Paradigmatic delimitation of lexical units Introduction There are two kinds of elements relevant to lexical semantics: - lexical units - lexemes They have different functions which impose different constraints of their nature. Lexical units - form-meaning complexes with stable and discrete semantic properties - stand in meaning relations – antonymy (long x short), hyponymy (dog, animal) -interact syntagmatically with contexts in various ways to produce different sorts of anomaly - - semantic identity of particular lexical unit is expressed by such relations, but these relations do not provide exhaustive characteristic of the unit Lexical units - sense = meaning aspect of a lexical unit - senses need to represent unitary 'quanta' of meaning, but they do not need to be finite in number antonymy: there should necessarily be only a finite number of opposite pairs in language Lexemes - items listed in the lexicon ('ideal dictionary') of the language - a lexeme may be associated with infinite number of senses but the set of lexemes must be finitely enumerable (a) a topless dress x (b) a topless dancer - lexically distinct – they have different typical contrasts - relatively stable across the contexts - number of possible disctinct uses of topless seems to be open: topless bar; the topless watchdog committee; topless by-laws; => attempts to draw up a determinate cloved list would be of questionable validity => (a) and (b) are not different lexemes Someone picks up an apple in greengrocery: Is this the fruit you mean? - 1 particular apple? - variety of apple? - apples in general? - fruit from a particular supplier? - number of possible readings is limited only by imagination Selection and modulation of senses - -basic problem of lexical semantics: multiplicity of semantic uses of a single word without grammatical difference - - - the meaning of any word form is in some sense different in every distinct context in which it occurs - - Selection and modulation of senses - two types of variation in the semantic contribution: - selection of different units of sense Sue is visiting her cousin. We finally reached the bank. - - contextual modification of a single sense - Selection and modulation of senses - two ways in which contexts have a restrictive influence on the meanings associated with word forms occurring within them: *modulation - a single sense can be modified in an unlimited number ways in by different contexts; each context is emphasizing certain semantic traits and obscuring and suppressing others - variation is continuous and fluid *contextual selection - activation by different contexts of different senses associated with ambiguous word forms - variation proceed rather in discreet jumps - Modulation - two types of modulation: 1.changes in the status of semantic traits along the dimension of necessity: - promotion - demotion A nurse attended us. A pregnant nurse attended us. Arthur poured the butter into a dish. * linkage of traits – butter not only liquid, but also hot Modulation 2.highlighting and background of semantic traits 3. The car needs servicing. We can‘t afford that car. The car needs washing. Our car couldn‘t keep with his. Normality When a sentence is uttered, it is rarely the utterer‘s intention that it should be interpreted in two or more different ways simultaneously. - 2 types of normality *sentence-internal normality - more than 1 ambiguous word form in a sentence => negotiation for achieving the most normal combination Several rare ferns grow on the steep banks of the burn where it runs into the lake. Normality *contextual normality - involves relevance, informativeness, consistency A: It‘s dark in here, isn‘t it? B: Yes, aren‘t there any lights? Indirect test for ambiguity I. If there exists a synonym of one occurrence of a word form which is not a synonym of a second, syntactically identical occurrence of the same word form in a different context, then that word form is ambiguous, and the two occurrences exemplify different senses. Guy struck the match. The match was a draw. Indirect test for ambiguity II. If there exists a word/expression standing in a relation of antonymy to one occurrence of a word form, which does not stand in the same relation to as second, syntactivally identical occurrence of the same owrd form in a different context, then that word form is ambiguous, and the two occurences exemplify different senses. The room was painted in light colours. Arthur has rather a light teaching load. Indirect test for ambiguity III. If there exists a word standing in a paronymic relation to one occurrence of a word form, but does not stand in the same relation to a second, syntactically identical occurrence of the same word form in a different context, then that word is ambiguous, and the two occurrences exemplify different senses. The race was won by Arcle. They are a war-like race. ________________________________________________________ - nothing can be reliably deduced from the fact that a word form has different meaning relations in different contexts Direct criteria for ambiguity I. Senses of an ambiguous word form should not in every case be totally conditioned by their contexts, unlike the interpretations which arise as a result of contextual modulation => an ambiguous word form set in a disambiguating context may well carry more information that can be accounted for in terms of interaction between the context-independent meaning of the word form and the semantic properties of the context Arthur washed and polished the car. John lubricated the car. The Rutarian monarch is expecting her second baby. Her husband is the manager of a local bank. At this point, the bank was covered with brambles John prefers bitches to dogs. Incredibly, John prefers an aged, half-blind bitch to a dog, as his canine companion. John prefers bitches to canines. Direct criteria for ambiguity II. Separate senses should be independently maximisable – under certain conditions, the application of certain terms must be maximised within the current universe of discourse, even at the expense of oddness. Mary likes mares better that horses. Mary prefer mares to theses horses. A: Is that a dog? B: Yes, it‘s a spaniel. No, it‘s a bitch. A: Is the subject of the poem a monarch? B: Yes, it‘s a queen. No, it‘s a king. Direct criteria for ambiguity III. Independent senses of a lexical form are antagonistic to one another => they cannot be used simultaneously without oddness; contexts activating more than one sense at a time give rise to the variety of oddness (zeugma) John and his driving licence expired last Thursday. John‘s driving licence expired last Thursday; so did John. My cousin, who is pregnant, was born on the same day as Arthur‘s, who is the father. Identity test for ambiguity Mary is wearing a light coat; so is Sue. Mary has adopted a child; so did Sue. Other examples 1.unit-type ambiguity A: Is this the jacket you want? B: Yes. (It‘s the type I want) No. (This particular one is shop-soiled) This is our best-selling jacket, do try it on. My sister has the skirt Sue is wearing right now. The skirt Sue is wearing belongs to Mary; my sister has it, too. 1. ambiguous readings are related – one reading entails another Other examples 2. ambiguous readings are related – one reading entails another 1. Mary bought a dog; so did Bill. Arthur wants to know if that is a dog; so does Mike. Dogs can become pregnant at 12 months. Dogs mature later than bitches. Dogs can become pregnant at 12 months, but mature later than bitches. 1. Other examples 3. the door has a cat-flap; the door is standing open, a cat goes through the cat-flap but not through the doorway 1. Did the cat go through the door? The door was smashed in so often that it had to be bricked. Non-lexical sources of ambiguity Pure syntactic ambiguity Old men and women French silk underwear Quasi-syntactic ambiguity The astronaut entered the atmosphere again A red pencil 1. Did the cat go through the door? The door was smashed in so often that it had to be bricked. Establishment of senses Potential senses – those which have never been realised in use Established senses – well-utilised Þ2 kinds of contextual selection: passive selection productive selection His new novel will be published next spring. Why is your desk always piled with novels? I‘m not interested in the cover design, or the binding – I‘m interested in the novel. I‘m not interested in the plot, or the characterisation, or anything of that nature – I‘m interested in the novel. THE END (finally) Thank you for your attention J