Unit 1:

What is semantics? The study of the linguistic meaning of words, phrases, and
sentences.

• The semantics properties of a word, e.g. boy, are the ones that speakers of a
language agree upon. (general or specific semantic properties).
. Homonyms: are different words that pronounced the same, e.g. to, too, two. Some
they leads to linguistic ambiguity.
• Synonyms are words that sounds different but have the same meaning (share a
number of semantic properties), e.g. sofa/couch and happy/glad. They allow
polysemy.

Semantics Properties of Lexical items:

-synonyms
-polysemous
-ambiguous
-antonyms
-homonyms

Sentence meaning:
-speaker
-Reference meaning
-Words meaning
-listener

• The meaning carried by words maybe affected by a speaker's will or intentions.

• We have to differentiate between what words (or sentences) mean and what
speakers mean.
-Speaker meaning: is what a speaker means (i.e. intend to convey) when he uses a
piece of language.
• Sentence meaning or word meaning is what a sentence or a word means.

Meaning is divided into:

• Lexical Meaning
• Sentence Meaning
-Speaker Meaning

1. Lexica Meaning
It is the meaning of a word in isolations. This is the one usually given by the
dictionary.

• The term "Lexical meaning" is to be interpreted as the meaning of lexemes

depends upon the meaning of the sentences in which they occur. Lexical meaning
gives an explanation to the referential relations.
• Semantic feature reviews words of language as a "container" containing "sense"
component. Lexical meaning deals with homonymy, polysemy, and synonymy.
2. Sentence Meaning:
• A sentence is a group of related words containing a subject and predicate and
expressing a complete and independence unit of thought.

• The common definition of the sentences as "a group of words containing a subject
and predicate" sets up two of them: it requires that a sentence be of more than on
word, and that it be a structure of predication.

3. Speaker Meaning

• Speaker meaning is what a speaker means (i.e, intends to convey) when he uses a
piece of language.
• The meaning carried by words maybe affected by a speaker's will or intentions.
. We have to differentiate between what words (or sentences) mean and what
speakers mean.
. Speaker meaning is a part of the meaning of a sentence that is not directly related
to the grammatical and lexical features, but is obtained either from associated
paralinguistic features or from the context,
linguistics and non linguistics, in which it occurs.
. So it can be said that the speaker meaning is a product of sentence meaning and
context.

What is meant by a theory of semantics?

• A semantic theory deals with semantic facts (facts about meaning).
• A Semantic theory is looking for "generalizations", i.e. facts and statements about
the meanings of the whole classes of items.
• A semantic theory is being applicable to all languages.
. Although there are differences between languages, similarities between languages
encourage semanticists to believe that it is possible to make some general
statements about all languages, especially about the
fundamental and central areas of meaning.
• Semantics concentrates on the similarities between languages, rather than on the
differences.
-Semantics theory is part of the linguistic
theory, which includes the study of syntax,
phonetics besides the study of meaning.
• No theory is COMPLETE. There are always further facts in need of explanation.
-Doing semantics is largely a matter of conceptual analysis, exploring the nature of
meaning in a careful and thoughtful way, using a wide range of examples, many of
which we can draw from our own knowledge.
Unit 2

What is an utterance?
• An UTTERANCE is any stretch of talk, by one person, before and after which there
is silence on the part of that person. An utterance is the USE by a particular speaker,
on a particular occasion, of a piece of language, such as a sequence of sentences, or
a single phrase, or even a single word.
-Utterances may consist of a single word, a single phrase or a single sentence.
-They may also consist of a sequence of sentences.
-It is not unusual to find utterances that consist of one or more grammatically
incomplete sentence-fragments. In short, there is no simple relation of
correspondence between utterances and sentences'
-Accent and voice quality belong strictly to the utterance, not to the sentence
uttered.
-Not all utterances are actually tokens of sentences, but sometimes only of parts of
sentences, e.g. phrases or single words.
-utterances in particular language and loud/low, grammatical and ungrammatical
and true or false and physical events.
-What is a Sentence? A SENTENCE is a grammatically complete string of words
expressing a complete thought.
• A SENTENCE is neither a physical event nor a physical object. It is, conceived
abstractly, a string of words put together by the grammatical rules of a language. A
sentence can be thought of as the IDEAL String of words behind various realizations
in utterances and inscriptions.
-sentence is particular language and abstract has no situation timeless complete
thought grammatical ungrammatical
-different sentences can have same meaning.
-We have defined a sentence as a string of words. A given sentence always consists
of the same words, and in the same order. Any change in the words, or in their
order, makes a different sentence, for our purposes.

How to distinguish between utterances and sentences?

