THURSDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2013 Preliminaries Semantics offers a thoughtful break from the more technical material of Chs

3-6 *The main point of this chapter is to show that meaning isnt only referential, as we often think, but also relational, contextual, etc. It asks: How (not what) do words mean? How do we arrive at the meaning of words? How do words mean in relation to one another? How do words mean socially and experientially? At issue is the nature of meaning itself Semantics Semantics: the study of meaning in language (words in relation to other words, in relation to syntax, reference, situation, etc.); semantics contrasts with syntax, which is all about function not meaning Two subfields of semantics: lexical semantics (word meaning, esp. in terms of things and concepts) and compositional semantics (sentence meaning, morpho-syntactic meaning at higher levels of constituency, e.g., idioms); our focus is the former Semantics is often theoretical and speculative, tentative, even philosophical, rather than practical or provable (contra much in Referential Meaning and Its Limits We often think of word meaning as referential: a referent (word, pitcher) refers to a referend (thing, a real pitcher in the world or the concept of a pitcher in the mind) But note that many words dont refer to anything, e.g., the closed classes of words; thus reference is a limited explanatory theory of meaning Meaning also depends on experience, linguistic context, social context (cf. connotation) Deictic Meaning Deictic meaning is mainly referential Deixis: has to do with pointing; deictics are pointing words of 3 kinds, pointing out people (personal deixis [I/you]), place (spatial deixis [this/that]), or time (temporal deixis [now/then]); meaning is thus also situational Again, this kind of reference is very limited; people have tried with varying success to extend deictic meaning; e.g., Platos thinking that words ultimately pointed to pure/perfect Exemplars or

Forms/Ideas existing outside experience Others have argued every word is defined by and refers to other words (cf. dictionaries), not Lexical Fields But meaning can involve more than reference Word meaning can also be relational: part of a words meaning depends on its relations to similar-meaning words Lexical fields: groups of words that belong together because each word shares meaning somehow with the others; words in the same lexical field are conceptually (not referentially) related Words within a lexical field share conceptual qualities not referents; e.g., iPhone, PC, GPS might all share technologicalness; also body parts or kinship relationships or water Can you think of other lexical fields? (e.g., body Meaningful Relationships among Words Semantic relationships: are meaningful relations words can have with one another; here meaning is relational not referential or conceptual There are several kinds: hypernymy (being superordinate in a semantic hierarchy) and hyponymy (being subordinate, a kind of), meronymy (part for the whole; part of NOT kind of), *synonymy (supposed sameness), *antonymy (oppositeness; often gradable), *homonymy (same form different meaning; incl. homophones and homographs) Lets do examples of each Other Terms to Know Polysemy: refers to one word with multiple different but often more or less historically related meanings; context helps disambiguate; cf. homonymy; e.g. present or foot or face or run or wood Idiom: a fixed expression, functioning as a unit, whose meaning is different from the sum of its parts; often metaphoric and non-literal and culturally specific; again, context helps in understanding them; e.g., foot the bill, kick the bucket, or pull a fast one The Mental Lexicon The brain organizes and stores words in various ways, partially like a dictionary When we encounter a word our brain then activates and processes its meaning in terms of the associations and relations surrounding it (homonyms, synonyms, collocates, words of similar spelling or sound, etc.)

This process of association is called priming; it gives us insight into how words become meaningful for us Cf. Google search suggestions? Prototype Semantics Prototype semantics proposes that there is a central meaning for a concept based on its best example or prototype, and that meaning within a category exists in relation to that prototypical member; boundaries get fuzzy; e.g., dog, sports A prototype is like an idealized concept, but may be arrived at through experience; members assigned to a given category are more or less prototypical, having varying degrees of typicality NB: members must share features with the prototype but not necessarily with other members of the category (though members often share more or fewer features) Meaning Beyond Lexical Semantics Compositional semantics is interested in not only the meaning of a sentences parts (words) but in how those parts work together as a whole We can also take a functional or contextual approach to meaning: meaning is determined in and by context, not (just) as the sum of parts Like other aspects of language, word meaning changes in various ways over time through use Thus meaning can be historically contingent, as well as relational or referential, etc. Various factors contribute to semantic change: linguistic, cultural, psychological, etc. We can categorize the ways words change their meaning as processes of semantic change Generalization and Specialization Generalization: the process according to which meaning becomes broader and more allencompassing; aka semantic broadening or expansion; e.g., holiday, cool, Kleenex Specialization: the process according to which meaning becomes narrower and less allencompassing; aka semantic narrowing or contraction; e.g., wife, accident, fowl, meat, hound

Metaphorical Extension Metaphorical Extension: the process according to which a word extends its meaning from the literal to the metaphorical, usually based on some perceived similarity

Metaphor is not merely literary use of language; much of our everyday language means metaphorically, though we might not notice E.g., crooked, bug, illuminate Euphemism and Dysphemism Euphemism: a (positive) word or expression substituted for a less positive one; because context is key here, we should probably speak about use not identity (i.e., should refer to language used euphemistically, not to words being euphemisms); e.g., downsize, collateral damage Dysphemism: a negative word or expression substituted for a less negative or neutral one; e.g, fry (for death by electrocution), fag or gay? Pejoration, Amelioration, Reappropriation Pejoration: the process according to which a word or term comes to take on a more negative meaning; e.g., nigger, lewd, wench, silly? Amelioration: the process according to which a word or term comes to take on a more positive meaning; happens less often than pejoration; e.g., knight, lord, nice Reappropriation: the process according to which a term used to degrade a group is reclaimed by that group and used more positively; e.g, fag or queer, bitch, slut? For Tuesday Do Exercises 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3 Well discuss whats on the midterm and do review as needed, so Bring specific questions, problems, and concerns, from the quizzes or otherwise Midterm next Thursday (including Ch 7 material) TUESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2013 Language, Thought, Reality: Discussion Does language determine thought (linguistic determinism) or influence it (linguistic relativism), and if so how and to what extent? If not, we are left with an objective reality outside us that language merely describes (objectivism). Do different languages cause people to think differently and therefore live in and experience different social realities? Does dropping he as general pronoun in EN help advance the cause of gender equality? What do we make of something like herstory instead of history? Can changing language change cultural attitudes or realities?

Review and Midterm Quickly go over Chapter 7 questions 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3 Address specific questions, problems, and concerns about material from Chs 1-7 Field questions about the midterm, including those deriving from the quizzes For Thursday Midterm Exam (20% of final grade) See me or e-mail me, in good time, if you have specific last-minute questions For Tuesday: Read Ch 9 Stylistics, 274-308; the emphasis will be on learning about stylistics so you can do stylistic analysis of texts (literary and non-literary) NB: We will not be reading Ch 8 Spoken Discourse