philo of language - terms

8/12/2019 Philo of Language - Terms

1/90

Philosophy of Language

Stoicism is a school of philosophy founded (308 BCE) in Athens by Zeno of Citium(Cyprus). It teaches selfcontrol and detachment from distractin! emotions"sometimes interpreted as an indifferenceto pleasure or pain. #his allo$s one to be a

clear thin%er" le&elheaded and unbiased. In practice" 'toicism is desi!ned to empo$eran indi&idual $ith &irtue" $isdom" and inte!rity of character. 'tudents areencoura!ed to help those in need" %no$in! that those $ho can" should. 'toicism alsoteaches psycholo!ical independence from society" re!ardin! it as an unruly and oftenunreasonable entity.

irtue" reason" and natural la$ are prime directi&es. By masterin! passions andemotions" it is possible to o&ercome the discord of the outside $orld and find peace$ithin oneself. 'toicism holds that passion distorts truth" and that the pursuit of truthis &irtuous. ree% philosophers such as Cleanthes" Chrysippus" and later *omanthin%ers such as Cicero" 'eneca the +oun!er" ,arcus Aurelius" Cato the Elder" Cato

the +oun!er" and Epictetusare associated $ith 'toicism. In Cicero-s case" it should beemphasised that $hile he shared many of the moral tenets of 'toicism" he $as not a'toic himself but an eclectic. 'toic philosophy is usually contrasted $ithEpicureanism.

A compoundis a $ord (le/eme) that consists of more than one free morpheme.

A certain type of compounds (endocentric) consist of a head" i.e. the cate!orical partthat contains the basic meanin! of the $hole compound" and modifiers" $hich restrict

this meanin!. or e/ample" the En!lish compound doghouse" $here houseis the headand dogis the modifier" is understood as a house intended for a do!. 1b&iously" anendocentric compound tends to be of the same part of speech($ord class) as itshead.

In other cases" the compound does not ha&e a head" and its meanin! cannot betransparently !uessed from its constituent parts. or e/ample" the En!lish compoundwhite-collaris neither a %ind of collar nor a $hite thin!. In the 'ans%rittradition" thisis called a bahuvrihi compound2 another (modern) term is exocentric compound"meanin! that the concept represented by the compound lies outside its parts. In ane/ocentric compound" the $ord class is determined le/ically" disre!ardin! the class of

the constituents. or e/ample" a must-haveis not a &erb but a noun.

Composition should not be confused $ith deri&ation" $here bound morphemes areadded to free ones.

A special %ind of composition is incorporation" of $hich noun incorporation into a&erbal root (as in En!lish backstabbing" breastfeed" etc.) is most pre&alent (seebelo$).

Formation of compounds

Compound formation rules &ary $idely across lan!ua!e types.

In a perfectly analytic lan!ua!e" compounds are simply elements strun! to!ether$ithout any mar%ers. In En!lish" for e/ample" science fictionis a compound noun thatconsists of t$o nouns and no mar%ers. A correspondin! e/ample from the ,andarinlan!ua!e$ould be Hny ( 2 simplified )" or 4the 5an Chinese lan!ua!e4"$hich also consists of t$o nouns and no mar%ers.

1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/308_BCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_of_Citiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyprushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indifferencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greecehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleantheshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysippushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Romehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cicerohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seneca_the_Youngerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Aureliushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_the_Elderhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_the_Youngerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_the_Youngerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epictetushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclecticismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Part_of_speechhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahuvrihihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivation_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Chinesehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/308_BCEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_of_Citiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyprushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indifferencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greecehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleantheshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysippushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Romehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cicerohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seneca_the_Youngerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Aureliushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_the_Elderhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_the_Youngerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_the_Youngerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epictetushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclecticismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Part_of_speechhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahuvrihihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivation_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Chinese


2/90

In a more synthetic lan!ua!e" the relationship bet$een the elements of a compoundmay be mar%ed. In erman" for e/ample" the compound Kapitnspatentconsists ofthe le/emes Kapitn (sea captain) and Patent (license) 6oined by the !eniti&e casemar%er -s. In the 7atin lan!ua!e" the le/eme paterfamilias contains the (archaic)!eniti&e formfamiliasof the le/emepater(father).

A!!lutinati&e lan!ua!estend to create &ery lon! $ords $ith deri&ational morphemes.Compounds may or may not reuire the use of deri&ational morphemes also. #he $ell%no$n 9apanese compound kamikaze consists only of the nouns kami (4!od"spirit4) and kaze (4$ind4). #he lon!est compounds in the $orld may be found ininnish and ermanic lan!ua!es" such as '$edish. erman e/amples includeKontaktlinsenvertrglichkeitstest(4contactlens compatibility test4) and the 6ocularheindampfschifffahrtsgesellschaftskapitnsstellvertreter (4*hine steamshipcompany &icecaptain4). In theory" e&en lon!er compounds are possible" but they areusually not found in actual discourse.

Conpounds can be rather lon!" $hen translatin! technical document from En!lish tofor e/ample '$edish. 4motion estimation search ran!e settin!s4 can be directlytranslated to 4r:relseupps%attnin!ss:%nin!srymdsinst;llnin!4" the len!th of the $ord istheoretically unlimited.

Compound types in different languages

Compound nouns

,ost natural lan!ua!es ha&e compound nouns and sometimes compound ad6ecti&es.#he position of the head $ithin a compound often depends on the branchin!tendency

of the lan!ua!e" i. e. the most common order of constituents in phrases $here nounsare modified by ad6ecti&es" by possessors" by other nouns" etc.


3/90

9apanese sho$s the same pattern" e/cept the $ord order is the opposite ($ithpostpositions) no naka(lit. 4of inside on4" i.e. 4on the inside of4).

Other examples

'panish

!iencia-ficci"n (4science fiction4) ciencia" 4science4" > ficci"n" 4fiction4 (#his$ord is a calue from the En!lish e/pression science fiction. In En!lish" thehead of a compound $ord is the last morpheme science fiction. Con&ersely"the 'panish head is located at the front" so cienciaficci?n sounds li%e a %ind offictional science rather than scientific fiction.)

!iempi#s(4centipede4) cien" 4hundred4" >pies" 4feet4 $errocarril(4rail$ay4)ferro" 4iron4" > carril" 4lane4

Italian

!entopiedi(4centipede4) cento" 4hundred4" >piedi" 4feet4 $errovia(4rail$ay4)ferro" 4iron4" > via" 4$ay4 %ergicristallo(4$indscreen4) tergere" 4to $ash4" > cristallo" 4crystal" (pane of)

!lass4

erman

&olkenkratzer(4s%yscraper4) wolken" 4clouds4" > kratzer" 4scraper4 'isenbahn(4rail$ay4) 'isen" 4iron4" > bahn" 4trac%4 Kraftfahrzeug (4automobile4) Kraft" 4po$er4" >fahren(fahr" 4dri&e4" > zeug"

4machinery4 )tacheldraht(4barbed $ire4) stachel" 4barb@barbed4" > draht" 4$ire4

innish

sanakir*a(4dictionary4) sana" 4$ord4" > kir*a" 4boo%4 tietokone(4computer4) tieto" 4%no$led!e" data4" > kone" 4machine4 keskiviikko(4 viikko" 4$ee%4 maailma(4$orld4) maa" 4land4" > ilma" 4air4

In morphemebased morpholo!y" a morpheme is the smallest lan!ua!e unit thatcarries a semanticinterpretation. ,orphemes are" !enerally" a distincti&e collocationof phonemes(as the free form pin or the bound form s of pins) ha&in! no smallermeanin!ful members.

'nglish example+#he $ord 4unbelie&able4 has three morphemes 4un4" (ne!atory) abound morpheme" 4belie&e4 a free morpheme" and 4able4. 4un4 is also a prefi/" 4able4 is a suffi/. Both are affi/es.

Types of morphemes

ree morphemes li%e town" dogcan appear $ith other le/emes(as in town-hallor dog-house) or they can stand alone" or 4free4. Allomorphsare &ariants of amorpheme" e.!. the plural mar%er in En!lish is sometimes reali=ed as @=@" @s@or @=@.

3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postpositionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calquehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphology_(linguistics)#Morpheme-based_morphologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefix_morphemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffix_morphemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affixhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allomorphhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postpositionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calquehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphology_(linguistics)#Morpheme-based_morphologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefix_morphemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffix_morphemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affixhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allomorph


4/90

Bound morphemes li%e 4un4 appear only to!ether $ith other morphemes toform a le/eme. Bound morphemes in !eneral tend to be prefi/es and suffi/es.,orphemes e/istin! in only one bound form are %no$n as 4cranberry4 ones"from the 4cran4 in that &ery $ord.

Inflectional morphemes modify a $ord-s tense" number" aspect" and so on. (as

in the dogmorpheme if $ritten $ith the plural mar%er morpheme sbecomesdogs). eri&ational morphemes can be added to a $ord to create (deri&e) another

$ord the addition of 4ness4 to 4happy4" for e/ample" to !i&e 4happiness4.

