Components and meaning
-
Upload
bida-javaid -
Category
Lifestyle
-
view
76 -
download
0
Transcript of Components and meaning
![Page 1: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
![Page 2: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Topic: Components and SentencePredicates and Arguments
![Page 3: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Components and Sentence
There are two types of Components 1) Components of word2) Components of meaning
![Page 4: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Component of meaningThe total meaning of a word being seen in terms of a number of distinct element or Components of meaning.
Example Man Woman ChildBull Cow CalfRam Ewe Lamb
![Page 5: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Katz and Fodor
![Page 6: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Katz and Fodor were two linguistics suggested that we can derive the meaning of the sentence from the meaning of words it contains. For this purpose they proposed set of rules to combine the meaning of individual lexical items. These rules are called Projection rules.
![Page 7: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
What are the
Projection
Rules
![Page 8: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Projection rules stated that what may be amalgamated with what , and in what order in a sentence.
Amalgamation Amalgamation is thus a
combination of the markers and distinguishers.Paths
meanings are called paths, So paths are the structural analysis of meaning.
![Page 9: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
The example chosen by Katz and Fodor as an illustration of application of projection rules is
“The man hit the colorful ball.”
(The man) has only one path.
Colorful ________ an adjective
![Page 10: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Colorful Ball
Path Cannon Ordinary Party
Color Hit
Collision Striking
![Page 11: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
We can combine colorful with ball (physical activity) in this case it is possible. But if we combine this colorful ball with hit then we will see syntactically it is correct but semantically it is wrong.So through this example we can say that components help us to understand the meaning of a sentence. The meaning is thus a human being strikes with an ordinary colorful ball.
![Page 12: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Objection or Problems in Projections Rules
![Page 13: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Cats chase Mice.Mice chase Cats.If we get it as Relational opposite then it gives a same meaning but if we take it as component then it gives the different sense.It is a flaw in it.
![Page 14: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
These seemingly identical sentence have totally different meanings.For Example:My son chased your dog away.Your dog chased my by son away.Mice chase Cats.Cats are chased by the Mice.
It is the first objection.
![Page 15: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Second Objection:Problem arises is that the same component may at time merely provide the environment for amalgamation. At other be part of the derive part.If we take the example of word pregnant then according to projection rules this will occur only in the environment of (female)
![Page 16: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Example:Pregnant Woman
notPregnant Man
But we used to say pregnant horse instead of pregnant mare.
![Page 17: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
So the componential analysis does not provide a simple way of proceeding from the meaning of lexical items to meaning of sentence by a process of the adding together of the components through amalgamation.
Conclusion
![Page 18: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Predicate and
Arguments
![Page 19: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Predicate:
The part of a sentence or clause containing a verb and stating something about the subject.
![Page 20: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Arguments:
Arguments usually indicates noun in a sentence.Example:
John loves Mary.
Arg Pre Arg
![Page 21: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Predicates and Arguments In a sentence the verb is often best seen as a relational feature. So Relational terms seems to offer a far more satisfactory solutions to the problem of sentence meaning than the componential analysis.If we take the example of open sentences walk, love and give then the symbolic representation of these sentences areW(x), L(x,y) and G(x,y,z).in term of one, two,and three place predicate.
![Page 22: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
For Examples:
Fried thinks that John loves Mary.
Predicate ( Think )
It has two arguments.
Think
Fred [ John loves Mary] Proposition
![Page 23: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
The structure of this sentence can be given as
[ Think ] (x, ([ Love ] ( y, z )))
Where the round brackets show that ( [ Love ] ( x, z )
Is a single element and like ( x ) is one of the argument of [ Think ].
![Page 24: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Predicate calculus provides a simple method of dealing with what is known in grammar as SUBORDNATION by allowing a proposition to function as an argument
In these examples the semantic interpretation has not been very different from that suggested by the Syntax of the sentence, But it is possible to break proposition down into far more basic elements than those indicated by the actual words of the sentence.
Bill gave Harry a book.[ Give ] ( x,y,z)
Example:
![Page 25: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
But we can interpret this sentence as
Bill caused harry to have a book.
The formula can be
[( cause ] ( x, ([ Have ] ( y,z )))
Where the arguments of [ cause ] are ( x )
( Bill ) and [ Have ] ( y,z )
( Harry have a book.)
Example:
![Page 26: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
KillSimilarly we might treat
Casue to dieCause to be
come not alive
![Page 27: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
John killed the Mary.
then would become
[ cause ] ( x, ([ Become ] ( y, ( [ - Alive ] ( y ))))).
Example:
John caused Mary become Mary not alive. This sentence can also be represent by tree diagram.
![Page 28: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Prop
Pred Arg Arg
Cause John Prop
Pred Arg Arg
Become Mary Prop
Pred Arg
Alive Mary
![Page 29: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
It is a mistake, however, to confuse such a semantic representation with the syntax of a sentence. In particular
John killed Mary is not identical with john cause Mary to become alive.
It can only be identical if we say on Thursday john cause Mary to become not alive on Saturday.
The difference lies in the temporal marking of the Predicate and if there is only one verb in the original sentence. They can not be more than one time indication.
![Page 30: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
As a means of showing sentence meaning (if we can restrict meaning to propositional or cognitive meaning), some kind of predicate calculus seems to be the most satisfactory. It allows us to move from word to sentence in that the formula for each word will usually form part of the whole sentence formula - though it will often be more than a single predicate or argument - as we have seen for give and kill. But it is equally clear that it will be far more complex than has so far been suggested.
Conclusion
![Page 31: Components and meaning](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062513/5564a2afd8b42afd4f8b518e/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)