English Semantics
Unit 3: Sense

Unit 3: Sense
Lesson 9: SENSE PROPERTIES AND STEREOTYPES
An ANALYTIC sentence is one that is necessarily
TRUE, as a result of the senses of the words in it.
An analytic sentence, therefore, reflects a tacit
(unspoken) agreement by speakers of the
language about the senses of the words in it.
Ex: All elephants are animals.
Gold is a precious metal.
A typhoon can destroy a large building.
> When we know exactly a sentence is true, it is an
analytic sentence.

A SYNTHETIC sentence is one which is NOT
analytic, but may be either true or false,
depending on the way the world is.
Ex: John is from Ireland.
John is rich.
There is nothing in the senses of John or
Ireland or from which makes this necessarily
true or false.
When we don't know if a sentence is right or
wrong, it is a synthetic sentence.

A CONTRADICTION is a sentence that is necessarily
FALSE, as a result of the senses of the words in it.
Thus a contradiction is in a way the opposite of an
analytic sentence.
Ex: “This animal is a vegetable” is a contradiction.
This must be false because of the senses of
“animal “and “vegetable”.
“Both of John's parents are married to aunts of
mine” is a contradiction.
This must be false because of the senses of “both
parents”, “married”, and “aunt”.

A NECESSARY CONDITION on the sense of a
predicate is a condition (or criterion) which a
thing MUST meet in order to qualify as being
correctly described by that predicate.
A SUFFICIENT SET OF CONDITIONS on the
sense of a predicate is a set of conditions (or
criteria) which, if they are met by a thing, are
enough in themselves to GUARANTEE that the
predicate correctly describes that thing.

Ex: Take the predicate square, as usually understood in
geometry. 'Four-sided' is a necessary condition for this
predicate, since for anything to be a square, it must be
four-sided.
'Plane figure, four-sided, equal-sided, and containing
right angles' is a sufficient set of conditions for the
predicate square, since if anything meets all of these
conditions, it is guaranteed to be a square.
'Four-sided and containing right angles' is not a sufficient
set of conditions for square. Many non-square shapes,
such as rectangles and trapezoids, meet these
conditions.
'Three-sided' is not a necessary condition for square.

The STEREOTYPE of a predicate is a list of the
TYPICAL characteristics or features of things to
which the predicate may be applied.
Ex: The stereotype of cat would be something
like:
Quadruped, domesticated, either black, or
white, or grey, or tortoise-shell, or marmalade
in colour, or some combination of these
colours, adult specimens about 50 cm long
from nose to tip of tail, furry, with sharp
retractable claws, etc.

Five kinds of sentences
- Equative
- Generic
- Analytic
- Synthetic
- Contradiction

Lesson 10: SENSE RELATIONS (1)
IDENTITY AND SIMILARITY OF SENSE
In previous units you were introduced to the
notion of sense. We now proceed to the
examination of sense relations. What we have
referred to previously as the sense of an
expression is the whole set of sense relations it
contracts with other expressions in the language.
We shall be mainly concerned with the sense
relations which involve individual predicates and
whole sentences.

SYNONYMY is the relationship between two
predicates that have the same sense.
Ex: In most dialects of English, stubborn and
obstinate are synonyms.
In many dialects, brigand and bandit are
synonyms.
In many dialects, mercury and quicksilver are
synonyms.

A sentence which expresses the same proposition
as another sentence is a PARAPHRASE of that
sentence (assuming the same referents for any
referring expressions involved). Paraphrase is to
SENTENCES (on individual interpretations) as
SYNONYMY is to PREDICATES (though some
semanticists talk loosely of synonymy in the case
of sentences as well).
Ex: Bachelors prefer redhaired girls is a paraphrase
of Girls with red hair are preferred by unmarried
men.
Bachelors prefer redhaired girls = Girls with red hair
are preferred by unmarried men.

HYPONYMY is a sense relation between
predicates (or sometimes longer phrases) such
that the meaning of one predicate (or phrase) is
included in the meaning of the other.
Ex: The meaning of red includes the meaning of
scarlet.
Red is the superordinate term; scarlet is a
hyponym of red (scarlet is a kind of red).
Superordinate Hyponym
House >< yard, room, garden
body >< head, trunk, arm, leg
Country >< capital, city, province

We define HYPONYMY in such a way that
SYNONYMY counts as a special case of
hyponymy. For example, given two synonyms,
such as mercury and quicksilver, we say for
convenience that these also illustrate the
hyponymy relationship, and that mercury and
quicksilver are hyponyms of each other.
Thus synonymy can be seen as a special case
of hyponymy, i.e. SYMMETRICAL HYPONYMY.
If X is a hyponym of Y and if Y is also a hyponym
of X, then X and Y are synonymous.