In human lan!ua!e" a phonemeis the basic theoretical unit that can be used todistin!uish $ords or morphemes. #hat is" chan!in! a phoneme in a $ord produceseither nonsense" or a different $ord $ith a different meanin!.

honemes in oral lan!ua!es are not physical sounds" but mental abstractions ofspeech sounds. A phoneme is a family of speech sounds ( phones) that the spea%ers ofa lan!ua!e thin% of as bein!" and hear as" the same sound. A 4perfect4 alphabet is onethat has one symbol for each phoneme.

In si!n lan!ua!es" a phoneme is a similarly basic theoretical unit of hand shape"motion" position" or facial e/pression. It $as formerly called a chereme (orcheireme)" but usa!e chan!ed tophoneme$hen it $as reco!ni=ed that the mentalabstractions in&ol&ed are essentially the same as in oral lan!ua!es.

Phonemics" a branch of phonolo!y" is the study of the systems of phonemes of

lan!ua!es.

Bacground and related ideas

#he phoneme is an abstraction that $as introduced by the olish lin!uist 9aniecisla$ Baudouin de Courtenay(D8FDGHG) and his student ,i%oa6 Jrus=e$s%i. #heconcept of the phoneme $as elaborated in the $or%s of i%olai #rubet=%oi (D8G0DG38)" as $ell as in that of structuralistsli%e erdinand de 'aussureand Ed$ard 'apir.7ater" it $as also used in !enerati&e lin!uistics" most famously by oam Choms%yand,orris 5alle" and remains central in &irtually all modern schools of phonolo!y.(5o$e&er" some !enerati&e phonolo!ists re6ected the phoneme durin! the DGK0s andDGL0s.)

#he phoneme can be defined as 4the smallest meanin!ful psycholo!ical unit of sound.4#he phoneme has mental" physiolo!ical" and physical substance our brains processthe sounds2 the sounds are produced by the human speech or!ans2 and the sounds arephysical entities that can be recorded and measured.

or an e/ample of phonemes" consider the En!lish $ords pat and sat" $hich differonly in their initial consonants. #his difference" %no$n as contrasti!eness" issufficient to distin!uish these $ords" and therefore the and ' sounds are said to bedifferent phonemes. A pair of $ords that are identical e/cept for such a sound are%no$n as a minimal pair2 this is the most freuent demonstration that t$o sounds areseparate phonemes.

If no minimal pair can be found to demonstrate that t$o sounds are distinct" it maybe that they are allophones. Allophones are &ariant phones (i.e." sounds) that are notreco!ni=ed as distinct by a spea%er" and are not meanin!fully different in thelan!ua!e" and yet are percei&ed as 4the same4. #his is especially li%ely if they

4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstractionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheremehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstractionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baudouin_de_Courtenayhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Miko%C5%82aj_Kruszewski&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Trubetzkoihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_de_Saussurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Sapirhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_linguisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomskyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_Hallehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimal_pairhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allophonehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphemehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstractionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheremehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstractionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baudouin_de_Courtenayhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Miko%C5%82aj_Kruszewski&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Trubetzkoihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_de_Saussurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Sapirhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_linguisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomskyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_Hallehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimal_pairhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allophone


5/90

consistently occur in different en&ironments. or e/ample" the 4dar%4 7 sound at theend of the En!lish $ord 4$ool4 is uite different from the 4li!ht4 7 sound at thebe!innin! of the $ord 4leaf4" but this difference is meanin!less in En!lish" and isdetermined by $hether the sound is at the be!innin! or end of a $ord. A nati&eEn!lish spea%er mi!ht ha&e a hard time hearin! the difference at first" but in #ur%ish

the difference bet$een 4li!ht4 and 4dar%4 7 is sufficient to distin!uish $ords. #hat is"they are t$o separate phonemes in #ur%ish" but allophones of a sin!le phoneme inEn!lish.

#he phonemic relationship of t$o sounds may not be ob&ious to a nonnati&e spea%er"$hich is $hy minimal pairs and an understandin! of phonetic en&ironments areimportant. or e/ample" in Jorean" there is a phoneme @r@ that is a flapped rbet$een &o$els" and is an lsound ne/t to other consonants. #hese sound &erydifferent to an En!lish spea%er" $ho is attuned to hearin! them because thedifferences are meanin!ful in En!lish. 5o$e&er" the nati&e spea%er has learned froman early a!e to filter out the difference" as they are not meanin!ful in their lan!ua!e.

In Jorean" for instance" it is impossible to distin!uish the t$o $ords 4ram4 and 4lam4"despite the fact that both * and 7 sounds occur in the lan!ua!e.

#he e/act number of phonemes in En!lishdepends on the spea%er and the method ofdeterminin! phoneme &s. allophone" but estimates typically ran!e from 0 to F"$hich is abo&e a&era!e across all lan!ua!es. irahMhas only D0" $hile NO?Phas DD.

ependin! on the lan!ua!e and the alphabet used" a phoneme may be $rittenconsistently $ith one letter2 ho$e&er there are many e/ceptions to this rule Q see


6/90

con&entions of ortho!raphy are then %ept separate from both phonemes andallophones by the use of the mar%ers S T to enclose the spellin!.

#he symbols of the International honetic Alphabet(IA) and e/tended sets adaptedto a particular lan!ua!e are often used by lin!uists to $rite phonemes of oral

lan!ua!es" $ith the principle bein! one symbol euals one cate!orical sound. ue toproblems displayin! some symbols in the early days of the Internet" systems such as O'A,Aand Jirshenbaum$ere de&eloped to represent IA symbols in plain te/t. As ofH00" any modern $eb bro$ser can display IA symbols (as lon! as the operatin!systempro&ides the appropriate fonts)" and $e use this system in this article.

#he only published set of phonemic symbols for a si!n lan!ua!e is the 'to%oe notationde&eloped for American 'i!n 7an!ua!e" $hich has since been applied to British 'i!n7an!ua!e by Jyle and


7/90

countless e/periments and obser&ations (many of $hich predate the !enerati&ists)ha&e confirmed its psycholo!ical reality" and today" no mainstream lin!uist re6ectsthe phoneme.

(estricted phonemes

A restricted phonemeis a phoneme that can only occur in a certain en&ironment andhas restrictions as to $here it can occur.

@W@" as in sing" can occur only at the end of a syllable or $ord" and can ne&eroccur at the be!innin! of a $ord.

Rnder some interpretations" /w/and /j/can occur only before a &o$el" and canne&er occur at the end of a syllable or $ord. 5o$e&er" many phonolo!ists$ould ha&e no difficulty $ith interpretin! a $ord li%e boyas either [boi]or [boj]($ith the ca&eat that the iin the first e/ample needs a diacritic to indicate itis nonsyllabic).

@h@ can occur only at the be!innin! of a syllable or $ord" and can ne&er occurat the end of a syllable or $ord.

Rnder some interpretations" in American accents $ith the cotcau!ht mer!er/@ can occur only before @r@ and can ne&er occur else$here2 ho$e&er" /@ (ora similar &o$el) appears before syllablefinal /l/in some American dialects. Inthese dialects" [V mi!ht better be interpreted as an allophone of another&o$el" rather than as a separate phoneme.

In nonrhotic accents" @r@ can only occur before a &o$el or inter&ocalically"and can ne&er occur at the end of a $ord or before a consonant.

"eutrali)ation* archiphoneme* underspecificationhonemes that are contrasti&e in certain en&ironments may not be contrasti&e in allen&ironments. In the en&ironments $here they don-t contrast" the contrast is said tobe neutrali)ed. In En!lish there are three nasal phonemes" /m, n, /" as sho$n by theminimal triplet"

@sm@ sum

@sn@ sun

@sW@ sung

5o$e&er" these sounds are not contrasti&e before plosi&es such as @p" t" %@. Althou!hall three phones appear before plosi&es" for e/ample in limp. lint. link" only one ofthese may appear before each of the plosi&es. #hat is" the @m" n" W@ distinction isneutralizedbefore each of the plosi&es @p" t" %@

1nly UmV occurs before UpV" only UnV before UtV" and only UWV before U%V.

#hus these phonemes are not contrasti&e in these en&ironments" and accordin! to

some theorists" there is no e&idence as to $hat the underlyin! representation mi!htbe. If $e hypothesi=e that $e are dealin! $ith only a sin!le underlyin! nasal" there isno reason to pic% one of the three phonemes @m" n" W@ o&er the other t$o.

(In some lan!ua!es there is only one phonemic nasal any$here" and due to obli!atoryassimilation" it surfaces as Um" n" WV in 6ust these en&ironments" so this idea is not asfarfetched as it mi!ht seem at first !lance.)

7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cot-caught_mergerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allophonehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhotic_and_non-rhotic_accentshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cot-caught_mergerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allophonehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhotic_and_non-rhotic_accents


8/90

In certain schools of phonolo!y" such a neutrali=ed distinction is %no$n as anarchiphoneme(i%olai #rubet=%oyof the ra!ue schoolis often associated $ith thisanalysis.). Archiphonemes are often notated $ith a capital letter. ollo$in! thiscon&ention" the neutrali=ation of /m, n, /before /p, t, k/could be notated as XX" andlimp. lint. link$ould be represented as Xlp" lt" l%X. (#he XpipesX indicate

archiphonemic representation.) 1ther $ays this archiphoneme could be notated are@mnW@" Ym" n" W" or @n[@.

