BA‐Basismodul: Introduction to Linguistics – Basic Questions, Concepts and Methods (Mi 10‐12; R. 209) Florian Haas Tel.: 838‐72314 [email protected] Handout 8: Semantics II
1. Lexical (semantic) fields
•
•
•
A group of words that covers the same extralinguistic domain (e.g. verbs of asking,
kinship terms etc.)
assumption: the meaning of a field member can only be fully determined and
delimited by reference to its semantic neighbours
this idea of word meaning being purely relative goes back to de Saussure’s idea of the
‘signe différentiel’: the meaning of a word is what it is not
Are there problems with the traditional notion of a ‘lexical field’? If so, name one of
them!
2. Componential analysis ( = feature analysis)
•
•
•
This approach tries to equate a word’s intension with an abstract concept consisting of
smaller components called (binary) semantic features.
Can describe similarities and differences among members of a lexical field: features =
dimensions along which a lexical field is structured
categories (here: word meanings) are defined in terms of necessary and sufficient
features (the features are necessary in that no entity which does not possess the full
set is a member of the category, and they are sufficient in that possession of all the
features guarantees membership).
man:
+HUMAN
+MALE
+ADULT
boy:
+HUMAN
+MALE
-ADULT
woman:
+HUMAN
-MALE
+ADULT
girl:
+HUMAN
-MALE
-ADULT
Figure 1: Semantic feature composition for man, woman, boy, girl
•
•
Componential analysis is effective when it comes to representing similarities and
differences among words with related meanings
It allows us to group entities into natural classes (similar to phonology); e.g. man and
woman care in a class defined by the features [+HUMAN, +ADULT]
2.1 Some important semantic features for nouns
[±COMMON]
teacher vs Volker
[±COUNT]
town vs sand
butter vs. commitment
[±CONCRETE]
[±ANIMATE]
pig vs ham
[±HUMAN]
student vs elephant
[±MALE] (or [±FEMALE])
bull vs cow
[±COLLECTIVE]
player vs team
1
3. Sense relations
3.1 Synonymy
• two words have the same meaning: kill – murder, strong – powerful, glad – happy
• absolute synonymy does not exist: there are always some contexts in which one
member of the pair cannot be used. In this way it is normally the descriptive meaning
of a word which is at issue (cf. decease, pass away, perish, expire, snuff it, kick the
bucket, bite the dust.)
In which ways can the meaning of synonymous expressions differ? Give examples.
3.2 Oppositeness (‘antonymy’ in the wider sense)
• contradictory contrast = two expressions are in complementary distribution, i.e.
they exclude each other absolutely: alive – dead, man – woman, true – false, open –
shut, hit – miss (a target), pass – fail (an examination); normally not gradable:
?extremely true, ?fairly dead, ?a little shut, ?more married than most, ?moderately
female
• gradable antonymy = two expressions designate endpoints on a scale of ‘more or
less’; the negation of one does not entail the applicability of the other: long – short,
fast – slow, easy – difficult, good – bad, hot – cold
• converses = two expressions represent the same event or the same relation from
contrasting perspectives: above – below, in front of – behind, before – after, parent of
– child of, teacher – pupil, master – servant, guest – host
• directional opposition = two expressions denote motion or change in opposite
directions: rise – fall, ascend – descend, advance – retreat, enter – leave, marriage –
divorce, learn – forget
3.3 Hierarchical sense relations
3.3.1
Hyponymy: the meaning of a word is included in that of another
animal
mammal
dog
elephant
bird
robin
fish
eagle
cod
insect
trout
ant
butterfly
spaniel alsatian
Figure 1: Hyponymy
•
•
•
hyponym = subordinate term
hyper(o)nym = superordinate term
co-hyponyms/heteronyms = the set of words which are hyponyms of the same
superordinate term
Exercise 4: Draw a tree like the one in Figure 1 with at least three levels and six terms
overall. Use any category you want (e.g. means of transport; plants…)
2
3.4 Meronymy (partitive relation; part-whole relation)
body
head
neck
trunk
arm
forearm
Figure 2: Meronymy
•
•
leg
hand
palm
finger
meronym = subordinate term
holonym = superordinate term
4. Lexical ambiguity: homonymy and polysemy
•
homonymy: two different words are identical in form; if both writing and
pronunciation are the same we speak of total homonymy. If not:
homophony (night – knight; threw – through; write – rite;
flower – flour; meat – meet; bare – bear)
homonymy
homography (wind ‘Wind’– wind ‘drehen’; lead ‘Blei’ – lead
‘Hundeleine’)
total homonymy (mole – mole)
homonymy
partial homonymy (mean A – mean V)
•
polysemy: there is a systematic relationship between the meanings of one word (a
mouth can be an ‘opening area through which an animate being takes food’ or ‘the
part of a river which empties into a lake or a sea’; cf. also wing; school; church;
university)
5. Ambiguity (polysemy + homonymy) vs vagueness
•
•
•
Vagueness refers to a situation in which some features of a word’s meaning are
underdetermined, e.g. cousin is underdetermined with respect to sex (cf. German
Cousin – Cousine); to paint is underdetermined with respect to the colours used
Testing ambiguity: zeugma and the identity test
Is (1) ambiguous or vague?
(1) Jane chased a squirrel.
¾ a red squirrel
¾ a grey squirrel
(2) Harry believed that Jane chased a squirrel and Fred did, too.
Would (2) be felicitous if Harry believed that the squirrel was red and Fred believed
that it was grey? If so, squirrel is vague and not ambiguous with respect to the colour
distinction. (≠ ?John and his driving license expired last week)
Reading for next week: Löbner 132-140; Kortmann 208-217
3