هليب مي سيمانتكس

[AL-anood sh]

الي خذا مادة السيمانتكس يشرح لي كيف اذاكراها مو عارفه كيف احس المادة سهلة بس مو فاهمته


book; semantics by palmar

[P e a c e]

بشكل عام

السيمانتيك هو معنى الكلام الظاهري

أما البراغماتيك فهو المقصد من الكلام

مثلا لما أقول لك: الجو بارد برى

هنا المعنى الظاهري للكلام semantically أن الجو بارد أو درجة الحرارة خارجا منخفضة

لكن المقصد من كلامي pragmatically إلبسي لك شي يدفيك

--------

وهناك أشياء كثيرة في هذي المادة, مثل antonyms, synonyms, syntagmatic relations, paradigmatic relations وأشياء أخرى

فإذا عندك شي محدد تفضلي وإن شاء الله نقدر نساعدك

[AL-anood sh]

الماده سهله لكن الكتاب مو قادره افهمه ولا عارفه كيف اذاكره :(


semantics: relatively new term - French semantique is from 1893, coined from Greek by M. Breal's in 1893. The following year, the word was first used in English, in a paper read at the American Philological association in 1894. In both cases, the term was used to refer to the historical development of meaning rather than meaning per se.
M. Breal's 1897 (french) book, tr. 1900 as Semantics: studies in the science of meaning - is a superb little book (now neglected), which treated semantics as the 'science' of meaning, and was not primarily concerned with diachronic change. Yet the term did not catch on. The famous 1923 book by Ogden and Richards, The meaning of meaning, never uses the term, though it appears in an appendix by Malinowski. HG Wells used "significs" in The shape of things, others used semiotics or semiology.
At the same time, popular writing often uses semantics pejoratively - "Semantic manoeuvres at the Pentagon" refers to mobile manoeuvre being used to imply retreat. Similarly, "homelessness reduced to semantics" --> too narrow and interpretation of h.
A true story: An eminent US linguist [HL Mencken] wasasked by a strip-tease dancer to find an alternative for the wordstrip-tease. "I hope that the science of semantics can help the verballyunderprivileged members of my profession." He suggested ecdysiast. p.2[/cvr] [This has become a word - from etymonline: H.L. Mencken's invented proper word for "strip-tease artist," 1940, from Gk. ekdysis "a stripping or casting off" (used scientifically with ref. to serpents shedding skin or crustacea molting), from ekdyein "to put off" (contrasted with endyo "to put on"), from ex- + dyo "sink, plunge, enter."]

[AL-anood sh]

The word "meaning" 3

"meaning" has many senses. - intend: I mean to be there tomorrow - signifier of a sign: That cloud means thunder, or A red light means 'stop'. - simpler paraphrase: what does calligraphy mean? it means 'beautiful writing' words to define other words; usually simpler words in the explanation. Thus, what does chat mean in French? cat, but the inverse is "what is French for cat, maybe because answer is no longer "simpler". p.3non-literal (pragmatic intent): "It wasn't what he said, but what he meant."e.g. (p.4): `Why is a raven like a writing-desk?' [said the Hatter] `Come, we shall have some fun now!' thought Alice. `I'm glad they've begun asking riddles.--I believe I can guess that,' she added aloud. `Do you mean that you think you can find out the answer to it?' said the March Hare. `Exactly so,' said Alice. `Then you should say what you mean,' the March Hare went on. `I do,' Alice hastily replied; `at least at least I mean what I say that's the same thing, you know.' `Not the same thing a bit!' said the Hatter. `Why, you might just as well say that `I see what I eat' is the same thing as `I eat what I see'!' -- Lewis Carrolloften words have other than 'literal' meanings - suggested with intonationor gestures. [or poetry?] e.g. the fall-rise tone in English - theintonation falls and rises on the 'accented' word in a sentence - suggests"but...". She's very clever - may be positive in plain intonation, butwith rise-fall it becomes pejorative - she's not very honest, or not veryattractive, etc. similarly I think so - may be that I don't know, butwith a diff intonation that I am pretty sure. That's very clever canmean that's very stupid; and if I wink while saying that's mine - then itprobably isn't.what we say often presupposes a lot - classic e.g. When did you stop beating your wife?1.2 Semantics and linguistics 5

