WEEK 1

- linguistics = the scientific study of language - requires methodology and theory

 it starts at the beginning of last century with structuralism (De Saussure)
 before that it was called philology (because it deals with texts)
- structuralism - language as a static system of interconnected units - consists of structures that are
tied to one another
- semantics = the scientific study of meaning - part of linguistics
- in its pre-scientific period, semantics dealt with three issues: the meaning of the word, the structure
of the vocabulary, semantics and grammar (word order)
- traditional levels of analysis involved in the study of meaning:
1) phonetics - studies the physical properties of sounds - more concerned with voice/sound and
not language - that is why it is divided
2) phonology - studies the systematic organization of sounds in languages - don’t have meaning
alone, only in bigger structures - meaning is established through minimal pairs
3) morphology - studies the forms of words - meaning is established through bound and free
morphemes - ex. a/the pencil (not grammatical nor lexical morphemes)
- morphemes:
a) bound
b) unbound - stand alone
4) syntax - studies the principles and processes by which sentences are constructed - word
order is important for meaning because they have weaker morphology → fixed word order
5) lexis - lexicology - studies words
6) semantics
- semantics deals with all of those levels - with meaning in relation to other branches on the list -
interrelationship
- this traditional list has changed, instead of lexis now there’s semantics both on the list and on the
side, but it’s the same discipline
- beginnings:
 Karl Reisig (1839) - wrote a book on Latin verbs, chapter on semasiology
- we cannot use latin words without thinking about the meaning
- verbs influence what words come before or after it
- for the first time makes abstract statements on verbs
- true predecessor of semantics
 Michel Bréal - first invented the term sémantique (greek to mean, to signify) in 1833
- 1897 - Essai de sématique - manifesto - semantics should be legitimate discipline in linguistics
- 1900 - English translation (Semantics: studies in the science of meaning)
 Ogden and Richards (1923) - The meaning of meaning - analytical rigour
- they dealt with semiotics (signs) that is determined by culture
- 22 definitions of meaning
- if you want to deal with semantics, you need to be analytically rigorous
- meaning is communicative product - the study of meaning is important if we want to know
human mind
- their vision was to achieve total theory of language
- American structuralism focused on phonology and morphology
- 1933 - publication of the book Language by Leonard Bloomfield - American structuralism
 mentalization is not good for meaning
 behaviorism - human behavior can be explained by stimulus and response (Pavlov)
 argued that salt could be clearly defined (its meaning) as sodium chloride (NaCl)
- Noam Chomsky - humans can produce infinitive amount of sentences that have never been spoken
(transformative generative grammar)
- 1987 - official beginning of cognitive linguistics - its fundamental basis is meaning

SEMANTICS AND OTHER RELATED DISCIPLINES

- etymology = studies the origin of words, how their form and meaning have changed through time
 status of one word can take up a whole sphere of other words (pričati - razgovarati, govoriti)
 speakers change meaning
- lexicology = studies lexemes (words)
- lexicography = art of writing and compiling dictionary
 different types of dictionaries: monolingual and bilingual
 monolingual dictionaries → provide additional information
 bilingual dictionaries → don’t usually provide additional details, just the translation of a word
 Webster - encyclopedic dictionary - explains entries in specific details - general or specific
 Roget’s Thesaurus - conceptual dictionary - no alphabetic order, organized according to basic
concepts - list of synonyms with attributes of stylistic differences
- stylistics = discourse/text analysis → sociolinguistics - how we use language
 analyses both spoken and written language - spoken more in America
 ex. indirect speech acts (It is hot in here. → speaker expects that someone opens the
window)
- pragmatics = studies the ways in which context contributes to meaning

- word → the term comes from written language - problematic term

 ex. verb run: He ran across the field. He runs the motor show. He runs for the office. →
multiple meaning - all its meanings are lexemes of the word ‘run’
 some languages don’t have tradition of writing
 there is limited number of words that you can have because of phonological reasons
 it takes centuries to change a phonetic system
 instead of word → lexeme
- terms in traditional semantics:
 lexeme - vocabulary words which may take on different forms (meanings) depending on the
context they find themselves in (Lyons, 1977) - family of lexical units, pairing of a meaning and a
form (Cruse, 1986) - incorrect
- lexeme - one form, multiple meanings

