Lexical Semantic: Referential Theory

There are several functions of language. At least there are three functions of language which become the fundamental basis in explaining meaning in language: (1) language function as the representation of reality; (2)  language function as media to gain and process information; and (3) language function as social fact which is able to create various forms of communication.

Related to the title of this article, the first function is used as the stand point for the referential theory. In referential theory, meaning is defined as label which is in human consciousness to point out the out side world. As label, the meaning appears because of the  process of observation and conclusion drawing through facts which make human possible to arrange and develop concept schemes. Therefore, put it simple, according to this view, the meaning of lexicon can be traced through its physical reference.

Moreover, the relation between lexicon and the thing it refers to is called referential relation, which becomes the part of extensionalism tradition, in which according to this tradition the meaning of word can be explained in a relation boundary between word and the thing it refers to. Further, this relation includes proper name which refers to person, such as Awin refers to a person who has written this article, noun which refers to thing, such as table refers nonliving thing made from usually wood functions to put objects on it and the couple of chair, verb which refers to action, adjective to the condition of thing or person, and adverb to the condition of certain action. Therefore, in the effort to gain meaning of lexicon by using this theory is emphasized on the observation of the out side world which can be felt by human five senses.

However, not all words/ lexicons of human language has physical reference, just say, the word: and, or, of , not, yet, no, very, in, etc.there is no evidence at all that those words refers to certain thing, or words such as: believe, want, and hope are also hard to define by this theory . This problem is getting worse if it is related to semantic categories of human perception. Since, not all categories of semantic field of human perception have physical reference. There are nine categories of semantic in human perception, those are:

(9) Being
(8) Cosmos
(7) Energy
(6) Substance
(5) Terrestrial
(4) Objects
(3) Living
(2) Animate
(1) Human 

This theory can explain limited only on the first to eighth but not the ninth, human senses only be able to capture those eight categories but not being which refers to abstract concept, such as sad, poverty, truth, love, etc

Types of Meaning

Semantics as one of the branches of pure linguistics is simply defined as the study of meaning in language. before going any further, first thing that you have to know is the word meaning itself, which becomes the focus of this study. Ferdinand de Saussure, one of the structuralism scholars introduces seven dichotomies in the effort to understand language, one of them is signifiant and signifie dichotomy. The first term refers to the form of language which is involved in a collection of phonemes, or in other words signifiant is the acoustic form of language or the basic form of phonological system of a language. Meanwhile, the second term refers to the mental image of a language, mental image refers to the intended meaning of it. De Saussure tried to tell us that in a language there must be symbols and thing that it's symbolized. The symbol can be so vary, it can be written, oral, and image, and the things  represented by those symbols are generally called meaning.

There are at least seven types of meaning (many linguists state their different categories of meaning) in semantic according Geoffrey Leech (1974), those are:

1. Conceptual meaning (logical, cognitive, or denotative content)
It refers to the dictionary meaning which indicates the concepts. In reading we can find many different words have the same conceptual meanings. Take the word walk as an example, the conceptual meaning or the primary dictionary meaning is to move forward by placing one foot in front of the other. There are also a few other words that, according to the dictionary, mean to move forward on foot, etc.

2. Connotative meaning (what is communicated by virtue of what language refers to)
It refers to the associations that are connected to a certain word or the emotional suggestions related to that word. The connotative meanings of a word exist together with the denotative meanings. The connotations for the word snake could include evil or danger.

3. Social meaning (what is communicated of the social circumstances of language use)
It refers to the usage of language in and by society which has big proportions in determining the meaning that certain speaker has to use and wants to convey, those factors include social class of the speaker and hearer and the degree of formality. Only part of the social meaning of a conversation is carried by words. Take saying hello or talking about the weather. Often such talk has little dictionary meaning. It is a way of being friendly or polite.

