WEEK ONE Linguistics the scientific (methodologically; within some theoretical framework) study of language; both theory and

d methodology; language belongs to a community of people; constant presence of interest in language (philology main focus on phonology and morphology)

Semantics technical term used to refer to the scientific study of meaning; where do we find meaning?; relation between signs and the things to which they refer; theoretical implications on how to deal with meaning; morphemes, words, phrases, sentences, discourse

Levels of analysis involved in the study of meaning:

phonetics Phonology Morphology Syntax Lexis

semantics

phonetics articulatory, acoustic, psycho-acoustic, more concerned with the voice and sound than language phonology important for semantics = connected with meaning if you change a phoneme, you change meaning morphology lexical and grammatical morphemes; all morphemes have meaning, bound and unbound morphemes syntax carries grammatical meaning in English;meaning: word order (position carries meaning); major role in defining the meaning lexis lexemes (words): meaning of individual units of language, lexis and semantics partially overlap MEANING: relationship between language, world, mind and intentions embedded in CONCEPTS: knowledge, communication, using and understanding linguistic units

Ferdinand de Saussure, 1916. Course in General Linguistics major turn in linguistics, radical changes Karl Reisig German scholar, philologist and linguist, published a book on Latin verbs in 1839, chapter on semasiology (=semantics) the meaning of a verb is crucial for understanding of a sentence Michel Breal French scholar, first coined the term semantique in 1883 (from Greek Semainen to mean, to signify), published: Essai de semantique in 1897. the book was translated into English in 1900 (Semantics: studies in the science of meaning) Ogden and Richards published a book called The Meaning of Meaning in 1923, analytical rigour point: semantics must become scientific through analytical rigour: key role for science, any analysis must be analytically rigorous, theory + methodology, rigorous in all procedures; triggering the scientific approach on meaning - semiotics vs semantics signs in general linguistic signs (narrows it down) - 22 definitions of meaning intrinsic property; combination of a word - stressing 2 aspects of meaning: 1

1) crucial to communication 2) central to the study of the human mind (thought processes, conception, cognition) - theories in semantics: MENTALISTIC (people have mental images) ANTIMENTALISTIC (everyone thinks of sth different) eg. dog - certain conceptual features connect all dogs that all speakers of a community have SHARED / MUTUAL KNOWLEDGE (culturally and socially based different between languages) - influenced by environment and culture - eg. Eskimos have different words for snow their life depends on different kinds of white - eg. English uncle, Croatian. stric, ujak highly developed vocabulary for family relations: ancient Slavs lived in huge families; there werent any first or last names: 1. family relations 2. first names 3. first names then became last names - concepts and mental images change over time - O. and R. introduced the 2 main pillars on which the scientific approach of meaning rests today; communication and human mind important

Semantics and other related disciplines: Etymology the study of the history of words, how their form and meaning changed over time, where a word came from; diachronic analysis (historic research) vs. synchronic Lexicology the branch of linguistics that studies words, their nature and meaning, relations between words and the whole lexicon, lexical component of language; deals with morphology of lexemes/words both morphological and semantic point of view Lexicography the writing of dictionaries (Alexandrian school they founded it): monolingual, bilingual, encyclopedic (Websters) and conceptual (stylistically marked) dictionaries ; pragmatic side of lexicology Stylistics the study and interpretation of text from a linguistics perspective, it usually deals with literature; started in 1970 in UK/USA as discourse analysis, in continental Europe it was called text analysis; it dealt with both spoken and written language; eg. Internet language, the return of aorist in Croatian Terms in traditional semantics: Lexeme: Lexemes are vocabulary words (connected to the written language in Eur. Tradition) which may take on different forms depending on the context they find themselves in. Cruse 1986 family of lexical units, pairing of a meaning and a form (de Saussure) - all meanings of one word (eg run trati, kandidirati, idi...) word comprised of phonemes, one word can have many meaning; all the meanings are lexemes of a word; center around lexemes rather than words! 2

He ran across the road. central / basic meaning The car is running well. He runs the motorshow. metaphorical meanings He runs for Hampshire.

