Semantics

Semantics is the study of linguistic meaning. It examines what meaning is,

how words get their meaning, and how the meaning of a complex
expression depends on its parts. Part of this process involves the
distinction between sense and reference. Sense is given by the ideas and
concepts associated with an expression while reference is the object to
which an expression points. Semantics contrasts with syntax, which
studies the rules that dictate how to create grammatically correct
sentences, and pragmatics, which investigates how people use language
in communication.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 1 of 227
:
 A central topic in semantics concerns the
relation between language, world, and
mental concepts.

Lexical semantics is the branch of semantics that studies word meaning. It

examines whether words have one or several meanings and in what lexical
relations they stand to one another. Phrasal semantics studies the
meaning of sentences by exploring the phenomenon of compositionality or
how new meanings can be created by arranging words. Formal semantics
relies on logic and mathematics to provide precise frameworks of the
relation between language and meaning. Cognitive semantics examines
meaning from a psychological perspective and assumes a close relation
between language ability and the conceptual structures used to
understand the world. Other branches of semantics include conceptual
semantics, computational semantics, and cultural semantics.

Theories of meaning are general explanations of the nature of meaning

and how expressions are endowed with it. According to referential
theories, the meaning of an expression is the part of reality to which it
points. Ideational theories identify meaning with mental states like the
ideas that an expression evokes in the minds of language users. According
to causal theories, meaning is determined by causes and effects, which
behaviorist semantics analyzes in terms of stimulus and response. Further
theories of meaning include truth-conditional semantics, verificationist
theories, the use theory, and inferentialist semantics.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 2 of 227
:
 The study of semantic phenomena began during antiquity but was not
recognized as an independent field of inquiry until the 19th century.
Semantics is relevant to the fields of formal logic, computer science, and
psychology.

Definition and related

fields
Semantics is the study of meaning in languages.[1] It is a systematic inquiry
that examines what linguistic meaning is and how it arises.[2] It
investigates how expressions are built up from different layers of
constituents, like morphemes, words, clauses, sentences, and texts, and
how the meanings of the constituents affect one another.[3] Semantics can
focus on a specific language, like English, but in its widest sense, it
investigates meaning structures relevant to all languages.[4][a][b] As a
descriptive discipline, it aims to determine how meaning works without
prescribing what meaning people should associate with particular
expressions.[7] Some of its key questions are "How do the meanings of
words combine to create the meanings of sentences?", "How do meanings
relate to the minds of language users, and to the things words refer to?",
and "What is the connection between what a word means, and the
contexts in which it is used?".[8] The main disciplines engaged in
semantics are linguistics, semiotics, and philosophy.[9] Besides its
meaning as a field of inquiry, semantics can also refer to theories within
this field, like truth-conditional semantics,[10] and to the meaning of
particular expressions, like the semantics of the word fairy.[11]

As a field of inquiry, semantics has both an internal and an external side.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 3 of 227
:
 The internal side is interested in the connection between words and the
mental phenomena they evoke, like ideas and conceptual representations.
The external side examines how words refer to objects in the world and
under what conditions a sentence is true.[12]

Many related disciplines investigate language and meaning. Semantics

contrasts with other subfields of linguistics focused on distinct aspects of
language. Phonology studies the different types of sounds used in
languages and how sounds are connected to form words while syntax
examines the rules that dictate how to arrange words to create sentences.
These divisions are reflected in the fact that it is possible to master some
aspects of a language while lacking others, like when a person knows how
to pronounce a word without knowing its meaning.[13] As a subfield of
semiotics, semantics has a more narrow focus on meaning in language
while semiotics studies both linguistic and non-linguistic signs. Semiotics
investigates additional topics like the meaning of non-verbal
communication, conventional symbols, and natural signs independent of
human interaction. Examples include nodding to signal agreement, stripes
on a uniform signifying rank, and the presence of vultures indicating a
nearby animal carcass.[14]

Semantics further contrasts with pragmatics, which is interested in how

people use language in communication.[15] An expression like "That's what
I'm talking about" can mean many things depending on who says it and in
what situation. Semantics is interested in the possible meanings of
expressions: what they can and cannot mean in general. In this regard, it is
sometimes defined as the study of context-independent meaning.
Pragmatics examines which of these possible meanings is relevant in a
particular case. In contrast to semantics, it is interested in actual
performance rather than in the general linguistic competence underlying
this performance.[16] This includes the topic of additional meaning that can
be inferred even though it is not literally expressed, like what it means if a
speaker remains silent on a certain topic.[17] A closely related distinction

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 4 of 227
:
 by the semiotician Charles W. Morris holds that semantics studies the
relation between words and the world, pragmatics examines the relation
between words and users, and syntax focuses on the relation between
different words.[18]

Semantics is related to etymology, which studies how words and their

meanings changed in the course of history.[7] Another connected field is
hermeneutics, which is the art or science of interpretation and is
concerned with the right methodology of interpreting text in general and
scripture in particular.[19] Metasemantics examines the metaphysical
foundations of meaning and aims to explain where it comes from or how it
arises.[20]

The word semantics originated from the Ancient Greek adjective

semantikos, meaning 'relating to signs', which is a derivative of sēmeion,
the noun for 'sign'. It was initially used for medical symptoms and only later
acquired its wider meaning regarding any type of sign, including linguistic
signs. The word semantics entered the English language from the French
term semantique, which the linguist Michel Bréal first introduced at the
end of the 19th century.[21]

Basic concepts

Meaning
Semantics studies meaning in language, which is limited to the meaning of
linguistic expressions. It concerns how signs are interpreted and what

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 5 of 227
:
 information they contain. An example is the meaning of words provided in
dictionary definitions by giving synonymous expressions or paraphrases,
like defining the meaning of the term ram as adult male sheep.[22] There
are many forms of non-linguistic meaning that are not examined by
semantics. Actions and policies can have meaning in relation to the goal
they serve. Fields like religion and spirituality are interested in the meaning
of life, which is about finding a purpose in life or the significance of
existence in general.[23]

Semantics is not focused on subjective

speaker meaning and is instead interested
in public meaning, like the meaning found
in general dictionary definitions.

Linguistic meaning can be analyzed on different levels. Word meaning is

studied by lexical semantics and investigates the denotation of individual
words. It is often related to concepts of entities, like how the word dog is
associated with the concept of the four-legged domestic animal. Sentence
meaning falls into the field of phrasal semantics and concerns the
denotation of full sentences. It usually expresses a concept applying to a
type of situation, as in the sentence "the dog has ruined my blue skirt".[24]
The meaning of a sentence is often referred to as a proposition.[25]
Different sentences can express the same proposition, like the English
sentence "the tree is green" and the German sentence "der Baum ist
grün".[26] Utterance meaning is studied by pragmatics and is about the

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 6 of 227
:
 meaning of an expression on a particular occasion. Sentence meaning and
utterance meaning come apart in cases where expressions are used in a
non-literal way, as is often the case with irony.[27]

Semantics is primarily interested in the public meaning that expressions

have, like the meaning found in general dictionary definitions. Speaker
meaning, by contrast, is the private or subjective meaning that individuals
associate with expressions. It can diverge from the literal meaning, like
when a person associates the word needle with pain or drugs.[28]

Sense and reference

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 7 of 227
:
 The distinction between sense
and reference was first
introduced by the philosopher
Gottlob Frege.[29]

Meaning is often analyzed in terms of sense and reference,[30] also

referred to as intension and extension or connotation and denotation.[31]
The referent of an expression is the object to which the expression points.
The sense of an expression is the way in which it refers to that object or
how the object is interpreted. For example, the expressions morning star
and evening star refer to the same planet, just like the expressions 2 + 2
and 3 + 1 refer to the same number. The meanings of these expressions
differ not on the level of reference but on the level of sense.[32] Sense is
sometimes understood as a mental phenomenon that helps people identify
the objects to which an expression refers.[33] Some semanticists focus
primarily on sense or primarily on reference in their analysis of meaning.
[34]
To grasp the full meaning of an expression, it is usually necessary to
understand both to what entities in the world it refers and how it describes
them.[35]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 8 of 227
:
 The distinction between sense and reference can explain identity
statements, which can be used to show how two expressions with a
different sense have the same referent. For instance, the sentence "the
morning star is the evening star" is informative and people can learn
something from it. The sentence "the morning star is the morning star", by
contrast, is an uninformative tautology since the expressions are identical
not only on the level of reference but also on the level of sense.[36]

Compositionality
Compositionality is a key aspect of how languages construct meaning. It is
the idea that the meaning of a complex expression is a function of the
meanings of its parts. It is possible to understand the meaning of the
sentence "Zuzana owns a dog" by understanding what the words Zuzana,
owns, a and dog mean and how they are combined.[37] In this regard, the
meaning of complex expressions like sentences is different from word
meaning since it is normally not possible to deduce what a word means by
looking at its letters and one needs to consult a dictionary instead.[38]

Compositionality is often used to explain how people can formulate and

understand an almost infinite number of meanings even though the
amount of words and cognitive resources is finite. Many sentences that
people read are sentences that they have never seen before and they are
nonetheless able to understand them.[37]

When interpreted in a strong sense, the principle of compositionality

states that the meaning of a complex expression is not just affected by its
parts and how they are combined but fully determined this way. It is
controversial whether this claim is correct or whether additional aspects

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 9 of 227
:
 influence meaning. For example, context may affect the meaning of
expressions; idioms like "kick the bucket" carry figurative or non-literal
meanings that are not directly reducible to the meanings of their parts.[37]

Truth and truth conditions

Truth is a property of statements that accurately present the world and
true statements are in accord with reality. Whether a statement is true
usually depends on the relation between the statement and the rest of the
world. The truth conditions of a statement are the way the world needs to
be for the statement to be true. For example, it belongs to the truth
conditions of the sentence "it is raining outside" that raindrops are falling
from the sky. The sentence is true if it is used in a situation in which the
truth conditions are fulfilled, i.e., if there is actually rain outside.[39]

Truth conditions play a central role in semantics and some theories rely
exclusively on truth conditions to analyze meaning. To understand a
statement usually implies that one has an idea about the conditions under
which it would be true. This can happen even if one does not know
whether the conditions are fulfilled.[39]

Semiotic triangle

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 10 of 227
:
 The semiotic triangle aims to explain how
the relation between language (Symbol)
and world (Referent) is mediated by the
language users (Thought or Reference).

The semiotic triangle, also called the triangle of meaning, is a model used
to explain the relation between language, language users, and the world,
represented in the model as Symbol, Thought or Reference, and Referent.
The symbol is a linguistic signifier, either in its spoken or written form. The
central idea of the model is that there is no direct relation between a
linguistic expression and what it refers to, as was assumed by earlier
dyadic models. This is expressed in the diagram by the dotted line
between symbol and referent.[40]

The model holds instead that the relation between the two is mediated
through a third component. For example, the term apple stands for a type
of fruit but there is no direct connection between this string of letters and
the corresponding physical object. The relation is only established
indirectly through the mind of the language user. When they see the
symbol, it evokes a mental image or a concept, which establishes the
connection to the physical object. This process is only possible if the
language user learned the meaning of the symbol before. The meaning of
a specific symbol is governed by the conventions of a particular language.
The same symbol may refer to one object in one language, to another
object in a different language, and to no object in another language. [40]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 11 of 227
:
 Others
Many other concepts are used to describe semantic phenomena. The
semantic role of an expression is the function it fulfills in a sentence. In the
sentence "the boy kicked the ball", the boy has the role of the agent who
performs an action. The ball is the theme or patient of this action as
something that does not act itself but is involved in or affected by the
action. The same entity can be both agent and patient, like when someone
cuts themselves. An entity has the semantic role of an instrument if it is
used to perform the action, for instance, when cutting something with a
knife then the knife is the instrument. For some sentences, no action is
described but an experience takes place, like when a girl sees a bird. In
this case, the girl has the role of the experiencer. Other common semantic
roles are location, source, goal, beneficiary, and stimulus.[41]

Lexical relations describe how words stand to one another. Two words are
synonyms if they share the same or a very similar meaning, like car and
automobile or buy and purchase. Antonyms have opposite meanings, such
as the contrast between alive and dead or fast and slow.[c] One term is a
hyponym of another term if the meaning of the first term is included in the
meaning of the second term. For example, ant is a hyponym of insect. A
prototype is a hyponym that has characteristic features of the type it
belongs to. A robin is a prototype of a bird but a penguin is not. Two words
with the same pronunciation are homophones like flour and flower, while
two words with the same spelling are homonyms, like a bank of a river in
contrast to a bank as a financial institution.[d] Hyponymy is closely related
to meronymy, which describes the relation between part and whole. For
instance, wheel is a meronym of car.[44] An expression is ambiguous if it
has more than one possible meaning. In some cases, it is possible to
disambiguate them to discern the intended meaning.[45] The term

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 12 of 227
:
 polysemy is used if the different meanings are closely related to one
another, like the meanings of the word head, which can refer to the
topmost part of the human body or the top-ranking person in an
organization.[44]

The meaning of words can often be subdivided into meaning components

called semantic features. The word horse has the semantic feature
animate but lacks the semantic feature human. It may not always be
possible to fully reconstruct the meaning of a word by identifying all its
semantic features.[46]

A semantic or lexical field is a group of words that are all related to the
same activity or subject. For instance, the semantic field of cooking
includes words like bake, boil, spice, and pan.[47]

The context of an expression refers to the situation or circumstances in

which it is used and includes time, location, speaker, and audience. It also
encompasses other passages in a text that come before and after it.[48]
Context affects the meaning of various expressions, like the deictic
expression here and the anaphoric expression she.[49]

A syntactic environment is extensional or transparent if it is always

possible to exchange expressions with the same reference without
affecting the truth value of the sentence. For example, the environment of
the sentence "the number 8 is even" is extensional because replacing the
expression "the number 8" with "the number of planets in the Solar
System" does not change its truth value. For intensional or opaque
contexts, this type of substitution is not always possible. For instance, the
embedded clause in "Paco believes that the number 8 is even" is
intensional since Paco may not know that the number of planets in the
solar system is 8.[50]

Semanticists commonly distinguish the language they study, called object

language, from the language they use to express their findings, called

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 13 of 227
:
 metalanguage. When a professor uses Japanese to teach their student
how to interpret the language of first-order logic then the language of
first-order logic is the object language and Japanese is the metalanguage.
The same language may occupy the role of object language and
metalanguage at the same time. This is the case in monolingual English
dictionaries, in which both the entry term belonging to the object language
and the definition text belonging to the metalanguage are taken from the
English language.[51]

Branches

Lexical semantics
Lexical semantics is the sub-field of semantics that studies word meaning.
[52]
It examines semantic aspects of individual words and the vocabulary
as a whole. This includes the study of lexical relations between words,
such as whether two terms are synonyms or antonyms.[53] Lexical
semantics categorizes words based on semantic features they share and
groups them into semantic fields unified by a common subject.[54] This
information is used to create taxonomies to organize lexical knowledge, for
example, by distinguishing between physical and abstract entities and
subdividing physical entities into stuff and individuated entities.[55] Further
topics of interest are polysemy, ambiguity, and vagueness.[56]

Lexical semantics is sometimes divided into two complementary

approaches: semasiology and onomasiology. Semasiology starts from
words and examines what their meaning is. It is interested in whether

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 14 of 227
:
 words have one or several meanings and how those meanings are related
to one another. Instead of going from word to meaning, onomasiology
goes from meaning to word. It starts with a concept and examines what
names this concept has or how it can be expressed in a particular
language.[57]

Some semanticists also include the study of lexical units other than words
in the field of lexical semantics. Compound expressions like being under
the weather have a non-literal meaning that acts as a unit and is not a
direct function of its parts. Another topic concerns the meaning of
morphemes that make up words, for instance, how negative prefixes like
in- and dis- affect the meaning of the words they are part of, as in
inanimate and dishonest.[58]

Phrasal semantics
Phrasal semantics studies the meaning of sentences. It relies on the
principle of compositionality to explore how the meaning of complex
expressions arises from the combination of their parts.[59][e] The different
parts can be analyzed as subject, predicate, or argument. The subject of a
sentence usually refers to a specific entity while the predicate describes a
feature of the subject or an event in which the subject participates.
Arguments provide additional information to complete the predicate.[61]
For example, in the sentence "Mary hit the ball", Mary is the subject, hit is
the predicate, and the ball is an argument.[61] A more fine-grained
categorization distinguishes between different semantic roles of words,
such as agent, patient, theme, location, source, and goal.[62]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 15 of 227
:
 Parse trees, like the constituency-based
parse tree, show how expressions are
combined to form sentences.