- types of meaning:
1) Primary (conceptual) meaning - basic - central factor in linguistic communication
- encompasses all the essential knowledge necessary in order to use or understand a certain
form correctly
 - can knowledge of language be separated from knowledge of the world?
- Benjamin Lee Whorf - language Hopi (doesn’t express tense) - your mother tongue
determines your world view
- primary meaning changes (ex. woman) - tied to certain society
2) Stylistic meaning - what is communicated of the social circumstances of language use
- ex. horse (general), steed (poetic), nag (slang), gee-gee (baby talk)
home (general), domicile (formal), residence (official), abode (poetic)
3) Affective meaning - what is communicated of the feelings and attitudes of the
speaker/writer- restricted meaning
- choice of grammatical and lexical structures and intonation → changes meaning
ex. I’m terribly sorry to interrupt but I wonder if you would be so kind as to lower your voice a
little.
4) Reflected meaning - what is communicated through association with another sense of the
same expression (ex. the Comforter vs. the Holy Ghost) - (utješitelj vs. Duh Sveti)
- taboo words - reflect meaning that are not socially accepted and are generally avoided -
culturally based
intercourse (basic meaning is communication, reflected is sex), erection (building)
5) Collocative meaning - what is communicated through association with words which tend to
occur in the environment of another word
- collocation functions as an unit, it is not as fixed as an idiom - adjective + noun
- pretty - girl, garden, woman.. but boy (for adults - pejorative meaning)
- handsome - boy, man, car.. but woman (elegant in presence - Meryl Streep)
The cows wondered across the field. (correct sentence)
The cows strolled across the field. (not a normal sentence - stroll is a conscious act)

- snarl words - words whose conceptual meaning becomes irrelevant because whoever is using them
is capitalizing on their unfavourable connotations in order to give forceful expression to his own
hostility (ex. nigger, boy)

- euphemisms - greek ‘well-speaking’; the practice of referring to something offensive or indelicate in

terms that make it sound more pleasant or becoming that it really is
 ex: disease and indisposition for illness
 privy, water-closet, toilet, cloakroom, rest room (in public in the US), comfort station
(appearing more and more in modern novels), loo, bathroom (in private homes in the US) for
lavatory
 countries are not backward or undeveloped, but developing, less developed, emergent nations,
third world nations etc.
 invalid - physically challenged

- conceptual and secondary meanings are prone to social and diachronical changes, they are highly
dynamic, culture-depending and socially affected, they can change overnight and depend on the
cultural factors
WEEK 2

- functions of language:
1) Informational function - language conveys information
2) Expressive function - language is used to express emotions, attitude
3) Directive function - how we aim to influence the behavior and attitude of others - commands
and requests - imperative
4) Aesthetic function - the use of language for the sake of the linguistic artifact itself
- literature → creativity - fundamental human characteristic
5) Phatic function (communion) - way of establishing contact - ex. greetings, talking about
weather
- Malinowski - participant observation (participating in speaker’s every-day life)
 identified a kind of communication that didn’t convey information
 language is determined by context of situation or culture
 keeping the communication lines open, keeping it in good condition

- Saussurean dichotomies - the beginning of European structuralism

1. langue vs. parole
- langue = language as an abstract system
- parole = spoken or written language - concrete use
- 1959 - Noam Chomsky - book Syntactic structures - introduced two terms:
a) competence (langue)
b) performance (parole)
- langage (langaž) - entirety of language phenomenon (langue + parole)
2. the linguistic sign - basic unit of communication
3. diachronical vs. synchronical research
- diachronical - studies development and evolution of a language through history
- synchronical - studies language at a specific point of time - without taking its history into
account
4. syntagmatic vs. paradigmatic level of language organization
- syntagmatic (parole) - analysis of syntax or surface structure - one element selects the other
element either to precede it or to follow it
- paradigmatic (langue) - the analysis of paradigms embedded in the text - by substituting
words of the same type or class to calibrate shifts in connotation (abstract construct)

- dates back to Ancient Greece → Aristotel - homonymy, synonymy..

- homonymy = one form but different meanings - meanings are not related in any way!
bank - financial institution
bank - of a river
- types of homonymy:
1) Absolute - two words are not related in meaning and they have to conform to the following 3
criteria:
a) their forms must be unrelated in meaning
b) all their forms must be identical (in whole paradigm)
 c) identical forms must be syntactically equivalent
- ex. bat - small animal bat - wooden stick
- sole - bottom surface of foot/shoe sole - flat fish → coorelated meaning
- intuitive judgment - impression of how one meaning relates to another
2) Partial - in one form the words coincide
- ex. sharing a grammatical category → find (naći) vs. found (osnovati)
They found (našli/osnovali) hospitals.
- The bell was rung at midnight. / A rung (prečka) of the ladder was broken. → different
grammatical category (verb vs. noun)

