Linguística Inglesa III - Semester 4 Study Guide: Semantics and Pragmatics

Core Concepts of Semantics and Pragmatics

• Semantics

  • Definition: The study of the literal meaning of language.

  • Nature: Words are taken in abstract terms, as part of a dictionary.

  • Focus: Semantic analysis is formal and ideational.

  • Central Question: "What does x mean?".

  • Domain: Focuses on the sentence, which is an abstract grammatical construction.

• Pragmatics

  • Definition: The study of contextual meaning.

  • Nature: Words are taken in concrete, non-literal terms as part of a specific situation.

  • Focus: Pragmatic analysis is functional and interpersonal.

  • Central Question: "What does y mean by x?".

  • Domain: Focuses on the utterance, which is a concrete event or action.

• Accounts of Meaning

  • Ideational Account: Giving the meaning of a word by paraphrasing it or using other words to explain it. Example: "Blue is the color of the sky."

  • Referential Account: Giving meaning by pointing at an object that exemplifies the word. Example: "That color is blue."

• Context Components: Includes the speakers, the place, the time, and the conventions of the situation.

Semantic Dichotomies

• Sense vs. Reference

  • Sense:

    • A set of features all objects of a category possess.

    • It is constant.

    • Example (Cow): Contains features like female ($[- \text{male}]$), cattle ($[- \text{human}]$), 2 horns, and providing milk.

    • Example (Man): Contains features like $[+ \text{human}]$, $[+ \text{male}]$, and $[+ \text{rational}]$.

    • Example (Teacher of English Linguistics III): Defined as the person in charge of the semantics/pragmatics course.

  • Reference:

    • The actual example of the object in the real world.

    • It is changeable and depends on the specific case.

    • Example (Turina): Specific qualities like being white with black patches.

    • Example (Proper Names): Miguel, João, Daniel, Henrique, Tiago.

    • Example (Teachers): Isabel Ermida, Anabela Rato, Jaime Costa.

• Connotation vs. Denotation

  • Connotation:

    • The set of properties (features/characteristics) implied by a word.

    • The prototypical idea or matrix/model a word projects.

    • Example (House): Prototypical features include having walls, a roof, a door, windows, a kitchen, a bathroom, and a bedroom.

  • Denotation:

    • The set of all examples that instantiate or represent a word.

    • Includes non-prototypical examples, such as an igloo.

    • Example (House): Includes the PM’s house, Obama’s house, or Buckingham Palace.

• Intension vs. Extension

  • Intension:

    • The set of properties which all objects in a category share.

    • Example (Girl): $[+ \text{human}]$, $[- \text{male}]$, $[- \text{adult}]$.

  • Extension:

    • The set of all actual examples (individuals or objects) the word applies to.

    • Example (Girl): Every individual girl existing in the real world.

  • Relationship between the two:

    • An ideational/connotative answer provides sense/intension (e.g., "The monarch of England is the person with supreme power," which is constant).

    • A referential/denotative answer provides reference/extension (e.g., "Elizabeth I," which is changeable).

  • Exceptions:

    • Words with sense but no reference: Santa Claus, Cinderella.

    • Objects with reference but no sense: New planets or new species for which features haven't been defined.

    • Intension and extension do not always coincide.

The Law of Substitution and Opaque Contexts

• Law of Substitution (Leibniz): "If two expressions are denotationally (referentially) equivalent, one can be substituted for another salve veritate (with truth unchanged)."

• Opaque Contexts (Referential Opacity):

  • Contexts where words are not transparent, and the Law of Substitution fails.

  • Gottlob Frege (1848) in "On Sense and Reference" noted that one reference (a star) can have two senses (morning star and evening star).

  • Example: Aristotle (one reference) corresponds to multiple senses: a Greek philosopher, a thinker born in Stagira, a pupil of Plato, a teacher of Alexander the Great.

  • Application Examples:

    • Transparent Context: "Charles Dickens lived in the 19th-century" ($T$) and "The author of Oliver Twist lived in the 19th-century" ($T$). Substitution works.

    • Propositional Attitudes (Beliefs, Hopes, Feelings):

      • Beliefs: "Tiago thinks Cameron Diaz is lovely" ($T$) vs. "Tiago thinks that the blond Charlie’s angel is lovely" ($?$). In Tiago's mind, they may not be the same entity.

