MEANING, THOUGHT, AND

REALITY
Dr. Najah Aljahdali
 2.1 Introduction
How can we use language to describe the world?
Example: describing a movie scene.

All languages allow speakers to describe aspects of

what they perceive.

- I saw Nelson Mandela on TV last night.

- We’ve just flown back from Paris.
Names allow us to pick out those specific individuals
and specific places.

Referring (denoting) is the action of picking and

identifying with words such as King Abdullah (refer
to a person), Paris (refer to a place), etc.

Referent: the entity referred to (Nelson Mandela,

Paris).
 Lyons’ Distinction

Referring Denoting

Is used for the action of a Is used for the relationship

speaker in picking out entities in between a linguistic expression
the world. (A room refers to and the world. (A room denotes
things in the world). certain classes of items).
Referring is what speakers do. Denoting is a property of words.

Reference is a moment-by- Denoting is a stable relationship

moment relationship: what entity in a language which is not
somebody refers to by using the dependent on any use of a word.
word room depends on the
context.
 Two approaches of meaning

a. Referential (denotational) b. Representational

 a. Referential (denotational)
approach
a. Referential (denotational) approach is the action
of putting words into relationship with the world is
meaning, so that to provide a semantic description
for a language we need to show how the
expressions of language can ‘hook onto’ the world.
a.1 by showing how they relate to situations
(sentences/nouns).

Nouns (meaningful) denote entities in the world.

Sentences (meaningful) because they denote situations
and events.

-There is a club in Grafton Street.

- There isn’t a club in Grafton Street.
Two situations describe different situations.

Incompatible (one of them is false)

 b. Representational approach
b. Representational approach is the ability to talk
about the world which depends on our mental
models of it. (a theory about reality).

- A speaker can choose to view the same situation in

different ways.
-a. Joan is sleeping. (Activity)
b. Joan is asleep. (a state).
Such situations are by a language’s conventional way of
viewing situations 

A language’s conventional way of viewing situations 

English: You have a cold. (possession)

HDA:‫(عندي برد‬possession)
Somali: ‘A cold has you.’ (possession)
Irish: ‘A cold is on you.’(location)
(situation) Possession/location different
conceptualizations influence the description of the
real-world situations.

Such a way of viewing reality as influenced by the

conceptual structures conventionalized in our
language can be termed as representational.
In representational approaches, meaning derives from
language being a reflection of our conceptual
structures.
 2.2 Reference
2.2.1 Types of reference
In this section we will talk about the ways that words
may be used to refer.

Confined to nominals. Why?

a. Referring expressions and non-referring expressions:

1. A referring expression identify an entity: cat,
door, etc.
2. Non-referring expressions can never be used to refer:
such, very, if, etc. (they contribute to meaning but they
can never identify entities in the real world).

Exceptional cases:
- They performed a cholecystechtomy this morning.
(referring expression to an individual operation).
- A cholecystechtomy is a serious procedure. ( not a
referring expression: generic interpretation).
Same case on the level of sentences as well.

What about the nominal The President of the United

States?
b. Constant versus variable reference:
1. Constant reference are expressions that have the
same referent across a range of utterance: the
Eiffel Tower, the Red Sea, etc.

2. Variable reference are expressions that have their

reference totally dependent on context.
- I wrote to you. (variable ref.)
- She put it in my office. (variable ref.)
c. Referents and extensions:
1. A referent of an expression is the thing picked out
by uttering the expression in a particular context
The referent of The capital of Saudi Arabia is the city
of Riyadh.