-In semantics we need to make a careful distinction between utterances and
sentences. In particular we need some way of making it clear when we are discussing
sentences and when utterances.:
• Words written between single quotation marks represents an utterance.
-Words italicized represents a sentence o(similarly abstract) part of a sentence, such
as a phrase or a word.
-Utterances of non-sentences, e.g. short phrases, or single words, are used by people
in communication all the time.
• People do not converse wholly in (tokens of) well formed sentences. But the
abstract idea of a sentence is the basis for understanding even those expressions
which are not sentences.
. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the meanings of non-sentences can best be
analyzed by considering them to be abbreviations, or incomplete versions, of whole
sentences.
-Propositions: The meanings of whole sentences involve propositions; the notion of a
proposition is central to semantics. What exactly a proposition is, is much debated
by semanticists.
• A PROPOSITION is that part of the meaning of the utterance of a declarative
sentence which describes some state of affairs.
-The state of affairs typically involves persons or things referred to by expressions in
the sentence and the situation or action they are involved in. In uttering a
declarative sentence a speaker typically asserts a proposition.
-The notion of truth can be used to decide whether two sentences express different
propositions. Thus if there is any conceivable set of circumstances in which one
sentence is true, while the other is false, we can be sure that they express different
propositions.
• One can entertain propositions in the mind regardless of whether they are true or
false, e.g. by thinking them, or believing them. But only true propositions can be
known.
-Examples for this are interrogatives, which are used to ask questions, and
imperatives, which are used to convey orders.
Normally, when a speaker utters a simple declarative sentence, he commits himself
to the truth of the corresponding proposition: i.e. he asserts the proposition. By
uttering a simple interrogative or imperative, a speaker can mention a particular
proposition, without asserting its truth.
• In saying, 'John can go' a speaker asserts the proposition that John can go..
• In saying, 'Can John go?', he mentions the same proposition but merely questions
its
truth.
-We say that corresponding declaratives and interrogatives (and imperatives) have
the same propositional content.
• Propositions, unlike sentences, cannot be said to belong to any particular language.
Sentences in different languages can correspond to the same proposition, if the two
sentences are perfect translations of each other.
-English I am cold, French J'ai froid, German Mir ist kalt, and Russian Mne xolodno
can, to the extent to which they are perfect translations of each other, be said to
correspond to the same proposition.
Unit 3:

Sense and Reference:

-Sense: deals with the relationships between words inside the language.
-Reference: deals with the relationships between language and the world.
-Example: My son is in the beech tree.
-By means of reference, a speaker indicate which things in the world are being talked
about.
-Remember that the same expression can be used to refer to different things.
• Thus some expressions in a language can have variable reference.
• Example:
• What is the referent of the phrase 'the president of the United States' used in:
September 2016? February 2017?

• The sense of an expression is its place in a system of semantic relationships with

other expressions in the language.
• Sameness of meaning is one of these semantic relationships.
Example: Which ones of these pairs of words have approximately the same meaning:
1) I (almost-nearly) fell over. 2) I will see you on (Wednesday - Thursday).
• We can also talk about the sense of longer expressions such as phrases and
sentences.
Example: the following sentences are said to
have nearly the same meaning:
1) Bachelors prefer redheads.
2) Girls with red hair are preferred by
unmarried men.
• In some cases, the same word can have more than one sense.
Example: Bank of England - The bank of the river
This kind of semantic relationships will be explained in details in the next chapter
(polysemy).
• Some sentences can have different senses. Example: The chicken is ready to eat.
-more than one expression can have same referent :camel-the ship of the desert
-tow expression has the same sense
-one expression has more than one sense:
Bank-side of rivers -financial organisations
-one sentence has more than one sense:
The chicken is ready to eat
-types of references:
1-variable:
The expression has more than one referent ex:my father,Sheikh nawab
2-invariable: the expression has one constant referent.ex: Africa,Kuwait
• A sense of an expression is an abstraction that can be entertained in the mind of a
language user.
-A reference of an expression is often a thing or a person in the world.
-Every expression that has meaning has sense, but not every expression has
reference.Example: almost/ probable/ if/ and/ above.
-• The same sense can be said to belong to expressions in different languages.
• Different expressions of different dialects of one language can have the same
sense.
• Examples:
British and American English
1) Pavement and sidewalk
2) Lift and elevator
-The act of referring to a thing or a person is picking out of a particular referent by a
speaker in the course of a particular utterance.
-My father: John is putting on weight these days.
-My friend: Jon is putting on weight these days.
Because they are two separate utterances there are two separate act of referring.
-The concept of reference is fundamentally related to utterances but we can also talk
about reference in connection with sentences or part of sentences.

Unit 4:

What is a referring expression?

• A REFERRING EXPRESSION is any expression used in an utterance to refer to
something or someone (or a clearly delimited collection of things or people), i.e.
used with a particular referent in mind.
-Referring Expressions:
• An expression can only be used to refer to some object or person in the world
depending on the kind of sentence an expression occurs in.
Example: Fred is me.
- There's no Fred at this address.
Is the name Fred in these examples considered a referring expression? Why?
-The same expression can be a referring expression or not (or, as some would put it,
may or may not have a 'referring interpretation'), depending on the context. This is
true of indefinite noun phrases.
-In the above examples the linguistic context often gave a vital clue as to whether
the indefinite noun phrase was a referring expression or not.

