/
Albert Gatt Albert Gatt

Albert Gatt - PowerPoint Presentation

tatyana-admore
tatyana-admore . @tatyana-admore
Follow
376 views
Uploaded On 2016-07-24

Albert Gatt - PPT Presentation

LIN 1180 Semantics Lecture7 Ambiguity and vagueness Continuation from last week Ambiguity vs Vagueness I In context a word can seem to have several distinct senses Some may appear more related than others ID: 418438

1180 lin senses semantics lin 1180 semantics senses words meaning relations word sense ambiguity synonymy related run vagueness hyponymy

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Albert Gatt" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Albert Gatt

LIN 1180 – Semantics

Lecture7Slide2

Ambiguity and vagueness

Continuation from last weekSlide3

Ambiguity vs. Vagueness (I)

In context, a word can seem to have several distinct senses. Some may appear more related than others.

In

our example:

run

1

= physical act of running

run

2

= place where fowl are kept

So

run is

2-ways ambiguous

(2 senses)

But

run

1

exhibits

vagueness

between a general sense of running, and the more specialised sense used in cricket.Slide4

Ambiguity vs. vagueness (II)

Similarly:

daħla

1

= entrance or inlet

daħla

2

= introduction to a text

2-ways

ambiguous

daħla

1

is

vague

between the sense of “entrance” and that of “inlet”Slide5

Ambiguity vs. vagueness (IV

)

Ambiguity:

In this case, the context will select one of the meanings/senses

We often don’t even notice ambiguity, because context clarifies the intended meaning.

Vagueness

:

Context adds information to the sense.

Therefore the sense of the word itself doesn’t contain all the information.

It is

underspecified

.Slide6

Tests for ambiguity and vagueness

There

are some tests to decide whether meaning distinctions involve ambiguity or vagueness.

The

do-so

test of meaning identity

The synonymy or sense-relations testSlide7

The

do-so

test: preliminary example

I

ate a sandwich

and Mary

The

do-so

construction is interpreted as

identical to the preceding verb phrase

Similar constructions in Maltese:

Kilt biċċa ħobż u

anka

MarijaKilt biċċa ħobż u Marija għamlet hekk ukoll.

did so toodid tooSlide8

The

do-so

test and meaning identity

Main principle:

if a particular sense is selected for a word in a verb phrase, it will also be the same sense in the

do-so

phrase

Therefore, very useful to test if two meanings are two distinct senses.Slide9

Do-so examples

Lili

għoġbitni

d-daħla

u lil Jimmy

wkoll

(I liked the entrance/introduction and so did Jimmy)

Suppose

daħla

here = “introduction”

Is it possible that

I liked the introduction and Jimmy liked the entrance

?

If not, then these are two distinct senses or daħlaI made

a run and so did PriscillaIf “I made a run” = “I ran”, then Priscilla cannot have made a run for her chickens...So, again, these are two distinct senses of run.Slide10

The sense relations test

Basic principle:

Words exhibit synonymy or similarity of meaning to other words.

Therefore, if a word is ambiguous, we can substitute it for a similar word in the same context, and see if the meaning

stays

roughly

the same.Slide11

Sense relations examples

Recall:

run

1

= physical act of running (

similar word:

jog

)

run

2

= a closed space for animals (

similar word:

enclosure)Pete went for .We can’t substitute one set of words for another and still keep the same meaning.

√ a run

a jog

*an enclosureSlide12

Lexical relations: basic concepts

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

We have established that:

words in the lexicon

can

have multiple senses (

ambiguity

)

they can also be

vague

, so that the actual meaning is underspecified and becomes clearer in context

In addition:

Words are

not merely listedthey are often related to one anotherSlide13

Homonymy,

polysemy

, synonymy

Part 1Slide14

How is the lexicon structured?

