Syntax and Semantics

“That’s just semantics.” This cutting remark is sometimes used as a dismissive statement
against someone who is trying to complicate an argument with a wordy explanation. This
satirical expression, which apparently downplays semantics, is in fact the opposite in terms of
the importance of this idea because semantics is more than just words, being verbose, or using
jargon. 

Semantics deals with the meaning and interpretation of words, phrases, and sentences. Without
semantics, we would not be able to understand each other; we would not be able to transmit
and receive communication. We cannot wholly and fully exist as a member of a human society
without being able to grasp the meaning of what the people around us are saying; accordingly,
we cannot share the same culture, institutions, norms and values, interests, and beliefs. Also,
we will not be able to establish relationships with others. Semantics influences the students’
reading comprehension; it plays a significant part in language learning. The teaching of
speaking and writing, as well as of reading and listening comprehension, is made possible
because of the use of semantics. The sounds, words and all forms of language structure will be
totally irrelevant without the application of meaning. Hence, it is very important that students
understand semantics because within the academic setting, they will encounter words that fall
under the category of synonym, antonym, homonym, and others. Without knowledge of
semantics, students will not be able to recognize that someone who is “green with envy” has
not changed hue, or that “having cold feet” has nothing to do with the appendage at the end of
our legs. Because semantics moves beyond the literal meaning of words and is culture-
dependent, this becomes difficult for individuals who are not native speakers and even those
who speak the same language but come from different cultures and convey meaning using
words in unique ways. This is one of the semantic barriers that make communication and
understanding among individuals problematic.

While semantics is of prime importance in communication, meaning cannot be formed without

the knowledge of proper word order or sentence structure. This knowledge is called syntax, the
study of how words are combined to create phrases and clauses in the sentences of a specific
language (Freeman and Freeman, 2014). Integrating this component of linguistics is inevitable
in studying the meaning of language. Without proper syntax, a sentence can be meaningless. A
syntactically correct sentence without a clear meaning such as “Colorless green ideas sleep
furiously.” (Chomsky 1957: 17) is useless and will not lead to understanding between the
receiver and sender of the language. It is likewise important to note that syntax defines
semantics; the meaning expressed in two sentences with exactly the same words (shown in the
following example) can be different if the arrangement of the words used is changed: “Lance
gave Ivan a brand-new cell phone.” and “Ivan gave Lance a brand-new cell phone.” What's
more, we structure sentences with the aim to create or form meaning. Hence, syntax and
semantics, although they are different fields of linguistics, cannot be taught or studied
completely separately.

L2, including syntax and semantics, cannot be taught entirely implicitly, yet neither should it be
solely explicitly. I believe that effective teaching cannot be carried out by using only one
teaching approach; therefore, I am using the eclectic approach and that includes using both
implicit and explicit teaching of L2. Since syntax is governed by rules and follows specific
structure and word order, and because learners need to be equipped with skills and strategies
that will help them improve their comprehension and sense of making meaning, I believe that
target competencies in teaching L2 can be best achieved if the teacher will employ both implicit
and explicit teaching of the language. Students may not acquire their comprehension skills and
be able to apply grammar rules perfectly by merely exposing them to L2 books and making
them listen to and engage in a lot of L2 conversations.  There must be formal and explicit
teaching occasionally, depending on the learning objective, complexity of the lesson, and ability
of the learners. Since grammar is the means by which we can understand how a language
“works”, a definitive study of language grammar is essential to language study. The study of
grammar reveals how language works, an important aspect in both English acquisition and
learning. (Chomsky). However, strictly explicit grammar study and grammar-focused lessons
are often not communicatively based. They can be boring, cumbersome, and difficult for
students to assimilate, and I see this situation myself in my students – they abhor grammar
lessons. The strict teaching of grammar and structure, except with students of the Logical –
Mathematical or Verbal – Linguistic multiple intelligences, can be frustrating and highly
ineffective (Lynch). In this case, I use implicit teaching. I sometimes employ techniques that
make them not too sentient that the focus of my lesson is on grammar such as using different
types of texts, games, subject integration techniques, cooperative learning strategies, think-pair-
share, etcetera. I also agree on the view that L1 is oftentimes not structured similarly with L2.
For example, the natural order of a sentence in Filipino (“Magdadala ako ng bulaklak bukas.”) is
not the same in English (“I will bring flowers tomorrow”.) The two sentences have the same
meaning, and both are said to be in the natural order of words. However, the verb comes first in
Filipino while the subject comes first in English.  While L1 can be better taught implicitly with the
use of authentic materials and through real life communicative practices, it cannot be applied to
a great extent in the teaching of L2. Probably, this is why I appreciate one feature of K-12
curriculum, which is the provision of lifelong performance tasks. It allows teachers to give
students opportunities to apply grammar and comprehension skills in real life situations. I
believe also that the training I got in providing MI and differentiated activities to the students is a
good way to address the negative impact of teaching an L2 topic explicitly. 

After reading so many materials about syntax and semantics and linguistics all in all, I
discovered several controversies and complexities about the topics. But all these existences of
syntactic, lexical, and semantic ambiguities, barriers, change in meaning over time, and
disputes in English grammar seem to lead me to one final conclusion: It is requisite to acquire a
profound knowledge and foundation in linguistics and to be aware of its various complexities,
but in the final analysis: I am still the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul (from
Invictus). I do not have to be left hanging, entangled, or carried away by the polemics of
linguistics; as long as I have gotten insights from the differing opinions and assumptions of
experts, I can champion my feat, serve my students better, and feel accomplished at the end of
each day of teaching and learning.