Introduction to the Study of Meaning in

Language
Semantics

 Language uses a system of linguistic

signs, each of which is a combination
of meaning and phonological and/or
orthographic forms.
 Semantics is traditionally defined as
the study of meaning in language.
 The study of meaning

 What does ‘meaning’ mean?

 To what extent is it a linguistic matter?

– what bits of meaning are given to us directly
by the forms of language?

 What kind of theory of meaning is best

suited to the linguistic facts?
Meaning and Language

Meaning is connected to language via:

 the lexicon

 grammar

Also:
 what we do with language
 Linguistic meaning
 Lexical meanings
– sense relations
synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy …
– componential analysis:
bachelor = [+male, -married]
 …but we’re also interested in meaning and
grammar
– putting meanings together
Meaning and grammar
Compositional meaning:

The rat bit the cat.

The cat bit the rat.

The indolent grey feline seated itself upon

the sixteenth century Azerbaijani kilim.
 Semantics and grammar

 Linguistic semantics: the output of

combining words through the syntax
 …though syntax can produce
`meaningless’ grammatical structures
too:

Colourless green ideas sleep furiously.

 The Principle of
Compositionality

The meaning of an expression is a

function of the meaning of its parts and
the way they are put together

Richard Montague
 The Principle of
Compositionality
Still, the syntax-meaning relationship isn’t
always straightforward:
 a beautiful dancer
 a criminal lawyer
Where do the differences originate?
The lexicon? Syntax? Semantics?
Pragmatics?
Semantics vs. Semiotics

 Semantics: the study of meaning of within

a linguistic system e.g. words and
sentences.

 Semiotics: the study of signs and symbols,

not necessarily linguistics.
 Types of Signs
Indexical
X is temporally or spatially associated with Y (for Z)

 Iconic
X resembles Y (for Z)

 Symbolic
X stands for Y for Z (relation between X and Y is arbitrary)
 Foundations of Semiotics
 Ferdinand de Saussure Course in General
Linguistics (1906-1911)
 One of the founders of modern linguistics
– Established the structural study of language,
emphasizing the arbitrary relationship of the signifier to
signified and the diacritical nature of signs
– Distinguished synchronic linguistics (studying language
at a given moment) from diachronic linguistics (studying
the changing state of a language over time)
 Creation of “semiology” the study of sign systems
 Hugely influential on modern literary and media
theory
Linguistic Sign
 Sign, Signified, Signifier
 The linguistic sign is the unity of the
signifier (a sound-image) and the signified
(a concept)
Concept

Sound-Image
Linguistic Signs and
Language
 The sign is arbitrary
 A multiplicity of signs is necessary to
form any language
 The system of signs in language is
over-complex
 Language exhibits a collective inertia
toward innovation
 Syntagmatic and Associative
Relations
 “In discourse, on the one hand, words acquire relations based on
the linear nature of language because they are chained together.
[...] Combinations supported by linearity are syntagms. The
syntagm is always composed of two or more consecutive units [...].
In the syntagm a term acquires its value only because it stands in
opposition to everything that precedes or follows it, or to both.
Outside discourse, on the other hand, words acquire relations of a
different kind. Those that have something in common are
associated in memory, resulting groups are marked by diverse
relations. [...]
We see that the co-ordinations formed outside discourse differ
strikingly from those formed inside discourse. Those formed
outside discourse are not supported by linearity. Their seat is in the
brain; they are a part of the inner storehouse that makes up the
language of each speaker. They are associative relations.” (p.
123).
Syntagmatic and Associative
Relations
Some Kinds Of Meaning

Concepts
 mental images, prototypes…
 not what we’re principally dealing with
 but of course it’s important
Some Kinds Of Meaning

Communicative intentions
 what the speaker wants to achieve
through an utterance
 clearly a matter for pragmatics
– what kinds of ‘knowledge of meaning’ are
involved here?
John: Would you like some salad?
Mary: I don’t eat rabbit food.
Conceptual meaning
 Conceptual meaning is also called
"denotative", "logical" or "cognitive"
meaning. This refers to the definition given
in the dictionary. It is widely assumed to be
the central factor in linguistic
communication and is integral to the
essential functioning of language. For
example, man can be defined by the
contrastive features [+Human], [+Male],
[+Adult], as distinct from girl, which can be
defined as [+Human], [-Male], [-Adult].
Associative meaning

 This refers to the meaning associated

with the conceptual meaning, which
can be further divided into following
five types:
 Connotative meaning: This is the
communicative value attributed to an
expression over and above its purely
conceptual meaning.
Associative meaning
 Social meaning: This refers to what is
communicated of the social circumstances
of language use, including variations like
dialect, time, topic, style.
 Affective meaning: This is what is
communicated of the feelings and attitudes
of the speaker/writer towards the listener
and/or what is talking about.
Associative meaning

