Semantics is one of my favorite parts of Linguistics, along with

Pragmatics. Before I studied English semantics this

2.1
semester, I had already done
Portuguese semantics and it was useful now.

I believe that this previous knowledge contributed a lot to my

understanding of many concepts, after all, some of them have very different
names in English, and in several occasions, I could recognize the concept by its
definition.

Doing the portfolios with the summary and exercises was quite difficult
sometimes due to several factors, as I commented in the reflections of the
previous portfolios, but I think they contributed a lot to the learning. I missed the
face-to-face classes a lot, because of the interaction with my classmates and with
the teacher, but I learned and that matters.

Finally, I would like to thank you, Heliana, for the semester and for the
learning. As I'm at the end of the course, I probably won't have any more classes
with you. Far from being a flatterer, but as a teacher and researcher, you are my
2.2
inspiration. Thank you very much! :D
 Chapter 1- The Study of Meaning

KREIDLER, C. W. The Study of Meaning. In: KREIDLER, C. W. Introducing

english semantics. Psychology Press, 1998, pp. 1-13.

In the first chapter of the book Introducing English Semantics, Kreidler

(1998) presents an overview of Semantics and some introductory concepts within
it. The author begins by saying that in general, people are interested in meaning
and to study it, there are three fields that have different focuses but contribute to
each other: Psychology, Philosophy and Linguistics. In the book, the focus is on
Linguistics, so, he says that linguists are interested in studying how language
works.
In the second section of the chapter, Kreidler (1998) shows the
differences between human language and the communication system of animals.
According to the author, all animals have forms of communication, such as bees
and dolphins, but humans are the only ones to produce and understand each
other without external stimulus. For this reason, he says that the first difference
is that human language is stimulus-free, because human beings do not depend
on the need for some stimulus to communicate. A second difference between
humans and animals is the creativity, the human capacity to create new
utterances and understand it produced by other people, while animals repeat the
same signs. The arbitrariness is the third difference and the feature responsible
for the productivity of the language. Productivity is the human ability to express
the same sentence in different ways, with various words, being distinct from
animals that have only fixed elements of communication. He concludes by saying
that language is natural for humans, but the way that meaning is given through
language is not natural.
In the third section of the chapter, the author discusses about the
language acquisition and explains that children learn to speak in childhood and it
is noticeable that their utterances are not repetitions of other people's speech but
are created by themselves. As children grow, they learn new skills such as writing
and reading, which contribute to the creativity of the language. He points out that
language is learned consciously and unconsciously by people and humans do
not know how they know, they only use the language according to the occasion,
having no restriction of topics. But despite these factors, the language has rules
and restrictions; and it does not have an infinite number of words or the means
to combine them and even if it did, we would not be able to learn. For this reason,
the author says that a speaker has two vocabularies that constitute knowledge of
the language, one to produce utterances and the other to understand people.
This vocabulary grows in childhood and can change throughout life.
Another important part addressed by this topic is about grammar and its
parts. For the author, grammar means the internal knowledge of the speaker and
the descriptions and explanations given by the linguist. The parts of grammar are
phonology, which is the description of sounds in language through phonemes;
syntax, which describes word classes and their organization in sentence or
sentence formation; and morphology, which describes word formation, its
derivations and flexions.
In the last section, the author talks about the types of semantic
knowledge that all speakers have and exemplifies them. According to him, every
speaker knows what has meaning in their language to identify an anomalous
sentence and if a sentence is equivalent, contradictory, ambiguous, or it has the
same semantic feature. It is also possible to presuppose, paraphrase, establish
synonyms or antonyms, know how to respond correctly according to the occasion
or whether the sentences are entailed.
Practice 1.1

Below are ten pairs of sentences. In each pair assume that the first sentence is
true. Then decide what we know about the second sentence, which has the same
topic(s). If the first is true, must the second also be true (T)? Or if the first is true,
must the second be false (F)? Or does the truth of the first tell us nothing about
the truth of the second (X)?

1a Rose is married to Tom.

1b Rose is Tom’s wife.

True. If 1a is true, 1b entails the truth of the other sentence. If Rose in the first
sentence is the same Rose of the second, we can presuppose that if she is
married to Tom, she is his wife.

2a David is an unmarried adult male.

2b David is a bachelor.

True. If 2a is true, the second sentence entails the truth of the first sentence and
we can presuppose that David is a bachelor.

3a This knife is too dull to cut the rope.

3b This knife isn’t sharp enough to cut the rope.

X. If the 3a is true, 3b can be true or false because the truth of the first sentence
tell us nothing about the truth of the second.

4a Victoria likes to sing.

4b Victoria doesn’t sing.

X. If 4a is true, 4b can be true or false because the truth of the first sentence tell
us nothing about the truth of the second. Victoria may like to sing but not have
the opportunity or not be a good singer.

5a Harold has been here for an hour.

5b Harold is tired of waiting.

X. If the 5a is true, 5b can be true or false because the truth of the first sentence
tell us nothing about the truth of the second. Harold can be tired or not.

6a Mr Bond has given up smoking.

6b Mr Bond used to smoke.

True. If 6a is true, the second sentence entails the truth of the other sentence. It
is not possible that Mr Bond has given up smoking if he had never smoked before.

7a Mr Bond still smokes.

7b Mr Bond used to smoke.

False. If 7a is true, the second sentence is contradictory.

8a Oil paintings are more expensive than watercolors.

8b Watercolors cost more than oil paintings.

False. If 8a is true, the second sentence is contradictory, because it makes
opposite statements.

9a The Carlson Hotel is more than a century old.

9b The Carlson Hotel has operated for more than a century.

X. If 9a is true, 9b can be true or false because the truth of the first sentence tell
us nothing about the truth of the second.

10a Alice invited some friends to lunch.

10b Alice has friends.

True. If 10a is true, we can presuppose the second sentence. To Alice to invite
friends to lunch, she needs to have friends
Reading this chapter was a bit difficult, even if the subject was familiar to me. I
have already studied Semantics of Portuguese but in English it is a bit different,
so I have to get used to the terms. I like Semantics a lot, it was a bit difficult to
summarize, but the subject is quite interesting.

The exercise was not so difficult. I had one question about the pair of sentences
number 4. I do not know if I confused it with Pragmatics. The first time I read it, I
had the impression that the truth of the first sentence said nothing about the
second because of the meaning of the sentence “Victoria doesn't sing”. I
understood that Victoria is not a good singer, but this fact would not be an
obstacle for her to sing. So, she might like to sing but not be a good singer. When
reading for the second time, taking into account the truth of the first sentence, the
second sentence seems contradictory.
“Semantics is the systematic study of meaning, and linguistic semantics is the
study of how languages organize and express meanings.” (p. 3)

“We know the language but we do not fully know what we know.” (p. 6)

“…speakers have two vocabularies, one that they use in producing utterances
and a somewhat larger one that is needed for understanding a variety of people.”
(p. 6)

“We use the term grammar to mean two things: the implicit knowledge that a
speaker has and the explicit description and explanation of it by the linguist.” (p.
7)

“Phonology is the knowledge, or the description, of how speech sounds are

organized in a particular language—there are units called phonemes which
combine in various possible ways (but not all possible ways) to express
meaningful units such as words.” (p. 7)

“Syntax is the knowledge, or the description, of the classes of words, sometimes

called parts of speech, and of how members of these classes go together to form
phrases and sentences.” (p. 8)

“Another part of grammar is morphology, the description or the knowledge of word

formation: the account of different forms of the ‘same’ word (cat, cats; connect,
connecting, connected) and the derivation of different words which share a basic
meaning (connect, disconnect, connection)” (p. 8)
 Chapter 2- Language in Use

KREIDLER, C. W. Language in Use. In: KREIDLER, C. W. Introducing english

semantics. Psychology Press, 1998, pp. 17-38.