- polysemy = single word (form) with several meanings → multiple meaning

 they relate in meaning!
 the meanings are related according to the principle called metaphorical extension - a
watered down term from metaphor - we feel relatedness on the basis of popular etymology
 popular etymology - what we as a speaker feel (but etymology - scientific methodology)
 synchronic relatedness of meaning
 ex. neck - part of the body, of a bottle, of a shirt..
 foot - part of the body, of a mountain, hill
 hands - of the body, of the clock

- synonymy = one meaning but different forms

 absolute vs. partial
 Do languages have absolute synonyms? Anglo-American tradition claims that there are no
absolute synonyms - Slavic tradition claims that there are (but just take denotational
meaning and ignore stylistic meaning)
 criteria for what would be absolute synonyms:
a) if their meanings are identical
b) if they are synonymous in all contexts - collocative meaning
c) if they are identical in all relevant dimensions of (stylistic) meaning
 ex. radio vs. wireless (anything without a wire, only in Australia means radio)
airfield (runway - military) vs. airport (runway + facility - public transport) vs. aerodrome
(fancy word)
pneumonia (frequent) vs. inflammation of the lungs (descriptive)
- in Croatian upala pluća is more frequent than pneumonia
 synonyms may be collocationally restricted - collocational range:
my big sister (older) vs. my large sister (fat)
defect (argument) vs. blemish (complexion) vs. flaw (argument, complexion)
stingy (negative) vs. economical (positive)
stench (for environment) vs. stink (for people)
 synonyms differ in: collocational range, stylistic meaning, according to a scale whther sth is
positive or negative
 maybe there are absolute synonyms briefly but then language economy changes that
WEEK 3

- is semantics scientific? traditional semantics (prescientific) vs. scientific semantic theories

- fundamental things are:
a) subject of study
b) methodology go hand in hand
c) theoretical framework
- in a methodology → mentalism, shared knowledge (in a linguistic community) is very important
 not all concepts are identical among speakers - different from culture to culture
 if it weren’t for the unity of mental images, we wouldn’t be able to communicate
- science can be EMPIRICAL and based on research on concrete data
 empirical implies that you are dealing with a certain subject matter not on the basis of
speculation and intuition, but are operating with publicly verifiable data obtained by
observation and experiment
 linguists use corpora (first - Francis and Kučera) - ample empirical data - diversity (different
styles of writing) and quantity are important
- 4 criteria that we could call the ideal for a theory of language:
1) Expliciteness (self-evident)
2) Objectivity - research in linguistics is done with corpora, research as a mix of neuroscience
and linguistics → needs shared knowledge (mentalism)
3) Simplicity of explanation - concise explanation
4) Completeness of description - not ideal but attainable

- the contextual view of meaning (conceptual approach) - 2 types of context:

1) immediate linguistic context - on syntagmatic level, depending on what surrounds a certain
linguistic element (big vs. large sister)
2) context of situation - phatic communion (Malinowski)
3) context of culture - you need to be careful because you can offend sb

- J.R.Firth - follower of Malinowski - stuck to the distinction between the first two contexts
- L.Bloomfield - behaviorism - meaning only comes from natural sciences, not from anything that is
mentalistic → anti-mentalist
- 1957 - Chomsky stresses the creative potential of human beings - his theories are based only on
immediate linguistic context
- in corpora there is context visible

How do we deal with context?

- recent work in semantics has returned to ‘mentalism’ against which Firth, Bloomfield and their
contemporaries reacted
- in spite of criticism, context is an important factor in communication
- meaning is often predictable by context:
SPLASH! UPSIDE DOWN!
IT’S OFF
JANET! DONKEYS!
- context narrows down the communicative possibilities of the message as it exists in abstraction
from context - this takes place in the following ways:
1) context eliminates ambiguities or multiple meanings (ex. page - boy attendant vs. a piece of
paper)
2) context indicates referents of certain words we call DIECTIC words (deixis)
- ex. here (where the speaker is), there (anything away from the speaker), this, that, now,
then, hrv. Evo, eto, eno, taj, ovaj, onaj; other expressions of definite meaning, ex. him
(personal pronouns), John, it
- deixis = to point (Greek) - cannot be explained without context
3) context supplies information which the speaker has omitted through ELLIPSIS

- mentalism - any scientific attempt which relies on introspection - an alternative to contextualism

 based on knowledge that comes from other sciences (psychology, neuroscience..)
 cognitive linguists are mentalists
 no communication without shared knowledge, mental image
 European structuralism is based on mentalism
- Chomsky - supports mentalistic approach - data about language can be supplied by direct resort to
intuition (intuitive knowledge) of the native speaker (the methodological instrument)
- cognitive linguistics → knowledge of language + knowledge of the world - constant interaction
 1987 - the beginning of cognitive linguistics
 language as an integral part of the human cognitive capability

