Seminar 5

On the Issues of the Semantic Structure of Words in Modern English

1. Get ready to answer the following questions:
1) What are the main objects of semantic studies?
Semantic studies encompass a broad and multifaceted field that examines the intricate
fabric of meaning in language. At its core, semantics investigates how words, phrases,
sentences, and larger linguistic units convey meaning. This exploration extends to
understanding how meaning is constructed, interpreted, and represented in the mind.
Lexical semantics, a fundamental aspect of semantic inquiry, scrutinizes the meanings
of individual words and how they interact with other words. Compositional semantics,
on the other hand, delves into the principles that govern how the meanings of smaller
linguistic units combine to form the meaning of larger expressions, such as phrases
and sentences.
Pragmatics, a closely related discipline, explores how context, intentions, and shared
knowledge influence the interpretation of meaning. This includes examining how
language is used to achieve certain goals and how meanings can be inferred beyond
the literal words used.
Additionally, semantics investigates the relationships between linguistic expressions
and the external world, considering how language reflects and shapes our perceptions
and understanding of reality. By exploring these intricate layers of meaning, semantics
provides valuable insights into the nature of language and its role in human
communication and cognition.
2) What is denoted by the terms semasiology and onomasiology?
• Semasiology, a branch of linguistics, focuses on the study of meaning changes
in words and expressions within a language. It examines how meanings evolve
over time, how they differ between languages or dialects, and how different
meanings of a word or expression are related. Semasiology is concerned with
semantic shifts and nuances, exploring how words acquire new meanings, lose
old meanings, or change in meaning over time. It also investigates the
relationships between different meanings of a word, such as metaphorical
extensions or shifts in connotation. By analyzing these changes, semasiology
provides insights into the dynamic nature of language and how meanings are
shaped by cultural, historical, and social factors.
• Onomasiology is the study of the naming process, focusing on how speakers
select words or expressions to convey a particular meaning or concept. It
explores questions such as “What word can I use to express this concept?” or
“How do I name this?” Onomasiology examines the range of lexical items
available to speakers to name or describe things in the world, including
synonyms, hyponyms, and related terms. It also investigates how these choices
vary across languages, dialects, and contexts, shedding light on cultural and
cognitive aspects of naming. Additionally, onomasiology explores the
motivation behind word choices, including factors such as sound symbolism,
cultural associations, and communicative efficiency.
In summary, while semasiology focuses on the meanings of words and expressions and
how they change over time, onomasiology examines how speakers select words to
express specific meanings or concepts, providing insights into the dynamic interplay
between language, thought, and culture.
3) Comment on the terminological difference between semantics and
semasiology.
The terminological difference between semantics and semasiology has evolved over
time, influenced by the work of scholars such as J.R. Firth and Michel Bréal.
• Semasiology: Originally, semasiology referred to the historical study of changes
in meaning of words and expressions. It focused on how meanings evolved over
time and how different meanings of a word were related. This term was used to
describe the historical and comparative aspects of meaning change.
• Semantics: In contrast, semantics originally referred to the study of meaning in
language as a whole. It was a broader term that encompassed the study of how
words, phrases, sentences, and larger linguistic units convey meaning, as well
as how meaning is interpreted and understood. Semantics was concerned with
the relationships between linguistic expressions and the world, as well as the
internal structure of meaning within language.
According to J.R. Firth, the distinction between semantics and semasiology was clear
until the publication of Michel Bréal’s book “Essai de sémantique” in 1900. Bréal’s
book was published in English under the title “Semantics,” which led to some
confusion and overlap between the two terms. As a result, the term “semantics”
gradually came to be used more broadly to encompass both the historical study of
meaning change and the broader study of meaning in language.
In modern usage, semantics is generally used as the broader term encompassing all
aspects of meaning in language, while semasiology is less commonly used and may
refer more specifically to the historical study of meaning change.
4) What is Ferdinand de Saussure’s contribution to linguistics? What
oppositions did he introduce? Comment on each of them.
Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss linguist, made several influential contributions to the
field of linguistics, particularly through his ideas on structuralism and semiotics. Some
of his key contributions and oppositions include:
• Language vs. Speech: Saussure distinguished between language (langue) and
speech (parole). Language (langue) refers to the underlying system or structure
of a language that is shared by a community of speakers, while speech (parole)
refers to the actual use of language by individuals. Saussure argued that the
study of language should focus on langue, as it reveals the underlying rules and
structures that govern linguistic behavior.
• Synchronic vs. Diachronic: Saussure introduced the distinction between
synchronic and diachronic linguistics. Synchronic linguistics focuses on the
study of a language at a particular point in time, without considering its
historical development. Diachronic linguistics, on the other hand, examines the
historical development of a language over time. Saussure argued that
synchronic linguistics is more fundamental, as it allows us to understand the
structure of a language at a particular moment in time.
• Syntagmatic vs. Paradigmatic: Saussure also introduced the concepts of
syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations in language. Syntagmatic relations
refer to the linear relationships between elements in a sequence, such as words
in a sentence. Paradigmatic relations, on the other hand, refer to the
relationships between elements that can occupy the same position in a
sequence, such as synonyms or grammatical forms. Saussure argued that
language is structured not only by the linear arrangement of elements but also
 by the choices that speakers make between different elements in a given
context.
Each of these oppositions introduced by Saussure has had a profound impact on
linguistics:
• The distinction between language and speech has influenced the study of
grammar and language structure, highlighting the importance of underlying
rules and structures;
• The differentiation between synchronic and diachronic linguistics has shaped
the way linguists approach the study of language change and evolution;
• The concepts of syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations have contributed to
our understanding of how meaning is constructed in language, highlighting the
importance of both linear and associative relationships between elements.
5) Explain the notion of linguistic sign in Saussure’s view and compare it
with the triadic definition of sign suggested by Peirce.
Saussure’s notion of the linguistic sign is a fundamental concept in his theory of
language. According to Saussure, a linguistic sign is composed of two inseparable
components: the signifier and the signified.
• The signifier is the sound pattern of the word, or the physical form of the sign.
It is the way in which the concept is expressed through a particular sound
pattern. For example, the word “tree” is a signifier that represents the concept
of a tree.
• The signified is the concept or meaning associated with the signifier. It is the
mental image or idea that the signifier evokes in the mind of the speaker. Using
the same example, the concept of a tall, woody plant with branches and leaves
is the signified associated with the signifier “tree.”
Saussure emphasized that the relationship between the signifier and the signified is
arbitrary and conventional, meaning that there is no inherent connection between the
sound pattern of a word and its meaning. Instead, the relationship is established by
social convention within a linguistic community.
Peirce’s definition of the sign is more complex and includes three components: the
sign, the object, and the interpretant.
• The sign is divided into the same two components as Saussure’s notion: the
signifier (which Peirce called the representamen) and the signified (which
Peirce called the object). The representamen is the form of the sign, similar to
the signifier, and the object is the thing to which the sign refers, similar to the
signified.
• The object is the thing in the world that the sign represents. It is the external
reality to which the sign refers.
• The interpretant is the mental concept or understanding that is produced in the
mind of the interpreter when they encounter the sign. It is the effect that the
sign has on the interpreter.
While Saussure’s notion of the linguistic sign focuses primarily on the relationship
between the signifier and the signified within the structure of language, Peirce’s triadic
definition of the sign emphasizes the dynamic process of semiosis, or the process of
signification, which involves the sign, the object, and the interpretant. Peirce’s
definition is more comprehensive and accounts for the interpretive and
communicative aspects of signs in a broader sense.
6) Comment on the referential approach to the study of meaning and the
triangle of reference.
The referential approach to the study of meaning, often associated with philosophers
such as Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell, emphasizes the relationship between
language and the external world. According to this approach, the meaning of a
linguistic expression is determined by its ability to refer to objects, concepts, or states
of affairs in the world. This approach contrasts with views that emphasize the internal
structure of language or the intentions of speakers.