Types of mening: 1) Primary (conceptual) meaning - central factor in linguistic communication; encompasses all the essential knowledge necessary in order to use or understand (this implies communication)a certain form correctly; concepts and meaning change with time, in a very rapid way; knowledge is relative; it is often culturally based Secondary types of meaning (derived kinds of meaning) - in different contexts can have different connotations 2) Stylistic meaning (most frequent): what is communicated of the social circumstances of language use - social/dialectic, archaic, scientific, slang - one concept, but different words in language for it stylistic meaning - same phenomenon in different types of vocabulary - perception of the world around us (cultural element) language tied to the perception of the world around us

horse steed nag gee-gee home domicile residence abode

general poetic slang baby talk general very formal, official formal poetic

throw general cast literary, biblical chuck casual, slang

tiny diminutive wee

colloquial very formal colloquial, dialectal

3) Affective meaning: what is communicated of the feeling and attitudes of the speaker/writer - speaker expresses this with intonation (also body language) - eg. Youre a vicious tyrant and I hate you. angry or loving - in spoken language utterance; in written language sentence - language extremely complex phenomenon (no clear boundaries) - things can be used in a combination of stylistic and affective meaning - all divisions inflicted by linguists 4) Reflected meaning: what is communicated through association with another sense of the same expression - sense structural term for meaning of a lexeme The Comforter vs The Holy Ghost - the notion comes from everyday life

Taboo words: reflect meanings that are not socially accepted and are generally avoided: intercourse originally: communication, but stylistically marked (formal) sexual terminology - dominant erection - building ejaculation to throw sth out - not excepted by society or soc. groups; things avoided in certain contexts (in some contexts can be used normally); sexual terms differ from age to age and culture to culture eg. sex not a taboo anymore in Victorian period: leg taboo 5) Collocative meaning: what is communicated through association with words which tend to occur in the environment of another word pretty girl, boy, woman, flower, garden, village, color etc. handsome boy, man, car, vessel, overcoat, airliner, typewriter, woman Snarl words (they are very rare): words whose conceptual meaning becomes irrelevant because whoever is using them is capitalizing on their unfavorable connotations in order to give forceful expression to his own hostility = insults, derogatory terms (conceptual and affective meaning) nigger -> African-American boy disabled, handicapped physically/mentally challenged Euphemisms: Greek well-speaking; the practice of referring to something offensive or indelicate in terms that make it sound more pleasant or becoming than it really is (in opposition to taboo words), a way of being politically correct, fundamentally cultural, conceptual meaning rarely comes on its own, meaning is determined by the use in society or culture (world view!) disease, indisposition (used in Victorian era) for illness privy, water-closet (Croatian imported the acronym), toilet, cloakroom, rest room, comfort station, loo, bathroom for lavatory AmE is more conservative than BrE in such examples! countries that are not backward or undeveloped, but developing, less developed, emergent nations, third world nations etc. -> political correctness conceptual meaning rarely comes on its own, its determined by the actual use in a society and culture (world view)

WEEK TWO Functions of language: 1. Informational function a. connected to conceptual meaning (concept. meaning predominant in the use of language) b. languages convey information c. basic, most important d. focused on the subject matter of a communicative situation

2. Expressive function swear words a. related to affective meaning b. how writers/speakers express their feelings, attitudes c. can be expressed by snarl words, swear words (cultural dimension) d. language used to express its originators (speakers) feelings and attitudes

3. Directive function aimed at influencing/directing others; demands and requests polite forms, indirect ways of saying things (Im hungry instead of Give me some food), politeness forms, speech arts (pragmatics), they are culturally marked; imperative used only with close friends and family members 4. Aesthetic function a. use of language for the sake of linguistic artifact itself b. when language is used in order to achieve aesthetic effect c. poetry, literature

5. Phatic function (phatic communication) Bronislaw Malinovski (Cambridge, born Polish) cultural anthropologist/ethnologist (1910-15): how language works: - field work vs armchair work he spent several years on an island in the Pacific, work has to be done in the field - shift in anthropology: you had to do field work - language is used for keeping up good social relationships, communicative lines are an empty discourse (its purpose isnt only to give information); avoidance of silence (awkward!), communication has a many layered social and cultural function A: Hi! B: Hi! A: Warm enough for you? B: Sure is. Looks like rain though. A: Well, take care. B: Ill be seeing you. A: So long. B: So long. Saussurean dichotomies de Saussure never dealt with semantics, he was the father of European structuralism everything in language is a system/structure or a part of it, things in semantics go back to ancient Greek