Verbs usually function as predicates and often help to establish

connections between different expressions to form a more complex
meaning structure. In the expression "Beethoven likes Schubert", the verb
like connects a liker to the object of their liking.[63] Other sentence parts
modify meaning rather than form new connections. For instance, the
adjective red modifies the color of another entity in the expression red car.
[64]
A further compositional device is variable binding, which is used to
determine the reference of a term. For example, the last part of the
expression "the woman who likes Beethoven" specifies which woman is
meant.[65] Parse trees can be used to show the underlying hierarchy
employed to combine the different parts.[66] Various grammatical devices,
like the gerund form, also contribute to meaning and are studied by
grammatical semantics.[67]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 16 of 227
:
 Formal semantics
Formal semantics uses formal tools from logic and mathematics to analyze
meaning in natural languages.[f] It aims to develop precise logical
formalisms to clarify the relation between expressions and their
denotation.[69] One of its key tasks is to provide frameworks of how
language represents the world, for example, using ontological models to
show how linguistic expressions map to the entities of that model.[69] A
common idea is that words refer to individual objects or groups of objects
while sentences relate to events and states. Sentences are mapped to a
truth value based on whether their description of the world is in
correspondence with its ontological model.[70]

Formal semantics further examines how to use formal mechanisms to

represent linguistic phenomena such as quantification, intensionality, noun
phrases, plurals, mass terms, tense, and modality.[71] Montague semantics
is an early and influential theory in formal semantics that provides a
detailed analysis of how the English language can be represented using
mathematical logic. It relies on higher-order logic, lambda calculus, and
type theory to show how meaning is created through the combination of
expressions belonging to different syntactic categories.[72]

Dynamic semantics is a subfield of formal semantics that focuses on how

information grows over time. According to it, "meaning is context change
potential": the meaning of a sentence is not given by the information it
contains but by the information change it brings about relative to a
context.[73]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 17 of 227
:
 Cognitive semantics

Cognitive semantics is interested in the

conceptual structures underlying language,
which can be articulated through the
contrast between profile and base. For
instance, the term hypotenuse profiles a
straight line against the background of a
right-angled triangle.

Cognitive semantics studies the problem of meaning from a psychological

perspective or how the mind of the language user affects meaning. As a
subdiscipline of cognitive linguistics, it sees language as a wide cognitive
ability that is closely related to the conceptual structures used to
understand and represent the world.[74][g] Cognitive semanticists do not
draw a sharp distinction between linguistic knowledge and knowledge of
the world and see them instead as interrelated phenomena.[76] They study
how the interaction between language and human cognition affects the
conceptual organization in very general domains like space, time,
causation, and action.[77] The contrast between profile and base is
sometimes used to articulate the underlying knowledge structure. The
profile of a linguistic expression is the aspect of the knowledge structure
that it brings to the foreground while the base is the background that

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 18 of 227
:
 provides the context of this aspect without being at the center of
attention.[78] For example, the profile of the word hypotenuse is a straight
line while the base is a right-angled triangle of which the hypotenuse
forms a part.[79][h]

Cognitive semantics further compares the conceptual patterns and

linguistic typologies across languages and considers to what extent the
cognitive conceptual structures of humans are universal or relative to their
linguistic background.[81] Another research topic concerns the
psychological processes involved in the application of grammar.[82] Other
investigated phenomena include categorization, which is understood as a
cognitive heuristic to avoid information overload by regarding different
entities in the same way,[83] and embodiment, which concerns how the
language user's bodily experience affects the meaning of expressions.[84]

Frame semantics is an important subfield of cognitive semantics.[85] Its

central idea is that the meaning of terms cannot be understood in isolation
from each other but needs to be analyzed on the background of the
conceptual structures they depend on. These structures are made explicit
in terms of semantic frames. For example, words like bride, groom, and
honeymoon evoke in the mind the frame of marriage.[86]

Others
Conceptual semantics shares with cognitive semantics the idea of
studying linguistic meaning from a psychological perspective by examining
how humans conceptualize and experience the world. It holds that
meaning is not about the objects to which expressions refer but about the
cognitive structure of human concepts that connect thought, perception,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 19 of 227
:
 and action. Conceptual semantics differs from cognitive semantics by
introducing a strict distinction between meaning and syntax and by relying
on various formal devices to explore the relation between meaning and
cognition.[87]

Computational semantics examines how the meaning of natural language

expressions can be represented and processed on computers.[88] It often
relies on the insights of formal semantics and applies them to problems
that can be computationally solved.[89] Some of its key problems include
computing the meaning of complex expressions by analyzing their parts,
handling ambiguity, vagueness, and context-dependence, and using the
extracted information in automatic reasoning.[90] It forms part of
computational linguistics, artificial intelligence, and cognitive science.[88]
Its applications include machine learning and machine translation.[91]

Cultural semantics studies the relation between linguistic meaning and

culture. It compares conceptual structures in different languages and is
interested in how meanings evolve and change because of cultural
phenomena associated with politics, religion, and customs.[92] For
example, address practices encode cultural values and social hierarchies,
as in the difference of politeness of expressions like tu and usted in
Spanish or du and Sie in German in contrast to English, which lacks these
distinctions and uses the pronoun you in either case.[93] Closely related
fields are intercultural semantics, cross-cultural semantics, and
comparative semantics.[94]

Pragmatic semantics studies how the meaning of an expression is shaped

by the situation in which it is used. It is based on the idea that
communicative meaning is usually context-sensitive and depends on who
participates in the exchange, what information they share, and what their
intentions and background assumptions are. It focuses on communicative
actions, of which linguistic expressions only form one part. Some theorists
include these topics within the scope of semantics while others consider

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 20 of 227
:
 them part of the distinct discipline of pragmatics.[95]

Theories of meaning
Theories of meaning explain what meaning is, what meaning an expression
has, and how the relation between expression and meaning is established.
[96]

Referential

Referential theories identify meaning with

the entities to which expressions point.

Referential theories state that the meaning of an expression is the entity to

which it points.[97] The meaning of singular terms like names is the
individual to which they refer. For example, the meaning of the name
George Washington is the person with this name.[98] General terms refer
not to a single entity but to the set of objects to which this term applies. In
this regard, the meaning of the term cat is the set of all cats.[99] Similarly,
verbs usually refer to classes of actions or events and adjectives refer to
properties of individuals and events.[100]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 21 of 227
:
 Simple referential theories face problems for meaningful expressions that
have no clear referent. Names like Pegasus and Santa Claus have meaning
even though they do not point to existing entities.[101] Other difficulties
concern cases in which different expressions are about the same entity.
For instance, the expressions Roger Bannister and the first man to run a
four-minute mile refer to the same person but do not mean exactly the
same thing.[102] This is particularly relevant when talking about beliefs
since a person may understand both expressions without knowing that
they point to the same entity.[103] A further problem is given by
expressions whose meaning depends on the context, like the deictic terms
here and I.[104]

To avoid these problems, referential theories often introduce additional

devices. Some identify meaning not directly with objects but with
functions that point to objects. This additional level has the advantage of
taking the context of an expression into account since the same
expression may point to one object in one context and to another object in
a different context. For example, the reference of the word here depends
on the location in which it is used.[105] A closely related approach is
possible world semantics, which allows expressions to refer not only to
entities in the actual world but also to entities in other possible worlds.[i]
According to this view, expressions like the first man to run a four-minute
mile refer to different persons in different worlds. This view can also be
used to analyze sentences that talk about what is possible or what is
necessary: possibility is what is true in some possible worlds while
necessity is what is true in all possible worlds.[107]

Ideational

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 22 of 227
:
 Ideational theories identify meaning with
the mental states of language users.

Ideational theories, also called mentalist theories, are not primarily

interested in the reference of expressions and instead explain meaning in
terms of the mental states of language users.[108] One historically
influential approach articulated by John Locke holds that expressions
stand for ideas in the speaker's mind. According to this view, the meaning
of the word dog is the idea that people have of dogs. Language is seen as
a medium used to transfer ideas from the speaker to the audience. After
having learned the same meaning of signs, the speaker can produce a sign
that corresponds to the idea in their mind and the perception of this sign
evokes the same idea in the mind of the audience.[109]

A closely related theory focuses not directly on ideas but on intentions.[110]

This view is particularly associated with Paul Grice, who observed that
people usually communicate to cause some reaction in their audience. He
held that the meaning of an expression is given by the intended reaction.
This means that communication is not just about decoding what the
speaker literally said but requires an understanding of their intention or
why they said it.[111] For example, telling someone looking for petrol that
"there is a garage around the corner" has the meaning that petrol can be
obtained there because of the speaker's intention to help. This goes
beyond the literal meaning, which has no explicit connection to petrol.[112]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 23 of 227
:
 Causal
Causal theories hold that the meaning of an expression depends on the
causes and effects it has.[113] According to behaviorist semantics, also
referred to as stimulus-response theory, the meaning of an expression is
given by the situation that prompts the speaker to use it and the response
it provokes in the audience.[114] For instance, the meaning of yelling "Fire!"
is given by the presence of an uncontrolled fire and attempts to control it
or seek safety.[115] Behaviorist semantics relies on the idea that learning a
language consists in adopting behavioral patterns in the form of stimulus-
response pairs.[116] One of its key motivations is to avoid private mental
entities and define meaning instead in terms of publicly observable
language behavior.[117]

Another causal theory focuses on the meaning of names and holds that a
naming event is required to establish the link between name and named
entity. This naming event acts as a form of baptism that establishes the
first link of a causal chain in which all subsequent uses of the name
participate.[118] According to this view, the name Plato refers to an ancient
Greek philosopher because, at some point, he was originally named this
way and people kept using this name to refer to him.[119] This view was
originally formulated by Saul Kripke to apply to names only but has been
extended to cover other types of speech as well.[120]

Others

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 24 of 227
:
 Truth-conditional semantics analyzes the meaning of sentences in terms
of their truth conditions. According to this view, to understand a sentence
means to know what the world needs to be like for the sentence to be true.
[121]
Truth conditions can themselves be expressed through possible
worlds. For example, the sentence "Hillary Clinton won the 2016 American
presidential election" is false in the actual world but there are some
possible worlds in which it is true.[122] The extension of a sentence can be
interpreted as its truth value while its intension is the set of all possible
worlds in which it is true.[123] Truth-conditional semantics is closely related
to verificationist theories, which introduce the additional idea that there
should be some kind of verification procedure to assess whether a
sentence is true. They state that the meaning of a sentence consists in the
method to verify it or in the circumstances that justify it.[124] For instance,
scientific claims often make predictions, which can be used to confirm or
disconfirm them using observation.[125] According to verificationism,
sentences that can neither be verified nor falsified are meaningless.[126]

The use theory states that the meaning of an expression is given by the
way it is utilized. This view was first introduced by Ludwig Wittgenstein,
who understood language as a collection of language games. The meaning
of expressions depends on how they are used inside a game and the same
expression may have different meanings in different games.[127] Some
versions of this theory identify meaning directly with patterns of regular
use.[128] Others focus on social norms and conventions by additionally
taking into account whether a certain use is considered appropriate in a
given society.[129]

Inferentialist semantics, also called conceptual role semantics, holds that

the meaning of an expression is given by the role it plays in the premises
and conclusions of good inferences.[130] For example, one can infer from
"x is a male sibling" that "x is a brother" and one can infer from "x is a
brother" that "x has parents". According to inferentialist semantics, the
meaning of the word brother is determined by these and all similar

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 25 of 227
:
 inferences that can be drawn.[131]

History
Semantics was established as an independent field of inquiry in the 19th
century but the study of semantic phenomena began as early as the
ancient period as part of philosophy and logic.[132][j] In ancient Greece,
Plato (427–347 BCE) explored the relation between names and things in
his dialogue Cratylus. It considers the positions of naturalism, which holds
that things have their name by nature, and conventionalism, which states
that names are related to their referents by customs and conventions
among language users.[134] The book On Interpretation by Aristotle (384–
322 BCE) introduced various conceptual distinctions that greatly
influenced subsequent works in semantics. He developed an early form of
the semantic triangle by holding that spoken and written words evoke
mental concepts, which refer to external things by resembling them. For
him, mental concepts are the same for all humans, unlike the conventional
words they associate with those concepts.[135] The Stoics incorporated
many of the insights of their predecessors to develop a complex theory of
language through the perspective of logic. They discerned different kinds
of words by their semantic and syntactic roles, such as the contrast
between names, common nouns, and verbs. They also discussed the
difference between statements, commands, and prohibitions.[136]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 26 of 227
:
 Bhartṛhari developed and compared
various semantic theories of the meaning
of words.[137]

In ancient India, the orthodox school of Nyaya held that all names refer to
real objects. It explored how words lead to an understanding of the thing
meant and what consequence this relation has to the creation of
knowledge.[138] Philosophers of the orthodox school of Mīmāṃsā
discussed the relation between the meanings of individual words and full
sentences while considering which one is more basic.[139] The book
Vākyapadīya by Bhartṛhari (4th–5th century CE) distinguished between
different types of words and considered how they can carry different
meanings depending on how they are used.[140] In ancient China, the
Mohists argued that names play a key role in making distinctions to guide
moral behavior.[141] They inspired the School of Names, which explored
the relation between names and entities while examining how names are
required to identify and judge entities.[142]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 27 of 227
:
 One of Peter Abelard's innovations was his
focus on the meaning of full sentences
rather than the meaning of individual
words.

