Successfully reported this slideshow.

Semantics (2017 18) hong oanh

17

Share

Loading in …3
×
1 of 175
1 of 175

More Related Content

Related Books

Free with a 14 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 14 day trial from Scribd

See all

Semantics (2017 18) hong oanh

  1. 1. SEMANTICS THE STUDY OF MEANING
  2. 2. Table of content Chapter 1: Basic ideas in semantics Chapter 2: From reference … Chapter 3: … to sense Chapter 4: Logic Chapter 5: Word meaning 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 2
  3. 3. CHAPTER 1: BASIC IDEAS IN SEMANTICS 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 3
  4. 4. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 4
  5. 5. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 5
  6. 6. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS KEY TERMS: o linguistics o language o components of language o theory of semantics o semantics o sentence (word) meaning o speaker meaning o native speaker (informant) o “knowing ” the meaning(s) of a word 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 6
  7. 7. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS SEMANTICS is: the STUDY of MEANING. the STUDY of MEANING in LANGUAGE. the STUDY of MEANING in HUMAN LANGUAGE. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 7
  8. 8. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS PRACTICE 1 (P.1) you glory it 6, 8 9, 12, 12, 135/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 8
  9. 9. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS PRACTICE 2 (p.2) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) No (4) Asking what JOHN meant in saying it (5) No (6) [your own answer] 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 9
  10. 10. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 10 SPEAKER MEANING SENTENCE (WORD) MEANING What a speaker means (i.e. intends to convey) when he uses a piece of language. What a sentence (or word) means, i.e. what it counts as the equivalent of in the language concerned. y #OR
  11. 11. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS PRACTICE 3 (P.3) 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 11 ANSWER (1) probably not (2) Yes, probably (3) No (4) No (5) Probably not (6) Yes (7) With B’s enquiry in line 6 (8) With B’s question in line 12
  12. 12. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS Meaningfulness vs. Informativeness Many sentences carry information in a straightforward way; Information exchange contexts To provide the hearer with the necessary information or knowledge AND Many sentences are used by speakers not to give information at all Small talks To maintain social relationships 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 12
  13. 13. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS PRACTICE 4 (P.5) 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 13 ANSWER (1) “Are you?”, “That’ll be nice for the family”, and “Nice day” (2) Yes (3) No (4) No, she is probably being sarcastic (5) Yes (6) No (7) part of a polite prelude to more interesting conversation (8) In the husband’s case, the remark is used to end a conversation, rather than initiate one.
  14. 14. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS The same sentences used by different speakers on different occasions to mean different things SPEAKER MEANING Problems: there are GAPS between sentence meaning and speaker meaning. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 14
  15. 15. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS PRACTICE 5 (P.6) 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 15 ANSWER (1) No (2) No (3) No (4) No (5) No
  16. 16. AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS Speakers can convey meaning quite vividly using sentences whose meanings are in some sense problematical. Semantic analysis: 1. to show what is wrong with such sentences, i.e. why they can’t be literally true 2. how speakers nevertheless manage to communicate something by means of them. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 16
  17. 17. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 17 AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS PRACTICE 6 (P.6-7) ANSWER (1) No (2) Yes (3) No (4) Yes (5) Probably not (6) Yes (7) Yes (8) the Sar- speaker
  18. 18. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 18 AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS Methods of semantics Semantics  theory of meaning THEORY A precisely specified, coherent, and economical frame-work of interdependent statements and definitions, constructed so that as large a number as possible of particular basic facts can either be seen to follow from it or be describable in terms of it
  19. 19. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 19 AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS PRACTICE 7 (p. 8) ANSWER (1) T (2) T (3) T (4) T (5) F (6) T (7) F (8) T (9) T
  20. 20. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 20 AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS Each of the above true statements belongs to the scope of semantics. Semantic theory deals with semantic facts, i.e. facts about meaning. Meaning of individual words, sentences and utterances
  21. 21. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 21 AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS PRACTICE 8 (p. 9) ANSWER (1) T (2) T (3) T (4) T
  22. 22. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 22 AN INTRODUCTION TO SEMANTICS The statements are general in some ways. (1) Deal with whole classes of words, not just with the individual examples actually mentioned. (2) Apply to human languages in general, not just to English.  Semantics focus on the similarities between languages rather than their differences.
  23. 23. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 23
  24. 24. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 24  Key terms:  sentence  utterance  proposition  declarative sentence  interrogative sentence  imperative sentence SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS
  25. 25. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 25 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS In groups of 4, say aloud the following sentences TWICE. (i) Good morning! (ii) I love you! (iii) What a beautiful day! (iv) “Utterances may consist of a single word, a single phrase or a single sentence. They may also consist of a sequence of sentences. It is not unusual to find utterances that consist of one or more grammatically incomplete sentence-fragments. In short, there is no simple relation of correspondence between utterances and sentences.”
  26. 26. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 26 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS Then, discuss the following questions. 1. Do you say the sentences differently each time? Why (not)? 2. What about your partners? 3. Can you guess the reason?