1. langue vs. parole dialectic relationship; its not the same as competence and performance! langue is a technical term for language as a system/structure parole is the actual utterance/production of a language LANGAGE the entirety of language: system + production; the totality of linguistic phenomena (langue + parole)

2. the linguistic sign: basic unit of communication FORM signifier (the word tree) oznaitelj CONTENT signified (the mental image of a tree) - oznaeno

dialectic relationship 5

= 1) mentalistic approach to language (early European structuralism) psychological reality, psychological validity that is stored in human mind; content implies a mentalistic approach to language = 2) language has a strong social character; the Prague School (Prague linguistic circle)- it existed during 1928-39. and developed methods of structural literary analysis Roman Jakobson (born Russian) was a member of the circle, emigrated into the States and there influenced the development of US thought on this subject 3. diachronical vs. synchronical research philology doesnt need theory, but linguistics is based on the idea of structure diachronical r. historical approach, a series of synchronical research synchronical r. research at one point in time, not necessarily contemporary

4. syntagmatic vs. paradigmatic level of language organization syntagmatic units which contrast in combination with other units of the same level (collocations, sentences, etc.) PAROLE sequence of units that we combine under certain rules sequence of units on syntagmatic level the linear organization of language (implies the sentence) paradigmatic > LOUNGE units that can be substituted one for another on the syntagmatic level, dictated by the rules of the system Leonard Bloomfield American linguist, published a textbook Language in 1933, his approach to linguistics was influenced by behaviorism (Ivan Pavlov and B.F. Skinner), there was a chapter about meaning in his book it cannot be analyzed until other sciences provide definitions: NaCl sodium chloride -> he practically killed semantics for 40ish years until Noam Chomsky emerged HOMONYMY - etymology defines them; the same sequence of phonemes one form but different meanings: meanings are not related in any way! bank1 financial institution bank2 bank of a river absolute homonymy ABSOLUTE vs. PARTIAL homonymy Absolute homonymy: two words are not related in meaning, and they have to conform to the following three criteria: 1. their forms must be unrelated in meaning 2. all their forms must be identical (the same word class!) 3. identical forms must be syntactically equivalent sole1 bottom surface of foot/shoe sole2 flat fish = certain relatedness in modern English (metaphorical connection), but their etymology differs bat1 a small animal bat2 a wooden stich = words arent related even metaphorically, different etymology in both cases they are put in dictionaries as separated entries 6

sole vs soul homophony

Partial homonymy ex. sharing a grammatical category find (nadi) vs. found (osnovati) the same form of past simple They found hospitals and charitable institutions. one of them sounds a bit weird in this context The bell was rung at midnight. A rung of the ladder was broken. different word classes POLYSEMY - usually called multiple meaning, i.e. single word (form) with several meanings neck: part of the body, of a bottle, of a shirt, a narrow piece of land (between a lake and the sea) - the meanings are related according to the principle called metaphorical extension these four lexemes show a relatedness in meaning foot: part of the body, of a mountain/hill - in dictionaries we find such words under one/the same entry; the similarity they show can be analyzed through popular etymology (folk) -> synchronic point of view (now!) or through etymology of the word/s diachronic (historical) research/development - in dictionaries polysemous senses are usually listed under the same lexical entry, while homonymous senses are given separate entries!

SYNONYMY - even Plato and Aristotle talked about it traditional definitions: expression with the same meaning; one meaning but different forms absolute (istoznanice) vs. partial (bliskoznanice) synonymy

ljekarna/apoteka, muzika/glazba the same meaning, but different usage (depending on the style) THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTE SYNONYMS language economy doesnt allow them, they are impossible in Anglo-Saxon world/tradition, but they may occur in some points in time, but only shortly Criteria for what would be absolute synonyms 1. Synonyms are fully synonymous if and only if all their meanings are identical. 2. Synonyms are totally synonymous if and only if they are synonymous in all contexts. 3. Synonyms are completely synonyms if and only if they are indentical in all relevant dimensions of meaning (=style, dialect) e.g. radio vs. wireless wireless absolute synonyms only in AusE (Outback); in was used extensively until WW2 it was predominately used, whereas radio was rarely used; today its archaic airfield (basic strip of land) vs airport (includes stores, shops etc.) vs aerodrome (military jargon, rather formal) pneumonia vs. inflammation of the lungs (descriptive synonymy) 7

synonyms may be collocationally restricted: a big house vs. large house my big sister vs. my large sister flaw in an argument blemish similar, but related to different aspect of reality (skin?) defect car (machines), physical LANGUAGE ECONOMY limitations in languages language meaning: - dynamic - open-ended - fast-changing 2 linguistic traditions