In the Middle Ages, Augustine of Hippo (354–430) developed a general

conception of signs as entities that stand for other entities and convey
them to the intellect. He was the first to introduce the distinction between
natural and linguistic signs as different types belonging to a common
genus.[143] Boethius (480–528) wrote a translation of and various
comments on Aristotle's book On Interpretation, which popularized its
main ideas and inspired reflections on semantic phenomena in the
scholastic tradition.[144] An innovation in the semantics of Peter Abelard
(1079–1142) was his interest in propositions or the meaning of sentences
in contrast to the focus on the meaning of individual words by many of his
predecessors. He further explored the nature of universals, which he
understood as mere semantic phenomena of common names caused by
mental abstractions that do not refer to any entities.[145] In the Arabic
tradition, Ibn Faris (920–1004) identified meaning with the intention of the
speaker while Abu Mansur al-Azhari (895–980) held that meaning resides
directly in speech and needs to be extracted through interpretation.[146]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 28 of 227
:
 An important topic towards the end of the Middle Ages was the distinction
between categorematic and syncategorematic terms. Categorematic
terms have an independent meaning and refer to some part of reality, like
horse and Socrates. Syncategorematic terms lack independent meaning
and fulfill other semantic functions, such as modifying or quantifying the
meaning of other expressions, like the words some, not, and necessarily.
[147]
An early version of the causal theory of meaning was proposed by
Roger Bacon (c. 1219/20 – c. 1292), who held that things get names similar
to how people get names through some kind of initial baptism.[148] His
ideas inspired the tradition of the speculative grammarians, who proposed
that there are certain universal structures found in all languages. They
arrived at this conclusion by drawing an analogy between the modes of
signification on the level of language, the modes of understanding on the
level of mind, and the modes of being on the level of reality.[149]

In the early modern period, Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) distinguished

between marks, which people use privately to recall their own thoughts,
and signs, which are used publicly to communicate their ideas to others.
[150]
In their Port-Royal Logic, Antoine Arnauld (1612–1694) and Pierre
Nicole (1625–1695) developed an early precursor of the distinction
between intension and extension.[151] The Essay Concerning Human
Understanding by John Locke (1632–1704) presented an influential
version of the ideational theory of meaning, according to which words
stand for ideas and help people communicate by transferring ideas from
one mind to another.[152] Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716)
understood language as the mirror of thought and tried to conceive the
outlines of a universal formal language to express scientific and
philosophical truths. This attempt inspired theorists Christian Wolff (1679–
1754), Georg Bernhard Bilfinger (1693–1750), and Johann Heinrich
Lambert (1728–1777) to develop the idea of a general science of sign
systems.[153] Étienne Bonnot de Condillac (1715–1780) accepted and
further developed Leibniz's idea of the linguistic nature of thought. Against

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 29 of 227
:
 Locke, he held that language is involved in the creation of ideas and is not
merely a medium to communicate them.[154]

Michel Bréal coined the French term

sémantique and conceptualized the scope
of this field of inquiry.

In the 19th century, semantics emerged and solidified as an independent

field of inquiry. Christian Karl Reisig (1792–1829) is sometimes credited as
the father of semantics since he clarified its concept and scope while also
making various contributions to its key ideas.[155] Michel Bréal (1832–
1915) followed him in providing a broad conception of the field, for which
he coined the French term sémantique.[156] John Stuart Mill (1806–1873)
gave great importance to the role of names to refer to things. He
distinguished between the connotation and denotation of names and held
that propositions are formed by combining names.[157] Charles Sanders
Peirce (1839–1914) conceived semiotics as a general theory of signs with
several subdisciplines, which were later identified by Charles W. Morris
(1901–1979) as syntactics, semantics, and pragmatics. In his pragmatist
approach to semantics, Peirce held that the meaning of conceptions

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 30 of 227
:
 consists in the entirety of their practical consequences.[158] The
philosophy of Gottlob Frege (1848–1925) contributed to semantics on
many different levels. Frege first introduced the distinction between sense
and reference, and his development of predicate logic and the principle of
compositionality formed the foundation of many subsequent
developments in formal semantics.[159] Edmund Husserl (1859–1938)
explored meaning from a phenomenological perspective by considering
the mental acts that endow expressions with meaning. He held that
meaning always implies reference to an object and expressions that lack a
referent, like green is or, are meaningless.[160]

In the 20th century, Alfred Tarski (1901–1983) defined truth in formal

languages through his semantic theory of truth, which was influential in
the development of truth-conditional semantics by Donald Davidson
(1917–2003).[161] Tarski's student Richard Montague (1930–1971)
formulated a complex formal framework of the semantics of the English
language, which was responsible for establishing formal semantics as a
major area of research.[162] According to structural semantics,[k] which
was inspired by the structuralist philosophy of Ferdinand de Saussure
(1857–1913), language is a complex network of structural relations and the
meanings of words are not fixed individually but depend on their position
within this network.[164] The theory of general semantics was developed
by Alfred Korzybski (1879–1950) as an inquiry into how language
represents reality and affects human thought.[165] The contributions of
George Lakoff (1941–present) and Ronald Langacker (1942–present)
provided the foundation of cognitive semantics.[166] Charles J. Fillmore
(1929–2014) developed frame semantics as a major approach in this area.
[167]
The closely related field of conceptual semantics was inaugurated by
Ray Jackendoff (1945–present).[168]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 31 of 227
:
 In various disciplines

Logic
Logicians study correct reasoning and often develop formal languages to
express arguments and assess their correctness.[169] One part of this
process is to provide a semantics for a formal language to precisely define
what its terms mean. A semantics of a formal language is a set of rules,
usually expressed as a mathematical function, that assigns meanings to
formal language expressions.[170] For example, the language of first-order
logic uses lowercase letters for individual constants and uppercase letters
for predicates. To express the sentence "Bertie is a dog", the formula
can be used where is an individual constant for Bertie and is a
predicate for dog. Classical model-theoretic semantics assigns meaning to
these terms by defining an interpretation function that maps individual
constants to specific objects and predicates to sets of objects or tuples.
The function maps to Bertie and to the set of all dogs. This way, it is
possible to calculate the truth value of the sentence: it is true if Bertie is a
member of the set of dogs and false otherwise.[171]

Formal logic aims to determine whether arguments are deductively valid,

that is, whether the premises entail the conclusion.[172] Entailment can be
defined in terms of syntax or in terms of semantics. Syntactic entailment,
expressed with the symbol , relies on rules of inference, which can be
understood as procedures to transform premises and arrive at a
conclusion. These procedures only take the logical form of the premises

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 32 of 227
:
 on the level of syntax into account and ignore what meaning they express.
Semantic entailment, expressed with the symbol , looks at the meaning
of the premises, in particular, at their truth value. A conclusion follows
semantically from a set of premises if the truth of the premises ensures
the truth of the conclusion, that is, if any semantic interpretation function
that assigns the premises the value true also assigns the conclusion the
value true.[173]

Computer science
In computer science, the semantics of a program is how it behaves when a
computer runs it. Semantics contrasts with syntax, which is the particular
form in which instructions are expressed. The same behavior can usually
be described with different forms of syntax. In JavaScript, this is the case
for the commands i += 1 and i = i + 1 , which are syntactically
different expressions to increase the value of the variable i by one. This
difference is also reflected in different programming languages since they
rely on different syntax but can usually be employed to create programs
with the same behavior on the semantic level.[174]

Static semantics focuses on semantic aspects that affect the compilation

of a program. In particular, it is concerned with detecting errors of
syntactically correct programs, such as type errors, which arise when an
operation receives an incompatible data type. This is the case, for
instance, if a function performing a numerical calculation is given a string
instead of a number as an argument.[175] Dynamic semantics focuses on
the run time behavior of programs, that is, what happens during the
execution of instructions.[176] The main approaches to dynamic semantics

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 33 of 227
:
 are denotational, axiomatic, and operational semantics. Denotational
semantics relies on mathematical formalisms to describe the effects of
each element of the code. Axiomatic semantics uses deductive logic to
analyze which conditions must be in place before and after the execution
of a program. Operational semantics interprets the execution of a program
as a series of steps, each involving the transition from one state to another
state.[177]

Psychology
Psychological semantics examines psychological aspects of meaning. It is
concerned with how meaning is represented on a cognitive level and what
mental processes are involved in understanding and producing language.
It further investigates how meaning interacts with other mental processes,
such as the relation between language and perceptual experience.[178][l]
Other issues concern how people learn new words and relate them to
familiar things and concepts, how they infer the meaning of compound
expressions they have never heard before, how they resolve ambiguous
expressions, and how semantic illusions lead them to misinterpret
sentences.[180]

One key topic is semantic memory, which is a form of general knowledge

of meaning that includes the knowledge of language, concepts, and facts.
It contrasts with episodic memory, which records events that a person
experienced in their life. The comprehension of language relies on
semantic memory and the information it carries about word meanings.[181]
According to a common view, word meanings are stored and processed in
relation to their semantic features. The feature comparison model states

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 34 of 227
:
 that sentences like "a robin is a bird" are assessed on a psychological level
by comparing the semantic features of the word robin with the semantic
features of the word bird. The assessment process is fast if their semantic
features are similar, which is the case if the example is a prototype of the
general category. For atypical examples, as in the sentence "a penguin is a
bird", there is less overlap in the semantic features and the psychological
process is significantly slower.[182]

See also

Contronym
Semantic technology –
Technology to help machines
understand data
Natural Language Processing
– Field of linguistics and
computer science

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 35 of 227
:
 Semantic change – Evolution
of a word's meaning
Talking past one another –
Semantic fallacy; social
phenomena

References

Notes

a. The study of meaning

structures found in all
languages is sometimes
referred to as universal

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 36 of 227
:
 semantics.[5]
b. Semantics usually focuses
on natural languages but it
can also include the study
of meaning in formal
languages, like the
language of first-order
logic and programming
languages.[6]
c. Antonym is an antonym of
synonym.[42]
d. Some linguists use the
term homonym for both

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 37 of 227
:
 term homonym for both
phenomena.[43]
e. Some authors use the term
compositional semantics
for this type of inquiry.[60]
f. The term formal semantics
is sometimes used in a
different sense to refer to
compositional semantics or
to the study of meaning in
the formal languages of
systems of logic.[68]
g. Cognitive semantics does
not accept the idea of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 38 of 227
:
 not accept the idea of
linguistic relativity
associated with the Sapir–
Whorf hypothesis and
holds instead that the
underlying cognitive
processes responsible for
conceptual structures are
independent of the
language one speaks.[75]
h. Other examples are the
word island, which profiles
a landmass against the
background of the

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 39 of 227
:
 background of the
surrounding water, and the
word uncle, which profiles
a human adult male against
the background of kinship
relations.[80]
i. A possible world is a
complete way of how
things could have been.
[106]

j. The history of semantics is

different from historical
semantics, which studies
how the meanings of words

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 40 of 227
:
 how the meanings of words
change through time.[133]
k. Some theorists use the
term structural semantics
in a different sense to refer
to phrasal semantics.[163]
l. Some theorists use the
term psychosemantics to
refer to this discipline while
others understand the term
in a different sense.[179]

Citations

1. AHD Staff 2022

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 41 of 227
:
 1. AHD Staff 2022
Saeed 2009, p. 4
Crimmins 1998, Lead
Section
2. Saeed 2009, pp. 4–5
Crimmins 1998, Lead
Section
King 2006, p. 735
Riemer 2010, pp. 2–3
3. Allan 2009, p. xi
4. Bezuidenhout 2009, p. 875
Jacobson 2014, p. 4 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=XRRCBA
AAQBAJ&pg=PA4)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 42 of 227
:
 AAQBAJ&pg=PA4)
Zaefferer 2019, p. 1 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=t9G1DwA
AQBAJ&pg=PA1)
5. Zaefferer 2019, p. 1 (http
s://books.google.com/book
s?id=t9G1DwAAQBAJ&pg
=PA1)
6. Lewis 2012, p. 169 (https://books.
google.com/books?id=vsb-CAAA
QBAJ&pg=PA169)
Saeed 2009, pp. 305–306, 315–
317
Fernández 2014, p. 14 (https://bo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 43 of 227
:
 Fernández 2014, p. 14 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=dzi5B
QAAQBAJ&pg=PA14)
7. Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
p. 12
8. Riemer 2010, p. 2
9. Crimmins 1998, Lead
Section
Saeed 2009, p. 5
Riemer 2010, pp. 4–6
10. Carston 2011, p. 280 (http
s://books.google.com/book
s?id=v0tz8crnDqEC&pg=P

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 44 of 227
:
 A280)
11. Williams 1997, p. 457 (http
s://books.google.com/book
s?id=DLmoKKkxAX0C&pg
=PA457)
12. Gross 2016, pp. 12–13
Riemer 2016, pp. 30–31
13. Saeed 2009, pp. 4–5
Jun 2009, p. 463
Jackendoff 2013, p. 72 (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=N_lQ
EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA72)
14. Saeed 2009, p. 5

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 45 of 227
:
 14. Saeed 2009, p. 5
Riemer 2010, pp. 4–6
15. Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
p. 1
Bezuidenhout 2009,
p. 875
16. Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
pp. 1–3, 14
Bezuidenhout 2009,
p. 875
17. Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
pp. 12–13
18. Bezuidenhout 2009,
p. 875

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 46 of 227
:
 p. 875
19. Malpas 2014, Introduction:
Hermeneutics and Philosophy (htt
ps://books.google.com/books?id=
zUaLBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA1)
AHD Staff 2022a
Vámos 2019, p. 3-2 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=v3GlDwA
AQBAJ&pg=SA3-PA2)
20. Anderson 2021, p. 4 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=LCdBEA
AAQBAJ&pg=PA4)
Burgess & Sherman 2014, pp. 1–
2 (https://books.google.com/book

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 47 of 227
:
 2 (https://books.google.com/book
s?id=G0iPBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA1)
21. Riemer 2010, p. 2
Hoad 1993, p. 428
22. Cunningham 2009,
pp. 530–531
Yule 2010, pp. 113–114
23. Leach & Tartaglia 2018,
pp. 274–275
Cunningham 2009, p. 526
Löbner 2013, pp. 1–2
Seachris, § 2a. The
Meanings of 'Meaning'

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 48 of 227
:
 24. Riemer 2010, pp. 21–22
Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
pp. 5–6
Löbner 2013, pp. 1–6, 18–
21
25. Tondl 2012, p. 111
26. Olkowski & Pirovolakis
2019, pp. 65–66 (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id
=FhaGDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT
65)
27. Riemer 2010, pp. 21–22
Griffiths & Cummins 2023,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 49 of 227
:
 Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
pp. 5–6
Löbner 2013, pp. 1–6
Saeed 2009, pp. 12–13
28. Yule 2010, p. 113
Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
pp. 5–6
29. Zalta 2022, § 1. Frege’s
Life and Influences, § 3.
Frege’s Philosophy of
Language.
30. Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
pp. 7–9
Cunningham 2009, p. 526

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 50 of 227
:
 Cunningham 2009, p. 526
Saeed 2009, p. 46
31. Cunningham 2009, p. 527
Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
pp. 7–9
32. Cunningham 2009, p. 526
Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
pp. 7–9
33. Marti 1998, Lead Section
Riemer 2010, pp. 27–28
34. Riemer 2010, pp. 25–28
Griffiths & Cummins 2023,
pp. 7–9
35. Cunningham 2009, p. 531
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 51 of 227
:
 35. Cunningham 2009, p. 531
36. Marti 1998, Lead Section
37. Szabó 2020, Lead Section
Pelletier 1994, pp. 11–12
Krifka 2001, p. 152 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=-wt1aZrG
XLYC&pg=PA152)
38. Löbner 2013, pp. 7–8, 10–
12
39. Gregory 2016, pp. 9–10
Blackburn 2008, Truth
Conditions (https://www.ox
fordreference.com/display/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 52 of 227
:
 fordreference.com/display/
10.1093/oi/authority.20110
803105953851)
Kearns 2011, pp. 8–10
40. Palmer 1976, pp. 25–26
Noth 1990, pp. 89–90 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=rHA4K
QcPeNgC&pg=PA89)
Dirven & Verspoor 2004, pp. 28–
29 (https://books.google.com/bo
oks?id=OM58J4nQJaYC&pg=PA
28)
Riemer 2010, pp. 13–16
41. Yule 2010, pp. 115–116