In this chapter, Kreidler (1998) presents the differences between

Semantics and Pragmatics. According to him, these two fields of Linguistics deal
with meaning, but under different aspects. While the first studies the ability of
speakers to use language and understand what is spoken by others, the latter
studies the ability of the speaker to imply meaning in situations and the language
used in context. Nevertheless, Semantics and Pragmatics are very close, so the
boundary between them is vague. Throughout the chapter, the author also
discusses prosody, intonation and non-verbal communication.
In the second section of the chapter, the author explains that language is
a group of symbols, whether written or spoken, used by people to communicate.
When a group of people use the same language, they are part of a language
community. Dialects are part of these communities because even though there
are differences, there is an understanding of the language. After that, the author
says that there are two types of signs: the natural and the conventional and that
human beings are used to interpreting these signs. According to him, this
interpretation of the information occurs through a process that consists of three
parts.
The first part is perception, when the observer perceives the signal in
some context; the second part is identification, when the observer connects the
signal with some previous occurrence in his/her memory after recognition and the
last part is interpretation, when the observer interprets the signal according to the
context. The author emphasizes that the same sign can have different
interpretations in different situations.
In the third section of the chapter, the author discusses about linguistics
signs in sequence to what was said in the previous section. Although he has
started talking about words as linguistic signs, the author focuses on the process
of getting information and the concepts of perception, identification and
interpretation in the language in use. The first step is the perception of the
utterance, whether written or spoken, and for identification, both the speaker and
the hearer need to share a common-ground. If there is understanding, the hearer
interprets the statement correctly and the communication is completed. After this
process, the hearer retains only the important part of the message not
considering pauses and repetitions said by the speaker. However, the speaker
must have a sense of the background information of the hearer so that he can
infer and understand for the speech to be complete.
The fourth section of the chapter begins with the distinction between
sentence and utterance. By means of examples, the author shows that within a
sentence can contain different utterances, and can be used in many speeches in
different contexts. The author emphasizes that the main difference is that the
utterance is an event, an act of speech or writing that happens only once, while
the sentence is only a construction of words in sequence that has meaning in
some language. According to Kreidler, the meaning of a sentence is “the
meanings of the individual words and the meaning of the syntactic construction
in which they occur”, while the meaning of the utterance is “the meaning of the
sentence plus the meanings of the circumstances” (1998, p.27). The name given
for these circumstances by the author is physical-social context. Thus, an
utterance is part of a larger discourse, as said by the author, because it depends
not only on the meaning, like the sentence, but also on the context. In addition,
the chapter explains the concept of implicature, which are parts of information
inserted in the context unconsciously, acting as connections between utterances.
In the fifth section of the chapter, the author discusses prosody, which
can be understood as the way words are said in a speech. The prosody is formed
by intonation and accent, and every utterance has an intonation, either in a rising
or a falling pitch. The meaning of some utterance may be changed because of
prosody, through the emphasis placed on a particular word or syllable. Finally,
the author presents the types of intonation of sentences that distinguish
utterances: statement and question (fall vs rise), representing an answer or a
statement; information sought and repetition requested (fall vs rise), representing
a request for repetition or information; parallel structure and antithesis (fall vs fall
and rise) indicating correlation or not; open question and alternative question (rise
vs rise, fall), indicating a polar or non-polar question; and full statement and
reservation (fall vs fall-rise), representing agreement or partial agreement.
In the last section of the chapter, the author addresses about non-verbal
communication. Although they are not considered parts of language, gestures
are visual signals that have a standard and can have different meanings
according to the culture of each country. Some vocal sounds such as laughter
and whistling, even though they are part of speech, are not considered part of
language being part of the paralanguage, which combined with gestures can
express the emotions of the speaker. In conclusion, according to the author, a
face to face communication must have some linguistics and non-linguistics
features such as words forming utterances, prosody, paralanguage, gestures,
among others.
Practice 2.1

Sometimes we can interpret what the speaker intends from clues in the physical
context even though we don’t understand completely what he or she has said
(interpretation without identification) and even without having heard everything
said (interpretation without perception). Can you recall an instance in which you
did not fully understand what someone said but figured out from the context what
he or she meant—what the speaker was trying to do, what the circumstances
seemed to require, etc.? If you can’t remember such an event, perhaps you can
imagine one.

I do not remember any specific event. But one situation where a person can
understand the context even without having heard is when we have a person with
hearing loss at home. My father has a hearing impairment and often does not
understand what we are talking about, but through the context he is able to
deduce the subject of the conversation or what he should do.

Can you recall an instance in which you understood quite well what somebody
said but still could not interpret it, because you did not have background
information, didn’t grasp what the message was about? If not, maybe you can
invent a possible situation.

One event I remember was when I entered the undergraduate research project
on Semantics and in the meetings, although I understood about the subject
(Semantics), I could not understand what they were talking about, because I was
not yet aware of the complete research.

Practice 2.2

The meaning of any language symbol depends to an extent on the context in

which it occurs. Here are two ‘narratives’ that are rather vague because a lot of
details are missing, but in each group the mere collocation of the words that are
here tells a sort of story.

(a)… pain… clinic… doctor… examine… surgery… hospital… nurses…

preparation… surgeon… successful operation… quick recovery

(b)… rocket… preparation… countdown… blastoff… orbit… splashdown… quick

recovery… successful operation

The term successful operation occurs in both stories. Does it seem to have the
same meaning in both of them?

The term ‘successful operation’ does not have the same meaning in both stories.
In the first case, the term represents in the context of a hospital, when a surgery
has occurred and the results were successful. The words “operation” and
“surgery” are synonymous. In the second case, the term is used when launching
a rocket, at the time when the launch operation was completed and everything
went well. The word operation is related to the set of actions performed by
professionals in launching the rocket.

The phrase quick recovery also occurs in both stories. Does it have the same
meaning in both?

The term ‘quick recovery’ in the same contexts has totally different meanings. In
the hospital, it means that after some procedure, the patient's recovery is being
satisfactory and at the launch of a rocket, means that it was possible to maintain
control of the spacecraft quickly after landing in the water.
Practice 2.3

In the following short discourses what is the implicature that connects the second
utterance to the first?

(a) Is there a garage near here? Our engine is making strange noises.

The implicature can be that the owner of the car needs a nearby location to repair
it.

(b) Barbara: How did you do on the examination?

Barry: I think I’ll just drop this course.

The implicature can be: “I did not do well”.

(c) Jim: Would you like to go dancing tomorrow night?

Laura: We have guests coming from out of town.

The implicature can be: I cannot go dancing tomorrow night.

Has Laura answered Jim’s question? If so, what is her answer? Has she
answered a question that he didn’t ask? If so, what is the question?

Laura answered Jim’s question and answered a question that he didn’t ask. She
presupposes that he will implicate and understand that she can’t go dancing
based on her answer about the guests she will receive.

Practice 2.4

The utterance “Alex phoned Louise last SUNday” may not have any special
emphasis, or it may emphasize Sunday as opposed to any other day. Each of the
following utterances has an emphasis that makes a contrast. What is the contrast,
in each case?
a) Alex phoned Edna LAST Sunday.

In this utterance, the emphasis is on ‘last’ because Alex did not phone Edna on
any other Sunday, but on the last Sunday.

b) Alex phoned EDna last Sunday.

In this utterance, the emphasis is on ‘Edna’ because Alex did not phone someone
else, he phoned to Edna.

c) Alex PHONED Edna last Sunday.