      • Hopes: "Sara hopes that Prof. Ermida will not be her teacher again" ($T$) vs. "Sara hopes that Bé will not be her teacher again" ($?$).

      • Feelings: "Andreia likes Edgar A. P." ($T$) vs. "Andreia likes the author of 'The Raven'" ($?$); "Mónica hates Justin Bieber" ($T$) vs. "Mónica hates the singer of 'Baby'" ($?$).

    • Reported Speech: "Ana said that Heidi Klum is a good model" ($T$) vs. "Ana said that Seal’s ex-wife is a good model" ($?$). One cannot safely attribute specific wording to another speaker.

Use vs. Mention

• Use: Words are taken as an extralinguistic reality, referring to existing objects in the real world.

  • Example: "Writers are often troubled people."

  • Example: "Gladys has a nice name."

• Mention: Words are taken materially as linguistic entities. This is a metalinguistic view used in grammar, lexicography, and stylistics.

  • Example: "'Writers' rhymes with 'lighters'."

  • Example: "'Gladys' is a nice name."

Structural Semantics: Sense Relations

• Oppositeness of Meaning (Contrast/Horizontal Relationships)

  • Gradable Antonyms:

    • Examples: hot/cold, strong/weak, intelligent/stupid.

    • Allow comparison and have degrees.

    • Have extremes and in-between cases.

    • Can be "both/and" (not either/or strictly).

    • Give rise to contrary propositions: they cannot both be true simultaneously, but both can be false (e.g., "My coffee is boiling/freezing").

  • Ungradable (Binary) Antonyms:

    • Examples: dead/alive, in/out, hit/miss, pass/fail, male/female.

    • Do not take intermediate terms; strictly "either/or".

    • Give rise to contradictory propositions: they cannot be both true and cannot be both false at the same time.

• Directional/Antipodal Opposition

  • Motion-based (towards/away): come/go, arrive/depart, go up/go down.

  • Location-based: here/there, left/right, front/back.

  • Deixis: The position of the subject in relation to another person or object.

• Non-Binary Contrast

  • Scales: excellent ($+\text{extreme}$) — good — fair — poor — bad — atrocious ($-\text{extreme}$).

  • Cycles: Periods of time like the days of the week (Sun, Mon, Tue, etc.).

• Hierarchy/Vertical Relationships

  • Hyperonymy vs. Hyponymy:

    • Hyperonym: The inclusive term (e.g., Flower, Virtue, Colour, Living being).

    • Hyponym: The specific instance (e.g., Rose is a hyponym of Flower).

    • Inclusivity:

      • Hyperonyms are more inclusive in terms of extension (e.g., "Bird" covers all birds in the world).

      • Hyponyms are more inclusive in terms of intension (e.g., "Penguin" requires far more descriptive features than just "Bird").

    • Rules:

      • Unilateral implication: "John bought a Volvo" entails "John bought a car," but not vice versa.

      • Transitivity: If $x$ is a hyponym of $y$ and $y$ is a hyponym of $z$, then $x$ is a hyponym of $z$.

      • Modification: Hyponymy often involves the sense of the hyperonym plus an adjective/adverb modification.

      • Co-hyponyms: Hyponyms within the same category contrast with one another.

• Meronymy (Part/Whole Relations):

  • Describes parts of a whole (e.g., Toe $\rightarrow$ Foot $\rightarrow$ Leg).

  • Lack of Transitivity: You cannot skip levels (e.g., "The toe of the foot" is correct, but "The toe of the leg" is lexicaly incorrect).

Logical Semantics

• Propositional Logic

  • Involves calculating the truth-value of compound sentences based on individual propositions.

  • Proposition: The content of a thought (Frege) or what is expressed by a declarative sentence making a statement (Lyons).

  • Variables: Letters ($p$, $q$, $r$, $s$) representing propositions.

  • Constants: Symbols representing fixed logical operations.

• Logical Operations and Truth Tables

  • Conjunction ($\land$ or $\cap$): Represented by words like "and", "but".

    • True only if both propositions are true.

    • $p=T, q=T \nrightarrow \ulcorner p \land q \urcorner = T$

    • $p=T, q=F \nrightarrow \ulcorner p \land q \urcorner = F$

  • Negation ($\sim$): Represented by "not".

