COVER

SEMANTIK BAHASA INGGRIS

DAFTAR ISI
 BAB I
BASIC IDEAS SEMANTIC

A. About Semantic
Semantic is the study of meaning in Language. We are all necessarily interested in
meaning. We wonder about the meaning of a new word. Sometimes we are not sure
about the message we should get from something we read or hear, and we are
concerned about getting our own messages across to others. We find pleasure in
jokes, which often depend for their humor on double meanings of words or
ambiguities in sentences. Commercial organizations spend a lot of effort and money
on naming products, devising slogans, and creating messages that will be meaningful
to the buying public. Legal scholars argue about the interpretation—that is, the
meaning—of a law or a judicial decision. Literary scholars quarrel similarly over the
meaning of some poem or story.
Three disciplines are concerned with the systematic study of ‘meaning’ in itself:
psychology, philosophy and linguistics. Their particular interests and approaches are
different, yet each borrows from and contributes to the others.
Psychologists are interested in how individual humans learn, how they retain,
recall, or lose information; how they classify, make judgements and solve problems—
in other words, how the human mind seeks meanings and works with them.
B. Sentence, Utterance and Proposition
An utterance is any stretch of talk, by one person, before and after which is there is
silence on the part of that person. An utterance is the use by particular speaker, on a
particular occasion, of a piece of language, such as sequence of sentences, or a single phrase,
or even a single word.
A sentence is neither a physical event nor 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. A sentence is grammatically complete string of words expressing a complete
thought.
A proposition is that part of the meaning of the utterance of a declarative sentence a
which describes some state of affairs.
Just as conventional signals like the blowing of a whistle can have different
meanings in different situations, so different pieces of language can have different
meanings in different contexts. Let’s illustrate with three fictitious events: A beggar
who has not eaten all day says “I’m hungry”; a child who hopes to put off going to bed
announces “I’m hungry”; a young man who hopes to get better acquainted with one
of his co-workers and intends to ask her to have dinner with him begins with the
statement “I’m hungry.” The three events obviously have something in common and yet,
just as obviously, they are different: they indicate different intentions and are liable to be
interpreted differently because the situations and the participants are different.
Each of the three speech events illustrated above is a different utterance, and we
write an utterance with quotation marks: “I’m hungry.” Each utterance contains the
same sentence, which we write with italics: I’m hungry. An utterance is an act of
speech or writing; it is a specific event, at a particular time and place and involving
at least one person, the one who produces the utterance, but usually more than one
person. An utterance happens just once; a spoken utterance happens and then,
unless it is recorded electronically, it ceases to exist; a written utterance is intended
to last—for a short time in the case of a shopping list, for instance, or much longer,
as in the case of a book. Why distinguish between sentence and utterance?
Because it is important to recognize what meanings are communicated to us in
language and which meanings we derive from the contexts in which language is used.
 Because it is important to distinguish between linguistic meaning, what is
communicated by particular pieces of language, and utterance meaning, what a
certain individual meant by saying such-and-such in a particular place, at a particular
time, and to certain other individuals. The utterance “Our visit to the factory was a
wonderful experience” may be spoken as a joke, or sarcastically, or as a straightforward
report, among other possibilities. The sentence Our visit to the factory was a
wonderful experience has none of these meanings in itself—or, to put it differently,
it has potentially any of these meanings.
An utterance is often part of a larger discourse—a conversation, a formal lecture, a
poem, a short story, a business letter, or a love letter, among other possibilities. A
spoken discourse is any act of speech that occurs in a given place and during a
given period of time. A written discourse may be the record of something that has
been spoken, or it may originate for the purpose of being performed aloud, like a
play or speech, or it may exist without ever having been spoken or intended to be
spoken, like most articles and books. The linguistic context of an utterance can make a
difference of meaning, as well as the social context.
C. Reference and Sense
By means of reference, a speaker indicates which things in the world (including person)
are being talked about. To turn from reference to sense, the sense of an expression is its
place in a system of semantic relationship with other expressions in the language.
In every language there are words like tree and run and re d which seem to have
an obvious relation to objects and events and descriptions of things in the world around
us. Children learning their native language first learn words in association with
observable items and situations and events. This simple fact can give rise to an
overly simple idea about what ‘meaning’ is. We are likely to think that a language
consists of a large number of words and each of these words has a direct correlation
with something outside of language, which is its meaning. And since, if we
communicate with one another through language, it must be that we all have the
same ‘idea’ or ‘concept’ associated with each word. The best known elaboration
of this view was made by Ogden and Richards (1923), who developed a mentalistic
theory about meaning, an attempt to explain meaning in terms of what is in people’s
minds. Their explanation centers around this scheme:

Ogden and Richards called the bond between word and concept an
‘association,’ the bond between concept and object ‘reference,’ and the bond
between object and word ‘meaning. ’
When we hear or read a word, we often form a mental picture of what the
word represents, and so we are apt to equate ‘concept’ with a mental picture. To be
sure, it is easier to form a mental picture for some words—DOOR and DOG, for
example—than for others such as ORDINARY or PROBLEM or PRETEND. But the idea
of a mental picture is misleading. What mental image do you form for DOOR? A
revolving door? A folding door? A sliding door, moving horizontally? An overhead
door which moves vertically? A door turning on hinges? Is it in a wall, or on a cabinet,
or part of a car? Is your image associated with DOG that of a St Bernard or a
Pekingese, a mongrel or an Irish Setter? You can picture all of these in sequence
but not simultaneously. Clearly the meaning of door or dog is more than what is
included in a single image, and your knowledge of these words is much more than
the ability to relate them to single objects. You can use these words successfully in a
 large number of situations because you have the knowledge that makes this
possible.
Meaning is more than denotation and connotation. What a word means depends
in part on its associations with other words, the relational aspect. Lexemes do not
merely ‘have’ meanings; they contribute meanings to the utterances in which they occur,
and what meanings they contribute depends on what other lexemes they are
associated with in these utterances. The meaning that a lexeme has because of these
relationships is the sense of that lexeme. Part of this relationship is seen in the
way words do, or do not, go together meaningfully. It makes sense to say John
walked and it makes sense to say An hour elapsed. It doesn’t make sense to say
John elapsed or An hour walked. Part of the meaning of elapse is that it goes with
hour, second, minute, day but not with John, and part of the meaning of hour,
second and so forth is that these words can co-occur with elapse.
D. Soal Latihan
1. You should understand these terms and concepts: semantics, sentence (word) meaning,
speaker meaning, native speaker, ‘knowing” the meaning(s) of a word, linguistics,
language, components of language, theory of semantics!
2. Try to paraphrase (restaste in your own words) each of the following uses of the word
mean as it is employed in the sentence below. Which are sentences are more reflective
of speaker meaning and which are more reflective of sentence meaning? Briefly explain!
a. I mean to be there tomorrow
b. A stalling car may mean a tune-up
c. Calligraphy means beautiful handwriting
d. It wasn’t what he said but what he meant
e. What does the German word Hund mean?
f. Those clouds mean rain
3. Utterance can be loud or quite, in a particular regional accent, and in a particular
language. Can you think of other characteristics of utterances!
4. Give an example sense and reference by explanation!
 BAB II
FROM REFERENCE

