CHAPTER ONE

1.1 Background of The Study

Semiotics is a branch of linguistics and philosophy that examines the relationship between signs

and the things they represent. It considers how signs are used to create meaning in language, art,

adverts and other forms of communication. The field was pioneered by thinkers like Ferdinand

De Saussure and Charles Sanders Pierce, who laid foundations for the study of signs and

symbols (2016).

At the end of the nineteenth century, Charles Sanders Pierce, the American philosopher,

proposed and described a study he called ‘’semiotic’’ and in his ‘’ course in general linguistics

(1915)’’, the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure independently proposed a science that he

called ‘’semiology’’. Since then, Semiotics and Semiology have become alternative names for

the systemic study of signs, as these function in all areas of human existence. The consideration

of signs is not limited to explicit systems of communication such as language. The Morse code,

Traffic signs and signals, and a great diversity of other human activities and productions; our

bodily postures and gestures, the social rituals we perform, the kind of clothes we wear, the

meals we eat, the buildings we inhabit, the objects we deal with, also convey common meanings

to members who participate in a particular culture, and so can be analyzed as signs that function

in diverse modes of signifying systems…C.S Pierce distinguished three classes of signs, defined

in the kind of relationship that exist between a signifying item and that which it signifies. An

Icon functions as a sign by means of inherent similarities or shared features, with what it

signifies; examples are the similarity of a portrait to the person it depicts or the similarity of a

map to the geographical area it stands for. An Index is a sign which bears a natural relation of

cause or effect to what it signifies, thus, smoke is a sign indicating fire and a pointing
weathervane indicates the direction of the wind. In the symbol (or in a less ambiguous term the

sign proper) the relation between the signifying item and what it signifies is not a natural one, but

entirely a matter of social convention . The gesture of shaking hands, for example, in some

cultures is a conventional sign of greeting or parting, and a red traffic light conventionally

signifies ‘’stop’’.

Ferdinand De Saussure introduced many of the terms and concepts exploited by current semiotic

scholars, most important are the following: a sign consists of two inseparable components or

aspects, the signifier and the signified, a verbal sign, in Saussure’s term is ‘’arbitrary’’. That is,

with the minor exception of onomatopoeia, there is no inherent or natural connection between a

verbal signifier and what it signifies.Abram .M, Galt .G (2009).

The study of semiotics among Jukun(Wapan) speakers is a multidisciplinary exploration that

aims to uncover the intricate web of meanings, symbols, and communication practices within the

Jukun(Wapan) community. The Jukun(Wapan) who reside primarily in Wukari Taraba State,

Nigeria, have a rich history and cultural heritage that significantly influenced their modes of

communication. They have a history dating back centuries, characterized by their engagement in

trade and culture. This historical context has shaped their worldviews, values, and cultural

evolution, and provided insights into the origins of Semiotics within their society.

The Jukun(Wapan) language itself serves as a critical vessel for Semiotics. The structure of the

language, its vocabulary, and its syntax contribute to the way Jukun(Wapan) speakers convey

meaning. Investigating linguistic features, such as metaphorical expressions, idiomatic phrases,

and culturally specific terms, can shed light on how they encode and decode messages using

Linguistic Semiotics. Symbols hold immense cultural significance among the Jukun people.

Rituals, ceremonies, art, and traditional practices are often accompanied by specific symbols that
carry deep meanings.These symbols can represent aspects of their spiritual beliefs. social

hierarchies, kinship systems and historical narratives. Semiotics extends beyond spoken

language to encompass various modes of communication, including visual art, body language

and gestures. Investigating how Jukun(Wapan) speakers employ these non-verbal forms of

communication adds another layer of complexity to the study.

The motivation for the selection of this topic is based on the various displays of Semiotic

characteristics during special or casual occasions and occurrences, such as gestures that represent

various meanings, concepts, or messages like hospitality, disrespect, e.t.c. Hopefully, this work

will contribute to the body of knowledge of Semiotics by being a documented reference for

scholars who would love to know more about the Jukun(Wapan) signs.

1.2 Statement of the problem

In the context of the Jukun(Wapan) community, the intricate interplay between signs , symbols,

and meaning seems to have remained understudied, creating a gap in our understanding of how

communication, culture, and identity converge within this distinct cultural and linguistic group.

The existing body of research fails to provide comprehensive insights to the semantic intricacies

of semiotics among the Jukun(Wapan) speakers, leaving unanswered questions about how signs

and symbols are attributed meaning, how they evolve in response to shift in cultural, social, and

technological dynamics. Addressing this gap is essential for preserving cultural heritage,

fostering cross-cultural understanding, and advancing our understanding of the universal

principles that underlie human communication and sense-making. This is what the study seeks to

do.
 1.3 Aim and objectives of the study

The aim of this research is to carry out a Semantic study of Semiotics among Jukun(Wapan)

speakers. The specific objectives are to ;

i. Identify the Semiotic elements of the Jukun(Wapan) speakers of wukari local government

area of Taraba state.

ii. Discuss the Semiotic elements in relation to their meaning.

iii. Explain how the Semiotic elements are employed across various modes of communication

among the Jukun(Wapan) speakers of wukari local government area of Taraba state.