Anglo-Am. tradition absolute synonymy impossible Slavic tradition: istoznanice vs. bliskoznanice (absolute syn.) ljekarna ~ apoteka, muzika ~ glazba, zemljopis ~ geografija (stylistic) - contextual difference, but important what they depict

WEEK THREE Is Semantics scientific? traditional semantics (focuses on pure observation, prescientific) vs. scientific semantic theories Can semantics be regarded as science? - fundamental things are 1) subject of study 2) methodology the way in which you obtain results, we should always be able to test the theory, if not it may lead to falsifiable semantics science can be EMPIRICAL (research on concrete data): empirical implies that you are dealing with a certain subject matter not on the basis of speculation and intuition but are operating with publicly verifiable data obtained by observation and experiment

4 requirements (criteria) that we could call the ideal for a theory of language 1) EXPLICITNESS (self-evident) 2) OBJECTIVITY question of objectivity when it comes to languages and linguistics 3) SIMPLICITY OF EXPLANATION theory should be easy to explain 4) COMPLETENESS OF DESCTIPTION complete theory for all the date we acquired, its hard to achieve it, its the ideal The contextual view of meaning two types of context (observable context), early 20th c. 1) immediate linguistic context (John is my ally) 2) context of situation we can fully understand the context only from the whole situation 8

This idea of contextualism was developed by J. R. Firth in 1930. British psychologist: You shall know a word by the company it keeps (from Malinovski) L. Bloomfield (OPET!) continued Firths work; behaviourism; meaning was observable in context supported the contextual view (situation in which the speaker utters sth and the response of the hearer)behavior can be scientifically explained; he considered language behavior; internal psychological processes cant be observed not important for science B.F. Skinner - published Verbal Behaviour in 1957. -> famous N. Chomskys review of this book: new theory linguistic competence (contextualism is simple-minded); too narrow to explain what meaning is; relation of meaning and context indirect; everything is context (language also observe in context; reinforcement; conditioning)

How do we deal with context? - recent work in semantic has returned to mentalism (meaning is a mental phenomenon) against which Firth, Bloomfield and their contemporaries reacted - in spite of criticism, context is an important factor in communication - meaning is often predictable by context (and background knowledge): SPLASH! UPSIDE DOWN! ITS OFF! JANET! DONKEYS! - context narrows down the communicative possibilities of the message as it exists ina abstraction from context; this takes place in following ways: 1) context eliminates ambiguities or multiple meanings (ex. page boy attendant vs. a piece of paper) 2) context indicates referents of certain words we call DEICTIC words, ex. here, there, this, that, now, then; hrv. evo, eto, eno, taj, ovaj, onaj; other expressions of definite meaning, ex. him (pers. pronoun), John, it 3) context supplies information which the speaker had omitted through ELLIPSIS: MEANING knowledge of language + knowledge of the world Mentalism and Intuition -mentalism any scientific attempt which relies on introspection, an alternative to contextualism - intuition basis of any analysis of meaning N.Chomsky data (viable linguistic data) can be supplied by direct resort to intuition (the native speaker) Cognitive linguistics: knowledge of language + knowledge of the world ->cultural and physical environments determine our concepts -knowledge of the world is intuitive, non-scientific, we share the same concepts (mental images)

Triangles of meaning 1) C.K. Odgen and I.A. Richards The Meaning of Meaning (1923) THOUGHT or REFERENCE mental image/concept in our mind of the referent SYMBOL lexeme, i.e. a word REFERENT extralinguistic reality, the (actual) thing in question - the relationship between SYMBOL and REFERENT is indirect arbitrary and conventional, there is no reason to call something with a particular name - the relationship between THOUGHT and REFERENCE key relationship, direct relation - the main flaw of this triangle was bad terminology because referent/thought is a too wide term

2) Stephen Ollmann , 1972 - an attempt to prove the faulty terminology of his predecessor again it wasnt scientific enough SENSE key term, its a better term than referent, but again used in too many contexts to be appropriate for such usage NAME THING too concrete, what about abstract ideas and feelings - relations between them are the same as in the first triangle (valjda)

