Propositions For example, the concepts JOHN, PETER, and

HIT may be combined to form propositions. The

In Part II above, ways of identifying the meaning
action HIT is the central EVENT concept. What
components of the lexical items of a language were
the proposition communicates will depend on the
presented. Words from various languages were
relationship of the other two concepts to HIT. If
compared showing how very differently languages
JOHN does the hitting and PETER is the one who
organize the lexicon. Ways of finding adequate
was HIT, then the proposition would be John hit
lexical equivalents were discussed. However,
Peter. If JOHN was the one who was HIT, the
translation is much more than finding word
proposition would be Peter hit John. Even though
equivalences. The source text structures must be
the difference in English is signaled by order, in
abandoned for the natural receptor language
the semantic structure, the order is unimportant.
structures without significant loss or change of
The important thing is that we know which
meaning. Therefore, we turn now to grammatical
concepts combine to form the proposition and the
structure. The emphasis will be on identifying the
relations between the concepts. There are many
semantic structure, i.e., the meaning of the
ways in which the semantic structure of a
grammatical structures, and comparing how that
proposition can be symbolized. For example, a
meaning is expressed in different languages. In
formula like the following might be used to show
chapter 3, an overview of semantic structure was
the difference between the two propositions above.
given. The students would benefit from rereading
chapter 3 before beginning the study of this third agent: John.... activity:HIT... .affected:Peter
part of the book.
agent:Peter... activity:HIT... .affected:John
In this section, Part III, propositions will be the
In the first example, JOHN has an agent relation to
focus of discussion, and in Part IV the combination
HIT; whereas, in the second, JOHN is the affected
of propositions within texts is discussed. (The
and PETER is; the agent. The order in the semantic
word proposition is used here in a broad sense to
structure is not important but the relations (agent,
include a single event or state and the concepts
affected) are. Some languages will tend to encode
which are immediately related to that event or
the agent first, others will tend to put it at the end,
state. John ran is a proposition. The flower is
after the activity. In the grammar, the semantic
beautiful is a proposition.) A proposition most
agent is most often expressed as the subject of the
often takes the form of a clause or simple
sentence. One knows who hit whom in English by
sentences in the grammatical structure, but not
the word order in the grammar. Other languages
always. It may be encoded in a variety of forms.
will have the opposite order, and perhaps
However, whatever the grammatical form, it is
additional markers to indicate the agent and the
encoding a semantic proposition. The skewing
affected. For example, a number of languages
between grammatical forms and the propositions
would use the order John Peter hit when JOHN is
will be discussed below.
the agent. In order to talk about semantic structure,
Defining propositions it is necessary to choose a form for writing
propositions. Since this text book is in English, we
Concepts, as discussed in the previous chapters,
will arbitrarily choose the normal English form to
consist of meaning components. Or, said another
indicate the propositions. In more technical
way, meaning components combine into concepts.
material, formulas could be used. The English
We look now at how concepts unite to form the
forms are simply a way of displaying the
next level of groupings called propositions. A
information. The translator must choose the natural
proposition is a grouping of concepts into a unit
forms of the receptor language in the translation
which communicates. It is a semantic unit
and not translate propositions literally. Any one
consisting of concepts, one of which is central and
proposition may be encoded in various ways in a
the others directly related to the central concept.
given language. The translator will look for the
best way; the most natural way. For example, the
proposition John hit Peter might be translated into
English with any of the following forms,
depending on the context in which it occurs:
John hit Peter.
Peter was hit by John.
The hitting of Peter by John...
Peter, who was hit by John,...
Peter, the one John hit,...
Which grammatical form is used in the translation
will depend on the relation that the proposition has
to other propositions and how the receptor
language (in this case English) will most naturally
express the propositions and the relations between
them.
A proposition, then, may be described as a
semantic unit consisting of concepts (THINGS,
EVENTS, ATTRIBUTES) in which one concept is
central and the other(s) related to it through a
system of RELATIONS. If the central concept is