    • $p=T \nrightarrow \ulcorner \sim p \urcorner = F$

    • Double negation: $\ulcorner \sim \sim p \urcorner = p$

  • Disjunction ($\lor$ or $\cup$): Represented by "or".

    • Inclusive ($\lor$): Admit possibility of both being true. True unless both are false.

    • Exclusive ($\veebar$): Admit only one to be true. False if both are true or both are false.

  • Condition/Implication ($\supset$ or $\rightarrow$): Represented by "if".

    • False only if the antecedent ($p$) is true and the consequent ($q$) is false.

    • Counterfactuals/Possible Worlds: In contexts like "If you date Brad Pitt, then I'm Santa Claus," anything goes as true if based on a false premise.

  • Bi-condition/Equivalence ($\equiv$ or "iff"): Represented by "if and only if".

    • True only when both propositions have the same truth-value.

Presupposition

• Logical/Semantic Presupposition

  • Information preserved under negation (the negation test).

  • Example: "Chicago is where Tom met Sally." negated becomes "Chicago is not where Tom met Sally." The stable content is "Tom met Sally."

  • Presupposition Triggers:

    1. Factive Predicates: Surprised, remarkable, resented, annoys, shocked. (Trigger: the fact following happened).

    2. Definite Names/Relative Constructions: John called (Trigger: John exists); "the puppy she found" (Trigger: Mary found a puppy).

    3. Cleft Sentences: "It was John who caught the thief" (Trigger: Someone caught the thief).

    4. Selectional Restrictions: Magrid is surprised (Trigger: Magrid is animate/intelligent).

    5. Temporal Subordinate Clauses: before/after/when Mary called (Trigger: Mary called).

    6. Nonrestrictive Relatives: "The Tiv, who respected Bohannon…" (Trigger: The Tiv respected Bohannon).

    7. Aspectuals: quit, continued, resumed (Trigger: Action was previously happening).

    8. Iteratives: again, another, return (Trigger: Action happened before).

    9. Presuppositional Qualifiers: only, everyone but (Trigger: specific individual involvement).

• Pragmatic Presupposition

  • Culturally and socially defined conditions for a successful utterance.

  • Factors: Relationship between participants, age, gender, class, physical context (presence of objects like a watch for "Could you tell me the time?"), place, and time.

Speech Act Theory

• Core Concepts

  • Developed by J. L. Austin (1962) and John Searle (1969).

  • The idea that we "do things with words" (performative utterances).

  • Performative Formula: A verb typically in the 1st person, singular, present, indicative, and active (e.g., "I promise," "I authorize").

  • Descriptive Fallacy: The wrong idea that the only purpose of language is to describe reality; language also warns, requests, and criticizes.

• Three Layers of a Speech Act

  1. Locutionary: What is literally said (the phonic and propositional act).

  2. Illocutionary: The intended communication/purpose (e.g., suggesting, ordering).

  3. Perlocutionary: The effect on the hearer (e.g., persuading, alarming, annoying).

• Conditions

  • Felicity Conditions: Requirements for an act to be carried out properly (e.g., a promise must involve something positive for the hearer).

  • Sincerity Conditions: Requirements for an act to be carried out sincerely (e.g., the speaker must intend to fulfill a promise).

• Classes of Illocutionary Acts

  1. Verdictives: Expressing a verdict or finding (e.g., estimate, diagnose, assess).

  2. Exercitives/Directives: Exercising power/influence (e.g., order, fine, warn).

  3. Commissives: Committing the speaker to action (e.g., promise, bet, plan).

  4. Behabitives: Expressing feelings toward behavior (e.g., thank, apologize, criticize).

  5. Expositives: Aiding the course of conversation (e.g., state, explain, illustrate).

Conversational Theory

• Paul Grice's Cooperative Principle (1957)

  • Principle: Every speaker should be as helpful to the hearer as possible according to social conventions.

  • The Four Maxims:

    1. Quantity: Give exactly the required amount of information.

    2. Quality: Tell the truth.

    3. Relevance/Relation: Be relevant to the topic.

    4. Manner: Be clear, brief, and unambiguous.

• Implicatures

  • Occur when a speaker is cooperative but cannot follow the maxims for strategic reasons.

  • Distinguishes between Entailment (Semantics/Truth-based) and Implicature (Pragmatics/Cooperativeness-based).