ENGLISH MODIFIER SYSTEM:
A SEMIOTIC ANALYSIS
BY
TASDIQ NOMAIRA ALAM
A dissertation submitted in fulfilment of requirement for the
degree of Master of Human Sciences in
Applied Linguistics
Kulliyyah of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and
Human Sciences
International Islamic University Malaysia
JUNE 2016
ABSTRACT
This study is an effort to investigate English modifiers that are referred to by different
names: adjectives, adverbs and rhetorical features, but work in the same way, i.e. to
modify another word class such as nouns, pronouns, verbs, adverbs or adjectives.
Underlying this study is an assumption that the rules of English modifiers are not
comprehensive enough as it is often confusing especially for ESL learners to
understand whether or not the modifier is an adverb or adjective or a rhetorical
feature. The study uses both quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis of the
sign –ly utilizing the meaning based framework advocated by Tobin (1990),
Govindasamy (2005), Stern (2006) and Reid (2011), all exponents of the Columbia
School of Linguistics. The objectives of this study necessitate the use of a textual
analysis format. Fifty feature articles written by native speakers of English from The
Economist between 2014 and 2015 were selected and analysed using simple
descriptive statistics. The objectives of the study are to investigate whether or not –ly
is primarily used as an adverb, and the study also aims to find out the semantic value
of the sign –ly by discovering its core meaning. The results of the study revealed that
although a majority of the –ly modifiers are adverbs (79.10%), considerable number of
adjectives and rhetorical feature that end in –ly (10.79% and 10.10% respectively) are
present in English language. Furthermore, and more importantly the findings illustrate
that –ly inflection consistently intensifies the modified either positively or negatively
irrespective of context. Among 462 –ly adverbs, 94.15% positively intensify and
5.85% negatively intensify their modified. 82.53% –ly adjectives positively intensify
and 17.47% negatively intensify the modified amongst 63 adjectives. The lowest
quantity of –ly modifiers are found as rhetorical features, 59, and 93.22% positively
intensify and 6.77% negatively intensify their respective modified. Thus, it can be
summed up that the sign –ly has a core meaning for all the modifiers. Consequently, it
is needless to classify the –ly modifiers as belonging to distinct word classes; in fact, it
should just be treated as a meaningful sign.
ii
ABSTRACT IN ARABIC
ly
V
The
Economist
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly)) 59
ly
ly
iii
APPROVAL PAGE
I certify that I have supervised and read this study and that in my opinion; it conforms
to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and
quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Master of Human Sciences in Applied
Linguistics.
……………………………………..
Subramaniam Govindasamy
Supervisor
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable
standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a
dissertation for the degree of Master of Human Sciences in Applied Linguistics.
……………………………………..
Nora Nasir
Examiner
This dissertation was submitted to the Department of English Language and Literature
and is accepted as a fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Human
Sciences in Applied Linguistics.
……………………………………..
Zahariah Pilus
Head, Department of English
Language and Literature
This dissertation was submitted to the Kulliyyah of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and
Human Sciences and is accepted as a fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of
Master of Human Sciences in Applied Linguistics.
……………………………………..
Ibrahim Mohamed Zein
Dean, Kulliyyah of Islamic
Revealed Knowledge and Human
Sciences
iv
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this dissertation is the result of my own investigation, except
where otherwise stated. I also declare that it has not been previously or concurrently
submitted as a whole for any other degrees at IIUM or other institutions.
Tasdiq Nomaira Alam
Signature…………………....……….
Date …….……………….
v
COPYRIGHT
INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA
DECLARATION OF COPYRIGHT AND AFFIRMATION OF
FAIR USE OF UNPUBLISHED RESEARCH
ENGLISH MODIFIER SYSTEM: A SEMIOTIC ANALYSIS
I declare that the copyright holder of this dissertation are jointly owned by the
student and IIUM.
Copyright © 2016 Tasdiq Nomaira Alam and International Islamic University Malaysia. All rights
reserved.
No part of this unpublished research may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise without prior written permission of the copyright holder
except as provided below
1.
Any material contained in or derived from this unpublished research may
be used by others in their writing with due acknowledgement.
2.
IIUM or its library will have the right to make and transmit copies (print
or electronic) for institutional and academic purposes.
3.