1.4 Research questions

i. What are the Semiotic elements of the Jukun(Wapan) speakers of wukari local

government area of Taraba state?

ii. How are the Semiotic elements related to their meanings?

iv. How are the semiotic elements employed across various modes of communication among

the Jukun(Wapan) speakers of wukari local government area of Taraba state?

1.5 Significance of the study

The significance of a Semantic Study of Semiotics among Jukun speakers lies in its potential to

offer valuable insights into the intricate processes of communication, meaning-making, and

cultural heritage, cultural understanding, interpersonal communication and scholarly

contributions.
1.6 Scope of the study

This research is restricted to Jukun(Wapan) ; the variety of the Jukun spoken in Wukari, Taraba

state, Nigeria. The researcher chose the jukun (Wapan) language because; she speak the

language, have direct access to some Jukun(Wapan) elders, and may encounter less stress in

collecting data.

1.7 Brief History of Jukun People

The Jukun people have an extensive and captivating history that stretches back through the ages.

As one of the prominent ethnic groups in Nigeria, their cultural heritage is deeply intertwined

with the social fabric of the region. Exploring the history of the Jukun people reveals a tapestry

of triumphs, challenges, and cultural vibrancy. The origins of the Jukun people can be traced to

the Kwararafa Kingdom, a renowned pre-colonial kingdom that held considerable sway in

northern Nigeria. This kingdom, with its extensive territorial influence and robust trading

networks, served as the cradle of Jukun civilization. From this fertile ground, the Jukun people

emerged, carving their own path in the annals of Nigerian history. During the 16th and 17th

centuries, the Jukun people experienced a period of significant growth and expansion. Under the

leadership of their revered rulers, known as Aku Uka, they established a strong political and

cultural presence. The Aku Uka wielded both political and religious authority, ensuring the

cohesion and prosperity of the Jukun society. They built numerous settlements (Kwararafa,

Byepyi Byenha Akwana), including Wukari, which stands today as the capital of the Jukun

people. However, the arrival of European colonial powers in the late 19th and early 20th

centuries marked a significant turning point for the Jukun people. The British colonial

administration exerted its influence, introducing new systems of governance and disrupting
traditional political structures. This period of colonization brought about profound changes,

altering the course of Jukun history and challenging their way of life.

Throughout their history, the Jukun people maintained intricate relationships with neighboring

ethnic groups. They engaged in extensive trade networks, fostering cultural exchanges and

intermarriage with communities such as the Tiv, Mumuye, Igbo, Fulani, and Hausa. These

interactions enriched the cultural tapestry of the Jukun society, contributing to their diverse and

vibrant traditions. With Nigeria's independence in 1960, the Jukun people became an integral

part of the newly formed nation. They have since made remarkable contributions to Nigeria's

political, social, and economic landscape. Jukun individuals have excelled in various professions,

contributing their skills and expertise to the nation's progress. They have admirably balanced

preserving their cultural heritage while adapting to the demands of a modern society. Central to

Jukun cultural identity are their traditional practices, which provide a window into their rich

heritage. The Jukun people have nurtured a vibrant tapestry of rituals, ceremonies, music, dance,

art, and oral traditions. These cultural expressions serve as a testament to their deep-rooted

connections to their ancestors and the natural world. They cherish their kinship ties and place

great value on communal living, while respecting the authority of their traditional rulers.

Historically, the Jukun people practiced traditional indigenous religions, honoring deities

associated with natural elements and ancestral spirits. However, the spread of Islam and

Christianity in Sudan united mission 1904 has brought about significant religious

transformations within the Jukun community. Today, many Jukun people embrace these

monotheistic religions, reflecting the evolving religious landscape of the region. Efforts to

preserve and promote Jukun culture and heritage are underway. Cultural festivals celebrate their

rich traditions, serving as vibrant showcases of their artistic expressions. Initiatives for language
revitalization seek to safeguard the Jukun language, ensuring its transmission to future

generations. Cultural centers and institutions serve as bastions of knowledge and guardians of

their cultural legacy, nurturing a deep appreciation for Jukun heritage. The history of the Jukun

people is an intricate tale of resilience, cultural richness, and adaptation. It is a testament to the

indomitable spirit of a people who have weathered storms and preserved their unique identity.

The Jukun people continue to evolve, drawing upon the lessons of their past to shape a promising

future. Their history stands as a testament to their endurance and the invaluable contributions

they have made to the tapestry of Nigerian society.

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter deals with the review and appreciation of previous works or studies relevant to this

work with a view to bridging the academic gap in them. The chapter discusses concepts such as

semantics.

2.1 THE CONCEPT OF SEMANTICS

Language is the primary means of human communication, allowing people to exchange

information, perspectives and knowledge. It is an incredibly powerful tool, as it can be used by

human beings to interact, reason and cooperate with one another.