-What is a Referring Expression?

Whether an expression is a referring expression is heavily dependent on both:
-the linguistic context (definite-indefinite-phrases)
-the circumstances of utterance(context)

-Proper names (e.g. John),

-personal pronouns (e.g. he, it),
- longer descriptive expressions (as in question (4))the man who shot …..can all be
used as referring expressions.
-In the case of definite noun phrases also, the question of whether they are used as
referring expressions is very much dependent on the context and circumstances of
use.

• An OPAQUE CONTEXT is a part of a sentence which could be made into a complete

sentence by the addition of a referring expression, but where the addition of
different referring expressions, even though they refer to the same thing or person,
in a given situation, will yield sentences with DIFFERENT meanings when uttered in a
given situation.
-Notice that opaque contexts typically involve a certain kind of verb, like want,
believe, think, and wonder about.
-Note that it was often in the context of such opacity-creating verbs that indefinite
noun phrases could be ambiguous between a referring and a non-referring
interpretation, as in 'Nancy wants to marry a Norwegian'.
-An EQUATIVE SENTENCE is one which is used to assert the identity of the referents
of two referring expressions, i.e. to assert that two referring expressions have the
same referent. Example: The following are equative sentences:
1)Tony Blair is the Prime Minister
2)That woman over there is my daughter's
- A feature of many equative sentences is that the order of the two referring
expressions can be reversed without loss of acceptability.•
Example:
1) The largest city in Africa is Cairo
2) Cairo is the largest city in Africa
——
Equative sentence:
1-has Two referring expressions
2-the Two RE have the same referent.
3-They have an identity relationship
4-Can't be negative.
5-Reversal Test ‫)بعكس (نطبق‬
8-T or F
9-can be real imaginary.
10-must have verb to be (is)
——-
Referring Expressions NP always
-types of RF:
1-Indefinite noun phrase: an -a
Ex:a man is strong than the woman (not RF)
-I saw a man (RF)
2-Definite NP:The
Pronoun: ex:he broke the window (RF)
-if anyone makes nosiness he will be punished (Not RF)

Unit 5

The PREDICATOR of a simple declarative sentence is the word (sometimes a (partial)

group of words) which does not belong to any of the referring expressions and
which, of the remainder, makes the most specific contribution to the meaning of the
sentence. Intuitively speaking, the predicator describes the state or process in which
the referring expressions are involved.
Examples:
1) asleep is the predicator in Mummy is asleep and describes the state Mummy is in.
2) love is the predicator in The white man loved the Indian maiden and describes the
process in which the two referring expressions the white man and the Indian maiden
are involved.

3) wait for is the predicator in Jimmy was waiting for the downtown bus and
describes the process involving Jimmy and the downtown bus.

-also that the verb to be in its various forms

(is, was, are, were, am) is not the predicator in any example sentence that we have
seen So far
-The predicators in sentences can be of various parts of speech:
-adjectives (red, asleep, hungry, whimsical)
-verbs (write, stink, place)
-prepositions (in, between, behind)
-nouns (crook, genius).
• Despite the obvious syntactic differences between these different types of words,
semantically they all share the property of being able to function as the predicators
of sentences.
• Words of other parts of speech, such as conjunctions (and, but, or) and articles
(the, a), cannot serve as predicators in sentences.
-The semantic analysis of simple declarative sentences reveals two major semantic
roles played by different subparts of the sentence. These are the role of predicator,
and the role(s) of argument(s), played by the referring expression(s).
-A PREDICATE is any word (or sequence of words) which (in a given single sense) can
function as the predicator of a sentence. Example hungry, in, crook, asleep, hit,
show, bottle, are all predicates; and, or, but, not, are not predicates.
-The definition of 'predicate' above contained two parenthesized conditions:
1. The first, '(or sequence of words)', is intended to take care of examples like wait
for, in front of, which are longer than one word, but which it seems sensible to
analyse as single predicates.
2. The second parenthesized condition, '(in a given single sense)', is more important,
and illustrates a degree of abstractness in the notion of a predicate. A 'word', as we
use the term, can be ambiguous, i.e. can have more than one sense, but we use
'predicate' in a way which does not allow a predicate to be ambigous. A predicate
can have only one sense.
-Normally, the context in which we use a word will make clear what sense (what
predicate) we have in mind.
Predicator is
1-common noun
2-preposition
3-Adj
4-verb to Be: only in aquative sentences
5-verb
: ‫عشان احدد الخبر الزم احذف‬
1-RF✖️‫احذف‬
2-verb to be (is)✖️ ‫اذا جمله فيها كوتف ماحذف‬
Unit 6

There are some phrases, in particular indefinite noun phrases, that can be used in
two ways, either as referring expressions, or as predicating expressions.

