DOCSLIB.ORG

An Introductory Course on Semantics and Pragmatics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

1 ================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 Vol. 20:3 March 2020 ================================================================ AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE ON SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS Prof. Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore 641 112 Tamilnadu, India [email protected] Coimbatore March 2020 ==================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 20:3 March 2020 Prof. Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE ON SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS 2 FOREWORD This monograph has been compiled by me for introducing semantics and pragmatics to the students of some correspondence course. It is a compiled work written in the style of a correspondence course. I was planning to expand it with Tamil examples and make it a comprehensive one. But I could not find time to do it. When it was uploaded in academia.edu and Research Gate, it received a lot of appreciations and quite a number of hits. So I thought of publishing it. As usual Prof. M.S. Thirumalai extended his helping hand to publish it in Language in India. Hope this will receive wider audience. RAJENDRAN SANKARAVELAYUTHAN ==================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 20:3 March 2020 Prof. Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE ON SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS 3 COURSE CONTENT Sr. no Headings and subheadings page AIM 13 UNIT 1 Nature and scope of semantics 13 CONTENT 13 OVERVIEW 13 LEARNING OBJECTIVES 15 1.1. Concept an definition of semantics 15 1.1.1. Concept of semantics 15 1.1.2. The definition of semantics 17 LEARNING ACTIVITY 1.1. 18 1.2. Brief history of semantics 18 LEARNING ACTIVITY 1.2. 24 1.3. Semantics and other disciplines 24 LEARNING ACTIVITY 1.3. 25 1.4. Major concerns of semantics 26 LEARNING ACTIVITY 1.4. 27 1.5. Approaches to the study of semantics 27 1.5.1. Traditional semantics 27 1.5.2. Behavioural semantics 28 1.5.3. Structural semantics 28 1.5.4. Generative semantics 29 LEARNING ACTIVITY 1.5 29 1.6. Branches of semantics 30 1.6.1. Lexical semantics 30 1.6.2. Grammatical semantic 30 1.6.3. Logical semantics 31 1.6.4. Linguistics and pragmatics 31 LEARNING ACTIVITY 1.6 32 SUMMARY 32 BIBLIOGRAPHY 33 ==================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 20:3 March 2020 Prof. Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE ON SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS 4 UNIT 2 The study of meaning 33 CONTENT 33 OVERVIEW 34 LEARNING OBJECTIVES 35 2.1. Schools of thought in meaning 35 LEARNING ACTIVITY 2.1. 36 2.2. Types of meaning 36 2.2.1. Thematic meaning 36 2.2.2. Conceptual meaning 38 2.2.3. Associative meaning 40 2.2.3.1. Connotative meaning 41 2.2.3.2. Collocative meaning 42 2.2.3.3. Affective meaning 43 2.2.3.4. Reflected meaning 44 2.2.3.5. Stylistic (or social) meaning 45 LEARNING ACTIVITY 2.2. 47 2.3. Theories of meaning 47 2.3.1. The ideational theory of meaning 48 2.3.2. Behaviorist theory of meaning 49 2.3.3. The referential theory of meaning 50 2.3.4. Possible-world theory of meaning 52 2.3.5. Fregean theory of meaning 52 2.3.6. Verificationist theory of meaning 53 2.3.7. Truth-conditional theory of meaning 54 2.3.8. Conceptual-role theory of meaning 56 2.3.9. Gricean theory of meaning 57 2.3.10. The use theory of meaning 57 LEARNING ACTIVITY 2.3. 58 2.4. Three perspective of meaning 58 2.4.1. Lexical semantics 58 2.4.2. Compositional semantics 59 2.4.3. Discourse or pragmatics 60 ==================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 20:3 March 2020 Prof. Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE ON SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS 5 LEARNING ACTIVITY 2.4. 60 SUMMARY 60 BIBLIOGRAPHY 61 UNIT 3 Lexical semantics I 61 CONTENT 61 OVERVIEW 62 LEARNING OBJECTIVES 62 3.1. Approaches to lexical semantics 63 3.1.1. One level vs. two level approaches 63 3.1.2. Monosemic vs polysemic approaches 63 3.1.3. The compositional approach 64 3.1.4. ‘Holist’ approach 65 3.1.5. Conceptual approach 67 3.1.6. Formal approach 67 LEARNING ACTIVITY 3.1 67 3.2 Lexical relations 68 3.2.1. Pragmatic and syntagmatic relations 68 3.2.2. Congruence relations 68 3.2.3. Pragmatic sense relations of identity and inclusion 70 3.2.3.1. Synonymy 70 3.2.3.2. Hyonymy and hypernymy 72 3.2.3.3. Meronymy and holonymy 75 3.2.3.4. Compatibility 77 3.2.4. Pragmatic sense relations of exclusion and opposition 78 3.2.4.1. Incompatibility 78 3.2.4.2. Opposition and contrast 78 3.2.4.2.1. Gradable and ungradable opposites 78 3.2.4.2.2. Complementaries 79 3.2.4.2.3. Privative and equipollent antonyms 79 3.2.4.2.4. Contraditions and contraries 79 3.2.4.2.5. Distinction between contrast, opposition and complementaries 79 3.2.4.2.6. Converseness 80 ==================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 20:3 March 2020 Prof. Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE ON SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS 6 3.2.4.2.7. Directional, orthogonal and antipodal opposition 80 3.2.4.2.8. Non-binary contrast 81 LEARNING ACTIVITY 3.2 82 UNIT 4 Lexical semantics II 82 CONENT 82 OVERVIEW 83 LEARNING OBJECTIVES 84 4.1. Hierarchies 84 4.1.1. Taxonomic hierarchies 85 4.1.1.1. Hyponymy and incompatibility 85 4.1.1.2. Taxonomy 86 4.1.1.3. Characteristics of natural taxonomies 87 4.1.1.3.1. Lexical gaps and covert category 87 4.1.1.3.2. Proto-typical vs. peripheral member 88 4.1.1.3.3. Quasi-relations 89 4.1.1.3.4 Overlapping of co-taxonyms 89 4.1.2. Meronymic hierarchies 90 4.1.2.1. Defining meronymy 90 4.1.2.2. Transitivity in meronymy 92 4.1.2.3. Characteristics of meronomies 93 4.1.2.4. Close relatives of the part-whole relation 94 4.1.2.5. Meronomies and taxonomies 96 LEARNING ACTIVITY 4.1 97 4.2. Non-branching hierarchies 97 4.2.1. From branching to non-branching 97 4.2.2. Chains, helices and cycles 100 4.2.3. Ranks, grades and degrees 102 4.2.4. Linear structures 103 4.2.4.1. Bipoles 104 4.2.4.2. Bipolar chains 104 4.2.4.3. Monopolar chains 104 4.2.4.3.1. Degrees 104 ==================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 20:3 March 2020 Prof. Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE ON SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS 7 4.2.4.3.2. Stages 104 4.2.4.3.3. Measures 105 4.2.4.3.4. Ranks 105 4.2.4.3.5. Sequences 105 4.2.5. Proportional series/Grids 105 4.2.6. Clusters 107 4.2.7 Miscellaneous types 108 LEARNING ACTIVITY 4.2. 108 SUMMARY 108 BIBLIOGRAPHY 109 UNIT 5 Componential analysis of meaning 109 CONTENT 109 OVERVIEW 110 LEARNING OBJECTIVES 110 5.1. Componential analysis 110 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.1. 112 5.2. Background to componential analysis 112 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.2. 115 5.3. How does the theory of meaning component work 115 5.3.1. Components of meaning 117 5.3.2. Componential analysis of meaning 119 5.3.3. Analysing and distinguishing meanings 125 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.3. 130 5.4. Procedural steps in the componential analysis of meaning 131 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.4. 132 5.5. Linguistic basis for componential analysis 133 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.5. 134 5.6. Contributions to the study of meaning 134 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.6. 134 5.7. Basic difficulties encountered in the analaysis of semantic component 135 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.7. 136 5.8. Applicability and universality 136 ==================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 20:3 March 2020 Prof. Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE ON SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS 8 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.8. 138 5.9. Apparent advantages of the componential approach 138 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.9. 139 5.10. Strength and weakness of componential analysis 140 LEARNING ACTIVITY 5.10. 140 SUMMARY 141 BIBLIOGRAPHY 141 UNIT 6 Dynamics of word meaning and lexicon 142 CONTENT 142 OVERVIEW 143 LEARNING OBJECTIVES 143 6.1. Dynamics of word meaning 143 6.1.1. Contextual variability of word meaning 144 6.1.2. Polysemy 145 6.1.2.1. Varieties of polysemy 145 6.1.2.1.1. Linear polysemy 145 6.1.2.1.2. Non-linear polysemy 146 6.1.2.1.2.1. Metaphor 146 6.1.2.1.2.2. Metonymy 147 6.1.2.1.2.3. Difference between Metonymy and synecdoche 148 6.1.3. Extensions of meaning 149 6.1.3.1. Naturalized extensions 149 6.1.3.2. Established extensions 149 6.1.3.3. Nonce readings 150 6.1.4. Semantic change 150 6.1.4.1. Mechanisms of semantic change 151 6.1.4.1.1. Technology and current relevance 151 6.1.4.1.2. Analogy 153 6.1.4.2. Consequence of semantic change 154 6.1.4.3. Types of semantic change 154 6.1.4.3.1. Widening or generalization or extension 154 6.1.4.3.2. Narrowing or specialization 155 ==================================================================== Language in India www.languageinindia.com ISSN 1930-2940 20:3 March 2020 Prof. Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE ON SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS 9 6.1.4.3.3. Branching 155 6.1.4.3.4.
Recommended publications
  • Cohesion and Coherence in Indonesian Textbooks for the Tenth Grader of Senior High School