In this utterance, the emphasis is on ‘phoned’ because he did not visit, did not
send a message or anything, he specifically phoned to Edna.

d) ALex phoned Edna last Sunday.

In this utterance, the emphasis is on ‘Alex’ because he was the one who phoned
Edna and not someone else.

Practice 2.5

How would you say “Yes, it is” in these two discourses?

(a) Is this your pen? Yes, it is. (answering the question)

Yes, it is.

(b) This isn’t your pen. Yes, it is. (contradicting)

Yes, it is.
Practice 2.6

Here are ten stylized gestures that are used by speakers of English. Write down
what each one ‘means’—that is, how you would interpret it in one or more speech
situations. Then compare your interpretations with those made by other members
of your class.

(a) The index finger of one hand points at someone and the hand is moved up
and down three or four times with deliberate motion (‘shaking a finger at
someone’).

When someone is angry and scolds another person.

(b) The fist, with knuckles down, moves up and down in short movements
knocking on something or as if knocking on something (‘knocking on wood’).

It is a superstition, when the person is trying to avoid bad luck for something that
someone else said.

(c) Shoulders are moved upward and down again, possibly repeated (‘shrugging
shoulders’).

It is a sign that the person does not care.

(d) Hands are clasped across each other, palm against palm, and forearms move
back and forth; this gesture can be executed in front of oneself or over one’s head
(‘shaking hands with oneself’).

It is a sign of victory on some occasion, generally used by politicians.

(e) Hand is held on the stomach, palm inward, and the hand makes a circular
movement.

It is used when the person is hungry or in pain.

(f) The tongue moves back and forth over the lips (‘licking one’s lips’).

It is a sign of the body language used in flirting.

(g) The palm of one hand is brought up and slaps smartly against the forehead.

It is a gesture used when someone forgets something

(h) The hand, slightly cupped, is pulled across the forehead as if wiping
something away,

It is a gesture symbolizing relief or fatigue.

(i) The index finger is pulled across the throat; the gesture may be accompanied
by a noise that is made with movement of air (and saliva) on one side of the
mouth while the lips are slightly open on that side.

It is a gesture used to say that someone is in trouble.

(j) The fingers of the two hands are interlocked and the thumbs move in circles
around each other (‘twiddling one’s thumbs’).

It is a gesture used by bored or anxious people in some situation.

Practice 2.7

In a class composed of students from different countries it will be interesting to

compare the signals made in the following situations:

(a) Two people who are acquainted see each other at some distance and greet
each other with a gesture.

To greet, we wave our hands in the air.

(b) Two people who have been together move apart and give each other a
farewell signal.

To greet, we wave our hands in the air.

(c) One person signals to another one to come forward.

To signal to another person to come forward we shake our hands

(d) One hand is used to indicate the height of a child or of some object.
To indicate the height of some object, we place our hand horizontally at the
desired height.

(e) The gesture-maker wants to indicate himself/herself.

To indicate himself, the gesture-maker uses the index finger pointed at himself.

(f) A movement to signal agreement or an affirmative answer.

To signal agreement or an affirmative answer, we shake our heads up and down.

(g) A movement to signal a negative answer,

To signal a negative answer, we shake our heads from side to side.

(h) A way of indicating one’s opinion that some other person is ‘crazy.’

To indicate that some other person is crazy, we move the index finger in circles
close to the ear.
Reading this chapter was easier than the first, because I really like Pragmatics. I
find it extremely interesting because I like to study gestures, non-verbal
communication, body language, and Prosody. Summarizing is not so easy
because all the content seems important, but it worked. I had no problems with
most of the exercises, they were easy to understand and solve. The practices 2.6
and 2.7 were more difficult because I didn't understand some of the gestures
described, so I searched Google and I didn't know the meaning of some of them.
“Pragmatics and semantics can be viewed as different parts, or different aspects,
of the same general study” (p.18)

“A language is a system of symbols through which people communicate.” (p.19)

“All sorts of sights, sounds and smells can be natural signs; they communicate to
someone who observes and can interpret but their messages are unintentional,
the by-products of various events.” (p.20)

“…linguistic meaning, what is communicated by particular pieces of language,

and utterance meaning, what a certain individual meant by saying such-and-such
in a particular place, at a particular time, and to certain other individuals.” (p.27)

“An implicature is a bridge constructed by the hearer (or reader) to relate one
utterance to some previous utterance, and often the hearer or reader makes this
connection unconsciously.” (p.29)
 Chapter 3- The Dimensions of Meaning

KREIDLER, C. W. The Dimensions of Meaning. In: KREIDLER, C. W. Introducing

english semantics. Psychology Press, 1998, pp. 41-60.

In this chapter, Kreidler (1998) presents important concepts for

understanding meaning. He starts by showing a short summary on some topics
that will be addressed in the chapter, such as lexemes, morphemes, homonyms,
among others. Then, in the first section, the author focuses on the concepts of
reference, which is a word or expression that can be used in specific situations
according to the context; and denotation, which is the relationship between any
expression or word and its meaning that represents entities in the real world.
According to him, in all languages there are words that are associated with
objects, events, or descriptions from the outside world, and are even used in
children's learning. Therefore, we can think that every concept said will produce
the same mental idea in all people because they are connected to something
outside of language. However, not every word can have a mental image. The
author mentions Odgen and Richards' theory that tried to explain how meaning
works in people's minds. In their theory, which is organized in a triangle, a word
that can be related to an object in the real world is associated with a concept that
refers to this object. Afterwards, he states that some words can be easier than
others to create a mental image, such as dog or door, used by him as examples.
But even so, not everyone will think of the same mental image and some words
have more than one meaning associated with them. He concludes by saying that
besides the denotation, there are other aspects of meaning, such as connotation
and sense relations, which will be addressed in other sections of the chapter.
 In the second section of the chapter, the author discusses the concept of
connotation. He begins by using the example of the word ‘dog’. The word itself
has a denotation, but the way each person feels about dogs is different and these
emotional associations are the connotation. Unlike the denotation, which is
connected to the general meaning of the word, connotation does not need to be
the same for everyone, as it is connected to individual emotions. One of the
examples used by author for this concept is the words ‘violin’ and ‘fiddle’, which
refer to the same object but differ in connotation. While ‘violin’ is a neutral word,
‘fiddle’’ is used according to the situation, and can have a good or bad
connotation, expressing affection or lack of it.
In the third section of the chapter, the author states that besides
connotation and denotation, the relationship with other words in a sentence are
part of the composition of the meaning. After all, a lexeme contributes to the
utterance, but this only happens because of the lexemes chosen to associate
with them. According to him, “the meaning that a lexeme has because of these
relationships is the sense” (1998, p. 46) and for this reason, one part of the
relationship is connected to the fact that certain words can be associated and
others cannot. Another part of this relationship is the variation of words in a
certain context, after all, several lexemes can vary the sense according to their
associations. The author also discusses about the two types of linkages between
lexemes: syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations. Syntagmatic relations are the
associations between lexemes in the same sentence that affect each other, and
their united meanings affect the general sense of the sentence. On the other side,
paradigmatic relations are the possibilities of choosing between words in the
same position in a sentence.
In the fourth section of the chapter, Kreidler (1998) begins by using the
example ‘A dog barked’ to define what is referring expression. According to him,
this concept is associated with a meaningful part of a sentence that can be
connected outside the language, such as entities, events, concepts, and the
referent is the entity itself. The sentence also has a predicate, represented by the
verb ‘bark’, which is associated to an action executed by the referring expression
‘dog’ outside the language. After that, he gives an explanation about grammatical
meaning, demonstrating the various possibilities of meaning using the same
sentence: statement vs question, affirmative vs negative, past vs present,
singular vs plural and indefinite vs definite. In each of these possibilities, the
grammatical meaning is presented in a different way, either with the plural affixed,
functional words (like ‘not’ or ‘some’) or organization of the words in the sentence.
Furthermore, he explains the concept of lexeme. A lexeme can be a simple word
or an expression in which the combined meaning of the words differs from their
individual meaning.
In the fifth section of the chapter, the author briefly presents an overview
of morphemes, just to make the reader's understanding easier. He explains that
a morpheme is the smallest part that is meaningful and can be free or bound. A
free morpheme has meaning by itself, while a bound morpheme needs to be
attached to another morpheme in order to have meaning.
In the sixth section of the chapter, the author explains about homonymy
and polysemy. Homonymy can be divided into two types. The first, when the
words have the same pronunciation and spelling, but unrelated meanings; and
the second, when the words have similar pronunciation and different spelling. He
also emphasizes that in English there are pairs of words with different
pronunciation but identical spelling called homographs. Afterwards, he explains
about polysemy and states that “a polysemous lexeme has several (apparently)
related meanings” (1998, p. 52). He exemplifies using the word ‘head’, as its
meanings derive from a common basis, the human head. According to him,
dictionaries distinguish between these two concepts when a polysemous lexeme
has only one entry, while a homophonous lexeme has two or more entries.
Sometimes this distinction is made by etymology, since some lexemes
considered homonymous today had a common origin in the past. Finally, the
author exemplifies by using the verb ‘ask’ by comparing its meanings in
sentences and its correspondence in English and other languages. He concludes
that ‘ask’ is a polysemous verb in English whose context determines the meaning.
In the seventh section of the chapter, Kreidler (1998) explains about
lexical ambiguity, which can be caused by homonymous words that occupy the
same position in an utterance. Most of these words belong to different lexical
categories, so they do not maintain ambiguity. In addition, he adds that ambiguity
can occur in expressions with a figurative and literal sense. The author
exemplifies by using the expression ‘There’s a skeleton in our closet’, which can
be considered a single lexeme in its figurative meaning or several lexemes in its
literal sense.
In the last section of the chapter, the author explains what sentence
meaning is. According to him, “the meaning of the sentence depends on the
meaning of the constituent lexemes and the grammatical meaning; and whether
you know what conditions are necessary for the sentence to be true” (1998, p.
56). He briefly discusses about truth-conditional semantics, a field of semantics
in which the conditions of truth are considered the basis of the meaning of a
sentence. After that, the author says that we usually get meaning by implying
things when we hear or read, and semantics are interested in these implications.
Practice 3.1