Another e/ample from En!lish is the neutrali=ation of the plosi&es @%" !@ follo$in!@s@. honetically" the unaspiratedtenuisplosi&e in skyis closer to En!lish @!@" $hichis partially &oicelessin initial position" than to aspirated@%@. #his can be heard bycomparin! the sky$ith this guy2 also" in the speech of youn! children $ho are not yetable to produce consonant clusters" they often pronounce skyas $hat sounds like/gai/to adult ears. #hat is" @%@ and @!@ are constrasti&e $ord initially"

@%ai@ chi

@!ai@ guy

But not after an @s@"

@s%ai@ sky

@s!ai@

#hus one cannot say $hether the underlyin! representation of the plosi&e in sky is@s%ai@ $ithout aspiration" or @s!ai@ $ithout &oicin!. #his neutrali=ation can instead

be represented as an archiphoneme XX" in $hich case the underlyin! representationof sky$ould be XsaiX.

Another $ay to tal% about archiphonemes in&ol&es the concept of underspecification.honemes can be considered fully specified se!ments $hile archiphonemes areunderspecified se!ments. In #u&an" phonemic &o$els are specified $ith the featuresof ton!ue hei!ht" bac%ness" and lip roundin!. #he archiphoneme XRX is anunderspecified hi!h &o$el $here only the ton!ue hei!ht is specified.

phoneme#archiphoneme

height bacness roundedness

@i@ hi!h front unrounded@@ hi!h bac% unrounded

@u@ hi!h bac% rounded

XRX hi!h


9/90

It should be noted that not all phonolo!ists use archiphonemes in their analyses" andsome do not accept the concept itself.

"on-phonemes

rothesis" epenthesis and para!o!e due to phonotactics add sounds into $ords$ithout addin! meanin!. e&ertheless" the sound is added" and thus the phonemestatus may be ambi!uous. or e/ample" 'panish prothetic e-must be added beforeconsonant clusters" e.!. estres.

Phonological extremes

1f all the sounds that a human &ocal tract can create" different lan!ua!es &aryconsiderably in the number of these sounds that are considered to be distincti&ephonemes in the speech of that lan!ua!e. Rby/and some dialects of Ab%ha= ha&eonly t$o phonemic &o$els" and many ati&e American lan!ua!esha&e three. 1n other

e/treme" the Bantu lan!ua!e!$ehas fourteen &o$el ualities" t$el&e of $hich mayoccur lon! or short" for t$entysi/ oral &o$els" plus si/ nasali=ed &o$els" lon! andshort" for thirtyei!ht &o$els2 $hile NO?P achie&es thirtyone pure &o$elsQnotcountin! &o$el len!th" $hich it also hasQby &aryin! the phonation. *oto%ashas onlysi/ consonants" $hile NO?P has some$here in the nei!hborhood of se&entyse&en" andRby/ ei!htyone. renchhas no phonemic tone or stress" $hile se&eral of the Jam'uilan!ua!esha&e nine tones" and one of the Jru lan!ua!es"


10/90

spellin! system.


11/90

In the philosophy of mathematicsa formalist is a person $ho belon!s to theschool of formalism" a certain mathematicalphilosophical doctrine $hichincludes for e/ample a&id 5ilbert. 'ee formal system.

#he term is often used !enerally in the Arts" but has become a familiar term inmodern poetryin particular. ormalist poets may be considered as the opposite

of -ree erse- poets" thou!h of course these are 6ust labels" and rarely sum upmatters satisfactorily. -ormalism- in poetry represents an attachment to poetrythat reco!nises and uses schemes of rhyme and rhythm to create poetic effectsand to inno&ate. #o distin!ush it from archaic poetry the term -neoformalist- issometimes used.

In literary theory" the school of criticism of I.A. *ichardsand his follo$ers hassometimes been labelled -formalist-. 'ee also *ussian ormalism.

In film studies" formalism is a trait in filmma%in!" $hich o&ertly uses thelan!ua!e of film" such as editin!" shot composition" camera mo&ement" setdesi!n" etc." so as to emphasise the artificiality of the film e/perience.E/amples of formalist films may include %he )eventh )eal (DGFL)" /reathless

(DGFG) and 0oulin ouge1(H00D).

Structuralism is a !eneral approach in &arious academic disciplinesthat e/ploresthe interrelationships bet$een fundamental elements of some %ind" upon $hichsome hi!her mental" lin!uistic" social" cultural etc 4structures4 are built" throu!h$hich then meanin!is produced $ithin a particular person" system" culture.

'tructuralism appeared in academic psycholo!y for the first time in the DGth centuryand then reappeared in the second half of the H0th century" $hen it !re$ to become

one of the most popular approaches in the academic fields that are concerned $ithanaly=in! lan!ua!e" culture" and society. #he $or% of erdinand de 'aussure is!enerally considered to be a startin! point of the H0th centurystructuralism. As $ithany cultural mo&ement" the influences and de&elopments are comple/.

Structuralism in linguistics

erdinand de 'aussure is the ori!inator of the H0th century reappearance ofstructuralism" specifically in his DGDKboo% !ourse in 2eneral 3inguistics" $here hefocused not on the use of lan!ua!e (parole" or tal%)" but rather on the underlyin!systemof lan!ua!e (langue) and called his theory semiotics. #his approach focused one/aminin! ho$ the elements of lan!ua!e related to each other in the present" that is"-synchronically- rather than -diachronically-. inally" he ar!ued that lin!uistic si!ns$ere composed of t$o parts" a signifier (the sound pattern of a $ord" either inmental pro6ection as $hen $e silently recite lines from a poem to oursel&es or inactual" physical reali=ation as part of a speech act) and a signified(the concept ormeaning of the $ord). #his $as uite different from pre&ious approaches $hichfocused on the relationship bet$een $ords on the one hand and thin!s in the $orldthat they desi!nate" on the other.

'aussure-s !ourseinfluenced many lin!uists in the period bet$een


12/90

ra!ue 'chool sou!ht to e/amine ho$ they $ere related. #hey determined that thein&entory of sounds in a lan!ua!e could be analy=ed in terms of a series of contrasts.#hus in En!lish the $ords -pat- and -bat- are different because the @p@ and @b@ soundscontrast. #he difference bet$een them is that the &ocal chords &ibrate $hile sayin!a @b@ $hile they do not $hen sayin! a @p@. #hus in En!lish there is a contrast

bet$een &oiced and non&oiced consonants. Analy=in! sounds in terms of contrasti&efeatures also opens up comparati&e scope it ma%es clear" for instance" that thedifficulty 9apanesespea%ers ha&e differentiatin! bet$een @r@ and @l@ in En!lishis dueto the fact that these t$o sounds are notcontrasti&e in 9apanese.


13/90

interpretation of a lan!ua!e is essentially !i&en by a homomorphism bet$een anal!ebra of syntactic representations and an al!ebra of semantic ob6ects.

#his principle is sometimes called Frege.s Principle" because re!eis $idely creditedfor the first formulation of it. #his claim has also been disputed.

#he rinciple of Compositionality also e/ists in a similar form in the denotationalsemanticsof pro!rammin! lan!ua!es.

Criti/ues

#he principle of compositionality has been the sub6ect of intense debate. Indeed"there is no !eneral a!reement as to ho$ the principle is to be interpreted" althou!hthere ha&e been se&eral attempts to pro&ide formal definitions of it.

'cholars are also di&ided as to $hether the principle should be re!arded as a factual

claim" open to empirical testin!2 an analytic truth" ob&ious from the nature oflan!ua!e and meanin!2 or a methodolo!icalprinciple to !uide the de&elopment oftheories of synta/ and semantics. #he principle has been attac%ed in all threespheres" althou!h so far none of the criticisms brou!ht a!ainst it ha&e been !enerallyre!arded as compellin!. ,ost proponents of the principle" ho$e&er" ma%e certaine/ceptions for idiomatice/pressions in natural lan!ua!e.

urther" in the conte/t of the philosophy of lan!ua!e" the principle ofcompositionality does not e/plain all of meanin!. or e/ample" you cannot infersarcasmpurely on the basis of $ords and their composition" yet a phrase usedsarcastically means somethin! completely different from the same phrase uttered

seriously. #he principle of compositionality" then" has to be re&ised to ta%e intoaccount lin!uistic and e/tralin!uistic conte/t" $hich includes the tone of &oice used"common !round bet$een the spea%ers" the intentions of the spea%er" and so on.

In lin!uistics" a uni!ersalis a statement $hich applies to all lan!ua!es.

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Philosophical realism refers to &arious philosophically unrelated positions" in

some cases diametrically opposed ones" $hich are termed 4realism.4 In lar!e measurethis depends on $hich debates are acti&e at the time" and may be encoura!ed by thefact that a philosophical position often loo%s stron!er if one attaches the $ord 4real4to it.

