Sense Relations

Linguistic meaning is a relation. Word meanings can be defined by relating them to their
referent or to each other.
The REFERENCE of a word/an expression is its direct relation with the extra-linguistic world.
The SENSE of a word/an expression is its place in a system of semantic relations with other
words/expressions in the language.
Reference is the relation between a language expression and whatever the expression pertains to
in a particular situation of language use; reference is the way speakers and hearers use an
expression successfully in a particular situation.
Denotation is the potential of a word to enter into such language expressions; denotation is the
knowledge speakers have that makes the use of such expression successful.
Ex.: morning star, evening star, Venus, planet, star
connotation the variable, subjective, often emotive part of the meaning of an expression.
example: colours in various cultures
The referring expressions 1. that violin and 2. that fiddle can have the same referent, they can
refer to the same object on a particular occasion – but they do not have the same meaning. Their
connotation is different.
extension “the class of actual or imagined objects or states of affairs an expression may be used
to refer to” (Meyer 2005)
intension “those properties which define an expression, its mental content independent of
context.
It may roughly be equated to sense.” (Meyer 2005)
Semantics: interested in classifying types of sense relation to describe the structure of a stable
linguistic system.
Paradigmatic relations: - hierarchical
- non-hierarchical.
PARADIGMATIC RELATIONS
NON-HIERARCHICAL RELATIONS
1. (Quasi)Identity of meaning: Synonyms and Paraphrases
Synonymy, i.e. “sameness of meaning” – words that sound different but have the same or nearly
the same meaning.
example: accompany/escort/convoy/conduct/attend/chaperon/see/show
The degree of semantic similarity between words depends to a great extent on the number of
semantic properties they share.
Some synonyms can be distinguished by register (often reflecting origin) – Germanic vs Romance
(Latin)
example buy vs purchase
The resources of English exceed those of Romanian in this respect.
example Failure of recollection is common….(?)
Syntactic structures may be different yet have the same meaning; they are considered
paraphrases of each other. They express the same proposition.
example The boy bought the book. ~ The book was bought by the boy.
2. (Quasi)Identity of form
a. Polysemy – a case of lexical units with multiple meanings, where the meaning is partly identical,
so the meanings are partly related. Signifiés (almost) identical, signifiants different.

1
Ex. school (1) a building (2) an institution (3) a group of people (4) a group of fish or dolphins.
Polysemy and homonymy are not always clearly distinct cases.
Polysemy is never accidental – the “different related meanings” of a lexeme derive from each other,
usually by way of metonymy or metaphor.
b. Homonymy an ambiguous word / phrase whose different senses are far apart from each other and
not obviously related to each other in any way.
Cases of homonymy - matters of accident or coincidence.
example ball1 n. round [?] object that is thrown, kicked or hit in a game or sport
ball2 n. a large or formal occasion at which people dance
homographs spelled the same – lead (v.) vs lead (n.)
homophones pronounced the same – flour vs flower
Homonyms are great sources for humour as well as for confusion.
example In God we trust. All others pay cash.
Oppositional relations
systematic vs unsystematic
A. Incompatibility (which implies a close semantic link), e.g. silly vs. clever, intelligent
B. Non-identity (no link), e.g., wise, well-clad, red.
Classes of Opposites
The meaning of a word may be partially defined by saying what it is not.
The basic property of two words that are antonyms is that they share all but one semantic
property.
ex beautiful and ugly vs beautiful and tall
Complementary pairs (also called binary pairs or simple antonyms): they do not allow for
gradations between the extreme poles of a semantic axis.
Ex. alive/dead present/absent
Gradable pairs of opposites (gradable antonyms): they are said to be in a polar contrast.
Ex. big/small hot/cold
Markedness - one is marked and the other is unmarked. "How high is it?" vs "How low is it?"
Comparative forms of gradable pairs of adjectives often form relational pairs/converses:
ex. if Sally is taller than Alfred, then Alfred is shorter than Sally.
Relational opposites (converses): display symmetry in their meaning. They actually
represent the same event/relation from contrasting perspectives.
Ex. give/receive buy/sell
Reverses (directional opposites): relation between terms describing movement, where one term
describes movement in one direction (→), and the other the same movement in the opposite
direction (←)
Ex. push/pull, up/down
Note: Some words have two antonyms, e.g. both young (of animates) and new (of inanimates) are
antonyms of old.
Multiple incompatibles (heteronyms; antonymic groups) : incompatibility involves more than
two words/expressions, which together form sets of terms; unlike polar antonyms they are not
related to scales and they are not placed at opposite extremes.
Ex. Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday, Saturday
II. HIERARCHICAL RELATIONS
Inclusion (Hyperonymy/Hyponymy)
-a relation of inclusion between a more general and a more specific term

2
Ex. boar>pig>animal
Word X will be said to be a hyponym of word Y (and, by the same token, Y a superordinate or
hyperonym of X) if A is f(X) entails but it is not entailed by A is f(Y):
Ex. This is a DOG. => (unilaterally entails) This is an ANIMAL.
Lower terms entail higher terms; the reverse proposition does not hold.
meronymy (Gk> meron = “part”) vs Holonymy
e.g., bicycle (holonym) and frame, fork, wheel, pedal, saddle (meronyms) etc.
The networks identified as meronymy are lexical: it is conceptually possible to segment items in
countless ways, but only some divisions are coded in the vocabulary of a language.
part-whole-like relations and differentiates six types of meronyms:
- component-object: branch-tree
- member-collection: tree-forest
- portion-mass : slice-cake
- stuff-object: aluminum-plane
- feature-activity: paying-shopping
- place-area: Dallas-Texas
Sets of meronyms form semantic fields: parts of the face, stages of life, jewelry etc. II.
SYNTAGMATIC RELATIONS
S-V heart-beat eye-see, mouth-eat/speak)
V-O smoke-cigarette/cigar; eat-(names of food), drink-tea
V-I cut-knife, write-pencil
Adj.-N: dark-night
Syntagmatic sense relations:
 Philonyms, e.g., John drinks tea. (They go together normally.) – normal combination
 Tautonyms, e.g., My male uncle... John drinks liquids. John kicked the ball with his foot.
(No new information = pleonasm) – pleonastic combination
 Xenonyms, e.g., John drinks morphemes. (= Semantic clash) / dissonantic combination
Rules:
1. Selection(al) restriction rules = rules that account for the acceptability of an utterance in
terms of semantic environment. (Co-occurrence restrictions)
Violation of selection restrictions -->:
*Water is in love with my friend.
*The girl assembles.
*Happiness is green.
2. Collocational rules, e.g., a high mountain, but a tall man. *a tall mountain (Co-occurrence
preferences) Also: a practical joke (not anecdote), of practical importance (not greatness)
Violation of 1. leads to (1) incongruity; and of 2. leads to (2) inappropriateness.
Conclusion:
Saussure stated the necessity of studying sense relations systematically and supported this
desideratum by two statements:
(1) A network of associative fields covers the whole language and thus structures the apparently
amorphous mass of words (Idea: the systematic nature of language at this level too)
(2) Each word is the centre of a constellation or of a series of constellations. Thus associative
fields or families are formed.

3
Videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=qSkCvjQADq4&list=PLINYK44rUHkPUe7qEjNUcvfmUfUvCdUIB&index=17