Semantics is the field of study that explores meaning in language from linguistic, logic and

philosophical perspectives. Linguistic expressions have been extensively investigated over the

years, with researchers developing numerous theoretical frameworks that outline the meaning

and function of different types of language expressions Kempson, R., Asher, N., & Fernando, T.

(2001). Results derived from semantics studies can have a number of practical applications, for

instance in computer science, where they can offer insight for the development of new

programming languages, dialogue systems, automated reasoning, and other technological tools.

(Roelofsen, May 23, 2018).

Semantics is the branch of linguistics concerned with the study of meaning in language. It

investigates how words, phrases, and sentences encode information and how this information is

interpreted by speakers and listeners. Semantics examines the relationship between linguistic

expressions and the extralinguistic world, as well as the principles governing meaning
composition and interpretation." (From: Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge

University Press).

Levels of Semantics

The study of semantics is an endeavor to understand not only what words mean in isolation but

also how they come together to create meaning in larger linguistic units. It beckons us to reflect

on the inherent richness of language, where each word serves as a brushstroke on the canvas of

communication, contributing to the creation of a larger, coherent picture.

Lexical Semantics

Lexical semantics is an academic discipline concerned with the meaning of words. Lexical

semanticists are interested in what words mean, why they mean what they mean, how they are

represented in speakers’ minds and how they are used in text and discourse. Cruse, D. A. (1986).

Outside linguistics proper, lexical semantics overlaps with disciplines such as philosophy,

psychology, anthropology, computer science and pedagogy. Within linguistics, it crucially

overlaps with what is traditionally referred to as lexicology, which is the overall study of the

vocabularies of languages, encompassing topics such as morphology and etymology and social,

regional and dialectal aspects of the vocabulary (Cruse, Hundsnurscher, Job & Lutzeier, 2002,

Hanks, 2007, Geeraerts, 2010). Lexical semantics is the subfield of linguistics concerned with

the study of word meaning, encompassing the investigation of the semantic properties and

relationships of individual lexical items within a language. It explores the range of meanings

associated with words, the factors influencing variations in meaning, and the principles

governing the organization of lexical knowledge in speakers' minds Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical

semantics is concerned with the meanings of words and the relationships between them. It

examines how words are structured and organized in the mental lexicon, how they acquire and
represent meaning, and how they interact with each other in linguistic contexts. Lexical

semanticists investigate the various dimensions of word meaning, including synonymy,

antonymy, polysemy, and semantic ambiguity, as well as the principles governing semantic

change and lexical variation over time and across languages Geeraerts, D. (2010).

Lexical semantics is the study of how words convey meaning within a language system. It

involves the analysis of the semantic properties of individual lexical items, including their

denotations, connotations, and associations. Lexical semanticists explore the principles

governing word formation, the representation of word meaning in the mental lexicon, and the

mechanisms by which speakers access and manipulate lexical information during language

processing. This field also investigates the semantic relations between words, such as hyponymy,

meronymy, and synonymy, as well as the semantic roles that words play in linguistic structures

and discourse contexts.

Examples:

Denotations: Both "dog" and "puppy" refer to canines, but "dog" typically denotes a mature

canine, while "puppy" specifically refers to a young canine.

Connotations: "Dog" might connote loyalty, companionship, or even derogatory qualities

depending on context. "Puppy" might connote innocence, playfulness, or vulnerability.

Associations: "Dog" might be associated with breeds, ownership, or specific behaviors like

barking or fetching. "Puppy" might be associated with images of small size, clumsiness, or

cuteness.
Word formation: Lexical semanticists would explore how these words are formed, considering

morphological processes like affixation ("puppy" as a diminutive form of "dog") or

compounding ("guide dog").

Semantic relations: "Puppy" is a hyponym of "dog," meaning it's a more specific instance within

the broader category of dogs. They're also closely related in terms of meronymy, where "puppy"

is part of the whole category of "dog." "Dog" and "puppy" are synonyms in many contexts,

although not completely interchangeable due to their specific denotations.

Semantic roles: In linguistic structures and discourse contexts, "dog" might serve as a subject or

object in a sentence ("The dog chased the cat"), while "puppy" might serve a similar role but

with nuances specific to its young age or behavior ("The puppy chewed on the shoe").

Sentential Semantics

There are three basic conceptions of a sentence, a syntactic, a semantic and a pragmatic.

According to the syntactic conception, a sentence is an expression with certain grammatical

properties, as specified in a grammar. According to the semantic conception, a sentence is an

expression with a certain type of meaning, for instance a sentence expressing a proposition,

something that is true or false (with respect to the actual world) Lycan W.G (2008). According

to the pragmatic conception, a sentence is an expression with a certain kind of use, typically that

of making a speech act. These three conceptions are naturally correlated. Speakers of natural

languages typically use sentences in the grammatical sense for making speech acts and

expressing propositional thoughts by means of the sentence meaning. Levinson, S. C. (1983).

Pragmatics.
2.2 THE CONCEPT OF MEANING

The term meaning has figured, in one way or another, in a great number of philosophical dispute

over the last century.

