NUR HIDAYANTI

SEMANTICS MODULE
Study of language meaning
English Education department
Faculty Tarbiyah and Teacher Training
Alauddin State Islamic University of Makassar
 PREFACE
The module entitled “ Semantics Module : The Study of Language Meaning ” is an
English language textbook which is intended as an effort to provide teaching materials that
are more suitable for teaching Semantics. This module was created as a mid-semester
assignment for fifth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program at
Alauddin State Islamic University, Makassar. This module consists of five chapters, namely
The Scope of Semantics, Approaches to Study of Semantics, Word Meaning, Sentence
Meaning and Explanation of Word Meaning . This module can be used in its current form,
emphasizing certain sections that are considered important for study. Hopefully this module
can be widely used as English teaching material in the field of semantics, and lecturers can
evaluate how effective this module is in facilitating student learning.

Thanks are addressed to the lecturer who teaches the course, the assistant lecturer who
teaches the semantics course, and to the English Language Education students at Alauddin
State Islamic University Makassar Class B who have accompanied and helped complete this
module.

07 November 2023

Compiler

Nur Hidayanti
 INTRODUCTION

General Information

Identity :

Course Name: Semantics and Pragmatics

Compiler : Nur Hidayanti

University: Alauddin Makassar State Islamic University

Year of Compilation: 2023

Department/Semester: English/Fifth Language Education

Purpose:

In this module with the topic of semantics in learning language meaning, students will be
invited to hone critical thinking skills through reading, asking, answering, discussing and
drawing conclusions about language meaning in each chapter.

Learning flow:

In this teaching module, students will begin by carefully reading information on a specific
topic, utilizing a variety of media and learning resources. They will encourage creative
thinking, analysis, problem solving, and healthy competition in collaboration. Afterwards,
student exploration will be highlighted, and they will reflect on their learning experiences
through innovative learning approaches. This will help train students' creativity and
innovation, and in group discussion activities, they will collaborate with group members to
take responsibility for certain topics that suit their group.
 CHAPTER 1
The Scope of Semantics

Standard Competence:
After reading chapter 1, students are expected to be able to :
11qqqqqq111
1. Know the definition of semantics
2. Know the semantics scope

LEARNING MATERIALS

A. The History of Semantics

Semantics in general, the study of the relationship between words and meaning. The
empirical study of the meaning of words and the meaning of sentences in existing
languages is one branch of linguistics. The abstract study of meaning in relation to
language or systems of symbolic logic is a branch of philosophy. Both are called
semantics. The field of semantics has three basic concerns: the relationship of words to
the objects they symbolize, the relationship of words to their interpreters, and in symbolic
logic, the formal relationship of signs to each other (syntax).

In linguistics, semantics originated in France and Germany in the 1820s when the
meaning of words became an important feature in the growth of language, proponents of
generative semantics insisted that the meaning of sentences was a function of their use.
Still other groups argue that semantics will not advance until theorists take into account
psychological questions about how people form concepts and how this relates to word
meanings.

B. Definitions of Semantics
Semantics in Indonesian comes from the English "semantik", from the Greek sema
(noun) 'sign': or from the verb samaino 'shows', 'means'. It is a technical term used by
linguists to name the part of linguistics that is concerned with meaning. Semantics is part
 of the three levels of language, namely phonology, predicative (morphology, syntax) and
semantics.
According to (Palmer, 1981:5) in Aminuddin (2008) : semantics (meaning) in
linguistics has the third or last component, the relationship between the three components
(tone, grammar , and semantics/meaning) is based on (a) first, language is abstract tones
that refer to the existence of certain signs, (b) signs are a set of systems that have a certain
order and relationships, and (c) a set of signs that have shapes and relationships that
associate certain meanings.

C. Types of Semantics
1. Semantic Behaviorist
Behaviorists have the same attitude, behaviorists do not believe in mentalistic
terms such as thoughts, concepts and ideas. Meaning is determined by the situation,
meaning is determined by the environment. Therefore, meaning can only be
understood if there is data that can be observed in the environment of human
experience.
Example: a mother is breastfeeding her baby.
Based on this sketch, meaning lies in the range between stimulus and
response, between stimulus and answer. Meaning is determined by the situation,
meaning is determined by the environment. Therefore, meaning can only be
understood if there is data that can be observed in the environment of human
experience.

2. Descriptive Semantics
A special semantic study shows the current meaning. The meaning of the word
when the word first appears is not noticed. For example, in Indonesian there is the
word champion, namely the person who gets the top rank in a match without paying
attention to the previous meaning, namely the organizer or mediator in a cockfight. So
, descriptive semantics only pays attention to the current meaning.

3. Generative Semantics
semantic theory emerged in 1968 because of no Linguists' satisfaction with
Chomsky's opinion . In their opinion, the semantic structure and syntactic structure
are homogeneous. Deep structure is not the same as semantic structure.
 To connect it, it is described using one rule, namely transformation. This
theory comes to the conclusion that grammar consists of an inner structure which
contains nothing other than the semantic structure and an outer structure which is the
embodiment of speech. These two structures are connected by a process called
transformation.

4. Grammatical Semantics
Grammatical semantics is a semantic study that specifically examines the
meaning contained in sentence units.
Verhaar said grammatical semantics is much more difficult to analyze. To
analyze the sentence "still sitting, brother is sleeping" is not only interpreted from the
words that make it up.
People must interpret the entire content of the sentence as well as what is
behind the sentence. A word will change its meaning when placed or combined with
other words.

5. Lexical Semantics
Lexical semantics is a more satisfactory synthetic study in discussing the
meaning system contained in words. Lexical semantics is not that difficult. A
dictionary is a good example of lexical semantics: the meaning of each word is
explained there. So, Lexical Semantics pays attention to the meaning contained in
word sentences as independent units.

6. Historical Semantics
Historical semantics is a semantic study that examines systems of meaning
over time. This historical semantic study emphasizes the study of meaning over time,
not changes in word forms. Changes in word forms are studied more in linguistics
historical.
The origins of words are part of the study of etymology . This semantics
compares words based on periods or between words from a certain period and words
in other languages. For example, in BI there is the word padi and in Javanese there is
the word pari. The phonemes/ d/ and/ r/ correspond.

7. Semantic Logika
 Semantic logic is a branch of modern logic which is concerned with concepts
and symbolic notation in the analysis of semantic language. Logic examines the
system of meaning seen from logic as it applies in mathematics which refers to the
word study of meaning or interpretation of teachings, especially those formed in a
system of logic which by Carnap is called semantics.
In logical semantics, the meaning of proportions is discussed as differentiated
from sentences, because different sentences in the same language can be said in the
same proportions. On the other hand, a sentence can be said in two or more
proportions. Proportions can be right or wrong, and symbols are called proportional
variables in logical semantics.

8. Structural Semantics
Structural semantics originates from the view of structural linguistics
pioneered by Saussure. Structuralists argue that every language is a system, a unique
structural relationship consisting of units called structures. This structure is
manifested in elements in the form of phonemes, morphemes, words, phrases, clauses,
sentences and discourse which divide it into phonology, morphology, syntax and
discourse studies.

D. Benefits of Semantics
 For a journalist, reporter or person involved in the world of newspapers and
reporting, they will probably get practical benefits from semantics. Semantics
knowledge will make it easier to choose and use words with the right meaning in
conveying information to the general public. Without knowledge of the concepts of
polysemy, homonymy, denotation, connotation and certain nuances of meaning, it
will be difficult for them to convey information accurately and correctly.
 For those involved in language research, such as those studying at the Literature
faculty, knowledge of semantics will provide them with a lot of theoretical provisions
to be able to analyze the language or languages they are studying.
 For a teacher or prospective teacher, semantic knowledge about semantics will
provide theoretical benefits as well as practical benefits. The theoretical benefit is
because he, as a language teacher, must also seriously study the language he teaches.
These semantic theories will help to better understand the "secret wilderness" of the
language he will teach. While the practical benefits will be obtained in the form of
 convenience for him in teaching the language to his students. A language teacher, in
addition to having extensive knowledge and skills about all aspects of language, must
also have adequate knowledge of semantic theory.
LEARNING TASK

1. How is the relationship between words and the objects they denote studied in semantics ?
2. What is the origin of the word “semantics” in Indonesian and what is the original
meaning of the word ?
 CHAPTER 2
Approaches To Study of
Semantics

Standard Competence:
After reading chapter 2, students are expected to be able to :
1. Know the types of approach 11qqqqqq111
in study of semantics
2. Know the example of each type of approach in study of semantics

LEARNING MATERIALS

A. Definition of approaches to the study of semantics

Semantics is a branch of linguistics that studies the meaning of words or phrases,
clauses and sentences that have lexical meaning and grammatical meaning but do not
have concepts (such as when, when, and who said the sentence).
Approach is a way of doing something or looking at something. It is a general
plan or guideline that can be used to achieve a goal or solve a problem. The approach can
be used in all aspects of life, from personal development to business to scientific research.
So, the semantic study approach is a method used by linguists to understand and
describe the meaning of language.

B. The traditionals approaches to semantics

You have learned that the study of meaning in language has been of interest to
both linguists and philosophers. This also interests general communicators. The study of
semantics has developed from earliest times to modern times, providing a historical
perspective. That way, we can focus on four main approaches – traditional, behavioral,
structural and generative perspectives.
1. Traditional Semantics
 Traditional semantics is associated with the works of great philosophers such as
Socrates , Plato and Aristotle as well as many others after them. Their main focus is
on the nature of human language itself.
Traditional semantics is also concerned with the relationship between form and
meaning. The meaning of a word is considered to be what it refers to. This view was
also held by Ogden and Richards (1923). There are also later scholars who believe
that an image of a word is formed in the mind of the speaker or listener. Another
major view of traditional semantics is that the meaning of a word can be deciphered
from its shape or sound. Words in this category are onomatopoeic . The main ideas in
traditional semantics are reference, concept, truth conditions, etc
2. Behavioral Semantics
The external environment is considered the main stimulus for all human speech.
Stimulus-response scenarios are identical to cause and effect relationships in most
natural situations.
Although behaviorism tended to give meaning to experimental explanations, it was
criticized for its rejection of introspection, concepts, and ideas. Not everything in
language can be physically observed. Excessive reliance on reinforcement tends to
present animal and human behavior as identical.
3. Structural semantics
The father of structuralism is Ferdinand de Saussure. Structuralism as a linguistic
theory considers structures and systems in language. The emphasis is on the process
of segmentation and classification of speech characteristics.
In structuralism, the emphasis is on the analysis of meaning relationships that link
words and meanings. Understanding is an expression of the system of semantic
relationships that a word has with other expressions in a particular language. This
relationship is usually paradigmatic in terms of similarities and dissimilarities. The
relationship of similarity occurs synonymously, while the relationship of dissimilarity
is called antonymy. Structural processes are useful in lexical relationships in learning
words.
4. Generative Semantics
Chomsky's generative grammar , there is a statement that syntax is autonomous and
does not depend on semantics. Only later in Aspects of the theory of Syntax (1965)
Chomsky showed that the semantic components determine the rules necessary for the
interpretation of deep structure. This observation improves the semantic
 representation of the sentence. Deep structure determines the original meaning of the
sentence before applying the transformation.

5. Semantic Branch
Cruse (2000:15) lists the following as the main areas of interest that can be broadly
distinguished in the study of meaning: lexical semantics, grammatical semantics,
logical semantics, and linguistic pragmatics. The compartments are not watertight
and may overlap each other.
6. Lexical Semantics
Lexical semantics studies the meaning of words, focusing on the 'content' of words
such as lion, jasmine, egoist and persuade, rather than the form/grammar of words
such as the , of , than , and so on. A non-specialist associates more meaning with
words compared to other linguistic units that are smaller than words (eg affixes) or
wider than words (eg phrases, sentences). The branch of semantics that
systematically studies the meaning of words is lexical semantics.
7. Grammatical semantics
Grammatical semantics studies aspects of meaning that have direct relevance to
syntax. This has many manifestations. Which can only be discussed briefly here.
Syntactic categories are one of the problems in the interface of syntax and semantics.
Another aspect of grammatical semantics is the meaning of grammatical morphemes
such as - ed of call , the - er of strong, the re - of reshuffle and al of central.
8. Logical Semantics
Logical semantics studies the relationship between natural languages and formal
logical systems such as propositional stones and predicates. Such studies usually aim
to model natural language as closely as possible using strictly controlled and strictly
logical formalisms ( Cruse , 2000; 15). Sometimes such studies shed more light on
the formalism used than on the language modeled . But valuable insights emerge
from this approach. Most of these studies to date have been concerned with
propositional or sentence-level meaning and they rarely go down to the level of
words.
9. Pragmatic Linguistics
Pragmatics is the study of context, or more precisely, a study of how context can
influence our understanding of linguistic utterances. Whenever we have contextual
 disagreements, we perceive ourselves to be in different contexts and these differences
influence what we do through our respective actions in expressing views.
For this purpose, pragmatics can be thought of as relating to aspects of information
(in the broadest sense) conveyed through language that are not encoded by generally
accepted conventions in the linguistic form used, but nevertheless arise naturally
from and depend on those aspects. . On the meanings conventionally encoded in the
linguistic forms used, which are taken in relation to the context in which these forms
are used. Through linguistic pragmatics we identify the individual referred to by John
in the sentence I saw the King yesterday. The co -referential information between the
room and that inferred from the examples, The king entered the room, The room was
empty is a matter of linguistic pragmatics.
Pragmatics is usually contrasted with semantics, which is concerned with
conventionalized meaning. The three divisions discussed above fall under semantics.

C. Newer approach to semantics

In addition to traditional approaches to semantics, there are also a number of new
approaches that have emerged in recent years. For example, corpus linguistics is a field
that uses large collections of text data to study language use. Corpus linguists can use
corpus data to study semantics by examining how words and phrases are used in different
contexts. For example, they might learn how the meaning of a word can change
depending on the genre of text used. Another new approach to semantics is cognitive
science. Cognitive science is a field that studies the mind and how it works. Cognitive
scientists are interested in how the brain processes language and how we understand the
meaning of what we hear and read. For example, they might study how the brain
processes metaphors or how the brain resolves ambiguities in language.

D. The function of The different approaches to semantics for linguist

1. Different semantic approaches can be used to study language meaning at different
levels. Cognitive semantics and discourse semantics are often used to study language
meaning at the level of the individual speaker or listener. Formal semantics and
lexical semantics are often used to study language meaning at the level of the
language system as a whole. Pragmatics is often used to study the meaning of
language at the level of communicative events.
 2. By using different semantic approaches, linguists can gain a more complete
understanding of language meaning. Each approach offers its own unique perspective
on the nature of meaning and how it is conveyed through language.
For example, cognitive semantics can help us understand how the human mind
represents and processes meaning. Formal semantics can help us develop precise and
rigorous theories of meaning. Lexical semantics can help us understand the meaning
of each word and their relationship to each other. Discourse semantics can help us
understand how language meaning is influenced by context. Pragmatics can help us
understand how language is used in communication.
3. By using all these different approaches, linguists can gain a deeper understanding of
the complex and fascinating phenomenon of meaning.

E. The function of study of the Semantics for students and public.

Semantics is a term that comes from French, " Semantique " or " ilm ." al -
dilalah” in Arabic and “Semantics” in Indonesian. This word is derived from the Greek
"Sema" which means sign or symbol and " Semaino " which means to mark or symbolize.
Sematics is the study of meaning. Semantics studies the relationship between linguistic
signs and the things they signify. Semantics means examining the meaning contained in
language, signs or symbols. More specifically, semantics studies types of meaning,
meaning fields, meaning changes, meaning relations, and so on.
The following are the benefits of studying Semantics:
1. Can understand the meaning or significance of a symbol.
2. Can improve a person's language skills.
3. Can make it easier for journalists to process words when providing information to
the public.
4. Can make it easier for teachers to teach students the meaning contained in a
language.
 LEARNING TASK

1. What is the difference between lexical meaning and grammatical meaning?

2. What are the differences between cognitive semantics, formal semantics, lexical
semantics, discourse semantics, and pragmatics in the context of the study of language
meaning?
3. How can each of these semantic approaches provide a more complete understanding
of language meaning?
 CHAPTER 3
Word Meaning

Standard Competence:
After reading chapter 3, students are expected to be able to :
1. Know the referent in conceptual meaning
2. Know the componential analysis and its example
11qqqqqq111
3. Know the semantic field of word
4. Know the difference among methapors, metonymy, concersion, synonymy,
antonymy (opposite), polysemy, homonymy, collocation, and idiom

WORD MEANING

Almost all of the words of a language have a conceptual meaning. There are words that
have more than one conceptual meaning. There are also words that have connotative
meaning, social meaning, and affective meaning.

1. The Conceptual Meaning

The meaning of a word in a language, refers to the real world, its meaning refers to
the underlying abstract ideas and concepts associated with the word or expression.

a. The referent can be an entity, like: a thing, a person, or an animal.

WORD REFERENT
House Inanimate, building, with rooms, made for a
family to live in
Doctor Animate, human, male or female, having been
trained in medical science.
 Puppy Animate, animal, quadruped, mammal,
vertebrate, dog, young.

b. The referent can be a psychological power.

WORD REFERENT
Patience The power of enduring trouble, suffering,
inconvenience, without complaining
Tolerance The power of endure without protest
Consideration The power to think about the needs of others

c. The revent can be an event.

WORD REFERENT
Party An event of gathering of persons, by invitation
for pleasure
Flood An event of the coming of great quantity of
water in a place thet is usually dry
Landslide An event of sliding down of a mass of earth,
rock etc. from the side of cliff, hillside,
railway cutting etc.

d. The referent can be a situation or time

WORD REFERENT
Famine Time when there is extreme food scarcity in a
region
Recess Time when work or business is stopped or
slackening
Eid Al-Fitr Muslim holiday/ big day of muslem

e. The referent can be a state.

 WORD REFERENT
Hot A state of heaving a high degree of temperature
Cold A state of having a low degree of temperature
Sad A state of being unhappy

f. The refent can be action.

WORD REFERENT
Cut An action of dividing or separating, making an
opening, tearing, or wounding in with an edged
instrument. Like a knife and pair of scissors
Bury An action of placing a dead body in the ground,
in a grave, or in the sea
Stab An action of wounding with sharp-pointed
weapon or instrument

g. The referent can be a process.

WORD REFERENT
Heating A process of becoming hot
Drying A process of becoming dry
Improving A process of becoming better

h. The referent can be a psychological experience.

WORD REFERENT
Know Have in the mind as a result of experience or
being informed or because one has learnt
Understand Know the meaning, nature, explanation of
Regret Feel sorry for the loss of

i. The referent can be manner.

WORD REFERENT
 Clearly In a clear manner
Reluctantly In an unwilling manner
Softly In a soft manner

j. The referent can be a location.

WORD REFERENT
Under In or to a position lower than
Above In a position of higher than
In front of In a position of head of

Accordingly, the meaning of a word consists of a set of contrastive fatures.

This kind of word meaning is called conceptual meaning, or logical meaning,
cognitive meaning, or denotative meaning. The conceptual meaning of a word is
universal. Is the same every where in the world, which becomes the basis for
universal communication.
2. Componential Analysis

Componential analysis is an analysis of the semantic components of a word that views

the meaning of a word as consisting of a bundle of semantic components or a bundle of
semantic elements.

Word The bundle of semantic components

Boar  Animate
 Animal
 Quadruped
 Vertebrate
 Mammal
 Porcine
 Wild or domestic
 Lion  Animate
 Animal
 Quadruped
 Vertebrate
 Mammal
 Feline
 Large
 Strong
 Flesh-eating

peacock  Animate
 Animal
 Biped
 Avian
 The peafowl
 Having a long, erectile, greenish
tail.

3. Semantic Fields

The concept of semantic fields is that a class or a group of words divide the semantic
field of a word. Which means that word that belongs to the class or the group has its own
meaning which cannot be used to substitute for the meaning of the other words in the
group. Some example,

a. In Javanese
Semantic Field A Class Of Mutually Exclusive Words

Nggawa (carry) a. Nyunggi (carrying on the head)

b. Nggendhong (carrying on the back with a cloth
sling)
c. Nyengklak (carrying on the back without a cloth
sling)

Mangan (eat) a. Nyikit (nibbling, eating in small amounts)

b. Nguntal ( eating without chewing the food)
 c. Ndublag (eating by taking very big bites)

b. In English
Semantic Field A Class Of Mutually Exlusive Words
Walk a. Tiptoe (walk or move on tiptoe)

b. Hobble (walk as when lame, or as when the fees

legs are impeded)
c. linger (walk slowly)
Laugh a. chuckle (laugh in a low, quiet way with a closed
mouth)
b. cachinnate (laugh loudly or immoderately)

c. snicker (laugh in a half suppressed way)

4. Metaphors

In the metaphorical use words, the meaning of a word is not the literal meaning of the
word, but the transferred meaning or the derived meaning. The derived meaning of the
word may differ from one language to another. Some example,

a. In Javanese
Word Transferred Meaning
Tikus (rat) A corruptor
Kancil (a small deer) A very cunning person
Jago ( roaster) A person who is number one in all cases

b. In English

Word Transferred Meaning

Snake A treacherous person who pretends to be a friend
Ass A very stupid person
Mule A stubborn person
5. Metonymy

Metonymy is the use of a linked term to stand in for an object or concept. According
to Fromkin, Rodman, and Hyams, a metonymy is a word that substitutes for an object the
name of an attribute or concept associated with that object (2007:192). Example :

Metonymy Meaning Example

Crown In place of a royal person We will swear loyalty to the
crown
Heart To refer to love or emotion My dear, you have all of my
heart
Ears For giving attention, listening Tell me about you first date.
I’m all ears!

6. Connotative Meaning

Leech defines connotative meaning as the communicative value an expression has by

virtue of what it refers to, over, and above its purely conceptual content (1981:12). If
conceptual meaning remains the same for ever, connotative meaning may change from
one time to another.

Word Connotative meaning

Teacher Clever, impatient, poor
Petani Poor, stupid
Police Disciplined

7. Social Meaning

It is a type of meaning based on the aspects of society. When people from a particular
society define language in their way, that is called social meaning. This meaning is based
on dialect. the conceptual meaning and the social meaning of any piece of language
would be different. The words ‘domicile’.

‘residence’, ‘abode’, ‘home’, all refer to the same thing, but each word belongs to a
particular situation of use.

a. Domicile (very formal situation)

 b. Residence (formal situation)

c. Abode (poetic situation)

d. Home (general situation)

8. Affective Meaning

Leech defines that affective meaning is the meaning of word which reflects the
personal feelings of the speakers, including his attitude to the listener, or his attitude to
something he is talking about (1981:15). Examples:

“You’re very a vicious tyrant and a avillainous reprobate, and I hate you.” Here
speaker seems to have a very negative attitude towards his listener. This is called
affective meaning. But very often we are more discreet (cautious) and convey our attitude
indirectly. Examples:

“I’m terribly sorry to interrupt, but I wonder if you would be so kind as to lower your
voices a little”

Conveys our irritation in a scaled down manner for the sake of politeness. Intonation
and voice quality are also important here. Thus the sentence above can be uttered in biting
sarcasm and the impression of politeness maybe reversed while “Will you belt up?”

9. Conversion

In conversion, a new meaning of a word is obtained when the syntactic function of the
word is converted or changed as when a noun is used as a verb or a verb is used as a
noun. Syntactic features are features pertaining to the arrangement of the word in a
phrase, a clause, or a sentence. Some example :

a. We are planning to wall our garden.

b. The mattress needs to be aired.

c. That was a reasonable bet.

10. Synonymy

Synonymy is sameness of meaning which is not concerned with the conceptual

meaning of words, but relations of words which have, more or less, the same conceptual
meaning. Example:
 a. Big = Large

b. Tiny = Small
c. Far = Distant

11. Antonymy

Antonymy is oppositeness of meaning. Like synonymy, antonymy is also a relation of

word meaning. It is called a sense relation. Example:

a. Dark = light

b. Ugly = beautiful

c. Short = long

12. Polysemy

Polysemy is a term to refer to a word which has a set of different meanings which are
related by extension. The following are the examples of polysemy:

Word A Set Of Different Meanings

Back  Human back

 The back of a chair
 The back of a knife

 The back of hand

Eye  Human eye
 The eye of needle

 The eye of foot

Foot  Human foot
 The foot of a bed

 The foot of a mountain

13. Homonymy

Homonymy is a term to refer to one form, which is the same in both written and
spoken, with two or more related meanings. Example:
 a. Mole (an animal)
Mole (a small dark mark on the skin)
b. Leaf (of a tree)
Leaf (of ears)

c. Miss (a title of an unmarried woman or girl)

Miss (a strong feeling of having someone present around you or in your
heart)
14. Hyponymy

Hyponymy is a term to refer to a set or a group of words that are included in a higher
term or word. The higher or upper term or word is called a super ordinate, and the lower
term is called a hyponymy. Example:

Super ordinate Hyponymy

 Carrots

Vegetable  Cabbages
 Spinach

 Lettuce

 Swallow

Bird  Crane
 Canary

 Woodpecker

 Apple

Fruit  Avocado
 Orange

 Durian
15. Meronymy

Another sense relation is called meronymy. Meronymy comes from the Greek words
meros = part and anoma = name. a meronymy denotes a constituent part of or a member
of something. Example:

Finger = Is a meronym of a hand

Chin = Is a meronym of face

Door = Is a meronym of house

16. Collocation

Collocation are onomatopoeic words, that is words which are formed by imitating the
sounds associated with the thing concerned. Example:

a. A horse neighs

b. A cat mews/meows

c. A cock crows

17. . Idioms

An idiom is a group of words with a new meaning which is quite different from the
meaning of the words individually. Example:

Idioms Meaning
A piece of cake Something very easy to do
Night owl Likes to stay up late
See eye to eye Agree
 LEARNING TASK

1. What is meant by polysemy and what are examples of words that have polysemous
meanings?
2. What are homonyms and how do you understand the meaning of homonyms in
context?
3. What is meant by idiomatic meaning in language?
 CHAPTER 4
Sentence Meaning

Standard Competence:
After reading chapter 4, students are expected to be able to :
11qqqqqq111
1. Know to explain the nature meaning of words
2. Know defenition of nature of word meaning and the nature of sentence
meaning

LEARNING MATERIALS

Sentential is a word that is not commonly used even though it has the same meaning. It is
something related to the concept of a sentence. Examining a sentence will reveal the subject
of the sentence or the subjects of the sentence.

Sentence meaning is an important component of a general account of linguistic meaning.

Sentence meaning is a difficult subject that can be introduced gently, starting with an overall
sketch of what a theory of linguistic meaning needs to consider, namely how initial
linguistically encoded semantic representations lead to the overall interpretation of an
utterance. in context. Linguistic semantics aims to explain what is encoded linguistically,
while pragmatic theory will explain how more detailed interpretations are obtained based on
semantic representations.
The meaning of sentences is also studied through meaning relationships. In word meaning,
understanding is the meaning of words, without any connection to the world outside
language. In sentence meaning, understanding is the meaning of a sentence, without any
connection to the world outside language, which is called context. Meaning relations are
relations between the meanings of sentences, especially main statements. The various types
of sensory relations are:

1. Paraphrase or synonym
A paraphrase or synonym is a sentence or proposition that has the same meaning as
another proposition. A proposition is a statement or statement that has a predicate,
with or without arguments. But almost always, a proposition is a statement that has a
predicate with one or more arguments.
For example :
Barbara is a teacher, can be:
Barbara is an instructor.
Barbara is an educator.
Barbara is a mentor
2. Attachment
Engagement is a proposition that follows from another proposition, for example
engagement:
Andrew is a bachelor, can be:
Andrew is not married
Andrew is single
3. Presupposition
A presupposition is a proposition that precedes another proposition. For example,
Estimate:
Patricia's pen friend visited her last week, maybe Patricia has a pen friend. Patrick
quit smoking, it could be that Patrick smokes.
4. Contradiction
For example:
Orphans have a mother.
Rich people can't afford their food. The spinster lives with her husband in Tokyo.
5. Tautology
 Tautology is a statement or proposition that is definitely true. It can't be wrong. For
example:
My father is a man
6. Inconsistency
For example:
I am an orphan inconsistent with me having a father.
7. Anomaly
For example:
My friend ate a lot of rocks
8. Ambiguity
A proposition is ambiguous if there are two interpretations of meaning. For example:
The athlete is standing up, may mean:
1. The athlete is in the position of standing up,
2. The athlete is in the process of assuming a standing position (Chafe, 170)

LEARNING TASK

1. What is meant by the compositional meaning of a sentence in semantics?

2. What is ambiguous in the context of a sentence and how can ambiguity be analyzed
from a semantic point of view?
 CHAPTER 5
Explanation of word Meaning

Standard Competence:
After reading chapter 5, students are expected to be able to :
1. Know to explain the defenition of sentence
11qqqqqq111
2. Know the principles of sentence meaning
3. Know the predicate and argument of each sentence

LEARNING MATERIALS

The relationship between a word and what it implies and between a sentence and what
it implies does not pose a problem, and is not a matter of debate. However, quite the opposite,
the explanation of these relations – that is, the problem of what we mean when we refer to the
meaning that a word or sentence has – is a classic problem of semantics, a problem on which
semantics is traditionally based. Since any formal representation of semantics will implicitly
present one particular solution to the problem, we cannot consider the details of the theory
except in the light of a coherent explanation or meaning.

There are three main ways that linguists and philosophers build explanations of
meaning in natural language: (a) by defining the nature of word meaning. (b) by explaining
the nature of the meaning of the sentence, and (c) by explaining the communication process.
First, word meaning is taken as a construction that can explain the meaning of sentences and
communication; secondly, it is the meaning of the sentence that is used as the basis, with
words characterized based on the systematic contribution they make to the meaning of the
sentence; and thirdly, the meaning of sentences and words is explained in relation to how
sentences and words are used in communication actions. It is no coincidence that there are
three types of explanation. First, there is a relationship between words and objects. We use
words to refer to objects and actions (consider words such as cup, horse, woman, graduate,
cook, sweep, think), and the explanation of these relationships is undoubtedly a semantic
task.

Likewise, sentences are used to describe events, beliefs, and opinions, and
undoubtedly the task of semantics is to explain the nature of the relationship between
sentences and the states of affairs described by them. Finally, because language is the means
we use to influence communication, it can be said that the interpretation of language must be
explained in terms of its role in communication. Moreover, the three aspects of meaning,
word meaning, sentence meaning, and communication, are reflected in the use of different
word means . In accordance with explanation (a) is:

1) Supererogatory means 'excessive'.

2) Spinster means 'unmarried woman'.

Corresponding to (b) is:

3) The sentence James killed Max means that someone named James deliberately killed
someone named Max.

In these two uses, the word mean has a meaning that is close to indicating. However,
the word mean is used in a different sense in the following conversation between two
speakers, A and B, a meaning that corresponds to explanation (C):

4) A: Are you going to sleep soon?

B: What do you mean?
A: I mean, I'm tired, and the sooner you go to bed, the sooner I can sleep.

In this case, the mean can be attributed to the speaker and has the same meaning as
the expression is intended to indicate. Therefore, we have at least three starting points that
make it possible to construct an explanation of meaning, namely the meaning of words, the
interpretation of sentences, or what the speaker wants to convey in the act of communication.
A. Meaning and Reference
The naming relationship between a word and its object is most transparent with
proper names, a paradigm case of naming. Here there is a one-to-one correspondence
between name and object: for example, the name The Parthenon refers to the
Parthenon object in Athens, and the name Ruth Kempson refers to the individual who
wrote the book. This relationship between word and object is called a reference
relationship, and there is a long tradition of equating the problem of meaning with the
problem of reference. This view, known as extensionalism because of its treatment of
meaning in terms of objects, called extensions, to which the items of language refer!
The meaning of a word can be explained through the relationship between the word
and the thing or object it refers to. Just as proper names refer to individuals, common
nouns refer to collections of individuals, verbs refer to actions, adjectives refer to
properties of individuals, and adverbs refer to properties of actions. So, for example, it
could be said that the relationship between the expression Ruth Kempson and the
individual Ruth Kempson can be compared directly to the relationship between the
word rat and the set of objects that can be referred to by the use of the word;
moreover, these two relations are said to be comparable to the relation that exists
between, say, the word red and a set of objects that have the property of redness, and
also to the relation that exists between the word fast and a series of actions that have
the corresponding property of speed.
Furthermore, if we return to the paradigm case of referring to proper names, we find
important differences between this category and other syntactic categories. Although
in proper names there is a one-to-one correspondence between word and thing, it is
not clear whether proper names have any meaning at all, since it makes no sense to
ask 'What is the meaning of the expression Noam Chomsky ?: we can only ask 'Who
is meant by Noam's expression Chomsky ? This at least shows that the semantic
calculation of proper names should not be like other words. But if this is the case, then
the initial assumption regarding the homogeneity of the semantic properties of nouns
and other categories, common nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, and so on, is a
mistake.
This does not deny that there are problems in reference analysis. On the other hand,
the solution to the problem of opacity in particular remains an open one, and a
separate issue for philosophers. But this casts doubt on the assumption that any
 solution to the problem of reference automatically provides a solution to the problem
of meaning.
B. The theory of image meaning

Another solution to the problem of explaining the nature of word meaning, which also
has a long tradition, is to explain the meaning of a word in terms of images in the
speaker's (or listener's) brain. The problem here is knowing what shape the image
takes. The most obvious thing is that these images cannot be visual. For example, my
image of an equilateral triangle:
If this is said to me to be the meaning of the word triangle, then triangle must
mean only an equilateral triangle, or a triangle must be said to be ambiguous
according to whether it is equilateral, isosceles, or unequal. Each of these things is
mutually exclusive. In the same way, owners of alsatian dogs may have a very
different image of the dog than owners of miniature poodles, but it is not clear
whether they speak different languages. There is no picture that does justice to what
dogs have, and none has the characteristics that all triangles have. And this is just one
of the many problems facing the simple picture theory of meaning. A further problem
arises from the fact that (a) a person may have more than one image for a single
expression, and (b) two expressions may have the same image. Thus the expression of
a tired child can evoke the image of a child (note that there is no neutral visual image
of boy or girl) curled up and almost asleep, or the image of a child stomping his feet
and screaming . Based on the explanation of meaning that equates the meaning of a
word with an image, every word that is related to more than one image is predicted to
be ambiguous. But despite these predictions, the child's tired expression is not
ambiguous. On the other hand, if two expressions have the same image, the image
theory of meaning predicts that they will be synonymous. But many expressions share
the same image: a tired child, an unhappy child, an angry child, or a would-be tyrant
may all evoke the same image as a child stomping his feet and screaming . But these
 expressions are not at all the same. As I have partly shown, the image theory of
meaning faces the additional problem of speaker variation. The picture we have of
what can be referred to by any word may not only vary from time to time, but because
that picture depends on our experience, it will inevitably differ in many details, or
even substantially, from that of other people. Take for example the word lecture. For
those giving lectures, the word might conjure up images of an audience of, say,
twenty to a hundred people gazing at some hapless individual, who may be self-
consciously pacing back and forth in front of them. However, for those who have
never been to college, the picture is more likely to be like someone who is constantly
babbling, often boring, sometimes incomprehensible, accompanied by the sensation of
having to fight drowsiness. These different images, if they correspond to the meaning
associated with the word lecture, will guarantee that communication between two
groups of people using the word lecture is impossible because each group has a very
different image of lecture and therefore a different conception about the meaning of
the word. word lecture. Worst of all, there are many words that are impossible to
associate with any image, or, therefore, etc. However, those words meant absolutely
nothing.
C. Meaning and Concept
The standard departure from the extreme form of the picture meaning view is
to say that pictures are not visual; but if so, it is unclear what claim is being made.
Take, for example, the notion that the 'speech element 'house' is a symbol, first and
foremost, not of a single perception, or even the idea of a particular object, but of a
'concept', in another sense. Words, from a comfortable thought capsule which
includes thousands of different experiences and which readily accepts thousands
more' (Sapir 1921: 13). What is involved in this claim that a word has the meaning of
a convenient thought capsule? If this is a withdrawal from a picture theory of
meaning, as it is, then it is a withdrawal from a specific and false claim to a claim that
is wholly untestable and hence empty. It is nothing more than a substitute for the term
problem which implies an equally opaque concept of the term. This does not provide
the required explanation ( cf. p. 1 above). If meaning is to be explained in terms of
concepts, then the term concept itself must be given a precise definition.
Sapir, de Saussure spoke freely about concepts, emphasizing that the concept
(the word he uses is meaning) represented by an element is solely due to its value in
the system: “Language is a system of interdependent terms in which the value of each
 term is only generated from the simultaneous presence of other terms. On this basis,
he would say that the word scholar, for example, has a meaning based solely on the
other elements in the system in which it is located. Related, women, husbands, sons.
Likewise, right across the vocabulary. So each member of the following series of
words stands in a certain relationship to each other (labeled valeur ), which is itself a
determinant of the interpretation of the word:

It is of course not clear that this observation saves the problem of defining
concepts from emptiness, since it is not clear how the relationship between value
( valeur ) and measurement (significance) itself can be tested. However, explanation
de Saussure was open to objections similar to those raised against the reference theory
of meaning and the image theory of meaning. In particular, words such as and,
because, or, etc., are counterexamples to this view, since it is not clear whether their
interpretation can be analyzed in terms of concepts. There is no point in suggesting
that what is meant by and is the concept of coordination, for what is coordination
other than by joining with and? Likewise, with or has no meaning to explain or has
the concept of disjunction in its meaning, whereas to explain disjunction it is
necessary to refer to or. And the general problem remains: explaining meaning based
on concepts alone is not empirical.
D. Component Analysis
Explicit description of systematic relationships between words. In this view,
the meaning of words is analyzed not as a unitary concept, but as a complex
consisting of components of meaning that are semantic primitives. In this case,
spinsterhood can be analyzed as a semantic complex consisting of the features (so-
called components, or signifiers) (FEMALE), [NEVER MARRIED], [ADULT],
[HUMAN].
 This form of analysis is particularly used by anthropologists who attempt to
explain kinship terminology in various cultures. For example, the distinction between
mother and aunt in English can be made explicit if the terms are analyzed as
contrasting complex components [FEMALE], [PAENT OF], [CHILD OF] Such
componential analysis is of course not limited to kinship terms: it can be applied in
many areas of vocabulary. For example, the distinction between murder and
manslaughter can be stated explicitly and economically if killing is analyzed as
having a meaning that is a complex of components representing intention, causation,
and death, and killing as having a complex consisting only of components
representing a cause. -consequences and death. Death. In the same way, giving and
receiving may prove to differ based on the complex of contrasting components that
represent causation and changes in ownership. In this way, the concept of value de
Saussure 's characterizing the relationship between a word and other words in a
system can be stated explicitly in terms of a complex of related but different
components, and indeed the main value of component analysis lies in the economic
statement of the word. These relationships are what he allows.
In the case of English words such as human where there is a one-to-one
correspondence between the word and the semantic components, we are given no
explanation at all other than the vague statement that what is meant by human is the
concept represented by [HUMAN]. This not only cannot explain the meaning, but
also cannot be faked. So, although the methods used in componential analysis may be
useful, basic The theory provided by explanations that include definitions of semantic
components in conceptual terms is useless. A falsifiable theory. If semantics is to
become part of empirical science, such explanations must be made more substantial.
In trying to reveal the concept of meaning in natural language by considering the
nature of meaning, we seem to be in a paradoxical position: characterizing meaning
only in terms of concepts alone cannot be explained, and characterizing meaning from
a frame of reference seems to get into too many things. Problems become convincing
solutions. This does not of course mean that problems in reference analysis can be
ignored, but simply that reference relations do not provide an adequate basis for
explaining word meaning.

LEARNING TASK
 1. What are the main differences between approaches that use the meaning of words as
the basis for explanation, approaches that use the meaning of sentences, and
approaches that focus on the communication process?
2. What are the challenges in explaining the meaning of words using a componential
analysis approach , especially in a language like English?
3. componential analysis approach understand the systematic relationships between
words in language, and how is the complexity of word meaning decomposed into
semantic components?

REFERENCES

Adisustrisno, M.P. (2008). Semantics an Introduction to the Basic Concepts. Yokyakarta:

Andi
Offset.
Ahkam A, M. Introduction to Fillmore’s Case Grammar. Dipetik November 6, 2022, dari
Pusat TOEFL Blogspot
Cruse, A. (2000). Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics.
United
States : Oxford University Press inc
Kempson, R. M. (1997). Semantic Theory. Cambridge: Press Syndicate of the University of
Cambridge.
Leech, G. (1981). Semantics: The Study of Meaning Second Edition-revised and update.
Britain: Penguin Books.
R. Kroger, P. (2018). Analyzing meaning: An introduction to semantics and Pragmatics.
Berlin: Language Science Press
Saeed, J.I. (2004). Semantics Second Edition. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.