#he oldest use of the term comes from ,edie&alinterpretations of ree% philosophy.5ere 4realism4 is contrasted $ith 4conceptualism4 and 4nominalism4. #his can be called4realism about uni&ersals.4 Rni&ersalsare terms or properties that can be applied tomany thin!s" rather than denotin! a sin!le specific indi&idualfor e/ample" red"beauty" fi&e" or do!" as opposed to 'ocrates or Athens. *ealism holds that theseuni&ersals really e/ist" independently and someho$ prior to the $orld2 it is associated$ith lato. Conceptualism holds that they e/ist" but only insofar as they areinstantiated in specific thin!s2 they do not e/ist separately. ominalism holds thatuni&ersals do not 4e/ist4 at all2 they are no more than $ords $e use to describespecific ob6ects" they do not name anythin!. #his particular dispute o&er realism islar!ely moot in contemporary philosophy" and has been for centuries.

13
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fregehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denotational_semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denotational_semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_languageshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empiricalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytichttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Methodological&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiomatichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contexthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_universalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medievalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptualismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_(metaphysics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_realismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fregehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denotational_semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denotational_semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_languageshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empiricalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytichttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Methodological&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiomatichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contexthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_universalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medievalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptualismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_(metaphysics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_realism


14/90

In another sense realism is contrasted $ith both idealism and materialism andconsidered synonymous $ith weak dualism. In still a third" and &ery contemporarysense realismis contrasted $ith anti-realism" primarily in the philosophy of science.

Both these disputes are often carried out relati&e to some specific area one mi!ht"

for e/ample" be a realist about physical matter but an antirealist about ethics. #hehi!h necessity of specifyin! the area in $hich the claim is made has been increasin!lyac%no$led!ed in recent years.

Increasin!ly these last disputes" too" are re6ected as misleadin!" and somephilosophers prefer to call the %ind of realism espoused there 4metaphysical realism"4and esche$ the $hole debate in fa&our of simple 4naturalism4 or 4natural realism4"$hich is not so much a theory as the position that these debates are illconcei&ed ifnot incoherent" and that there is no more to decidin! $hat is really realthan simplyta%in! our $ords at face &alue.

"ominalismis the position in metaphysicsthat there e/ist no uni&ersalsoutside ofthe mind.

ominalism is best understood in contrast to realism. hilosophical realism holds that$hen $e use descripti&e terms such as 4!reen4 or 4tree"4 the orms of those conceptsreally e/ist" independently of $orld in an abstract realm. 'uch thou!ht is associated$ith lato. ominalism" by contrast" holds that ideas represented by $ords ha&e noreal e/istence beyond our ima!inations.

The Problem of 1ni!ersals

ominalism arose in reaction to the problem of uni&ersals. 'pecifically" accountin! forthe fact that some thin!s are of the same type. or e/ample" luffy and Jit=ler areboth cats" or" the fact that certain properties are repeatable" such as the !rass" theshirt" and Jermit the ro! are !reen. 1ne $ants to %no$ in &irtue of whatma%esluffy and Jit=ler both cats and whatma%es the !rass" the shirt" and Jermit !reen.

#he realistans$er is that all the !reen thin!s are !reen in &irtue of the e/istenceof auni&ersal2 a sin!le abstractthin!" in this case" that is a partof all the !reen thin!s.


15/90


16/90

step" $ater has continued to rush for$ard" the ban%s ha&e shifted a bit" and the ri&eris no lon!er the same.

5eraclitus is often interpreted as su!!estin! a s%eptical conclusion from thisobser&ation. 'ince nothin! e&er stays the same from moment to moment" any

%no$led!e $e may thin% $e ha&e is obsolete before $e acuire it. 5e mi!ht also ha&ebeen su!!estin! that names are an artificial $ay to impose stability on the flu/ ofreality by callin! this a 4ri&er4 I pretend that it is one entity. #his $ould ma%e ofhim the first nominalist.

,uch in the philosophy of latomay be understood as an ans$er to 5eraclitus"especially to the s%eptical implications of his $ritin!s. or lato" our intellect cancontemplate the same ri&er any number of times" for ri&er as an idea" as a form"remains al$ays the same. #here is a sharp distinction bet$een the $orld of thesenses and the $orld of the intellect one can only ha&e opinions about the former"but one can ha&e %no$led!e" 6ustified true belief" about the latter. or 6ust that

reason" the intelli!ible $orld is the real $orld" the sensible $orld is only pro&isionallyreal" li%e the shado$s on the $all of a ca&e.

It must be noted that the latonic notion of timeless ideas" or forms" isn-t confined touni&ersals. articular terms" too" can be understood as the name of an intelli!ibleform. 'o althou!h ri&er is a form" ,eander is also a form" and 4the ,eander as it $asat noon last riday4 is a form. E&en the concept 45eraclitean flu/4 is a form" and assuch flu/lessly timelessN #here are parado/es aplenty here" and lato himselfe/plored them in a da==lin!ly dialectical dialo!ue" armenides.

But at least part of $hat lato meant to con&ey is that *i&er" as a uni&ersal" is a

timeless idea in $hich the mutable ri&ers partially participate" as the material $orldis an imperfect mirror of the really real $orld. lato" accordin!ly" $as the firstrealist.

5is student" Aristotle" disa!reed $ith both lato and 5eraclitus. Aristotle transformedlato-s forms into 4formal causes"4 the blueprints implicit in material thin!s.


17/90

#homas Auinasmade it his personal mission to reconcile Aristotle-s philosophy $ith*oman Catholic faith. As part of this tas%" in ,e 'nte et 'ssentia he restatedAristotle-s &ie$s on essence" or uni&ersals.

4#his nature4 he said" meanin! a uni&ersal" 4has a dual bein! one in sin!ular thin!s"

another in the soul" and both dra$ accidents to that nature 6ust mentioned. Insin!ular thin!s it has" after all" a multiple bein! throu!h the di&ersity of those sin!ularthin!s. But ne&ertheless is the bein! of those thin!s not compulsi&e for that nature"accordin! to its first consideration" namely the absolute.4

In other $ords" oa%ness e/ists in the particular trees" as $ell as in the soul of thebiolo!ist studyin! them. #he 4bein! in the thin!s is not compulsi&e4 in that the formitself" oa%ness" doesn-t chan!e thou!h particular oa%s die.

As the middle a!es $aned and the *enaissance approached" European intellectualss$itched their alle!iances to nominalism. #he ne$ 5eraclitus of this period $as


18/90

4But" thou!h meanin! them only as part of a lar!er a!!lomeration" $e ha&e the po$erof fi/in! our attention on them" to the ne!lect of the other attributes $ith $hich $ethin% them combined.


19/90


20/90

3ottlob Frege

,odern philosophy of lan!ua!e be!an $ith the discussion of sense and reference inottlob re!e-s essay 7ber )inn und /edeutung(no$ usually translated as n )enseand eference). re!e noted that proper names present se&eral problems $ith

respect to meanin!. 'uppose" as one mi!ht casually say" the meanin! of a name is thethin! it refers to. )am" then" means 'am. But $hat if the ob6ect referred to by thename does not e/ist Is Pegasus" then" meanin!less Clearly not. #here may also bet$o different names that refer to the same ob6ect Hesperus and Phosphorus" fore/ample" $hich $ere both once used to refer to the planet enus. If the $ords meanthe same" then substitutin! one for the other in a sentence $ill not result in asentence that differs in meanin! form the ori!inal. But in that case 45esperus ishosphorus4 means the same as 45esperus is 5esperus.4 #his is clearly absurd" sinceyou mi!ht learn somethin! ne$ by the former" but not by the latter.

re!e can be interpreted as ar!uin! that it $as therefore a mista%e to thin% that the

meanin! of a name is the thin! it refers to. Instead" the meanin! must be somethin!elseQthe 4sense4 of the $ord. #$o names for the same person" then" can ha&edifferent senses. Alternati&ely" the meanin! of a name has t$o components the senseand the reference. Each sense $ill pic% out a uniue referent" but one referent mi!htbe pic%ed out by more than one sense. re!e ar!ued that" ultimately" the samebifurcation of meanin! must apply to most or all lin!uistic cate!ories. Ironicallyenou!h" it is no$ accepted by many philosophers as applyin! to all e/pressions butproper names.

Saul 4ripe

'aul Jrip%e e/amined the relation bet$een sense and reference in dealin! $ithpossible and actual situations. 5e sho$ed that one conseuence of his interpretationof certain systems of modal lo!ic $as that the reference of a proper name isnecessarilylin%ed to its referent" but that the sense is not. 'o for instance 45esperus4necessarily refers to 5esperus" e&en in those ima!inary cases and $orlds in $hichperhaps 5esperus is not the e&enin! star. #hat is" 5esperus is necessarily 5esperus"but only contin!ently the mornin! star.