Meaning in language refers to the complex interplay between linguistic signs and the mental

representations they evoke in the minds of language users. It comprise both semantic meaning,

which pertains to the literal denotation of words and sentences, and pragmatic meaning, which

relates to the inferred intentions, presuppositions, and implicatures conveyed in communicative

interactions. Meaning is inherently context-dependent, shaped by linguistic conventions,

sociocultural norms, and the inferential processes of language users. It serves as the foundation

for successful communication, enabling speakers to convey information, express attitudes, and

negotiate social relationships through language.Jackendoff, R. (2002). Meaning in language

refers to the cognitive and communicative content associated with linguistic signs, encompassing

both semantic content (the denotative meaning) and pragmatic content (the contextual and social

meaning). Semantic meaning involves the relationship between linguistic signs and the world

they represent, while pragmatic meaning involves the use of language in specific contexts to

achieve communicative goals. Meaning is inherently dynamic and context-dependent, shaped by

linguistic conventions, cultural norms, and the intentions of speakers and interpreters.Sperber,

D., & Wilson, D. (1986 P:50). Meaning in language refers to the cognitive and communicative

significance conveyed by linguistic expressions. It bound both denotative aspects, where words

and sentences refer to entities and states of affairs in the world, and connotative aspects, where

linguistic signs evoke associations, emotions, and attitudes. Meaning is multifaceted and context-

dependent, shaped by linguistic, cognitive, social, and cultural factors. It involves the
interpretation of linguistic signs by speakers and listeners within specific communicative

situations, drawing on shared knowledge, Cruse, D. A. (2004) 55.

TYPES OF MEANING

Conceptual Meaning

Conceptual meaning, within the realm of linguistics and semantics, delves into the cognitive and

mental representations that individuals associate with linguistic expressions. It involves

understanding how words and linguistic elements connect to the conceptual frameworks within

the human mind. This essay explores the intricacies of conceptual meaning, its relation to

language, and its significance in our cognitive processes. (Stefflon 1999). As Leech underlines in

“Semantics. The Study of Meaning”, the emphasis in this classification should be put on the

logical or conceptual meaning (also called “denotative” or “cognitive”) (1981, 9). He states that

conceptual meaning “is widely assumed to be the central factor in linguistic communication”.

(Leech 1981, 9). He goes further to explain that conceptual meaning plays an enormous role in

linguistic communication for it “has a complex and sophisticated organization which may be

compared with, and cross-related to, a similar organization on the syntactic and phonological

levels of language”. (Leech 1981, 9). This is connected, according to Leech, with “two principles

of all linguistic patterning” (1981, 9), i.e. the principle of contrastiveness and the principle of

structure. (1981, 9)

At its core, conceptual meaning goes beyond the surface-level definitions provided by

dictionaries. It encompasses the rich array of ideas, images, and associations that individuals

evoke when encountering a word or expression. Unlike denotative meaning, which focuses on
the explicit definition of a term, conceptual meaning delves into the mental landscapes and

cognitive structures that underlie our understanding of language. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.

(1980). One fundamental aspect of conceptual meaning is the idea that words serve as symbols

for mental concepts. When we hear or read a word, it triggers a mental representation associated

with that word. These mental representations are not static; they are dynamic and context-

dependent. The same word may evoke different conceptual meanings based on the context in

which it is used, the individual's experiences, and cultural influences. Language is a powerful

tool for conveying complex thoughts and abstract ideas, and conceptual meaning plays a pivotal

role in this process. Consider a word like "freedom." While its denotative meaning might refer to

the state of being free from coercion or restraint, its conceptual meaning extends to notions of

autonomy, choice, and individual rights. Each person's conceptualization of "freedom" is shaped

by their unique experiences, cultural background, and personal values. Furthermore, conceptual

meaning is closely tied to the idea of semantic fields, which are networks of related concepts.

Words within the same semantic field share common features or attributes, contributing to a

cluster of interconnected meanings. For instance, within the semantic field of "emotion," words

like "joy," "anger," and "sadness" are conceptually related, forming a network of emotional

states. Cognitive linguists, such as George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, have made significant

contributions to our understanding of conceptual meaning through the theory of conceptual

metaphor. They argue that our conceptual system is often structured metaphorically, with

abstract concepts understood in terms of more concrete experiences. For example, the metaphor

"time is money" expresses the conceptual link between time and value, rooted in our everyday

experiences with currency and economic transactions. Conceptual meaning is dynamic and

shaped by both individual and collective experiences. Cultural influences, societal norms, and

personal histories contribute to the formation of conceptual networks within a linguistic

mutual understanding.

Connotative Meaning

Connotative meaning is the communicative value an expression has by virtue of what it refers to,

over and above its purely conceptual content.” (Leech 1981, 12). As it can be seen from the

definition, connotative meaning unavoidably overlaps with certain aspects of the conceptual

meaning. Therefore, the “reference” overlaps with the elements of conceptual meaning, as in

when the contrastive features of conceptual meaning become attributes of the “real world”

referent. But additional attributes expected from the referent depend on various other factors,

such as age or society, and they can also depend on the individual, as claimed by Leech. (1981).