1 How do the following words in each pair differ in connotation?

Politician, Statesman: The word statesman has a good connotation, it is

associated with an experienced and respected person in politics. The word
politician is more neutral and has a general connotation, being only someone who
is active in politics.

Cautious, Timid: The word cautious is more neutral, it has the connotation of a
careful person, who avoids risks. The word timid has a bad connotation,
associated with a person without confidence, who is afraid.

Lawyer, Shyster: The word lawyer is more neutral, it has a general sense of
anyone who works with the law as a lawyer. The word shyster has a bad
connotation because it is associated with dishonest people, especially lawyers or
politicians.

Inquisitive, Nosey: The word inquisitive is more neutral, it has a general sense of
someone who wants to know everything about things, a curious person. The word
nosey has a bad connotation because it is associated with a person who wants
to know everything, being annoying and making people uncomfortable.

Bargain, Haggle: The word bargain has a neutral connotation, meaning a

negotiation between people on some purchase to get a better price. The word
haggle has a negative connotation, because it means a negotiation where one
person is very insistent.
Sensitive, Touchy: The word sensitive is more neutral, it has a meaning of
someone who gets hurt or upset easily, so you have to be careful when talking to
her. The word touchy has a negative connotation because it means a person who
easily gets offended, irritated or angry in any situation.

2 It might seem that any name would be appropriate as a label for a commercial
product as long as it is easy to remember. However, companies with products to
sell make great expenditures of time, talent and money to select brand names
which will project the preferred ‘image’ for cars, cosmetics, detergents et al., but
names are often chosen for their connotation rather than for what they denote.

Why is Caterpillar a good name for an earth-moving tractor but not for a sports
car?

Sports cars are more associated with speed, beauty and power, the name
Caterpillar is associated with an animal that the connotation is exactly the
opposite. An earth-moving tractor can have a name like this because tractors
does not need to be fast or beautiful, just efficient.

How would you rank the following as possible names for a sports car?

Butterfly Cheetah Dolphin Owl Rattler XL4

1st Cheetah

2nd XL4

3rd Owl

4th Rattler

5th Dolphin

6th Butterfly

Would you care to suggest others?

I’m not so good naming cars, but maybe Panther or Eagle.

Give an example of a possible name for a men’s cologne (which of course is
never called perfume) and an example of a name which is very unlikely.

A good name for a men’s cologne would be Power and a very unlikely name
would be Daisies or Bloom, names associated with flowers.

Practice 3.2

The verb bake is typically followed by a noun phrase that refers to some item of
food (bread, beans, ham, etc.) or of clay (bricks, pottery, etc.). Each verb below
is fairly limited as to the kind of referring expression that can occur as object.
Name one or two nouns that can occur in the object.

Bounce: bounce ideas, bounce ball

Brandish: brandish a knife, brandish weapons

Brew: brew beer, brew coffee

Coil: thick coil

Flash: flash of light, flash news

Furl: furl the sail

Shrug: shrug the shoulders, rhetorical shrug

Untangle: untangle the knot

Practice 3.3

What a lexeme means depends on what it occurs with and also what it contrasts
with. What colors does red contrast with in these collocations?

a red apple: a green apple

red hair: blonde hair, brown hair

a red traffic light: green traffic light, yellow traffic light

red wine: white wine

Practice 3.4

Dictionaries have a single entry for the common noun needle but list various
‘meanings,’ including the eleven below. Is this a single lexeme? If you think it
should be considered as more than one lexeme, how would you divide? (Don’t
be influenced by the order in which the definitions appear here.)

1 the thin, short, pointed leaf of some trees, such as the pine and spruce. 2 a
pointed instrument, usually metal, with a sharp point and an eye through which
thread is inserted, for sewing. 3 one of a pair of pointed instruments, usually
metal, each with a hook at one end, used for crocheting. 4 one of two or more
pointed instruments, made of metal, plastic or other material, around which yarn
is wrapped, used for knitting. 5 a pointed, hollow instrument connected to a
container which is fitted with a plunger, used for injecting medicine, drugs or other
liquid substances into the body. 6 a pointed, hollow instrument through which
dyes can be inserted into the skin of an individual, creating tattoo designs. 7 a
pointed instrument which is heated in some way and used for burning designs in
wood. 8 a pointed instrument which is part of a gramophone and which moves in
the continuous groove of a record. 9 a pointed piece of metal or other substance,
as on a compass, speedometer, thermometer or the like, which moves and
indicates some value, numerical or other, from a range of values. 10 the slender,
tapered top of a spire. 11 a rock formation which is very narrow in proportion to
its height.

It can be considered a single lexeme because although it seems to have many

different senses, all definitions have a related meaning, the idea of something
with a very sharp point.

If it were considered more than one lexeme, I would divide it according to the
related meanings. Some senses presented for the word needle are more literal
and some more abstract, so I would divide using this criterion.

