Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
-
Upload
jorge-guzman -
Category
Documents
-
view
222 -
download
0
Transcript of Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
1/71
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
2/71
Componential analysis is a way
proposed by the structural semanticists
to analyze word meaning. The approach
is based upon the belief that the meaningof a word can be dissected into meaning
components, called semantic features.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
3/71
Plus and minus signs are used to
indicate whether a certain semantic
feature is present or absent in the
meaning of a word, and thesefeature symbols are usually written
in capitalized letters.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
4/71
Man [+HM!",+!#$T,+M!$%&
'oman[+HM!"
+!#$T
(M!$%&
)oy[+HM!", (!#$T, +M!$%&
girl[+HM!",(!#$T,(M!$%&
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
5/71
This is parallel to the way a phoneme is
analyzed into smaller components calleddistincti*e features.
b [+P$-/%,+)$!)!$,+/C%#&
P[+P$-/%,+)$!)!$,(/C%#&
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
6/71
Componential analysis pro*ides
an insight into the meaning of
words and a way to study the
relationships between words that
are related in meaning.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
7/71
! feature of 0belongingness1
distinguishes to return, when it ta2es an
ob3ect, from to take back, We took
Junior back to the zoo might refer to
letting him *isit the place again, but We
returned Junior to the zoocalls him an
inmate.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
8/71
! feature 0enemy1
distinguished U-boatfrom the
neutral submarine in the 4irst
'orld 'ar.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
9/71
Predications,!rguments and Predicates
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
10/71
)efore the analysis of sentence meaning
is discussed, two points should be madeclear.
4irst, the meaning of a sentence is not the
sum total of the meanings of all its
components. t cannot be wor2ed out byadding up all the meanings of its constituent
words.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
11/71
-econd, there are two aspects tosentence meaning5 grammatical
meaning, which means the
grammaticality or grammatical well(formedness of a sentence, and
semantic meaning, which is
go*erned by selectionalrestrictions.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
12/71
6rammaticality is go*erned by thegrammatical rules of the language
while -electional 7estrictions are
constraints on the combination of
words to ensure semantic well(
formedness. -ome sentences which are
grammatically well(formed may not be
semantically meaningful.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
13/71
4or e8ample9
:The brown concept
3umps sympathetically.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
14/71
The predication analysis,
proposed by $eech, is a waytoanalyze the meaning of
sentences. ! sentence,
composed of a sub3ect and
predicate, is a basic unit for
grammatical relation. The
basic unit for meaning
analysis is calledpredication, which is the
abstraction of the meaning
of a sentence.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
15/71
The grammatical form of the sentence does
not affect the semantic predication of the
sentence, therefore the following forms ha*ethe same predication H%;
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
16/71
Consider the three sentences The
children ate their dinner, Did the
children eat their dinner? And Eat
your dinner, children!$ea*ing aside
differences of tense and pronouns,these sentences ha*e a common
content which can be e8pressed in a
2ind of Pidgin %nglish9 0Children eatdinner1. t is this type of structure
which are called predication,
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
17/71
! predication consists ofargument(s)and
predicate. !n argument is a logical participant
in a predication. t is generally identical with
the nominal element ;s= in a sentence. !
predicate is something that is said about anargument or it states the logical relation lin2ing
the arguments in a sentence.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
18/71
!ccording to the number of argumentsin a predication, predication can be
di*ided into one(place predication,
two(place predication and no(placepredication.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
19/71
4or e8ample9
Children li2e sweets. ;two(place predication=
CH$#7%", -'%%T;$?%=
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
20/71
0t is hot.1 is a meteorological utterance. t
is difficult to accept that the elemente8pressed by 0 it1 is an argument, since it
has no meaning independent of the
predicate. 0it1 is so predictable that onecannot construct a @uestion for which 0it1
is an appropriate answer, therefore it is a
no(place predication9
'hat is hot>
: tA
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
21/71
The predicate is the main element in a
predication, for it includes tense, modality,etc., determines the number and nature of
the arguments and go*erns the arguments.