    Cohesion and Coherence in Indonesian Textbooks for the Tenth Grader of Senior High School

    Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 301 Seventh International Conference on Languages and Arts (ICLA 2018) COHESION AND COHERENCE IN INDONESIAN TEXTBOOKS FOR THE TENTH GRADER OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL Syamsudduha1, Johar Amir2, and Wahida3 1Universitas Negeri Makasar, Makassar, Indonesia, [email protected] 2Universitas Negeri Makasar, Makassar, Indonesia, [email protected] 3 Universitas Negeri Makasar, Makassar, Indonesia, [email protected] Abstract This study aims to describe: (1) cohesion and (2) coherence in Indonesian Textbooks for XI Grade Senior High School. This type of research is qualitative analysis research. The data are the statements or disclosures that contain cohesion and coherence in the Indonesian textbooks. The sources of data are the texts in The Indonesian Textbooks for XI Grade Senior High Schoolpublished by the Ministry of Education and Culture of Republic of Indonesia. The data collection techniques are carried out with documenting, reading,and noting. Data analysis techniques are carried out through reduction, presentation, and inference/verification of data. The results of this study showed that (1) the use of two cohesion markers, grammatical cohesionand lexical cohesion. The markers of grammatical cohesion were reference, substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction. The markers of lexical cohesion were repetition, synonym,antonym, hyponym, and collocation. The later result was (2) the use of coherence markers which are addition, sequencing, resistance, more, cause-consequences, time, terms, ways, uses, and explanations. Those findings showed that the textsof Indonesian Textbooks for XI Grade Senior High School published by the Ministry of Education and Culture of Republic of Indonesia were texts that had cohesion and unity of meaning so that Indonesian Textbooks for XI Grade Senior High Schoolpublished by the Ministry of Education and Cultureof The Republic of Indonesia was declared good to be used as a teaching material.
  • Words and Alternative Basic Units for Linguistic Analysis