an EVENT concept, then the proposition is an
Event Proposition; if the central concept is a
THING or ATTRIBUTE, then the proposition is a
State Proposition (Beekman, Callow, and Kopesec
1981:52). This difference will be discussed after
the method for identifying propositions within a
text is discussed.
Identifying event propositions
Identifying event propositions begins by
classifying the concepts that are represented by the
lexical items in the text. For example, the
following sentence is first analyzed by determining
which words represent EVENT concepts, which
represent THING concepts, and which represent
ATTRIBUTE and RELATION concepts.
E T E A
The destruction of the city was planned well.
Then, the grammatical sentence can be re-
expressed in propositions with the EVENTS as the
center of the propositions. There are two EVENTS,
destroy and plan. The two propositions are:
(Someone) destroyed the city.
(Someone) planned well.
However, the propositions cannot be expressed
without including the PARTICIPANTS. Notice
that someone has been used in the proposition to
indicate the AGENT; that is, the one who did the
ACTION. Because the text does not indicate who
did the action, a generic term has been used in the
proposition. If the rest of the text were available, it
might be possible to be more explicit. The steps for
rewriting as event propositions are:
1. Look for the forms which express EVENT
concepts in the text. Express each of these
concepts with a finite verb.
2. Identify the PARTICIPANTS (persons or
objects that do the action or to which the action is
done).
3. Rewrite as a proposition with the EVENT
expressed as a finite verb and the PARTICIPANTS
made explicit, using the form in which there is no
mismatch of grammar and semantics in English.
That is, the form used for the proposition should
indicate by the English structure who the agent is
by putting the agent as the subject, who or what the
affected is by putting it as the object, etc. The
relations between the concepts are shown by the
normal English signals used when there is no
mismatching.
4. The relations between the propositions then need
to be studied and a rewrite made expressing these
relations, reordering the propositions, etc. This
fourth step is not included here. It will be discussed
in Part V.
Notice the following application of these steps:
TEXT: John rejected Peter's offer.
Step 1: The EVENTS are reject and offer.
Step 2: The PARTICIPANTS are John and Peter.
Step 3: John rejected. Peter offered (to do
something).
Step 4: The order would be changed; that is, Peter
offered before John rejected. The relationship
between the two propositions is sequential, one
happened and then the other.
TEXT: His graduation depended on her help.
(Referring to a past event.)
Step 1: The EVENTS are graduate and help
{Depend is encoding a conditional relation.)
Step 2: The PARTICIPANTS are male-person and
female-person.
Step 3: He could graduate. If she helped (him).
Step 4: The order of the events is helped and then
graduate. The relation between propositions is
condition CONSEQUENCE. (If she helped him,
then he could graduate.)
Using these four steps, one is able to analyze any
text, recasting it in such a way that the underlying
semantic structure is made clear. The whole text is
written in propositions with all the EVENTS,
PARTICIPANTS (THINGS), ATTRIBUTES, and
RELATIONS made explicit. Even though a
translator may not find it necessary to rewrite
every passage he is translating, there will be many
times when it will be necessary to do this kind of
an analysis before an adequate equivalent can be
found. Even when a translator thinks he knows the
meaning, making it explicit in propositions may
help him to find a more accurate way to translate
the text.
A proposition is the smallest unit of
communication. Concepts have meaning only in
that they refer to THINGS, EVENTS,
ATTRIBUTES, or RELATIONS. However, it is
only when a concept occurs with other concepts
that there is meaningful communication. The
combination must not result in nonsense except
perhaps in fantasy, poetry, apocalyptic materials,
etc. The combination is a proposition only when
the combination makes sense. A single proposition
is understood by the speakers of the language to be
a single event (that is, a single action, experience,
process, or state). If there is more than one
EVENT, there is more than one proposition. For
example, the sentence John, jumping over the
fence, ran, and dove into the lake would be three
propositions: (1) John jumped over the fence, (2)
John ran, and (3) John dove into the lake. Notice
that a proposition has the form of a simple
sentence; that is, a sentence which has only one
predicate (verb), only one clause. A proposition is
a single predication.
In the following examples, the source text has been
rewritten as propositions (without indicating
relations since these have not yet been studied).
Source language: Disobedience brings much
suffering.
Propositions: (Someone) disobeys.
(Someone) suffers.
Source language: The compliment was received