Practice 3.5
Several nouns are listed below. Each is followed by two or more illustrations of
how the lexeme is used or by two or more short definitions. For each noun try to
decide whether the form represents one lexeme with two or more senses
(polysemy) or two or more different lexemes that happen to be pronounced (and
spelled) alike (homonymy). Don’t consult a dictionary before finishing this
exercise.

Bark: the bark of a dog; the bark of a tree (homonymy)

Bit: a tool for drilling into wood; the cutting edge of an axe; the mouthpiece of a
bridle; a small quantity of any substance; a small role in a play or film (homonymy)

Compound: a substance composed of two or more elements; an enclosure

containing land and several buildings (homonymy)

Corn: a grain (in North America, maize; in Scotland, rye); a calloused place in the
epidermis, especially on the foot (homonymy)

Flight: the act of flying; the act of fleeing (homonymy)

Foot: the foot of a person or animal; the foot of a hill; the foot of a bed: the foot of
a table; the foot of a ladder; the foot of a page; 12 inches (polysemy)

Horn: one of two hard, projected growths on the head of certain animals; a wind
instrument (homonymy)

Junk: any useless material; a type of sailing-vessel (homonymy)

Pole: a long, comparatively slender piece of wood or metal, more or less rounded;
either of the two points, north and south, where the earth’s axis of rotation meets
the surface; one of the two points on a battery where opposite electrical forces
are concentrated (polysemy)

Quarry: an animal that is being pursued or hunted; a place from which stone is
excavated (homonymy)

School: an educational institution; a group of fish of the same species moving

together (homonymy)

Tattoo: markings made on the skin by injecting a dye; a signal on a drum or bugle
(homonymy)
This chapter was difficult to summarize because of the examples. It has many 31.1

examples! I easily understood all the concepts except the denotation and
reference concepts because the explanations given in the book were somewhat
confusing. When I wrote, I had many difficulties because I understood, but I did
not know how to write. I am very perfectionist, so I had to write, go out and read
again after some time, because if I didn't do that, I could freak out.

The exercises were not so difficult. Practice 3.1(exercise 2) was the funniest
because I’m terrible at naming things, so I’m sorry for my bad ideas. In practice
3.2, some words were hard to find collocations that could occur with them.
“Reference is the way speakers and hearers use an expression successfully;
denotation is the knowledge they have that makes their use successful.” (p. 44)
“A denotation identifies the central aspect of word meaning, which everybody
generally agrees about. Connotation refers to the personal aspect of meaning,
the emotional associations that the word arouses.” (p. 45)
“…syntagmatic relations, the mutual association of two or more words in a
sequence (not necessarily right next to one another) so that the meaning of each
is affected by the other(s) and together their meanings contribute to the meaning
of the larger unit, the phrase or sentence.” (p. 48)
“…a paradigmatic relation, a relation of choice. We choose from among a number
of possible words that can fill the same blank: the words may be similar in
meaning or have little in common but each is different from the others.” (p. 48)
“A referring expression is a piece of language that is used AS IF it is linked to
something outside language, some living or dead entity or concept or group of
entities or concepts.” (p. 50)
“A lexeme is a minimal unit that can take part in referring or predicating. All the
lexemes of a language constitute the lexicon of the language, and all the lexemes
that you know make up your personal lexicon.” (p. 50, 51)
 Chapter 5- Lexical Relations

KREIDLER, C. W. Lexical Relations. In: KREIDLER, C. W. Introducing english

semantics. Psychology Press, 1998, pp. 85-113.

In this chapter, Kreidler (1998) presents different types of lexical relations

such as hyponymy, synonymy, antonymy, among others. He starts by explaining
about two semantic approaches that describe lexical relations: semantic field
theory and truth conditional semantics. The former classifies lexemes according
to their features, while the latter studies entailment, paraphrase and contradiction
relations by comparing predications with the same referent. He exemplifies these
relations with two imaginary sentences: p and q. Entailment is the relation in
which if p is true, q must also be true, but if q is true, p may not be true.
Paraphrase is the relation in which if p is true or false, q must follow p. Finally,
contradiction is the relation in which if p is true, q must be false and vice versa.
Then, in the first section, the author discusses about lexical relations in
semantic field theory. According to him, lexemes are divided into sets according
to their features in common and can be distinguished within these sets. He also
affirms that lexical sets can form paradigms and exemplifies using the set
composed by the words man, woman, boy and girl. The semantic feature that
these words share and that distinguishes them from other sets are [human] and
the analysis of these features is called componential analysis. The paradigms
also “shows that lexemes are systematically related” (1998, p. 88). The author
illustrates the componential analysis through the example with the set ‘stool,
chair, bench and sofa’, in which he presents features that the set shares and
features that differentiate the elements within the set.
 In the second section of the chapter, the author discusses kinship
systems, a part of compositional analysis. He affirms that kinship is universal but
different according to society. Four primitive features of family relationships are
presented: [parent], related to mother and father; [offspring], related to daughter
and son; [sibling] related to brother and sister; and [spouse] related to husband
and wife. These features associated with the [male] and [female] components
form combinations of predicates. He also shows comparisons between
languages such as English and East Asian languages that have other
characteristics in his kinship system, such as terms to distinguish siblings
according to age.
In the third section of the chapter, the author starts to discuss lexical
relation in truth conditional semantics and the first type of relation is hyponymy.
In this type of relations there are the hyponym, which is the more specific concept
and the superordinate, which is more general. To exemplify this relationship, the
author uses the sentences 'Rover is a collie' and 'Rover is a dog', which collie is
the hyponym, and dog is the superordinate. The relationship between the first
sentence entails and is analogous to the second because the denotation of collie
is inside of the denotation of dog. Then, if the sentence contains the hyponym
and the superordinate at the same time, it will be redundant. On the other side, if
the sentence contains some conjunction such as but, it will be contradictory.
Kreidler affirms that there are some anomalies such as the existence of co-
hyponym but no superordinate, being a lexical gap.
In the fourth section of the chapter, the author presents synonymy
relations. According to him, when two words have the same truth value and
represent the same referring expression in two different sentences, they are
synonymous. Although synonyms have the same weight in a sentence, they do
not have the same sense nor occur in the same contexts. Some types of
synonyms can differ dialectically (lift and elevator), in pragmatic value (verbs hide
and conceal) and in connotation (skinny, slender and thin). The author finalizes
by saying that synonyms have different ranges of compatibility, so some terms
can be compatible in certain subjects but not in others.
In the fifth section of the chapter, the author explains about the relation
of antonymy. Antonyms are lexemes with opposite meanings, most of them
adjectives, but they can also be nouns or verbs. The main feature of sentences
with antonyms is contradiction. If one of the sentences is true, the other must be
false. The author exemplifies with several pairs of antonyms that are adjectives
of measures, usually associated with expressions of measures, such as 'nineteen
years old'. In such cases, the meaning of the antonym depends on the topic they
are associated with. They can also be marked or unmarked, as the author gives
the example of the pair 'old' and 'young'. According to him, old is the unmarked
member, used to express age, while young is marked.
In the sixth section of the chapter, the author discusses the two types of
antonyms: binary and non-binary. Binary antonyms are like on and off, where
there is no middle ground. Non-binary antonyms are part of a scale and can be
graded, such as old and new. However, contrary to the logical, some expressions
with binary antonyms can accept modifiers and still be meaningful, like 'quite
dead' or 'wide open'. The author also cites that some antonyms are
morphologically marked by adding or changing prefixes.
In the seventh section of the chapter, the author compares the
relationships discussed in the previous sections. According to him, the relations
of synonymy and binary antonyms are contrary to each other. While synonyms
indicate double entailment, sentences with binary antonyms indicate that if one
of the sentences is true, the other is false. Sentences with non-binary antonyms
can be equal to sentences with binary antonyms, or both can be false. Finally,
hyponyms and superordinate are different from the previous ones, because if the
hyponym is true, so is the superordinate, and if the superordinate is false, so is
the hyponym.
In the eighth section of the chapter, Kreidler (1998) discusses the relation
of converse antonyms. He presents the concept of converse predicates, which
are predicates with valency of 2 or more, which means that the roles of a sentence
can be reversed. The most common examples of converse antonyms are social
roles (employer of- employee of), kinship (husband of- wife of) and directions (in
front of- behind), and these relationships have to do with the semantic roles in
the sentence. Then, the author explains that have some boundaries to the
converseness, for example, same size, importance or rank. It is presented in the
sentence ‘A newspaper kiosk is in front of the Grand Hotel’, which the contrary
would be unusual.
 In the ninth section of the chapter, the author discusses symmetry and
reciprocity. Symmetry refers to pairs of sentences such as given in the example
‘Line AB and Line CD are parallel to each other'. If the first or second element of
the sentence is changed, the lines are still parallel. However, some sentences
appear to be symmetrical but are not, and there are sentences that are not
reciprocal. For instance, in the sentence ‘Tom agreed with Ann', there is no
necessary that the opposite is true, so there is a reciprocal predicate. The author
presents some examples of verbs that are reciprocal such as argue and concur.
Finally, he proposes some adjectives formed with prepositions and participles
formed with causative verbs that are symmetrical predicates, such as congruent
with, equivalent to, connect and combine.
In the last part of the chapter, the author briefly explains quantifiers, their
meanings and their relations of hyponymy and superordinate. He affirms that
some quantifiers have vague meanings, such as 'some', 'many' or 'few', and that
“a speaker can employ these terms in an acceptable way without necessarily
knowing the exact quantity, and an addressee accepts the terms without
necessarily expecting to know the exact quantity.” (1998, p. 110) Afterwards, the
author concludes by comparing the use of quantifiers in sentences and the results
show that it is possible to explain them according to the contrast of hyponymy
and superordinate in the positions of subject and object.
Practice 5.1