Examples:
(1) Is a man in John attacked a man a referring expression?
(Referring expression)
(2) Is a man in John is a man a referring expression?
No it’s predicting expression

-A man can be either a referring expression or a predicating expression, depending

on the context.

Predicates do not refer. But they can be used by a hearer when contained in the
meaning of a referring expression, to identify the referent of that expression. Some
more examples follow:
(1) Does the phrase in the corner contain any predicates?
(The predicator in the Corner)

(2) Is the phrase the man who is in the corner a referring expression?
-referring Expressions the man

(3) Do the predicates in the phrase in the corner help to identify the referent of the
referring expression in (2) above?
Yes

(4) is the predicate bald contained in the meaning of the bald man?

(5) Is the predicate man contained in the meaning of the bald man?

• Speakers refer to things in the course of utterances by means of referring

expressions.

• The words in a referring expression give clues which help the hearer to identify its
referent. In particular, predicates may be embedded in referring expressions as, for
instance, the predicates man, in, and corner are embedded in the referring
expression the man in the corner.

-The correct referent of such a referring expression is something which completely

fits, or satisfies, the description made by the combination of predicates embedded in
it. .

Example:
The whale is the largest mammal
In The whale is the largest mammal (interpreted in the most usual way) does the
whale pick out some particular object in the world (a whale)? So is The whale here a
referring expression?

- A GENERIC SENTENCE is a sentence in which some statement is made about a

whole unrestricted class of individuals, as opposed to any particular individual.

Generic sentence:
1-it’s made about a whole unrestricted class
2-it’s not made about a particular member.
3-doesn’t have RE

. Note that generic sentences can be introduced by either( a )ex: a camel eats grass
or (the )ex: the fireman puts out fires.

-Any expression that can be used to refer to any entity in the real world or in any
imaginary world will be called a referring expression.

-Language is used for talking about things in the real world, like parrots, paper-clips,
babies, etc. All of these things exist. But the things we can talk about and the things
that exist are not exactly the same. We shall now explore the way in which language
creates unreal worlds and allows us to talk about non-existent things. We start from
the familiar notion of reference.

-real entities: exists in the world

1-physical concrete ex:car-pen
2-abstract: love-respect

-unreal entities imaginary and fictitious doesn’t exist in the world ex-unicorn -Santa
Claus

-universe of discourse-context of utterance -immediate situation of utterance

-These were relatively clear cases. Note that no universe of discourse is a

totally fictitious world. Santa Claus is a fiction, but the toy telephones he might bring
do actually exist.
So in examples like this we have interaction between fact and fiction, between real
and imaginary worlds. When two people are 'arguing at cross-purposes, they could
be said to be working within partially different universes of discourse.

-Assuming the same universe of discourse is essential to successful communication.

-Assuming different universes of discourse is not the only reason for breakdown of
communication.
-The predicates embedded in a referring expression help the hearer to identify its
referent.
Unit 7:
Deictic Words:
In general, what clue to the identity of the referent of a referring expression is given
by the inclusion of the demonstrative word this? Formulate your reply carefully,
mentioning the notion 'utterance'.

-A referring expression modified by this refers to an entity (place, person, thing etc.)
at or near the actual place of the utterance in which it is used.

-.A DEICTIC word is one which takes some element of its meaning from the context
or situation (i.e. the speaker, the addressee, the time and the place) of the utterance
in which it is used.

-So far, all of our examples of deictic terms have been referring expressions, like you,
here, and today, or modifiers which can be used with referring expressions, like the
demonstrative this.
-Such deictic terms help the hearer to identify the referent of a referring expression
through its spatial or temporal relationship with the situation of utterance.

-.A DEICTIC word is one which takes some element of its meaning from the context
or situation (i.e. the speaker, the addressee, the time and the place) of the utterance
in which it is used.

-In our definition of deixis, 'time of utterance and place of utterance' must generally
be taken very flexibly. Sometimes these are interpreted very broadly, and sometimes
very narrowly and strictly.

-In addition to deictic words (such as here, now, come, and bring), there are in
English and other languages certain grammatical devices called tenses for indicating
past, present, and future time, which must also be regarded as deictic, because past,
present, and future times are defined by reference to the time of utterance.

-Sentence ambiguity
John chased the dog with the stick.
-It is an example of a structure ambiguity. This ambiguity is ruled out by background
knowledge as well as situation contextual elements.
-Knowledge is based on predictions on how people and dogs act, experience and
facts about dogs and people.
-Situational elements is based on our knowledge about the people in the situation
and the time and the place of the utterance.
-Therefore, normal interpretation can be over-ruled in particular context.

-By the use of:

-Background knowledge
-Contextual elements
-Linguistics structure (definiteness) -Sentence Ambiguity will be ruled-out.
Relating the notion of context to the
notion of definiteness:
When to use the definite article THE ?
• Examples:
-Do you remember when we met at the university?
-Do you remember when we met at a university?
-Shall we go into the house now?
-Shall we go into a house now?