Triangles of meaning

1. Richards and Ogden (1923) - semioticians

THOUGHT OR REFERENCE → mental concept

dominant relationship → ← adequate relationship (of lesser importance)

SYMBOL REFERENT → concrete object - not prominent

arbitrariness

- mentalistic approach - the meaning doesn’t reside only in language

2. Stephen Ullmann (1963)

SENSE → began to mean meaning - in line with European structuralism

NAME THING
- narrows the points (name, thing) - not correct → name evokes personal name, not all referents
are things
 - the relationship between NAME and SENSE is the most important
- did get 2 things right: he put the arrows and used sense which represents something mentalistic
3. Žic Fuchs (1991)

LEXICAL CONCEPT → knowledge of world

knowledge of language → LEXEME DENOTATUM → abstract

- knowledge is a process and activates 2 kinds of knowledges (about language and the world) →
influenced by culture and history - it changes
- meaning evolves individually and within a structure
- there is causal relationship everywhere
- mentalistic approach

WEEK 4

- mentalism vs. the notion of analytical rigour

- the first attempts of serious rigorous analysis of meaning started around 1950s in Europe
- no great breakthrough in linguistics has happened in Europe → generative (Chomsky) and cognitive
linguistics started in the US
- everything stopped in Europe after WW2 - the US channelled big thinkers and names to come work
in the US
- componential analysis - the analysis of word meanings is often seen as a process of breaking down
the sense of a word into its minimal distinctive features, i.e. into components which contrast with
other components
 developed from analytically rigorous approach → taken from chemistry
 has to be done in a group of related lexemes so that we could come up with minimal
distinctive features
 +/- represents contrast, a group of semantically related lexems, the components are words in
capitals → dealing with TRADITIONAL COMPONENTIAL ANALYSIS
 within a realm of European structuralism
 but in the US (Bloomfield) meaning cannot be described without science

man +HUMAN +ADULT +MALE

woman +HUMAN +ADULT -MALE
boy +HUMAN -ADULT +MALE
girl +HUMAN -ADULT -MALE

 words derive part of their meaning from paradigmatic relationships

 problem → lacking in sense of being precise and don’t provide enough input to describe the
mental image (ex. man has 2 meanings: 1. male, 2. generic as human - second meaning is
not denoted)
- Pottier (1964)

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S1 with a back
chair + + + + - + S2 raised above the ground
armchair + + + + + +
S3 for one person
stool - + + + - +
S4 to sit in or on
sofa + + - + + +
puffe - + + + - - S5 with arms
S6 with solid material
- problem → it doesn’t say that these are objects - no true definition

- despite the lack of what meaning is, the componential analysis exists as a methodology

Generic (unmarked) vs. marked terms

MAN - woman
DOG - bitch
- generic terms refer to both sexes - marked terms are more distinctive, need more context
COW - bull
DUCK - drake
- J. Lyons: “componential analysis leaves unexplained at least as much as it succeeds in explaining”
 it doesn’t give us the structure of meaning

Relations between related meanings of different terms

- basic relations come from Eugene Nida (1975)
1) Inclusion - in many instances the meaning of one word may be said to be included within the
meaning of another

Animal dog poodle

bitch cocker spaniel

Color red vermillion (royalty)

scarlet
dark red
blue

move walk amble (the way people walk)

stroll (conscious act, done for pleasure)

- semantics requires quantity → a lot of proof

- there is hierarchy
 - ex. come and go (deictic words) - usage of these words is determined by the position of
speaker and the hearer

2) Overlapping - they are not identical in meaning, but they do overlap in that they can be
substituted one for the other in at least certain contexts without significant changes in the
conceptual content of an utterance

give vs. bestow

possess vs. own collocational range
ill vs. sick
answer vs. reply

- different types of overlapping →

3) Complementation - meanings complementary to each other involve a number of shared

features of meaning but show marked contrasts and often opposite meanings

- lacks framework → they always function between one domain

of meaning
good bad → opposite
high low → opposite
beautiful ugly → relative concepts (culturally determined)
buy sell → contrast
lend borrow → contrast (not the same thing)

4) Contiguity - these relations can be found between closely related meanings occupying a well
defined, restricted semantic domain and exhibiting certain well marked contrasts

-ex. violet - blue - green - yellow - red → they share a semantic domain
walk - jump - hop → they are connected in a loose way, they are verbs of motion
- relationships between walk, amble and stroll are much stronger - they are related in
meaning