English, because of its double-barreled vocabulary, Germanic and Romance,

seems to have numerous pairs and even trios of synonyms. Ten such pairs of
nouns are given below. For each pair try to decide what difference the two words
have—a context in which one is possible but the other is not, or a difference in
the effect created where they share a context. You may also want to say which
is of Old English origin and which came from French.
ache, pain: The words ache and pain can be synonymous in a context of physical
discomfort or some kind of emotional hurt. According to the results in COCA,
ache is used more in situations of continuous, physical but internal pain like
headache. On the other side, the word pain is more used in contexts of a physical
pain that can be touched, such as a cut or broken bone. They differ in the sense
that it is possible to say headache but it is not possible to say 'headpain', or a
sentence like 'I have an ache in my head'. The word ache comes from Old English
and the word pain comes from Old French.
error, mistake: The words error and mistake can be synonymous in a context of
something that has been done and is not correct. However, error is more formal
and used in the context of lack of knowledge, such as a grammatical error, but
can also be used in the context of a moral error. On the other side, the word
mistake is more informal, is often used with adjectives such as biggest, huge or
terrible, and can be used in the context of an unintentional failure, a
misunderstanding. The word error comes from Old French and the word mistake
comes from Old Norse.
altitude, height: The word altitude is more formal and used more often in the
geographical sense, it comes from Latin and means "elevation above the horizon"
and it is a measure of distance above a reference point, such as sea level. The
word height is more used in the context of a fixed measurement relative to a
reference point, such as the height of a person or an animal, which do not change
even if the reference point changes. The word height comes from Old English
and means “highest part or point, summit; the heavens, heaven”.
force, strength: Both words can be used in the sense of physical strength, but the
word force can also be used in the sense of Physics, the forces of nature or in
the sense of a group of military forces or police of a country. The word strength
cannot be used in these contexts and has the meaning of the physical or
emotional strength of a person, the influence of a country or the resistance of a
material. The meaning of both words was the same, being force from Old French
and strength from Old English, but the former acquired new meanings through
time.
center, middle: The words center and middle are synonymous in the sense of
something that is between two edges. However, the word center can be used in
the context of a place where activities are carried out, such as a shopping center.
It can also be used in the sense of political position or position in sports such as
soccer or American football and the word middle cannot be used in these
contexts. The word middle can be used in a sense of intermediary position, such
as Middle Age or Middle school. The word center comes from Old French and the
word middle comes from Old English.
labor, work: The two words are synonymous in the sense of a productive activity
to make a profit. But they are different because labor can have the sense of a
group of manual workers or the birth process of a child and work cannot be used
in these contexts. Work can have the sense of a place where the person does his
job, or something produced as a result of some activity and labor cannot be used
in these contexts. Also, in old French, labor had the sense of suffering and
tribulation. The word work comes from Old English.
cord, string: The two words are synonymous because they have the sense of
some kind of string, but the word string can be used in contexts connected to
musical instruments such as violin or guitar, a section of the orchestra, and the
word cord cannot be used. The word cord can be used in the context of human
body parts like vocal cord or spinal cord, and string cannot be used. The word
cord comes from Old French and the word string comes from Old English.
pace, step: The two words are synonymous in the context related to walking. But
the word pace can be used in the sense of rhythm or speed. The word step cannot
be used in that context. It can be used in the sense of the process of doing
something, or some raised surface on a ladder, while pace cannot be used. The
word pace comes from Old French and the word step comes from Old English.
dale, valley: The word dale is more informal, has an origin in Germanic and Old
English and means an open valley. The word valley is more formal, it comes from
Old French and means a place between mountains, deeper, which usually has a
river.
sight, vision: The two words are synonymous in the context of the human sense
of sight. However, the word sight is associated with the ability to see, or the part
of a weapon, such as a rifle, that helps to aim correctly, the word vision cannot
be used in this sense. The word vision can be used in the context of seeing
something supernatural or the imagination of something that can be done in the
future, and the word sight cannot be used in this sense. The word sight comes
from Old English and the word vision comes from Old French.

In the phrase a funny story we can replace funny with the synonymous adjective
humorous. In a funny feeling a better synonym for funny is peculiar, but humorous
and peculiar are not synonymous with each other. Each predicate below is
illustrated in several contexts. Give a synonym for each context and test to see
whether a single term can be synonymous in more than one of the contexts.
a clear sky, a clear stream, a clear speech: a bright sky, a limpid stream, a
coherent speech
In the phrases ‘a clear sky’ and ‘a clear stream’ the synonyms chosen were
‘bright’ and ‘limpid’, which can be used in the context of both phrases. But in the
phrase ‘a clear speech’, the synonym ‘coherent’ cannot be used in the context of
the previous phrases. Therefore, bright and limpid are synonymous with each
other, but coherent is not.
a wild party, wild geese, wild rice: a crazy party, savage geese, natural rice
In all three phrases, none of the chosen terms could be used as synonyms in the
context of the other sentences. Therefore, natural, savage and crazy are not
synonymous with each other.

Practice 5.2

Among the following pairs of antonyms, which are binary and which are non-
binary? What problems do you find in making this decision?
true, false: binary
tall, short: non-binary
expensive, cheap: non-binary
beautiful, ugly: non-binary
happy, unhappy: non-binary
pass, fail: binary
hot, cold: non-binary
deep, shallow: non-binary
legal, illegal: binary
rich, poor: non-binary
fast, slow: non-binary
rude, polite: non-binary
One problem in deciding whether pairs are binary or non-binary is the fact that
some pairs can be misleading. One example is the pair ugly and beautiful.
Apparently, they are a pair of binary antonyms but they can be graded, as in ‘very
beautiful’ and ‘very ugly’ or ‘a little bit ugly’.