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 53 of 227
:
 41. Yule 2010, pp. 115–116
Saeed 2009, pp. 152–155
42. Heffer 2014, p. 42 (https://
books.google.com/books?i
d=7WOEAgAAQBAJ&pg=P
A42)
43. Saeed 2009, p. 63
44. Yule 2010, pp. 116–120
Saeed 2009, pp. 63–70
45. Edmonds 2009, pp. 223–226
Murphy & Koskela 2010, p. 57 (htt
ps://books.google.com/books?id=
YO0WDRPHcWIC&pg=PA57)
46. Yule 2010, pp. 113–115

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 54 of 227
:
 46. Yule 2010, pp. 113–115
47. Saeed 2009, p. 63
Reif & Polzenhagen 2023,
pp. 129–130 (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=DyPdEAAAQBA
J&pg=PA129)
48. Meulen 2008, Philosophy of
Language and Linguistics (https://
books.google.com/books?id=tSKf
SI-7ZncC&pg=PA1653)
Kuche & Rowland 2023, pp. 13–
14 (https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=Kaa7EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA1
3)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 55 of 227
:
 3)
49. Cornish 1999, pp. 18–19 (https://
books.google.com/books?id=xip7
6JYlvygC&pg=PA18)
Jiang 2016, § Summary
50. Blackburn 2008c
Partee 1997, pp. 833–834 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=o
1jGSavwQZIC&pg=PA833)
51. Riemer 2010, pp. 22–23
Gamut 1991, pp. 142–143 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=k
tqxlzcc5nQC&pg=PA142)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 56 of 227
:
 Dummett 1981, p. 106 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=EYP7u
CZIRQYC&pg=PA106)
52. Geeraerts 2017, Lead Section
Taylor 2017, pp. 246–247 (https://w
ore/books/abs/cambridge-handboo
stics/lexical-semantics/798AB6901
A52EC8ECF)
Pustejovsky 2006, pp. 98–100 (htt
m/books?id=cxYGQfiD_1oC&pg=PT
Pustejovsky 2009, p. 476
Márquez 2011, p. 146 (https://book
id=TkKVwYcG8Q4C&pg=PA146)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 57 of 227
:
 53. Geeraerts 2017, Lead Section, §
1. The Descriptive Scope of
Lexical Semantics
Pustejovsky 2009, p. 476
Márquez 2011, pp. 146–147 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=T
kKVwYcG8Q4C&pg=PA146)
54. Geeraerts 2017, Lead
Section, § 1.3 Lexical Fields
and Componential Analysis
Yule 2010, pp. 113–115
55. Pustejovsky 2009, p. 479
56. Pustejovsky 2006, pp. 98–100 (h

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 58 of 227
:
 ttps://books.google.com/books?id
=cxYGQfiD_1oC&pg=PT11380)
Geeraerts 2017, § 1.1 Polysemy
and Vagueness
57. Geeraerts 2017, § 1. The Descriptiv
Semantics
Noth 1990, p. 106
Taylor 2017, pp. 246–247 (https://w
ore/books/abs/cambridge-handboo
stics/lexical-semantics/798AB6901
A52EC8ECF)
58. L'Homme 2020, pp. 67–69 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=j

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 59 of 227
:
 dbHDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT89)
Trips 2009, p. 236 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=gsNjdT8i
ArQC&pg=PA236)
Andreou 2015, Abstract
59. Fasold & Connor-Linton 2006,
pp. 141, 156 (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=E85VAgAAQBA
J&pg=PA141)
Jackendoff 2002, p. 378
Park-Johnson & Shin 2020,
pp. 103–104
Riemer 2010, p. 21

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 60 of 227
:
 Bieswanger & Becker 2017,
p. 128 (https://books.google.com/
books?id=Tzg8DwAAQBAJ&pg=
PA128)
Jacobson 2014, p. 5
60. Fasold & Connor-Linton 2006,
p. 156 (https://books.google.com/
books?id=E85VAgAAQBAJ&pg=P
A156)
Bagha 2011, pp. 1414–1415
61. Fasold & Connor-Linton
2006, pp. 141–143 (http
s://books.google.com/book

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 61 of 227
:
 s?id=E85VAgAAQBAJ&pg
=PA141)
62. Fasold & Connor-Linton 2006,
p. 143 (https://books.google.com/
books?id=E85VAgAAQBAJ&pg=P
A143)
Park-Johnson & Shin 2020,
pp. 103–104
63. Jackendoff 2002, pp. 378–
380
64. Jackendoff 2002, pp. 382–
383
65. Jackendoff 2002,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 62 of 227
:
 65. Jackendoff 2002,
pp. 384–385
66. Valin 2008, p. 466 (https://books.
google.com/books?id=a4X2oVrrz
-EC&pg=PT466)
Berwick & Stabler 2019, p. 110 (h
ttps://books.google.com/books?id
=bPerDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA110)
67. Wierzbicka 1988, p. 3 (http
s://books.google.com/book
s?id=f2G3RFoxk84C&pg=
PA3)
68. Bohnemeyer 2021, p. 24 (https://
books.google.com/books?id=HLJ

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 63 of 227
:
 books.google.com/books?id=HLJ
FEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA24)
Pollock 2017, p. 172 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=UIwrDgA
AQBAJ&pg=PA172)
69. Geeraerts 2010, pp. 118–119 (htt
ps://books.google.com/books?id=
JC8TDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA118)
Moeschler 2007, pp. 31–33 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=h
3SpC0oBc_AC&pg=PA31)
Portner & Partee 2008, pp. 1–2 (
https://books.google.com/books?i
d=ptgUWREtAkMC&pg=PA1)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 64 of 227
:
 d=ptgUWREtAkMC&pg=PA1)
70. Moeschler 2007, pp. 31–
33 (https://books.google.c
om/books?id=h3SpC0oBc
_AC&pg=PA31)
71. Portner & Partee 2008,
pp. 3, 8–10, 35, 127, 324 (
https://books.google.com/
books?id=ptgUWREtAkM
C&pg=PA3)
72. Portner & Partee 2008, pp. 3–4 (
https://books.google.com/books?i
d=ptgUWREtAkMC&pg=PA3)
Janssen & Zimmermann 2021,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 65 of 227
:
 Janssen & Zimmermann 2021,
Lead Section, § 1. Introduction, §
2.3 Logic and Translation
73. Groenendijk & Stokhof
2009, pp. 272–273
Nouwen et al. 2022, Lead
Section
74. Li 2021
Taylor 2009, pp. 73–74
Croft & Cruse 2004, pp. 1–3 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=I
6Z9H-eRSgoC&pg=PA1)
75. Kortmann 2020, p. 165 (htt
ps://books.google.com/boo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 66 of 227
:
 ps://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=0PoFEAAAQBAJ&pg
=PA165) .
76. Taylor 2009, pp. 73–74
77. Li 2021
78. Taylor 2009, pp. 74–75
Enfield 2002, p. 152 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=ei4CErNy
xp0C&pg=PA152)
79. Taylor 2009, pp. 74–75
Taylor 2013, pp. 38–40 (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=MZYg
AAAAQBAJ&pg=PA38)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 67 of 227
:
 80. Taylor 2009, pp. 74–75
81. Taylor 2009, p. 85
Li 2021
82. Li 2021
Taylor 2009, pp. 83–84
83. Taylor 2009, pp. 76–77
84. Taylor 2009, p. 82
85. Mushayabasa 2014, p. 21 (https://
books.google.com/books?id=2Qc
SBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA21)
Shead 2011, pp. 34–35 (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=feR5
DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA34)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 68 of 227
:
 DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA34)
86. Gawron 2011, pp. 664–
665, 669
Fillmore 2009, pp. 330–
332
87. Riemer 2010, pp. 261–263
Jackendoff 2011, p. 688
88. Geeraerts 2010, p. 118 (https://boo
om/books?id=JC8TDAAAQBAJ&pg
Bunt & Muskens 1999, pp. 1–2 (http
nger.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94
_1)
89. Bunt & Muskens 1999,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 69 of 227
:
 pp. 1–2 (https://link.springe
r.com/chapter/10.1007/978
-94-011-4231-1_1)
90. Geeraerts 2010, p. 118 (https://boo
om/books?id=JC8TDAAAQBAJ&pg
Bunt & Muskens 1999, pp. 1–2 (http
nger.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94
_1)
Erk 2018, Summary
91. Erk 2018, Summary
Geeraerts 2010, p. 118 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=JC8TD
AAAQBAJ&pg=PA118)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 70 of 227
:
 92. Zhao 2023, Preface (http
s://brill.com/display/book/9
789004535183/front-10.x
ml)
93. Farese 2018, pp. 1–3 (http
s://books.google.com/book
s?id=NsllDwAAQBAJ&pg=
PA1)
94. Peeters 2006, p. 25 (http
s://books.google.com/book
s?id=MsIFbHm0_lcC&pg=
PT25)
95. Márquez 2011, p. 149 (https://boo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 71 of 227
:
 95. Márquez 2011, p. 149 (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=TkKVwY
cG8Q4C&pg=PA149)
Bublitz & Norrick 2011, pp. 215–
216 (https://books.google.com/bo
oks?id=XgYP7AKeoKwC&pg=PA2
15)
96. Speaks 2021, Lead Section
Glock 2012, pp. 51–52
Holm & Karlgren 1995,
pp. 20–21
Bagha 2011, pp. 1414–
1415
97. Glock 2012, p. 51

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 72 of 227
:
 97. Glock 2012, p. 51
Holm & Karlgren 1995,
pp. 21–22
98. Speaks 2021, § 2.1.1 The Theory
of Reference
Holm & Karlgren 1995, pp. 21–22
Davis 2005, pp. 209–210
Gibbs 1994, pp. 29–30 (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=4kVJ
AMghNmUC&pg=PA29)
99. Davis 2005, pp. 209–210
100. Gibbs 1994, pp. 29–30 (htt
ps://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=4kVJAMghNmUC&p

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 73 of 227
:
 ks?id=4kVJAMghNmUC&p
g=PA29)
101. Davis 2005, p. 211
102. Holm & Karlgren 1995, pp. 21–22
Gibbs 1994, pp. 29–30 (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=4kVJ
AMghNmUC&pg=PA29)
103. Speaks 2021, § 2.1.2
Theories of Reference Vs.
Semantic Theories
104. Speaks 2021, § 2.1.4
Character and Content,
Context and Circumstance

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 74 of 227
:
 105. Davis 2005, pp. 209–210
Holm & Karlgren 1995,
pp. 21–22
Speaks 2021, § 2.1.4
Character and Content,
Context and Circumstance
106. Berto & Jago 2023, Lead Section
Pavel 1986, p. 50 (https://books.g
oogle.com/books?id=OF7ZA54U
pYYC&pg=PA50)
107. Speaks 2021, § 2.1.5 Possible
Worlds Semantics
Rooij 2012, pp. 198–199 (https://

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 75 of 227
:
 books.google.com/books?id=KlP
wvH6ICqIC&pg=PA198)
Davis 2005, pp. 209–210
108. Chapman & Routledge
2009
Speaks 2021, § 3.1
Mentalist Theories
109. Chapman & Routledge 2009
Holm & Karlgren 1995, p. 22
Appiah & Gutmann 1998, p. 34 (h
ttps://books.google.com/books?id
=ylp_omhIPssC&pg=PA34)
Pearce 2022, pp. 194–195 (http

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 76 of 227
:
 s://books.google.com/books?id=i
nhXEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA194)
110. Chapman & Routledge 2009
Pearce 2022, pp. 194–195 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=i
nhXEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA194)
Speaks 2021, § 3.1.1 The Gricean
Program
111. Chapman & Routledge 2009
Glock 2012, p. 52
Speaks 2021, § 3.1.1 The Gricean
Program
Feng 2010, pp. 11–12 (https://boo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 77 of 227
:
 ks.google.com/books?id=_AgDSh
5c1QcC&pg=PA11)
112. Feng 2010, p. 19 (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id
=_AgDSh5c1QcC&pg=PA1
9)
113. Glock 2012, pp. 51–52
Blackburn 2008a
Speaks 2021, § 3.2.1
Causal Origin
114. Holm & Karlgren 1995,
p. 23
Lyons 1996, pp. 120, 123–

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 78 of 227
:
 Lyons 1996, pp. 120, 123–
125
Lepore 2009, p. 1026
115. Duignan 2023, §
Behaviourist Semantics
Lepore 2009, p. 1026
116. Lyons 1996, pp. 123–125
117. Lyons 1996, pp. 120–121
118. Blackburn 2008a
Speaks 2021, § 3.2.1
Causal Origin
119. Blackburn 2008a
120. Speaks 2021, § 3.2.1

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 79 of 227
:
 Causal Origin
121. Dummett 2008, pp. 45–46
Kearns 2011, pp. 8–11
122. Berto & Jago 2023, § 1.
Reasons for Introducing
Impossible Worlds
123. Kearns 2011, pp. 8–11
124. Glock 2012, p. 51
Morris & Preti 2023, pp. 369–
370 (https://books.google.com/b
ooks?id=p_3LEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA
369)
Boyd, Gasper & Trout 1991, p. 5 (

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 80 of 227
:
 Boyd, Gasper & Trout 1991, p. 5 (
https://books.google.com/books?i
d=pEzcsK1wlVYC&pg=PA5)
Lepore 2009, p. 1027
125. Boyd, Gasper & Trout 1991,
p. 5 (https://books.google.c
om/books?id=pEzcsK1wlV
YC&pg=PA5)
126. Morris & Preti 2023, pp. 369–
370 (https://books.google.com/b
ooks?id=p_3LEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA
369)
Boyd, Gasper & Trout 1991, p. 5 (
https://books.google.com/books?i

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 81 of 227
:
 https://books.google.com/books?i
d=pEzcsK1wlVYC&pg=PA5)
127. Holm & Karlgren 1995, pp. 23–24
Strauven 2018, p. 78 (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=eYdIDw
AAQBAJ&pg=PA78)
128. Speaks 2021, § 3.2.4
Regularities in Use
129. Speaks 2021, § 3.2.5
Social Norms
130. Speaks 2021, § 2.2.3
Inferentialist Semantics
Whiting, Lead Section, §
1a. A Theory of Linguistic

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 82 of 227
:
 1a. A Theory of Linguistic
Meaning
Hess 2022, § Abstract, § 1
Introduction
131. Whiting, § 1a. A Theory of
Linguistic Meaning
132. Meier-Oeser 2019, p. 182
Nerlich 1992, p. 2 (https://books.
google.com/books?id=BeJBAAAA
QBAJ&pg=PA2)
133. Geeraerts 2010, p. 1 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=JC8TDA
AAQBAJ&pg=PA1)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 83 of 227
:
 Kay 2015, pp. 1–2 (https://books.
google.com/books?id=UZw7DwA
AQBAJ&pg=PA1)
134. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 184–185
Allan 2015, p. 48
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 752–
753
135. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 186–187
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 755–
756
136. Meier-Oeser 2019,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 84 of 227
:
 pp. 189–191
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 757–
758
Durand 2018, p. ii
137. Bekkum et al. 1997,
pp. 110–112 (https://books.
google.com/books?id=uU9
IAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA110)
138. Bekkum et al. 1997, p. 102 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=u
U9IAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA102)
Chakrabarti 1997, p. 215 (https://
books.google.com/books?id=SbIR