  27. 27. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 27 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS The same sentence can be read differently each time even by the same speaker. Different UTTERANCES Different unique physical events
  28. 28. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 28 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS UTTERANCE Any stretch of talk, by one person, before and after which there is a silence on the part of that person. An UTTERANCE is the USE by a particular speaker, on a particular occasion, of a piece of language, such as a sequence of sentences, or a single phrase, or even a single word.
  29. 29. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 29 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 1 (P. 16) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) No, this is a string of sounds (5) No, this is a string of sounds
  30. 30. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 30 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS Utterances are physical events. Events are ephemeral, i.e. short-lived.  Utterances MUST be analyzed in a specific contexts (time, place, speaker, and language).  Utterances have no special form or content.
  31. 31. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 31 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS CHARACTERISTICS OF AN UTTERANCE  It is spoken.  It is a physical event. Events are ephemeral, i.e. short-lived.  It may be grammatical or not.  It is a piece of language (a single phrase or even a single word).  It can be meaningful or meaningless.  It is identified by a specific time or on a particular occasion. It is said / uttered by a a specific person (in a particular accent)
  32. 32. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 32 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS  A sentence has no time or place, etc. but it has a different linguistic form. SENTENCE (PARTIAL DEFINITION) A sentence is neither a physical event not a physical object. It is, conceived abstractly, a string of words put together by the grammatical rules of a language. A sentence can be thought of as the IDEAL string of words behind various realizations in utterances and inscriptions.
  33. 33. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 33 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 2 (P. 17) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) No (3) No (4) Yes (5) No (6) Yes
  34. 34. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 34 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS CONVENTION IN SEMANTICS  A book contains NO UTTERANCES or SENTENCES.  In semantics, there is a need to make a careful distinct between utterances and sentences. o An utterance is written between single quotation marks. o A sentence is written in an italicized way.
  35. 35. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 35 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 3 (p. 18) ANSWER (1) John announced “Mary’s here” . (2) Mary thought how nice John was. OR Tom: ‘Mary thought how nice John was.’
  36. 36. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 36 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS RULE:  A given sentence always consists of the same words, and in the same order.  Any change in the words, or their order, makes a different sentence, for our purposes.
  37. 37. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 37 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 4 (p. 18) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Le jour de gloire est arrivé  FRENCH Alle Menschen sprechen eine Sprache  GERMAN
  38. 38. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 38 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS ???
  39. 39. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 39 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS SENTENCE (PARTIAL DEFINITION) A sentence is a grammatical complete string of words expressing a complete thought. Example: (1) I would like a cup of coffee (2) Coffee, please. (3) In the kitchen (4) Please put it in the kitchen
  40. 40. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 40 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS Any strings of words that do not have a verb in it are not sentences. A sentence is a complete expression in a language.
  41. 41. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 41 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 5 (P. 19) ANSWER (1) NS (2) S (3) NS (4) S (5) NS
  42. 42. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 42 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS Utterances of non-sentences:  short-phrases, or even single words  used in daily communications Because:  people usually don’t converse in (tokens of) wellformed sentences. How to understand these utterances?  an abstract idea of the sentence is necessary .  consider them as abbreviations, or incomplete versions, of whole sentences.
  43. 43. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 43 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 6 (p. 19) ANSWER (1) Goethe died in 1832 (2) I would like coffee please (3) Wellington won the battle of Waterloo
  44. 44. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 44 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS SEMANTICS meaning non- sentences sentences PROPOSITIONS
  45. 45. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 45 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PROPOSITION The part of meaning of the utterance of a declarative sentence which describes some states of affairs  a claim about the world  just the form of an idea.  a (potential) fact about the world  can be TRUE or FALSE
  46. 46. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 46 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 7 (p. 20) ANSWER (1) No (2)No (3) Yes (4) Yes (5) Yes
  47. 47. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 47 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS  propositions:  true: correspond to facts  false: do not correspond to facts
  48. 48. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 48 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 8 (p. 21) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) No (4) No
  49. 49. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 49 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS Can one entertain propositions in the mind regardless of whether they are true or false? e.g.: What am I doing if I entertain the thought that the moon is made of green cheese? Entertain = to admit into the mind, consider  Can one entertain propositions in the mind regardless of whether they are true or false? YES, by thinking them, or believing them.
  50. 50. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 50 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS However,  ONLY true proposition can be known.  Not all true beliefs are knowledge.  Not all unknown beliefs are false.
  51. 51. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 51 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 9 (p. 21) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) Yes, there is a kind of contradiction here, in that the same thing is said to be both ‘a fact’ and ‘not possibly true’. (5) No, there is nothing odd about this sentence, because we stated that propositions can be either true or false.
  52. 52. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 52 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS  Example: (1) I went to the supermarket yesterday. (2) What did you do yesterday? (3) Tell me where you went to yesterday. Do sentences (2) and (3) have their propositions?
  53. 53. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 53 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS Propositions are involved in the meanings of other types of sentences in addition to declarative.  DECLARATIVE: the speaker commits himself to the truth of the corresponding proposition: i.e. he asserts the proposition.  INTERROGATIVE: is used to ask questions. The speaker questions the truth of the proposition.  IMPERATIVE: is used to convey orders. The speaker demands carrying out the proposition.
  54. 54. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 54 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 10 (P. 22) ANSWER (1) A/ No B/ No C/ Yes (2) A/ Yes B/ No common proposition is involved. C/ Yes
  55. 55. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 55 ephemeral either loud or quiet  no two utterances can be the same.  either true or false  in a particular regional accent  in a particular language  in the form of a sentence or non- sentence UTTERANCES SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS sentences in different languages can correspond to the same proposition.  can be grammatical or not  not spoken  either true or false  not belonging to any particular regional accent  belonging to a particular language SENTENCES  not spoken  not dealing with grammatical aspects  either true or false  not belonging to any particular regional accent  not belong to a particular language  no PROPOSITIONS
  56. 56. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 56 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS PRACTICE 11 (p. 23)               
  57. 57. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 57 Family tree relationship among utterances, sentences and propositions SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS
  58. 58. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 58 Proposition: an abstract grasped by the mind of an individual person Proposition is an object of thought.  Can one equate propositions as thoughts? Why (not)? SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS
  59. 59. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 59 SENTENCES, UTTERANCES & PROPOSITIONS  private, personal and mental processes  a process going on in an individual’s mind  public (the same proposition is accessible to different persons: different individuals can grasp the same proposition)  not a process THOUGHTS PROPOSITIONS The word “thought” may sometimes be used loosely in a way which includes the notion of a proposition. relationship between o mental processes: THOUGHTS o abstract semantic entities: PROPOSITIONS o linguistic entities: SENTENCES o actions: UTTERANCES
  60. 60. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 60
  61. 61. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 61 Reference and Sense ANSWER (1) S, U (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) No (5) No (6) Yes
  62. 62. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 62 Reference and Sense  Key terms:  sense  reference  referent  context  dialect  proposition
  63. 63. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 63 Reference and Sense  In linguistics, the triangle of reference is a model for explaining how words convey meaning.
  64. 64. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 64 Reference and Sense  Triangle of reference:  also known as o Triangle of Semantics, o Triangle of reference, o the Semiotic Triangle, o the Referent Triangle, o Triangle of Meaning, o the Ogden-Richards Triangle, and o the Meaning of Meaning Model  Triangle of reference:  describes a simplified form of relationship between the speaker as subject, a concept as object or referent, and its designation (sign, signants) 
  65. 65. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 65 Reference and Sense  Interpretation of the Triangle of Reference
  66. 66. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 66 Reference and Sense SENSE Relationships inside the language REFERENCE Relationships between language and the world
  67. 67. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 67 Reference and Sense Example: REFERENCE By means of reference, a speaker indicates which things in the world (including persons) are being talked about
  68. 68. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 68 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 1 (p. 27) ANSWER (1) Your left ear (2) Part of the world (3) Yes (4) No
  69. 69. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 69 Reference and Sense  The same expression can, in some cases, be used to refer to different things. Many expressions in a language can have . Can the same expression be used to refer to different things?
  70. 70. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 70 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 2 (p. 28) ANSWER (1) (a) George W. Bush (b) Bill Clinton (2) variable reference (3) (a) George W. Bush (b) Bill Clinton (4) (c)
  71. 71. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 71 Reference and Sense Can the same expression be used to refer to different things?
  72. 72. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 72 Reference and Sense  In most everyday situations that one can envisage, have constant reference. In fact,  very little constancy of reference in language  In everyday discourse almost all of the fixing of reference comes from the context in which expressions are used. Example: the Morning Star and the Evening Star
  73. 73. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 73 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 3 (p. 28) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) Yes
  74. 74. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 74 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 4 (p. 29) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes
  75. 75. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 75 Reference and Sense SENSE Its place in a system of semantic relationships with other expressions in the language Semantic relationships: 1/ sameness of meaning 2/ converseness of meaning
  76. 76. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 76 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 5 (p. 29) ANSWER (1) S (2) S (3) S (4) D (5) D
  77. 77. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 77 Reference and Sense Can longer expressions (phrases and sentences) have their sense? YES!!! They can.
  78. 78. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 78 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 6 (p. 29) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes
  79. 79. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 79 Reference and Sense Can one word have different senses? YES!!! It can. Example:  bank  row  bear
  80. 80. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 80 Reference and Sense  any spelled with the same sequence of letters and pronounced with the same sequence of phonemes (distinctive sounds) in a standard dialect  in an ordinary dictionary, different entries of one word (word-form) distinguished by a subscript e.g.: bank1 bank2
  81. 81. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 81 Reference and Sense Can one sentence have different senses? YES!!! It can.
  82. 82. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 82 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 7 (p. 30) ANSWER (1) The chicken is ready to be eaten. // The chicken is ready to eat something. (2) Smiling, he greeted the girl. // He greeted the smiling girl. (3) He changed the direction over the field. // He turned the field over.
  83. 83. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 83 Reference and Sense Relationship between sense and reference:  The referent of an expression is often a thing or a person in the world.  The sense of an expression is not a thing at all; it is an abstraction that can be entertained in the mind of a language user.  It is difficult to say what sort of entity the sense of an expression is. It is useful to think of sense as that part of the meaning of an expression that is left over when reference is factored out.  It is much easier to say whether or not two expressions have the same sense.
  84. 84. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 84 Reference and Sense Every expression that has meaning has sense. Does every expression have reference?
  85. 85. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 85 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 8 (p. 31) ANSWER  None of the above words refers to a thing in the world.  Nevertheless all these words, almost, probable, and, if, and above have some sense.
  86. 86. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 86 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 9 (p. 31) ANSWER (1) an expression with the same sense (2) words (3) Yes (4) Yes
  87. 87. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 87 Reference and Sense  Circularity  defining the senses of words and expressions by other words or expressions  not a bad thing  often unavoidable
  88. 88. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 88 Reference and Sense  There is something semantically complete about a proposition, as opposed to the sense of a phrase or single word.  Roughly speaking, a proposition corresponds to a complete independent thought.
  89. 89. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 89 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 10 (p. 32) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) No (3) No (4) Yes
  90. 90. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 90 Reference and Sense
  91. 91. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 91 Reference and Sense Can the same sense belong to expressions in different languages? In case that perfect translation between languages is possible, the answer is YES. Expressions in different DIALECTS of one language can have the same sense.
  92. 92. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 92 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 11 (p. 33) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes
  93. 93. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 93 Reference and Sense SIMILARITY SENSE REFERENCE PROPOSITION UTTERANCE DIRECT NOT SO DIRECT
  94. 94. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 94 Reference and Sense  Both referring and uttering are acts performed by particular speakers on particular occasions.  Most utterances contain, or are accompanied by, one or more acts of referring.  An act of referring is the picking out of a particular referent by a speaker in the course of a particular.
  95. 95. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 95 Reference and Sense  Although the concept of reference is fundamentally related to utterances, in that acts of reference only actually happen in the course of utterances. When talking about reference in connection with sentences, or parts of sentences, we are imagining a potential utterance of the sentence or expression in question.  In daily conversation, the words meaning, means, mean, meant, etc. are sometimes used to indicate reference and sometimes to indicate sense.
  96. 96. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 96 Reference and Sense PRACTICE 12 (p. 34) ANSWER (1) R (2) R (3) S (4) S (5) S (6) R
  97. 97. CHAPTER 2: FROM REFERENCE … 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 97
  98. 98. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 98
  99. 99. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 99 Referring Expressions ANSWER (1) George W. Bush, the former governor of Texas (2) My daughter (3) the sun, Vietnam (4) the Morning Star and the Evening Star (5) and, if, furthermore (6) (c)
  100. 100. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 100 Referring Expressions  Key terms:  referring expression  indefinite noun phrase  definite noun phrase  opaque context  equative sentence
  101. 101. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 101 Referring Expressions  e.g.: The name Fred  “Fred hit me”  “There is no Fred at this address” REFERRING EXPRESSION Any expression used in an utterance to refer to something or someone (or a clearly delimited collection of things or people) i.e. used with a particular referent in mind
  102. 102. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 102 Referring Expressions PRACTICE 1 (p. 37) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) No (4) Yes (5) Yes (6) Yes (7) No (8) No
  103. 103. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 103 Referring Expressions  can be a referring expression or not = may or may not have a “referring interpretation”  Depending on the context  This is true of INDEFINITE NOUN PHRASES. Can the same expression always be referring expression? NO!!! It cannot.
  104. 104. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 104 Referring Expressions PRACTICE 2 (p. 37-38) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) No (4) No (5) Yes (6) No
  105. 105. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 105 Referring Expressions INDEFINITE NOUN PHRASES  linguistic context  often gives a vital clue to decide a particular indefinite noun phrase is a referring expression or not  not always give a clear indication
  106. 106. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 106 Referring Expressions PRACTICE 3 (p. 38) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) ambiguous sentence (3) ambiguous sentence (4) Yes and No (5) Yes (6) Yes and No
  107. 107. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 107 Referring Expressions By the use of the word certain immediately following the indefinite article a  Indefinite noun phrases can be referring expressions.  referring expressions depend heavily on linguistic context and on circumstances of utterance. How can one resolve the ambiguities in the above examples?
  108. 108. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 108 Referring Expressions PRACTICE 4 (p. 39) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) Yes
  109. 109. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 109 Referring Expressions DEFINITE NOUN PHRASES  different kinds  proper names (e.g. John)  personal pronouns (e.g. he, I)  longer descriptive expressions (e.g. The young man who won the first prize in the competition) Most frequently used as referring expressions Are there any definite noun phrases that are not used as referring expressions?
  110. 110. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 110 Referring Expressions PRACTICE 5 (p. 39) ANSWER (1) No (2) No (3) Not a referring expression (4) Not a referring expression
  111. 111. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 111 Referring Expressions The notion of “referring expression” is not always easy to apply  It is not clear what we mean when we say a speaker must have a particular individual in mind in order to refer.  Definite noun phrases are very much dependent on the context and circumstances of use.
  112. 112. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 112 Referring Expressions PRACTICE 6 (p. 40) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) Yes
  113. 113. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 113 Referring Expressions Reference vs. Definiteness  Definiteness is a condition of the referring expression. e.g.: ‘The boy is honest’ ‘The boy may get sick as the girl’  Indefiniteness indicates that a language expression is not a referring expression. e.g.: ‘Look there! I see a boy climbing the tree’ ‘A boy must have broken the window’ False. It is just one of the necessary conditions. False. It depends on the context of the utterance
  114. 114. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 114 Referring Expressions ‘Definite’ and ‘Indefinite’ are grammatical terms which are not directly parallel to the semantic terms of ‘referring expression’ and ‘non-referring expression’.  Definite and indefinite noun phrases can be used as referring expressions depending on the context and circumstances of use.
  115. 115. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 115 Referring Expressions  A referring expression can be  one word or  more than one word e.g.: ‘London’ ‘The man who wrote on the oaktree’
  116. 116. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 116 Referring Expressions REVIEW ANSWER (1) T (2) T (3) F (4) T (5) F (6) F
  117. 117. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 117 Referring Expressions  Normally, utterances which differ only in that they use different expressions referring to the same thing (or person) will have the same meaning.  However, there is a class of exceptions to this generalization, involving opaque contexts.
  118. 118. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 118 Referring Expressions OPAQUE CONTEXT A part of a sentence which could be made into a complete sentence by the addition of a referring expression, but where the addition of different referring expressions, even though they refer to the same thing or person, in a given situation, will yield sentences with DIFFERENT meanings when uttered in a given situation.
  119. 119. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 119 Referring Expressions PRACTICE 7 (p. 41) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) No (5) Yes (6) Yes (7) No
  120. 120. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 120 Referring Expressions  OC is a linguistic context in which it is not always possible to substitute “co-referential” expressions (expressions referring to the same object) without altering the truth of the sentences. Substitution of co-referential expressions into an opaque context does not always preserve the truth. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opaque_context)
  121. 121. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 121 Referring Expressions
  122. 122. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 122 Referring Expressions
  123. 123. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 123 Referring Expressions OPAQUE CONTEXT:  these contexts seem to “block our view” through them to the referential interpretations (referents) of referring expressions.  typically involve a certain kind of verb: WANT, BELIEVE, THINK and WONDER ABOUT. NOTE: It is often in the context of opacity-creating verbs that indefinite noun phrases could be ambiguous between a referring and a non-referring interpretation. e.g.: ‘Mary wants to marry a Norwegian’
  124. 124. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 124 Referring Expressions e.g.:  Mark Zugckerberg is Facebook’s founder. Mark Zugckerberg = Facebook’s founder  That woman over there is my daughter’s teacher. EQUATIVE SENTENCE is used to assert the identity of the referents of two referring expressions, i.e. to assert that two referring expressions have the same referent.
  125. 125. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 125 Referring Expressions  Equative sentence:  the order of the two referring expressions can be reversed without the loss of acceptability. However,  The ‘reversal test’ / ‘inversion test’ is not a perfect diagnosis for equative sentences. e.g.: Facebook’s founder is Mark Zugckerberg. What I need now is a cup of coffee. That is the man who stole my wallet.
  126. 126. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 126 Referring Expressions  Why?  Facebook’s founder is Mark Zugckerberg. Reversible + acceptable  Equative  What I need now is a cup of coffee. Reversible + not a referring expression  has no particular referent in mind  Equative  That is the man who stole my wallet. Equative + not reversible  unacceptable
  127. 127. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 127 Referring Expressions PRACTICE 8 (p. 42) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) No (4) No (5) Yes (6) No
  128. 128. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 128
  129. 129. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 129 Predicates ANSWER (1) (c) (2) No (3) (c) (4) No (5) Yes (6) John, Venus
  130. 130. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 130 Predicates  Key terms  predicator  predicate  argument  degree of a predicate  ellipsis (elliptical)  identity relation
  131. 131. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 131 Predicates  Simple declarative sentences contain  one or more referring expressions, and  some other words that do not form part of any of the referring expressions e.g.: Mary’s new job seems inspirational To me, February is the most beautiful time in the year.
  132. 132. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 132 Predicates PRACTICE 1 (p. 46) ANSWER (1) bit (2) is writing (3) is in (4) is between (5) stinks (6) is red (7) was a genius
  133. 133. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 133 Predicates  The ‘remainder’  varied set  it is possible to discern one word (or part of a word) which ‘carries more meaning’ than the others. Write in example (2) carries more specific information than is and the suffix –ing. 
  134. 134. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 134 Predicates  If one strips away such less meaningful elements, one is left with a sequence of words, which, though ungrammatical and inelegant, can still be understood as expressing a proposition.  The result is a kind ‘Tarzan jungle talk’ e.g.: Boy bad for The boy is bad Woman write speech for The woman is writing the speech.
  135. 135. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 135 Predicates PRACTICE 2 (p. 46) ANSWER (1) write (2) in (3) between, and (4) stink (5) red (6) genius
  136. 136. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 136 Predicates  The words that just have been isolated from their original sentences are called PREDICATORS of those sentences.
  137. 137. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 137 Predicates PREDICATOR (partial definition) Of a simple declarative sentence is the word (sometimes a group of words) which does not belong to any of the referring expressions and which, of the remainder, makes the most specific contribution to the meaning of the sentence. Intuitively speaking, the predicator describes the state or process in which the referring expressions are involved.
  138. 138. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 138 Predicates  e.g.:  asleep is the predicator in Mummy is asleep and describes the state Mummy is in.  love is the predicator in The white man loved the Indian maiden and describes the process in which the two referring expressions the white man and the Indian maiden are involved.  wait for is the predicator in Jimmy was waiting for the downtown bus and describes the process involving Jimmy and the downtown bus.
  139. 139. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 139 Predicates PRACTICE 3 (p. 47) ANSWER (1) hungry (2) in (3) a crook (4) is whimsical (5) behind
  140. 140. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 140 Predicates  Note:  The semantics of tense: o contributes to the meaning of a sentence differently o e.g.: the indicators of past and present tense  The verb BE in its various forms (is, am, are, was, were, been): NOT the predicator
  141. 141. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 141 Predicates  Types of predicators: various parts of speech  adjectives  verbs  prepositions  nouns  Exceptions: words of other parts of speech  cannot serve as predicators in sentences  conjunctions  articles  to BE
  142. 142. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 142
  143. 143. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 143 Predicates 
  144. 144. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 144 Predicates PRACTICE 4 (p. 48) ANSWER (1) predicator: menace, argument: Denis (2) predicator: showed, arguments: Fred, Jane, his BMW (3) predicator: proud, arguments: Donald, his family (4) predicator: outside, arguments: the hospital, the city
  145. 145. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 145 Predicates  Semantic and Grammatical Predicates  Although there is some overlap, the semantic analysis does not correspond in most cases to the traditional grammatical analysis.  This course is concerned almost exclusively with the semantic analysis of sentences.
  146. 146. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 146 Predicates SENTENCES SEMANTIC ANALYSIS TRADITIONAL GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS PREDICATOR + ARGUMENT (S) SUBJECT + PREDICATE
  147. 147. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 147 Predicates PREDICATE Any word (or sequence of word) which (in a given single sense) can function as the predicator of a sentence.
  148. 148. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 148 Predicates PRACTICE 5 (p. 48-49) Are the following predicates? (1) dusty Yes / No (2) drink Yes / No (3) woman Yes / No (4) you Yes / No (5) Fred Yes / No (6) about Yes / No ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) No (5) No (6) Yes
  149. 149. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 149 Predicates  The definition of ‘predicate’ contained two parenthesized conditions.  (or sequence of words): seems sensible to analyse as single predicates.  (in a given single sense): more important  illustrates a degree of abstractness in the notion of predicate A predicate can have only one sense.
  150. 150. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 150 Predicates e.g.: bank1 bank2 row1 row2  Normally  the context  clarifies what sense (what predicate) we have in mind  Occasionally  use subscripts on words to distinguish between different predicates
  151. 151. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 151 Predicates  identifies elements in the language system  independently of particular examples  can envisage a list of predicates in English  identifies semantic roles  played by a word (or more) in a particular sentence  can’t list the predicators of English PREDICATE PREDICATOR The semantic term ‘predicator’ ~ the grammatical term ‘subject’ The subject of a particular sentence NOT A list of ‘the subjects of English’ The predicator of a particular sentence NOT A list of ‘the predicators of English’ A simple sentence only has ONE PREDICATOR, although it may well contain MORE THAN ONE instance of PREDICATE.
  152. 152. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 152 Predicates  e.g.: A tall, handsome stranger entered the saloon This sentence consists of one predicator: enter  predicates: tall, handsome, stranger, saloon These predicates can function as predicators in other sentences. e.g.: John is tall He is handsome He is a stranger That ramshackle building is a saloon
  153. 153. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 153 Predicates PRACTICE 6 (p.50) ANSWER (1) (b) (c) (2) (b) (c)
  154. 154. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 154 Predicates e.g.:  asleep is a predicate of degree one (~ one-place predicate)  love (v) is a predicate of degree two (~ two-place predicate) DEGREE of PREDICATE A number indicating the number of arguments it is normally understood to have in simple sentences
  155. 155. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 155 Predicates PRACTICE 7 (p. 50) ANSWER (1) (a) Yes (b) No (c) No (2)Yes (3) (a) No (b) Yes (c) No (4) No (5) Yes (6) Yes (7) No
  156. 156. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 156 Predicates How many arguments can a verb have? most naturally with just two arguments two-place predicates Are there any verbs that are THREE-PLACE PREDICATE? Give examples.
  157. 157. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 157 Predicates PRACTICE 8 (p. 51) ANSWER (1) (a) No (b) Yes (c) No (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) Yes
  158. 158. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 158 Predicates PRACTICE 9 (p. 51) ANSWER (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Yes (4) No (5) 3
  159. 159. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 159 Predicates English semantics only deals with verbal predicates. Is it true? No, English semantics can have predicates that are ADJECTIVES, NOUNS and PREPOSITIONS.
  160. 160. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 160 Predicates  PREPOSITIONAL PREDICATES  e.g.: London is in Europe.  two-place predicate The cat is on the tree.  two-place predicate
  161. 161. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 161 Predicates PRACTICE 9 (p. 51) ANSWER (1) 2 (2) No (3) No (4) 2 (5) 2 (6) No (7) Yes (8) 3
  162. 162. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 162 Predicates  ADJECTIVAL PREDICATES The majority of adjectives are one-place predicates. e.g.: The new English teacher is good-manned Can you find any examples in which adjectives are two- place predicates? e.g.: different, similar
  163. 163. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 163 Predicates The role of prepositions in compound adjectives as predicates  e.g.: fond of, afraid of, aware of  NOT predicates  Some adjectives in English require (grammatically) to be joined to a following argument by a preposition. Adj. + prep + argument  Often considered as relatively meaningless linking particles
  164. 164. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 164 Predicates The role of prepositions in compound adjectives as predicates  Often considered as relatively meaningless linking particles Adj. + linking particle  complex or multi-word predicate with basically one unified meaning  Often one can use different linking preposition with NO change in meaning e.g.: different to and different than
  165. 165. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 165 Predicates  NOUNS AS PREDICATES e.g.: Hanoi is the capital city of Vietnam.  Most nouns are one-place predicates.  However, a few nouns could be said to be ‘inherently relational’  two-place predicates e.g.: father, son, neighbour
  166. 166. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 166 Predicates PRACTICE 10 (p. 53) ANSWER (1) 1 (2) No (3) 1 (4) 1 (5) 1 (6) 1 (7) 1
  167. 167. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 167 Predicates Can two predicates of different grammatical parts of speech have the same sense?
  168. 168. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 168 Predicates Two predicates are of different grammatical parts of speech but can have nearly the same sense. e.g.: Tom is a fool and Tom is foolish I am afraid of snakes and I fear cats The corresponding predicates have the same degree.
  169. 169. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 169 Predicates  The relation can be found in equative sentences.  The identity relation has very basic role in communication of information. e.g.: Ms Janet is my daughter’s new English teacher My daughter’s new English teacher is Ms Janet
  170. 170. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 170 Predicates  VERB BE in English semantics  expresses the identity of the referents of two different referring expressions  functions as a grammatical device: to link a predicate that is not a verb (e.g.: adjective, preposition, noun) to its first argument  functions as a device for ‘carrying’ the tense of a sentence
  171. 171. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 171 Predicates PRACTICE 11 (p. 54) ANSWER: The identity relation is expressed by a form of be in sentences (2), (3), and (5).
  172. 172. 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 172 Predicates PRACTICE 12
  173. 173. CHAPTER 3: … TO SENSE 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 173
  174. 174. CHAPTER 4: LOGIC 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 174
  175. 175. CHAPTER 5: WORD MEANING 5/24/2018 Semantics (2017-18) HongOanh 175

Editor's Notes

  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Semantics
    is the study of Meaning.
    Is the study of Meaning in language.

    Language vs. language
  • Reference:
    http://wobewo.be/semantic-triangle/
    Ogden & Richards in The meaning of meaning (1923)
    http://inmyownterms.com/mysmartterms/mysmarterms-5-the-semantic-triangle-words-dont-mean-people-mean/
    https://www.communicationtheory.org/the-meaning-of-meaning-model/
    http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-triangle-of-reference.htm
    http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~johnca/spch100/4-1-ogden.htm
  • http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ling201/test3materials/semanticsHANDOUT.htm
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definiteness
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referring_expression
  • As far as I can tell, the term 'predicate' is used rather differently in syntax and semantics.
    Syntacticians speak of 'predicates' only when a 'predication' relation - 'primary' (as in Bill came home) or 'secondary' (as in Bill came home rather depressed)- is established with a syntactic 'subject', which may be the (unique) subject of the clause or another NP/DP, in certain cases of 'secondary predication' in which the 'subject' is not the subject of the clause, but an object, or the subject of a subordinate 'small clause', etc., depending on which analysis each syntactician favours (as in, e.g., I saw Bill rather depressed, I consider Bill an excellent teacher, etc.).
    Hence, syntactic predicates normally or even invariably (depending on the analyses syntacticians adopt), correspond to only one type of what semanticists would call 'first-order one-placepredicates', the type in which the argument that must 'saturate' the unsaturated one-place predicate to yield a 'proposition' is discharged, precisely, by the syntactic subject of the clause, but, of course, the undischarged argument of an unsaturated one-place predicate need not correspond to the subject of the clause; semantically speaking, I sent Bill__ is also a one-place first-order predicate, even though the missing argument is, syntactically, not discharged by a subject, but by a direct object (say the invitation in I sent Bill the invitation, or which in This is the invitation which I sent Bill, etc.).
    In semantics, on the contrary, the term 'predicate' is used much more generally. Of course it is applied in cases of 'functional application' that do correspond to syntactic predications, but also to many other cases that do not. For one thing, semanticists, following logicians, speak of 'monadic' (= one-place), 'dyadic' (two-place), and, generally, 'n-adic' (n-place) 'predicates' (and all are 'predicates', from the semantic point of view). A transitive verb, for example, is, semantically speaking, a two-place (first-order) predicate, although, obviously, it does not by itself constitute a complete syntactic predicate, and a 'ditransitive' verb is a three-place first-order 'predicate', although it would need to be construed with two objects to constitute a complete syntactic predicate, etc. On the other hand, the 'predicates' the semanticist talks about need not be first-order, they may also be higher-order (2nd, third,... etc., depending on how rich the semanticist's ontology is), and, as a consequence, ad-nominal APs, PPs, relative clauses, etc. internal to an NP/DP, for example, are also one-place 'predicates' (2nd order, in this case, since they are predicated of a common, or modified common noun, that is itself, semantically speaking, a first-order predicate), and, correspondingly, AdvPs, PP's, etc. modifying unsaturated VPs also qualify as one-place (in this case, nth-order) predicates, since they are 'predicated' of partially constructed VPs. Actually, 'adverbials', as Ernst and Cinque, in particular, have shown, may be 'predicated' of entities that syntactically correspond to many different types of verbal or extended verbal projections, AuxPs, Modality Phrases, full predications, propositions (with polarity specified), ForcePs etc., etc., which are not first-order entities, either. So, in sum, in semantics, the extension of the predicate 'predicate' is much bigger than it is in syntax.
    https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/6781/is-there-an-established-distinction-between-semantic-and-syntactic-predicates?rq=1


    According to traditional grammar, the predicate is the part of a sentence that modifies the subject, i.e., the sentence can be divided into two parts: the subject and the predicate. For example, in the sentence The kids may have started the game, the NP (the kids) is the subject and the VP (may have started the game) is the predicate. I know that the term predicate identifies elements in the language system and predicator identifies the semantic roles. The former is related to syntax/grammar while the latter is related to semantics (argument structure). However, inspired by predicate calculus, modern theories of syntax and grammar see predicates as relations between or functions over arguments. Predicates assign a property to a single argument or relate two or more arguments to one other, e.g., Sam helped you (help is a predicate, while Sam and you are arguments). Up to this point it's clear.
    Now, Hurford (2007) defines predicator and predicate as follows:
    Predicator
    The predicator of a simple declarative sentence is the word (sometimes a (partial) group of words) which does not belong to any of the referring expressions and which, of the remainder, makes the most specific contribution to the meaning of the sentence. Intuitively speaking, the predicator describes the state or process in which the referring expressions are involved.
    Predicate
    Predicate is any word (or sequence of words) which (in a given single sense) can function as the predicator of a sentence.
    The problem arises with the following example:
    A tall, handsome stranger entered the saloon.
    This sentence only contains one predicator (enter) but the sentence also contains the words tall, handsome, stranger and saloon, all of which are predicates, and can function as predicators in other sentences, e.g. John is tall, He is handsome, He is a stranger and That ramshackle building is a saloon.
    Now, some people illustrate this specific example as:
    A tall, handsome stranger (predicate) and entered (predicator)
    While others, on the basis of traditional grammar, argue that since A handsome stranger is the subject of the sentence, it cannot be a predicate. According to them:
    A tall, handsome stranger (subject), entered the saloon (predicate) and entered (predicator)
    In my view, the sentence can be illustrated as follows:
    A tall, handsome stranger (argument of predicate) entered (matrix predicate/predicator) the saloon (argument of predicate)
    A tall, handsome stranger (as a subject) may not necessarily be acting as a predicate in this specific sentence, but the illustration given in Hurford (2007) may simply mean that these words can act as predicator or predicate in other sentences e.g. He is tall, He is handsome and He is a stranger. In all these sentences, the VP (is tall, is handsome, is a stranger) is a predicate and the words tall, handsome and stranger are predicators. Is this correct?
    The question is about the first group who label the sentence according to traditional grammar and are confused when they interpret A tall handsome stranger as the predicate in the sentence A tall, handsome stranger entered the saloon.
    https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/12443/predicate-traditional-vs-modern-view-semantics-vs-syntax?rq=1
  • (1) (a) Yes (b) No (c) No (2) Yes (3) (a) No (b) Yes (c) No (4) No (5) Yes
    (6) Yes (7) No
  • http://primus.arts.u-szeged.hu/bese/Glossary/gloss_two-place_predicate.htm
  • ×