Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
THE SEMANTIC STRUCTURE OF SENTENCES, SEMANTICS II - Coggle Diagram
THE SEMANTIC STRUCTURE OF SENTENCES
IT IS FALSE THAT THE MEANING OF A SENTENCE IS THE SUM OF THE MEANINGS OF THE WORDS AND OTHER CONSTITUENTS WHICH COMPOSE IT
THE PROPOSAL MAY BE TO LOOK FOR UNITS AND STRUCTURES WHICH OPERATE ON THE SEMANTIC LEVEL
IN EVALUATING A SEMANTIC DESCRIPTION, WE SHOULD RESORT TO THE SIMPLICITY OF STABLE RELATIONS BETWEEN SYNTAX AND SEMANTICS
THE SEMANTIC UNIT WITHIN WHICH COMPONENTIAL ANALYSIS APPLIES IS NOT ONLY SMALLER THAN A SENTENCE, BUT LARGER THAN A WORD
PREDICATIONS
THE MAJOR UNIT MEANING OF A SENTENCE IS THE PREDICATION
ARGUMENTS
LOGICAL PARTICIPANTS
BOTH CAN BE ANALIZED COMPONENTIALLY. BOTH ARE COMPARABLE UNITS
PREDICATE
LINKING ELEMENT, VERB
WE ARE GOING TO FIND HERE THE MAIN OR GOVERNING ELEMENTS OF PREDICATIONS
TENSE, MODALITIES AND ADVERBIAL MEANINGS
IT CANNOT BE DISPENSED WITH
TWO-PLACE
ONE-PLACE
NO-PLACE
PREDICATIONS consist of ARGUMENTS/PREDICATES consits of FEATURES
NOTATIONS FOR PREDICATIONS ANALYSIS
SIGENES NOW IS EXTENDED TO REPRESENT PREDICATIONS. IT ALSO ALLOWS FOR PREDICATION-COMPONENTIALFORMULAE
LINEAR PREDICATION-COMPONENTIAL FORMULAE
MEANING IN LINEAR FORM
WE CAN ALLOW IT TO CONTAIN AS MANY NOTATIONAL VARIATIONS AS WE WANT
FORMAL
INFORMAL REPRESENTATIONS OF MEANING
SEMI-INFORMAL
PREDICATION ANALYSIS
THIS KIND OF ANALYSIS CONSISTS IN BREAKING DOWN PREDICATIONS INTO THEIR CONSTITUENTS
COMPONENTIAL AND PREDICATION ANALYSIS TOGETHER ENABLE US TO REPRESENT THE GREATER PART OF THE MEANING OF SENTENCES
ENTAILMENT AND INCONSISTENCY
RELATIONS BETWEEN ARGUMENTS AND BETWEEN PREDICATES
AN ENTAILMENT RELATION EXISTS BETWEEN TWO PROPOSITIONS WHICH DIFFER ONLY IN THAT AN ARGUMENT OF ONE IS HYPONYMOUS TO AN ARGUMENT OF THE OTHER
SEMANTIC INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION
NULL ARGUMENTS
OR ARGUMENTS WHICH CONTAIN NO FEATURES
IT IS VOID OF CONTENT IN THE SENSE THAT IT HAS THE MAXIMUM GENERALITY OF REFERENCE
IT HAS NO SYNTACTIC REALIZATION
SELECTION RESTRICTIONS
THE MEANING SEEMS TO FLOW SIDEWAYS FROM ONE PART OF A SETENCE TO ANOTHER
IT IS SOMETIMES EXPRESSED IN TERMS INANIMATE/ANIMATE, SINGULAR/PLURAL, ABSTRACT, CONCRET, SOLID/LIQUID OR SUCH RELATIONSHIPS
CONDITIONS OF SYNTACTIC CO-OCCURRENCE. IT IS DEFINED SEMANTICALLY
IF TWO WORDS ARE SYNONYMOUS
TWO SEPARATE STATEMENTS CAN BE BROUGHT TOGETHER ON THE SEMANTIC LEVEL
IF TWO EXPRESSIONS ARE CONVERSES
SUBORDINATE PREDICATIONS
THE SAME SMALL REPERTOIRE OF STRUCTURES RECURS
A SUBORDINATE PREDICATION MAY BE PART OF A MAIN PREDICATION. THE SAME SMALL REPERTOIRE OF STRUCTURES RECURS IN A SINGLE OVERALL PREDICATION
A PREDICATE MAY GOVERN NOT ONLY ARGUMENTS, BUT OTHER PREDICATES
TERM
AN ELEMENT WHICH IS GOVERNED BY A PREDICATE
DOWNGRADED OR FEATURIZED PREDICATIONS
ONE PREDICATION MAY BE INCLUDED IN ANOTHER
PREDICATIONS WHICH ARE DEMOTED IN THE WAY THAT THE SEMANTIC HIERARCHY IS REDUCED
IT IS EXPRESSED BY MEANS OF A RELATIVE CLAUSE
IT SHARES PART OF THE CONTENT OF THE REMAINDER OF THE ARGUMENT IN WHICH IT OCCURS
TWO KINDS
A QUALIFYING PREDICATION
OCCURS WITHIN AN ARGUMENT
ACCOMPLISHES ADJECTIVAL FUNCTIONS OF SYNTAX: ADJECTIVES, RELATIVE CLAUSES, QUALIFYING PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES
A MODIFYING PREDICATION
OCCURS WITHIN A PREDICATE
ACCOMPLISHES ADVERBIAL FUNCTIONS OF SYNTAX: ADVERBS, ADVERBIAL PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES, ADVERBIAL CLAUSES
THEY ARE ARGUMENTS
THE ELEMENTS WHICH COMBINE TO FORM ARGUMENTS AND PREDICATES
MORE ON SEMANTIC DEVIATION
SUBORDINATION AND DOWNGRADING CAN BE USED TO EXPLAIN SEMANTIC DEVIATIONS
SUCH AS TAUTOLOGY AND CONTRADICTIONS
SEMANTICS II
CHAPTER 8 CONCEPTUAL MAP
NAME: VEIZAGA BLANCO JHAMIL SCOTH
DATE: NOVEMBER 10TH, 2020