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Lexical items belong to semantic fields

words that belong to the same “topic” ,“subject” or “usage”

lexical relations are often strongest within a semantic field

different senses of a word often fall into different fields

Examples

:

computing

:

gigabyte, CPU, memory, disk,

monitor

administration/diplomacy/politics:

green, monitor, parliament, electionNotice that monitor here has two senses, each falling in a different field.Slide15

Homonymy -- I

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Homonyms are

unrelated senses of a the same phonological or orthographic word

.

sometimes we use

homographs

for unrelated senses of a written word

could be considered different words

lexicographers often treat derivationally related forms as homonyms

Examples

:

bank (river) / bank (financial)

ring / wring

house (N) / house (V)right / writeSlide16

Two subtypes

of homonymy

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

homphony

ring / wring

same phonology

different

orthography

homography

articulate (ADJ) / articulate (V)

Maltese:

domna

(V) (stay-late.3PL) /

domna (N) (religious icon)

different phonologysame orthographySlide17

Polysemy

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

One phonological word, multiple senses

(ambiguity)

senses are related, though distinguishable

cf.

daħla

(entrance) vs.

daħla

(in

let

)

in traditional dictionaries, multiple senses are listed under the same head word.Slide18

Homonymy vs. polysemy

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Relatedness:

homonymy: senses are unrelated;

polysemy: senses are related

either historically or

based on speaker intuition

NB

: Not always a clear-cut distinction. Speakers’ intuitions vary considerably.

Do you consider

sole

(“bottom of foot”) and

sole

(“flat, riverbed fish”) related?Slide19

Synonymy

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Different phonological words with

highly related meanings

:

sofa / couch

boy / lad

żgħir (small) / ċkejken (little)

moxt

(comb) /

petne

(comb)

Very

very difficult to find examples of perfect synonyms.Slide20

Imperfect synonymy

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Synonyms often exhibit slight differences, espcially in connotations

petne

(“

comb

”)

has Romance origins; probably used by most speakers today

moxt

(“

comb

”)

has Semitic origins (cf.

xuxa “hair”)Usage differs depending on dialect, context…Slide21

The importance of register

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

With near-synonyms, there are often register-governed conditions of use.

Register = a style of language specific to a situation (e.g. formal, colloquial etc)

E.g

.

naive

vs

gullible

vs

ingenuous

gullible

/

naive seem critical, or even offensiveingenuous more likely in a formal contextSlide22

Synonymy vs. Similarity

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Native speakers often have strong intuitions about words which are “related”, though not necessarily identical, in meaning.

E.g

. boat/ship; car/truck; man/woman

But

also near-synonyms such as: snake/serpent

Similarity

is broader than synonymy, since even words with “opposite” or “antonymous” meanings can be judged as similar; e.g. large/smallSlide23

When are two words similar?

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Contextual view of meaning (Wittgenstein, 1953…):

the meaning of linguistic expressions can be characterised by looking at how they are

used

two words are similar to the extent that they’re used in similar waysSlide24

Example: master/pupil

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

These words have very different meanings, but share a core set of uses.

Both refer to human roles which tend to be practised in the same real world contexts (school etc).

Is

this reflected in the way we use the words?

master of X school, pupil of X school

past master, past pupil

Rather

than in contextual terms, we could view similarity as simply arising from links in a network of concepts.Slide25

Opposites and antonymy

Part 2Slide26

Semantic opposition

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Traditionally,

antonyms

are words which are opposite in meaning.

dead – alive

We can find other kinds of opposition:

hot – cold

explode – implode

writer – reader, employer – employee

black – white, red – orange

(?)Slide27

Simple vs Gradable antonyms

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Simple antonyms:

dead – alive

,

hit – miss

truth of one implies falsity of the other

?

X is dead but he’s alive

.

Gradable antonyms:

hot – cold

,

big – small both may be “false”: neither tall nor shorttypically, many terms to express gradations:

hot >> warm >> tepid >> cool >> coldoften modifiable with intensifiers:very hot, somewhat cold

exhibit global dependencies: If we say X is big, we mean “big for an object of type X”

big elephant

is much bigger than a

big mouseSlide28

Reverses and converses

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Reverses:

explode – implode

a kind of opposition where one terms “reverses” the other.

often found with terms related to movement (

go/come

, etc)

Converses:

employer – employee, own – belong to

describe a relation between two entities from different viewpoints

“complement eachother”

if X is Y’s employer, then Y is X’s employeeif X owns Y, then Y belongs to XSlide29

Taxonomies

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Colour

red

orange

yellow

green

blue

Taxonomies are classification systems, often in the form of a tree.

Sisters are elements at the same level.Slide30

Taxonomic sisters

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Usually taken to be complementary or “opposed” or “incompatible”

or “mutually exclusive”

NB: Taxonomies are often our way of imposing a discrete categorisation on a continuum (e.g. colour).Slide31

Opposites and similarity

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

To many native speakers, the most highly related word to an adjective is its antonym or opposite.

also typical of taxonomic sisters

does this mean that opposites are synonymous?

No! It just means that “similarity” under the contextual view is much broader than synonymy.Slide32

Hyponymy and other relations

Part 3Slide33

Definition of hyponymy

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Hyponymy is a

relation of inclusion

.

Arrows can be interpreted as “IS-A” relations.

Unlike taxonomic sisterhood, which is horizontal, hyponymy is vertical.

ANIMAL

MAMMAL

BIRD

CANARY

SPARROWSlide34

Elements of hyponymy

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

If

Y IS-A X

then:

X is the

superordinate

or

hypernym

of Y

Y is a

subordinate

or

hyponym of Xe.g. HUMAN is the hypernym of MAN, TOOL is the hypernym of CHAINSAWInclusion:if Y is a hyponym of X then Y contains the meaning of X (plus something extra)e.g. MAN includes all the features of HUMAN, plus the specification of ADULT and MALE.

Transitivity:if X IS-A Y and Y IS-A Z, then X IS-A ZSlide35

Transitivity -- illustration

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

A CANARY IS-A BIRD

A BIRD IS-A ANIMAL

Therefore, a CANARY IS-A ANIMAL

ANIMAL

BIRD

SPARROW

CANARY

MAMMALSlide36

Special cases of taxonomic relations

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Sometimes, language exhibits special cases of relations that are:

well-established and lexicalised

seem to depend on an underlying taxonomy or hierarchy

ADULT-YOUNG

dog – puppy, duck – duckling, etc

MALE-FEMALE

woman – man, dog – bitch, drake – duck, etc

NB: These pairs are often

asymmetric

. The unmarked case in the MALE-FEMALE is the MALE.

We tend to use it for the name of the species.Slide37

Meronymy or part-whole

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

A different kind of taxonomic relationship. Arrows are interpreted as “

HAS-A

ANIMAL

BIRD

WING

LEG

HAS-A

IS-A

HAS-ASlide38

Meronymy vs. Hyponymy

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Meronymy tends to be less regular than hyponymy:

NOSE is perceived as a necessary part of a FACE

CELLAR may be part of HOUSE, but not necessarily

Meronymy need not be transitive:

If X HAS-A Y and Y HAS-A Z, it does not follow that Y HAS-A Z

window HAS-A pane

room HAS-A window

??room HAS-A pane

Common-sense knowledge plays a very important role in acceptability of these relations.Slide39

Member-collection relations

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

We often lexicalise names of collections of specific things:

flotta (fleet) : a collection of ships

merħla (flock): a collection of sheep

Native

speakers know there is a member-collection relation:

flotta (fleet) – vapur (ship)

armata (army) – suldat (soldier)

merħla (flock) – nagħġa (sheep)

Can

be viewed as a special, lexicalised case of meronymy.Slide40

Are collections singular or plural?

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

In many languages, there is the possibility of switching from:

a view of a collection as a single entity vs. the “contents” of the collection as a group or set

English:

The band played well tonight.

It drove the crowd nuts

[SG]

They drove the crowd nuts

[PL]

Maltese:

L-armata rtirat

(The army retreated.SG)?L-armata rtiraw. (The army retreated.PL)Perhaps not as acceptable? Only with some nouns?Slide41

Portion-mass

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

Mass nouns:

nouns denoting things which have no units

noun is also true of portions of the substance

liquid, coal, hair

Langu

a

ges often have lexicalised concepts denoting portions of specific substances:

qatra

(drop) for liquids

strand

of hairSlide42

Summary

LIN 1180 -- Semantics

This lecture gave an overview of some standard ways to classify relations between lexical items.

homonymy vs. polysemy

synonymy (and contextual similarity)

taxonomic relations: part-whole and hyponymy