1 / 42

LIN 1180 – Semantics Lecture7

LIN 1180 – Semantics Lecture7. Albert Gatt. Continuation from last week. Ambiguity and vagueness. Ambiguity vs. Vagueness (I). In context, a word can seem to have several distinct senses. Some may appear more related than others. In our example: run 1 = physical act of running

barrett
Download Presentation

LIN 1180 – Semantics Lecture7

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. LIN 1180 – SemanticsLecture7 Albert Gatt

  2. Continuation from last week Ambiguity and vagueness

  3. Ambiguity vs. Vagueness (I) • In context, a word can seem to have several distinct senses. Some may appear more related than others. • In our example: • run1 = physical act of running • run2 = place where fowl are kept • So run is 2-ways ambiguous (2 senses) • But run1 exhibits vagueness between a general sense of running, and the more specialised sense used in cricket.

  4. Ambiguity vs. vagueness (II) • Similarly: • daħla1 = entrance or inlet • daħla2 = introduction to a text • 2-ways ambiguous • daħla1is vague between the sense of “entrance” and that of “inlet”

  5. Ambiguity vs. vagueness (IV) • Ambiguity: • In this case, the context will select one of the meanings/senses • We often don’t even notice ambiguity, because context clarifies the intended meaning. • Vagueness: • Context adds information to the sense. • Therefore the sense of the word itself doesn’t contain all the information. • It is underspecified.

  6. Tests for ambiguity and vagueness • There are some tests to decide whether meaning distinctions involve ambiguity or vagueness. • The do-so test of meaning identity • The synonymy or sense-relations test

  7. The do-so test: preliminary example • I ate a sandwich and Mary • The do-so construction is interpreted as identical to the preceding verb phrase • Similar constructions in Maltese: • Kilt biċċa ħobż u anka Marija • Kilt biċċa ħobż u Marija għamlet hekk ukoll. did so too did too

  8. The do-so test and meaning identity • Main principle: if a particular sense is selected for a word in a verb phrase, it will also be the same sense in the do-so phrase • Therefore, very useful to test if two meanings are two distinct senses.

  9. Do-so examples • Lili għoġbitni d-daħla u lil Jimmy wkoll (I liked the entrance/introduction and so did Jimmy) • Suppose daħla here = “introduction” • Is it possible that I liked the introduction and Jimmy liked the entrance? • If not, then these are two distinct senses or daħla • I made a run and so did Priscilla • If “I made a run” = “I ran”, then Priscilla cannot have made a run for her chickens... • So, again, these are two distinct senses of run.

  10. The sense relations test • Basic principle: • Words exhibit synonymy or similarity of meaning to other words. • Therefore, if a word is ambiguous, we can substitute it for a similar word in the same context, and see if the meaning stays roughly the same.

  11. Sense relations examples • Recall: • run1 = physical act of running (similar word:jog) • run2 = a closed space for animals (similar word: enclosure) • Pete went for. • We can’t substitute one set of words for another and still keep the same meaning. √ a run √a jog *an enclosure

  12. Lexical relations: basic concepts • We have established that: • words in the lexicon can have multiple senses (ambiguity) • they can also be vague, so that the actual meaning is underspecified and becomes clearer in context • In addition: • Words are not merely listed • they are often related to one another LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  13. Part 1 Homonymy, polysemy, synonymy