A. Referring Expression
A referring expression is any expression used in an utterance to refer to something or
someone (or clearly delimited collection of things or people), i.e. used with a particular
referent in mind. A referring expression is a piece of language that is used AS IF it is
linked to something outside language, some living or dead entity or concept or group
of entities or concepts. Most of the next chapter is about referring expressions. The
entity to which the referring expression is linked is its referent. Another meaningful
part is the verb bark, which is also linked to something outside of language, an
activity associated, here, with the referring expression a dog. We call this meaningful
part a predicate. The use of language generally involves naming or referring to some
entity and saying, or predicating, something about that entity.
The sentence also has several kinds of grammatical meanings. Every language has a
grammatical system and different languages have somewhat different grammatical
systems. We can best explain what grammatical meanings are by showing how the
sentence A dog barked differs from other sentences that have the same, or a similar,
referring expression and the same predicate. The grammatical system of English
makes possible the expression of meanings like these:

statement vs question:
A dog barked. Did a dog bark?
affirmative vs negative:
A dog barked. A dog did not bark. No dog barked.
past vs present:
A dog barked. A dog barks.
singular vs plural:
A dog barked. Some dogs barked.
indefinite vs definite:
A dog barked. The dog barked.

Grammatical meanings, then, are expressed in various ways: the arrangement of words
(referring expression before the predicate, for instance), by grammatical affixes
like the -s attached to the noun dog and the - ed attached to the verb bark, and by
grammatical words, or function words, like the ones illustrated in these sentences:
do (in the form did), not, a, some, and the.

B. Predicates
The predicator 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
reminder, makes the most specific contribution to the meaning of the sentence. Intuitive
speaking, the predicator describes the state or process in which the referring expressions are
can function as the predicator of a sentence. To understand the difference
between thematic and functional categories we first need to introduce concepts to do with
how the elements of a sentence can be related to each other. Take a simple sentence:
Peter chased Mary
This sentence describes an event which can be described as ‘chasing’ involving two
individuals, Peter and Mary, related in a particular way. Specifically, Peter is the one doing
the chasing and Mary is the one getting chased. The verb describes the character of the
event and the two nouns refer to the participants in it. A word which functions as the verb
 does here, we call a predicate and words which function as the nouns do are
called arguments. Here are some other predicates and arguments:
B1. Selena slept
argument predicate
B2. Tom is tall
argument predicate
B3. Percy placed the penguin on the podium
argument predicate argument argument
In (B1) we have a ‘sleeping’ event referred to involving one person, Selena, who was
doing the sleeping. In (B2) the predicate describes a state of affairs, that of ‘being tall’ and
again there is one argument involved, Tom, of whom the state is said to hold. Finally, in (B3)
there is a ‘placing’ event described, involving three things: someone doing the placing, Percy,
something that gets placed, the penguin, and a place where it gets placed, on the podium.
What arguments are involved in any situation is determined by the meaning of the
predicate. Sleeping can only involve one argument, whereas placing naturally involves three.
We can distinguish predicates in terms of how many arguments they involve: sleep is a one-
place predicate, see is a two-place predicate involving two arguments and placeis a three-
place predicate. Moreover, the nature of the arguments is also largely determined by the
meaning of the predicate. Compare the following:
B4. Harold hit Henry
B5.
a. Sam saw Simon
In the first case, Harold is the one doing the hitting and Henry is the one getting hit
whereas in the second Sam does the seeing and Simon gets seen. However, these arguments
play very different roles in the two events. With hit the one doing the hitting consciously
performs an action and the one who gets hit is affected in some way by this. We call an
argument who deliberately performs an action an agent and one who or which is acted upon
a patient. With see, the arguments are not interpreted as agent and patient however: Sam is
not performing any action and Simon is not getting acted upon in (b).

C. Deixis and definiteness

A deictic word is one which takes some element of its meaning from the context or
situation (i.e. the speaker, the addressee, the time and the place) of the utterance in which it
is used. The most primitive way of referring to something is to point to it. Of course,
this kind of reference can only be accomplished with people and concrete things in
one’s immediate environment. On a less primitive level, every language has deictic
words which ‘point’ to ‘things’ in the physical-social context of the speaker and
addressee(s) and whose referents can only be determined by knowing the context in
which they are used. For example, if we should encounter a message like the following,
on paper or on an electronic recording

I was disappointed that you didn’t come this afternoon.

I hope you’ll join us tomorrow.