4. Affective meaning (what is communicated of the feeling and attitudes of the speaker/writer)
It refers to the speaker’s feeling / attitude towards the content or the ongoing context.It is important to remember that each individual will have a different affective meaning for a word. As such, only the person using a word will be aware of the particular affective meaning that they hold with the word. For example, we can discuss the word winter further. The word winter denotatively refers to a time period during which either the northern or southern hemisphere is furthest away from the sun.Different use of stress and intonation also provides a striking contrast in the feelings and attitudes communicated through an utterance.

5. Reflected meaning (what is communicated through association with another sense of the same expression)
It refers to terms which have more than one meaning surfaces at the same time, so there is a kind of ambiguity. It is as if one or more unintended meanings were inevitably thrown back rather like light or sound reflected on a surface. For instance, if I use the medical expression chronic bronchitis, it is difficult for the more colloquial emotive meaning of chronic, 'bad,' not to intrude as well. . . . Sometimes, such coincidental, 'unwanted' meanings cause us to change a lexical item for another.

6. Collocative meaning (what is communicated through association with words which tend to occur in the environment of another word)
It refers to the associations a word acquires on account   of   the   meanings of words which tend to occur in its environment.In other words, it is that part of the word-meaning suggested by the words that go before or come after a word in question, for instance, heavy news (a piece of sad news); heavy schedule (a very tight schedule); fast color (the color that does not fade); fast friend (a reliable friend); fast woman (a lady of easy virtue), etc.

7. Thematic meaning (what is communicated by the way in which the message is organized in terms of order and emphasis).
It relates to or constitutes a topic of discourse, the meaning that the word conveys is that of something that is connected with the theme of something
Types 2-6 are also categorized as associative meaning.

According to Charles Morris, there are three types of meanings: referential meaning (the relationship between signs and entities in the world), pragmatic meaning (the relationship between signs and their users; it includes identificational meaning, expressive meaning, associative meaning, social meaning, and imperative meaning), and intralingual meaning (the relationship between different signs; it includes phonological meaning, graphemic meaning, morphological or lexemic meaning, syntactic meaning, and discoursal or textual meaning).

Metaphor


Many authors credit Aristotle with being the first to outline a theory of metaphor, and note its influence on subsequent writing on the topic; others criticize him for precisely the same reason. Aristotle is responsible for initiating a pernicious and all-encompassing Western tradition that treats metaphor not only as based on similarity, but also as deviant from literal language, and as a matter of language rather than thought. Aristotle generically defines metaphor as a ‘transfer of a name belonging to elsewhere’. Furthermore, the term metaphor is defined as a linguistic expression which signifies a concept which, in its literal meaning does not signify and which, normally, is signified by some other words or expressions. Admittedly, this definition is quite broad in scope in that it includes not only the concept of comparison (Aristotle) but also the concept of substitution (Quintilian) as well.

The figuralist vs. The literalists

Theorists have different viewpoints in viewing the taxonomy of metaphor, and therefore, have come up with different classifications of metaphor. Some Theorists use the term “metaphor” very broadly as almost synonymous with ‘figurative,’ others use it very narrowly, as naming one very specific figure along side many other ones. From these two different viewpoints, there appear two major schools in the study of metaphor, the figuralists and the literalists. The proponents of figuralist viewpoint, as Veale remarks, see metaphor as a natural element of our conceptual repertoire, an organic component of language and cognition. Therefore, the relation between language and thought is wholly figurative. They further believe that metaphor is a cognitively irreducible phenomenon, providing an essential and irreplaceable service to cognitive agent. With such a frame of mind, thus, they jump to the conclusion that all languages are metaphoric.

The figuralist

Take the sentence exampled by Veale ‘the box is on the table’ for instance. This example is perfectly literal; the component words do seem to be used in their truest and most ordinary senses—‘box’ signifies just a box, ‘table’ just a table. However, we may perceive different kinds of box (small, big, plastic, black, or heavy box) and table (glass table, guestroom table, dining table, or kitchen table). Veale himself thinks of a cardboard cubic box about a foot long and varnished wooden kitchen table with flowers in the center, and surrounded by chairs. This thinking process is similar with the form of deep analogical reasoning process involved in understanding metaphor. Thus, they conclude that all languages are actually metaphoric.

