Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)

Hon Kin Ho 11404939

LANG A338F Semantics TMA1

Name: Hon Kin Ho
11404939
2016/11
T05

1
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

Question 1a
Answer:
If we assume that all the preposition in in the examples above are representing
different senses, then a word will have a different interpretations depends on the
context in which the word occur, indicating that there is distinction between a
linguistics-semantic level of meaning, and an non-linguistics, conceptual level of
meaning (Two-level). (John, 2005)
Therefore, to decompose each meaning of in and identify its actual value, we
might need to take account of our conceptual knowledge, the context of the
words use, and to put a priority on their normal interpretation.
a) The water in the bowl
The sense of this usage of in is expressing a hollow container is
entirely filled by something. By way of illustration, trajectory object
(TR, water) is situated within a hollow area as the landmark object (LM)

Inside the LM container, the TR has a free movement and circulation

and forms a flow.

b) The crack in the bowl

Crack is a very narrow space that has split surface of something. As a
small part of the bowl, it cannot be completely detached from the bowl
by simply removing it with bare hands, like extracting the crack and
then install it in another bowl. It makes no sense at all.
The meaning of in in this sentence is forming a part of something.
Thereby TR is within the substance of the LM
2
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

The area in black is the material substance of LM. The white line (TR) is
the crack that has spitted the substance and created a very small
fracture.

c) The bones in his arm

Bones are the hard parts inside a human that makes up the skeleton,
and flesh close off the bones on all side. So the meaning of this
presupposition in is expressing certain entity is enclosed by
something.
The bones is conceptualized in a way in which it is lodged inside the
flesh of his arm. And taking this interpretation, the spatial arrangement
is: the TR (bones) is enclosed by the LM (flesh of arm)

3
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

d) The pear in the bowl

From this in-relation between the pear and the bowl, the pear is
held in position and located partly or wholly inside the bowl. Given this
holding relation, the TR is supported by the containment of LM.

e) The gap in the fence

The gap are the break in continuity of barrier made of planks or
boards or wires. Depends on how we interpret the word fence, we

4
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

can draw different schematic diagrams based on our reference to

conceptual knowledge.

For gap in the wire fence, gap (TR) is formed and located within
many grids in the fence (LM) made of wire.

But taking this on another interpretation: fence as wall built outdoors

of wood, then the in-relation is denoted as the gap (TR) is the space
situated in the wall (LM) and got separated by wood plank.

479

5
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

Question 1b
Lakoffs concept of radial category is a combination of the ideas of prototype,
resemblance and fuzzy boundaries (MacEachren, 1995), and it is a conceptual
category in which concepts are arranged based on their resemblance to the
central concept.
The meanings of the word in can definitely be structured in a radial category
based on our works in question 1a. All five senses of in above indicate contact
with a central sense which is neutral on the issue of context.

The central sense of in

The trajectory (TR) is within and surrounded by the boundaries of landmark (LM).
Both TR and LM are unspecified in this case, but this schematic diagram
represents the very basic and essential meaning of the preposition word in.
Now, let us turn back to five senses of in which are more concrete and
specified due to added information.

6
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

7
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

Now, if we evaluate each schema of Figure 2.2-2.62 in terms of their similarity to

the central sense, and place them in a continuum regarding their degree of
resemblance, we can draw a semantic network in which the core meaning is
extending to less-central and non-central meaning.

The images of Figure 2.5, 2.2 and 2.4 show a closer affinities to the prototype
than Figure 2.3, 2.61, and 2.62. If we compare Figure 2.3 with Figure 2.6.1 and
2.6.2, it is obvious that the in-relation of the gap in the fence expresses the
most abstract meaning among all examples.

8
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

Mapping the continuum, we will have a diagram which represents conceptual

category. The meanings of the word in can be structured in a radial category.

(265 words)

9
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

Question 2

(1) Entailment

The truth table for entailments is as follows:

p q Valid?
T T
F F
F T or F
T or F T

If p entails q, all four formulas must be valid.

Let (a) be p while (b) be q.

p = Jane stopped attending class.

q = Jane stopped doing something.

p q Valid?
T T Yes
F F Yes
F T or F Yes
T or F T Yes
Since all formulas are valid, (a) entails (b).
The reason p entails q is that the meaning of stopped attending class includes the meaning of
stopped doing something.

10
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

Let (a) be p while (c) be q.

p = Jane stopped attending class.

q = Somebody stopped attending class

p q Valid?
T T Yes
F F Yes
F T or F Yes
T or F T Yes
Since all formulas are valid, (a) entails (c).
The reason p entails q is that the meaning of Jane includes the meaning of somebody.

Let (a) be p while (d) be q.

p = Jane stopped attending class.

q = Jane used to attend class.

p q Valid?
T T Yes
F F Yes
F T or F No
T or F T No

If p = false, then Jane used to attend class cannot be either true or false. q is true even when p
is false. Therefore, (a) does not entail (d).

