Componential analysis

Using square brackets to indicate such semantic features, [male/female], and [adult/child] are the features,
or components, that differentiate the members of the set from one another. The determination of such features
has been called componential analysis.

CA is particularly applicable to distinguishing the meanings of lexemes that

are semantically related or in the same semantic domain. It is often seen as a process
of breaking down the sense of a word into its minimal distinctive features; that is, into
components which contrast with other components. It refers to the description of the
meaning of words through structured sets of semantic features, which are given as
“present”, “absent” or “indifferent with reference to feature”. To describe the
presence and absence of a feature binnary rules are used. The symbol ‘+’ means the
feature is present, while ‘-‘ means the feature is absent (Saeed, 2009: 260).

Jackson in “Words and their meaning” (1996: 83) dan Nida in “Componential
Analysis of Meaning” (1975: 32) categorize the types of components into two main
types, i.e. common component and diagnostic or distinctive component.
a. Common component.
This is the central component which is shared by all the lexemes in the same
semantic domain or lexical field.
b. Diagnostic or distinctive components.
They serve to distinguish the meaning from others from the same domain.

Procedural Steps in the Componential Analysis of Meaning

Componential analysis (CA) can only be done within the same semantic domain. There are three
basic steps in the procedure for determining the diagnostic features (Nida, 1975: 48), they are:
a. determining the common features and line up all the apparently relevant differences in form and
possibly related functions;
b. studying the relations of the features to one another, in order to determine the
redundancies and dependencies; and
c. formulating a set of diagnostic features and testing such a set for adequacy.

Another problem of its application which shows its limitation is the fact that
componential analysis (among other types of meaning) only focuses on referential
meaning. In other words, it is only concerned with the relation between the lexical
unit and the referent, and the meanings of lexemes which refer to objects. It is
important to consider that not all words have referents (Nida, 1975: 25).

Linguistic Basis for Componential Analysis

Naming

Paraphrasing

Defining

classifying
- In studying the meaning of euphemism appeared in Iron Lady Movie script, the writer using
componential analysis as approach.

-Componential analysis can be useful to determine the meaning of a lexeme by breaking down the
sense of a word into its minimal distinctive feature. (Susana Wijayanti- abstrak- componential
analysis of meaning jurnal).

-In addition Kreidler determine componential analysis as the using of ‘square breckets’ to indicate
semantic features that differentiate the member of the set from on another (p.87-88).

- Moreover to differentiate the words into several sets, it is necessrary to determine the
‘component’ of lexeme

-So that the lexeme can be packed into disticntive feature using the square bracket.

- Jackson (1996: 83 cited in Susana Wijayanti) and Nida (1975: 32 cited in Susana Wijayanti)
categorize the types of components into two main types:

a. Common component.
Common component is the central component which is shared by all the lexemes in the same
semantic domain or lexical field.
b. Diagnostic or distinctive components.
They serve to distinguish the meaning from others from the same domain.

-Together with the two types of component above, ‘binary feature’ also used as the device to
determine the semantic feature of a lexeme.

-Binary feature refers to the value of the meaning of words, which are given as ‘present’ (+), absent
(-), or “indifferent with reference to feature” (Susana Wijayanti)

-there are words that can be the example for the using of two types of components and the binary
feature.

-Such as the words man, woman, boy, and girl, (leech 1976, 96 cited in Susana) which represented
by the following matrix:
- The words man, woman, boy, and girl, are included in the semantic domain of [human] ,
which [human] refers to the common component.
- Furthermore these words are distinguished into [adult] and [male] , which these
components refer to the diagnostic components.
- The meanings of the individual words can then be expressed by combinations of these
features:

-
- In studying the meaning of words using componential analysis, Nida provide the
four basic processes in componential analysis, which describe as the following:
- A. Naming
- The naming process is almost similiar to reference, however the perspective is somewhat
different, which naming is the specific act of designating a referent.
b. paraphrasing
Paraphrasing is peocess of describing the distinctive features of any semantic unit of a word.
For instance, Uncle can be paraphrased into my father’s brother or my mother’s brother.
c. defining
The process of defining is another form of paraphrase, but defining is a highly specialized
form of paraphrase . It consists essentially in combining all the various specific paraphrases
into a single statement based on the diagnostic components. For example, Uncle can be
defined as the brother of one’s father or mother or the husband of one’s aunt.
d. classifying
Classifying is a process of relating some words in similiar feature and sepatering those
words which have distinctive unit from one another in order to determine the basis for
such groupings.

Previous studies
In this research proposal, the researcher uses two previous studies. One of them is in the
form of thesis made by Yohana Sari. She conducted a research about euphemism analysis
on “American Pie5” script. She applied the approach of semantic theory such as Lexical
relation and componential analysis to find the meaning of euphemism which appeared in
the script. The method that she used in her thesis is qualitative method, since it focuses in
finding out the meaning of the euphemims and it deals with descriptive data.The final
result of her thesis concerns with the use of euphemism in replacing the taboo terms and
its meaning. The difference between Yohana’s thesis and the present research proposal is
the object. While Yohana uses film series of American Pie 5, the researcher decide to
analyze euphemism in Iron lady movie script.The theory of type of euphemism and the
samantic analysis of meaning is similiar with present research, such as componential
analysis.However the final result of both research is somehow different, because Yohana’s
thesis concerns more with sexual euphemism, in the othr hgand, the present research
contain less sexual euphemism.
The researcher also uses journal as the previous studies. The journal made by Kerry Linfoot,
which conducting a study of of Euphemism Formation. She/he took the data from several
novel, they were Jane Austen's (1816) Emma, D. H. Lawrence's (1928) Lady Chatterly's Lover,
and Fiona Walker's (1996) Well Groomed. This journal focus on the use of Warren’s theory of
Types of euphemism to figure out the formation of euphemism and its meaning. The
researcher decide to use Kerry’s journal to expand the knowledge of how the theories work
in analysing the data.
Those previous studies are beneficial for the researcher, since they give the information of
how the researcher should apply the theory and how the researcher will analyze the data.