we wouldn’t be able to identify the referents of I, you, us, this afternoon or

tomorrow though we understand how the first three and the last two are related to
one another; because we know English, we know, for example, that the referent of I is
part of the referent of us and we know the time sequence of this afternoon and
tomorrow. The meaning of any lexeme depends to some extent on the context in which
it occurs, but deictic elements can only be interpreted through their contexts. English
 examples of deictic words include (1) pronouns I, you and we, which ‘point’ to
the participants in any speech act; he, she, it and they, when they are used to refer
to others in the environment; (2) locative expressions here and there, which designate
space close to the speaker or farther away; this/these and that/those, which
respectively indicate entities close to or removed from the speaker; and (3) temporal
expressions: now, then, yesterday, today, tomorrow, last week, next month and so on.
These last are all relative to the time when they are used.
Words which can be deictic are not always so. Today and tomorrow are deictic in “We
can’t go today, but tomorrow will be fine.” They are not deictic in “Today’s costly
apartment buildings may be tomorrow’s slums.” Yet the relation between the two words is
analogous. Similarly, here and there are deictic in “James hasn’t been here yet. Is he
there with you?” They are not deictic in “The children were running here and there.”
The pronoun you is not deictic when used with the meaning ‘one; any person or
persons,’ as in “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.”
Similarly, they has a generalized, non-deictic reference to people in general,
especially those in charge of some endeavor or other, as in “They say that an ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure,” “They don’t make good cider the way they
used to.”
D. Words and things: extension and prototype
The extension of a one-place predicate is the set of all individuals to which that
predicate can truthfully be applied. It is the set of things which can POTENTIALLY be referred
to by using an expression whose main element is that predicate. The extension of window is
the set of all windows in the universe. The extension of dog is the set of all dogs in the
universe. The extension of house is the set of all houses. The extension of red is the set of all
red things. Extensions are relative to all times, past, present, and future. Thus, the extension
of window, for example, includes all past windows, all present windows, and all future
windows. Similarly, the extension of dead includes all things which have been dead in the
past (and presumably still are, if they still exist), which are dead now, and which will be dead
in the future.
Predicates are tenseless, i.e. unspecified for past, present, or future. In actual use,
predicates are almost always accompanied in sentences by a marker of tense (past or
present) or a future marker, such as will. These have the effect of restricting the extensions
of the predicates they modify, so that, for example, the extension of the phrase is dead could
be said to be the set of all things which are dead at the time of utterance. Correspondingly,
the extension of the phrase is alive could be said to be the set of all things alive at the time of
utterance. Thus the extensions of is dead and is alive are different in the appropriate way at
any particular time of utterance. Everything called ‘have four foots’ are like animals e.g. cat,
horse etc. And things e.g. chair, table.
A PROTOTYPE of a predicate is an object which is held to be very TYPICAL of the kind
of object which can be referred to by an expression containing the predicate. In other words,
the prototype of a predicate can be thought of as the most typical member of the extension
of a predicate. Example: A man of medium height and average build, between 30 and 50
years old, with brownish hair, with no particularly distinctive characteristics or defects, could
be a prototype of the predicate man in certain areas of the world. A dwarf or a hugely
muscular body-builder could not be a prototype of the predicate man.
The idea of a prototype is perhaps most useful in explaining how people learn to use
(some of) the predicates in their language correctly. Recent research on the acquisition of
categories in human language indicates that the prototypical members of the extension of a
predicate are usually learned earlier than non-prototypical members. Predicates
like man, cat, dog are often first taught to toddlers by pointing out to them typical examples
of men, cats, dogs, etc. A mother may point to a cat and tell her child ‘That’s a cat’, or point
to the child’s father and say ‘Daddy’s a man’. This kind of definition by pointing is called
 ostensive definition. It is very plausible to believe that a child’s first concepts of many
concrete terms are induced by ostensive definition involving a prototype. Obviously,
however, not all concepts can be learned in this way.
E. Soal Latihan
1. You should understand these terms and concepts: referring expression, indefinite noun
phrase, definite noun phrase, opaque text, equative sentence!
2. Explain the ambiguity in: ‘I’m looking for a pencil’!
3. You should understand these terms and concepts: predicator, predicate, argument,
degree of a predicate, ellipsis (elliptical), and identity relation!
4. What are the functions of the verb be in these sentences (i.e. does it function an identity
predicate or as a grammatical device for linking a non-verbal predicate to its first
argument)? Do all instances of be carry tense?
a. Mary is happy
b. A tulip is a flower
c. George W. Bush is the US President
d. God is
5. You should understand these terms and concepts: deictic words (deictics), reported
speech, context, definiteness!
6. When is it appropriate to use the definite article the? When is it appropriate to use the
indefinite article a?
7. You should understand these terms and concepts; extension, extension of one-place
predicate, prototype, fuzzy set, ostensive definition, denotation!
8. Distinguish between referent and extension!
9. Describe briefly the extension of car!
 BAB III
TO SENSE

A. Sense properties and sterotypes

In semantics, experts argue there are two main ways of teaching sense of expression
such as sense relation with other expression and sense properties. Sense properties consists
of two words which have literal meaning i.e. sense and property. The former means a
meaning conveyed or intended while the latter is defined as a quality or trait belonging and
especially peculiar to an individual or thing (merriam-webster.com). Sense properties refer to
a quality or trait belongs to conveyed meanings. The quality of conveyed meaning usually can
be done if a language is uttered or written in a sentence not in a word. It is because sentence
meaning is proposition which means possess literal meaning or locution while a word is only
a concept. Hurford and Heasley suggest that there are three ways of identifying a quality of a
sentence such as analytic, synthetic, and contradictory.
1. Analytic Sentences: An analytic sentence is one that is necessarily true, as a result of the
senses of the words in it (Hurford and Heasley, 1983:91). It means that those belong to
analytic sentences are absolute true sentences. Take a look at the examples below. Lions
are animals, Pigeons are birds, The aforementioned examples are analytic sentences.
Some agree but some may question why? It is because people include young and adult,
men and women, suburb or urban will have the same concepts of animals which
anything that lives and moves (CALD) produces sounds. Then, none will hesitate that
lions are animals. It is because lions are lived things which can move from one spot to
another spot and produce roar and growl sound. Then it is deliberately clear that lions
are animals. The same explanation also can explain why pigeon are birds. Everyone has
the same perception or concept about birds. Bird is a creature with feathers, and wings,
and usually able to fly (CALD). Many agrees that pigeon’s body is covered by feathers,
and it also has two wings to help it flies from one place to another place. Thus, pigeon’s
creature meets a requirement as a bird.
2. Synthetic Sentences: Some will ask about sentence contains unclear statement whether
true or false. Hurford and Heasley argue that sentence which is not analytic, but may be
either true or false, depends on the way the world is a synthetic sentence. I assume that
synthetic sentences potentially give more informative statement. See the examples
below.

Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is the president of Indonesia.

Sukhoi Superjet 100 missed over mt. Salak.

The aforesaid examples are synthetic sentences. Some will ask why do not those
examples above belong to analytic sentences? Don’t they contain an absolute truth?
Here, my arguments. The former sentence which states Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
(SBY) is the president of Indonesia is true sentence for a certain people. Only some know
that SBY is having authority to govern Indonesia. How about Englishmen or Polish people
who do not have an interest about Indonesia. Of course they do not the president of
Indonesia. Another real case in Bali can prove the statement that SBY is the president of
Indonesia becomes synthetic sentence. In 25th October 2011, there is a gardener with
his bicycle went across of SBY when he gave his speech in Bali. This man is an Indonesian
person, but he seems do not who his president is. Then, this becomes strong evidence
that not all people over the world or even Indonesian people know that SBY is the
Indonesian president. Thus, this statement turns out to be synthetic sentence. The
identical argument is given for the latter example which states that Sukhoi Superjet 100
missed over mt. Salak. This is update information for the Indonesian people. However, I
argue that not all Indonesian know that news. People in the remote area, who do not
 have television or radio to access information, will not know this news. It may be happen
for Papua people. They may be not knowing what Sukhoi Superjet is 100 or where mt.
Salak is. Then, the information statement tends to be synthetic sentence.
3. Contradictory Sentence: In contrast with analytic sentences, Hurford and Heasley argue
about a contradictory sentence. A contradiction is a sentence that is necessarily false, as
a result of the senses of the words in it. If those belong to analytic sentences are
absolute true sentences, then those included in contradictory sentence. Take a look at
the examples below.

The boy is female

Jellyfish are plants

The two examples are contradictory sentences. Of course, reading the two examples
above tickles my notion. How come the sex of boy is female? Doesn’t the sex for all boys
are males and for girls are females? And how come jellyfishes are vegetables? Don’t they
belong to animals? The statement “The boy is female” is contradict with factual data.
Many argue and agree that boys are defined as male child, more generally, a male of any
age (CALD). People will argue and agree that the sex of all boys is males. None will show
their hesitation about it. Everyone in every side of the world realises about it. Not only
the literate people but also those who are not will automatically know the truth and say
that the statement is wrong. The equal argument also can explain why the statement of
“Jellyfish are vegetables” is contradictory sentence. In CALD, jellyfishes are defines as a
sea animal with a soft oval almost transparant body. Based on the definition above, of
course, it is positively that jellyfishes belong to animal not a plant. As an animal, jelly fish
can moves using its tentakel. this statement tends to contradict with the facts. Thus, this
one is also contradictory sentence. After knowing the definition, examples and
elaboration. It is hoped that we understand about the concept of sense properties in the
term of analytic, synthetic, and contradiction sentences.