2. An extension of an expression is the set of things

which could possibly be the referent of that
expression.
The extension of the word city will be the set of all
cities.
See you next class 
 2.2.2 Names
Names are labels for people, places, etc. They often
seem to have little other meaning. Karl Marx 

Context is important in the use of names. Adel Imam

(Egyptian comedian)

The speaker assumes that the hearer can identify the

(Egyptian comedian).
How do names work? a. Description theory
A shorthand for knowledge about the referent.
(associating the name with the right description)

How do names work? b. Causal theory

Names are socially inherited or borrowed.
-Depends on the social knowledge in the use of
names.
Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him)
 2.2.3 Nouns and noun phrases (NPs)

1. Definite/indefinite NPs can be used to refer.

2. They can operate like names to pick out, let’s say,

an individual.
- a. I spoke to a woman about the noise.
-b. I spoke to the woman about the noise. (previously
identified to the listener)

(implicature)
3. Definite NPs can form definite descriptions where
the referent is whoever/whatever fits the
description.
- She has a crush on the captain of the hockey team.

4. the referent is no referent to fit the description:

The King of France is bald.
5. NPs could be used to refer to not real referents:
The man in the iron mask was brave.
6. NPs can refer to groups of individuals either:

6.a Distributively: where the focus on the individual

members of the group.
The people in the lift avoided each other’s eyes.

6.b Collectively: when the focus is on the aggregate.

The people in the lift proved to be too heavy for the
lift motor.
7. Nominals can denote substances, actions, and
abstract ideas.

- Who can afford coffee?

- Sleeping is my hobby.
- She has a passion for justice.
8. Some nominals are trickier in their denotational
behavior.

No student enjoyed the lecture.

No student does not denote an individual who

enjoyed the lecture.
The meaning of this sentence can be:

1. paraphrased:
Of the students, not one enjoyed the lecture.

2. Presented in a logical framework:

For each student x, x did not enjoy the lecture.
Quantifiers are a class of words that in English
includes each, all, none, some, no.

Quantifiers allow the speakers the flexibility to

predicate something of a whole class of entities.
-Every Frenchman would recognize his face.
- Some Frenchmen voted for him twice.
- A few Frenchmen voted for him.
2.3 Reference as a Theory of Meaning

In its simplest form: reference picks out elements in the

real world.

Proper nouns denote individuals

Common names denote sets of individuals
Verbs denote actions
Adjectives denote properties of individuals
Adverbs denote properties of actions
Problems with this theory:
It claims that many words have no meaning. Ex: so,
very, but, etc.

2. Many nominal expressions used by speakers do not

have a referent that exists or has ever existed:
unicorn (they are meaningless if they are related to
items in the real world).
3. There is not always a one-to-one correspondence
between a linguistic expression and the item to be
identified.

- Then in 1981 Anwar El Sadat was assassinated.

- Then in 1981 the President of Egypt was
assassinated.
My neighbor, Pat’s mother, Michael’s wife, the Head of
Science at St Helen’s school, etc all refer to the same
person but differ in meaning.

There is more to meaning than reference.

How can we characterize this extra dimension?

Sense/reference
 2.4 Mental Representations
2.4.1 Introduction
Sense of a word is a conceptual representation in an
individual’s mind.

Sense places a new level between words and the

world: a level of mental representation.

A noun is said to gain its ability to denote because it

is associated with something in the
speaker’s/hearer’s mind.
What these mental representations are? Images.

However, problems with common nouns! Variations

of images: car, house, etc (experience).

The most usual modification of the image theory is to

hypothesize that the sense of some words, while
mental, is not visual but a more abstract element: a
concept.
Advantages:

1. A concept might be able to contain the non-visual

features.

2. Linguists to pass on some of describing words to

psychologists (simple/complex concepts) 
See you next class 
 2.4.2 Concepts
A hypothesis: A noun is a combination of its denotation
and a conceptual element.

This will entitle two questions:

1. What form can we assign to concepts?

2. How do children acquire them, along their linguistic
labels?
Answer Q1: some concepts are:
1. lexicalized single words or
2. some concepts are described in phrases as seen below:

- On the shopping channel, I saw a tool for compacting

dead leaves into garden statuary.