One key figure in the exploration of connotative meaning is Ferdinand De Saussure, a linguist

whose groundbreaking work laid the foundations for structuralism, Saussure's contributions

made around the late 19th and early 20th centuries. While Saussure primarily focused on the

structural aspects of language, his emphasis on the arbitrary nature of the linguistic sign hinted at

the importance of associations and cultural values linked to words. This laid the groundwork for

later scholars to delve into the connotative dimensions of meaning. Building upon Saussure's

legacy, Roland Barthes, a prominent figure in semiotics, contributed to the understanding of

connotative meaning through his theory of connotation. In his influential work "Mythologies"

(1957), Barthes explored how signs and symbols in everyday life acquire additional meanings

beyond their denotations. He argued that connotation is a social construct, influenced by cultural,

historical, and ideological factors. Barthes' work sparked discussions on the ideological

underpinnings of language and the layers of meaning that go beyond the literal.
Furthermore, the American linguist and philosopher Charles Hockett made significant

contributions to the study of connotation by introducing the concept of "emotive meaning." In

his essay "The Problem of Universals in Language" (1954), Hockett distinguished between

referential and emotive aspects of language. While referential meaning pertains to conveying

information, emotive meaning involves expressing the speaker's feelings or attitudes. This

distinction sheds light on the emotional and evaluative dimensions inherent in connotative

meaning.

Connotative meaning is not only shaped by cultural and social contexts but also by individual

experiences. Steven Pinker, a cognitive scientist and linguist, emphasized the role of mental

representations in understanding connotations. In his book "The Stuff of Thought" (2007), Pinker

explored how connotative meanings are stored in the mental lexicon and how individuals draw

upon their unique cognitive associations when interpreting language.

Affective Meaning

Language, as a sophisticated tool for communication, operates on multiple levels, from conveying

straightforward information to capturing complex nuances of human thought and

emotion.Affective meaning refers to the emotional significance and subjective interpretations

imbued within linguistic expressions or symbols, shaping individuals' affective responses and

influencing their cognitive processing (Osgood, 1952; Fiske, 1982). It circumscribe the affective

associations, attitudes, and emotional valence evoked by stimuli, contributing to the richness and

complexity of human communication and interaction.

According to Russell, 1980 and Barrett, 2006 Affective meaning covers the emotional nuances

and subjective interpretations embedded within linguistic expressions, influencing individuals'

affective responses and shaping their perceptions and attitudes toward stimuli. It Proves the
affective associations, valence, and emotional connotations evoked by words or symbols,

contributing to the depth and complexity of human communication and understanding affective

meaning. Lindquist et al., 2015; Fontaine et al., 2019 define affective meaning as the emotional

significance and subjective interpretations inherent in linguistic symbols, encompassing the

affective associations, attitudes, and emotional valence evoked by stimuli, which contribute to

individuals' subjective experiences and perceptions. It reflects the dynamic interaction between

language and emotion, shaping individuals' affective responses and cognitive processing in

diverse socio-cultural contexts.

Referential Meaning

Language, as a vehicle for communication, achieves remarkable precision through various layers

of meaning. One crucial dimension is referential meaning, where words and expressions point to

specific entities or concepts in the world. Linguistic scholars across different periods have delved

into the intricacies of referential meaning, unraveling the ways in which language establishes

connections between symbols and the external reality they signify.

Noam Chomsky, a towering figure in linguistics, contributed significantly to the understanding

of referential meaning through his development of generative grammar. In "Syntactic Structures"

(1957) and subsequent works, Chomsky explored the deep structure of sentences—the abstract

representation that captures the essential meaning. Referential meaning, within the generative

grammar framework, is intricately tied to the systematic and rule-based structures that underlie

language. Chomsky's approach sheds light on the generative mechanisms through which words

and expressions refer to specific concepts.

Thematic meaning refers to the central subject matter or main topic conveyed through linguistic

expressions, influencing the organization and coherence of discourse (Halliday & Matthiessen,

2014; Martin & Rose, 2003). It deals with the overarching message or motif that structures the

content of communication, facilitating interpretation and understanding within its contextual

framework. thematic meaning pertains to the underlying subject matter or central topic conveyed

through linguistic expressions, shaping the organization and coherence of discourse (Halliday,

1967; Martin & Rose, 2003). It close in the overarching message or motif that structures the

content of communication, facilitating the interpretation and understanding of textual or spoken

material within its contextual framework. Thematic meaning underline’s message, idea, or topic

conveyed through linguistic expressions, emphasizing the central theme or subject matter within

discourse (Halliday, 1967; Fawcett, 2000 p:205). It covers the overarching concept or motif that

structures the content and organization of communication, facilitating coherent interpretation and

understanding among participants.

Central Subject Matter: Thematic meaning focuses on identifying and understanding the core

subject matter or main topic within communication. This involves recognizing the primary idea

or message being conveyed through linguistic expressions.