B. Sense Relation
Synonymy is the relationship between two predicates that have the same sense.

B1 Jack is a seaman.
B2 Jack is a sailor.

Assuming that Jack refers to the same person in the two sentences, then if B1 is
true, B2 is true; if B2 is true, B2 is true; and if either is false, the other is false. This is
our basis for establishing that seaman and sailor are synonyms: when used in
predications with the same referring expression, the predications have the same
truth value. The lexemes seaman and sailor are synonyms; sentences 6a and 6b are
paraphrases of each other.

Synonyms can be nouns, as in B3 and B4, or adjectives, adverbs, or verbs.

B3 The rock is large.
B4 The rock is big.
B5 The train traveled fast.
B6 The train traveled rapidly.
B7 The bus left promptly at 10.
B8 The bus departed promptly at 10.
 Thus for any two sentences [B3] and [B4] that differ only in the presence
of synonymous terms we can express their truth relationship this way:
B3 ® B4 & B4 ® B3 (The truth of [B3] entails the truth of [B4], and vice versa.)
~B3 ® ~B4 & ~B4 ® ~B3 (The falsity of [B3] entails the falsity of [B4], and vice versa).
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. Turning
now to truth conditional semantics, let’s consider these pairs of sentences:

B9 Rover is a collie.
B10 Rover is a dog.
B11 There are tulips in the vase.
B12 There are flowers in the vase.

Here we see a kind of relation that is an example of entailment. If we know that

sentence B9 is true, we know that B10 must also be true; but if we know that B9 is not
true, we cannot say anything about the truth of B10; if we know that B10 is true, we
do not know if B9 is true or not; if we know that B10 is not true, we know that B9 is
not true. The relationship between B11 and B12 is analogous. The term collie is a
hyponym of dog and tulip is a hyponym of flower; dog and flower are, respectively, the
superordinates of collie and tulip. (Some semanticists use the term ‘hyperonym’ instead of
‘superordinate.’) We can also say ‘A collie is a dog’ and ‘A tulip is a flower.’ Any
lexeme that can be substituted for a hyponym is also a hyponym. Chihuahua, Dalmatian
and Irish setter are other hyponyms of dog, and they are co-hyponyms of collie. Daffodil
and rose are two co- hyponyms of tulip.

Lexical Relation:
B13 Alvin is watching television now.
B14 Alvin isn’t watching television now.

Two sentences that differ in polarity like these are mutually contradictory. If one
is true, the other must be false. Two sentences that have the same subject
and have predicates which are antonyms are also mutually contradictory.

B15 The television is on now.

B16 The television is off now.
B17 Mr Adams is an old man.
B18 Mr Adams is a young man.
B19 The road is wide here.
B20 The road is narrow here.

Lexemes like on and off, old and young, wide and narrow are pairs of
antonyms. Antonyms are opposite in meaning, and when they occur as predicates
of the same subject the predications are contradictory. Antonyms may be nouns
like Communist and non-Communist or verbs such as advance and retreat, but
antonymous pairs of adjectives are especially numerous. They are measure
adjectives because they can be combined with expressions of measurement: four
feet long, two meters high, nineteen years old, etc. We note, first, that these
adjectives, like others relating to size (e.g. big/little, large/small, heavy/light) are
antonymous, and, second, that their meanings are very much dependent on the
topics they are associated with; a big rat is not as big as a small elephant, for
instance.
Homonymy is one of ambiguous words whose different senses are far apart from
each other and not obviously related to each other in any way with respect to a native’s
speaker intuition. Cases of homonymy seem very definitely to be matters of mere
accident or coincidence. A lexeme is a conjunction of form and meaning. The form is
fairly easy to determine: in writing it is a sequence of letters, in speech a
sequence of phonemes. But meaning is more difficult to determine. In
homonyms, such as bank ‘a financial institution’ and bank ‘the edge of a stream,’
pronunciation and spelling are identical but meanings are unrelated. In other pairs,
numerous in English, such as steak and stake, pronunciation is identical but
spelling is different, reflecting the fact that the words were once different in their
phonological form. English also has pairs of homographs, two words that have
different pronunciations but the same spelling; for example, bow, rhyming
with go and referring to an instrument for shooting arrows, and bow, rhyming
with cow and indicating a bending of the body as a form of respectful greeting.
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. Lexicographers and semanticists sometimes
have to decide whether a form with a wide range of meanings is an instance of
polysemy or of homonymy. A polysemous lexeme has several (apparently) related
meanings. The noun head, for instance, seems to have related meanings when we
speak of the head of a person, the head of a company, head of a table or bed, a
head of lettuce or cabbage. If we take the anatomical referent as the basic one,
the other meanings can be seen as derived from the basic one, either reflecting
the general shape of the human head or, more abstractly, the relation of the
head to the rest of the body.
C. Soal Latihan
1. You should understand these terms and concepts; sense, analytic sentences, set of
sufficient conditions, sense properties of sentences, syntetic sentences, contradiction,
necessary condition, stereotype (feature)!
2. What is the difference between prototype and sterotype!
3. Give an example of analytic, synthetic and contradictory sentence? Briefly explanation!
4. Identify in the following sentences the pairs of words in upper-case letters which appear
to share the same (or nearly the same) sense. In some (or all) cases it may be difficult to
decide, so be ready to explain the difficulty.
a. Fred always sleeps on the SOFA/COUCH.
b. The neighbors have the BIG/LARGE family.
c. The winning horse TROTTED/RAN to the finish line.
d. This table is very SMOOTH/FLAT.
e. That is very HIGH/TALL building.
f. That is very FLAT/SLIPPERY road.
5. Identify the type of antonymy or incompatibility (binary, gradable, converses, or multiple
incompatibles) for each pair of words below.
a. High/low
b. Punch/slap
c. Husband/wife
d. Higher/lower
e. Pregnant/not pregnant
f. Legal/illegal
g. Lessor/lessee
h. Expensive/cheap
i. Table/chair
j. Parent/offspring
 BAB IV
LOGIC