The literalists

The literalists, on the other angle, view metaphor as a rhetorical linguistic phenomenon (a matter of lexical semantics) rather than an issue of conceptual representation (world knowledge). They claim that metaphor is a cognitively reducible phenomenon, providing no essential or irreplaceable service to the cognitive agent. They further claim that natural language has rich and powerful literal substrata sufficient to express literally any possible speaker meaning. This school takes a language as metaphoric if there is a clear sense of visual disparity and there is a point of similarity between the object (the item which is described by the metaphor) and the image (the item in terms of which the object is described). The more the metaphor suggests incompatibility or point of dissimilarity and the more striking the incompatibility, the greater the emotive tension of the metaphor. To say, for example, “my dentist is a butcher”, evokes tension through the juxtaposition of the image and the object which at first seems irreconcilable but has particular point of similarity in the speaker’s mind and thus appreciably metaphoric. Thus, this school doesn’t conclude all language as metaphoric, instead, only those sentences or statements whose objects and images that arouse visual disparity or particular point of similarity are considered as metaphors. Considering the matter of practicality, therefore, the researcher applies this literalist view in approaching the metaphors in his study. Another consideration is that the literalist views tend to treat the study of metaphors as a linguistics phenomenon rather than a psychological or a cognitive phenomenon, like what the figuralists believe. This is parallel with the approach of this study which also treats metaphor as a linguistic phenomenon.
See Also:
==============================================
RULE OF NATURE REFLECTED IN LANGUAGE USAGE
Assimilation
Apocope
Syncope
Lenition
Clipping
Blending
Performative Sentence
Imperative Sentence
Ellipsis Sentence
Metaphor

What is Semantic: Brief Explanation


Semantics is the study of the meaning of words, phrases, and sentences. It focuses on the conventional meaning conveyed by the use of words and sentences in language, not on what a spaeker might want the words to mean in a particular occasion. It means that semantics only deals with objective and general meaning rather than subjective and local meaning.

Linguists and Philosophers invent three ways in defining meaning. First, by defining the essence of words or lexicon meaning, second, by defining the essence of the meaning of sentence, and third, by explaining communication process. Therefore based on the above ways of defining meaning,  the study of semantics is broken down into are three levels, in which they have different and varied theories to analyze each levels, those are:
  • Lexical semantic 
  • Sentential semantic, and
  • Speech act semantic
Lexical semantic is semantic which tries to explain the meaning of words or lexicon, it means that the focus of this level is only in word and lexicon. Before I go to the kinds of theories in analyzing this level. I want to ask you something. What is the different between word and lexicon anyway? To differentiate those two terms have a look these illustration.

1.  What is the meaning of "kill"?
2. You kill the deer with a gun.

Take a close attention to the word "kill" on those two sentences, the first "kill" refers to word and the second "kill" refers to lexicon. So can you guess what is word and lexicon? Yes you're right, word refers to phonological construct which carries meaning in which it doesn't have any context. Meanwhile, lexicon refers to word which is context sensitive, or word that have context is called lexicon. Therefore you can safely say that every lexicon is word but word is not necessarily lexicon.

There are generally four kinds of theories in this level, those are:
Sentential semantic, the higher level of lexical semantic, is semantic which tries to explain the meaning of sentence. Sentence refers to a group of words which contain a topic and a comment. e.g. "John killed a deer" means that John caused a deer to die. There are three kinds of theories used to analyze this level, those are:
Speech act semantic is semantic which tries to explain the meaning of utterances in language used. There are eight features of language in use, those are:
  • Appropriacy
  • Non-literal or indirect
  • Inference
  • Indeterminacy
  • Context
  • Relevance
  • Reflexivity
  • Misfire

Presupposition

Presupposition is first assumption that appears in speaker's mind in conversation that the hearer can understand what the speaker is talking about.  Presupposition is assumption that the addressee is able to understand what the speaker means because the speaker's utterance has certain sign, context, and reference that is understood by interlocutor.