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 85 of 227
:
 FAzav64C&pg=PA215)
139. Bekkum et al. 1997,
pp. 75–76 (https://books.g
oogle.com/books?id=uU9I
AAAAQBAJ&pg=PA75)
140. Aklujkar 1970, p. 13
Staal 1966, pp. 304–307
Bekkum et al. 1997, pp. 110–112 (
https://books.google.com/books?i
d=uU9IAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA110)
Cardona 2019, p. 303 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=XnmV
DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA303)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 86 of 227
:
 141. Fraser 2023, pp. 204–205 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=x
865EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA204)
Indraccolo 2020, p. 174 (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=Mejq
DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA174)
142. Sun 2014, p. 23 (https://books.go
ogle.com/books?id=MLx_BAAAQ
BAJ&pg=PA23)
Fraser 2020, Lead Section, § 2.1
Same and Different
143. Meier-Oeser 2019, p. 192
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 759–761

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 87 of 227
:
 Kretzmann 2006, pp. 759–761
Benin 2012, p. 94 (https://books.
google.com/books?id=MdvKg89e
eCkC&pg=PA94)
144. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 193–195
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 761–
762
145. Meier-Oeser 2019, pp. 197–198
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 763–764
Provenzola 2013, p. 22 (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=iAvG
NlIWg9IC&pg=PA22)
146. Bekkum et al. 1997, p. 229 (http

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 88 of 227
:
 146. Bekkum et al. 1997, p. 229 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=u
U9IAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA229)
Leaman 2015, p. 180 (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=2wS2C
AAAQBAJ)
147. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 198–199
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 769–
770
Blackburn 2008b
148. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 200–201
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 769–

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 89 of 227
:
 Kretzmann 2006, pp. 769–
770
149. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 201–202
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 770–
771
150. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 205–206
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 773–
774
Martin 1953, p. 210
151. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 206–207
Kretzmann 2006, p. 777

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 90 of 227
:
 Kretzmann 2006, p. 777
152. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 207–208
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 777–
778
Chapman & Routledge
2009
153. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 209–210
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 779–
780
154. Meier-Oeser 2019,
pp. 212–213
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 784–

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 91 of 227
:
 Kretzmann 2006, pp. 784–
785
155. Nerlich 2019, pp. 218,
221–223
156. Nerlich 2019, pp. 230–231
Allan 2015, p. 51
157. Kretzmann 2006, pp. 795–
796
158. Burch & Parker 2024, § 4.
Pragmatism, Pragmaticism,
and the Scientific Method
Kretzmann 2006, pp. 797–
799

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 92 of 227
:
 159. Kretzmann 2006, pp. 787–
789
Pelletier 1994, Abstract
160. Kretzmann 2006, pp. 802–
803
161. Harris 2017, pp. 150, 162
Gupta 2011, p. 236 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=ffYvdYfAf
k8C&pg=PA236)
Lepore & Ludwig 2009, pp. 1–2 (
https://books.google.com/books?i
d=lhJREAAAQBAJ&pg=PA1)
162. Harris 2017, pp. 150, 162

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 93 of 227
:
 162. Harris 2017, pp. 150, 162
Chatzikyriakidis & Luo 2021, p. 6 (
https://books.google.com/books?i
d=zt8MEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA6)
163. Rowe & Levine 2015, p. 151
(https://books.google.com/
books?id=ePQ5CgAAQBA
J&pg=PA151)
164. Murphy 2009, p. 27
Noth 1990, p. 61
165. Hörmann 2013, p. 298 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=euwH
CAAAQBAJ&pg=PA298)
Steinfatt 2009, pp. 438–440 (htt

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 94 of 227
:
 Steinfatt 2009, pp. 438–440 (htt
ps://books.google.com/books?id=
S8Kf0N0XALIC&pg=PA438)
166. Taylor 2009, p. 73
Fischer 2013, p. 7 (https://books.
google.com/books?id=jdQhAAAA
QBAJ&pg=PA7)
167. Croft & Cruse 2004, p. 8 (
https://books.google.com/
books?id=I6Z9H-eRSgoC&
pg=PA8)
168. Östman & Fried 2005,
pp. 191–192 (https://books.
google.com/books?id=e02

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 95 of 227
:
 google.com/books?id=e02
q1C_J1OUC&pg=PA191)
169. Riemer 2010, pp. 173–174
Jaakko & Sandu 2006,
pp. 13–14
Shapiro & Kouri Kissel
2024, Lead Section, § 2.
Language
170. Shapiro & Kouri Kissel
2024, Lead Section, § 4.
Semantics
Jansana 2022, § 5.
Algebraic Semantics
Jaakko & Sandu 2006,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 96 of 227
:
 Jaakko & Sandu 2006,
pp. 17–18
171. Grimm 2009, pp. 116–117 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=
QwyS2rZKnB0C&pg=PA116)
Shapiro & Kouri Kissel 2024, Lead
Section, § 4. Semantics
Magnus et al. 2021, pp. 193–195
172. Riemer 2010, pp. 173–174
Jaakko & Sandu 2006, pp. 13–14
Shapiro & Kouri Kissel 2024, Lead
Section
Gregory 2017, p. 82 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=9heXDQ

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 97 of 227
:
 s.google.com/books?id=9heXDQ
AAQBAJ&pg=PA82)
173. Forster 2003, pp. 74–75 (https://
books.google.com/books?id=mVe
TuaRwWssC&pg=PA74)
Johnstone 1987, p. 23 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=_hlsBp
VA3qkC&pg=PA23)
Shapiro & Kouri Kissel 2024, Lead
Section, § 4. Semantics
Jaakko & Sandu 2006, pp. 17–20
174. Fernández 2014, pp. 10, 14–15 (h
ttps://books.google.com/books?id
=dzi5BQAAQBAJ&pg=PA10)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 98 of 227
:
 =dzi5BQAAQBAJ&pg=PA10)
Dale, Weems & Headington
2003, pp. 42, 44 (https://books.g
oogle.com/books?id=VbyCFuJLg
OMC&pg=PA42)
O’Regan 2020, p. 193 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=hnLJD
wAAQBAJ&pg=PA193)
175. Fernández 2014, pp. 14–15 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=d
zi5BQAAQBAJ&pg=PA14)
Fritzson 2010, p. 703 (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=doNqLi7
279wC&pg=PA703)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 99 of 227
:
 279wC&pg=PA703)
Mosses 2003, p. 167 (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=tMlrCQ
AAQBAJ&pg=PA167)
176. Fernández 2014, pp. 15–16 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=d
zi5BQAAQBAJ&pg=PA15)
Fritzson 2010, p. 703 (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=doNqLi7
279wC&pg=PA703)
Mosses 2003, p. 167 (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=tMlrCQ
AAQBAJ&pg=PA167)
177. Fernández 2014, p. 16 (https://bo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 100 of 227
:
 177. Fernández 2014, p. 16 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=dzi5B
QAAQBAJ&pg=PA16)
O’Regan 2020, pp. 193–194 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=h
nLJDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA193)
178. Smith, Rips & Shoben 1975,
pp. 1–3 (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=o5LScJ9ecGUC&pg
=PA1)
Sanford 2009, pp. 792–793, 796
179. Halpern & Voĭskunskiĭ 1997, p. 21
(https://books.google.com/books?
id=02JK4iG16GAC&pg=PA21)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 101 of 227
:
 id=02JK4iG16GAC&pg=PA21)
Cohen 2009, p. 59 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=6U01Mm
L9fxsC&pg=PA59)
180. Sanford 2009, pp. 793–
797
181. Smith, Rips & Shoben 1975,
pp. 3–4 (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=o5LScJ9ecGUC&pg
=PA3)
Hampton 2015, p. 125 (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=GplGC
gAAQBAJ&pg=PA125)
Tulving 2001, p. 278 (https://boo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 102 of 227
:
 Tulving 2001, p. 278 (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=-wt1aZr
GXLYC&pg=PA278)
182. Sanford 2009, p. 792
Smith, Rips & Shoben 1975,
pp. 3–4, 42 (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=o5LScJ9ecGU
C&pg=PA3)
Hampton 2015, pp. 125–128 (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=
GplGCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA125)
Shi 2017, pp. 85–86 (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=4vatDgA
AQBAJ&pg=PA85)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 103 of 227
:
 AQBAJ&pg=PA85)

Sources

AHD Staff (2022).

"Semantics" (https://www.ahdi
ctionary.com/word/search.htm
l?q=semantics&submit.x=58&
submit.y=14) . American
Heritage Dictionary. Harper
Collins. Archived (https://web.a
rchive.org/web/20240131093
946/https://www.ahdictionary.
com/word/search.html?q=sem
antics&submit.x=58&submit.y

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 104 of 227
:
 antics&submit.x=58&submit.y
=14) from the original on 31
January 2024. Retrieved
31 January 2024.
AHD Staff (2022a).
"Hermeneutics" (https://www.
ahdictionary.com/word/search.
html?q=hermeneutics&submit.
x=58&submit.y=14) .
American Heritage Dictionary.
Harper Collins. Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2024
0223174147/https://www.ahdi
ctionary.com/word/search.htm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 105 of 227
:
 l?q=hermeneutics&submit.x=5
8&submit.y=14) from the
original on 23 February 2024.
Retrieved 31 January 2024.
Aklujkar, Ashok (1970).
"Ancient Indian Semantics".
Annals of the Bhandarkar
Oriental Research Institute. 51
(1/4): 11–29. ISSN 0378-1143
(https://search.worldcat.org/iss
n/0378-1143) .
JSTOR 41688671 (https://ww
w.jstor.org/stable/41688671) .

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 106 of 227
:
 Allan, Keith (2009).
"Introduction" (https://books.g
oogle.com/books?id=3_1snsg
mqU8C) . In Allan, Keith (ed.).
Concise Encyclopedia of
Semantics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-
0-080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Allan, Keith (2015). "3. A
History of Semantics" (https://
books.google.com/books?id=
GplGCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA48) .
In Riemer, Nick (ed.). The

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 107 of 227
:
 Routledge Handbook of
Semantics. Routledge.
ISBN 978-1-317-41245-8.
Retrieved 2024-02-23.
Anderson, Derek Egan (2021).
Metasemantics and
Intersectionality in the
Misinformation Age: Truth in
Political Struggle (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=LCdB
EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA4) .
Springer Nature. ISBN 978-3-
030-73339-1. Retrieved
2024-02-23.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 108 of 227
:
 2024-02-23.
Andreou, Marios (2015).
"Lexical Negation in Lexical
Semantics: The Prefixes in-
and dis-". Morphology. 25 (4):
391–410. doi:10.1007/s11525-
015-9266-z (https://doi.org/1
0.1007%2Fs11525-015-9266
-z) .
Appiah, Kwame Anthony;
Gutmann, Amy (1998). Color
Conscious: The Political
Morality of Race (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=ylp_o

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 109 of 227
:
 s.google.com/books?id=ylp_o
mhIPssC&pg=PA34) .
Princeton University Press.
ISBN 978-1-400-82209-6.
Retrieved 2024-02-18.
Bagha, Karim Nazari (2011). "A
Short Introduction to
Semantics". Journal of
Language Teaching and
Research. 2 (6).
doi:10.4304/jltr.2.6.1411-1419
(https://doi.org/10.4304%2Fjlt
r.2.6.1411-1419) .
Bekkum, Wout Jac van;

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 110 of 227
:
 Bekkum, Wout Jac van;
Houben, Jan; Sluiter, Ineke;
Versteegh, Kees (1997). The
Emergence of Semantics in
Four Linguistic Traditions:
Hebrew, Sanskrit, Greek,
Arabic (https://books.google.c
om/books?id=uU9IAAAAQBA
J&pg=PA229) . John
Benjamins. ISBN 978-9-027-
29881-2. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Benin, Stephen D. (2012). The
Footprints of God: Divine

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 111 of 227
:
 Footprints of God: Divine
Accommodation in Jewish and
Christian Thought (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=Mdv
Kg89eeCkC&pg=PA94) .
State University of New York
Press. ISBN 978-0-791-
49628-2. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Berto, Francesco; Jago, Mark
(2023). "Impossible Worlds" (h
ttps://plato.stanford.edu/entrie
s/impossible-worlds/) . The
Stanford Encyclopedia of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 112 of 227
:
 Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Metaphysics
Research Lab, Stanford
University. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/202102102
35859/https://plato.stanford.e
du/entries/impossible-worlds/)
from the original on 10
February 2021. Retrieved
17 February 2024.
Berwick, Robert C.; Stabler,
Edward P. (2019). Minimalist
Parsing (https://books.google.
com/books?id=bPerDwAAQB

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 113 of 227
:
 com/books?id=bPerDwAAQB
AJ&pg=PA110) . Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
198-79508-7. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Bezuidenhout, A. (2009).
"Semantics–Pragmatics
Boundary" (https://books.goog
le.com/books?id=3_1snsgmq
U8C) . In Allan, Keith (ed.).
Concise Encyclopedia of
Semantics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-
0-080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 114 of 227
:
 2024-02-04.
Bieswanger, Markus; Becker,
Annette (2017). Introduction to
English Linguistics (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=Tzg8
DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA128) .
UTB. ISBN 978-3-825-
24528-3. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Blackburn, Simon (2008).
"Truth Conditions". The Oxford
Dictionary of Philosophy (http
s://www.oxfordreference.com/d
isplay/10.1093/oi/authority.201

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 115 of 227
:
 isplay/10.1093/oi/authority.201
10803105953851) . Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
199-54143-0. Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2024
0208102419/https://www.oxfo
rdreference.com/display/10.10
93/oi/authority.20110803105
953851) from the original on
2024-02-08. Retrieved
2024-02-09.
Blackburn, Simon (2008a).
"Causal Theory of Meaning".
The Oxford Dictionary of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 116 of 227
:
 Philosophy (https://www.oxfor
dreference.com/display/10.109
3/oi/authority.201108030955
55953) . Oxford University
Press. ISBN 978-0-199-
54143-0. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/202402171
03720/https://www.oxfordrefer
ence.com/display/10.1093/oi/a
uthority.2011080309555595
3) from the original on 2024-
02-17. Retrieved 2024-02-18.
Blackburn, Simon (2008b).
"Syncategorematic". The
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 117 of 227
:
 "Syncategorematic". The
Oxford Dictionary of
Philosophy (https://www.oxfor
dreference.com/display/10.109
3/oi/authority.201108031005
47345) . Oxford University
Press. ISBN 978-0-199-
54143-0. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/202402231
92947/https://www.oxfordrefer
ence.com/display/10.1093/oi/a
uthority.2011080310054734
5) from the original on 2024-
02-23. Retrieved

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 118 of 227
:
 02-23. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Blackburn, Simon (2008c).
"Referentially
Opaque/Transparent". The
Oxford Dictionary of
Philosophy (https://www.oxfor
dreference.com/display/10.109
3/oi/authority.2011080310041
0334) . Oxford University
Press. ISBN 978-0-199-
54143-0. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/202402240
95358/https://www.oxfordrefer