#his results in the curious situation that part of the meanin! of a name that it refersto some particular thin! is a necessary fact about that name" but another part thatit is used in some particular $ay or situation is not.

Jrip%e also dre$ the distinction bet$een spea%er-s meanin! and semantic meanin!"elaboratin! on the $or% of ordinary lan!ua!e philosophers aul rice and Jeithonnollan. #he spea%er-s meanin! is $hat the spea%er intends to refer to by sayin!somethin!2 the semantic meanin! is $hat the $ords uttered by the spea%er meanaccordin! to the lan!ua!e.

In some cases" people do not say $hat they mean2 in other cases" they say somethin!that is in error. In both these cases" the spea%er-s meanin! and the semantic meanin!seem to be different. 'ometimes $ords do not actually e/press $hat the spea%er$ants them to e/press2 so $ords $ill mean one thin!" and $hat people intend to

con&ey by them mi!ht mean another. #he meanin! of the e/pression" in such cases" isambi!uous.

2eaning as use

2!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_and_referencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottlob_Fregehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottlob_Fregehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Kripkehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Gricehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Keith_Donnollan&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Keith_Donnollan&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_and_referencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottlob_Fregehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Kripkehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Gricehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Keith_Donnollan&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Keith_Donnollan&action=edit


21/90

#hrou!hout the H0th Century En!lish philosophy focused closely on analysis oflan!ua!e. #his style of analytic philosophybecame &ery influential and led to thede&elopment of a $ide ran!e of philosophical tools.

9. 7. Austin ar!ued a!ainst fi/atin! on the meanin! of $ords. 5e sho$ed that

dictionary definitions are of limited philosophical use" since there is no simple4appenda!e4 to a $ord that can be called its meanin!. Instead" he sho$ed ho$ tofocus on the $ay in $hich $ords are used in order to do thin!s. 5e analysed thestructure of utterances into three distinct parts locutions" illocutions andperlocutions. 5is pupil 9ohn 'earlede&eloped the idea under the label 4speech acts4.#heir $or% !reatly influenced pra!matics.

At around the same time 7ud$i!


22/90

are not %no$n to the listener" and a lan!ua!e-s morpholo!y can allo$ a listener tounco&er the meanin! of a $ord by e/aminin! the morphemesthat ma%e it up.

Semantics

#he field of semantics e/amines the $ays in $hich $ords" phrases" and sentences canha&e meanin!. 'emantics usually di&ides $ords into their sense and reference. #hereference of a $ord is the thin! it refers to in the sentence 4i&e the !uy sittin! ne/tto you a turn4" the guyrefers to a specific person" in this case the male one sittin!ne/t to you. #his person is the phrase-s reference. #he sense" on the other hand" isthat part of the e/pression that helps us to determine the thin! it refers to. In thee/ample abo&e" the sense is e&ery piece of information that helps to determine thatthe e/pression is referrin! to the male human sittin! ne/t to you and not any otherob6ect. #his includes any lin!uistic information as $ell as situational conte/t"en&ironmental details" and so on. #his" ho$e&er" only $or%s for nouns and nounphrases.

#here are at least four different %inds of sentences. 'ome of them are truthsensiti&e"$hich are called indicati&e sentences. 5o$e&er" other %inds of sentences are nottruthsensiti&e. #hey include e/pressi&e sentences" li%e 41uchN42 performati&esentences" such as 4I damn theeN42 and commandati&e sentences" such as 4et themil% from the frid!e4. #his aspect of meanin! is called the !rammatical mood.

Amon! $ords and phrases" different parts of speech can be distin!uished" such asnoun phrases and ad6ecti&al phrases. Each of these ha&e different %inds of meanin!2nouns typically refer to entities" $hile ad6ecti&es typically refer to properties. ropernames" $hich are names that stand for indi&iduals" li%e 49erry4" 4Barry4" 4aris"4 and

4enus"4 are !oin! to ha&e another %ind of meanin!.


23/90

meanin!s $hich stay $ithin a boundary are seen by other spea%ers of the lan!ua!e torefer to reality if one $ere to refer to smells as red" most other spea%ers $ouldassume the person is tal%in! nonsense (althou!h statements li%e this are commonamon! synaesthetics).

Pragmatics

ra!matics studies the $ays that conte/t affects meanin!. #he t$o primary forms ofconte/t important to pra!matics are lin!uistic conte/t and situational conte/t.

7in!uistic conte/t refers to the lan!ua!e surroundin! the phrase in uestion. #heimportance of lin!uistic conte/t becomes e/ceptionally clear $hen loo%in! atpronouns in most situations" the pronoun himin the sentence 49oe also sa$ him4 hasa radically different meanin! if preceded by 49erry said he sa$ a !uy ridin! anelephant4 than it does if preceded by 49erry sa$ the ban% robber4 or 49erry sa$ yourdo! run that $ay4.

'ituational conte/t" on the other hand" refers to e&ery nonlin!uistic factor thataffects the meanin! of a phrase. early anythin! can be included in the list" from thetime of day to the people in&ol&ed to the location of the spea%er or the temperatureof the room. An e/ample of situational conte/t at $or% is e&ident in the phrase 4it-scold in here4" $hich can either be a simple statement of fact or a reuest to turn upthe heat" dependin! on" amon! other thin!s" $hether or not it is belie&ed to be in thelistener-s po$er to affect the temperature.


24/90

demonstrated by sho$in! that people beha&iourally respond in specific" nonarbitrary$ays to sensin! a stimulus" consciously or subconsciously" e&en althou!h they ha&e no$ay of tellin! $hat it is or means" and no possible $ay of %no$in! $hat it is or $hatit means.

A semantic feature is a notational method $hich can be used to e/press thee/istence or none/istence of semantic propertiesby usin! plus and minus si!ns.

0an is U>5R,AV" U>,A7EV" U>AR7#V&oman is U>5R,AV" U,A7EV" U>AR7#V/oy is U>5R,AV" U>,A7EV" UAR7#V2irlis U>5R,AV" U,A7EV" UAR7#V

Intersectin! semantic classesshare the same features.

'ome features need not be specifically mentioned as their presence or absence isob&ious from another feature. #his is a redundancyrule.

A definitionmay be a statement of the essential properties of a certain thin!" or astatement of eui&alence bet$een one e/pression and another" usually more comple/e/pression that !i&es the meanin!of the first. #hese t$o senses are not mutuallye/clusi&e" nor are they eui&alent.

A thin! bein! defined is called (from 7atin) a definiendum2 the e/pression $hichdefines it is called a definiens.

In semantics ($ith applications to both philosophy and mathematics)"extension is the set of thin!s to $hich a property applies2 see E/tension(semantics).

In !eneral semantics" e/tension is a process that" as in this mathematicale/ample" starts $ith uniue indi&iduals" and !i&es them uniue names" e.!." I"

II" III" etc." or D" H" 3" etc. #he ne/t step if needed !enerali=es or passesbeyond e/tension to infinite&alued hi!herorder abstractions li%e -numbers-"and so on. #he passin! from lo$erorder abstractions (presented e/tensionally)to hi!her orders" e.!." from -D" H" 3" etc."- to -numbers"- is said to follo$ the-natural order of e&aluation"- so that $hen one tal%s about order" e/tension isimplied" and $hen one tal%s about e/tension" order is implied. An e/ample ofre&ersed order is $hen a particular hi!herorder abstraction such as race" e.!."-$hite-" -blac%- etc." is pro6ected onto the indi&iduals comprisin! it. #heindi&iduals (each uniuely different by e/tension" no matter $hat is bein!discussed) comprise the -race- ($hich e/ists only on hi!herorders)" not theother $ay around. 'ee e/tensional de&ices.

Accordin! to the semantic analysis of eoffrey 7eech" the associati!e meaningofan e/pression has to do $ith indi&idual mental understandin!s of the spea%er. #hey"in turn" can be bro%en up into si/ subtypes connotative. collocative. social.affective. reflected and thematic(,$iha%i H00).

24
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_classhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundancyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension_(semantics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension_(semantics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_semanticshttp://esgs.free.fr/de/ext.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Geoffrey_Leech&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_classhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundancyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension_(semantics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension_(semantics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_semanticshttp://esgs.free.fr/de/ext.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Geoffrey_Leech&action=edit


25/90

#he connotati&e meanin!sof an e/pression are the thou!hts pro&o%ed by aterm $hen in reference to certain entities. #hou!h these meanin!s may not bestrictly implied by rele&ant definitions" they sho$ up in common or preferredusa!e re!ardless. #his is not to be confused $ith $hat is historically referred toas connotation" $hich more closely describes ri!id definitions of $ords.

Collocati&e meanin!" or 4collocation4" describes $ords that re!ularly appearto!ether in common use ($ithin certain conte/ts). 'ocial meanin!" $here $ords are used to establish relationships bet$een

people and to delineate social roles. or e/ample" in 9apanese" the suffi/ 4san4$hen added to a proper name denotes respect" sometimes indicatin! that thespea%er is subordinate to the listener2 $hile the suffi/ 4chan4 denotes that thespea%er thin%s the listener is a child or childli%e (either for purposes ofaffection or derision).