In addition, Palmer (1989: 181) tries to explain this by giving an example "the king of France is bald", Palmer tries to compare the notion of Russell (1905) and Strawson in which according to Russell, considered by Palmer as the first notion appeared, the sentence "the king of France is bald" indicates two things, first, the existence of king of France and the king is bald. If essentially the king of France does not exist, the sentence is judged as fake or false sentence, and conversely. The second notion comes from Strawson, he states that in sentence "the king of France is bald", the speaker supposes that the hearer is able to recognize exactly the man or thing in the sentence uttered by him exists. So that the speaker is not necessary to confirm whether the man or thing is really exist, however the speaker only makes presupposition about the existence of it. If the man or thing does not exist, so it will appear what is called 'the failure of presupposition', and the sentence is not true or false. Simpler we can say that, if sentence (a) presuppose sentence (b), the truth of the sentence (b) must follow from the truth of sentence (a), but if sentence (b) is false, then the sentence (a) will has no truth value. 

In addition presupposition is divided into two categories, they are: logic presupposition and pragmatic presupposition. Logic presupposition is presupposition which deals with the arrangement and understanding of message in which as the part of semantics has logic relationship with form of expression, both in coding and structuring of relationship. In addition, pragmatic presupposition is presupposition which deals with context, both in the relation between the users and social-situational surrounded it.

In the study of logic of language, we know about the term propositional calculus. This term basically involve two concepts, they are: calculus and proposition. Calculus is 'taking conclusion determining truth' and proposition is 'statement which suitable with abstraction in the consciousness of the user'. So that, propositional calculus deals with characteristics abstraction of reference when it is in the conceptualization of expression, taking conclusion of the characteristic of relationship of abstraction result is signed by connective sign, such as: which, that, to be, and, not, or. For instance, '"Malang is beautiful city", when the speaker abstracts Malang city for instance, he has known well about Malang city so that he is able to give earmark' beautiful'.  
.................................................................................................................
See also:

Entailment


Entailment is a relationship that applies between two sentences, where the truth of one implies the truth of the other because the meanings of the words involved. It is relation between sentences such that the truth of the second sentence necessarily follows from the truth of the first. The test of entailment can be done as follows: sentence (a) entails sentence (b) if the truth of sentence (a) insures the truth of sentence (b) and if the falsity of sentence (b) insures the falsity of sentence (a). For instance, (a) Adi is a bachelor (b) Adi has been unmarried. In this case, sentence (a) entails sentence (b) because the truth of sentence (a) insures the truth sentence (b) (if Adi is a bachelor, he is automatically unmarried), and the falsity of sentence (b) insures the falsity of sentence (a) (if Adi is married, he is not bachelor). However, the relation of entailment is unidirectional, it means the position between sentence (a) and (b) are irreplaceable. For instance, let us take the previous example and try to replace them, (b) Adi has been unmarried (a) Adi is a bachelor. In this case, sentence (b) does not entail sentence (a¬) because if Adi has been unmarried, it does not mean that he a bachelor, it is very possible that he is a widower or etc. (Kempson, 1977: 142).

.................................................................................................................
See also:

Synthetic Sentence


Sentence which might be true or false depend on the world which they refer. In contrast to analytic sentences, synthetic sentences are not true or false because of the words which comprise them; they, however, do or do not accurately describe some state of affairs in the world. For instance, the sentence, 'Adi's home is burning.' is a synthetic sentence. We cannot judge its truth or falsity by examining the words in the sentence. We must investigate the truth or falsity of this sentence empirically. 

In addition, there are certain sentences which make us confuse to determine whether it is included in analytic or synthetic sentence. For instance the sentence ' oxygen is not blue', the problem appears concerning the color of the oxygen, because we do not know the color of oxygen since we can not see it just feel it, in this case the sentence tend to be included into synthetic sentence since the definition of the two categories them selves, analytic is true by definition and synthetic is true as the result of investigating, verifying, and falsifying empirically. 