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 119 of 227
:
 95358/https://www.oxfordrefer
ence.com/display/10.1093/oi/a
uthority.2011080310041033
4) from the original on 2024-
02-24. Retrieved
2024-02-24.
Bohnemeyer, Jürgen (2021).
Ten Lectures on Field
Semantics and Semantic
Typology (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=HLJFEAAAQ
BAJ&pg=PA24) . Brill.
ISBN 978-9-004-36262-8.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 120 of 227
:
 Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Boyd, Richard; Gasper, Philip;
Trout, J. D. (1991). The
Philosophy of Science (https://
books.google.com/books?id=p
EzcsK1wlVYC&pg=PA5) . MIT
Press. ISBN 978-0-262-
52156-7. Retrieved
2024-02-18.
Bublitz, Wolfram; Norrick, Neal
R. (2011). Foundations of
Pragmatics (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=XgYP7AKe
oKwC&pg=PA215) . Walter de

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 121 of 227
:
 oKwC&pg=PA215) . Walter de
Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-110-
21426-0. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Bunt, Harry; Muskens,
Reinhard (1999).
"Computational Semantics" (h
ttps://research.tilburguniversit
y.edu/en/publications/004ba4
4f-2c70-434b-8639-62336f
c5d675) . Computing
Meaning: Volume 1. Springer
Netherlands. doi:10.1007/978-
94-011-4231-1_1 (https://doi.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 122 of 227
:
 org/10.1007%2F978-94-011-
4231-1_1) . ISBN 978-9-401-
14231-1. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Burch, Robert; Parker, Kelly A.
(2024). "Charles Sanders
Peirce" (https://plato.stanford.e
du/entries/peirce/) . The
Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Metaphysics
Research Lab, Stanford
University. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/202001070

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 123 of 227
:
 81501/https://plato.stanford.ed
u/entries/peirce/) from the
original on 7 January 2020.
Retrieved 22 February 2024.
Burgess, Alexis; Sherman, Brett
(2014). "Introduction: A Plea
for the Metaphysics of
Meaning". In Burgess, Alexis;
Sherman, Brett (eds.).
Metasemantics: New Essays
on the Foundations of
Meaning (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=G0iPBQAAQ
BAJ&pg=PA1) . Oxford

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 124 of 227
:
 BAJ&pg=PA1) . Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
191-64835-9. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Cardona, Georgio R. (2019).
Panini: A Survey of Research (
https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=XnmVDwAAQBAJ&pg=
PA303) . Walter de Gruyter.
ISBN 978-3-110-80010-4.
Retrieved 2024-02-23.
Carston, Robyn (2011). "Truth-
conditional Semantics" (http
s://books.google.com/books?i

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 125 of 227
:
 s://books.google.com/books?i
d=v0tz8crnDqEC&pg=PA28
0) . In Sbisà, Marina; Östman,
Jan-Ola; Verschueren, Jef
(eds.). Philosophical
Perspectives for Pragmatics.
John Benjamins. ISBN 978-9-
027-20787-6. Retrieved
2024-02-10.
Chakrabarti, A. (1997).
Denying Existence: The Logic,
Epistemology and Pragmatics
of Negative Existentials and
Fictional Discourse (https://bo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 126 of 227
:
 Fictional Discourse (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=SbI
RFAzav64C&pg=PA215) .
Springer. ISBN 978-0-792-
34388-2. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Chapman, Siobhan; Routledge,
Christopher (2009).
"Ideational Theories". Key
Ideas in Linguistics and the
Philosophy of Language (http
s://www.degruyter.com/docum
ent/doi/10.1515/9780748631
421-033/html) . Edinburgh

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 127 of 227
:
 421-033/html) . Edinburgh
University Press. pp. 84–85.
doi:10.1515/9780748631421-
033 (https://doi.org/10.1515%
2F9780748631421-033) .
ISBN 978-0-748-63142-1.
Retrieved 2024-02-18.
Chatzikyriakidis, Stergios; Luo,
Zhaohui (2021). Formal
Semantics in Modern Type
Theories (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=zt8MEAAAQ
BAJ&pg=PA6) . John Wiley &
Sons. ISBN 978-1-786-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 128 of 227
:
 Sons. ISBN 978-1-786-
30128-4. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Cohen, Jonathan (2009). The
Red and the Real: An Essay on
Color Ontology (https://books.
google.com/books?id=6U01M
mL9fxsC&pg=PA59) . Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
191-60960-2. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Cornish, Francis (1999).
Anaphora, Discourse, and
Understanding: Evidence from

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 129 of 227
:
 Understanding: Evidence from
English and French (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=xip
76JYlvygC&pg=PA18) .
Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0-
198-70028-9. Retrieved
2024-02-24.
Crimmins, Mark (1998).
"Semantics" (https://www.rep.r
outledge.com/articles/themati
c/semantics/v-1) . Routledge
Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Routledge.
doi:10.4324/9780415249126

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 130 of 227
:
 -U036-1 (https://doi.org/10.43
24%2F9780415249126-U03
6-1) . ISBN 978-0-415-
25069-6.
Croft, William; Cruse, D. Alan
(2004). Cognitive Linguistics (
https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=I6Z9H-eRSgoC&pg=P
A8) . Cambridge University
Press. ISBN 978-0-521-
66770-8. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Cunningham, D. J. (2009).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 131 of 227
:
 "Meaning, Sense, and
Reference" (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=3_1snsgmq
U8C) . In Allan, Keith (ed.).
Concise Encyclopedia of
Semantics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-
0-080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Dale, Nell B.; Weems, Chip;
Headington, Mark R. (2003).
Programming and Problem
Solving with Java (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=VbyC

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 132 of 227
:
 FuJLgOMC&pg=PA42) .
Jones & Bartlett. ISBN 978-0-
763-70490-2.
Davis, Wayne A. (2005).
Nondescriptive Meaning and
Reference: An Ideational
Semantics (https://academic.o
up.com/book/8071) . Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
191-60309-9. Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2024
0216094419/https://academi
c.oup.com/book/8071) from
the original on 2024-02-16.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 133 of 227
:
 the original on 2024-02-16.
Retrieved 2024-02-18.
Dirven, René; Verspoor,
Marjolijn (2004). Cognitive
Exploration of Language and
Linguistics (https://books.goog
le.com/books?id=OM58J4nQ
JaYC&pg=PA28) (2nd ed.).
John Benjamins. ISBN 978-9-
027-29541-5. Retrieved
2024-02-09.
Duignan, Brian (2023).
"Semantics" (https://www.brita
nnica.com/science/semantic

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 134 of 227
:
 nnica.com/science/semantic
s) . Encyclopædia Britannica.
Archived (https://web.archive.o
rg/web/20231205133455/htt
ps://www.britannica.com/scien
ce/semantics) from the
original on 5 December 2023.
Retrieved 17 February 2024.
Dummett, Michael (1981).
Frege: Philosophy of
Language (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=EYP7uCZIRQ
YC&pg=PA106) . Harvard
University Press. ISBN 978-0-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 135 of 227
:
 University Press. ISBN 978-0-
674-31931-8. Retrieved
2024-02-09.
Dummett, Michael (2008).
Thought and Reality.
Clarendon. ISBN 978-0-199-
20727-5.
Durand, Marion Olivia (2018).
Language and Reality: Stoic
Semantics Reconstructed (htt
ps://www.proquest.com/openvi
ew/c5004bf14780a1e3cb7c3
7b7d2941b45/1) (Thesis).
University of Toronto.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 136 of 227
:
 University of Toronto.
Edmonds, P. (2009).
"Disambiguation" (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=3_1sn
sgmqU8C) . In Allan, Keith
(ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of
Semantics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-
0-080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Enfield, N. J. (2002).
Ethnosyntax: Explorations in
Grammar and Culture:
Explorations in Grammar and
Culture (https://books.google.c

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 137 of 227
:
 Culture (https://books.google.c
om/books?id=ei4CErNyxp0
C&pg=PA152) . Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
191-58179-3. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Erk, Katrin (2018).
"Computational Semantics" (h
ttps://oxfordre.com/linguistics/
view/10.1093/acrefore/97801
99384655.001.0001/acrefore
-9780199384655-e-331) .
Oxford Research
Encyclopedia of Linguistics.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 138 of 227
:
 Encyclopedia of Linguistics.
Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-199-38465-5.
Archived (https://web.archive.o
rg/web/20240213180752/htt
ps://oxfordre.com/linguistics/lin
guistics/view/10.1093/acrefor
e/9780199384655.001.000
1/acrefore-9780199384655-
e-331) from the original on
2024-02-13. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Farese, Gian Marco (2018).
The Cultural Semantics of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 139 of 227
:
 The Cultural Semantics of
Address Practices: A
Contrastive Study Between
English and Italian (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=Nsll
DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1) .
Rowman & Littlefield.
ISBN 978-1-498-57928-5.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Fasold, Ralph; Connor-Linton,
Jeffrey (2006). An
Introduction to Language and
Linguistics (https://books.goog
le.com/books?id=E85VAgAAQ

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 140 of 227
:
 le.com/books?id=E85VAgAAQ
BAJ&pg=PA156) . Cambridge
University Press. ISBN 978-1-
107-71766-4. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Feng, Guangwu (2010). A
Theory of Conventional
Implicature and Pragmatic
Markers in Chinese (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=_Ag
DSh5c1QcC&pg=PA11) . Brill.
ISBN 978-1-849-50934-3.
Retrieved 2024-02-18.
Fernández, Maribel (2014).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 141 of 227
:
 Fernández, Maribel (2014).
Programming Languages and
Operational Semantics: A
Concise Overview (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=dzi5
BQAAQBAJ&pg=PA14) .
Springer. ISBN 978-1-447-
16368-8. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Fillmore, C. J. (2009). "Frame
Semantics". In Allan, Keith
(ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of
Semantics (https://books.goog
le.com/books?id=3_1snsgmq

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 142 of 227
:
 U8C) . Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-
080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Fischer, Kerstin (2013). From
Cognitive Semantics to Lexical
Pragmatics: The Functional
Polysemy of Discourse
Particles (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=jdQhAAAAQ
BAJ&pg=PA7) . Walter de
Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-110-
82864-1. Retrieved
2024-02-23.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 143 of 227
:
 Forster, Thomas (2003). Logic,
Induction and Sets (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=mV
eTuaRwWssC&pg=PA74) .
Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-0-521-53361-4.
Retrieved 2024-02-19.
Fraser, Chris (2020). "School
of Names" (https://plato.stanfo
rd.edu/entries/school-name
s/) . The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Metaphysics Research Lab,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 144 of 227
:
 Stanford University.
Fraser, Chris (2023). Late
Classical Chinese Thought (ht
tps://books.google.com/book
s?id=x865EAAAQBAJ) .
Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-192-59168-5.
Fritzson, Peter (2010).
Principles of Object-Oriented
Modeling and Simulation with
Modelica 2.1 (https://books.go
ogle.com/books?id=doNqLi72
79wC&pg=PA703) . John

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 145 of 227
:
 Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-
470-93761-7. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Gamut, L. T. F. (1991). Logic,
Language, and Meaning,
Volume 1: Introduction to
Logic (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=ktqxlzcc5nQC&p
g=PA142) . University of
Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-
226-28084-4. Retrieved
2024-02-09.
Gawron, Jean-Mark (2011).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 146 of 227
:
 "29. Frame Semantics".
Semantics (https://www.degru
yter.com/document/doi/10.151
5/9783110226614.664/html)
. De Gruyter Mouton.
ISBN 978-3-110-22661-4.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Geeraerts, Dirk (2010).
Theories of Lexical Semantics
(https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=JC8TDAAAQBAJ&pg=
PA118) . Oxford University
Press. ISBN 978-0-198-
70030-2. Retrieved

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 147 of 227
:
 70030-2. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Geeraerts, Dirk (2017). "Lexical
Semantics" (https://oxfordre.co
m/linguistics/display/10.1093/
acrefore/9780199384655.00
1.0001/acrefore-9780199384
655-e-29) . Oxford Research
Encyclopedia of Linguistics.
Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-199-38465-5.
Archived (https://web.archive.o
rg/web/20240215165238/htt
ps://oxfordre.com/linguistics/di

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 148 of 227
:
 ps://oxfordre.com/linguistics/di
splay/10.1093/acrefore/97801
99384655.001.0001/acrefore
-9780199384655-e-29)
from the original on 2024-02-
15. Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Gibbs, Raymond W. (1994).
The Poetics of Mind:
Figurative Thought,
Language, and Understanding
(https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=4kVJAMghNmUC&pg=
PA29) . Cambridge University
Press. ISBN 978-0-521-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 149 of 227
:
 Press. ISBN 978-0-521-
42992-4. Retrieved
2024-02-18.
Glock, Hans-Johann (2012).
"What Is a Theory of Meaning?
Just When You Thought
Conceptual Analysis Was
Dead...". Cahiers Ferdinand de
Saussure (65): 51–79.
ISSN 0068-516X (https://sear
ch.worldcat.org/issn/0068-51
6X) . JSTOR 24324915 (http
s://www.jstor.org/stable/24324
915) .

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 150 of 227
:
 915) .
Gregory, Howard (2016).
Semantics. Routledge.
ISBN 978-0-415-21610-4.
Gregory, Paul A. (2017). Formal
Logic (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=9heXDQAAQBA
J&pg=PA82) . Broadview
Press. ISBN 978-1-77048-
594-5. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Griffiths, Patrick; Cummins,
Chris (2023). An Introduction
to English Semantics and

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 151 of 227
:
 to English Semantics and
Pragmatics (3rd ed.).
Edinburgh University Press.
ISBN 978-1-399-50460-7.
Grimm, Stephan (2009).
"Knowledge Representation
and Ontologies" (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=QwyS
2rZKnB0C&pg=PA116) . In
Gaber, Mohamed Medhat (ed.).
Scientific Data Mining and
Knowledge Discovery:
Principles and Foundations.
Springer. ISBN 978-3-642-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 152 of 227
:
 Springer. ISBN 978-3-642-
02788-8. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Groenendijk, J.; Stokhof, M.
(2009). "Dynamic Semantics"
(https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=3_1snsgmqU8C) . In
Allan, Keith (ed.). Concise
Encyclopedia of Semantics.
Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-080-
95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Gross, Steven (2016). "
(Descriptive) Externalism in

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 153 of 227
:
 (Descriptive) Externalism in
Semantics". In Riemer, Nick
(ed.). The Routledge
Handbook of Semantics.
Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-
66173-7.
Gupta, Anil (2011). "An
Argument Against Tarski's
Convention T" (https://books.g
oogle.com/books?id=ffYvdYfA
fk8C&pg=PA236) . In
Schantz, Richard (ed.). What Is
Truth?. Walter de Gruyter.
ISBN 978-3-110-88666-5.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 154 of 227
:
 ISBN 978-3-110-88666-5.
Retrieved 2024-02-23.
Halpern, Diane F.; Voĭskunskiĭ,
Aleksandr (1997). States of
Mind: American and Post-
Soviet Perspectives on
Contemporary Issues in
Psychology (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=02JK4iG16
GAC&pg=PA21) . Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
19-510351-9. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Hampton, James A. (2015). "7.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 155 of 227
:
 Hampton, James A. (2015). "7.
Categories, Prototypes, and
Exemplars" (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=GplGCgAA
QBAJ&pg=PA125) . In Riemer,
Nick (ed.). The Routledge
Handbook of Semantics.
Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-
41245-8. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Harris, Daniel W. (2017). "The
History and Prehistory of
Natural-Language Semantics"
(https://philarchive.org/rec/HA

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 156 of 227
:
 RTHA-15) . Innovations in the
History of Analytical
Philosophy. Palgrave
Macmillan. pp. 149–194.
doi:10.1057/978-1-137-
40808-2_6 (https://doi.org/1
0.1057%2F978-1-137-40808
-2_6) . ISBN 978-1-137-
40808-2. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Heffer, Simon (2014). Simply
English: An A-Z of Avoidable
Errors (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=7WOEAgAAQBA