well by Mary.
Propositions: (Someone) complimented Mary.
Mary responded well.
Source language: The men who are now thinking
about running for president will begin their
campaigns soon.
Propositions: Some men are now thinking (about
something).
They want to be president.
They will campaign soon.
Notice that running for president is an idiom. The
meaning is indicated in the proposition they want
to be president. In these examples, we have only
done the first three steps of the analysis. One could
not do a good translation of these propositions
without the fourth step; that is, determining the
relations between the various propositions. The
order would need to be changed and the relations
made clear. Step four will be discussed later.
Classifying propositions
There are two main kinds of propositions - Event
Propositions and State Propositions. If the
proposition has an EVENT as the central concept,
it is an Event Proposition; if not, it is a State
Proposition. A State Proposition will have a
THING or ATTRIBUTE as the central concept.
All Event Propositions consist of at least a central
EVENT concept and an additional THING
concept. The central EVENT concept may refer to
an action, an experience, or a process. Actions
would be such concepts as RUN, HIT, EAT, and
SWIM. Experiences are concepts which refer to
the activities of the five senses or to cognitive or
psychological activities, as for example, SMELL,
SEE, HEAR, THINK, and COVET. Processes
always represent a change of state (from one
condition or state of being to another). For
example, DIE, BECOME SOUR, and FREEZE are
processes (Beekman, Callow, and Kopesec
1981:56).
The following are examples of Event Propositions;
the EVENT has been italicized:
Actions: The boys ran.
John ate the food.
Mary gave the book to Peter.
Experiences: Mary knew little.
The boys heard the whistle.
John saw the cow.
Processes: The milk soured.
The dog died.
The ice melted.
State Propositions do not have an EVENT concept
central to the proposition. They consist of THINGS
and ATTRIBUTIVES which are related the one to
the other by state relations. A State Proposition has
two main parts; the topic and the comment. The
topic is the CONCEPT being talked about, and the
comment consists of the THING or ATTRIBUTE
being used to describe or identify the topic plus the
state relation.
For example, in the English sentence
The book is Peter's,
the topic is BOOK, and it is related to the central
concept PETER by the relation of ownership.
So the meaning is The book is owned by (belongs
to) Peter.
The various kinds of relations which occur in State
Propositions will be discussed in chapter 20. The
central concept in a State Proposition is the
THING or ATTRIBUTE which occurs as part of
the comment. This is central because it is the
important (often new) information that is being
presented about the topic (often old information).
Notice the following examples in which the three
parts of State Propositions are given first, and then
the English equivalent is given. The central
CONCEPT is in bold.
CAR...ownership...ME The car is mine.
DOG...naming...FIDO The dog's name is Fido.
DIRECTOR...identification...MR, JONES The
Director is Mr. Jones.
JOHN...location...HOUSE John is in the house.
JOHN...description...BIG John is big.
English uses the verb be (is) to express many State
Propositions. Aguaruna, however, would translate
the above as follows (literal backtranslation):
1. car-possessed-first-person
2. dog Fido name-owner
3. director that-one-Mr. Jones his-name
4. John house-in stays
5. John big-is
These same propositions would be expressed with
the following structures in Otomi of Mexico, and
Gahuku of Papua New Guinea (data from Richard
Blight and Ellis Deibler):
OTOMI GAHUKU
1. This is my car. 1. My-car exists.
2. Dog he-is-named the Fido. 2. Dog name-
(phrase-closure-marker) Fido-is.
3. Director he-is-named the Mr. 3. Overseer-man-
(phrase-cIosureJones. marker) Mr. Jones is-he.
4. John lives there in the house. 4. John-(phrase-
closure-marker) house-in is-he.
5. Is big the John. 5. John-(phrase-closure-marker)
man big is-he.
The semantic structure, that is, the proposition,
remains the same, but each language will express
the proposition with different grammatical forms.
Situational meanings of propositions So far, we
have been discussing the referential meaning of the
proposition. But propositions also must be looked
at from the point of view of the situation in which
they are used.
What is the author (speaker) trying to do with the
proposition?
What is the author's purpose?
The author may be asking a question or making a
statement, or giving a command. The proposition
which is diagrammed below is the same for each of
these three usages:
Referential meaning:
JOHN....agent...HIT....affected....BALL
Statement: John hit the ball.
Question: Did John hit the ball?
Command: John, hit the ball!
The referential meaning is the same, but the usage
is different for each proposition. Both Event and
State Propositions may occur with any of these
three situational meanings. These are often called
the illocutionary forces of the proposition. In
writing propositions, simple English sentences and
English word order, and punctuation may be used
to indicate the illocutionary force of the
propositions as was done above. Intonation often
indicates illocutionary force in oral English. Note
the following examples:
State proposition which commands: You be
nearby!
State proposition which questions: Is Mary your
sister?
State proposition which states: The dog is in the
barn.
Event (action) proposition which commands:
(You) run fast!
Event (process) proposition which questions: Did
the milk sour?
Event (experience) proposition which states: We
heard the sound.
In the grammar of some languages, the
illocutionary force is shown by word order, in
others by special particles, affixes, or words. The
illocutionary force is often encoded by mood. Each
proposition is either a STATEMENT, a
QUESTION, or a COMMAND. This will be
represented in the translation by the natural forms
of the receptor language. A proposition has only
referential meaning until the illocutionary force is
added. No real communication can be carried on
without this situational meaning being included as
well. It is possible to know the concepts which
make up a proposition and their relation to one
another and still not know what the speaker means.
For example, we might have the EVENT eat, the
AGENT tiger, and the AFFECTED traveler but
still not know what the speaker means, unless we
know whether he is asserting a fact (The tiger ate
the traveler) or asking a question (Did the tiger eat
the traveler?). The intent of the speaker in saying
something is, therefore, part of the communication.
Sometimes the illocutionary force is stated by the
speaker. Instead of simply saying, "Go!" as a
command, a person might say, "I command you to
goI" In this sentence, the illocutionary force is
actually stated by I command. Notice the
following:
1. Go! I command you to go! Command
2. He went. I say that he went. Statement
3. Why did he go? I am asking why he went.
Question
In the first column, the illocutionary force is
indicated by the mood of the sentence. In the
second column, it is made explicit. In the third
column, the illocutionary force is classified.
Normally, a proposition or a propositional cluster
is either a COMMAND, a STATEMENT, or a
QUESTION.
Another way of looking at the three distinctions in
illocutionary force is to think of a statement as
intended to give information to the hearer, a
question as intended to gain information from the
hearer, and a command as intended to encourage or
solicit the action of the hearer. The intent of the
speaker is in focus as it relates to what he wants of
the hearer.
Technically, the implied propositions 1 command,
I say, and 1 ask are called performatives. The
purpose of the speaker is not always stated
explicitly as in column two above. It is more often
indicated by the mood of the sentence as in column
one. However, the performative is an important
part of the semantic structure, i.e., the meaning of
the proposition. Without knowing if the author's
purpose is to STATE, QUESTION, or
COMMAND, it is impossible to understand the
communication.
EXERCISES — Propositions
A. Look again at some of the examples on the
preceding pages (and listed below). How would
you express the meaning in a language other than
English? Look back at the propositions if
necessary. Give at least two grammatical forms for
each. For example, John saw the cow would have
at least two other forms in English: The cow was
seen by John and The cow which John saw...
1. Peter is my witness.
2. Peter has some knowledge of these happenings.
3. The car was sold by John.
4. There was not much investment left.
5. Visitors are always impressed by the beauty of
the Islands.
6. Those to whom judgment was committed
answered.
7. We obeyed his command.
8. Work continues on the new building.
C. Using the propositions you wrote for В above,
how would you express the eight sentences in a
language other than English?
D. Each of the following is a proposition with the
function of STATEMENT. Rewrite the proposition
to indicate a QUESTION. Then rewrite it to
indicate a COMMAND. Then translate into a
language other than English first as a statement,
then as a question, and finally as a command.
1. John is happy.

1. The destruction of the city was well planned. 2. Mary ran to the house.

2. John rejected Peter's offer. 3. The boy ate the meat.

3. His graduation depended on her help. 4. John saw the river.

4. Disobedience brings much suffering. 5. Mary gave the flowers to Jane.

5. The compliment was well received by Mary.

6. The men who are now thinking about running
for president will begin their campaign soon.
7. The car is mine.
8. The dog's name is Fido.
9. John is in the house.
10. The milk soured.
B. First underline the EVENT words in the
following sentences. Then identify the
PARTICIPANTS which are related to the EVENT
and rewrite with propositions. If the participants
are implicit, you will need to make them explicit.