Componential and predication analysestogether will enable us to represent the
greater part of the meaning of sentences.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
22/71
My uncle owns This car
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
23/71
Could be bro2en down into two
arguments ; or 0logical
participants1=, 0my uncle1 and 0this car1, with a relational element
lin2ing them ;0owns1=. This lin2ing
element may be called, following
logical rather than grammatical
terminology, predicate.
My uncle owns This car
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
24/71
7ather as sub3ect,*erb,
ob3ect, ad*erb, etc., are
constituents of sentences,so argument and
predicate are constituents
of the predicationse8pressed by sentences.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
25/71
!rguments sometimes match syntactic
elements li2e sub3ect, *erb and ob3ect,and sometimes do not.
My uncle owns This car
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
26/71
ne has to a*oid associating the
Bpredicate1 in this sense with the0predicate1 of traditional grammar.
! tall woman was in front of the car
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
27/71
!ssuming that all predications can bedi*ided up into arguments and
predicates, we ha*e to as2 how the
content of these units themsel*es canbe analyzed. The e8amples we ha*e
loo2ed at suggest that these units can
be analyzed componentially.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
28/71
4or e8ample9
! tall woman9
Tall, +Human, +!dult, (male, +singular
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
29/71
! similar analysis, containing
features such as 0 pri*ate1,0motor1, and 0*ehicle1,could
be supplied for 0 the car1.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
30/71
Predicates, too, can bebro2en down into
features. The predicate
0boiled ; in thesentence !dam boiled
an egg= might be
analyzed into three
components9 0coo21, 0in
water1, and 0past1.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
31/71
0!dam boiled an egg1
entails
0 !dam coo2ed an egg.1
)oil9 [+coo2, +in water,+ past&
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
32/71
an front of b an front of b
)ut this does not go far enough. The
analysis of 0 in front of 0 fails to show itsrelation to the locati*e meanings, such as
0o*er1, 0under1, 0by1, 0on the left of1, etc.
4or this purpose, three semanticoppositions are needed9
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
33/71
#irections
#irections
#irectional
contrast
between 0 in
front of 0 and
0behind1, 0o*er1and 0under1, etc. =
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
34/71
+Horizontal 0horizontal1
(Horizontal 0*ertical1
+$ateral 0side(to(side1
($ateral 0front(to(bac21
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
35/71
The prepositions o*er, under, in
front of, behind, etc., may now be
defined9
;a= o*er
[ spatial&
direction(horizontal
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
36/71
;b= under
[ spatial&
direction
(horizontal
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
37/71
;c= in front of
[ spatial&
direction
[+horizontal&
(lateral
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
38/71
;d= behind
[ spatial&
direction
[+horizontal&
(lateral
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
39/71
;e= on the left
[ spatial&
direction
[+horizontal&
+ lateral
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
40/71
;f= on the right
[ spatial&
direction
[+horizontal&
+ lateral
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
41/71
;g= beside, by
[ spatial&
+ pro8imate
[+horizontal&
+ lateral
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
42/71
D=The shell e8ploded by thewing of the airplane.
E=Place the one coin by the
other.F=The red car was par2ed by the
green one.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
43/71
n ;D=, bysimply means 0 in spatial
pro8imity to1. Here 0by1 could include
0o*er1 or 0under1.
D=The shell e8ploded by the
wing of the airplane.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
44/71
n ;E=, the most li2ely sense is 0 near to
on a horizontal plane1(((that is,
e8cluding 0o*er1 and 0under1.
E= Place the one coin by the other.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
45/71
n ;F= the meaning is e*en morespecific9 it is 0beside1, in contrast to
0 in front of1 or 0behind1.