(2) Presupposition

Same approach applies to presupposition.

Truth table for presupposition:

p q
T T
F T
T or F T
If all formulas are valid, p presupposes q.

11
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

Let (a) be p while (b) be q.

p q Valid?
T T Yes
F T No
T or F T
Whenever p is false, q can be either true or false. (a) does not presupposes (b)
The negation of p cannot indicate the (q = T)

Let (a) be p while (c) be q.

p q Valid
T T Yes
F T No
T or F T
Whenever p is false, q can be either true or false. (a) does not presuppose (c)
The negation of p cannot indicate the (q = T)

Let (a) be p while (d) be q.

p q Valid?
T T Yes
F T Yes
T or F T Yes
Unlike with entailment, when (a) is false, then (d) is still true. (a) presupposes (d).
Stopped as a change of state verbs triggers a presupposition relation between (a) and (d). And
presuppositions hold under negation.

(395 words)

12
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

Question 3

By the use of conditionals to express material implication in English like (c) and (d), we assume a
causal connection between the antecedent clause (the if-clause) and the consequent clause (the
then-clause), as in 3.1 below.

3.1 If cows can fly (p), then Winnie teaches the course Semantics (r)

As given above, (p = T, r = T). So the statement 3.1 (p r) is T according to the truth table of
material implication. But the ifthen sentence grants us the information of causation that If
cows are able to fly, then Winnie will teach Semantics. However, it would be uncomfortable to
try and accept cows can fly as the necessary condition to make Winnie teaches the course
Semantics happen. This compound makes no sense in English but they are valid in material
implication.

Lets take a look at 3.2

3.2 If pigs can fly (q), then Winnie teaches the course Semantics (r).

Although (q = F) Pigs can fly is false, (q r) is still T, whatever the truth value of the
consequent (r). This statement (q r) cannot be invalidated by whether Winnie teaches the
course Semantics or not if pigs cannot fly (q = F). This conditional sentence is valid by the truth
table but it is nonsense in English. It seems that the causation expressed by the if.then
construction is not part of the material implication, and it is likely that the logical implication
simply does not fit the use of ordinary language conditionals.

The explanation for this situation is we try to match the material implication relation of p r
and q r with our conventional use of conditional ifthen construction in English, but the
truth-conditional relation often neglect our intuitions about the regular use of ifthen: the
causation. The material conditional statement pr does not specify a causation between p and
r unlike English conditionals.

In other words, because the logical connective of implication () does not work like the way in
which our conditional if.then in real language works. We can conclude that there are issues
when we try to capture the logical relation of material implication using ifthen construction
in English. As a result, we might find the English translation of material implications not sound,
odd and sometimes unacceptable.

(380 words)

13
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

Question 4
Modality is defined as linguistics devices which indicate speakers attitude towards a proposition
i.e. the verb phrase and the subject. They are often expressed by modal auxiliaries: may, must,
can etc. The same model can have epistemic, deontic meaning.

a) You may not raise the question.

Epistemic reading:
*In a Q&A section. Audience A knows audience B has a question to ask*
It seems that they dont have time for another question, so you may not raise
the question today
(A is not certain if B still has the time to ask a question.)

Deontic reading
*In a press conference, A is asking a question but MC stop him politely*
Sorry, but you may not raise the question, because we are running out of time
(MC prohibits A from asking question)

b) You can leave now

Epistemic reading:
This meeting is not going to happen so Im sure you can leave now
(With some certainty, speaker estimates that the meeting wont happen any
time soon and the staffs can leave earlier)

Deontic reading
The exam is over, you can leave now
(Speaker/exam rules are giving the permission to audience to leave.)

c) We must go home at once.

Epistemic reading:
We must go home at once if we dont want to miss the TV program
(Speaker has no doubt that they need to go back immediately to watch the TV
program)

Deontic reading:
Mum asks us to go home ASAP, we must go home at once)
(We are obliged to go home ASAP)

14
Semantics Assignment (assignment 1)
Hon Kin Ho 11404939

d) I will not graduate from this university.

Epistemic reading:
I hate this university, I will not graduate from this university
(Speakers knows he wont graduate from this university)

Deontic reading:
I failed my final year at university, so, according to the letter they sent me, I
will not graduate from this university.
(University doesnt allow speaker to graduate this year since speaker failed the
standard)

e) We should be at the lecture by 4pm.

Epistemic reading:
If the train is right on time, and we should be at the lecture by 4pm
(Speaker is certain that they will be at the lecture by 4pm if certain conditions
are met)

Deontic reading:
We have a presentation in the upcoming lecture, we need to prepare it first.
We should be at the lecture by 4pm to prepare, Is everyone OK with that?
(Speaker requires his groupmates to be on time)

(397 words)

Reference
LakoffG. (1987). Woman, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

MacEachrenM.Alan. (1995). How Maps Work: Representation, Visualization, and Design. New
York: The Guilford Press.

MV. & GreenEvans. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics, an introduction. London: Publishers.

15