Nearly all linguists have explicitly or implicitly assumed a model in whichsemantics is at one 'end' and phonetics at the other, with grammarsomewhere in the middle...de Saussure: signifiant (signifier) - for sounds of language, and signfié (signified) for the meaning. he unfortunately used the term SIGN for the association of these [today's "symbol"], but some of his followers, more reasonably, used sign for the signifier alone. 6Lg does not always contain a 'message' or a piece of information - part ofits function is w social relationships. (even in animal communicn)it has been convincingly argued that human lg differs in kind rather than indegree from other 'languages' 6[ messages can be described in terms of language, but how to describe language itself? ]we cannot define meaning (the "message") independently of language. p.6Linguistics is the scientific study of language. One essential requirementis that it should be empirical. What is meant by 'scientific' or'empirical' is a matter of some debate. Must be possible to test andverify statements within it.Difficult in semantics, for unlike phonetics, we cannot observe what isbeing meant.de saussure: langue (language) and parole ("speaking", indiv language werrors); the distinction reappeared in Chomsky 1965:4 as COMPETENCE andPERFORMANCE. (Chomsky differs greatly in what "competence" is, but thedistinction is the same). Both for Chomsky and de Saussure, langue orcompetence excludes accidental individual variations - some kind ofidealized system without any clear empiricalbasis. p.7-8 [see Bouquet, Simon, below]can we make a similar distinction in semantics? We can't be concerned withcompletely idiosyncratic usage, e.g. `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'There are variations - e.g. the poet's or the madman's - but neither would bepossible without the generalized "normal" patterns to make comparisonswith. 8need to distinguish usual meaning of word w meaning in specialcircumstances. --> distinction between semantics and PRAGMATICS. 8Utterance vs Sentence 8

An UTTERANCE is an event in time - produced by some one under certaincircumstances. A SENTENCE has no existence in time, but is part of thelinguistic system of a language. The distinction is related to performanceand competence.utterances as objects of study:may be ok if you use a voice recording, but becomes v difficult iftranscribed - e.g. words are already sophisticated linguistic constructsand not the result of direct observation.Even if written in IPA it has already have acquired some of thecharacteristics of a sentence.It follows from this that semanticists will not be (and cannot really everbe) concerned w the meaning of utterances but only with the meaning ofsentences.[AM: however, surely they can consider the social context in which thesentence was uttered!]However, a lot of meaning lost when we throw outthe prosody and other paralinguistic aspects? ]1.4 Historical semantics

Synchronic study of lg must precede diachronic - cannot study change unlesswe know what it was like that is changing. so too in semantics. 12

[AL-anood sh]

Ch 2: Scope of Semantics - Naming

Meaning as denotation - Plato Cratylus: words "stand for" something in theworld. Words are labels for things. Child learns names by a process ofnaming.Meaning of larger constructs (expressions) [Lyons, Semantics, 1977 2vols:206-9]Denotation : the class of persons, things etc. generally represented by the expressionReference: the actual person, thing being referred to in a specific contextThis view appears to be limited to nouns. Maybe colours (adjectives). Butnot at all plausible even for adj like "attractive", useful, relevantdifficult, plausible. 18With a noun we can often draw a picture of the object denoted. But this isdifficult, if not impossible, with verbs.even nouns like goblin, unicorn, fairy etc - for objects that don't existConsider the verb "run", and an attempt to illustrate what it denotes with apicture of running (maybe a moving picture). Difficulty: picture has a boy,and has him running - hard to distinguish the boy and "what he is doing". 19meaning != denotation 20

Morning star / evening starIn Gilbert and Sullivan's Mikado, First Lord of the treasury Lord Chief Justice Commander in Chief Lord High admiral Master of the Buck Houndsare all names for Pooh-Bah. 20[same holds for "His Holiness" and "the Pope" and "Benedict XVI"]even when names are limited to visible objects, they may represent a wholelot of rather different objects.[Hence - meaning must be based on function]"In the world of experience, objects are not clearly grouped together ready,so to speak, to be labelled with a single word.Realist view: all things called by the name have some common propertyNominalist: nothing is common except for the name. [this radical view is of course false, chairs can't be called mountains]possible cultural relevance-

Malinowski (1923, The Problem of meaning in primitive lgs, supplem to Ogden and Richards 1923/1949:299-300)was troubled by the fact that he was unable to produce satisfactorytranslations for the Trobriand Islanders' speech (text) he had recorded.e.g. boast by canoeist: "We-run front-wood ourselves... we-turn we-seecompanion-ours he-runs rear-wood."This, Malinowslki argued (:300-01), made sense only ifthe utterance was seen in the context [--> Behaviourism].lg is not a "mirror of reflected thought", or a "counteersign of thought",but a "mode of action". Expressions such as "How do you do" or "Ah there youare" - more to establish a common sentiment than any semantic substance.Also talk about the weather or family 50-51 --> PHATIC COMMUNION - ony social, no semantics 52Eskimo: have four words for "snow" (1911:20): "snow on the ground", "falling snow", "drifting snow", and "snowdrift". (Boas 1911, Intro to Hbk of Am Ind Lgs :20)Hopi: only one word for "flier" - be it insect or aeroplane (Whorf 1956:210) p.21Bloomfield: Salt is "NaCl" - is wrong. It is what appears on our tables, with pepper and mustard, and is no less salt if it is not exactly NaCL [AM: e.g. composition may have other elements, Mg or Iodine]Russell: Object word vs Dictionary word 22