A proposition X ENTAILS a proposition Y if the truth of
Y follows necessarily from the truth of X. We extend
this basic definition in terms of propositions to cover
SENTENCES in the following way. A sentence
expressing proposition X entails a sentence expressing
proposition Y if the truth of Y follows necessarily from
the truth of X.
Ex: John ate all the kippers (X) entails Someone ate
something (Y).
John killed Bill (X) entails Bill died (Y).
It is not possible to think of any circumstances in
which sentence X is true and sentence Y false.

Two sentences may be said to be PARAPHRASES
of each other if and only if they have exactly
the same set of ENTAILMENTS; or, which
comes to the same thing, if and only if they
mutually entail each other so that whenever
one is true the other must also be true.
It rains heavily
The roads are wet.
One-way entailment
He supports us
We are supported by him.
Two-way entailment

Hyponymy and synonymy are sense relations
between predicates. The latter is a special,
symmetric, case of the former. Entailment and
paraphrase are sense relations between
sentences, the latter being a special, symmetric
case of the former. The sense relations between
predicates and those between sentences are
systematically connected by rules such as the
basic rule of sense inclusion. These sense relations
are also systematically connected with such sense
properties of sentences as ANALYTICITY and
CONTRADICTION.

Summary

Speaker meaning Sentence meaning
Utterance Sentence
Proposition Sense
Reference
Referent: Variable, constant, co-referent
Referring expression
Opaque context
Equative sentence
Predicator Predicate
Degree of (Arguments) Generic sentence
Universe of discourse
Synonym
Hyponym >< Superordinate
One-way entailment >< Two-way entailment

Six kinds of sentences
- Equative
- Generic
- Analytic
- Synthetic
- Contradiction
- Paraphrase (pair)

Lesson 11: SENSE RELATIONS (2)
OPPOSITENESS AND DISSIMILARITY OF SENSE AND AMBIGUITY
In this unit we complete our introductory review of sense
relations. Our topics include what has been termed
'oppositeness of meaning', an area that traditionally was
viewed in rather simple terms. Modern semanticists, as you
will see, have explored and mapped many areas within this
area of meaning that go well beyond the simple traditional
'oppositeness' notion.
A traditional view of antonymy is that it is simply
'oppositeness of meaning'. This view is not adequate, as
words may be opposite in meaning in different ways, and
some words have no real opposites.

BINARY ANTONYMS are predicates which come in
pairs and between them exhaust all the relevant
possibilities. If the one predicate is applicable, then
the other cannot be, and vice versa. Another way to
view this is to say that a predicate is a binary
antonym of another predicate if it entails the
negative of the other predicate.
Ex: true and false are binary antonyms.
If a sentence is true, it cannot be false. If it is false,
it cannot be true. Alternatively, if something is
true, this entails that it is not false. If it is false, this
entails it is not true.

Two predicates are GRADABLE ANTONYMS if
they are at opposite ends of a continuous scale
of values (a scale which typically varies according
to the context of use).
Ex: Hot and cold are gradable antonyms.
Between hot and cold is a continuous scale of
values, which may be given names such as
warm, cool, or tepid. What is called hot in one
context (e.g. of oven temperatures in a recipe
book) could well be classed as cold in another
context (e.g. the temperatures of stars).

If a predicate describes a relationship between
two things (or people) and some other predicate
describes the same relationship when the two
things (or people) are mentioned in the opposite
order, then the two predicates are CONVERSES
of each other.
Ex: Parent and child are converses, because X is
the parent of Y (one order) describes the same
situation (relationship) as Y is the child of X
(opposite order).
Formula: If X is … of Y, Y is …of X.

A proposition is a CONTRADICTORY of another
proposition if it is impossible for them both to be true
at the same time and of the same circumstances. The
definition can naturally be extended to sentences thus:
a sentence expressing one proposition is a
contradictory of a sentence expressing another
proposition if it is impossible for both propositions to
be true at the same time and of the same
circumstances. Alternatively (and equivalently) a
sentence contradicts another sentence if it entails the
negation of the other sentence.
Ex: This beetle is alive is a contradictory of This beetle is
dead.

A case of HOMONYMY is one of an ambiguous word
whose different senses are far apart from each other
and not obviously related to each other in any way
with respect to a native speaker's intuition. Cases of
homonymy seem very definitely to be matters of
mere accident or coincidence.
Ex: Mug (drinking vessel vs gullible person) would be
a clear case of homonymy.
Bank (financial institution vs the side of a river or
stream) is another clear case of homonymy.
There is no obvious conceptual connection
between the two meanings of either word.

