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.