Semantics and
linguistics
Let us now try to place semantics
within linguistics and see what that implies.
semantics is a component or level of linguistics of the same kind as phonetics or
grammar..
•How do linguists view
semantics within
linguistics?
Nearly all linguists have, explicitly or implicitly, accepted a linguistic model in
which semantics is at one 'end' and phonetics at the other, with grammar
somewhere in the middle
(though not necessarily that there are just these three
levels).
•Why is this view “model”
plausible?
Semantics Grammar Phonetics
Channel
Communication Cycle
receiverSender
Message
Feedback
For Communication, we needA Communication
System
Something to communicate
Something to communicate
with
Language
Message
Signs or symbols
The Swiss linguist
Ferdinand de Saussure
De Saussure used the term SIGN to refer to the association of the
signifier and the signified
A problem with terminology
His more recent followers
used SING for the signifier
alone.
•There are so many communication
systems.•They are much simpler
then language.
Examples are
Traffic lights
animals communicate
Gibbons
have a set of calls to indicate • the discovery of food, •danger, • friendly interest, •desire for company, •establishing position
have a set of calls to indicate • the discovery of food, •danger, • friendly interest, •desire for company, •establish position
Language as a system of communication differs from other communication
systems.
First, language does not always have a 'message’
• language is not simply a matter of providing factual information.
(Inter-personal relations)(Social relashionships)
Secondly•Complexity of “signifiers;
and the “signified” in language.
•Complexity of the relation between them.
Thirdly• difficulty
(impossibility), of specifying precisely what the message is.
Example•In the communication system of traffic
wait
“in English”
The message can be independently
identified in terms of language
For languageMeaning (the 'message')
cannot be identified independently of
language.
What is the meaning of
Could you please pass the salt?
Language can only be described in
terms of language.
Language can only be described in
terms of language.
Is semantics “scientific”?
(1)A scientific study should be “empirical”.
(2) Linguistics is defended as:
the 'scientific' study of language.
one essential requirement of a scientific study is that statements made within it must, in principle at least,
be verifiable by observation.
This can easily be applied to “phonetics”
we can observe what is
happening.
•We can listen to a person speaking.
Auditory phonetics
English vowels : 1. / i: /
/ i/:
1 / .i: / e.g. see
spelling:
ee ------see
e ------eve
ei ------receive
ay ------quay
ea ------sea
ie ------field
Close, front ,spread narrow lips and long
•We can describe the operations of the vocal organs
Articulatory phonetics
We can measure precisely the physical characteristics of the
sounds that are emitted.
Accoustic phonetics
there is, unfortunately, no
similar, simple, way of dealing with
semantics.
BUT
Furthermore,
if linguistics is scientific, it must be concerned
not with specific instances, but with
generalisations.
This point was made by two linguists:
Ferdinand de Saussure Avram Noam Chomsky
•Made the distinction betweenFerdinand de Saussure
•Made the distinction between:
Noam Chomsky
PerformanceCompetence
Unconscious knowledge of
possible grammatical
structures in an idealized speaker
Actual production and comprehension of language in
specific instances of
language use
What are they all concerned about?
They are all concerned essentially to exclude what is
purely individual and accidental (speaking or performance),
and to insist that the proper study of linguistics is
language or competence.
How does Palmer differ from de Saussure and Chomsky?
For de Saussure and Chomsky: language or competence is some
kind of idealised system without any clear empirical basis
Palmer prefers to think in terms of generalisations
What does this mean?
Let’s take the example of
“phonetics” again.
The phonetician is not primarily concerned with• the particular sounds • that are made at a particular
time• by a particular person.
What does a phonetician do?S/He studies the pronunciation of
words.To do so, s/he (1) will listen to a number of
individual utterances of the word, and
(2) will make a generalised statement on the basis of these.
What happens at each time a person speaks is not
usually of interest in itself; it is rather part of the
evidence for the generalisations.
How does this relate to
“semantics”The same must be true of semantics.
Recall Lewis Carroll once again
(Through the Looking-Glass):
Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone,
'When I use a word, it means what I choose it to mean - neither more nor
less'.
Semantics is not normally concerned with the
meaning any individual wishes to place on his
words.
An individual's meaning is not part of the general
study of semantics.
However, it is interesting or important for some
purposes to see how and why an individual diverges from the normal pattern.
For example: (1) Literature (2) Psychiatric stdies. (3) Etc
An important noteWhat is the difference
between:
(1) a sentence and(2) an utterance?
This is my bag.
Is this a sentence or an utterance?
The distinction is as follows
An utterance is an event in time:
Produced by someone.At some particular time.
A sentence is (1) An abstract entity that
has no existence in time, but
(2) It is part of the linguistic system of a language.
The distinction is related to
Competence
Performance
and
Competence
Sentences belong to
Utterance belong to
Performance
So; what is semantics concerned with?
Semantics is not concerned with the
meaning of utterances.It is concerned with the
meaning of sentences
What does this imply?• Semantics cannot be
studied without assuming a great deal about
grammar and other aspects of the structure of
language.