Some words refer to objects and are learned as labels, while others arelearned as definitions based on them - OSTENSIVE DEFINITIONS. (Russell 1940 An inq into meaning and truth:25,66 repr. 1962:23,63). p.22Wittgenstein (1953:16): I must be a master of lg to understand an ostensivedefinition."The child does not simply learn labels - else he would not be able to handleall these complexities. We shall not solve problems of semantics by looking at a child learning lg, for an understanding of what he does raises precisely the same problems as those of understanding what adults do in their normal speech. 23Concepts 24

Ogden & Richards 1923/1949:11 : the concept (thought or reference) is in arelation with the symbol, and also the actual referent;Triangular relationship - but symbol and referent are connected by dashed line. 24What is precisely the "associative bond" of Saussure, or the link betweenO&R's symbol and concept?semantics as "association in the mind". The difficulty w this view is that it really says nothing at all. 26 [becomes a circular definition, a tautology] [AM: results from our inadequacy in understanding the mechanism in the mind, until that's understood, philosophizing becomes only hot air]nothing is gained by moving meaning one step back to the brain - the ghost inthe machine / homunculus argument. 27Dualism is encouraged by the term "meaning" itself.Wittgenstein (1953:31): for a large class of words... the meaning of a word is its use in lg.'not a very helpful remark, since "use in lg" is just as unclear. But still,has value; we can now investigate "use". 29Sense and Reference

Reference: what the expr refers to in the non-linguistic world of experienceSense: relationships that hold between the lg elements (mostly the words) themselvesWould appear that reference is the key part of semantics.But - sense relations are also common - e.g. sex differences (older grammars in English) - ewe / ram - cow/bull; mare/stallion - were thought to be grammatical, and not lexical (since related to gender). p.30also father/son; duck/duckling; buy/sell;Dictionary : concerned primarily w sense relationsthere may be two kinds of semantics - one that relates to non-linguisticentities, and the others (as in dictionaries, with their unsystematicdefinitions) - intra-linguistic.Bierwisch (1970:167) says that a semantic theory must explain sentences like:1. His typewriter has bad intentions2. My unmarried sister is married to a bachelor3. John was looking for the glasses.4a. The needle is too short b. The needle is not long enough [is it a paraphrase?]6a. How long was Archibald in Monte Carlo? b. He was there for some time [presupposed by "a")123 are : anomalous, contradictory, ambiguousKatz and Fodor 1963:176 A semantic theory describes and explains the interpretive ability of speakers; by accounting for their performance in determining the number of readings of a sentence; by detecting semantic anomalies; by deciding upon paraphrase relations between sentences; and by marking every other semantic property or relation tha plays a role in this ability."Notably, the list of abilities (in later work, Katz:1972 has fifteen suchrelations), does not include the ability to relate the sentences to the worldof experience; and indeed K&F explicitly exclude from a semantic theory anyreference to the context.2.4 The word 32

"Boys like to play"what is the meaning of "to"?Henry Sweet 1891, distinguished "full" words (tree, sing, blue, gently) from"form" words (the, of, and). The form words are not normal dictionary wordsand have only grammatical meaning.word may be defined in terms of stress - only one main stress -e.g. in spoken lg, can distinguish "blackbird" from "black bird" 33(so does "shoe-horn" or "shoe polish")Bloomfield 1933: "word is the minimum free form" in isolation; the, is, by donot appear in isolation (but then, maybe, neither do any others).Bloomfield: morphemes as units of meaning, e.g. "-berry" in blackberry or"-y" in Johnny.Later linguists: "loved" = love + -d = adore + past. (but what of "took")LEXEME: love and loved are under the same dictionary heading; unitBloomfield: status of "cran-" in cranberry - no indep meaning, and notoccurring in any other words. (for that matter, straw- and goose- +berry)greenfinch bullfinch and chaffinch: green- is a colour, bull- is a word butnot relate-able to bullfinch; and chaffinch no meaning at all).may be PHONAESTHETIC - initial cluster of consonants gives an indication ofmeaning of a speccial kind.e.g. many words with "sl-" are "slippery" in some sense - slide, slip,slither, slush, sluice, sludge etc. often pejorative - slatterns, slut,slang, sly, sloppy, slovenly. 35ending in -ump often refers to roundish mass : plump, chump, rump hump lumpbump stump, perhaps even dump and mumps. 35Ullman 1962: transparent vs opaque words, "male giraffe" vs "stallion"doorman vs axe. But does a scredriver "drive" screws? spanner - obsoletesense of span.heavy smoker = "heavy smoke"+er, not heavy+smoker; similarly "good singer","criminal lawyer" etc ياليت احد يشرح لي