A. About logic
A branch of logic that deals with the study of the meaning and sense (in Russian, znache
nie and smy) of concepts andpropositions and of their formal analogues
the interpretations of expressions (terms and formulas) of different calculi (formalsystems).
The first and foremost task of logical semantics is to define precisely the concepts of “meanin
g,” “sense,” and“interpretation,” and, accordingly, the concepts of “truth,” “definability,” “ex
pressibility,” “consequence,” and “model” (includingsuch general and primary concepts as “s
et,” “object,” and “correspondence”).
Important semantic problems arise as a result of the difference between the content an
d extension of concepts and betweenthe meaning and truth value of propositions. Properties
such as equivalence and consequence that are related to the contentof concepts and the sig
nification of propositions are called intensional; properties related to the extension of conce
pts andthe truth value of judgments are called extensional. Propositions and concepts that ar
e intensionally equivalent are alsoextensionally equivalent, although the opposite is generall
y false. For example, the statements “The Volga flows into theCaspian Sea” and “2 × 2 = 4” ar
e equivalent extensionally but not intensionally.
Logic is word that means many things to different people. Many everyday uses of the
words logic and logical could be replaced by expressions such as reasonable expression and
reasonable. You may say, for instance, ‘Sue acted quite logically in locking her door’, meaning
that Sue had good, well thoughout reason for doing what she did. We shall use the words
logic and logical in a narrower sense, familiar to semanticist. Logic deals with meanings in a
language system, not with actual behavior of any sort. Logic deals most centrally with
propositions. A system for describing logical thinking contains a notion for representing
proposition ambiguously and rules for inference defining how propositions go together to
make up valid arguments.
Because logic deals with such very basic aspect of thought and reasoning, it can
sometimes seems as if it is ‘stating obvious’. The thing to remember is that one is not, in the
end, interested in individual particular example of correct logical argument (for, taken
individually, such as 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 fact about the individual example will follow
automaticly.

B. Connectives

The words and and so are grammatical conjunctions joining the sentences (A) and (B) to
form the compound sentences (C) and (D). The and in (C) is a logical connective, since the
truth of (C) is completely determined by (A) and (B): it would make no sense to affirm (A) and
(B) but deny (C). However, so in (D) is not a logical connective, since it would be quite
reasonable to affirm (A) and (B) but deny (D): perhaps, after all, Jill went up the hill to fetch a
pail of water, not because Jack had gone up the hill at all. Various English words and word
pairs express logical connectives, and some of them are synonymous. Examples are:

Word Connective Symbol Logical Gate

And conjunction "∧" AND

and then conjunction "∧" AND

 Word Connective Symbol Logical Gate

and then within conjunction "∧" AND

Or disjunction "∨" OR

either...or exclusive disjunction "⊻" XOR

Implies implication "→" "←"

if...then implication "→" "←"

if and only if biconditional "↔" XNOR

only if implication "→" "←"

just in case biconditional "↔" XNOR

But conjunction "∧" AND

However conjunction "∧" AND

not both alternative denial "|" NAND

neither...nor joint denial "↓" NOR

Not negation "¬" NOT

it is false that negation "¬" NOT

it is not the case that negation "¬" NOT

Although conjunction "∧" AND

even though conjunction "∧" AND

therefore implication "→" "←"

So implication "→" "←"

that is to say biconditional "↔" XNOR

AND
Furthermore conjunction "∧"

List of common logical connectives

Commonly used logical connectives include

 Negation (not): ¬ , N (prefix), ~

 Conjunction (and): ∧ , K (prefix), & , ∙
 Disjunction (or): ∨, A (prefix)
 Material implication (if...then): → , C (prefix), ⇒ , ⊃
 Biconditional (if and only if): ↔ , E (prefix), ≡ , =
Alternative names for biconditional are "iff", "xnor" and "bi-implication".
For example, the meaning of the statements it is raining and I am indoors is transformed when the
two are combined with logical connectives. For statement P = It is raining and Q = I am indoors:

 It is not raining ( P)
 It is raining and I am indoors (P Q)
 It is raining or I am indoors (P V Q)
 If it is raining, then I am indoors (P Q)
 If I am indoors, then it is raining (Q P)
 I am indoors if and only if it is raining (P Q)

C. Soal Latihan
1. You should understand these terms and concepts; logical conjunction (with &), logical
disjunction (with V), rules of inference, commutavity of conjuction, commutavity
disjunction, compositionality of meaning, truth table!
2. You should understand these terms and concepts; implication ( ), conditional sentence,
negative operator (~), more rules of inference, de Morgan’s Law ~(p V q) ≡ ~p & ~q, ~(p &
q) ≡ ~p V ~q, double negation p≡~~p, modus ponens, modus tollens, bicondictional (≡),
propositional calculus (or propositional logic)!
 BAB V
WORD MEANING

A. About Dictionaries
A dictionary is a central part of the description of any language. A good ordinary
household dictionary typically gives (at least) three kinds of information about words:
phonological information about how the word is pronounced, grammatical (syntactical
and morphological) information about its part of speech (e.g. noun, verb) and
inflections (e.g. for plural number or past tense), and semantic information about the
word’s meaning. These are some (slightly edited) entries extracted from the Random
House Dictionary of the English Language (College edition 1968). In each case (a) underline
the phonological information, (b) bracket [thus] the grammatical information, and (c)
leave the semantic information unmarked.
A1. green (gre-n), adj. of the color of growing foliage
A2. must (must), auxiliary verb to be compelled to, as by instinct or natural law
A3. oak (o-k), noun any fagaceous tree or shrub of the genus Quercus, bearing the
acorn as fruit
A4. squirt (skwûrt), intransitive verb to eject liquid in a jet, as from a narrow orifice .

A dictionary tells you what words mean. The semanticist dictionary-writer and the
ordinary dictionary-writer have quite similar goals, but they differ markedly in their style
of approach and the emphasis which they place on their various goals. In order to
illustrate the kind of dictionary that a semanticist tries to devise, we will first take a look
at some properties of a good ordinary household dictionary. We will give you some
exercises based on samples extracted from the Concise Oxford Dictionary (6th edition,
1976), given below. (We have edited these samples from the dictionary so as to give only
information that is relevant to the following exercises.)

A5. Animal: Organized being endowed (more or less perceptibly) with life, sensation,
and voluntary motion; (esp.) such being other than man.

A5. Female: Of the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs; (of plants or their
parts) fruit-bearing, having pistil and no stamens . . .

A5. Homo: (Name of the genus including) man

A6. Human: (1). Of or belonging to man; that is a man or consists of men, (2). Of man
as opp. to God, (3) Having or showing the qualities distinctive of man as opp. to
animals, machines, mere objects, etc.

A6. Husband: Married man, esp. in relation to his wife

A7. Join: Put together, fasten, unite . . .; unite (persons, one with or to another) in
marriage, friendship, alliance, etc.

A8. Male: Of the sex that can beget offspring by performing the fertilizing function;
(of plants) whose flowers contain only fecundating organs . . . of men or male
animals or plants

A9. Man: (1) Human being, individual of genus Homo, distinguished from other
animals by superior mental development, power of articulate speech, and upright
posture, (2) Adult, human male, opp. to woman, boy, or both.
 A10. Marriage: Condition of man and woman legally united for purpose of living
together and usu. procreating lawful offspring.