    Words and Alternative Basic Units for Linguistic Analysis

    Words and alternative basic units for linguistic analysis 1 Words and alternative basic units for linguistic analysis Jens Allwood SCCIIL Interdisciplinary Center, University of Gothenburg A. P. Hendrikse, Department of Linguistics, University of South Africa, Pretoria Elisabeth Ahlsén SCCIIL Interdisciplinary Center, University of Gothenburg Abstract The paper deals with words and possible alternative to words as basic units in linguistic theory, especially in interlinguistic comparison and corpus linguistics. A number of ways of defining the word are discussed and related to the analysis of linguistic corpora and to interlinguistic comparisons between corpora of spoken interaction. Problems associated with words as the basic units and alternatives to the traditional notion of word as a basis for corpus analysis and linguistic comparisons are presented and discussed. 1. What is a word? To some extent, there is an unclear view of what counts as a linguistic word, generally, and in different language types. This paper is an attempt to examine various construals of the concept “word”, in order to see how “words” might best be made use of as units of linguistic comparison. Using intuition, we might say that a word is a basic linguistic unit that is constituted by a combination of content (meaning) and expression, where the expression can be phonetic, orthographic or gestural (deaf sign language). On closer examination, however, it turns out that the notion “word” can be analyzed and specified in several different ways. Below we will consider the following three main ways of trying to analyze and define what a word is: (i) Analysis and definitions building on observation and supposed easy discovery (ii) Analysis and definitions building on manipulability (iii) Analysis and definitions building on abstraction 2.
  • ON SOME CATEGORIES for DESCRIBING the SEMOLEXEMIC STRUCTURE by Yoshihiko Ikegami

    ON SOME CATEGORIES for DESCRIBING the SEMOLEXEMIC STRUCTURE by Yoshihiko Ikegami

    ON SOME CATEGORIES FOR DESCRIBING THE SEMOLEXEMIC STRUCTURE by Yoshihiko Ikegami 1. A lexeme is the minimum unit that carries meaning. Thus a lexeme can be a "word" as well as an affix (i.e., something smaller than a word) or an idiom (i.e,, something larger than a word). 2. A sememe is a unit of meaning that can be realized as a single lexeme. It is defined as a structure constituted by those features having distinctive functions (i.e., serving to distinguish the sememe in question from other semernes that contrast with it).' A question that arises at this point is whether or not one lexeme always corresponds to just one serneme and no more. Three theoretical positions are foreseeable: (I) one which holds that one lexeme always corresponds to just one sememe and no more, (2) one which holds that one lexeme corresponds to an indefinitely large number of sememes, and (3) one which holds that one lexeme corresponds to a certain limited number of sememes. These three positions wiIl be referred to as (1) the "Grundbedeutung" theory, (2) the "use" theory, and (3) the "polysemy" theory, respectively. The Grundbedeutung theory, however attractive in itself, is to be rejected as unrealistic. Suppose a preliminary analysis has revealed that a lexeme seems to be used sometimes in an "abstract" sense and sometimes in a "concrete" sense. In order to posit a Grundbedeutung under such circumstances, it is to be assumed that there is a still higher level at which "abstract" and "concrete" are neutralized-this is certainly a theoretical possibility, but it seems highly unlikely and unrealistic from a psychological point of view.
  • Wiley APA Style Manual: a Usage Guide

    Wiley APA Style Manual: a Usage Guide

    Version 2.2 Wiley Documentation Wiley APA Style Manual: A Usage Guide File name: Wiley APA Style Manual Version date: 01 June 2018 Version Date Distribution History Status and summary of changes Version 2.2 01 June 2018 Journal copyedit levels Updating supporting information; using stakeholder group semicolon for back-to-back parentheses; numbered abstracts are allowed for some society journals; display and block quotes to be set in roman. Table of Contents Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Part I: Structuring and XML Tagging ........................................................................................................... 4 Part II: Mechanical Editing ........................................................................................................................... 4 2. Manuscript Elements ................................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Running Head ..................................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Article Title ......................................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Article Category .................................................................................................................................. 5 2.4 Author’s Name
  • Citing a Reference Work in Text Apa