Rule: If some entity (or entities) (i.e. person(s), object(s), place(s), etc.) is/are the
ONLY entity (or entities) of its/their kind in the context of an utterance, then the
definite article (the) is the appropriate article to use in referring to that entity (or
those entities).

3 types of Deixis deictic:

1-time: yesterday-tomorrow-know-today
2-Adverb of place:there-here
3-personal pronouns: he -she -we
4-tense: past-present-future
5-modifier+referring expression:this city-that girl

-definitness:
1-syntax:the ‫اي جمله فيها ذا تعتبر سنتاكس‬
2-semantic: based on the meaning
3-both

-the unique entities on the universe (the sun the earth (only thing in a universe of
discourse known by this name)
UNIT 8

• To show what we mean when we talk of a 'gap' between reference and sense, we
look first at the question of how much a knowledge of the reference of referring
expressions actually helps a speaker in producing and understanding utterances
which describe the world he lives in.

-This leads us to the notion of the extension of a predicate.

-The EXTENSION of a one-place predicate is the set of all individuals to (partial)
which that predicate can truthfully be applied. It is the set of things which can
POTENTIALLY be referred to by using an expression whose main element is that
predicate.

-The extension of window is the set of all windows in the universe.

-The extension of dog is the set of all dogs in the universe.
-The extension of house is the set of all houses.
-The extension of red is the set of all red things.

-Extension is involves a set.

-sense and extension is independent of particular occasions or utterance.
-extension and reference is connects language to the world

-The notions of reference and extension are clearly related, and are jointly opposed
to the notion of sense. The relationship usually envisaged between sense, extension,
and reference can be summarized thus:
(1) A speaker's knowledge of the sense of a predicate provides him with an idea of its
extension. For example, the 'dictionary definition' which the speaker accepts for cat
can be used to decide what is a cat, and what not, thus defining implicitly the set of
all cats. Some semanticists describe this relationship between sense and extension
by saying that the sense of a predicate 'fixes' the extension of that predicate.
(2) The referent of a referring expression used in a particular utterance is an
individual member of the extension of the predicate used in the expression; the
context of the utterance usually helps the hearer to identify which particular
member it is. For example, if any English speaker, in any.

-Since clearly one can refer to things which no longer exist and to things which do
not yet exist, and since the notion of the extension of a predicate is defined as a set
of potential referents, we are forced to postulate that extensions are relative to all
times, past, present, and future. Thus, the extension of window, for example,
includes all past windows, all present windows, and all future windows. Similarly, the
extension of dead includes all things which have been dead in the past (and
presumably still are, if they still exist), which are dead now, and which will be dead in
the future. Predicates are tenseless, i.e. unspecified for past, present, or future.
In actual use, predicates are almost always accompanied in sentences by a marker of
tense (past or present) or a future marker, such as will. These have the effect of
restricting the extensions of the predicates they modify, so that, for example, the
extension of the phrase is dead could be said to be the set of all things which are
dead at the time of utterance. Correspondingly, the extension of the phrase is alive
could be said to be the set of all things alive at the time of utterance. Thus the
extensions of is dead and is alive are different in the appropriate way at any
particular time of utterance. This restricting of the extensions of predicates is an
example of a more general fact.

-The original motivation for the idea of extension was to explain the ability of
speakers of a language to group entities having similar characteristics, such as cats or
chickens, into distinct mental categories and to refer to these objects in the world,
using linguistic expressions containing predicates. In addition, the idea of extension
was to explain their ability as hearers to identify the referents of referring
expressions containing predicates, and their ability to make and understand
descriptive statements using predicates, as in Atkins is a cat. But speakers are in fact
only able to do these things in normal situations. The idea of extension is too
ambitious, extending to all situations. In fact, a speaker does not have a perfectly
clear idea of what is a cat and what is not a cat. Between obvious cats and obvious
non-cats there is a grey area of doubt, as we see in the following sketches.
In order to get around such difficulties with the idea of extension, semanticists have
introduced the two closely related notions of prototype and stereotype.

-Definition A PROTOTYPE of a predicate is an object which is held to be very TYPICAL

of the kind of object which can be referred to by an expression containing the
predicate. In other words, the prototype of a predicate can be thought of as the
most typical member of the extension of a predicate.

-Example: A man of medium height and average build, between 30 and 50 years old,
with brownish hair, with no particularly distinctive characteristics or defects, could
be a prototype of the predicate man in certain areas of the world.

-The REFERENT of a referring expression is the thing picked out by the use of that
expression on a particular occasion of utterance.
-The EXTENSION of a predicate is the complete set of all things which could
potentially (i.e. in any possible utterance) be the referent of a referring expression
whose head constituent is that predicate.
-A PROTOTYPE of a predicate is a typical member of its extension.
Exercise:-
Unit 1:
——————-
1. Which of the following items appear to illustrate (sentence meaning) and which
illustrates (speaker meaning)? Explain your choice of speaker meaning.
1) I am over the moon.
-speaker meaning (the speaker explains
that he/she feel happy)

2) Dinosaurs distinct million of years ago.

sentence meaning (Fact in sentence)

3) I could eat a horse.