A11. Marry: . . . (of person) take as wife or husband in marriage.

A12. Sex: Being male or female or hermaphrodite.

A13. Unite: Join together, make or become one, consolidate, amalgamate

A14. Wife: Married woman esp. in relation to her husband

A15. Woman: Adult human female

B. Meaning Postulates
A MEANING POSTULATE is a formula expressing some aspect of the sense of a
predicate. It can be read as a proposition necessarily true by virtue of the meaning of
the particular predicates involved.
In short, if it is stated that metal is a hyponym of mineral, and that mineral is a
hyponym of substance, there is no need to state explicitly that metal is a hyponym of
substance. This example illustrates a basic principle in the organization of the dictionary,
namely that the information explicitly stated in it is less than the information that can
be deduced from it. This is no excuse for lack of precision; the information that is not
stated explicitly in dictionary entries must be deducible by the strict, simple, and clear
laws of logical inference. Any of the logical connectives &, V, and ~ (Units 14 and 15) can
be used in meaning postulates to express the various sense relations that occur in
language. The negative connective ~ can be used to account for relations of binary
antonymy.

Example: ASLEEP: x ASLEEP 1 ~x AWAKE

CONTRADICTION is most centrally a logical term. The basic form of a logical

contradiction is p & ~ p. Anything that is clearly an instance of this basic logical
contradiction, e.g. John is here and John is not here, can be called a contradiction.
ANOMALY is semantic oddness (as opposed to grammatical oddness) that can be
traced to the meanings of the predicates in the sentence concerned. Thus Christopher is
killing phonemes is anomalous because the meanings of the predicates kill and phoneme
cannot be combined in this way. Anomaly involves the violation of a selectional
restriction.
Meaning postulates can be used to deduce information about sense relations,
including hyponymy and some forms of antonymy, and about selectional restrictions
and anomaly. Hyponymy relations and selectional restrictions are expressed by
meaning postulates that look formally alike. Anomaly is seen as an indirect case of
contradiction. Areas not easily handled by meaning postulates include change-of-state
verbs and gradable predicates which require some kind of statement about the context
in which the predicates are used.

C. Derivation
There are four different types of derivational relationship between words:
addition, mutation, conversion and subtraction.
1. addition: Some lexemes are formed by combining morphemes: those like
armchair and busybody, which consist entirely of free morphemes; words
like violinist, disarm and blue-eyed, which have partly free and partly
 bound morphemes; and the type represented by astronaut and biology,
composed entirely of bound morphemes.
2. mutation: The words proud and pride are semantically related and are
related formally as well, but it is impossible to say that one is formed by
adding something to the other. Rather, derivation is accomplished here by a
change of vowel; in other pairs of words the change may be in
consonants, as in believe and belief; or both vowel and consonant, as with
choose and choice; or by change of stress: e.g. verbs extráct, insúlt,
progréss in contrast to nouns extract, insult, progress.
3. conversion or zero change: This is the simple change of a word of one class
to a word of another class with no formal alteration. Thus clean, dry and
equal are adjectives and also verbs; the relation of the adjective clean to
the verb clean is the same as that of the adjective long to the verb
lengthen. Fan, grasp and hammer are verbs and also nouns; capital,
initial and periodical are nouns and adjectives.
4. subtraction (or reduction): By removing parts of certain lexemes new
lexemes are formed. One kind of shortening is called an acronym; another
is called a clipping. An acronym is a word derived from the written
form of a construction; a construction is a sequence of words that
together have a meaning. Some acronyms are pronounced as a sequence
of letters: UK for ‘United Kingdom,’ USA for ‘United States of America.’ In
other acronyms the letters combine to produce something
pronounceable: AIDS for ‘Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome,’
UNESCO for ‘United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization.’ As these examples show, the acrony m is typically but not
always formed from the first letter of each written word. The acronym
may be formed from parts of a single word: ID for identification, TB for
tuberculosis, TV for television; or it may include more than initial letters:
Nabisco (National Biscuit Company), Sunoco (Sun Oil Company). With a
few exceptions, acronyms are essentially names (Kreidler 1979).

D. Participant Roles
The basic semantic ingredients of a common type of simple sentence, as we have
analysed it, are (1) a predicate, and (2) a number of referring expressions. The referring
expressions correspond to actual things, persons, etc. in the world more or less directly, via
the device of reference. The function of the predicate is to describe the specific
relationship between the things, persons, etc. referred to, i.e. to describe how the things
and/or people participate in the particular situation described. In this unit, we shall
investigate a proposed way of being more precise about the different ways in which things
and people participate in some of the real-world situations described by sentences.

John opened the door with the key

The key opened the door
The door opened

The roles played by the participant objects (door, key) and people (John) do not
vary. In this example, the roles played by the participants are labelled as follows:
John AGENT
the door AFFECTED
the key INSTRUMENT
 The AGENT of a sentence is the person deliberately carrying out the action described,
e.g. John in John opened the door. The AFFECTED participant is the thing (not usually a person,
although it may be) upon which the action is carried out, in many cases the thing changed by
the action in the most obvious way, the door in our example. Some semanticists refer to the
affected participant as the PATIENT. The INSTRUMENT is the thing (hardly ever a person) by
means of which the action is carried out, the key in our example.
E. Soal Latihan
1. You should understand these terms and concepts; dictionary vs encyclopaedia, types
of dictionary, a linguistic semanticist’s dictionary, an ordinary dictionary-writer’s
dictionary, semantic primes, technical (theoretical) predicates!
2. What are meaning postulates and why are they an important part of the linguistic
semanticist’s dictionary? Give an example. What specific kinds of truths are they
designed to account for? What role (if any) does context play in their use?
3. Show how the following anomalous sentences (designated again by the * notation)
can be reduced to cases of basic logical contradiction, following the procedure
outlined in this unit. Indicate what meaning postulates you have to invoke to make
the deductions follow through. (a) *The reptile speaks (b) *The glass walked
4. Try to identify the component morphemes in the following English words and
then describe the steps (rules) involved in their derivation.
a leathery i jittery
b privatize j implausibility
c watertight k inconceivable
d tabulation l flatten
e redden m unhappier
f intensity n deemphasize
g befriended o endearment
h washable p girlfriend
5. In each of the following sentences identify the participant role and the
grammatical position (i.e. either Subject, Object, or Complement) of each
referring expression. Possible semantic roles include Agent, Affected, Instrument,
Location, Beneficiary, Experiencer, and Theme.
a Mary roasted the duck
b Jane smelled the burning dinner
c The duck was roasted by Mary
d The bomb destroyed the building
e Jane kicked the tyre with her foot
f Fred saw a comedy show in that club
g I saw Mortimer in Detroit
 BAB VI
INTERPERSONAL AND NON-LITERAL MEANING