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 157 of 227
:
 m/books?id=7WOEAgAAQBA
J&pg=PA42) . Random House.
ISBN 978-1-446-47380-1.
Hess, Leopold (2022).
"Inferentialist Semantics for
Lexicalized Social Meanings" (
https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs11
229-022-03817-5) .
Synthese. 200 (5).
doi:10.1007/s11229-022-
03817-5 (https://doi.org/10.10
07%2Fs11229-022-03817-
5) .
Hoad, T. F. (1993). The

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 158 of 227
:
 Hoad, T. F. (1993). The
Concise Oxford Dictionary of
English Etymology. Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
192-83098-2.
Holm, P.; Karlgren, K. (1995).
"Theories of Meaning and
Different Perspectives on
Information Systems" (https://li
nk.springer.com/chapter/10.10
07/978-0-387-34870-4_3) .
Information System Concepts:
Towards a Consolidation of
Views. Springer US.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 159 of 227
:
 Views. Springer US.
doi:10.1007/978-0-387-
34870-4_3 (https://doi.org/10.
1007%2F978-0-387-34870-
4_3) . ISBN 978-0-387-
34870-4. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/202402160
94429/https://link.springer.co
m/chapter/10.1007/978-0-38
7-34870-4_3) from the
original on 2024-02-16.
Retrieved 2024-02-18.
Hörmann, Hans (2013).
Psycholinguistics: An

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 160 of 227
:
 Psycholinguistics: An
Introduction to Research and
Theory (https://books.google.c
om/books?id=euwHCAAAQB
AJ&pg=PA298) . Springer
Science & Business Media.
ISBN 978-1-461-26211-4.
Retrieved 2024-02-24.
Indraccolo, Lisa (2020).
"Argumentation (Bian 辯)". In
Fung, Yiu-ming (ed.). Dao
Companion to Chinese
Philosophy of Logic (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=Mej

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 161 of 227
:
 oks.google.com/books?id=Mej
qDwAAQBAJ) . Dao
Companions to Chinese
Philosophy. Vol. 12. Springer
Nature. ISBN 978-3-030-
29033-7.
Jaakko, Hintikka; Sandu,
Gabriel (2006). "What Is
Logic?". Philosophy of Logic (h
ttps://books.google.com/book
s?id=1xEVkzuX5e0C) .
Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-080-
46663-7. Retrieved
2024-02-19.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 162 of 227
:
 2024-02-19.
Jackendoff, Ray (2013).
"Constructions in the Parallel
Architecture" (https://books.go
ogle.com/books?id=N_lQEAA
AQBAJ&pg=PA72) . In
Hoffmann, Thomas; Trousdale,
Graeme (eds.). The Oxford
Handbook of Construction
Grammar. Oxford University
Press. ISBN 978-0-199-
37663-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Jackendoff, Ray (2011). "30.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 163 of 227
:
 Jackendoff, Ray (2011). "30.
Conceptual Semantics".
Semantics. De Gruyter
Mouton.
doi:10.1515/9783110226614.
688 (https://doi.org/10.1515%
2F9783110226614.688) .
ISBN 978-3-110-22661-4.
Jackendoff, Ray (2002).
Foundations of Language:
Brain, Meaning, Grammar,
Evolution. Oxford University
Press. ISBN 978-0-198-
27012-6.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 164 of 227
:
 Jacobson, Pauline I. (2014).
Compositional Semantics: An
Introduction to the
Syntax/Semantics Interface (h
ttps://books.google.com/book
s?id=XRRCBAAAQBAJ&pg=P
A4) . Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-199-67714-6.
Retrieved 2024-02-04.
Jansana, Ramon (2022).
"Algebraic Propositional Logic"
(https://plato.stanford.edu/entri
es/logic-algebraic-proposition

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 165 of 227
:
 al/) . The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Metaphysics Research Lab,
Stanford University. Archived (
https://web.archive.org/web/2
0161220155433/https://plato.
stanford.edu/entries/logic-alge
braic-propositional/) from the
original on 20 December 2016.
Retrieved 19 February 2024.
Janssen, Theo M. V.;
Zimmermann, Thomas Ede
(2021). "Montague Semantics"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 166 of 227
:
 (https://plato.stanford.edu/entri
es/montague-semantics/) .
The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Metaphysics
Research Lab, Stanford
University. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/202104161
05851/https://plato.stanford.e
du/entries/montague-semanti
cs/) from the original on 16
April 2021. Retrieved
12 February 2024.
Jiang, Yan (2016). "Deixis and
Anaphora". A Reference

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 167 of 227
:
 Anaphora". A Reference
Grammar of Chinese (https://
www.cambridge.org/core/book
s/abs/reference-grammar-of-c
hinese/deixis-and-anaphora/F
BD4274CE4C5398AD25046
35AB702EBA) . Cambridge
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
521-76939-6. Retrieved
2024-02-24.
Johnstone, P. T. (1987). Notes
on Logic and Set Theory (http
s://books.google.com/books?i
d=_hlsBpVA3qkC&pg=PA23)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 168 of 227
:
 d=_hlsBpVA3qkC&pg=PA23)
. Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-0-521-33692-5.
Retrieved 2024-02-19.
Jun, J. S. (2009). "Lexical
Conceptual Structure" (https://
books.google.com/books?id=3
_1snsgmqU8C) . In Allan, Keith
(ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of
Semantics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-
0-080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Kay, Christian (2015). English
Historical Semantics (https://b

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 169 of 227
:
 Historical Semantics (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=U
Zw7DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1) .
Edinburgh University Press.
ISBN 978-0-748-64479-7.
Retrieved 2024-02-23.
Kearns, Kate (2011).
Semantics. Palgrave
Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-333-
71701-1.
King, Jeffrey C. (2006).
"Semantics". In Borchert,
Donald M. (ed.). The
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 8:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 170 of 227
:
 Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 8:
Price - Sextus Empiricus
(2nd ed.). Thomson Gale,
Macmillan Reference.
ISBN 978-0-028-65788-2.
Kortmann, Bernd (2020).
English Linguistics: Essentials
(https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=0PoFEAAAQBAJ&pg=P
A165) . Springer Nature.
ISBN 978-3-476-05678-8.
Retrieved 2024-02-25.
Kretzmann, Norman (2006).
"Semantics, History of". In

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 171 of 227
:
 "Semantics, History of". In
Borchert, Donald M. (ed.). The
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 8:
Price - Sextus Empiricus
(2nd ed.). Thomson Gale,
Macmillan Reference.
ISBN 978-0-028-65788-2.
Krifka, Manfred (2001).
"Compositionality" (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=-wt
1aZrGXLYC&pg=PA152) . In
Wilson, Robert A.; Keil, Frank C.
(eds.). The MIT Encyclopedia
of the Cognitive Sciences

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 172 of 227
:
 of the Cognitive Sciences
(MITECS). MIT Press.
ISBN 978-0-262-73144-7.
Retrieved 2024-02-09.
Kuche, Louise; Rowland, Susan
(2023). "Rhetoric, Influence,
and Persuation" (https://books.
google.com/books?id=Kaa7EA
AAQBAJ&pg=PA13) . In
Rowland, Susan; Kuchel,
Louise (eds.). Teaching
Science Students to
Communicate: A Practical
Guide. Springer Nature.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 173 of 227
:
 Guide. Springer Nature.
ISBN 978-3-030-91628-2.
Retrieved 2024-02-24.
L'Homme, Marie-Claude
(2020). Lexical Semantics for
Terminology: An Introduction (
https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=jdbHDwAAQBAJ&pg=P
T89) . John Benjamins.
ISBN 978-9-027-26178-6.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Leach, Stephen; Tartaglia,
James (2018). "Postscript: The
Blue Flower". The Meaning of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 174 of 227
:
 Blue Flower". The Meaning of
Life and the Great
Philosophers. Routledge.
ISBN 978-1-315-38592-1.
Leaman, Oliver (2015). The
Biographical Encyclopedia of
Islamic Philosophy (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=2wS
2CAAAQBAJ) . Bloomsbury.
ISBN 978-1-472-56945-5.
Retrieved 2024-02-23.
Lepore, E. (2009). "Truth
Conditional Semantics and
Meaning" (https://books.googl

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 175 of 227
:
 Meaning" (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=3_1snsgmqU
8C) . In Allan, Keith (ed.).
Concise Encyclopedia of
Semantics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-
0-080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Lepore, Ernest; Ludwig, Kirk
(2009). Donald Davidson's
Truth-Theoretic Semantics (ht
tps://books.google.com/book
s?id=lhJREAAAQBAJ&pg=PA
1) . Clarendon. ISBN 978-0-
191-53749-3. Retrieved

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 176 of 227
:
 191-53749-3. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Lewis, David (2012). "General
Semantics" (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=vsb-CAAA
QBAJ&pg=PA169) . In
Davidson, Donald; Harman,
Gilbert (eds.). Semantics of
Natural Language. Springer.
ISBN 978-9-401-02557-7.
Retrieved 2024-02-04.
Li, Fuyin (2021). "Cognitive
Semantics" (https://www.oxfor
dbibliographies.com/display/d

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 177 of 227
:
 dbibliographies.com/display/d
ocument/obo-978019977281
0/obo-9780199772810-027
9.xml) . Oxford Bibliographies.
Archived (https://web.archive.o
rg/web/20230325140013/htt
ps://www.oxfordbibliographies.
com/display/document/obo-9
780199772810/obo-978019
9772810-0279.xml) from the
original on 25 March 2023.
Retrieved 10 February 2024.
Löbner, Sebastian (2013).
Understanding Semantics

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 178 of 227
:
 (2nd ed.). Routledge.
ISBN 978-0-415-82673-0.
Lyons, John (1996). Semantics
1 (Repr. ed.). Cambridge
University Press. ISBN 978-0-
521-21473-5.
Magnus, P. D.; Button, Tim;
Thomas-Bolduc, Aaron; Zach,
Richard; Loftis, J. Robert;
Trueman, Robert (2021). Forall
X: Calgary: An Introduction to
Formal Logic (https://forallx.op
enlogicproject.org/forallxyyc.p

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 179 of 227
:
 df) (PDF). University of
Calgary. ISBN 979-8-527-
34950-4. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/202302160
93131/https://forallx.openlogic
project.org/forallxyyc.pdf)
(PDF) from the original on 16
February 2023. Retrieved
27 March 2023.
Malpas, Jeff (2014).
"Introduction: Hermeneutics
and Philosophy". In Malpas,
Jeff; Gander, Hans-Helmuth
(eds.). The Routledge

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 180 of 227
:
 (eds.). The Routledge
Companion to Hermeneutics (
https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=zUaLBQAAQBAJ&pg=P
A1) . Routledge. ISBN 978-1-
317-67664-5. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Márquez, Miguel Fuster (2011).
Working with Words: An
Introduction to English
Linguistics (https://books.goog
le.com/books?id=TkKVwYcG8
Q4C&pg=PA146) . Universitat
de València. ISBN 978-8-437-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 181 of 227
:
 de València. ISBN 978-8-437-
08579-1. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Marti, Genoveva (1998).
"Sense and Reference" (http
s://www.rep.routledge.com/arti
cles/thematic/sense-and-refer
ence/v-1) . Routledge
Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Routledge.
doi:10.4324/9780415249126
-X038-1 (https://doi.org/10.43
24%2F9780415249126-X03
8-1) . ISBN 978-0-415-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 182 of 227
:
 8-1) . ISBN 978-0-415-
25069-6. Retrieved
2024-02-09.
Martin, R. M. (1953). "On the
Semantics of Hobbes".
Philosophy and
Phenomenological Research.
14 (2): 205–211.
JSTOR 2103327 (https://www.
jstor.org/stable/2103327) .
Meier-Oeser, Stephan (2019).
"8. Meaning in Pre-19th
Century Thought".
Foundations, History, and

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 183 of 227
:
 Foundations, History, and
Methods. De Gruyter Mouton.
ISBN 978-3-110-37373-8.
Meulen, Alice ter (2008).
"Philosophy of Language and
Linguistics" (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=tSKfSI-7Zn
cC&pg=PA1653) . In Dascal,
Marcelo; Gerhardus, Dietfried;
Lorenz, Kuno; Meggle, Georg
(eds.). Sprachphilosophie
[Philosophy of Language] (in
German). Walter de Gruyter.
ISBN 978-3-110-20329-5.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 184 of 227
:
 ISBN 978-3-110-20329-5.
Retrieved 2024-02-24.
Moeschler, Jacques (2007).
"Introduction to Semantics" (ht
tps://books.google.com/book
s?id=h3SpC0oBc_AC&pg=PA
31) . In Rajman, Martin (ed.).
Speech and Language
Engineering. EPFL Press.
ISBN 978-0-824-72219-7.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Morris, Kevin; Preti, Consuelo
(2023). Early Analytic
Philosophy: An Inclusive

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 185 of 227
:
 Philosophy: An Inclusive
Reader with Commentary (htt
ps://books.google.com/books?
id=p_3LEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA3
69) . Bloomsbury. ISBN 978-
1-350-32361-2. Retrieved
2024-02-18.
Mosses, Peter D. (2003). "The
Varieties of Programming
Language Semantics (And
Their Uses)" (https://books.go
ogle.com/books?id=tMlrCQAA
QBAJ&pg=PA167) . In Bjørner,
Dines; Broy, Manfred; Zamulin,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 186 of 227
:
 Dines; Broy, Manfred; Zamulin,
Alexandre (eds.). Perspectives
of System Informatics: 4th
International Andrei Ershov
Memorial Conference, PSI
2001, Akademgorodok,
Novosibirsk, Russia, July 2-6,
2001, Revised Papers.
Springer. ISBN 978-3-540-
45575-2. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Murphy, M. L.; Koskela, Anu
(2010). Key Terms in
Semantics (https://books.goog

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 187 of 227
:
 le.com/books?id=YO0WDRPH
cWIC&pg=PA57) . A&C Black.
ISBN 978-1-847-06276-5.
Retrieved 2024-02-09.
Murphy, M. L. (2009).
"Antonymy and
Incompatibility" (https://books.
google.com/books?id=3_1sns
gmqU8C) . In Allan, Keith (ed.).
Concise Encyclopedia of
Semantics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-
0-080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 188 of 227
:
 Mushayabasa, Godwin (2014).
Translation Technique in the
Peshitta to Ezekiel 1-24: A
Frame Semantics Approach (h
ttps://books.google.com/book
s?id=2QcSBQAAQBAJ&pg=P
A21) . Brill. ISBN 978-9-004-
27443-3. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Nerlich, Brigitte (2019). "9. The
Emergence of Linguistic
Semantics in the 19th and
Early 20th Century".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 189 of 227
:
 Foundations, History, and
Methods. De Gruyter Mouton.
ISBN 978-3-110-37373-8.
Nerlich, Brigitte (1992).
Semantic Theories in Europe,
1830–1930: From Etymology
to Contextuality (https://books.
google.com/books?id=BeJBA
AAAQBAJ&pg=PA2) . John
Benjamins. ISBN 978-9-027-
27726-8. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Noth, Winfried (1990).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 190 of 227
:
 Handbook of Semiotics (http
s://books.google.com/books?i
d=rHA4KQcPeNgC&pg=PA8
9) . Indiana University Press.
ISBN 978-0-253-20959-7.
Retrieved 2024-02-09.
Nouwen, Rick; Brasoveanu,
Adrian; van Eijck, Jan; Visser,
Albert (2022). "Dynamic
Semantics" (https://plato.stanf
ord.edu/entries/dynamic-sema
ntics/) . The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Metaphysics Research Lab,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 191 of 227
:
 Metaphysics Research Lab,
Stanford University. Archived (
https://web.archive.org/web/2
0240225181025/https://plato.
stanford.edu/entries/dynamic-
semantics/) from the original
on 25 February 2024.
Retrieved 13 February 2024.
Olkowski, Dorothea;
Pirovolakis, Eftichis (2019).
Deleuze and Guattari's
Philosophy of Freedom:
Freedom's Refrains (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=Fha