Affecti&e meanin! has to do $ith the personal feelin!s or attitudes of thespea%er.

*eflected meanin! has to do $ith $hen one sense of a particular $ord affects

the understandin! and usa!e of all the other senses of the $ord. #hematic meanin! concerns itself $ith ho$ the order of $ords spo%en affects

the meanin! that is entailed.

Connotation

In lo!icand in some branches of semantics" connotation is more or less synonymous$ith intension. Connotation is often contrasted $ith denotation" $hich is more or lesssynonymous $ith extension.

E&eryday Rsa!e

In e&eryday usa!e" connotation has a different meanin!. #o e/plain this meanin!" it ishelpful to e/plicate the partial theory or meanin! that it presupposes. #he theory!oes li%e this e&ery $ord or phrase has t$o %inds of meanin! primary" literalmeanin!s (sometimes called denotations)" and secondary meanin!s %no$n asconnotations. Connotations are thou!ht to color $hat a $ord 4really means4 $ithemotionor &alue 6ud!ments.

or e/ample" a stubborn person may be described as bein! either strong-willed orpig-headed. Althou!h these ha&e the same literal meanin! (i.e. stubborn)" strong-willed connotes admiration for someone-s con&ictions" $hile pig-headed connotesfrustration in dealin! $ith someone.

ote that not all theories of lin!uistic meanin! honor the distinction bet$een literalmeanin! and connotations. ('ee 7iteral and fi!urati&e lan!ua!e.) onetheless" thedistinction probably feels intuiti&ely correct and seems useful to most nati&e En!lishspea%ers.

A desire for increased positi&e connotations (or fe$er ne!ati&e ones) is one of themain reasons for usin! euphemisms.

It is often useful to a&oid $ords $ith stron! connotations (especially dispara!in!ones)$hen stri&in! to achie&e a neutral point of &ie$.

25
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Connotative_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connotationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Social_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Affective_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reflected_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thematic_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denotationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension_(semantics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literal_and_figurative_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pejorativehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_viewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Connotative_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connotationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Social_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Affective_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reflected_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thematic_meaning&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denotationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension_(semantics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literal_and_figurative_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pejorativehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view


26/90

Euphemism

A euphemism is an e/pression intended by the spea%er to be less offensi&e"disturbin!" or troublin! to the listener than the $ord or phrase it replaces" or in thecase of doublespea%to ma%e it less troublesome for the spea%er.

pheme (g) 4speech@spea%in!4. #he eupheme $asori!inally a $ord or phrase used in place of a reli!ious $ord or phrase that should notbe spo%en aloud (see taboo). #he primary e/ample of taboo $ords reuirin! the use ofa euphemism are the unspea%able names for a deity" such as ersephone" 5ecate"emesis or +ah$eh. By spea%in! only $ords fa&orable to the !ods or spirits" thespea%er attempted to procure !ood fortune by remainin! in !ood fa&or $ith them.

5istorical lin!uistics has re&ealed traces of taboo deformations in many lan!ua!es.'e&eral are %no$n to ha&e occurred in IndoEuropean" includin! the ori!inal IndoEuropean $ords for bear (8rtkos)" wolf (8wlkwos)" and deer (ori!inally" hart). Indifferent IndoEuropean lan!ua!es" each of these $ords has a difficult etymolo!ybecause of taboo deformations Q a euphemism $as substituted for the ori!inal" $hichno lon!er occurs in the lan!ua!e. An e/ample is the 'la&ic root for bearQ8medu-ed-"$hich means 4honey eater4.

26
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Doublespeak%23Doublespeakhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_relationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Etymology%23Etymologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Common_examples%23Common_exampleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Etymology%23Etymologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Religious_euphemisms%23Religious_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Religious_euphemisms%23Religious_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Etymology%23Etymologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#The_.22euphemism_treadmill.22%23The_.22euphemism_treadmill.22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Classification_of_euphemisms%23Classification_of_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#The_evolution_of_euphemisms%23The_evolution_of_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Euphemisms_for_the_profane%23Euphemisms_for_the_profanehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Religious_euphemisms%23Religious_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Excretory_euphemisms%23Excretory_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Sexual_euphemisms%23Sexual_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Euphemisms_for_death%23Euphemisms_for_deathhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Doublespeak%23Doublespeakhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Common_examples%23Common_exampleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#See_also%23See_alsohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#References%23Referenceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#External_links%23External_linkshttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/euphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiktionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taboohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persephonehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hecatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemesis_(mythology)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahwehhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_linguisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Europeanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bearhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Doublespeak%23Doublespeakhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_relationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Etymology%23Etymologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Common_examples%23Common_exampleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Etymology%23Etymologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Religious_euphemisms%23Religious_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Religious_euphemisms%23Religious_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Etymology%23Etymologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#The_.22euphemism_treadmill.22%23The_.22euphemism_treadmill.22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Classification_of_euphemisms%23Classification_of_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#The_evolution_of_euphemisms%23The_evolution_of_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Euphemisms_for_the_profane%23Euphemisms_for_the_profanehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Religious_euphemisms%23Religious_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Excretory_euphemisms%23Excretory_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Sexual_euphemisms%23Sexual_euphemismshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Euphemisms_for_death%23Euphemisms_for_deathhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Doublespeak%23Doublespeakhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Common_examples%23Common_exampleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#See_also%23See_alsohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#References%23Referenceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#External_links%23External_linkshttp://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/euphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiktionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taboohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persephonehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hecatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemesis_(mythology)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahwehhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_linguisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Europeanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bearhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology


27/90

In some lan!ua!es of the acific" usin! the name of a deceased chief is taboo. 'incepeople are often named after e&eryday thin!s" this leads to the s$ift de&elopment ofeuphemisms. #hese lan!ua!es ha&e a &ery hi!h rate of &ocabulary chan!e.

#he 4euphemism treadmill4

Euphemisms can e&entually become taboo $ordsthemsel&es throu!h a process thelin!uist 'te&en in%er has called the euphemism treadmill (cf9 resham-s 7a$ ineconomics).


28/90

$ho $as boorish or stupid" and $as a forbidden term in public media" but is no$acceptable (for e/ample" the 'te&e ,artinfilm" %he ;erk).

Classification of euphemisms

,any euphemisms fall into one or more of these cate!ories

#erms of forei!n and@or technical ori!in (derriere" copulation" perspire"urinate" security breach)

Abbre&iations ()/ for 4son of a bitch4" /) for 4bullshit4" %)for 4tou!h shit4"etc.)

Abstractions (it" the situation"go" left the company" do it) Indirections (behind" unmentionables" privates" live together" go to the

bathroom" sleep together) ,ispronunciation (goldarnit"freakin" shoot" etc. )eeminced oath) lays on abbre&iations (barbecue saucefor 4bull shit4" sugar honey ice teafor

4shit4" 0aryland farmer for 4motherfuc%er4" see you next %uesdayfor 4cunt4"etc.)

#here is some disa!reement o&er $hether certain terms are or are not euphemisms.or e/ample" sometimes the phrase visually impaired is labeled as a politicallycorrect euphemism for blind. 5o$e&er" &isual impairment can be a broader term"includin!" for e/ample" people $ho ha&e partial si!ht in one eye" a !roup that $ouldbe e/cluded by the $ord blind.

#here are three antonyms of euphemism dysphemism" cacophemism" and powerword. #he first can be either offensi&e or merely humorously deprecatin! $ith the

second one !enerally used more often in the sense of somethin! deliberatelyoffensi&e. #he last is used mainly in ar!uments to ma%e a point seem more correct.

#he e&olution of euphemisms

Euphemisms may be formed in a number of $ays. Periphrasisor circumlocutionis oneof the most common to 4spea% around4 a !i&en $ord" implyin! it $ithout sayin! it.1&er time" circumlocutions become reco!ni=ed as established euphemisms forparticular $ords or ideas.

#o alter the pronunciation or spellin! of a taboo $ord (such as a s$ear $ord) to forma euphemism is %no$n as taboo deformation. #here are an astonishin! number oftaboo deformations in En!lish" of $hich many refer to the infamous fourletter $ords.In American En!lish" $ords $hich are unacceptable on tele&ision" such as fuck" maybe represented by deformations such as freakQ e&en in children-s cartoons. 'omee/amples of Coc%ney rhymin! slan!may ser&e the same purpose Q to call a person aberksounds less offensi&e than to call him a cunt" thou!h berkis short for /erkshireHunt$hich rhymes $ith cunt.

Bureaucracies such as the military and lar!e corporations freuently spa$neuphemisms of a more deliberate (and to some" more sinister) nature. 1r!ani=ationscoin doublespeake/pressions to describe ob6ectionable actions in terms that seemneutral or inoffensi&e. or e/ample" a term used for radiation lea%ed from animproperly operated nuclear po$er plantis sunshine units.