.................................................................................................................
See also:

Analytic Sentence

An analytic sentence is one that is necessarily true as a result of the words in it. For instance "bachelor is unmarried man” is true not because the world is the way it is, but because of the English is the way it is. Based on our English knowledge, the word 'bachelor' means 'unmarried man'. It is not necessary for us to check on the outside world to prove the truth of this sentence. In the other word, the sentence is obligatory true, it is not bounded the condition that follows, based on the relationships between words formed the sentence (Kempson, 1977: 26). In addition, it can be defined that analytic sentence are "true by definition". Analytic truth may be considered as linguistic truth since they are true in virtue of the language itself. Parker in Ahmadin (1998: 17).
.................................................................................................................
See also:

Formal semantics

Although the term of 'formal semantic' might be used in a very general sense to refer to a whole set of different approaches to the study of meaning, it is usually employed nowadays with particular reference to a certain version of truth conditional semantics which originated in the investigation of specially constructed formal languages by logicians and has recently been applied to the investigation of natural languages.

According to Tarski to know the meaning of certain sentence, it means to understand in what condition the sentence is true. For instance, the sentence 'snow is white', to know the meaning of that sentence we have to understand what condition existed that supports that sentence is true. There is a formula concerning this discussion:

S is true if and if only P

S refers to the sentence, and P refers to the condition which supports the S. from the preceding example we can say that snow is white is true and if only snow is white.

In addition, the study of truth condition falls into two basic categories: the study of different types included in individual sentences: analytic and syntactic; and the study of different types of truth connections that hold between sentences; entailment and presupposition. 
.................................................................................................................
See also:

Performative vs. Constative Sentence

Philosophically sentence is devided into two categories, performative and constative. Performative is a sentence which does not describe nor affirm about fact but contains a felicity condition, that is a certain condition that have to be fulfilled when the perform takes place. There are five characteristics of performative sentence, they are:

(1) The subject of performative sentence must be in the form of first person pronoun;
(2) The verb must be in the same category with performative verbs such as tell, say, demand, advice, ask etc.;
(3) The object of performative sentence is always a second person pronoun;
(4) It must be in the form of affirmative not negative;
(5) It must be in the form of present tense.

e.g. Stand up!
Note:
- The deep structure of the above sentence before encountering modification (become imperative) is
"I command you to stand up."
- Felicity condition of the above sentence:
¢Your addressee is sitting, or laying, or ducking, etc.
¢Your addressee has ability to stand (not cripple)

On the other hand, constative sentence is a sentence which affirms about fact, reports events, and describes situation and condition. It must contain truth values.

e.g.  Prices slumped.

The sentence is true if the fact in the actual world the prices are slumped. If in fact they are not slumped, you can simply say that the sentence is false.

However, when you take a look constative deeper, you will find that it also fulfills the five criteria of perfomative sentence, since the above example of constative sentence is only in the level of surface structure, in deep structure, it will become: “I tell you that price slumped”. In this form the constative sentence also has the all criteria take to become a performative sentence. Therefore, in short we can simply say that constative sentence is also included into performative sentence. You will find the reflection of the principle of maximum ease of articulation in this pattern. The metrical sentence “I tell you …” is unnecessarily to say, so that it is omitted. A sentence “I tell you that prices slumped” encounters a modification or a deletion process in the phrase “I tell you …” it appears only the surface structure “prices slumped”. Other examples of this phenomenon are that:









See Also:
===========================================

TRUTH CONDITION THEORY

Key issues:
What is sentence?
What is sentential semantics?
What is truth?
What is truth condition theory?
What is componential analysis?


Constative Sentence

Performative Sentence

Tarsky's (1933) postulate:



S is true, iff p Sentence is true if and only if P

S: sentence

p: a condition which can guarantee the truth of the sentence

e.g. "snow is white"

Componential analysis
Explaining the meaning of lexicon by presenting as many components as possible which construct totality of meaning of lexicon.

Can you define and differentiate these words?
Man, woman, boy, girl, bachelor, and spinster.

Perfected by
Ruth M. Kempson (1977)

S means that p necessarily, S is true iff p

: equal and only equal

e.g. "A boy hurried home"

Weaknesses:
1. The theory is circular;
2. It is restricted only on constative/ factual statement

Meaning Relations

1. Synonymy is a meaning relation which involves two or more expression having the same interpretation. Synonymy will always mean one of two or more words in the English language which have the same or very nearly the same essential meaning.
Synonym: words which have the same meaning.

Three kinds of synonymy

  • True synonymy is a meaning relation which involves two or more sentences having the same exact meaning.

e.g.

"Uncle is a true synonymy of the brother of one’s father or mother, or the husband of one’s aunt."


  • Close synonymy is a meaning relation which involves two or more expressions of which the interpretation is not entirely the same but very close.

e.g. war, battle, combat, fight, struggle.

  • Partial synonymy is a meaning relation in which the meaning or interpretation of one lexicon only a part of the meaning of the other.

e.g. hen is partial meaning of chicken.

2. Antonymy: a meaning relation which involves two or more lexicons having opposite interpretations/ meanings.

Four kinds of antonymy


  • True antonymy: the meaning relation which involves two or more lexicons having true opposite meaning.
e.g. - male vs. female
      - true vs. false
  • Reciprocal antonymy: the meaning relation which involves two or more lexicons having reciprocal opposite meaning. Usually, it is in the form of actions.
e.g. - close vs. open
       - sleep vs. awake
  • Gradual antonymy: the meaning relation which involves two or more lexicons having gradual opposite meaning.
e.g. - uninjured- barely injured –injured- badly wounded- died
      - big – medium – small
  • One- to- many antonymy: the meaning relation in which one lexicons has many opposite meanings.

e.g. . sweet vs. bitter
                      salty
                      sour
                      hot
                      etc.
3. Hyponymy: a relationship between two words, in which the meaning of one of the words includes the meaning of the other words
e.g. ‘Eagle’, ‘swallow’, ‘parrot’, etc. are hyponyms of the super ordinate ‘bird’

4. Ambiguity: a meaning relation which involve only one expression having more than one interpretation.


  • Lexical ambiguity arises when context is insufficient to determine the sense of a single word that has more than one meaning.
e.g. can, bank, duck etc.
  • Syntactic ambiguity arises when a sentence can be parsed in more than one way.
e.g. The chicken is ready to eat

5. Polysemy is a word or phrase with multiple, related meanings
e.g.

The house is at the foot of the mountains
One of his shoes felt too tight for his foot
'Foot' here refers to the bottom part of the mountains in the first sentence and the bottom part of the leg in the second.

Definition of Semantics

Key issues:
Do you know what is the definition of language?
Do you know what are the language feature?
Do you know what is meaning?

Language:

Linguistics:

Semantics:


Lexical meaning
Lexical meaning is the meaning of a word in isolation. The term 'lexical meaning' is to be interpreted as the meaning of lexemes depends upon the meaning of the sentences in which they occur.
Lexical meaning covers among other things the discussion about
Ambiguity:
Synonymy:
Antonymy:
Hyponymy:
Polysemy:
Homophony:
and homonymy:

Can you define for each term?

Sentential Meaning
A sentence is a set of words expressing a statement, a question, or a command. Sentence can be defined as a group of words that forms a statement, command, exclamation or question, it usually contains a subject and a verb and (in writing begins with a capital letter and ends of the mark (.,!,?) (Procter in Ahmadin, 1998: 12)
Theories in sentential semantic:
1. theory of truth condition:
2. theory of deep structure:

Discourse Meaning/ speech act
Discourse is a term used in linguistics to refer to a continuous stretch of language larger than a sentence. In addition, according to Fromkin in Ahmadin (2002: 22) linguistic knowledge accounts for speaker's ability to combine phonemes into morphemes, morphemes into words and words into sentences. Knowing a language also permits combining sentences together to express complex thought and ideas. This linguistic ability makes language an excellent medium for communication. These larger linguistic units are called discourse.
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Recommend us on Google Plus