(3) the scope of semantics 1
Download as PPTX, PDF13 likes5,343 views
This document discusses different views of semantics and the relationship between words and their meanings. It dismisses the view that words are simply names for objects in the world. While this view may apply to some nouns, it cannot account for other parts of speech like verbs, adjectives, and prepositions. The relationship between words and their meanings is more complex, as a single word can refer to abstract concepts, non-physical objects, and even different physical objects. Grammarians use terms like "abstract things" but the view that all words name objects in the world is an oversimplification that fails to explain the full complexity of language and semantics.
(3) the scope of semantics 1
- 2. In the coming chapters We need to consider various aspects of semantics. To do this, the way has to be cleared by
- 3. (1) Discussing (and dismissing) two unsatisfactory views of semantics. WHY They provide no solution to semantic
- 4. Note: These two views may seem at first plausible, but they are really not.
- 5. (2) Attempting to set out some of the more important distinctions that have to be made.
- 7. Naming Language is a communication system. The concept of the signifier and the signified is central to that system. BUT There is a basic problem here
- 9. An ancient view comes from Plato
- 10. 1. The signifier is a word in the language. 2. The signified is an object in the world. 3. The signifier: stands for refers to denotes the signified. (Words are names or lables for things)
- 11. Taken at face value: No doubt this is true. Children learn any of their words by naming things. BUT
- 12. There are problems: What part of speech is this view more likely to apply to? NOUNS
- 14. Word that names •A Person An Idea A Thing
- 16. What about other parts of speech? Adjectives: Take colours as an example:
- 18. Colours are names. Colours can be adjectives. What is your favourite colour?Do you dram in colour?green bananas
- 19. With reference to the relationship between “the signifier” and “the signified ” What about other adjectives?
- 20. Can they be used as a label to identify something that they denote?
- 21. Take the examples of: fearful, interesting, clever (in a clever idea)
- 22. What about verbs? Is it possible to identify what is 'named' by a verb?
- 23. With nouns we can often draw a picture of the object that is denoted. A boy
- 24. BUT What about a verb like ‘run’?
- 25. We can attempt to illustrate what it denotes with a picture of a boy running
- 27. There are two difficulties that arise: 1. We are not presented separately with a boy and with 'running'. We need a fairly sophisticated method of separating the two.
- 28. 2. We can distinguish the boy and 'what he is doing‘.
- 29. The boy What he is doing
- 30. But it is far more difficult to identify precisely what are the essential characteristics of what is denoted by the verb than what is denoted by the noun.
- 31. Does running involve only the movement of the feet or are the arms involved too? Does it necessarily involve a change of position? Is the speed relevant?
- 32. Clearly there is not something that can easily be recognised and identified as 'running'
- 33. This is ‘run’. What about: remember like see
- 34. What about the other “parts of speech”
- 36. What about nouns such as: If we hold the theory of ‘naming’ true, can it be applied only to nouns?
- 37. unicorn
- 38. ghost
- 39. fairy
- 40. gremlin
- 41. Do they denote objects in the world? Can we distinguish two kinds of world: the ‘real world’ and the ‘other world’? What will happen if we do?
- 42. We must admit that words are not just names of things, and it must involve some fairly sophisticated explanation of the way in which we can move from giving names to objects in the world to giving names to objects that do not exist
- 43. What about •The digital world?
- 46. Forget about the ‘other world’. Aren’t there nouns that do not refer to imaginary things but do not refer to physical objects at all?
- 47. Can we identify the object to be named by: love hate inspiration
- 48. •What do grammarians call such words? •“abstract things’’ •Why do they call them things? •Because they have nouns corresponding to them.
- 49. We fall in a trap of a circular definition: Nouns refer to things. Things are named by nouns.
- 50. Another problem: •Even with some identifiable physical objects, the meaning is not the same with its denotation:
- 53. Another difficulty: Visible objects in the world around us often seem to denote a whole set of rather different objects.