The IIUM library will have the right to make, store in a retrieved system
and supply copies of this unpublished research if requested by other
universities and research libraries.
By signing this form, I acknowledged that I have read and understand the IIUM
Intellectual Property Right and Commercialization policy.
Affirmed by Tasdiq Nomaira Alam
……..……………………..
Signature
………………………..
Date
vi
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my beloved son Ayaz Ibrahim Hasan.
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am thankful to Allah, the Lord of the worlds, without His blessings nothing on the
earth is possible including my effort in writing the thesis.
Thesis writing has been one of the most pleasant academic exercises I have
ever commenced. It has given me the opportunity to study a wide range of literature. It
also enriched my analytical thinking and enlightened the aptitude to evaluate different
views in linguistics. In fact, it has taught me to become more patient, confident and
courageous in research works. There are several important people that tremendously
supported me to accomplish my study.
First and foremost, I would like to deeply acknowledge Dr. Subramaniam
Govindasamy, the best supervisor in the world, for his tremendous help, valuable
advice and continuous encouragement. He is the one who taught me Semantics and its
charisma. I would like to thank him for igniting the semanticist in me.
Behind this work lie the constant support and concern of my dear husband Dr.
Muhammad Hasibul Hasan without whom I would never have completed the task. I
owe a great debt to him for his remarkable moral support and continuous motivation.
Furthermore, the patience and kindness of my adorable son Ayaz facilitates me to
finish the study.
Most importantly, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my parents
Mrs. Amina Akhter and Dr. Nausher Alam for their constant prayers and moral
encouragement. I feel grateful for all what my parents did for making me the person I
am today.
I would like to thank and appreciate my lovely friend Aliaa Kahwaji for being
the examiner of the analyzed data and cross-check them diligently.
My special appreciation and love also goes to my father-in-law Md. Habibur
Rahman for being the consistent source of encouragement and motivation.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract .......................................................................................................................... ii
Abstract in Arabic .......................................................................................................... iii
Approval Page ................................................................................................................ iv
Declaration ..................................................................................................................... v
Copyright ....................................................................................................................... vi
Dedication ...................................................................................................................... vii
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................ viii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures ................................................................................................................ xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Background of the Study .............................................................................. 2
1.3 Statement of the Problem.............................................................................. 3
1.4 Objectives of Study....................................................................................... 4
1.5 Research Questions ....................................................................................... 5
1.6 Significance of the Study .............................................................................. 5
1.7 Scope of the Study ........................................................................................ 6
1.8 Conceptual Definition of the Terms ............................................................. 6
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................... 9
2.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Traditional Approach and Meaning-Based Approach .................................. 9
2.3 Review of Studies Using the Meaning-Based Framework ........................... 14
2.4 Use of –Ly in English Modifier System ....................................................... 24
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY................................................................. 30
3.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 30
3.2 Theoretical Framework................................................................................. 30
3.3 Research Design ........................................................................................... 32
3.4 Sample Selection and Data Collection Procedure ........................................ 33
3.5 Analytical Framework .................................................................................. 35
3.6 Data Analysis Proceddure ............................................................................ 37
CHAPTER FOUR: THE SEMANTIC VALUE OF –ly .......................................... 38
4.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 38
4.2 Use of –Ly in English ................................................................................... 38
4.3 The Semantic Value of –Ly .......................................................................... 44
4.3.1 Use of Adverb Modifiers .................................................................... 46
4.3.1.1 Use of Adverb as a Positive Intensifier .................................. 47
4.3.1.2 Use of Adverb as a Negative Intensifier ................................. 53
4.3.2 Use of Adjective Modifiers ................................................................. 56
4.3.2.1 Use of Adjective Modifiers as a Positive Intensifier .............. 57
4.3.2.2 Use of Adjective Modifiers as a Negative Intensifier ............ 61
4.3.3 Use of Rhetorical Features .................................................................. 61
ix
4.3.3.1 Use of Rhetorical Features as a Positive Intensifier ............... 63
