Semantic : Sense and Relations (Synonym, Paraphrase, Hyponymy, Homonymy, Polysemy, Logic, Proposition)

Sense and Relations :
Identity and Similarity of Sense

Introduction

In previous units you were introduced to the notion of sense. We now proceed to the examination of sense relations. What we have referred to previously as the sense of an expression is the whole set of sense relations it contracts with other expressions in the language. We will mainly be concerned with the sense relations which involve individual predicates and whole sentences.

Definition of Synonymy

SYNONYMY is the relationship between two predicates that have the same sense.

•      For example, In most dialects of English, stubborn and obstinate are synonyms. In most dialects of Javanese, tuku and tumbas are synonyms.

Example:

àHow many kids have you got?

àHow many children have you got?

•      Here we would say that kids and children have the same sense, although clearly they differ in style, or formality.

Similarity of Meaning

Definition of Paraphrase

A sentence which expresses the same proposition as another sentence is a PARAPHRASE of that sentence (assuming the same referents for any referring expressions involved).

Paraphrase is to SENTENCES (on individual interpretations) as SYNONYMY is to PREDICATES (though some semanticists talk loosely of synonymy in the case of sentences as well).

Example:

Bachelors prefer red haired girls is a paraphrase of Girls with red hair are preferred by unmarried men

Definition of Hyponymy

HYPONYMY is a sense relation between predicates (or sometimes longer phrases) such that the meaning of one predicate (or phrase) is included in the meaning of the other.

For example, the meaning of red is included in the meaning of scarlet. Red is the superordinate term; scarlet is a hyponym of red (scarlet is a kind of red).

Inclusion or Exclusion?

•      Before we leave the discussion of hyponymy, a note should be made of its relationship with extension.

•      Hyponymy is a sense relation. Another term for sense, preferred by logicians, is intension, a term deliberately chosen for its implicit contrast with extension. Hyponymy is defined in terms of the inclusion of the sense of one item in the sense of another. We say, for example, that the sense of animal is included in the sense of cow.

•      This inclusion can be shown roughly by a diagram giving a list of the ‘sense-components’ of cow. It

•      will be seen that this list includes the component ‘animal’.

•      Sense of cow à animal à sense of animal

                                 bovine

                                 female

But paradoxically, if we draw a diagram of the extensions of cow and animal, the inclusion relationship appears the other way around.

Note :

•      Earlier in this unit we saw that it is possible to extend the notion of ‘sameness’ of meaning between predicates (synonymy) to sameness of meaning between propositions that are expressed by sentences (paraphrases).

•      Similarly, the notion of hyponymy, which involves meaning inclusion between individual predicates, can be extended to a particular kind of meaning inclusion between propositions in a language involving truth conditions called ‘entailment’.

Summary :

•      Hyponymy and synonymy are sense relations between predicates. The latter is a special, symmetric, case of the former. Entailment and paraphrase are sense relations between sentences, the latter being a special, symmetric case of the former. The sense relations between predicates and those between sentences are systematically connected by rules such as the basic rule of sense inclusion. These sense relations are also systematically connected with such sense properties of sentences as ANALYTICITY and CONTRADICTION.

Sense Relation :

Oppositeness and Dissimilarity of Sense

And Ambiguity

Introduction

In the case of ambiguous words, a distinction is sometimes made between polysemy and homonymy. This distinction has basically to do with the closeness, or relatedness, of the senses of the ambiguous words.

Definition of Homonymy

A case of HOMONYMY is one of an ambiguous word whose different senses are far apart from each other and not obviously related to each other in any way with respect to a native speaker’s intuition. Cases of homonymy seem very definitely to be matters of mere accident or coincidence.

Example :

•      Mug (drinking vessel vs gullible person/an easily deceived person) would be a clear case of homonymy.

•      Bank (financial institution vs the side of a river (bantaran sungai) or stream) is another clear case of homonymy.

•      A word that has the same pronunciation as another is homonym. Homonyms differ from each other in:

1. Meaning
2. Origin
3. Spelling

Homonyms in English differ from their sense:

•      (Homophone) Words the same pronunciation but different in meaning: boar (babi hutan) and bore (membosankan)

•      Homographs (words with the same spelling but different in meaning): bisa (racun) and bisa (mampu); bow (the front part of ship), bow (to bend), bow (a decorative knot

Definition of Polysemy

A case of POLYSEMY is one where a word has several very closely related senses. In other words, a native speaker of the language has clear intuitions that the different senses are related to each other in some way.

Example :

•      Mouth (of a river (bibir sungai) vs of an animal) is a case of polysemy.

•      The two senses are clearly related by the concepts of an opening from the interior of some solid mass to the outside, and of a place of issue at the end of some long narrow channel.

•      Run is another more complicated case of polysemy in which the word has more than one related sense. Note that in this case we have an example of polysemy with a verb (at least in most of its senses).