  14. How is the lexicon structured? • Lexical items belong to semantic fields • words that belong to the same “topic” ,“subject” or “usage” • lexical relations are often strongest within a semantic field • different senses of a word often fall into different fields • Examples: • computing: gigabyte, CPU, memory, disk, monitor • administration/diplomacy/politics:green, monitor, parliament, election • Notice that monitor here has two senses, each falling in a different field. LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  15. Homonymy -- I • Homonyms are unrelated senses of a the same phonological or orthographic word. • sometimes we use homographs for unrelated senses of a written word • could be considered different words • lexicographers often treat derivationally related forms as homonyms • Examples: • bank (river) / bank (financial) • ring / wring • house (N) / house (V) • right / write LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  16. Two subtypes of homonymy • homphony • ring / wring • same phonology • different orthography • homography • articulate (ADJ) / articulate (V) • Maltese: domna (V) (stay-late.3PL) / domna (N) (religious icon) • different phonology • same orthography LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  17. Polysemy • One phonological word, multiple senses (ambiguity) • senses are related, though distinguishable • cf. daħla (entrance) vs. daħla (inlet) • in traditional dictionaries, multiple senses are listed under the same head word. LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  18. Homonymy vs. polysemy • Relatedness: • homonymy: senses are unrelated; • polysemy: senses are related • either historically or • based on speaker intuition • NB: Not always a clear-cut distinction. Speakers’ intuitions vary considerably. • Do you consider sole (“bottom of foot”) and sole (“flat, riverbed fish”) related? LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  19. Synonymy • Different phonological words with highly related meanings: • sofa / couch • boy / lad • żgħir (small) / ċkejken (little) • moxt (comb) / petne (comb) • Very very difficult to find examples of perfect synonyms. LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  20. Imperfect synonymy • Synonyms often exhibit slight differences, espcially in connotations • petne (“comb”) has Romance origins; probably used by most speakers today • moxt (“comb”) has Semitic origins (cf. xuxa “hair”) • Usage differs depending on dialect, context… LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  21. The importance of register • With near-synonyms, there are often register-governed conditions of use. • Register = a style of language specific to a situation (e.g. formal, colloquial etc) • E.g. naive vs gullible vs ingenuous • gullible / naive seem critical, or even offensive • ingenuous more likely in a formal context LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  22. Synonymy vs. Similarity • Native speakers often have strong intuitions about words which are “related”, though not necessarily identical, in meaning. • E.g. boat/ship; car/truck; man/woman • But also near-synonyms such as: snake/serpent • Similarity is broader than synonymy, since even words with “opposite” or “antonymous” meanings can be judged as similar; e.g. large/small LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  23. When are two words similar? • Contextual view of meaning (Wittgenstein, 1953…): • the meaning of linguistic expressions can be characterised by looking at how they are used • two words are similar to the extent that they’re used in similar ways LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  24. Example: master/pupil • These words have very different meanings, but share a core set of uses. • Both refer to human roles which tend to be practised in the same real world contexts (school etc). • Is this reflected in the way we use the words? • master of X school, pupil of X school • past master, past pupil • … • Rather than in contextual terms, we could view similarity as simply arising from links in a network of concepts. LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  25. Part 2 Opposites and antonymy

  26. Semantic opposition • Traditionally, antonyms are words which are opposite in meaning. • dead – alive • We can find other kinds of opposition: • hot – cold • explode – implode • writer – reader, employer – employee • black – white, red – orange (?) LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  27. Simple vs Gradable antonyms • Simple antonyms: dead – alive, hit – miss • truth of one implies falsity of the other • ? X is dead but he’s alive. • Gradable antonyms: hot – cold, big – small • both may be “false”: neither tall nor short • typically, many terms to express gradations: • hot >> warm >> tepid >> cool >> cold • often modifiable with intensifiers: • very hot, somewhat cold • exhibit global dependencies: If we say X is big, we mean “big for an object of type X” • big elephant is much bigger than a big mouse LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  28. Reverses and converses • Reverses: explode – implode • a kind of opposition where one terms “reverses” the other. • often found with terms related to movement (go/come, etc) • Converses: employer – employee, own – belong to • describe a relation between two entities from different viewpoints • “complement eachother” • if X is Y’s employer, then Y is X’s employee • if X owns Y, then Y belongs to X LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  29. Taxonomies Colour red orange green blue yellow • Taxonomies are classification systems, often in the form of a tree. • Sisters are elements at the same level. LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  30. Taxonomic sisters • Usually taken to be complementary or “opposed” or “incompatible” or “mutually exclusive” • NB: Taxonomies are often our way of imposing a discrete categorisation on a continuum (e.g. colour). LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  31. Opposites and similarity • To many native speakers, the most highly related word to an adjective is its antonym or opposite. • also typical of taxonomic sisters • does this mean that opposites are synonymous? • No! It just means that “similarity” under the contextual view is much broader than synonymy. LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  32. Part 3 Hyponymy and other relations