4.3.3.2 Use of Rhetorical Features as Negative Intensifiers ............... 64
4.3.4 Non-Inflected –ly Modifiers................................................................ 66
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................... 69
5.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 69
5.2 Summary of the Study .................................................................................. 69
5.3 Conclusion .................................................................................................... 73
5.4 Recommendations for Future Research ........................................................ 74
5.5 Pedagogical Implications for Second Language Teaching and
Learning ........................................................................................................ 74
BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................ 78
APPENDIX I ................................................................................................................ 82
APPENDIX II ............................................................................................................... 90
x
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1
Distribution of –self and Simple Pronouns (Stern, 2006)
14
Table 3.1
Analysis for Validity/Reliability of the data
33
Table 3.2
Data Collection
34
Table 3.3
Analytical Framework for Analyzing Adverb (Adv) Modifiers,
Adjective (Adj) Modifiers and Rhetorical Features (RF)
35
Table 3.4
Analysis of Semantic Value of –ly Sign
36
Table 3.5
Research Design: Research Questions, Data collection Methods,
Data Analysis Procedures
37
Table 4.1
Number of Occurrences
39
Table 4.2
Use of Adverb Modifiers as Positive and Negative Intensifiers
46
Table 4.3
Use of Adjective Modifiers as Positive and Negative Intensifiers
56
Table 4.4
Use of Rhetorical Features as Positive and Negative Intensifiers
62
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1
The Percentage of –ly Modifiers
40
Figure 4.2
The Percentage of Intensify and Diminish
45
Figure 4.3
Percentage Distribution of Positive and Negative Intensifiers of
Adverbs
46
Figure 4.4
Percentage of Positive and Negative Intensifiers of Adjectives
57
Figure 4.5
Percentage of Positive and Negative Intensifiers of the Rhetorical
Features
62
xii
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
There are numerous approaches to present the grammar of a language, one being the
formal approach that explains grammar as a set of rules. A formal approach merely
specifies all the possible grammatical structures of a language. The functional
approach or the meaning-based approach that is used in this study, on the other hand,
considers language mainly as a system of communication that allows speakers and
writers to make and exchange meanings (Lock, 1996). Berry (2012), a functionalist,
states that, “Grammar is the system of rules that enables users of a language to relate
linguistic form to meaning” (p. 23). Unlike the formal approach, Halliday (1994),
another functionalist describes grammar as systems rather than rules. According to
Halliday, every grammatical structure is associated with a choice from a valid set of
options. Language is thus a meaning potential; speakers or writers can choose the
form of language to express themselves based on their purposes; and different
meanings are realized by different forms of language too (Haliday, Matthiessen, 2013;
Halliday, Matthiessen & Matthiessen, 2014; and Jones & Lock, 2011). Traugott
(2008) contends that language is fundamentally a symbolic system that pairs forms
and meaning. Driven and Verspoor (2004) states that language is seen as a system of
communication in which people make use of different language signs to communicate
their intended message. And that is the main intention of meaning-based approach. In
functional grammar or meaning-based approach, language is perceived as an
instrument for human beings to communicate with each other. This study is an effort
to analyze English modifier system utilizing a meaning based approach.
1
1.2 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
According to Bloom and Lahey (1978) as cited in De Leo, Lubas and Mitchell (2012),
the structure of the language is based on three components: phonology, morphology,
and syntax. Phonology characterizes the understanding of the sound system of a
language and the production of meaningful words.
The second component
morphology indicates the structure of words. And syntax relates to the rules of the
language, such as grammar. This study is more close to the second and third main
components. The importance of grammar as well as the meaning of a language cannot
be overemphasized. However, the understanding of grammar varies from one to one.
Many linguists, English language instructors and students still believe that grammar
should be learnt only based on certain rules, and the content is insignificant. The fact
is learning the rule will not help learners producing native like language especially
when English grammar has numerous exceptions. Understanding the content and the
inner meaning of the words are equivalently important while learning a second
language. A very effective way of acquiring another language is when learners notice
the functions of different forms of the target language (Lewis, 2010). Lewis contends
that consciousness raising activities can be helpful to learn the target language
efficiently. There is a possibility that a meaning-based quest would bring some
consciousness raising of a grammatical feature.
The main purpose of this study is based on a logical assumption that the role of
English modifiers such as adjectives, adverbs and rhetorical features from the
traditional approach is elegant but not comprehensive. Thus, this study will
comprehensively explore the role of –ly in the English modifier system.
2
1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
In English grammar, a modifier is used to make the meaning more specific. It is a
word, phrase, or clause which can function as different parts of speech to add
description to a word or make its meaning more explicit. This study will focus on the
modifiers that embrace the sign –ly. The suffix –ly, according to the Merriam-Webster
Dictionary, is an adverb. Many adverbs do very frequently end in -ly. For example,
They happily watched TV until dinner. (Huddleston & Pullum, 2002, p.
575)
In this above excerpt, according to Huddleston and Pullum (2002), the adverb
of manner happily is placed in the central position and enlarges the meaning and
narrows the application of the verb watched.
In spite of the high frequency, a –ly ending is not an assurance that the word is
an adverb. The words lovely, lovely, motherly, friendly, neighbourly, for instance, are
adjectives. According to Cambridge dictionary, the sign –ly is also used like the
stated person or thing: fatherly attitude, advice-priestly duties, cowardly behaviour
and so on. It is also used for indicating one of a series of events that happen with the
stated regular period of time: a daily shower, a weekly meeting, a yearly check-up and
so on. The -ly is also added to nouns to form adjectives to indicate that someone or
something is like another person or thing in manner, nature, or appearance (Mayor,
2009). For example,
There was a cowardly and violent attack on a police office last night.
Furthermore, –ly can be used to indicate something that happens regularly after
the stated period of time: a weekly/monthly meeting. It is added to nouns to indicate
that something happens at regular intervals (Mayor, 2009). In the first example
mentioned below, the word daily is an adjective because it modifies the noun
3
schedule. The second example shows daily is an adverb because it modifies the verb
walk.
My daily schedule is different from week to week.
I walk daily.
In addition, there are some features ending in –ly, and largely utilized to
connect, organize and manage sentences. According to the Cambridge dictionary,
firstly, lastly, actually, absolutely, certainly, definitely, exactly, really, fortunately,
honestly, frankly etc. are adverbs (Aish & Tomlinson, 2012; Aarts, 2011) used as
rhetorical features.
It is reasonably difficult for the ESL learners to acquire a second language
which is more or less unfamiliar to them. Attaining the grammatical understanding
accurately is even more complicated (Ali & Alam, 2015). Therefore, it is confusing
for the ESL learners to understand the word class role of the –ly sign: an adverb, an
adjective or a rhetorical feature. And, whether or not this categorization is even
important. Thus, this study will explore the English modifier system based on the
semantic analysis of textual data to find out its frequency distribution to verify claims
(i.e. the structural condition for its use) by grammarians. It also aims to find out the
semantic value, i.e. the core meaning, of –ly by examining the communications to
which the form –ly is deployed, which sadly has not been sufficiently emphasized.
1.4 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
The primary objective of the study is to determine the role of the sign –ly in the
authentic texts (texts written by native speaker of English) to see the syntactic class it
aptly fits. The corollary objective is to examine the signified value of the sign. The
two objectives are reconstituted in the following statement:
4
1.
to investigate whether or not –ly is primarily used as an adverb;
2.
to find out the semantic value of –ly in authentic communicative
situations.
1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
To achieve the objectives of this study, the research aims to find the answers to the
following research questions.
1.
To what extent is –ly used as an adverb in the English language?
2.
Is the semantic value of –ly an intensifier of the modified in actual
communicative situations?
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
Most of the English grammar books include the definition of adjectives, adverbs and
rhetorical features with idealized examples. The text books do not provide sufficient
explanation about the use of –ly sign. The idealized examples are not clear enough to
remove the confusion in learners regarding the syntagmatic role of the use of –ly. This
study does not want to rely on the cue from the traditional rules of grammar as it
attempts to derive a functional explanation to the context.
Because ESL learners acquire more in a meaning copious situation than
otherwise, they must be guided to understand the semantic distinctions that exist in
language (Lewis, 2010) and the learners must observe the fact that language forms can
be used to convey different contextual messages (Tobin, 1993; Wherrity, 2001;
Granath & Wherrity, 2014).
Hence, the outcome may be useful to language
instructors to adopt a functional way, through reprising the potentiality of –ly use from
traditional approaches to English Language Teaching (ELT). When a person is able to
5
understand the existing features of a language, it is the best time to learn the language
(Lewis, 2010). Also, learners will be more enthusiastic by observing the different
features of language learning. This study will be comprehensive enough to promote
progress in students’ learning. Teaching and learning is often effective when meaning
is highlighted. It is anticipated that this study will shed light on the problematic area of
English modifiers where learners encounter difficulties.
1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This study used 50 expository articles from the online journal The Economist. Thus,
the findings of the current study may be reliable based on the investigation on these
particular samples and the similar data. Different data from different sources might
have different interpretation. The present study is limited to one genre: expository
writing in journals. Generalization to all types of texts might need a greater range of
analysis.
1.8 CONCEPTUAL DEFINITION OF THE TERMS
Traditional Approach
Traditional approach is a conventional way of perceiving the language based on the
grammatical rule and regulation. This approach only provides an idea of correctness
or incorrectness of a sentence since the sentence is taken as the basic unit of analysis.
Traditional approach is unable to convey any intended meaning or message of the
signs that present in the language.
For example,
Hamish, a 24-year-old British chemical-engineering graduate, says his
“jaw dropped” when he alighted at Budapest’s Keleti station to find
himself confronted with the sight of thousands of migrants, mainly
6
Syrians, waiting to be granted permission to board trains to Austria and
Germany (The Economist, What Europe means to the young, 5
September, 2015).
If the traditional approach is followed, there is no meaning of the –ly in the
word mainly; it only provides an emphasis on the plural noun Syrians as an adjective.
Meaning-based approach
Meaning-based approach which is usually referred to as the functional approach is a
modern way of observing the language as an instrument for humans to communicate
with each other. This approach believes that language consisted of signs and each sign
has its own semantic value contributing to the intended message of the speakers.
Unlike the traditional approach, a meaning-based approach emphasizes on the
relationship between the meaning and messages. It believes that the association
between message and meaning is not deterministic; in fact, language users have the
vital role in communication procedure. This approach follows the sign-based theory
advocated by Columbia School of Linguistics that analyse language as a collection of
signs where meaning is the vital part.
English Modifiers
English modifiers are words, phrases or clauses that function as different parts of
speech: adjective, adverbs or rhetorical features to depict a word or phrase. Modifiers
make the meaning of their respective entities more specific. When a modifier is an
adverb, it modifies a verb, adjective, or another adverb. If a modifier is an adjective, it
modifies a noun, pronoun or a noun phrase. A rhetorical feature which is also defined
as a discourse marker is a word or phrase whose purpose is to arrange the discourse
7
into segments. The rhetorical features are moderately syntax-independent that do not
change the meaning of the sentence.
Authentic Texts
The expository texts written by native speakers of English are referred to as authentic
texts. This study made use of authentic texts to avoid writing errors in English. Welledited texts can also be considered authentic texts and they add to the presupposition
that language is error free through emulating the writer’s process of native speakers of
language.
Purposive sampling
Purposing (judgemental) sampling is a type of non-probability sampling in which the
units to be observed are selected based on a researcher’s judgement about which ones
will be the most useful or representative.
ESL Learners
ESL learners are the pupils who learn English language in addition to their native
language.
8
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter reviews the relevant literature to the area of the study, which is the
English modifier. In the first section of this chapter, the paradigms of the traditional
and functional approaches of grammar are provided. The second section discusses the
meaning-based theory and its versatility as depicted in various researches. The third
and last section includes an in depth discussion about the role of the –ly sign, a
frequently occurring English modifier. In the last section, issues surrounding the –ly
sign, the traditional rules and the exceptions, the –ly as a full-fledged sign and new
researches are presented.
2.2 TRADITIONAL APPROACH AND MEANING-BASED APPROACH
Lock (1996) suggests that the grammar of a language is described in two ways. The
first way is the traditional approach where rules are outlined, with an emphasis on a
limited number of features. This emphasis on a few examples invariably leads to a
neglect of all the contextual spread of the sign. Therefore, many areas are not
adequately explained. Lock further states that the Formal or the Traditional Approach
demonstrates grammar as a set of rules and analyses show that a sentence is either
grammatically correct or incorrect. The ensuing scope is limited as explicit idealistic
examples follow the grammar rules in an inflexible way. The alternative to the formal
approach is the functional approach which agrees with the grammatical structures and
sees it as a communicative instrument that delivers the communicative message
9
between speakers. The functional structure explains the formulation of the particular
grammatical structures and provides solutions of unexplained grammatical rules.
Reid (2011) and Govindasamy (2001), in a similar vein, contend that there are
two faces to languages. The first face is a formal one in which rules and rigidity
prevail; the second one is less rigid and communication-driven. Based on the formal
approach, grammar is taught prescriptively with an eye on the rules. However, the
meaning-based
approach
believes
on
analyses
which
are
dependent
on
communication-driven data. For example, studies based on the latter approach focus
on verbs which can convey a whole array of meaning such as number, tense, control,
factuality/hypotheticality, person and immediacy. In formal approaches, according to
Govindasamy (2001), grammar books focuses on subject-verb agreement entirely
without focusing on other forces. Therefore, he believes that there is a need to move
away from the instructional approach to a goal directed approach so that language
instructor can use the language data for analysis and testing of emerging hypothesis.
The researcher further states that if the traditional rule-based approach is followed to
teach ESL learners, the students confined themselves in limited features of learning
English. Conversely, meaning-based approach allows learners to involve themselves
extensively in linguistic research of such features which enables them to keep the
information in their long-term memory.
Unlike traditional approach, meaning-based approach talks about grammar
users rather than grammar rules. According to functional approach, language users are
the controller of language, not controlled by language. As cited in Bertolo (2001)
Saussure considers the language users as the major role-players. He asserts that
meaning of a language is not self-possessed; it comes from the language users instead.
This confirms the notion that language underdetermines meaning (Reid, 1991).
10
Reid (2011) asserts that explaining grammar using the traditional approach
may create problems empirically and methodologically as it only focuses on
grammatical structure. Moreover, Reid asserts that language users can choose between
subject number and verb number as a communicative choice to convey the intended
message. This concept contradicts the rule of traditional grammar because verb
number is considered as a formal response to the subject number. However, all uses of
verbs and nouns do not follow rules of grammar. In fact, in some cases, it is observed
that singular subjects occur with plural verbs and plural subjects occur with singular
verbs. Such unusual use appear because language users are trying to communicate
strategic messages (Reid, 2011).
As cited in Harris (1990), Reid (1991) and Govindasamy (2005), Saussure
considers language users a vital part in determining the meaning of words or
sentences. Tobin (1990) illustrates the importance of the communication and human
factors in achieving successful communication. These factors involve language
features - lexical and grammatical – and particularly how these features are chosen
and syntagmatically combined to provide a certain message in a communication.
It is a fact that words convey several contextual meanings; Tobin (1990) explains
that the same linguistic sign with a single invariant meaning can be inferred to have
various diverse messages and multiple syntactic and pragmatic functions within
diverse discourse contexts. The following examples cited in Tobin’s work are helpful
in comparing the message senses of the word drove.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
John drove his wife
inference = by car
John drove his wife home
John drove his wife crazy
inference = not by car
John drove his herd home
Ahmed, the shepherd, drove the herd home
ambiguous inference
John drove his wife to the insane asylum
11
In example (a) and (b), the inferred inference connected with the word drove is
‘by car’ despite the fact that there is no vehicle mentioned. In example (c), it is ‘John’s
behaviour’ which can be inferred in connection with the word drove as opposed to ‘by
car’ in this collocation with the word crazy. In example (d), it appears like John is a
shepherd who is walking on foot and perhaps holding a staff in his hand. From
example (d) it can be said that the word drove does not really signify by car in this
specific collocation. In example (e), conversely, when John is replaced by Ahmed, the
possibility of two ambiguous meanings arises: ‘by car’ or ‘not by car’. In example (f),
the insane asylum replaces the word home and/or crazy. Two discourse messages can
be inferred from this example: ‘by car’ or ‘not by car’ with the word drove depending
upon whether it is interpreted as in the sense of example (b) or (c). If an abstract
invariant meaning is hypothesized from the word drove (led/transported X or caused
X to move), it is possible to infer a single core meaning that can be found by the users
of the language to create specific messages in different linguistic and situational
contexts (Tobin, 1990).
Stern (2006), another proponent of the meaning-based approach, shows that –self
pronouns do not always follow the traditional grammar rules. In formal terms, -self
pronouns are reflexive pronouns that should appear whenever a noun phrase in a
predicate is a co-referent with the subject of the sentence. In addition, -self occurs in
apposition to provide emphasis. For instance,
Barney talked to herself. (Stern, 2006, p. 178)
In above example, the reflexive pronoun –self is used as a co-referent with the
subject of the sentence.
I’ve never been there myself. (Stern, 2006, p. 178)
12