    Citing a Reference Work in Text Apa

    Citing A Reference Work In Text Apa Undrooping and quinquefoliate Maxfield woo neurotically and disposes his Jewry intelligibly and dialectally. Geoff Normiefornicates debating lankly whilesuntans insubordinate and scaffold Gabriel jazz. nick uppermost or noticing contradictiously. Excitably magnesian, The text only capitalize each citation? Need to the indirect source type of the publisher, or as much of citing in. If using apa style work in a reference text apa generator to a semicolon to them with a wiki does it! Apa style reference 6th edition pdf for apa reference citation book edition October 19. How cite works by mass opinion or missing, working in america: bureau of your argument for you would be alphabetized by source type of this. If cited work, cite works and citing a different authors, list all of a period or sexually abused, you read it? Begin the full quote a direct quotation, or paraphrased information as you no longer include the recommendation for apa reference a work in text, and pertains to check with. Quotations from a book that you would you cite personal communication list of its place of individual cases depends on how to understand its proper citation. You cite the theory, agency author of the article in a reference text. APA In-Text Citation Guide wall Street College of Education. Journal articles use apa parenthetical citation in a reference text apa bibliography is an additional information you. Good reason to the department of scholars were laid out of text reference a work in apa reference. National institutes of apa essay: getting consistent with ai software in a reference text apa website? Pamela Good: Breaking the cycle of illiteracy.
  • Acquaintance Inferences As Evidential Effects

    Acquaintance Inferences As Evidential Effects

    The acquaintance inference as an evidential effect Abstract. Predications containing a special restricted class of predicates, like English tasty, tend to trigger an inference when asserted, to the effect that the speaker has had a spe- cific kind of `direct contact' with the subject of predication. This `acquaintance inference' has typically been treated as a hard-coded default effect, derived from the nature of the predicate together with the commitments incurred by assertion. This paper reevaluates the nature of this inference by examining its behavior in `Standard' Tibetan, a language that grammatically encodes perceptual evidentiality. In Tibetan, the acquaintance inference trig- gers not as a default, but rather when, and only when, marked by a perceptual evidential. The acquaintance inference is thus a grammaticized evidential effect in Tibetan, and so it cannot be a default effect in general cross-linguistically. An account is provided of how the semantics of the predicate and the commitment to perceptual evidentiality derive the in- ference in Tibetan, and it is suggested that the inference ought to be seen as an evidential effect generally, even in evidential-less languages, which invoke evidential notions without grammaticizing them. 1 Introduction: the acquaintance inference A certain restricted class of predicates, like English tasty, exhibit a special sort of behavior when used in predicative assertions. In particular, they require as a robust default that the speaker of the assertion has had direct contact of a specific sort with the subject of predication, as in (1). (1) This food is tasty. ,! The speaker has tasted the food. ,! The speaker liked the food's taste.
  • Exploring the Relationship Between Word-Association and Learners’ Lexical Development

    Exploring the Relationship Between Word-Association and Learners’ Lexical Development

    Exploring the Relationship between Word-Association and Learners’ Lexical Development Jason Peppard An assignment for Master of Arts in Applied Linguistics Module 2 - Lexis July 2007 Centre for English Language Studies Department of English UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM Birmingham B15 2TT United Kingdom LX/06/02 Follow task 123 outlined on page 152 of McCarthy (1990 Vocabulary OUP). You do not have to use students: anyone who has an L2 but has not been brought up as a bilingual will do. Use at least four subjects and test them on their L2 (or L3/ L4 etc.). Report your findings, giving the level(s) of subjects' L2 (L3, etc.) and including the prompt words and responses. Follow McCarthy's list of evaluation points, adding other points to this if you wish. Approx. 4530 words 1.0 Introduction Learning or acquiring your first language was a piece of cake, right? So why then, is it so difficult for some people to learn a second language? For starters, many learners might be wondering why I referred to a dessert in the opening sentence of a paper concerning vocabulary. The point here is summed up neatly by McCarthy (1990): No matter how well the student learns grammar, no matter how successfully the sounds of L2 are mastered, without words to express a wide range of meanings, communication in an L2 just cannot happen in any meaningful way (p. viii). This paper, based on Task 123 of McCarthy’s Vocabulary (ibid: 152), aims to explore the L2 mental lexicon. A simple word association test consisting of eight stimulus words was administered to both low-level and high-level Japanese EFL students as well as a group of native English speakers for comparative reasons.
  • A Survey on How to Cross-Reference Web Information Sources Joe Raad, Aurélie Bertaux, Christophe Cruz