-speaker meaning (the speaker feel
hungry )

4) The earth orbits the sun once a year.

-sentence meaning (Fact in sentence)

————
Unit 2
• Say whether these sentences are true or false:
1) A proposition can be said to belong to a
particular language. (F)
2) Sentences can be true or false.(T)
3) Utterances are not tied to a particular time and place.(F)
4) Sentences and utterances can be grammatical and ungrammatical.(T)
———-
Unit 4
Could the following possibly be used as referring expressions:
(1) John. ✔️
(2)My uncle✔️
(3)and✖️
(4) the girl sitting on the wall by the bus stop✔️
(5) a man (both)
(6)my parents ✔️
(7)send ✖️
(8)Under ✖️
————
Are the following referring Expressions?
1-a man was in here looking for you last night
-a man is a referring expression because the speaker has in mind a particular person

2-the sign is bigger than a man’s head.

-a man is not a referring expression because the speaker has no particular person.

3-a Norwegian, used in 'Nancy wants to marry a Norwegian'

-both because its ambiguous and the speaker could be either referring to a specific a
Norwegian in mind or nothing specific in mind and just a Norwegian in general

4-a car, used in 'John is looking for a car'

-both because its ambiguous and the speaker could be either referring to a specific a
car in mind or nothing specific in mind and just a car in general

5-a swan, used in 'Every evening at sunset a swan flew over the house'
-both because its ambiguous and the speaker could be either referring to a specific a
car in mind or nothing specific in mind and just a car in general
———
Are the following referring
expressions?
(1) John in John is my best friend'
-referring Expressions because the speaker has in mind a particular person

(2) he in 'He's a very polite man', said by a

husband to his wife in a conversation about their bank manager
-referring Expressions because the speaker has in mind a particular person

(3) it in 'It's sinking!' used in a conversation about a battleship which has just been
attacked
-referring Expressions because the speaker has in mind a particular person

(4) the man who shot Abraham Lincoln in 'The man who shot Abraham Lincoln was
an unemployed actor'
-referring Expressions because the speaker has in mind a particular person
———
(1) he in 'If anyone ever marries Nancy, he's in for a bad time' (meaning that
whoever marries Nancy is in for a bad time)
-not a referring expression because the speaker has no particular person in his mind

(2) it in 'Every man who owns a donkey beats it.

-not a referring expression because the speaker has no particular donkey in his mind
.

• (3) the person who did this in 'The person who did this must be insane', spoken by
someone on discovering a brutally mutilated corpse, where the speaker has no idea
who committed the crime
-not a referring expression because the speaker has no particular person in his mind

. (4) Smith's murderer in 'Smith's murderer must be insane', uttered in circumstances

like the above, where the corpse is Smith's
-not a referring expression because the speaker has no particular person in his mind
Which of the following are equative sentences? Explain why.

1. Fred is the man with the gun. equative sentence because it has two referring
expressions , 'fred' and 'the man with the gun'. The tow referring expressions has the
same referent and they have an identity relationship.
2. William the Conqueror is the current King of England equative sentences
3. Detroit is a nearby city not an equative sentences because it dose not containtwo
referring expressions with one referent ,
4. Mary is a genius not equative sentences
5. A box of cookies is what I would like. not an equative sentences
6. Detroit is not the largest city in the USA not equative sentence because its negative

1-Different expression of different dialects of one language can have the same
sense:
-The words “courgette” and “zucchini” are of different dialects of one language
with the same sense.

2-same sense belongs to expression in different language

-The words “man” and “‫ ”رجل‬have the same sense and they belong to different
languages.

Unit 6:
There are some phrases, in particular indefinite noun phrases, that can be used in
two ways, either as referring expressions, or as predicating expressions give
examples:
-1) John attacked a man
(a man is Referring expression) because the speaker has in mind a particular man
(2) John is a man
a man is predicting expression because it shows the state in which John.

——

Are the following generic sentences?

(1) Gentlemen prefer blondes✔️
(2) Jasper is a twit✖️
(3) The male of the species guards the eggs✔️
(4) A wasp makes its nest in a hole in a tree✔️
(5) A wasp just stung me on the neck (✖️)
——-

(1) Do unicorns exist in the real world?✖️

(2) In which two of the following contexts are unicorns most frequently mentioned?
Circle your answer:
(a) in fairy stories✔️
(b) in news broadcasts
(c) in philosophical discussions about reference
(d) in scientific text books

(3) Is it possible to imagine worlds different in certain ways from the world we know
actually to exist?✔️

(4) In fairy tale and science fiction worlds is everything different from the world we
know?✔️

(5) In the majority of fairy tales and science fiction stories that you know, do the
fictional characters discourse with each other
according to the same principles that apply in real life?✔️

(6) Do fairy tale princes, witches, etc. seem to refer in their utterances to things in
the world!✔️
_____
(1) Is the context of an utterance a part of the universe of discourse?✔️

(2) Is the immediate situation of an utterance a part of its context?

———
Which of the following are generic sentences? Explain.
a-Americans like to eat apple pie
Generic sentence
-it is made about a whole unrestricted class

b-Fred likes to buy Uzis

Not generic sentence
-because it’s contained a referring Expression

c-A bird lays eggs

-generic sentence
-it is made about a whole unrestricted class

d-My pet finch just laid an egg

Not generic sentence because it’s contained a referring Expression
———
Referring Expressions contains predicates why?
-the man in the corner
This referring expression contains predicates (in,corner). To help us identify the
referent of the referring expression
-predicates give more details and description to the referent expression.so the
predicates are embedded
——
-language can create unreal worlds . Explain and give illustration different from those
discussed in this unit
-language is used to talk about
unreal entities imaginary and fictitious doesn’t exist in the real world
ex: unicorn -Santa Claus
———
1) Unlike sentences utterances are tied to particular times and places.✔️
2) A universe of discourse can be partly imaginary. ✔️
3) In order to achieve a successful communication, it is necessary that the speaker
and the hearer share the same universe of discourse.✔️
4) The pronoun 'I' in the utterance 'I will never speak to you again' refers to any
speaker of the utterance. ✔️
5) 'Neil Armstrong was the first man to walk on the moon' is a generic sentence
because it contains two referring expressions.✖️
——
Examine these conversations and explain why the speaker and the address
understand each others.
1) A: I'm hungry
B: I'll lend you some money
-they have the same universe of discourse

2) A: Shall we go and get ice-cream?

B: I'm on a diet.
-they have the same universe of discourse

3) A: Come over next week for lunch. B: It's Ramadan.

-they have the same universe of discourse

Do the following expressions refer to physical objects?

1. (a) Christmas Day 1980 - no

2. (b) one o’clock in the morning -n0
3. (c) when Eve was born -no
4. (d) 93 million miles -no
5. (e) the distance between the Earth and the Sun -n0
6. (f) ‘God Save the Queen’ no
7. (g) the British national anthem. -no
8. (h) eleven hundred -no
9. (i) one thousand one hundred -no
Are the following words deictic?
(1) here ✔️
(2) Wednesday. ✖️
(3) place ✖️
(4) today. ✔️
(5) you ✔️
——
Identify all the deictic expressions in the following sentences and explain why they
are decitic.
1) You noticed me standing there
-you (personal pronoun)
-noticed (past-tens)
-me (personal)
-standing there (adverb of place)

2) This book was written by that author over

there.
-this book it’s (modifier+referring expression)
-was written it’s (past tense )
-that author (modifier+referring expression)
-over there adverb of place

3) Just set your briefcase to the right of mine

-your briefcase (modifier+referring expression )
-to the right (place)
-mine (personal )

4) Now we have to make plans for next week

-know (time)
-we (personal
-have to make (present tense)
-next week (modifier+referring expression )

5) Her best friend was standing behind John

-her best friend (modifier+referring expression )
-was standing (past tense)
-behind (place)

6) All the guests arrived two hours ago

-All the guests. (modifier+referring expression )
-arrived (tense)
-two hours ago (time)

———-

1) Reference is a relationship between certain. uttered expressions and things in the

world.✔️
2) All words in a language may be used to refer, but only some words have sense.✖️

3) The context of an utterance is a part of the universe of discourse.✔️

4) Hearers identify the referent of a referring expression (other than a proper name)
by seeking in the context of the utterance some object to which the predicates in the
referring expression apply.✔️

Unit 9

Ch. 9 Sense properties and stereotypes

• Sense
• We are still discussing meaning of words.
• We have been in situations where we were asked about something (x) , and
our answer could be " it depends what you mean by x "
• For example: " Are you free?"
• " It depends on what you mean by free "
• Does it mean "not busy, single, just been divorced, independent, etc".

It happens that two people might not agree on the meaning of a word, but
usually it gets clarified later.
• In order to communicate effectively we need to agree on the meaning
of words.
• Sometimes people deliberately argue about the meaning of words for
personal reasons: avoid blame, avoid responsibility, or any other
reason.
• If a person wants to hinder or obstruct communication, they start to
argue about meaning of words.
• Practice p. 94 for three conversations that go wrong because speakers
do not agree on the meaning of words.