Influence on Organization: Thematic meaning plays a crucial role in organizing discourse. It

helps determine the flow of information, how ideas are connected, and the overall structure of

the communication. By highlighting the central theme, it aids in arranging the content in a

coherent manner.
Collocative Meaning

To clearly define what constitutes the collocative type of meaning a quotation from Leech needs
to be mentioned: “Collocative meaning consists of the associations a word acquires on account
of the meanings of words which tend to occur in its environment.” (Leech 1981, 17) To clarify
his definition, he used the examples of the adjectives “pretty” and “handsome” and the words
which usually find themselves in their vicinity.
In the case of collocative meaning, the quasi-synonyms need to be mentioned, such as “to

wander” and “to stroll”, whereby Leech explains that “cows may wander, but may not stroll”.

(1981, 17) Besides that, a person can only “tremble” with fear and, on the other hand, only

“quiver” with excitement. (1981, 17). Collocative meaning intricate network of lexical

associations and patterns of word usage within a linguistic context, which contribute to the

nuanced interpretation and communicative effectiveness of individual lexical items (Baker &

Ellece, 2017; Wray, 2018). It confines the co-occurrence tendencies and semantic relationships

between words, shedding light on the subtleties of language use and discourse comprehension.

Denotative Meaning

The denotative is a noun derived from the verb denote. To denote something means to be sign of

something. It is synonyms with indicate. Denotation refers to an object or idea to which a word

or a lexeme refers. Whatever a word or expression refers to is what it denotes. The noun head

for example denotes the part of the body on top of the neck containing the nose, the eyes, ears,

hairs, mouth etc. it could be human head (man, woman, boy, girl, baby), or animal head such as

goat, cow, cat, etc. or insect such as flies, ants, mosquitoes, bees, hornets. Denotative meaning

refers to the explicit, literal definition of linguistic symbols, devoid of subjective interpretations

or emotional connotations, and represents the objective, referential content conveyed by words or

symbols (Clark & Clark, 1977; Cruse, 1986). It as well comprises of specific, commonly

understood meanings of lexical items, providing a shared foundation for communication and
comprehension among language users. Denotative meaning pertains to the literal, explicit

definition of linguistic symbols, devoid of subjective interpretations or emotional connotations,

and represents the objective, referential content conveyed by words or symbols (Jackendoff,

1992; Geeraerts, 2010). It conveys the precise, commonly agreed-upon meanings of lexical

items, facilitating clear communication and mutual understanding in language use. Denotative

meaning is the literal or dictionary definition of a word, devoid of emotional or subjective

connotations, and represents the explicit, objective content conveyed by linguistic symbols

(Lyons, 1977; Cruse, 1986). It is bounded by the specific referential meaning of words or

symbols, serving as the foundation for communication and facilitating shared understanding

among individuals.

2.3 SEMIOTICS

Semiotics, often referred to as the study of signs and symbols, encompasses the examination of

how meaning is created and communicated through various sign systems, including language,

visual representations, and gestures (Saussure, 1916; Peirce, 1931-1935). It explores the

interplay between signifiers (the physical form of signs) and signifieds (the mental concepts or

meanings associated with signs), as well as the cultural and social contexts that shape their

interpretation (Barthes, 1964; Eco, 1976). Semiotics provides a framework for understanding the

ways in which signs and symbols function within human communication, representation, and

culture.

Semiotics, according to Ferdinand de Saussure, involves the study of signs and their

relationships within language and culture, focusing on the arbitrary nature of linguistic signs and

the structural principles governing their organization (Saussure, 1916; Culler, 1976). It examines
how signs acquire meaning through their differential relations within a system, emphasizing the

role of both synchronic and diachronic dimensions in understanding signification (Bouissac,

1998; Deely, 2009). Saussure's contributions have profoundly influenced the fields of linguistics,

semiotics, and cultural theory, shaping our understanding of the mechanisms underlying human

communication and representation.

Semiotics is a broad diverse field that involves the study of multiple kinds of signs conveyed via

varied channels and media, of socially-organized and evolutionarily-generated sign systems, and

of the conditions of signification or semiosis (i.e., the processes of making meaning from signs).

It can be traced to ancient Greek formulations of semeion, as symptom or sign, in medical and

philosophical traditions, leading etymologically to current notions of semantics as well as

semiotics. The standard medieval definition for the sign became alquid stat pro aliquo

(something that stands for something). In modern history, semiotics has been taken up in

philosophy, literary and cultural studies, language and literacy studies, psychology, and even

biology. The present shape of the field has been forged in the competing theoretical traditions of

Saussure’s (1983) and Peirce’s (1998) accounts of the sign and of Voloshinov’s (1973)

historical-materialist accounts of the social and psychological functions of signs.

The Semantic Triangle relates the three basic components to each other as they constitute one

whole system. These are the Object, the Meaning (of an Object) and the Sign. This can be shown

in the following form of a scheme:

Object

Meaning (Thought) Linguistic Sign (Word)

The Semiotic Triangle (Ogden & Richards, 1923).