Practice 5.3

Give an antonym for the adjective in each of the following collocations:

a light package: a heavy package
a light color: a dark color
a tall building: a short building
low prices: high prices
low heels: high heels
a hard problem: an easy problem
a hard chair: a soft chair
a soft voice: a rough voice/ a loud voice
a narrow road: a wide road
a narrow mind: a broad-minded
a thick board: a thin board
thick soup: thin soup/ clear soup
a sweet apple: a sour apple
sweet tea: unsweetened tea
a strong body: a weak body
strong feelings: weak feelings

What is the antonym of raw in the following?

raw fruit, raw materials, raw weather: cooked fruit, processed materials, hot
weather

Practice 5.4

Each sentence below contains a symmetrical predicate preceded by one referring

expression and followed by another. Restate them with a compound subject that
contains both referring expressions; for example, “Angle BAC is equal to Angle
ACB” should be changed to “Angle BAC and Angle ACB are equal (to each
other).”
(a) This box is the same size as that basket.
This box and that basket are the same size.

(b) Sean is married to Eileen.

Sean and Eileen are married.
(c) The Greens are neighbors of the Browns.
The Greens and the Browns are neighbors.
(d) Your answer is irreconcilable with my answer.
Your answer and mine are irreconcilable.
(e) Figure A is congruent with Figure B.
Figure A and B are congruent.
(f) Sailor is synonymous with seaman.
Sailor and seaman are synonymous.
(g) The picture your child drew is practically identical with the picture my child
made.
The pictures our children drew are practically identical.
(h) This picture is quite different from that picture, I’d say.
This picture and that one are quite different, I’d say.
(i) In fact, this one makes a strong contrast with the other one.
In fact, this one and the other one make a strong contrast.
(j) Janice is related to Josie.
Janice and Josie are related.
(k) The bank is adjacent to the pharmacy.
The bank and the pharmacy are adjacent.
(l) Pat met Paula at three o’clock.
Pat and Paula met at three o’clock.
This chapter was difficult to understand certain parts and also to summarize. I
think the most difficult ones were sections 5.8 and 5.9. When I learned in
Portuguese, it was hard to understand about hyponyms, this time it was a little
easier. The examples were once again difficult to summarize because they all
seem important and it’s hard to explain that I understood them without copying
them exactly like the book. The first exercise was the hardest, because I had to
look up the frequency of use of words in corpora. I'm not very good at researching
corpora, as I haven't done any courses on that yet. And although I had more time
to do the summary, I think I am more tired, so I can't wait for the semester to end.
 Chapter 7- Reference

KREIDLER, C. W. Reference. In: KREIDLER, C. W. Introducing english

semantics. Psychology Press, 1998, pp. 129-153.

In this chapter, Kreidler (1998), discusses about reference. Some topics

covered during the chapter are: referent, referential expression, anaphora, deixis,
among others. He starts by saying that a referring expression is a part of
language that is associated with some entity outside the language, which may or
may not exist. The referent is the entity outside language itself, which may be
real, fictional, physical, or not.
Then, in the first section the author shows some ideas about reference
and referring expression. He starts explaining that referent and referring
expression are not the same thing. While the first is associated with extralinguistic
reference, the second is associated with what the lexeme denotes within the
language. Secondly, there is no relation between the referent and the referring
expression, although some ancient scholars said there was. Third, even if there
is a referring expression, the referent may not exist in the real world. And finally,
several referring expressions may be linked to the same referent but without the
same meaning, or the same connotation.
In the second section, Kreidler (1998) discusses extension and intension
of lexemes. The extension is the set of entities that a lexeme denotes, while the
intension are the properties that all entities belonging to extension
share. According to the author, "extension can change while intension remains
the same" (p.133). He explains this through the example given by the book: the
expression ‘The Mayor of Chicago’ always has the same intension, but from time
to time, the extension changes. Afterwards, he introduces the concept of
prototype, which is an object or referent that can usually represent an entire set.
A prototype can be different according to the person or the country.
The third section is divided into three subsections to explain the different
kinds of classes of referents. In the first subsection, the author explains about
unique and non-unique referents. Unique referents are referring expressions that
have a fixed referent that is generally known, for example Japan, or Lake Ontario.
Non-unique referents are referring expressions that have a variable referent,
where the knowledge is specific to the context, like my dog or my uncle. However,
it is possible to use variable references in names that have fixed references, as
in the example 'This fellow is an Einstein'.
In the second subsection, the author explains about concrete and
abstract references. Concrete references are lexemes that convey the idea of a
concrete object, like dog or stone, while abstract referents are lexemes that
convey the idea of abstract things or concepts, like knowledge and reason. Some
lexemes with several types of denotations can have a literal or figurative meaning,
according to the context. We can observe in the example given by the book that
the lexeme ‘key’ has a literal meaning in a concrete context, as in a sentence like
'the key to the front door'. However, it has a figurative meaning in an abstract
context, as in the sentence 'the key of the success’.
Then, in the last subsection the author explains about countable and non-
countable referents. While countable referents are those that we can count by
units, noncountable referents are those that refer to substances consisting of
numerous particles (sand), liquids (ink), collections of objects (jewelry) or
indivisible concepts (information). He also presents a difference between the
singular and plural of countable noun phrases that does not occur in
noncountable noun phrases. The countable singular must have a quantifier, the
countable plural and non-countable nominal phrases may have no
specifier. According to him, it is not possible to say that nouns are countable or
non-countable because they have “a range of ‘countability’” (p. 137). Therefore,
he shows some examples of contrast that some nouns can denote. One of the
examples is that some animals when named are countable, but when they are
named as food, they are non-countable, such as chicken or lobster. Other
examples are substances like coffee or soup, which are non-countable, but may
appear in some countable sentences to indicate a certain quantity or type of
substance.
The fourth section starts the discussion on different ways of referring,
which can be three: proper names, personal pronouns or noun phrases with
variable referents and determiners. The determiners can be demonstrative,
indicating proximity or not; possessive, indicating some kind of relationship
between two referents; quantifiers, indicating quantity or amount and can be
divided into collective or distributive. Then, the author organizes the chapter into
three subsections, where he presents types of references associated with
determiners.
In the first subsection, the author defines generic reference, which is a
more general way of referring to a noun, and non-generic reference, which is a
way of specifying one noun among others in a more particular group. We can
observe in the examples given by the book through the sentences ‘Dogs make
fine pets’ and ‘A dog is lying in the middle of the street’. The first is generic
because it is not a particular dog, but the class of dogs. The second is non-
generic, as it is about a specific dog in some situation or context. In addition, he
affirms that a generic reference has no difference between plural and singular.
In the second subsection, the author defines specific reference, which is
a reference to a particular thing among others, and non-specific reference, which
is a more general reference. According to the author, whether the expression is
specific or not is determined by the larger context.
In the third subsection, the author defines definite and indefinite
reference. According to him, a definite reference can be a determiner, which can
be either demonstrative, possessive or quantitative, while an undefined reference
can have determiner a(n), some or zero. When definite reference is used, the
speaker presumes that the hearer knows about the reference, either by context,
by implicature, by general knowledge, by position as a unique referent in a limited
situation or even through some modifier or complement. When the reference is
indefinite, the hearer must infer that there is more than one referent in the class
to which the reference belongs.
 In the fifth section, the author discusses about deixis. According to him,
deictic words are used to point things and every language have them. These
words have referents that can only be determined according to knowledge of the
context in which they are used (p. 144). They consist of personal pronouns;
locative expressions, such as here and there; and temporal expressions such as
yesterday and tomorrow. Nevertheless, these words may not be deictic in some
cases, as in the example of the sentence "You can lead a horse to water but you
can't make him drink", in which the pronoun ‘you’ is not deictic because it has the
meaning of any person.
In the sixth section, the author explains about anaphora, which is a type
of secondary reference in which lexemes are used to resume a previous
reference without repeating it. Anaphoric items can be deictic words, some
function words or equivalent lexemes. According to the author, although some
function words are deictic and anaphoric, the difference between the two
concepts is that the anaphoric expression refers to a previous reference, while
deixis refers to the expression itself. He says that English is a language that uses
the pronouns ‘he’, ‘she’, ‘it’ or ‘they’ as a secondary reference. He compares it to
Spanish, which has gender agreement; and Japanese, that in some cases uses
classifiers according to the noun. Afterwards, the author presents two types of
anaphora: lexical and grammatical anaphora. The former can be achieved by the
repetition of the noun, by a synonym or by a superordinate and the latter can be
achieved with personal pronouns.
In the seventh section, the author discusses some shifts in ways of
referring that can cause misunderstandings. According to him, a speaker can shift
the references, causing vagueness. He exemplifies using the sentence ‘We didn’t
buy a new car because they cost too much now’, which the pronoun they can be
related to ‘cars’ or a ‘new cars’, but the prosody can clarify the meaning of the
sentence.
In the last section, the author briefly discusses referential ambiguity and
presents occasions that it can occur. According to him, it is caused by the
vagueness of referring expressions or when the speaker thinks in one referent
for a defined expression and the listener thinks in another. Kreidler (1998) cites
four occasions where referential ambiguity can occur. The first one is when an
indefinite expression can be specific or not; the second one is when personal
pronouns can be linked to more than one referent in an anaphora; the third one
is when the pronoun you is used in a general or specific way; and the last one is
when a noun phrase can have a distributed or collected referent using ‘every’.
Practice 1