A. Speech acts
‘Actions speak louder than words’ is a well-known proverb. But we will show in
this unit that the alleged distinction between acts and speech is a misleading
oversimplification. We will show how, to a large extent, speech is action, and that
language can actually be used to do things.
An ACT of ASSERTION is carried out when a speaker utters a declarative sentence
(which can be either true or false), and undertakes a certain responsibility, or
commitment, to the hearer, that a particular state of affairs, or situation, exists in
the world. Example; If I say, ‘Simon is in the kitchen’, I assert to my hearer that in the
real world a situation exists in which a person named Simon is in a room identified
by the referring expression the kitchen.
The DESCRIPTIVE FALLACY is the view that the sole purpose of making assertions
is to DESCRIBE some state of affairs. Example; According to the Descriptive Fallacy
view, my only purpose in uttering ‘Simon is in the kitchen’ would be to describe a
particular state of affairs, and nothing more. The Descriptive Fallacy view is not
wholly wrong. An element of description is involved in many utterances. But
description is not indulged in only for its own sake. There is usually a more basic
purpose behind an utterance.
A PERFORMATIVE utterance is one that actually describes the act that it
performs, i.e. it PERFORMS some act and SIMULTANEOUSLY DESCRIBES that act.
Example ‘I promise to repay you tomorrow’ is performative because in saying it the
speaker actually does what the utterance describes, i.e. he promises to repay the
hearer the next day. That is, the utterance both describes and is a promise. By
contrast, the utterance ‘John promised to repay me tomorrow’, although it
describes a promise, is not itself a promise. So this utterance does not
simultaneously do what it describes, and is therefore not a performative.
A CONSTATIVE utterance is one which makes an ASSERTION (i.e. it is often the
utterance of a declarative sentence) but is NOT performative. Example ‘I’m trying to
get this box open with a screwdriver’ is a constative utterance, because it makes an
assertion about a particular state of affairs, but is not performative, i.e. the
utterance does not simultaneously describe and perform the same act.
A PERFORMATIVE VERB is one which, when used in a simple positive present
tense sentence, with a 1st person singular subject, can make the utterance of that
sentence performative. Example Sentence is a performative verb because, for
example, ‘I sentence you to be hanged by the neck’ is a performative utterance.
Punish is not a performative verb because, for example, ‘I punish you’ is not a
performative utterance.
B. Perlocution and Illucutions
The PERLOCUTIONARY ACT (or just simply the PERLOCUTION) carried out by a speaker
making an utterance is the act of causing a certain effect on the hearer and others.
Example If I say ‘There’s a hornet in your left ear’, it may well cause you to panic, scream
and scratch wildly at your ear. Causing these emotions and actions of yours is the
perlocution of my utterance, or the perlocutionary act I perform by making that
utterance.
The ILLOCUTIONARY ACT (or simply the ILLOCUTION) carried out by a speaker making
an utterance is the act viewed in terms of the utterance’s significance within a
conventional system of social interaction. One way to think about the illocutionary act is
that it reflects the intention of the speaker in making the utterance in the first place.
Illocutions are acts defined by social conventions, acts such as accosting, accusing,
 admitting, apologizing, challenging, complaining, condoling, congratulating, declining,
deploring, giving permission, giving way, greeting, leavetaking, mocking, naming, offering,
praising, promising, proposing marriage, protesting, recommending, surrendering,
thanking, toasting. Example, Saying: ‘I’m very grateful to you for all you have done for me’
performs the illocutionary act of thanking, which appears to be the speaker’s intention in
making the utterance.

C. Felicity Condition

The FELICITY CONDITIONS of an illocutionary act are conditions that must be fulfilled
in the situation in which the act is carried out if the act is to be said to be carried out
properly, or felicitously. Examples; One of the felicity conditions for the illocutionary act
of ordering is that the speaker must be superior to, or in authority over, the hearer.
Thus, if a servant says to the Queen ‘Open the window’, there is a certain incongruity, or
anomalousness, or infelicity in the act (of ordering) carried out, but if the Queen says
‘Open the window’ to the servant, there is no infelicity.

A SINCERITY CONDITION on an illocutionary act is a condition that must be fulfilled if

the act is said to be carried out SINCERELY, but failure to meet such a condition does not
prevent the carrying out of the act altogether. Example; A sincerity condition on
apologizing is that the apologizer believes that the thing apologized for is wrong in some
way. Thus, if John enters a room at a certain time, believing that to do so is wrong in
some way (e.g. impolite, tactless, sacrilegious) and he says ‘I’m sorry to come in here at
this moment’, then he has apologized, and apologized sincerely. But if he says the same
thing in the same circumstances, except that he does not believe that what he has done
is wrong in any way, then he has still apologized, but insincerely.

A felicity condition for the illocutionary act of accusing is that the deed or property
attributed to the accused is wrong in some way. Thus one can felicitously accuse someone
of theft or murder, but normally only infelicitously of, say, being a nice guy, or of helping an
old lady to cross the road.

D. Direct and Indirect Illocutions

The DIRECT ILLOCUTION of an utterance is the illocution most directly indicated by a

LITERAL reading of the grammatical form and vocabulary of the sentence uttered. The
INDIRECT ILLOCUTION of an utterance is any further illocution the utterance may have.
Example; The direct illocution of ‘Can you pass the salt?’ is an enquiry about the hearer’s
ability to pass the salt. The indirect illocution is a request that the hearer pass the salt.

A DIRECTIVE act is any illocutionary act which essentially involves the speaker trying to
get the hearer to behave in some required way. Example; Ordering and suggesting are
directive acts. Apologizing and promising are not.

A COMMISSIVE act is any illocutionary act which essentially involves the speaker
committing himself to behave in some required way. Example; Promising and swearing (in
one sense) are commissive acts. Ordering and thanking are not

E. Propositions and Illocutions

SENTENCE MEANING is what a sentence means, regardless of the context and situation in
which it may be used. UTTERANCE MEANING is what a speaker means when he makes an
utterance in a particular situation.
 The PROPOSITIONAL CONTENT of a directive illocution can be expressed (par tial) by a
declarative sentence describing the action that the speaker requires of the hearer. (This
definition is partial because it only applies to directives. It does not apply to commissives, for
instance, or other types of illocution.)

The PROPOSITIONAL CONTENT of a COMMISSIVE ILLOCUTION can be expressed by a

declarative sentence describing the action which the speaker undertakes to perform.

Considerations of politeness are among the main reasons for speakers preferring to get
their message across by means of indirect, rather than direct, illocutions.

Directives Commissives
ASSERTION of relatively impolite moderately polite
propositional
content

QUESTIONING of relatively polite moderately polite but

propositional not appropriate in all
content cases

F. Conversational implicature

Implicature (as we will call it for short) is a concept of utterance meaning as opposed
to sentence meaning, but is parallel in many ways to the sense relation (i.e. sentence
meaning concept) of entailment (Unit 10). Furthermore, implicature is related to the
method by which speakers work out the indirect illocutions of utterances (Unit 24). If,
when a proposition A is TRUE, a proposition B must therefore also be TRUE, then
proposition A ENTAILS proposition B. (We extend this definition in a natural way to involve
the SENTENCES expressed by two such propositions, A and B).