We may disagree on the meaning of some words, but in general people

understand words to have certain sense in the language system.
• The sense of an expression is its indispensable hard-core meaning.
• This definition of sense emphasizes on the sense of a word or the
sentence regardless of context or situation of utterance.
• The sense of an expression is the sum of its sense properties or
characteristics and sense relations with other expressions.
Sense properties of sentences:
1. Analytic sentences
2. Synthetic
3. Contradiction
An analytic sentence MUST be TRUE, as a result of the combination of the
senses of its words.
• cats are animals.
• Bachelors are males.
• My brother is a boy.

A synthetic sentence is one that is NOT analytic. It could be true or false.

• My brother is a dentist.
• John is American.
•My house is white.
• There's nothing inherent in these sentences to make them necessarily true
or false. • So, analytic sentences are always true, synthetic sentences can
sometimes be true and sometimes false.

A Contradiction is a sentence that is always FALSE.

•The girl is her own mother's mother.
• John killed Bill who remained alive for two more years.
•The cat is a dentist.
•A speaker's knowledge of the sense of a predicate provides him with an idea
of its extension. We said earlier that another way of talking about this
relationship is that the sense of a predicate determines or 'fixes' the extension
of that predicate.

• For example, the 'dictionary definition' which the speaker accepts for cat
can be used to decide what is a cat, and what is not, thus defining, implicitly,
the set of all cats.

A NECESSARY CONDITION on the sense of a predicate is a condition which a

thing MUST meet in order to qualify as being correctly described by that
predicate.

• A SUFFICIENT SET OF CONDITIONS on the sense of a predicate is a set of

conditions (or criteria) which, if they are met by a thing, are enough in
themselves to GUARANTEE that the predicate correctly describes that thing.
•The predicate square, for example, as usually understood in geometry.
•'Four-sided' is a necessary condition for this predicate, since for anything to
be a square, it must be four-sided.

UNIT 10 SENSE RELATIONS

• Sense relations in sentences
• How words are semantically related in a sentence.
• SYNONYMY is the relationship between two predicates that have the same
(partial) sense.
•perfect synonymy is hard to find.
•No two synonyms are exactly alike.
• Glad vs. happy, conceal vs. hide
• Practice: deep/profound: You have my deep sympathy for You have my
profound sympathy//
•This is a deep river XX *This is a profound river
• Dialects have different words for same meaning
•Practice
SYNONY M Y IS A RELATION BET WEEN PREDICATES, AND NOT
BETWEEN WORDS
• A word may have many different meanings (senses).
• Each distinct sense of a word is a predicate. For example, in a dictionary a
word with different senses will be listed with subscript numbers.
• Hide1, intr. Verb. I'm hiding behind the tree.
• Hide2, tr. Verb. Let's hide the cookies from John.
• Hide3, noun. We were watching them from our hide.
• Hide4, noun. The hide of an ox is very heavy.
• Each of these senses is a predicate. So, hide in 2 is a synonym of conceal but
not the others.
PRACTICE.
PARAPHRASE
• A sentence which expresses the same proposition as another sentence is a
PARAPHRASE of that sentence.
• A synonym: (word/ predicate level)
• Paraphrase: (sentence/ proposition level)
• John is happy vs, John is glad
• The cat ate the fish vs. The fish was eaten by the cat.
• PRACTICE
HYPONYMY
• HYPONYMY is a sense relation between predicates (or sometimes longer
phrases) such-that the meaning of one predicate (or phrase) is included in the
meaning of the other.
• The meaning of red is included in the meaning of scarlet.
• Red is the superordinate term; scarlet is a hyponym of red (scarlet is a kind
of red). • The meaning of flower is included in the meaning of tulip.
• Flower is the superordinate term; tulip is a hyponym of flower
• PRACTICE
• SYNONYMY counts as a special case of hyponymy. For example, glad
includes the meaning of happy, and happy includes the meaning of glad. So,
each is a hyponymy of the other.
SYMMETRICAL HYPONYMY
• SYNONYMY counts as a special case of hyponymy.
• If X is a hyponym of Y and if Y is also a hyponym of X, then X and Y are
synonymous. • Thus, synonymy can be seen as a special case of hyponymy,
i.e. SYMMETRICAL HYPONYMY.
• Propositions
• The notion of 'sameness' of meaning between predicates (synonymy) can
also be sameness of meaning between propositions that are expressed by
sentences (paraphrases)
• A proposition X ENTAILS a proposition Y if the truth of Y follows necessarily
from the truth of X.
• A sentence expressing proposition X entails a sentence expressing
proposition Y if the truth of Y follows necessarily from the truth of X.
ENTAILMENT
• A sentence expressing proposition X entails a sentence expressing
proposition Y if the truth of Y follows necessarily from the truth of X.
•Examples:
• John ate all the sardines (X) entails Someone ate something (Y).
• John killed Bill (X) entails Bill died (Y).
• Mary bought tulips (X) entails Mary bought flowers (Y).
• Two sentences may be said to be PARAPHRASES of each other if and only if
they have exactly the same set of ENTAILMENTS; or, which comes to the same
thing, if and only if they mutually entail each other so that whenever one is
true the other must also be true