F=The red car was par2ed by the
green one.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
46/71
D=The shell e8ploded by the
wing of the airplane.
by ;D=spatial
+ pro8imate
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
47/71
E=Place the one coin by the
other.
by ;E=
[ spatial&
+pro8imate
+horizontal
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
48/71
F=The red car was par2ed by thegreen one.
by ;F=
[ spatial&
+pro8imate
+lateral
+horizontal
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
49/71
This discussion of spatial relations
has emphasized the point that
predicates, li2e arguments, can be
analyzed componentially. -o
arguments and predicates are
comparable units9 on the one hand
they are the elements ofpredications, and on the other they
consist of features.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
50/71
Predications
!rguments,
predicates
features
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
51/71
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
52/71
The predicate is the ma3or element inthe sense that it determines ; in ways
that will shortly be made clear = the
number and nature of the arguments. nthe abo*e case, the relational meaning
of 0in front of1 re@uires the presence of
two arguments which can be placed in aspatial relationship5 without them, 0in
front of1 would not ma2e sense.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
53/71
Three general types of predicateare distinguished9 two(place, one(
place and no(place.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
54/71
t is doubtful whether there are
three( or four(place predications
because they usually turn out to be
combinations of two(place and one(
place predications.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
55/71
0
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
56/71
%ntailment and nconsistency
n predication analysis, hyponymy and
incompatibility are treated as relationsbetween arguments and between predicates,
rather than between word(meanings.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
57/71
!n entailment relation e8ists between two
propositions which differ only in that anargument of one is hyponymous to an
argument of the other. 4or e8ample, a is a
hyponym of b in9
;DI=
a b
0 saw a boy %ntails 0 saw a child
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
58/71
The hyponymy relation can also be between
predicates9
;DJ=
P K
0 Turpin stole a horse1 %ntails 0Turpin too2 a horse1
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
59/71
The following general rules for entailment
and inconsistency may now be stated9
G entails L if G and L are identical e8cept
that D. G contains an argument a and L
contains an argument b, and
E. a is a hyponym of b
a b
0 saw a boy1 %ntails 0 saw a child1
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
60/71
or D. G contains an argument a and L
contains an argument b, and
E. b is a hyponym of a
a
0Children are a nuisance.1
b entails
0)oys are a nuisance.1
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
61/71
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
62/71
G is inconsistent with L if G and L are
identical e8cept that
D.G contains a predicate P and L
contains a predicate K
E.P is incompatible with K
%ric2 disli2es wor2. %ric2 li2es wor2.
P K
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
63/71
The rules of entailment and
inconsistency apply cumulati*ely, in
the following ways9
;!=f G entails L and L entails ,then G entails ;i.e. entailment
is a transiti*e relation=
;)=f G entails L and L isinconsistent with , then G is
inconsistent with .
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
64/71
These two supplementary rules may be
illustrated by supposing G,L,and to bethe following9
;!=G9 )oys ran down the street
L9 )oys went down the street 9 Children went down the
street
;)=G9
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
65/71
Tautology arises, roughly spea2ing,
when information contained in anargument of a prediction includes the
information contained in the rest of the
predication.
n a one(place predication, this
means simply that the argument is
hyponymous to the predicate9
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
66/71
; a 9 P =
HM!"
!#$T(M!$% (M!$%
Nwho.$/%. youO
0The woman you lo*e is female1
The argument is hyponymous to the
predicate9
l di i l
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
67/71
n a two(place predication, a tautology
arises where*er a @ualifying predication in
one of its arguments semantically includesthe rest of the main predication.
; a .-%$$. food =
HM!"
M!$%
Nwho.-%$$.meatO
0 ! butcher sells food1
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
68/71
These rules can be stated more precisely in
linear notation9
7ules of tautology9
a= f a is hyponymous to P, ;a9P= is a
tautology9
This boy is male.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
69/71
The third type of de*iation, semantic
anomaly arises when one of thearguments or the predicate of the main
predication is self(contradictory.
This orphans father drin2s hea*ily.
This programme is for themusic(lo*er who disli2es music.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
70/71
Contradiction9
Contradiction arises when the
information contained in an
argument of a predication isincompatible with the information
contained in the predicate.
That man is female.
-
7/24/2019 Chapter 5 Semantics(3)
71/71
n a two(place predication, a
contradiction means the @ualifying
predication is inconsistent with the
rest of the main predication, e.g.
This orphan has a father.