  33. Definition of hyponymy • Hyponymy is a relation of inclusion. • Arrows can be interpreted as “IS-A” relations. • Unlike taxonomic sisterhood, which is horizontal, hyponymy is vertical. ANIMAL MAMMAL BIRD SPARROW CANARY LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  34. Elements of hyponymy • If Y IS-A X then: • X is the superordinate or hypernym of Y • Y is a subordinate or hyponym of X • e.g. HUMAN is the hypernym of MAN, TOOL is the hypernym of CHAINSAW • Inclusion: • if Y is a hyponym of X then Y contains the meaning of X (plus something extra) • e.g. MAN includes all the features of HUMAN, plus the specification of ADULT and MALE. • Transitivity: • if X IS-A Y and Y IS-A Z, then X IS-A Z LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  35. Transitivity -- illustration • A CANARY IS-A BIRD • A BIRD IS-A ANIMAL • Therefore, a CANARY IS-A ANIMAL ANIMAL MAMMAL BIRD SPARROW CANARY LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  36. Special cases of taxonomic relations • Sometimes, language exhibits special cases of relations that are: • well-established and lexicalised • seem to depend on an underlying taxonomy or hierarchy • ADULT-YOUNG • dog – puppy, duck – duckling, etc • MALE-FEMALE • woman – man, dog – bitch, drake – duck, etc • NB: These pairs are often asymmetric. The unmarked case in the MALE-FEMALE is the MALE. • We tend to use it for the name of the species. LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  37. Meronymy or part-whole • A different kind of taxonomic relationship. Arrows are interpreted as “HAS-A” LEG ANIMAL HAS-A IS-A WING BIRD HAS-A LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  38. Meronymy vs. Hyponymy • Meronymy tends to be less regular than hyponymy: • NOSE is perceived as a necessary part of a FACE • CELLAR may be part of HOUSE, but not necessarily • Meronymy need not be transitive: • If X HAS-A Y and Y HAS-A Z, it does not follow that Y HAS-A Z • window HAS-A pane • room HAS-A window • ??room HAS-A pane • Common-sense knowledge plays a very important role in acceptability of these relations. LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  39. Member-collection relations • We often lexicalise names of collections of specific things: • flotta (fleet) : a collection of ships • merħla (flock): a collection of sheep • Native speakers know there is a member-collection relation: • flotta (fleet) – vapur (ship) • armata (army) – suldat (soldier) • merħla (flock) – nagħġa (sheep) • Can be viewed as a special, lexicalised case of meronymy. LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  40. Are collections singular or plural? • In many languages, there is the possibility of switching from: • a view of a collection as a single entity vs. the “contents” of the collection as a group or set • English: • The band played well tonight. • It drove the crowd nuts [SG] • They drove the crowd nuts [PL] • Maltese: • L-armata rtirat (The army retreated.SG) • ?L-armata rtiraw. (The army retreated.PL) • Perhaps not as acceptable? Only with some nouns? LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  41. Portion-mass • Mass nouns: • nouns denoting things which have no units • noun is also true of portions of the substance • liquid, coal, hair • Languages often have lexicalised concepts denoting portions of specific substances: • qatra (drop) for liquids • strand of hair LIN 1180 -- Semantics

  42. Summary • This lecture gave an overview of some standard ways to classify relations between lexical items. • homonymy vs. polysemy • synonymy (and contextual similarity) • taxonomic relations: part-whole and hyponymy LIN 1180 -- Semantics

More Related