An INFERENCE is any conclusion that one is reasonably entitled to draw from a

sentence or utterance. An implicature of one part of an utterance is said to be CANCELLED
when another part of the utterance or a following utterance explicitly contradicts it.
Example; In the utterance ‘I tried to buy salt, and in fact I succeeded’, the implicature (from
the first half of the utterance) that the speaker did not in fact buy salt is explicitly
cancelled by the assertion in the second half of the utterance.

Implicature exists by reason of general social conventions, the chief of which is the
principle of co-operativeness between speakers. (The idea of implicature, which links logic
and conversation, was developed by the philosopher Paul Grice.)

G. Non-literal meaning: idioms, metaphor, and metonymy

IDIOMATIC EXPRESSIONS (IDIOMS) are multi-word phrases whose overall meanings

are idiosyncratic and largely unpredictable, reflecting speaker meanings that are not
derivable by combining the literal senses of the individual words in each phrase according
to the regular semantic rules of the language. Examples Expressions such as let the cat out
of the bag and take the bull by the horns are commonly used idioms whose usual meanings
are not fully compositional, but have to be learned as a whole. Any speaker of English
knows, for example, that let the cat out of the bag is usually used to mean something like
‘reveal a secret’, though it also has a possible, though rarely intended, literal compositional
meaning something like ‘release a small feline animal from a sack’. Similarly, take the bull by
the horns typically evokes the idea that someone ‘takes charge of a situation’, though it
could also have the more literal compositional meaning ‘grab a (real) bull by its horns’.

METAPHORS are conceptual (mental) operations reflected in human language

that enable speakers to structure and construe abstract areas of knowledge and
experience in more concrete experiential terms. Example Consider our earlier examples
of My car is a lemon and Dr Jones is a butcher.In each case a certain aspect of the more
complex and/or abstract areas of knowledge involving what we generally know about cars
and doctors has been explicitly highlighted in each metaphorical expression by
linguistically linking the more abstract target domains of knowledge about cars and
doctors to more particularized familiar concrete source domains (i.e. knowledge about
lemons in the ‘fruit’ domain and butchers in the domain of possible professions,
respectively) in order to specify that there is something negative about each. We know
from experience, for example, that lemons are sour and that butchers can be messy and
rough in their work. This familiar knowledge helps us understand certain negative aspects
of car ownership and medical practice in a particularly immediate way via metaphor.

STRUCTURAL METAPHORS are abstract metaphorical systems in which an entire

(typically abstract) complex mental concept is structured in terms of some other (usually
more concrete) concept. They typically involve multiple individual linguistic expressions
that evoke some aspect of the metaphor (as opposed to more restricted frozen
metaphors which usually occur in only one expression). Another way of thinking about
structural metaphors is that ‘they allow us . . . to use one highly structured and clearly
delineated concept to structure another’ (LJ 1980: 61). Example Consider such
expressions as the following: (1) Her point of view is indefensible. (2) They attacked
everything we said. (3) I finally won/lost the argument. (4) She defended her claim that the
moon is habitable. (5) We demolished their argument. (6) My strategy against their argument
was weak. (7) Our criticism of his claim was right on target.

ORIENTATIONAL METAPHORS give concepts spatial orientation by associating an

abstract knowledge area with some aspect of experiential knowledge grounded in how
human beings understand their orientation in physical space, i.e. up vs down, front vs
back, etc. Example; Expressions such as the following seem to relate the abstract notion of
being happy with being located in a physically UP position: I’m feeling up today, That movie
boosted my spirits, Her spirits rose at the news. LJ call this metaphor HAPPY IS UP.

ONTOLOGICAL METAPHORS help structure our understanding of abstract

concepts and experiences, such as events, activities, emotions, ideas, etc., in terms of our
experience with actual physical objects and substances in the real world. (The term
ontological is derived from the Greek root onta ‘the things which exist’ -logy ‘the science
of ’.) Example; LJ use the metaphor INFLATION IS AN ENTITY to illustrate how ontological
metaphors work. They observe that by treating an abstract concept such as monetary
inflation as though it were a physical object we can use the everyday language we typically
use to talk about such objects to understand the concept better. Here are some ways in
which we can talk about inflation: (1) Inflation is lowering our standard of living. (2)
Inflation is increasing every year. (3) The negative aspects of inflation far outweigh the positive
ones. (4) Inflation is ruining our economy. (5) We have to fight inflation or it will conquer us.

PERSONIFICATION is a particular subtype of ontological metaphor in which an

abstract entity is construed as though it were a physical object which is then further
specified as being a person. Examples Here are some examples of personification: (1) That
theory explains everything you need to know about metaphor. (2) I think that life has
cheated me out of any hope of happiness. (3) Cancer finally caught up with him.
 METONYMY is a kind of non-literal language in which one entity is used to refer to
another entity that is associated with it in some way. In other words, metonymic concepts
‘allow us to conceptualize one thing by means of its relation to something else’ (LJ 1980:
39). Example: The following example of metonymy is frequently cited in the literature to
illustrate this concept: ‘The ham sandwich in the next booth is waiting for his bill’.

H. Soal Latihan
1. You should understand these terms and concepts; speech acts, act of referring, act of
assertion, descriptive fallacy, performative utterance, , constative utterance,
performative verb!
2. Make sure you understand the difference between perlocutionary and
illocutionary acts!
3. For each of the following situations, identify both the sentence type of the utterance
and the act carried out by the utterance (from among asserting, asking, or ordering).
a. Father to his son: ‘The car is dirty.’
b. Irate citizen to the city council: ‘Is it right to allow skateboarding on our
sidewalks?’
c. Mother to small child: ‘Look at the mess you just made!’
d. Student to a friend on a windy day: ‘Some of my papers have blown away.’
e. Photographer to a client: ‘Stand right there and say cheese!’
4. Briefly describe the difference between felicity and sincerity conditions!
5. Briefly describe the difference between direct and indirect illocutions.
6. What do the notions entailment and implicature have in common? How do they
differ? What does it mean to say that implicatures are non-truth- conditional
inferences?
7. Identify 5 idioms and figuratives language!
 REFERENCES

Hurford, JR & Heasley, B. 1983. Semantics: A coursebook. London: Cambridge University Press.

Kreidler, Charles. W.2002. Introducing English Semantic. Lodon and New York: Taylor & Francis e-
Library.

http://primus.arts.u-szeged.hu/bese/Chapter1/1.3.2.htm

http://sampulbaca.blogspot.co.id/2012/08/words-and-things-extensions-denotations.html

www.merriam-webster.com

www.dictionary.cambridge.org

http://widyakusu.blogspot.co.id/2012/05/sense-properties-analytic-synthetic-and.html

http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Logical+Semantics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_connective