The extension of bird includes robins, eagles, hawks, parrots, ducks, geese,
ostriches and penguins. What is the intension? What do all the referents of bird
have in common and which is not shared by non-birds? Which of these—robins,
eagles, etc.— seem to you to be closer to a prototype and which farther away?
Will all speakers of English agree about this?

Distinctions that we take for granted often turn out to have fuzzy boundaries when
we try to explain the difference. We might say, for example, that the difference
between a tree and a bush is a matter of size, but a tall bush can be bigger than
a tree, and in any case a bonsai tree and a sapling are smaller than any bushes.

I think the intension of the birds is the wings, the beak, laying eggs and having
feathers. All birds have these characteristics in common, but the wings are
unique, they don't share this characteristic with non-birds. In Brazil, I think a
chicken or a sparrow is closer to a prototype for birds, in the US it could be a robin
or an eagle, but other English speakers might not agree with that. The bird
furthest from being a prototype might be an ostrich. 49.1
Practice 2

How do the lexemes in these pairs differ in their intension (or extension)?

shoe, slipper: The extension of shoe includes slipper. The intension of shoe
includes the properties of a slipper, shared with other types of shoes, such as an
object to wear on the feet and it has a sole.

cup, mug: The extension of cup includes mug, and the intension of cup includes
properties of a mug, such as an object to drink something.

fruit, vegetable: The extension of vegetable includes fruit, and the intention of
vegetable includes properties of a fruit, such as they are plants and natural
substances that we can eat.

door, gate: The extension of gate includes door, and the intension of gate
includes properties of a door, such as an object used at the entrance of some
place and that moves to open and close.

Practice 3

The following occur in expressions with concrete reference and in expressions

that have abstract reference. For each noun give an example of each kind of
reference. Is there also a difference of countability?

Beauty: Concrete- Sleeping Beauty / Abstract- beauty secrets

It has no difference of countability

Curiosity: Concrete- Rover Curiosity /Abstract- sincere curiosity

It has no difference of countability

Kindness: Concrete- acts of kindness / Abstract- pure kindness

It has a difference in countability

Novelty: Concrete- novelty songs / Abstract- novelty value

It has no difference of countability

Personality: Concrete- Tv personalities /Abstract- strong personality

It has a difference of countability

Representation: Concrete- graphical representation /Abstract- perfect

representation

It has no difference in countability

Practice 4

Which of the following are countable nouns and which are noncountable? Do any
belong to both categories?

Beer: Countable or noncountable.

Glue: Countable or noncountable.

Copper: Noncountable

Livestock: Noncountable

Dust: Noncountable
51.1
Piano: Countable

Equipment: Noncountable

Wire: Countable or noncountable

Practice 5

Which of the underlined expressions have specific reference and which do not?

1 Somebody telephoned and left a message for you. (Specific reference).

2 I hope somebody will tidy up this file cabinet. (Non-specific reference)

3 The last person to leave the office should lock the door. (Specific reference)

4 A stitch in time saves nine. (Non-specific reference)

5 Evans sometimes forgets to keep his eye on the ball. (Specific reference)

Practice 6

What do the underlined words refer to?

1 Pete promised me a souvenir from Paris but I never got it.

The underlined word ‘it’ refers to the souvenir.

2 Pete promised me a souvenir from Paris but I never got one.

The underlined word ‘one’ refers to the souvenir, but in the sense that Pete
brought souvenirs but did not give any to the person.

3 Frances asked Shirley to lend her some money.

The underlined word ‘her’ refers to Frances.

4 Frances promised Shirley to lend her some money.

The underlined word ‘her’ refers to Shirley.

5 The police arrested several demonstrators because they were destroying

property.

The underlined word ‘they’ refers to the demonstrators.

6 The police arrested several demonstrators because they felt the demonstration
was getting violent.

The underlined word ‘they’ refers to the police.

 53.1

I think the most difficult part of this chapter was understanding about the types of
references as definite, indefinite, generic, non-generic, non-specific and specific. 53.2

These are concepts that can be confusing and we need to pay attention to the
details to understand better. Also, organizing time amidst all the cumulative
activities of several disciplines was a huge challenge. There are so many things
53.3
that sometimes I got lost, but fortunately everything went well.
 “A referring expression is a piece of language, a noun phrase, that is used in an
utterance and is linked to something outside language, some living or dead or
imaginary entity or concept or group of entities or concepts.” (p. 130)

“The extension of a lexeme is the set of entities which it denotes.” (p.132)

“The intension of any lexeme is the set of properties shared by all members of
the extension.” (p.133)

“A prototype is an object or referent that is considered typical of the whole set.”

(p.133)

“Anaphora is a kind of secondary reference in which a previous reference is

recalled by use of special function words or equivalent lexemes.” (p.145)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 Índice de comentários

2.1 Lovely!

2.2 Thank you so much, Debora, I am so glad to have your feedback - thank you for your kindness, I can only hope
to deserve your confidence. I wish you a beautiful ride ahead on your path!

31.1 Have these become clearer in chapter 7?

49.1 penguins also, are pretty borderline because they don't fly. In some of my trips in Africa a saw ostriches take
short, low, flights. After that, penguins are really my own off the prototype birds ;-)

51.1 it could be no-count, too, as in: The piano is the most beautiful of all instruments - in this case, piano would
represent the whole class of pianos.

53.1 I agree...

53.2 it is helpful to associate examples to the different categories - that way, you can always deductively get to the
correct classification.

53.3 Tell me about it.... I am myself taking a new degree, it hasn't been easy. I am not getting top grades, but am
doing my best ;-)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)