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 192 of 227
:
 oks.google.com/books?id=Fha
GDwAAQBAJ) . Routledge.
ISBN 978-0-429-66352-9.
Retrieved 2024-02-09.
Östman, Jan-Ola; Fried, Mirjam
(2005). Construction
Grammars: Cognitive
Grounding and Theoretical
Extensions (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=e02q1C_J1
OUC&pg=PA191) . John
Benjamins. ISBN 978-9-027-
21823-0. Retrieved
2024-02-23.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 193 of 227
:
 2024-02-23.
O’Regan, Gerard (2020).
Mathematics in Computing:
An Accessible Guide to
Historical, Foundational and
Application Contexts (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=hn
LJDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA193) .
Springer Nature. ISBN 978-3-
030-34209-8. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Palmer, Frank Robert (1976).
Semantics: A New Outline.
Cambridge University Press.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 194 of 227
:
 Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-0-521-20927-4.
Park-Johnson, Sunny K.; Shin,
Sarah J. (2020). Linguistics for
Language Teachers: Lessons
for Classroom Practice.
Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
ISBN 978-1-138-68182-8.
Partee, Barbara (1997).
"Opacity and Scope" (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=o1j
GSavwQZIC&pg=PA833) . In
Ludlow, Peter (ed.). Readings
in the Philosophy of Language.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 195 of 227
:
 in the Philosophy of Language.
MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-
62114-4. Retrieved
2024-02-24.
Pavel, Thomas G. (1986).
Fictional Worlds (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=OF7Z
A54UpYYC&pg=PA50) .
Harvard University Press.
ISBN 978-0-674-29966-5.
Retrieved 2024-02-18.
Pearce, Kenneth L. (2022).
"Berkeley's Theory of
Language" (https://books.goo

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 196 of 227
:
 Language" (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=inhXEAAA
QBAJ&pg=PA194) . The
Oxford Handbook of Berkeley.
Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-190-87342-4.
Retrieved 2024-02-18.
Peeters, Bert (2006). Semantic
Primes and Universal
Grammar: Empirical Evidence
from the Romance Languages
(https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=MsIFbHm0_lcC&pg=PT
25) . John Benjamins.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 197 of 227
:
 25) . John Benjamins.
ISBN 978-9-027-23091-1.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Pelletier, Francis Jeffry (1994).
"The Principle of Semantic
Compositionality". Topoi. 13
(1): 11–24.
doi:10.1007/BF00763644 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF00
763644) .
Pollock, John L. (2017). The
Foundations of Philosophical
Semantics (https://books.goog
le.com/books?id=UIwrDgAAQ

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 198 of 227
:
 le.com/books?id=UIwrDgAAQ
BAJ&pg=PA172) . Princeton
University Press. ISBN 978-1-
400-88646-3. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Portner, Paul H.; Partee,
Barbara H. (2008). Formal
Semantics: The Essential
Readings (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=ptgUWREtAk
MC&pg=PA1) . John Wiley &
Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-
75818-2. Retrieved
2024-02-15.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 199 of 227
:
 2024-02-15.
Provenzola, Thomas (2013).
"Abelard, Peter" (https://books.
google.com/books?id=iAvGNlI
Wg9IC&pg=PA22) . In
Hindson, Edward E.; Mitchell,
Daniel R. (eds.). The Popular
Encyclopedia of Church
History: The People, Places,
and Events That Shaped
Christianity. Harvest House.
ISBN 978-0-736-94807-4.
Retrieved 2024-02-23.
Pustejovsky, J. (2009). "Lexical

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 200 of 227
:
 Pustejovsky, J. (2009). "Lexical
Semantics" (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=3_1snsgmq
U8C) . In Allan, Keith (ed.).
Concise Encyclopedia of
Semantics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-
0-080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Pustejovsky, J. (2006). "Lexical
Semantics: Overview" (https://
books.google.com/books?id=c
xYGQfiD_1oC&pg=PT11380) .
Encyclopedia of Language &
Linguistics (2nd ed.). Elsevier.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 201 of 227
:
 ISBN 978-0-080-44854-1.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Reif, Monika; Polzenhagen,
Frank (2023). Cultural
Linguistics and Critical
Discourse Studies (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=DyP
dEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA129) .
John Benjamins. ISBN 978-9-
027-24952-4. Retrieved
2024-02-09.
Riemer, Nick (2010).
Introducing Semantics (http

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 202 of 227
:
 s://books.google.com/books?i
d=tJjZ0FmNdzIC) .
Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-0-521-85192-3.
Retrieved 2024-02-04.
Riemer, Nick (2016).
"Internalist Semantics:
Meaning, Conceptualization
and Expression". In Riemer,
Nick (ed.). The Routledge
Handbook of Semantics.
Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-
66173-7.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 203 of 227
:
 Rooij, Robert van (2012).
"Meaning and Use" (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=KlP
wvH6ICqIC&pg=PA198) . In
Kempson, Ruth M.; Fernando,
Tim; Asher, Nicholas (eds.).
Philosophy of Linguistics.
Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-444-
51747-0. Retrieved
2024-02-18.
Rowe, Bruce M.; Levine, Diane
P. (2015). A Concise
Introduction to Linguistics (htt
ps://books.google.com/books?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 204 of 227
:
 ps://books.google.com/books?
id=ePQ5CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA1
51) . Routledge. ISBN 978-1-
317-34928-0. Retrieved
2024-02-24.
Saeed, John I. (2009).
Semantics (3rd ed.). Wiley-
Blackwell. ISBN 978-1-405-
15639-4.
Sanford, A. J. (2009).
"Psychology, Semantics in" (ht
tps://books.google.com/book
s?id=3_1snsgmqU8C) . In

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 205 of 227
:
 Allan, Keith (ed.). Concise
Encyclopedia of Semantics.
Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-080-
95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Seachris, Joshua. "Meaning of
LIfe: Contemporary Analytic
Perspectives" (https://iep.utm.
edu/mean-ana/) . Internet
Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved 19 September 2024.
Shapiro, Stewart; Kouri Kissel,
Teresa (2024). "Classical

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 206 of 227
:
 Logic" (https://plato.stanford.e
du/entries/logic-classical/) .
The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Metaphysics
Research Lab, Stanford
University. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/199805030
05350/https://plato.stanford.e
du/entries/logic-classical/)
from the original on 3 May
1998. Retrieved 19 February
2024.
Shead, Stephen (2011).
Radical Frame Semantics and

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 207 of 227
:
 Radical Frame Semantics and
Biblical Hebrew: Exploring
Lexical Semantics (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=feR5
DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA34) . Brill.
ISBN 978-9-004-22218-2.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Shi, Zhongzhi (2017). Mind
Computation (https://books.go
ogle.com/books?id=4vatDgAA
QBAJ&pg=PA85) . World
Scientific. ISBN 978-981-314-
582-5. Retrieved 2024-02-19.
Smith, Edward E.; Rips, Lance

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 208 of 227
:
 Smith, Edward E.; Rips, Lance
J.; Shoben, Edward J. (1975).
"Semantic Memory and
Psychological Semantics". In
Bower, Gordon H. (ed.). The
Psychology of Learning and
Motivation (https://books.goog
le.com/books?id=o5LScJ9ec
GUC&pg=PA1) . Academic
Press. ISBN 978-0-080-
86359-7. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Speaks, Jeff (2021). "Theories
of Meaning" (https://plato.stan

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 209 of 227
:
 of Meaning" (https://plato.stan
ford.edu/entries/meaning/) .
The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Metaphysics
Research Lab, Stanford
University. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/201909260
12942/https://plato.stanford.e
du/entries/meaning/) from the
original on 26 September
2019. Retrieved 10 February
2024.
Staal, J. F. (1966). "Indian
Semantics, I". Journal of the

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 210 of 227
:
 Semantics, I". Journal of the
American Oriental Society. 86
(3): 304–311. ISSN 0003-
0279 (https://search.worldcat.
org/issn/0003-0279) .
JSTOR 597038 (https://www.j
stor.org/stable/597038) .
Steinfatt, Thomas M. (2009).
"General Semantics" (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=S
8Kf0N0XALIC&pg=PA438) .
In Littlejohn, Stephen W.; Foss,
Karen A. (eds.). Encyclopedia
of Communication Theory.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 211 of 227
:
 of Communication Theory.
Sage. ISBN 978-1-412-
95937-7. Retrieved
2024-02-24.
Strauven, Wanda (2018).
"Marinetti's Tattilismo
Revisited" (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=eYdIDwAAQB
AJ&pg=PA78) . In Catanese,
Rossella (ed.). Futurist
Cinema: Studies on Italian
Avant-garde Film. Amsterdam
University Press. ISBN 978-9-
048-52523-2. Retrieved

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 212 of 227
:
 2024-02-18.
Sun, Zhenbin (2014).
Language, Discourse, and
Praxis in Ancient China (http
s://books.google.com/books?i
d=MLx_BAAAQBAJ) .
Springer. ISBN 978-3-642-
54865-9.
Szabó, Zoltán Gendler (2020).
"Compositionality" (https://plat
o.stanford.edu/entries/composi
tionality/) . Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 213 of 227
:
 Metaphysics Research Lab,
Stanford University. Archived (
https://web.archive.org/web/2
0240225181030/https://plato.
stanford.edu/entries/compositi
onality/) from the original on
25 February 2024. Retrieved
7 February 2024.
Taylor, J. R. (2009). "Cognitive
Semantics" (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=3_1snsgmq
U8C) . In Allan, Keith (ed.).
Concise Encyclopedia of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 214 of 227
:
 Semantics. Elsevier. ISBN 978-
0-080-95969-6. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Taylor, J. R. (2013). "Cognitive
Semantics and Structural
Semantics" (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=MZYgAAA
AQBAJ&pg=PA38) . In Blank,
Andreas; Koch, Peter (eds.).
Historical Semantics and
Cognition. Walter de Gruyter.
ISBN 978-3-110-80419-5.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 215 of 227
:
 Taylor, John R. (2017). "Lexical
Semantics". The Cambridge
Handbook of Cognitive
Linguistics (https://www.cambr
idge.org/core/books/abs/camb
ridge-handbook-of-cognitive-l
inguistics/lexical-semantics/7
98AB6901B9AD5B0AC42C9
4A52EC8ECF) . Cambridge
University Press. ISBN 978-1-
107-54420-8. Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2024
0215165203/https://www.cam
bridge.org/core/books/abs/ca

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 216 of 227
:
 bridge.org/core/books/abs/ca
mbridge-handbook-of-cogniti
ve-linguistics/lexical-semantic
s/798AB6901B9AD5B0AC42
C94A52EC8ECF) from the
original on 2024-02-15.
Retrieved 2024-02-15.
Tondl, L. (2012). Problems of
Semantics: A Contribution to
the Analysis of the Language
Science (https://books.google.
com/books?id=SY59CAAAQB
AJ&pg=PA111) . Springer.
ISBN 978-9-400-98364-9.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 217 of 227
:
 ISBN 978-9-400-98364-9.
Retrieved 2024-02-09.
Trips, Carola (2009). Lexical
Semantics and Diachronic
Morphology: The
Development of -hood, -dom
and -ship in the History of
English (https://books.google.c
om/books?id=gsNjdT8iArQC&
pg=PA236) . Walter de
Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-484-
30527-4. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Tulving, Endel (2001).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 218 of 227
:
 Tulving, Endel (2001).
"Episodic Vs. Semantic
Memory" (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=-wt1aZrGXLY
C&pg=PA278) . In Wilson,
Robert A.; Keil, Frank C. (eds.).
The MIT Encyclopedia of the
Cognitive Sciences (MITECS).
MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-
73144-7. Retrieved
2024-02-19.
Valin, Robert D. Van (2008).
Investigations of the Syntax-
semantics-pragmatics

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 219 of 227
:
 semantics-pragmatics
Interface (https://books.googl
e.com/books?id=a4X2oVrrz-E
C&pg=PT466) . John
Benjamins. ISBN 978-9-027-
20572-8. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Vámos, Tibor (2019). "3.
Knowledge Representation" (h
ttps://books.google.com/book
s?id=v3GlDwAAQBAJ&pg=SA
3-PA2) . In Liebowitz, Jay
(ed.). The Handbook of
Applied Expert Systems. CRC

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 220 of 227
:
 Applied Expert Systems. CRC
Press. ISBN 978-0-429-
60697-7. Retrieved
2024-02-23.
Whiting, Daniel. "Conceptual
Role Semantics" (https://iep.ut
m.edu/conceptual-role-seman
tics/) . Internet Encyclopedia
of Philosophy. Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2024
0217140245/https://iep.utm.e
du/conceptual-role-semantic
s/) from the original on 17
February 2024. Retrieved

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 221 of 227
:
 17 February 2024.
Wierzbicka, Anna (1988). The
Semantics of Grammar (http
s://books.google.com/books?i
d=f2G3RFoxk84C&pg=PA3) .
John Benjamins. ISBN 978-9-
027-23019-5. Retrieved
2024-02-15.
Williams, Noel (1997). "The
Semantics of the Word Fairy:
Making Meaning Out of Thin
Air" (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=DLmoKKkxAX0

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 222 of 227
:
 C&pg=PA457) . In Narváez,
Peter (ed.). The Good People:
New Fairylore Essays.
University Press of Kentucky.
ISBN 978-0-813-10939-8.
Retrieved 2024-02-10.
Yule, George (2010). The
Study of Language (4th ed.).
Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-0-521-76527-5.
Zaefferer, D. (2019).
"Introduction: Universals and
Semantics". In Zaefferer, D.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 223 of 227
:
 (ed.). Semantic Universals and
Universal Semantics (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=t9
G1DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1) .
Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-
3-110-87052-7. Retrieved
2024-02-04.
Zalta, Edward N. (2022).
"Gottlob Frege" (https://plato.s
tanford.edu/entries/frege/) .
The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Metaphysics
Research Lab, Stanford
University. Archived (https://we

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 224 of 227
:
 University. Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/202402251
80913/https://plato.stanford.e
du/entries/frege/) from the
original on 25 February 2024.
Retrieved 9 February 2024.
Zhao, Ming (2023). "Preface".
Cultural Semantics in the
Lexicon of Modern Chinese (h
ttps://brill.com/display/book/97
89004535183/front-10.xml) .
Brill. ISBN 978-9-004-53518-
3. Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20240215165202/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 225 of 227
:
 e.org/web/20240215165202/
https://brill.com/display/book/
9789004535183/front-10.xm
l) from the original on 2024-
02-15. Retrieved 2024-02-15.

External links

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Semantics&oldid=1287839778"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 226 of 227
:
 This page was last edited on 28 April

2025, at 19:41 (UTC). •

Content is available under CC BY-SA
4.0 unless otherwise noted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics 29/4/25, 14 16
Page 227 of 227
: