Lexical semantics By D'A' Cruse - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 20
About This Presentation
Title:

Lexical semantics By D'A' Cruse

Description:

Serve discourse cohesion, adding necessary informational redundancy to the ... Reflect the way infinitely and continously varied experienced reality is ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:349
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 21
Provided by: tinepossel
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Lexical semantics By D'A' Cruse


1
Lexical semanticsBy D.A. Cruse
  • Chapter 4
  • Introducing lexical relations

2
Sense relations
  • Syntagmatic relations
  • Serve discourse cohesion, adding necessary
    informational redundancy to the message, at the
    same time controlling the semantic contribution
    of individual utterance elements through
    disambiguation, for instance, or by signalling
    alternative e.g. figurative strategies of
    interpretation
  • Paradigmatic relations
  • Reflect the way infinitely and continously varied
    experienced reality is apprehended and controlled
    trhougt being categorised, subcategorised and
    graded along specific dimensions of variation.
    They represent systems of choices a speaker faces
    when encoding his message.

3
Paradigmatic Lexical Relations
  • Identity
  • Inclusion
  • Overlap
  • Disjunction

A B
A
B
A
B
A
B
4
Propositional Synonymy
  • Definition Synonyms are different lexemes which
    have the same or similar meanings - Identity.
    E.g. friend, pal, mate
  • X is a propositional synonym of Y if
  • X and Y are syntactical identical
  • S1 (X) S2 (Y)
  • Example He was drunk ? He was
    intoxicated

5
Hyponymy
  • Definition The meaning of a word which must be
    said to be includedd in that of another
    Inclusion.
  • X is a kind of Y i.e. x is the hyponym of y,
    and y is the superordinate of X
  • E.g. pop is a hyponym of music

Hypernym (superordinate)
(Co-) hyponyms
6
Hyponymy
  • Entailment
  • A sentence containing a hyponym unilaterally
    entails a parallel sentence which is identical in
    all respects except that it contains a super-
    ordinate in place of the hyponym. E.g. John
    listens to pop entails John listens to music
  • Reversed direction (i.e. from superordinate to
    hyponym)
  • A negative, universial quantifier, form part of a
    conditional clause or other expression of
    contingency. E.g. Its not music entails Its not
    pop
  • Exceptions

7
Compatibility
  • Definition The relationship that can be
    established between words with partly overlapping
    meaning
  • E.g. dark and night
  • Defining characteristics
  • No systematic entailment
  • Must have superordinate in common
  • Kinds of Compatibility
  • Strict compatibility
  • Contigent compatibility

8
Incompatibility
  • The relation between classes with no members in
    common.
  • X and Y are incompatibles if A is f(X) can be
    found which entails a parallel sentence of the
    form A is not f(Y) Its a cat entails Its
    not a dog
  • Contrary relationship
  • I cycled to work true, I walked to work ?
    true
  • I cycled to work false, I walked to work
    true or false

9
Congruence Variants
  • Finger congruent meronym of hand
  • Doctor hypo-converse of patient
  • Patient superconverse of doctor

10
Partial relations
  • Finish can occur without overt DO, can take
    gerund complement (I have finished running)
  • Complete require an overt DO, cannot take gerund
    complement( ? I have completed running)
  • Almost practically gt not always full
    equivalence e.g. p. 97 12a

11
Quasi-relations
  • Lack of super-ordinate for knife, fork and spoon
  • Quasi-superordinate would then be cutlery
  • Lack of super-ordinate for red, orange and yellow
  • Quasi-superordinate would then be colour

12
Pseudo-relations
  • angle side
  • logical equivalence but state different things

13
Para-relations
  • Lexical relations defined in terms of
    expectation rather than necessity
  • Para-hyponymy
  • dog pet expected relationship
  • but-testIts a dog, but its a pet (expressive
    paradox)Its a dog, but its not a pet
    (normal)
  • Para-incompatibility
  • involves negative expectation
  • but-test He is a student, but he is also a
    bank manager (normal)He is a student, but he
    is not a bank manager (redundant more than is
    necessary)

14
The Semantic Head
  • An element which interacts directly with an
    element or elements outside the construction.
  • e.g. Extremely fast cars crash violently
  • Fast is the semantic head of extremely fast and
    cars is the head of extremely fast cars.

15
Head-modifier constructions
  • A head-modifier construction is typically
    endocentric, that is to say, the head alone can
    play a grammatical role in the sentence identical
    to that of the whole construction. This
    construction is consequently reducible.
  • e.g. We drank red wine ? We drank wine

16
Head-compliment constructions
  • A head-compliment construction is typically not
    reducible syntactically to the head alone. 
  • e.g. Arthur stroked the cat ? Arthur stroked
    (what?)

17
Selector and Selectee
  • It is generally possible to specify a selector
    in a construction in which co-occurrence
    restrictions are operating. In a head-modifier
    construction, the modifier is the selector, but
    in a head-complement construction it is the head
    which the selector.
  • Selectors, generally, presuppose one or more
    semantic traits.
  • e.g. Pregnant in pregnant X
  • X, the head of the construction, bears the
    semantic trait female.
  • Selectees , in general, do not presuppose traits
    of their selectors.

18
Encapsulation
  • The second directional property involves the head
    of a construction and any dependent item or
    items. A dependent item is expected to bring to a
    construction semantic traits not already
    prefigured in the head if not the combination is
    pleonastic. Under such circumstances the head
    encapsulates the meaning of the dependent item.
  • e.g. the male uncle

19
Philonyms, tautonyms and xenonyms
  • A set of syntagmatic relations can be based on
    the results of putting grammatically appropriate
    lexical units together in a construction
  • philonyms if the combination is normal
  • tautonyms if the combination is pleonastic we
    talk of the head of the tautonym
  • xenonyms if the combination results in
    dissonance

20
Dissonance
  • There are three degrees of dissonance
  • Inappropriateness
  • Is diagnosed by the fact that it is cured by
    substituting a prepositional synonym for one of
    the items involved in the clash.
  • Paradox occurs when
  • There is no possibility of resolving dissonance
    by synonymous substitution
  • But there exits a superordinate of either xenonym
    which is philonym of the other.
  • Incongruity
  • Characteristic of incongruity is that there is no
    superordinate of either xenonym which can restore
    normality
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com