Here we have a basic component – an object (1), which acquires its meaning (2) that is expressed

by a linguistic sign (word) (3). The same structure and the same three components constitute this

Stoic concept: Meaning (Thought), Sounds (word), and the Object. The components of this stoic

concept is the same as those of the modern Semantic Concept. Three elements link to form one

whole system. According to the Stoics two of these elements (Sounds and Object) are of a

material form and one of them is of a non-material (Meaning/Thought). This last element of a

three-component system the Stoics gave the name “Lekton”. 1. Classical and modern

interpretations of a sign For better understanding of this concept we refer to this reference:
According to Aristotle there are only two elements which are in correlation with each other – the

human subject with its consciousness/language by means of which he/she perceives and

designates things. As for the Stoics, they have three different components: object, subject

(perceiving and designating) and some kind of intermediate element between the object and the

subject, more specifically – the object of an expression and perception; By means of this very

intermediate element things are being perceived and designated. (Losev, 1982, p. 170) In this

given reference the distinction between Aristotelian and Stoic points of views is made. Again, let

us continue defining the nature of Lekton as an intermediate element between the signifier and

the signified: Ammonius writes: “Aristotle teaches us what they (names and words) designate

and that from one side there is mental representations (Noemata) and from the other side the

process of naming and designation is being realized by the means of a designator (subject) and

an object and that one should not add any kind of intermediate element between the thought and

the object.” This very third element was given the name Lecton by the Stoics. In that way

Aristotle did not understand the “signified” as an independent instance between the designator

(subject) and the object. The Stoics, on the other hand used to emphasize and acknowledge the

third instance and were sharply opposed to both the designating subject and the object.

Relationship Between Semantics And Semiotics

Study of Meaning: Both semantics and semiotics are concerned with the study of meaning.

Semantics focuses on meaning within language, analyzing how words and sentences convey

meaning, while semiotics examines meaning across various sign systems, including linguistic

and non-linguistic signs. (Saussure, 1916; Lyons, 1977)

which are composed of signifiers (words) and signifieds (referents or meanings). Semiotics,

meanwhile, investigates signs in a broader sense, including visual signs, gestures, symbols, and

other forms of communication. (Peirce, 1931-1958; Eco, 1976)

Interdisciplinary Nature: Semantics and semiotics are interdisciplinary fields, drawing on

insights from linguistics, philosophy, psychology, sociology, anthropology, and other disciplines.

Both fields recognize the complex nature of meaning and its relationship to culture, cognition,

and social interaction. (Barthes, 1964; Hodge & Kress, 1988)

Focus on Context: Both fields emphasize the importance of context in shaping meaning.

Semantics considers linguistic context, including syntactic and pragmatic factors, while

semiotics explores broader cultural and social contexts that influence the interpretation of signs.

Understanding meaning requires considering the context in which signs are produced and

interpreted. (Halliday, 1978; Fiske, 1990)

Interest in Semiosis: Semantics and semiotics both involve the study of semiosis, the process of

signification or meaning-making. They examine how signs are created, interpreted, and

understood by individuals and communities. Both fields explore the dynamics of communication

and how meaning is negotiated within specific contexts. (Eco, 1976; Katz & Fodor, 1963)

semantics and semiotics share several relationship, including their focus on the study of

meaning, analysis of signs, interdisciplinary nature, emphasis on context, and interest in

semiosis. While semantics specializes in the study of meaning within language, semiotics offers

a broader perspective, considering meaning across various sign systems and cultural contexts.
Semantics and Semiotics

According to John Saeed (2016) “language represents man’s most sophisticated use of signs.” He

has cited the words of the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1974) when he stressed that ‘the

study of linguistic meaning{semantics}is a part of this general study of the use of sign systems

and this general study is called semiotics.’ Saussure’s idea of linguistic sign consists of signifier

and signified. The signifier is the sound image and signified is the concept. They are linked by a

bond which is mostly psychological (Palmer, 1981: 24). A brief distinction between sign vehicle

and the ‘sign’ itself is worthy to be mentioned. The former is the form in which the sign appears

while the latter includes the signifier and signified. The signified has a psychological nature

rather than physical. It can be identified from mentalist prescriptive in the form of a constructed

impression that the signifier leaves on the interpreter (Strazny,2005:950).

The relationship between signifier and signified is called signification. One of its characteristics

is that such relationship is “ontologically arbitrary” but at the same time “conventional.” Once a

speech community agrees upon a particular ‘signifier’ it can’t be changed. The degree of such

arbitrariness is controversial and many semioticians dispute among it. This pushes them to

propose the existence of areas where these relationships overlap. Therefore, they suggest a

number of different signs (see section 5). The mentalist comprehension of Saussurean’s sign

appears to affirm an idealist philosophical interpretation of reality. The idea which assumes that

there are no real objects in the world without consideration of any constructed signs. This view is
not supported by all semioticians. Peirce’s views that “the referent of a sign as something with its

own ontological status, something external to the sign’s interpreter.” Peirce’s model suggests

“more realist philosophical interpretation of the world according to which reality is composed of

objects and properties which stand on their own and independently of our means of describing

them or of knowing them via a system of signs” (ibid).