,ilitaries at $arfreuently do %ill people" sometimes deliberately and sometimes bymista%e2 in doublespea%" the first may be called neutralizing the target and thesecond collateral damage. A common term $hen a soldieraccidentally is %illed (buysthe farm) by the side they are fi!htin! for isfriendly fire. (4Buy the farm4 has its o$n

28
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Martinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jerkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minced_oathhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politically_correcthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politically_correcthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blindnesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonymhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periphrasishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swear_wordhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-letter_wordhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Englishhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuckhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockney_rhyming_slanghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cunthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeakhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_planthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateral_damagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldierhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_firehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Martinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jerkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minced_oathhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politically_correcthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politically_correcthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blindnesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonymhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periphrasishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swear_wordhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-letter_wordhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Englishhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuckhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockney_rhyming_slanghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cunthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeakhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_planthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateral_damagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldierhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire


29/90

interestin! history.) 'xecution is an established euphemism referrin! to the act ofputtin! a person to death" $ith or $ithout 6udicial process2 it ori!inally referred tothe e/ecution" i.e. the carryin! out" of a death $arrant (an authori=ation to a sheriff"prison $arden" or other official to put a named person to death). 4E/ecution4 of an4e/ecutable4 computer pro!ram still uses the ori!inal sense of carryin! out

instructions.7i%e$ise" industrial unpleasantness such as pollution may be toned do$n tooutgassingor runoffQ descriptions of physical processes rather than their dama!in!conseuences. 'ome of this may simply be the application of precise technicalterminolo!y in the place of popular usa!e" but beyond precision" the ad&anta!e oftechnical terminolo!y may be its lac% of emotional undertones" the disad&anta!ebein! the lac% of reallifeconte/t.

Euphemisms for the profane

rofane $ords and e/pressions are !enerally ta%en from three areas reli!ion"e/cretion" and se/.


30/90

'e/ual euphemisms

#he term pudendum for the !enitals literally means 4shameful thin!4. 2roin andcrotchrefer to a lar!er re!ion of the body" but are euphemistic $hen used to refer tothe !enitals.

irtually all other se/ual termsare still considered profane and unacceptable for usee&en in a euphemistic sense.

Euphemisms for death

#he En!lish lan!ua!e contains numerous euphemisms related to dyin!" death" burial"and the people and places $hich deal $ith death. #he practice of usin! euphemismsfor death is li%ely to ha&e ori!inated $ith the 4ma!ical4belief that to spea% the $ord-death- $as to in&ite death ($here to 4dra$ eath-s attention4 is the ultimate badfortune a common theory holds that death is a taboo sub6ect in most En!lish

spea%in! cultures for precisely this reason). It may be said that one is not dyin!" butfading 6uickly because the end is near. eople $ho ha&e died are referred to asha&in!passed awayor passedor departed. ,eceasedis a euphemism for -dead-" andsometimes the deceased is said to ha&e gone to a better place" but this is usedprimarily amon! the reli!ious $ith a concept of hea&en.

#here are many euphemisms for the dead body" some polite and some profane" as$ell as dysphemismssuch as worm food" or dead meat. #he corpse $as once referredto as the shroud ?or house or tenement@ of clay" and modern funerary $or%ers useterms such as the loved one(title of a no&elabout 5olly$oodunderta%ers by E&elyn


31/90

astonishes orobyanino& $ith his classification of people by the euphemisms used tospea% of their deaths.

oublespea%


32/90

find the more direct uestion rude if as%ed by Europeans $ho don-t %no$ aboutthis euphemism.)

#hese lists mi!ht su!!est that most euphemisms are $ell%no$n e/pressions. 1fteneuphemisms can be some$hat situational2 $hat mi!ht be used as a euphemism in a

con&ersation bet$een t$o friends mi!ht ma%e no sense to a third person. In this case"the euphemism is bein! used as a type of innuendo. As an e/ample" in the tele&isionseries %he $resh Prince of /el-:ir" the Ban%s family ($ho are blac%) discuss 5ilary-sne$ boyfriend" $ho happens to be $hite" usin! tallas a euphemism for white.


33/90


34/90

Afalsidical paradoxestablishes a result that not only appears false but actuallyis false2 there is a fallacy in the supposed demonstration. #he &arious in&alidproofs(e.!. that D H) are classic e/amples" !enerally relyin! on a hiddendi&ision by =ero. Another e/ample $ould be the 5orse parado/.

A parado/ $hich is in neither class may be an antinomy" $hich reaches a self

contradictory result by properly applyin! accepted $ays of reasonin!. ore/ample" the rellin!elson parado/ points out !enuine problems in ourunderstandin! of the ideas of truthand description.

5ysphemism

In lan!ua!e" both dysphemism (from the ree% -dys- CDE non and -pheme- FGI speech) and cacophemism (in ree% -cacos- JJLE bad) are rou!h opposites ofeuphemism" meanin! the usa!e of an intentionally harsh $ord or e/pression instead ofa polite one.

#he latter is !enerally used more often in the sense of somethin! deliberatelyoffensi&e" $hile the former can be either offensi&e or merely humorouslydeprecatin!. E/amples of dysphemism include dead tree editionfor the paper &ersionof an online ma!a=ine" or the American military personnel-s use of shit on a shinglefor their common brea%fast of creamed chipped beef on toast.

ysphemism is as common as euphemism in e&eryday usa!e. o sports team actuallyslaughtersor annihilatesanother2 fe$ companies crushtheir competition2 no one isdumb as a box of hair(nor" for that matter" a bo/ of roc%s or bric%s" or a sac% ofhammers" $ith or $ithout their heads).

,any of the same sub6ects can be dysphemi=ed as euphemi=ed" such as se/ and deathQa $ellthou!htof dead person may be said to ha&e passed away" a disrespected oneto ha&e kicked the bucketor to be worm food. 1ddly" some humorous e/pressions canbe both euphemistic and dysphemistic dependin! on conte/t for e/ample spank themonkeymi!ht be used as either a softer alternati&e to 4masturbate4" or as a moredeliberately pro&ocati&e one dependin! on the audience. 7i%e$ise"pushing up daisiescan be ta%en as either softer or harsher than 4died4. #his is because terms $hich canbe dysphemic can also be affectionate.

*etrie&ed from 4http@@en.$i%ipedia.or!@$i%i@ysphemism4

#he paradox of the heap(or the Sorites Paradox" sMrosbein! ree%for 4heap4 andsMrites the ad6ecti&e) is a parado/that arises $hen people apply lo!ic to certain&a!ueconcepts.

D. #$o or three !rains of sand do notma%e a heap.H. A million !rains doma%e a heap.3. If n !rains of sand do notma%e a heap" neither do (n>D) !rains.. If n !rains of sand ma%e a heap" so do (nD) !rains.

#he parado/ is that" contrary to (3)" $e mi!ht add !rain after !rain to our collectionof sand until it truly does become a heap. And accordin! to ()" if $e be!an $ith aheap" and too% sin!le !rain after sin!le !rain a$ay from the collection" it $ould ne&erstop bein! a heap2 e&en if there $ere no !rains of sand left at all.

34
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invalid_proofhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invalid_proofhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grelling-Nelson_paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_tree_editionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chipped_beef_on_toasthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masturbationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaguenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invalid_proofhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invalid_proofhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grelling-Nelson_paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_tree_editionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chipped_beef_on_toasthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masturbationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysphemismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradoxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagueness


35/90

'o common lan!ua!e su!!ests that heaps of sand ha&e the properties described in (3)and ()" since the difference of one !rain of sand is thou!ht to be ne!li!able. But itseems that these properties are actually mutually inconsistent. #hat is the parado/.

Possible solutions

,any philosophers and lo!icians ha&e confronted this pu==lin! ar!ument andre!istered their analysis. 'ome" li%e Bertrand *ussell" simply deny that lo!ic $or%s$ith &a!ue concepts. 1thers !o so far as destruction of all ar!uments of this form"includin! mathematical induction ($hich may or may not be a 'orites ar!ument).

6nduction

Applyin! mathematical inductionsho$s that the first property combined $ith thethird implies that a million !rains of sand do notma%e a heap" in contradiction $iththe second property. 'imilarly" a combination of the second and fourth properties

sho$s that t$o or three !rains do ma%e a heap" in contradiction $ith the firstproperty. (If one $as $illin! to $rite out each of the million intermediate premises ofthe form" 4If GGGGGG !rains do not ma%e a heap" then GGGGG8 do not"4 one couldformulate the ar!ument $ithout relyin! on induction.)

#his contradiction arises from the interaction of the abo&e properties. #he secondt$o fairly clearly e/press the idea that there is no clear line bet$een 4is a heap4 and4isn-t a heap4. ote" ho$e&er" that the four ta%en to!ether also imply that any pile ofsand can nonproblematically be classified as 4heap4 or 4nonheap4. (#his a!ain follo$sfrom mathematical induction.)


36/90

sand. 1ne $ould then ha&e a precise analo! for $hich the 'orites ar!ument $ouldclearly fail because statement H abo&e could not be applied to all pheaps. #here$ould be a 4least pheap4 to $hich the item could be applied.

Consider the 4hei!ht4 form of the ar!ument.