The triangle of reference, also known as the semantic triangle, is a conceptual model
that illustrates the relationship between a linguistic expression, its meaning, and the
external world. The triangle consists of three elements:
• Referent (or Object): This is the entity in the external world to which the
linguistic expression refers. For example, in the sentence “The cat is on the
mat,” the referent of “cat” and “mat” are the actual cat and mat in the physical
world.
• Concept: This is the mental representation or idea that corresponds to the
linguistic expression. It is the intermediary between the linguistic expression
and the referent. For example, the concept of a cat is the mental image or idea
of a cat that the word “cat” evokes in our minds.
• Sound Form (or Symbol): This is the linguistic expression itself, such as a word
or a sentence. It is the form in which the concept is expressed. For example, the
word “cat” is the sound form that represents the concept of a cat.
The triangle of reference illustrates how meaning is established through the
relationship between the sound form, the concept, and the referent. According to this
model, the meaning of a linguistic expression is determined by its ability to evoke the
correct concept in the mind of the interpreter and to refer to the appropriate referent
in the external world.
Critics of the referential approach and the triangle of reference argue that meaning is
more complex than a simple correspondence between words and objects. They suggest
that meaning is also shaped by context, use, and cultural factors, and that the
relationship between language and the world is more dynamic and multifaceted than
the referential approach implies.
7) Comment on the differential approach to meaning and explain the
difference between the terms seme and sememe.
The differential approach to meaning, often associated with Louis Hjelmslev and other
structuralist linguists, focuses on the relationships between linguistic elements within
a system. This approach considers meaning to be a product of the differences and
contrasts between linguistic elements, rather than their reference to external objects
or concepts. According to this view, meaning is generated through the system of
differences that exist within a language.
In the differential approach, meaning is analyzed in terms of oppositions and contrasts
between elements. These oppositions can be at various levels of linguistic structure,
including phonological (sounds), morphological (word forms), syntactic (sentence
structures), and semantic (meanings) levels. By examining these oppositions, linguists
can uncover the underlying structure and organization of a language.
The terms “seme” and “sememe” are used within the differential approach to refer to
different levels of meaning:
 • A seme is the smallest unit of meaning that can be distinguished within a
language. It represents a basic semantic feature or element that contributes to
the meaning of a word or expression. For example, in the word “cat,” the seme
might include features such as “animal,” “four-legged,” and “mammal.”
• A sememe is a larger unit of meaning that consists of one or more semes. It
represents the meaning of a word or expression as a whole. For example, the
sememe of “cat” would encompass all the features and attributes that make up
the concept of a cat.
In essence, the differential approach to meaning focuses on the internal structure and
organization of language, emphasizing the role of contrasts and differences in
generating meaning. The concepts of seme and sememe help to analyze and describe
these internal structures, providing insights into how meaning is created and
organized within a language.
8) Watch the video attached to the lecture
([Link] and
comment on the prototype theory of meaning.
Prototype theory is a theory of categorization within cognitive science and linguistics
that suggests that categories are not defined by a strict set of defining features but
rather by a prototype, which is a typical or idealized example of the category. This
theory, proposed by Eleanor Rosch and others, contrasts with the classical view of
categorization, which posits that categories are defined by a set of necessary and
sufficient features.
According to prototype theory, categories are organized around central, prototypical
examples that represent the most typical or common instances of a category. These
prototypes are based on typical features or characteristics that are most frequently
associated with the category. For example, when thinking of the category “bird,”
people are more likely to think of a prototypical bird like a sparrow or a robin, rather
than a penguin or an ostrich.
One of the key insights of prototype theory is that categorization is graded rather than
all-or-nothing. Objects or concepts that are closer to the prototype are judged to be
more typical members of the category and are categorized more quickly and easily than
those that are less typical. For example, a robin is judged to be a more typical bird than
a penguin, even though both are considered birds.
Prototype theory has been influential in various fields, including linguistics,
psychology, and philosophy. In linguistics, it has been used to explain phenomena
such as family resemblance in word meanings and graded membership in categories.
In psychology, it has been used to study how people categorize and perceive the world
around them. Overall, prototype theory provides a nuanced and flexible framework for
understanding categorization and meaning, highlighting the importance of typical
examples and graded membership in categories.