2.4 EMPIRICAL REVIEW

An Empirical Exploration

The Concept of Semantics The review embarks on a journey by elucidating the foundational

concept of semantics. This section serves as a compass, guiding readers through the intricate

landscape of language meaning and its theoretical underpinnings.

Level of Semantic Analysis

Lexical Semantics Delving into the granularity of language, the exploration extends to lexical

semantics, unraveling the significance of individual words and their nuanced meanings. A

spotlight on the microcosm of language meaning.

Sentential Semantics Expanding the scope, sentential semantics comes into focus, where the

dynamic interplay of words within sentences is dissected. This segment unravels the macrocosm,

revealing how sentences construct intricate layers of meaning.

Meaning This pivotal section serves as the nexus, delving into the very essence of meaning.

Philosophical and linguistic perspectives converge to offer a comprehensive understanding of

how meaning is conceptualized and communicated through language.

symbiotic relationship between language and meaning. It examines how language becomes the

vessel through which nuanced thoughts, ideas, and emotions find expression.

Types of Meaning

Conceptual Meaning

Collodative Meaning

Affective Meaning

Connotative Meaning

Referential Meaning

Thematic Meaning This section intricately categorizes the diverse facets of meaning, providing a

nuanced exploration of conceptual, emotional, and contextual dimensions that enrich the

semantic tapestry.

Semiotics The review extends its gaze to semiotics, unveiling the study of signs and symbols.

This section examines how linguistic elements become carriers of meaning and explores the

broader implications of semiotic analysis.

Semiotic Triangle A focal point emerges with the exploration of the semiotic triangle, where the

relationships between the sign, the object, and the interpretant are dissected. This section deepens

the understanding of how signs acquire meaning in the semiotic realm.

Relationship between Semantics and Semiotics The synthesis of knowledge culminates in an

exploration of the intricate interplay between semantics and semiotics. This section sheds light

on how the study of meaning intersects with the broader examination of signs and symbols.
In this empirical review, each section serves as a beacon, guiding readers through the

multifaceted landscape of semantics, meaning, and semiotics, providing a comprehensive

understanding of language's profound ability to convey meaning in diverse ways.

2.5 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Theoretical Framework of Semantics, Meaning, and Semiotics: A Comprehensive Exploration

The Concept of Semantics At the heart of linguistic inquiry, the exploration begins with a

theoretical deconstruction of semantics. Drawing on foundational linguistic theories, this section

delves into the nature of meaning and its manifestation in language, laying the groundwork for a

comprehensive understanding.

Level of Semantic Analysis

Lexical Semantics Rooted in linguistic theories of lexical semantics, this section examines the

intricacies of word meaning. Theoretical perspectives on semantic relationships between words

form the backbone, exploring how lexical choices shape overall linguistic expression.

Sentential Semantics Synthesizing syntactic and semantic theories, this section navigates through

sentential semantics. Theoretical frameworks elucidate how sentence structures contribute to

meaning, providing insights into the dynamic interplay between syntax and semantics.

Meaning Grounded in philosophical and linguistic theories of meaning, this section delves into

questions of reference, truth conditions, and the nature of linguistic meaning. Theoretical

perspectives from semantics and philosophy of language converge to construct a robust

understanding of meaning.
Language and Meaning Drawing on linguistic and cognitive theories, this section explores the

intricate relationship between language and meaning. Theoretical frameworks, encompassing

linguistic relativity and cognitive semantics, unveil the mechanisms by which language becomes

a vessel for thought and communication.

Types of Meaning

Conceptual Meaning Rooted in cognitive semantics, this subsection explores theories of

conceptual meaning. Theoretical perspectives on how concepts are formed and represented in

language contribute to a nuanced understanding of cognitive semantics.

Collodative Meaning, Affective Meaning, Connotative Meaning, Referential Meaning, Thematic

Meaning Each type of meaning is theoretically dissected, drawing on linguistic theories and

semantic frameworks to provide a comprehensive understanding of the diverse dimensions that

contribute to the richness of meaning in language.

Semiotics Grounded in semiotic theories of Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Peirce, this

section explores the study of signs and symbols. Theoretical perspectives on the signifier,

signified, and the arbitrariness of signs contribute to a deeper understanding of semiotic

processes in language.

Semiotic Triangle This section draws on Peircean semiotic theories to theoretically examine the

relationships between the sign, the object, and the interpretant. Theoretical perspectives on

semiotic processes enrich the exploration of how meaning is constructed through signs.

Relationship between Semantics and Semiotics Synthesizing linguistic and semiotic theories, this

final section explores the theoretical intersections between semantics and semiotics. Theoretical
frameworks elucidate how the study of meaning converges with the analysis of signs, offering a

holistic perspective on linguistic and semiotic processes.

In this theoretical review, each section is a theoretical lens, bringing together linguistic,

cognitive, and semiotic theories to provide a comprehensive framework for understanding

semantics, meaning, and semiotics in the realm of language.