    A Survey on How to Cross-Reference Web Information Sources Joe Raad, Aurélie Bertaux, Christophe Cruz

    A Survey on how to Cross-Reference Web Information Sources Joe Raad, Aurélie Bertaux, Christophe Cruz To cite this version: Joe Raad, Aurélie Bertaux, Christophe Cruz. A Survey on how to Cross-Reference Web Information Sources. Science and Information Conference, Jul 2015, Londres, United Kingdom. pp.609 - 618, 10.1109/SAI.2015.7237206. hal-01199440 HAL Id: hal-01199440 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01199440 Submitted on 2 Feb 2018 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. A Survey on how to Cross-Reference Web Information Sources Joe Raad1, Aurelie Bertaux2, and Christophe Cruz3 CheckSem Department, Le2i Laboratory University of Burgundy Dijon, France [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract—The goal of giving information a well-defined express a single event in thousands of ways in natural meaning is currently shared by different research communities. language sentences. Therefore, paraphrase identification, Once information has a well-defined meaning, it can be searched which determines whether or not two formally distinct strings and retrieved more effectively. Therefore, this paper is a survey about the methods that compare different textual information are similar in meaning is an effective way to solve this sources in order to determine whether they address a similar problem.
  • Compositional and Lexical Semantics • Compositional Semantics: The

    Compositional and Lexical Semantics • Compositional Semantics: The

    Compositional and lexical semantics Compositional semantics: the construction • of meaning (generally expressed as logic) based on syntax. This lecture: – Semantics with FS grammars Lexical semantics: the meaning of • individual words. This lecture: – lexical semantic relations and WordNet – one technique for word sense disambiguation 1 Simple compositional semantics in feature structures Semantics is built up along with syntax • Subcategorization `slot' filling instantiates • syntax Formally equivalent to logical • representations (below: predicate calculus with no quantifiers) Alternative FS encodings possible • 2 Objective: obtain the following semantics for they like fish: pron(x) (like v(x; y) fish n(y)) ^ ^ Feature structure encoding: 2 PRED and 3 6 7 6 7 6 7 6 2 PRED 3 7 6 pron 7 6 ARG1 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 ARG1 1 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 4 5 7 6 7 6 7 6 2 3 7 6 PRED and 7 6 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 2 3 7 7 6 6 PRED like v 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 ARG1 6 ARG1 1 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 ARG2 6 6 ARG2 2 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 4 5 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 2 3 7 7 6 6 PRED fish n 7 7 6 6 ARG2 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 6 ARG 2 7 7 7 6 6 6 1 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 4 5 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 4 5 7 6 7 4 5 3 Noun entry 2 3 2 CAT noun 3 6 HEAD 7 6 7 6 6 AGR 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 4 5 7 6 7 6 COMP 7 6 filled 7 6 7 fish 6 7 6 SPR filled 7 6 7 6 7 6 7 6 INDEX 1 7 6 2 3 7 6 7 6 SEM 7 6 6 PRED fish n 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 ARG 1 7 7 6 6 1 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 6 7 7 6 4 5 7 4 5 Corresponds to fish(x) where the INDEX • points to the characteristic variable of the noun (that is x).
  • Download Article

    Download Article

    Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 312 International Conference "Topical Problems of Philology and Didactics: Interdisciplinary Approach in Humanities and Social Sciences" (TPHD 2018) Methods of Identifying Members of Synonymic Row Juliya A. Litvinova Elena A. Maklakova Chair of Foreign Languages Chair of Foreign Languages Federal State Budget Educational Institution of Higher Federal State Budget Educational Institution of Higher Education Voronezh State University of Forestry and Education Voronezh State University of Forestry and Technologies named after G.F. Morozov Technologies named after G.F. Morozov Voronezh, Russia Voronezh, Russia [email protected] Affiliation): dept. name of organization Abstract— This article is devoted to identifying the criteria of analysis, method of field modeling, method of semantic synonymity of lexical items. The existence of different definitions interpretation, method of generalization of dictionary of synonymy, the selection criteria of items in the synonymic row definitions, methods of quantitative, lexicographical, indicate the insufficient study and incoherence of this contextual, psycholinguistic analysis. Data for the study were phenomenon in linguistics. The study of the semantics of lexical 2 lexical items in the Russian language (gorodok, gorodishko) items allows explaining the most accurately and authentically the integration and differentiation of lexical items close in meaning. obtained from the Russian Explanatory Dictionaries (V. I. The description of the meaning structure (sememe) is possible Dahl, D. N. Ushakov, S. I. Ozhegov, A. P. Evgenieva, S. A. through the description of its seme composition. The methods of Kuznetsov, T. F. Efremova), Russian National Corpus seme semasiology (lexicographic, psycholinguistic, contextual) (ruscorpora.ru). allow revealing various components in the sememe structure.
  • Sentential Negation and Negative Concord

    Sentential Negation and Negative Concord

    Sentential Negation and Negative Concord Published by LOT phone: +31.30.2536006 Trans 10 fax: +31.30.2536000 3512 JK Utrecht email: [email protected] The Netherlands http://wwwlot.let.uu.nl/ Cover illustration: Kasimir Malevitch: Black Square. State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia. ISBN 90-76864-68-3 NUR 632 Copyright © 2004 by Hedde Zeijlstra. All rights reserved. Sentential Negation and Negative Concord ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam op gezag van de Rector Magnificus Prof. Mr P.F. van der Heijden ten overstaan van een door het College voor Promoties ingestelde commissie, in het openbaar te verdedigen in de Aula der Universiteit op woensdag 15 december 2004, te 10:00 uur door HEDZER HUGO ZEIJLSTRA geboren te Rotterdam Promotiecommissie: Promotores: Prof. Dr H.J. Bennis Prof. Dr J.A.G. Groenendijk Copromotor: Dr J.B. den Besten Leden: Dr L.C.J. Barbiers (Meertens Instituut, Amsterdam) Dr P.J.E. Dekker Prof. Dr A.C.J. Hulk Prof. Dr A. von Stechow (Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen) Prof. Dr F.P. Weerman Faculteit der Geesteswetenschappen Voor Petra Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................ I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................V 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................1 1.1 FOUR ISSUES IN THE STUDY OF NEGATION.......................................................1
  • Chapter 1 Negation in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective

    Chapter 1 Negation in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective

    Chapter 1 Negation in a cross-linguistic perspective 0. Chapter summary This chapter introduces the empirical scope of our study on the expression and interpretation of negation in natural language. We start with some background notions on negation in logic and language, and continue with a discussion of more linguistic issues concerning negation at the syntax-semantics interface. We zoom in on cross- linguistic variation, both in a synchronic perspective (typology) and in a diachronic perspective (language change). Besides expressions of propositional negation, this book analyzes the form and interpretation of indefinites in the scope of negation. This raises the issue of negative polarity and its relation to negative concord. We present the main facts, criteria, and proposals developed in the literature on this topic. The chapter closes with an overview of the book. We use Optimality Theory to account for the syntax and semantics of negation in a cross-linguistic perspective. This theoretical framework is introduced in Chapter 2. 1 Negation in logic and language The main aim of this book is to provide an account of the patterns of negation we find in natural language. The expression and interpretation of negation in natural language has long fascinated philosophers, logicians, and linguists. Horn’s (1989) Natural history of negation opens with the following statement: “All human systems of communication contain a representation of negation. No animal communication system includes negative utterances, and consequently, none possesses a means for assigning truth value, for lying, for irony, or for coping with false or contradictory statements.” A bit further on the first page, Horn states: “Despite the simplicity of the one-place connective of propositional logic ( ¬p is true if and only if p is not true) and of the laws of inference in which it participate (e.g.