10

3) ic-Fux 1991 - terminology was improved lexical CONCEPT LEXEME DENOTATUM Latin term, better than thing, more abstract and its that that is signified; the actual object referred to by a linguistic expression

- meaning is the relationship between our knowledge of the language and the knowledge of the world

WEEK FOUR COMPONENTIAL ANALYSIS = traditional semantics -we learn words through the relationship they have one to another -comp.an is breaking down words to the meaning of smallest lexemes that are semantically related -definition: the analysis of word meanings is often seen as a process of breaking down the sense of a word into its minimal distinctive features, i.e. into components which contrast with other components -intuition is important, started off in 1930s; comparison of lexemes that belong to the same linguistic field, the feature itself can be further broken down into components -concepts are relative in nature, the component itself can be broken down itself -> how tall is tall? -some concepts are not fully explanatory In dictionaries we have informal c.a. - 30s of the 20th ct, simultaneously in USA and Europe:

Am. structuralism compon. analysis = method (anthropology - origin) Eu. structuralism theory of the moment:
compon. analysis = theory: description + explanation basic premise: number of components is universal how many components are necessary, are all of them adequate? 11

man woman boy girl

+human +human +human +human

+adult +adult -adult -adult

+male -male +male -male

human basic element, common feature; adult where is the line drawn, at what age?, male arbitrary feature => are only 3 elements enough? In the 60s of the 20th century-linguists strived for a better way of applying componential analysis as a method.

Bernard Pottier, French linguist, 1964 example of various things to sit on S1 + + + S2 + + + + + S3 + + + + S4 + + + + + S5 + + S6 + + + + -

chair armchair stool sofa pouffe

S1 with a back S2 raised above the ground S3 for one person S4 to sit in or on S5 with arms S6 with solid material - the table is based on oppositions, but some make no sense: S4 it doesnt help to differentiate items; he didnt take into account the relevance of criteria - concepts are relative, they depend on our perceptions, culturally related/based, physical environment determines them -> all this is traditional componential analysis successful to a point, but not completely! - it can explain only semantically related lexemes, it cannot be applied to only one thing Generic (unmarked) vs. marked terms - generic terms are semantically unmarked and they are far more frequent, they have to have a wider context to be specific - generic terms are either on the male or female side: MAN woman DOG bitch WOLF shewolf COW - duck DUCK - drake CAT tomcat

- all the generic terms, so to say, have zero value (they do not focus on the sex): professor, child, doctor J. Lyons: componential analysis leaves unexplained at least much as it succeeds in explaining - present (comp an) today, but its very different -> contemporary compon. analy. meaning of a lexeme is an unlimited list (explains as much as it doesnt)

12

Relations between related meanings of different terms - they are still valid; 1979. Eugene Neider 4 basic types of relation/related meaning 1) INCLUSION - in many instances the meaning of one word may be said to be included within the meaning of another = similar to taxonomy (animals); superordinate subordinate relations; it has restriction in membership

2) OVERLAPPING - they are not identical in meaning but they do overlap in that they can be substituted one for the other in at least certain contexts without significant changes in the conceptual concept of an utterance = sometime, not in all context; it can be slight or almost complete (=synonyms)

give - generic term, used in all contexts vs. bestow sb of a higher rank bestows sth to a person of a lower rank; marked register possess diamond, house, property vs. own property, car, house, company ill vs. sick answer oral, by telephone vs. reply written form get vs. receive vs. acquire overlap can occur between more than two words, as long as they share the same basic conceptual concept in some contexts

13

3) COMPLEMENTATION - meanings complementary to each other involve a number of shared features of meaning but show marked contrast and often opposite meaning (antonyms); the same event from a different point of view - wider conceptual frame (ODNOSI SE NA CRTE)

good bad; high low; beautiful ugly; buy sell; lend (to) borrow (from) 4) CONTIGUITY - these relations can be found between closely related meanings occupying a well-defined, restricted semantic domain and exhibiting certain well marked contrasts - e.g. colors: related, but show contrast (different restricted semantic domain) blue, red, yellow - or verbs of movement: walk, jump, hop

1975. meaning of verbs of movement vidi handout William Labov? cups n shit, definitions that an average speaker cannot understand! Anna Wierzbicka methodological introspection, definition and its simplicity, refined Labovs cups/mugs description/difference with stuff the people would/could say about them -> contemporary componential analysis

14