•      So polysemy is not restricted to just one part of speech.

Note :

•      The multiple senses of run are related to each other in a somewhat more abstract way than in the case of the senses of mouth. Some uses of run which bring out a few of its complex interrelated senses include: run a race (on foot), run for office, this road runs from east to west, the motor is running, the water is running down the roof, run a computer program, a run in a stocking, etc.

Logic

Introduction

Logic is a word that means many things to different people. Many every day uses of the words logic and logical could be replaced by expressions such as reasonable behaviour and reasonable. You may say, for instance, ‘Sue acted quite logically in locking her door’, meaning that Sue had good, well thought out reasons for doing what she did. We shall use the words logic and logical in a narrower sense, familiar to semanticists. We give a partial definition of our sense of logic below.

Definition of Logic

LOGIC deals with meanings in a language system, not with actual behaviour of any sort. Logic deals most centrally with PROPOSITIONS. The terms ‘logic’ and ‘logical’ do not apply directly to UTTERANCES (which areinstances of behaviour).

There is an important connection between logic (even in our narrow sense) and rational action, but it is wrong to equate the two. Logic is just one contributing factor in rational behaviour. Rational behavior involves:

(a) goals

(b) assumptions and knowledge about existing states of affairs

(c) calculations, based on these assumptions and knowledge, leading to ways of achieving    the goals.

Example (of rational behavior) :

Goal: to alleviate my hunger. (Hunger is alleviated by eating food.)

Assumptions and knowledge

Cheese is food.

There is a piece of cheese in front of me.

I am able to eat this piece of cheese.

Calculations:

Ø  If hunger is alleviated by eating food and cheese is food, then hunger is alleviated by eating cheese.

Ø  If hunger is alleviated by eating cheese, then my own hunger would be alleviated by eating this piece of cheese in front of me, and eating this piece of cheese would alleviate my hunger, and my goal is to alleviate my hunger, so therefore eating this piece of cheese would achieve my goal.

(Rational) action: eating the cheese.

Logic, then, tells us nothing about goals, or assumptions, or actions in themselves. It simply provides rules for calculation which may be used to get a rational being from goals and assumptions to action. There is a close analogy between logic and arithmetic (which is why we have used the word calculation).

‘Arithmetical fact’ does not mean just fact involving numbers in some way, but rather fact arising from the system of rules defining addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. A similarity between arithmetic and logic is the unthinkability of alternatives.

Example :

‘2 + 2 = 5’ is unthinkable. We can say the words easily enough, but there is no way that we can put together the concepts behind ‘2’, ‘+’, ‘=’, and ‘5’ so that they fit what ‘2 + 2 = 5’ seems to mean. This is an arithmetical contradiction.

All men are mortal and some men are not mortal is unthinkable in the same way. This is a logical contradiction

Definition of Proposition

In our definition of ‘proposition’ we explicitly mentioned declarative sentences, but propositions are clearly involved in the meanings of other types of sentences, such as interrogatives, which are used to ask questions, and imperatives, which are used to convey orders.

Normally, when a speaker utters a simple declarative sentence, he commits himself to the truth of the corresponding proposition: i.e. he asserts the proposition. By uttering a simple interrogative or imperative, a speaker can mention a particular proposition, without asserting its truth.

Example :

•      In saying, ‘John can go’ a speaker asserts the proposition that John can go.

•      In saying, ‘Can John go?’, he mentions the same proposition but merely questions its truth.

•      We say that corresponding declaratives and interrogatives (and imperatives) have the same propositional content.

Propositions, unlike sentences, cannot be said to belong to any particular language. Sentences in different languages can correspond to the same proposition, if the two sentences are perfect translations of each other.

E.g.

•      English I am sleepy and Indonesia  Saya ngantuk, can, to the extent to which they are perfect translations of each other, be said to correspond to the same proposition.

Summary :

Logic deals with meanings in a language system (i.e. with propositions,etc.), not with actual behaviour, although logical calculations are aningredient of any rational behaviour. A system for describing logical thinking contains a notation for representing propositions unambiguously and rules of inference defining how propositions go together to make up valid arguments.

Because logic deals with such very basic aspects of thought and reasoning, it can sometimes seem as if it is ‘stating the obvious’. The thing to remember is that one is not, in the end, interested in individual particular examples of correct logical argument (for, taken individually, such examples are usually very obvious and trivial), but rather in describing the whole system of logical inference, i.e. one is trying to build up a comprehensive account of all logical reasoning, from which the facts about the individual examples will follow automatically. One only looks at individual examples in order to check that the descriptive system that one is building does indeed match the facts.

Logic, with its emphasis on absolute precision, has a fascination for students who enjoy a mental discipline. Thus, in addition to its contribution to our understanding of the ‘Laws of Thought’, it can be good fun.