D. A man $hose hei!ht is se&en feet is tall.H. *educin! the hei!ht of a tall man by one inch lea&es him still tall.3. A man $hose hei!ht is four feet is tall.

o$ consider this ar!ument

D. A man $hose hei!ht is se&en feet is considered tall by e&eryone.H. *educin! the hei!ht of a man considered tall by consensus may chan!e the

consensus or not. If the reduction is small" then the consensus may only chan!esli!htly.

3. A man $hose hei!ht is four feet is considered tall by &ery fe$ human people.

#he usefulness of lan!ua!e is the consensus$e share on the definitions of terms.recise terms ha&e a mechanism by $hich one can persuade others that a specificapplication of the term is &alid. a!ue terms ha&e no such mechanism. If a personinsists on callin! a se&en foot man short" one mi!ht suspect that its reference setincludes many professional bas%etball players $ho play the center position" but $e$ould hardly accuse it of a lo!ic error. a!ue terms are useful to the e/tent that $eha&e consensus" but $hen used them out of conte/t" they !enerally confuse.

#he 'orites parado/ merely illustrates lo!ical analysis of ho$ one uses &a!ue

lan!ua!e. It indicates that it is a fallacy to assume that e&erybody a!rees on thedefinition of a &a!ue term. 'ome people may a!ree in its application to but not allmembers of the uni&erse of discourse $ill as a matter of course.

#he Prototype is $hat a )tereotype is called in co!niti&e lin!uistics. It is anIdeali=ed co!niti&e model (IC,) of reality $hich is used as a benchmar% $hencate!ori=in! ob6ects and ideas.

It $as coined by Eleanor *oschin the DGL0s as she performed e/perimental research

in cate!ori=ation. It $as established that the cate!ori=ation done by the sub6ects didnot resemble the traditional Aristotelian &ie$ $ith necessary and sufficient condition.

1n the contrary it $as disco&ered that there $ere typical members of a cate!ory andless typical members.

6nfluence

#he rototype theory has led to se&eral ne$ approaches in lin!uistics" such asConceptual metaphors" rimary metaphorsand Conceptual inte!ration(or Blendin!).

In semantics" truth conditionsare $hat obtain precisely $hen a sentenceis true.or e/ample" 4It is sno$in! in ebras%a4 is true precisely $hen it is sno$in! inebras%a.

36
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotypehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealized_cognitive_modelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleanor_Roschhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_metaphorshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_integrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blendinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotypehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealized_cognitive_modelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleanor_Roschhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguisticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_metaphorshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_metaphorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_integrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blendinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semanticshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_(linguistics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True


37/90

,ore formally" $e can thin% of a truth condition as $hat ma%es for the truth of asentence in an inducti&e definitionof truth. (or details" see the semantic theory oftruth.) Rnderstood this $ay" truth conditions are theoretical entities. #o illustrate$ith an e/ample suppose that" in a particular truth theory" the $ord 4i/on4 refersto*ichard ,. i/on" and 4is ali&e4 is associated $ith the setof currently li&in! thin!s.

#hen one $ay of representin! the truth condition of 4i/on is ali&e4 is as the orderedpairSi/on" Y/ / is ali&eT. And $e say that 4i/on is ali&e4 is true if and only if thereferent of 4i/on4 belon!s to the set associated $ith 4is ali&e4" that is" if and only ifi/on is ali&e.

In semantics" the truth condition of a sentence is almost uni&ersally considered to bedistinct from its meanin!. #he meanin! of a sentence is con&eyed if the truthconditions for the sentence are understood. Additionally" there are many sentencesthat are understood althou!h their truth condition is uncertain. 1ne popular ar!umentfor this &ie$ is that some sentences are necessarily truethat is" they are true$hate&er happens to obtain. All such sentences ha&e the same truth conditions" but

ar!uably do not thereby ha&e the same meanin!. 7i%e$ise" the sets Y/ / is ali&e andY/ / is ali&e and / is not a roc% are identicalthey ha&e precisely the samemembersbut presumably the sentences 4i/on is ali&e4 and 4i/on is ali&e and is nota roc%4 ha&e different meanin!s.

Logical positi!ism(later referred to as logical empiricism" also referred to as neopositi&ism) is a philosophy (of science) that ori!inated in the ienna Circle in theDGH0s. 7o!ical positi&ism holds that philosophy should aspire to the same sort of ri!oras science. hilosophy should pro&ide strict criteria for 6ud!in! sentences true" false

and meanin!less.

E/amples of lo!ical positi&ists include ,orit= 'chlic%" *udolf Carnap" 1tto eurath"and A.9. Ayer. Althou!h Jarl opperbelon!ed to the ienna Circle in his early days"he became the main critic of the neopositi&ist approach.

&ssertions and origins of Logical Positi!ism

Althou!h the lo!ical positi&ists held a $ide ran!e of beliefs on many matters" they allshared an interest in science and deep s%epticism of the theolo!ical andmetaphysical. ollo$in!


38/90

uni&ersities by the members of the ienna Circle. A.9. Ayeris considered responsiblefor the spread of lo!ical positi&ism to Britain. #he term subseuently came to bealmost interchan!eable $ith 4analytic philosophy4 in the first half of the t$entiethcentury. 7o!ical positi&ism $as immensely influential in the philosophy of lan!ua!eand represented the dominant philosophy of science bet$een


39/90

proposition is said to be &erifiable" in the stron! sense of the term" if" and only if" itstruth could be conclusi&ely established by e/perience.4 (Ayer DGKF0) It is this senseof &erifiable that causes the problem of &erification $ith ne!ati&e e/istential claimsand positi&e uni&ersal claims. 5o$e&er" the $ea% sense of &erification states that aproposition is 4&erifiable... if it is possible for e/perience to render it probable.4 (ibid)

After establishin! this distinction" Ayer !oes on to claim that 4no proposition" otherthan a tautolo!y" can possibly be anythin! more than a probable hypothesis4 (AyerDGKFD) and therefore can only be sub6ect to $ea% &erification. #his defence $ascontro&ersial amon! 7o!ical ositi&ists" some of $hom stuc% to stron! &erification"and claimed that !eneral propositions $ere indeed nonsense.

'ubseuent philosophy of science tends to ma%e use of the better aspects of both ofthese approaches.


40/90

one of the a/iomatic foundations for mathematics" allo$in! mathematical ob6ects tobe constructed formally from the undefined terms of 4set4" and 4set membership4. It isin its o$n ri!ht a branch of mathematicsand an acti&e field of on!oin! mathematicalresearch.

In nai&e set theory" sets are introduced and understood usin! $hat is ta%en to be theselfe&ident concept of sets as collections of ob6ects considered as a $hole.

In a/iomatic set theory" the concepts of sets and set membership are definedindirectly by first postulatin! certain a/ioms$hich specify their properties. In thisconception" sets and set membership are fundamental concepts li%e pointand lineinEuclidian !eometry" and are not themsel&es directly defined.

7o!ical Atomismis a philosophical belief that ori!inated in the early H0th century$ith the de&elopment of Analytic philosophy. Its principal e/ponents $ere the Britishphilosopher Bertrand *ussell" the early $or% of his Austrianborn collea!ue 7ud$i!


41/90

hilosophicusmore or less a!reed $ith *ussell that lan!ua!e ou!ht to be reformulatedso as to be unambi!uous" so as to accurately represent the $orld" so that $e couldbetter deal $ith the uestions of philosophy.

#he seachan!e brou!ht on by


42/90

Important names in the 1rdinary 7an!ua!e school include 9ohn


43/90

(ii) A con6unction A\B is true if A is true and B is true

(iii) A dis6unction A & B is true if A is true or B is true.

(i&) A uni&ersal statement 4for all / A(/)4 is true if each ob6ect satisfies 4A(/)4.

(&) An e/istential statement 4there e/ists / A(/)4 is true if there is an ob6ect$hich satisfies 4A(/)4.

#hese e/plain ho$ the truth conditions of complex sentences (built up fromconnecti&es and uantifiers) can be reduced to the truth conditions of theirconstituents. #he simplest constituents are atomic sentences. A contemporarysemantic definition of truth $ould define truth for the atomic sentences as follo$s

(&i) An atomic sentence (/D"..."/n) is true (relati&e to an assi!nmentof &aluesto the &ariables /D" ..." /n)) if the correspondin! &aluesof &ariablesbear the

relatione/pressed by the predicate.

#ars%i himself defined truth for atomic sentences in a &ariant $ay that does not useany technical terms from semantics" such as the 4e/pressed by4 abo&e. #his is becausehe $anted to define these semantic terms in terms of truth" so it $ould be circular$ere he to use one of them in the definition of truth itself. #ars%i-s semanticconception of truth plays an important role in modern lo!ic and also in muchcontemporary philosophy of lan!ua!e. It is rather contro&ersial matter $hether#ars%i-s semantic theory should be counted as either a correspondence theory or as adeflationary theory. #ars%i himself seems to ha&e intended his account to be arefinement of the c

philo of language - terms

Documents