 Reflected meaning: This is the

meaning when we associate one sense
of an expression with another.
 Collocative meaning: This refers to
what is communicated through
association with words which tend to
occur in the environment of another
word.
Thematic meaning
 This is what is communicated by the way in
which the message is organized in terms of
order and emphasis. Now compare the
following pair of sentences:
 (1) The young man donated the kidney
voluntarily.
 (2) The kidney was donated by a young
man voluntarily.
Language and the outside
world
One definition of meaning:
To understand a sentence is to be able
to relate it to the outside world.
Truth-conditional
semantics
How do you understand my describing a state
of affairs?
You know what it would take for that state of
affairs to hold in the world.
Or: you know what it would take for what I
said to be true.
So we can define the meaning of an
expression as the conditions on its being
true (or its truth conditions)
Truth values

(Another perspective on the same idea:)

 A sentence denotes (picks out in the world)

a truth value: T or F
– just like Andrew Flintoff picks out a person

 Knowing the meaning of a sentence is

knowing how to calculate its truth value
Truth conditions

For example:
Gottlob has earlobes = T iff:

the person picked out by Gottlob has

earlobes
Deixis

Some bits of linguistically-supplied

meaning are pretty much `fixed’:
envy, kick, dog, banana, green…

Others always `shift’ in meaning,

according to the situation:
Then she came here.
Sentences and
propositions
Then she came here.
 could be true or false, as it stands
 but it still relates to a (true or false) state of
affairs, on any given occasion
– e.g. ‘At 12:10pm on 23-05-1995, Edwina Currie
arrived at John Major’s office’
 so it isn’t sentences as such that have truth
conditions
 …but rather the propositions that sentences
convey
Sentences and
propositions
Representation:
Sentence: Gottlob has earlobes
Proposition: ‘Gottlob has earlobes’
(which is T iff …)
 better not to use English sentences to
convey the meanings of English sentences
– a logical formalism can provide a useful
metalanguage
Truth and meaning
relations
 Entailment : if P is true, then Q is true
P: Phil killed Bill.
Q1: Phil killed someone.
Q2: Someone did something in the past.
 Paraphrase : P is true, if and only if Q is true
P: Bill was killed by Phil.
Q: Phil caused Bill to die.
 Contradiction : if P is true, then Q is false
P: Phil is a murderer.
Q: Phil has never killed anyone.
 Semantics v. pragmatics
In general:
 Meaning from the language = semantics
 Meaning from the context = pragmatics
(identity of / relationship between speaker and
hearer, situation, beliefs, intentions …)
Geraldine hit Norman with the frying pan.
‘Geraldine hit Norman with the frying pan [=a
uniquely identifiable object that has those
properties characteristic of frying pans]’
Not: ‘Geraldine was truly out of her mind and
Norman’s recent good behaviour is explicable.’
 Semantics v. pragmatics
(II)
A different criterion: truth conditions
 Semantics (of a sentence)= what must
hold true in the world for the sentence to
be judged true
 Pragmatics = the rest (all speaker- or
context-related meaning)
Bill has a fleece and Anne has a waterproof.
Bill has a fleece but Anne has a waterproof.
 Semantics v. pragmatics
(II)
A different criterion: truth conditions
 Semantics (of a sentence)= what must
hold true in the world for the sentence to
be judged true
 Pragmatics = the rest (all speaker- or
context-related meaning)
Bill has a fleece and Anne has a waterproof.
Bill has a fleece but Anne has a waterproof.
Even Gottlob has earlobes.
 Language and truth-
conditions
Linguistic meaning often coincides with
truth-conditional meaning, but not always
She even hit him with the bloody frying pan.
Truth conditions go beyond strictly
linguistic meaning: she, him, the bloody
frying pan must be associated with
particular objects, in context
(triggered by linguistic material, at least)
 Language and truth-
conditions
Linguistic meaning often coincides with
truth-conditional meaning, but not always
She even hit him with the bloody frying pan.

Linguistic meaning goes beyond truth

conditions (of the basic proposition
conveyed): even, bloody
 Language and truth-
conditions
We will continue to treat a sentence as
‘having truth conditions’
 enables discussion of semantic knowledge
 and connects linguistic meaning to the
world
 …but really truth depends also on context
 Different levels of
meaning
 Sentence meaning
 Propositional meaning (truth-conditional
semantics)
 Utterance meaning (semantics+pragmatics)
I’d like you to read Hurford and Heasley.
‘The speaker would like the addressee(s) to
read some entity that goes by the name
“Hurford and Heasley”.’
 Different levels of
meaning
 Sentence meaning (linguistic semantics)
 Propositional meaning (truth-conditional
semantics)
 Utterance meaning (semantics+pragmatics)
I’d like you to read Hurford and Heasley.
‘DW would like the L2 class to read
(selected passages of) the book Semantics:
a coursebook by H&H.’
 Different levels of
meaning
 Sentence meaning (linguistic semantics)
 Propositional meaning (truth-conditional
semantics)
 Utterance meaning (semantics+pragmatics)
I’d like you to read Hurford and Heasley.
‘DW is instructing the L2 class to read
(selected passages of) the book Semantics:
a coursebook by H&H.’