things!
This analysis is very progressive: the term analytical rigour changed its meaning.
Because of its precision, the term analytical rigour became even more rigorous.

27