- We’re designing a device for cooking food by

microwaves.
Why are some concepts lexicalized while others are
not?

Utility is when we refer to something enough it will be

lexicalized (invented and catch on). (encapsulating)

A process happening all the time.

Answer Q2:
Children’s concepts may differ from adults.

1. Underextending concepts: dog (referring to their

pets only not the one next door).

2. Overerextending concepts: daddy (referring to

every male adult).

3. Children/Adult’s world (items are different!!!).

 2.4.3 Necessary and sufficient
conditions
Concepts can be described by using sets of necessary
and sufficient conditions: woman (a list of attributes)
- x is a woman if and only if L.

Where L is a list of attributes, like:

x is human;
x is adult;
x is a female, etc.
Attributes as conditions:
Necessary conditions: must be there.
Sufficient conditions: a set that is enough to define x

In sum, this theory views concepts as lists of bit of

knowledge:

Problem:

1. not all people share/agree on the same lists.

2. Disagreement on necessary/sufficient conditions. (a three-
legged zebra)
Because of problems of necessary and sufficient
conditions, several theories have been proposed.

Rosche et al (the notion of Prototypes).

 2.4.4 Prototypes
Prototypes are central or typical members of a
category but then a shading off into less typical or
peripheral members.

Chair is a more central member of the category

FURNITURE than lamp.

Through experiment: People tend to agree more

readily on typical members than on less typical
members. Why?
Problems:
allows for borderline uncertainty.

2. Cultural rooted differences (ICMs to Lakoff) the

Pope vs. bachelor. Dictionary-type definitions/
encyclopedia-type entry of cultural knowledge.
Using a word involves combining semantic knowledge
and encyclopedic knowledge resulting in
typicality effects.
 2.4.5 Relations between concepts
Relational nature of conceptual knowledge.

A crucial element is not the amount of knowledge but its

integration into existing knowledge:

Peccary (a kind of wild pig)

Pecorino (a kind of Italian cheese)
Such relations between concepts have been used to
motivate models of conceptual hierarchies
(inclusion) Fig 2.1

Inclusion a subordinate node inherits attributes from

a superordinate node.
 2.4.6 Acquiring concepts
How do we acquire concepts?

Ostensive definition thoery (defining be examples):

An adult pointing to a dog while walking with a
child to make him acquire the concept of DOG.
2.5 Words, Concepts, and Thinking
We will discuss two opposing views with their strong
and weak versions:
 2.5.1 Linguistic relativity
Linguistic relativity (Sapir and Whorf) refers to that lexicalized
concepts impose restrictions on possible ways of thinking.

It provides an explanation for a common experience when

dealing with different languages. French pourpe and English
purple. (translation: lack of fit between words in 2 diff.
languages).

put on clothes in English/Japanese.

Language mirrors cultural differences.

People’s thoughts are determined by the categories available

to them in their language.

A universal semantic theory??

Can we translate from one language to another with no
difficulty?
Can we think in different ways?
Can we step outside our own language to set up a
metalanguage which does not privilege any particular
language or language family?
 2.5.2 The language of thought
hypothesis
Language of thought hypothesis maintains that
thinking and speaking, while obviously related,
involve levels of representation.

The idea of linguistic relativity is rejected by many

linguists and researchers in cognitive science (study
of intelligence which draws on cognitive psychology,
computer science and linguistics).
Two types of argument that support this view:

1.There is evidence of thinking without language. (thinking

and language are 2 different things: remembering,
reasoning, etc.) Kay and Kempton’s (1984) experiment.
[a language of thought ‘Mentalese’]

2. Language underspecifies meaning. (semantics and

pragmatics): meaning is richer than language [hearers].
The language of thought is universal.

Humans have the same mental architecture and

mental processes, though they speak different
languages.
 2.5.3 Thought and reality
Not included
 Group Work

[Ch. 1]: 1.1 and 1.3

[Ch.2]: 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 (f)