9) Describe the tasks and the procedure of componential analysis.
Componential analysis is a method used in linguistics and anthropology to analyze the
meaning of words by breaking them down into their component parts or features. This
approach is based on the idea that the meaning of complex concepts can be understood
in terms of simpler, more basic elements or features. The procedure of componential
analysis typically involves several tasks:
• Identifying Semantic Components: The first step in componential analysis is to
identify the semantic components or features that make up the meaning of a
word. These components are typically binary (either present or absent) and are
 used to distinguish between different members of a category. For example, in
the category of “birds,” one component might be “can fly.”
• Establishing Contrasts: Once the components have been identified, the next
step is to establish the contrasts between different words or concepts based on
these components. This involves identifying which components are shared
between words and which are different. For example, in the category of “birds,”
the component “can fly” would be present for most birds but absent for birds
like penguins.
• Creating Componential Tables: Componential analysis often involves creating
componential tables, which are matrices that represent the contrasts between
words or concepts based on their components. Each row in the table represents
a different word or concept, and each column represents a different component.
A checkmark or other symbol is used to indicate whether a component is
present or absent for each word.
• Analyzing Semantic Relations: Once the componential tables have been
created, they can be analyzed to identify patterns of semantic relations between
words or concepts. This can help to reveal the underlying structure of meaning
within a semantic domain and can provide insights into how different words or
concepts are related to each other.
• Interpreting Results: Finally, the results of the componential analysis are
interpreted to draw conclusions about the meaning of words or concepts. This
can involve identifying the core features that define a category, as well as
understanding how different words or concepts within a category are related to
each other.
Overall, componential analysis is a systematic method for analyzing the meaning of
words based on their component parts. By breaking down complex concepts into
simpler components, this approach helps to uncover the underlying structure of
meaning within a language or culture.
10) Characterize macrocomponents of meaning.
In linguistics, macrocomponents of meaning refer to the broad, overarching aspects of
meaning that are shared across different languages and cultures. These
macrocomponents provide a framework for understanding how meaning is organized
and expressed in language. Some key macrocomponents of meaning include:
• Semantic Fields: Semantic fields are groupings of words or concepts that are
related in meaning. For example, the semantic field of colors includes words
like “red,” “blue,” and “green,” which are all related to the concept of color.
Semantic fields help to organize and categorize the meanings of words within a
language.
• Conceptual Categories: Conceptual categories are abstract, cognitive
frameworks that help us organize and understand the world around us. These
categories are often reflected in language through the use of words and
expressions. For example, the conceptual category of “animals” includes a wide
range of specific animals, each with its own name and characteristics.
• Prototypes: Prototypes are idealized or typical examples of a category that
represent the most central or common features of that category. For example,
when we think of the prototype of a “bird,” we might imagine a small, flying
creature with feathers, a beak, and wings. Prototypes help us understand how
categories are organized and how different members of a category are related.
• Metaphors and Metonymies: Metaphors and metonymies are ways in which
meaning is extended or transferred from one concept to another. Metaphors
involve the use of one concept to understand another concept, while
 metonymies involve the use of a related concept to refer to another concept.
These processes are fundamental to how we understand and communicate
meaning.
• Semantic Roles: Semantic roles are the relationships between different
elements in a sentence or proposition, such as the subject, object, and verb.
These roles help to clarify the meaning of a sentence and how different elements
relate to each other.
Overall, macrocomponents of meaning provide a framework for understanding how
meaning is organized and expressed in language. By examining these
macrocomponents, linguists can gain insights into the underlying structure of
meaning and how it varies across languages and cultures.
11) Study different general and special linguistic dictionaries and try to
suggest the definition of the lexical meaning. Comment on the suggested
definition.
Studying different general and special linguistic dictionaries is a great way to gain
insights into the diverse definitions and interpretations of lexical meaning. Here are
some suggested definitions of lexical meaning from various dictionaries, along with
comments on each:
• Oxford English Dictionary: The OED defines lexical meaning as “the meaning
of a word considered in isolation from the sentence or discourse in which it
occurs.” This definition emphasizes the idea that lexical meaning is the basic,
standalone meaning of a word, independent of its context.
• Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Merriam-Webster defines lexical meaning as
“the meaning of a word or phrase independent of the meanings of the individual
words in it.” This definition is similar to the OED’s definition and highlights the
idea that lexical meaning is determined by the word itself, rather than its
context.
• Collins English Dictionary: Collins defines lexical meaning as “the meaning of
a word or phrase that is independent of its context, as opposed to grammatical
meaning.” This definition emphasizes the distinction between lexical meaning,
which is the inherent meaning of a word, and grammatical meaning, which is
the meaning derived from the word’s role in a sentence.
• Cambridge Dictionary: Cambridge defines lexical meaning as “the meaning of
a word that you find in a dictionary.” This definition is straightforward and
reflects the common understanding of lexical meaning as the meaning of a word
as listed in a dictionary.
Overall, these definitions highlight the basic idea that lexical meaning refers to the
inherent meaning of a word, independent of its context. However, the definitions also
suggest that lexical meaning can vary depending on the dictionary or linguistic
framework used, underscoring the complexity and nuances of lexical semantics.
Practical Tasks
1. Study denotative components of meaning of the words below and fill in
the blanks:
Word Denotative Connotative Type of
Component Component connotation
(emotive,
evaluative, of
duration, of cause,
etc.)
 lonely alone, without feeling of sadness negative
company and isolation
notorious widely known widely known for negative
sth bad or
undesirable
celebrated widely known admired for one’s positive
achievements or
qualities
to glare to look sense of hostility, negative
intensity, or anger
to glance to look quick or casual neutral or slightly
look positive
to shiver to tremble sensation of cold, negative
fear, or excitement
to shudder to tremble fear, discomfort, or negative
revulsion

2. Study definitions of the noun hand and compile a list of semes that
make up its semantic structure.
• Oxford English Dictionary: The OED defines “hand” as "the end part of a
person’s arm beyond the wrist, including the palm, fingers, and thumb.”
Semes:
Body part: arm, wrist, palm, fingers, thumb.
Limb: part of the body used for grasping, touching, etc.
• Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Merriam-Webster defines “hand” as “the
terminal part of the vertebrate forelimb when modified (as in humans) as a
grasping organ.”
Semes:
Grasping: ability to hold or manipulate objects.
Forelimb: part of the limb used for manipulation or movement.
• Collins English Dictionary: Collins defines “hand” as “the part of your body at
the end of your arm, including your fingers and thumb.”
Semes:
Manipulation: ability to handle or control objects.
Anatomy: part of the body connected to the arm, including fingers and thumb.
• Cambridge Dictionary: Cambridge defines “hand” as “the part of the body at the
end of the arm that is used for holding, moving, touching, and feeling things.”
Semes:
Functionality: used for various tasks such as holding, moving, touching.
Sensation: ability to feel things.
3. Make a list of denotative and connotative components of the noun
heart.
Denotative Components:
 • Organ: The heart is a muscular organ in the chest that pumps blood through
the circulatory system.
• Function: Its primary function is to circulate blood throughout the body,
supplying oxygen and nutrients to the tissues and removing waste products.
• Anatomy: It is located between the lungs, slightly to the left of the center of the
chest, and is roughly the size of a fist.
• Physiology: The heart beats rhythmically, pumping blood through a series of
chambers and valves.
Connotative Components:
• Emotion: The heart is often associated with emotions such as love, compassion,
and courage.
• Symbolism: It is a symbol of life, vitality, and the seat of emotions or the soul in
many cultures and traditions.
• Metaphor: It is commonly used metaphorically to refer to the center or core of
something, as in “the heart of the city” or “the heart of the matter.”
• Health: The term “heart” is often used in discussions about health and well-
being, particularly cardiovascular health.
• Strength: The heart is sometimes symbolically associated with strength,
resilience, and endurance, as in sayings like “heart of a lion” or “heartfelt
determination.”