HOMONYMY
Sound Spelling
Meaning
Homonym
+
+
Homophone
+
Homograph
+
Notes: + (same) ><
- (different)
homonyms:
Ex 1: row (line) >< row (move a boat)
homophones:
Ex 2: flower >< flour
homographs:
Ex 3: read (bare infinitive) >< read (past simple)
lead (v)
lead (n)
In Vietnamese there is only one kind of homonym.
Ex: đường (sugar) >< đường (way/road)

A case of POLYSEMY is one where a word has several very
closely related senses. In other words, a native speaker of
the language has clear intuitions that the different senses
are related to each other in some way.
Ex: Mouth (of a river vs of an animal) is a case of polysemy.
The two senses are clearly related by the concepts of an
opening from the interior of some solid mass to the
outside, and of a place of issue at the end of some long
narrow channel.
Polysemy in nouns is quite common in human
languages. Some additional examples will be given for
you to think about in the exercises at the end of this unit.

Ex: Run is another more complicated case of polysemy in
which the word has more than one related sense. Note that
in this case we have an example of polysemy with a verb (at
least in most of its senses). So polysemy is not restricted to
just one part of speech.
The multiple senses of run are related to each other in a
somewhat more abstract way than in the case of the
senses of mouth. Some uses of run which bring out a few of
its complex interrelated senses include: run a race (on
foot), run for office, this road runs from east to west, the
motor is running, the water is running down the roof, run a
computer program, a run in a stocking, etc. Can you
determine how these various senses are related to each
other?

A word or sentence is AMBIGUOUS when it
has more than one sense.
A sentence is ambiguous if it has two (or
more) paraphrases which are not themselves
paraphrases of each other.
Ex: We saw her duck is a paraphrase of We saw
her lower her head and of We saw the duck
belonging to her, and these last two sentences
are not paraphrases of each other. Therefore We
saw her duck is ambiguous.

We have lexical ambiguity and structural
(grammatical) ambiguity.
Any ambiguity resulting from the ambiguity of a
word is a LEXICAL AMBIGUITY.
Ex: The captain corrected the list is lexically
ambiguous.
Notes: List (1) a range of things/people
(2) slanting/uneven position

In the case of words and phrases, a word or
phrase is AMBIGUOUS if it has two (or more)
SYNONYMS that are not themselves synonyms
of each other.
Ex: Trunk is synonymous with elephant's
proboscis and with chest, but these two are not
synonyms of each other, so trunk is ambiguous.
Similarly coach is synonymous with trainer and
with charabanc (or bus) but these two are not
synonyms of each other, so coach is ambiguous.

A sentence which is ambiguous because its
words relate to each other in different ways,
even though none of the individual words are
ambiguous,
is
STRUCTURALLY
(or
GRAMMATICALLY) AMBIGUOUS.
Ex: The chicken is ready to eat (and many of the
other sentences we have used) is structurally
ambiguous.

A phrase is REFERENTIALLY VERSATILE if it can be
used to refer to a wide range of different things
or persons. This is very similar to the notion of
vagueness mentioned earlier in this unit.
Ex: The pronoun she can be used to refer to any
female person. On a given occasion she might be
used to refer to Mary, on another occasion to
Lucy, etc., but this does NOT mean that she is
ambiguous, because although it is used to refer
to different people this is not a matter of a
difference in sense.

• Binary antonymy, converseness, and gradable
antonymy are sense relations between predicates
which fit a simple pretheoretical notion of
'oppositeness
of
meaning'.
Multiple
incompatibility, though not traditionally thought
of as a kind of oppositeness, is formally similar to
binary antonymy, the main difference being in the
number of terms (i.e. 2 or more than 2) in the
system concerned. Contradictoriness is a sense
relation between sentences (and propositions),
related in an apparently complicated way to the
sense relations mentioned above.

Lexical ambiguity depends on homonymy (senses not
related) and polysemy (senses related). To show the
relationship between ambiguous sentences and
ambiguous words we proposed the following statement:
some sentences which contain ambiguous words are
ambiguous while others are not, and some sentences
which contain no ambiguous words are ambiguous while
others are not. We then discussed the differences
between grammatical ambiguity and lexical ambiguity
and suggested ways of representing grammatical
ambiguity. Finally we distinguished referential versatility
and referential vagueness from ambiguity.

Summary
Synonym
Hyponym >< Superordinate
Antonymy: binary and gradable
Converse
Contradictory
Homonymy
Polysemy
Ambiguity: lexical and structural (grammatical)
Referrentially versatile

Seven kinds of sentences
- Equative
- Generic
- Analytic
- Synthetic
- Contradiction
- Paraphrase (pair)
- Contradictory (pair)

GOOD LUCK!