Meaning and notion. Types of meaning.

Speaking about the word, we speak about two more notions: the meaning and the sign.

As well as many other linguistic notions the sign is a complicated one. The simplest one is the sign is a unity of form substituiting for some object and the information about it.

There are numerous classifications of signs. The most famous one was given by Ch. Pearce, the American philosopher, the founder of semiotics (the study of signs and languages in general, including all sorts of codes, such as military signals, traffic signals, etc.) According to him,all the signs can be divided into 3 types: symbols, indexes, icons. Symbols are conventional, their form is not connected with the object (denotatum) itself. Most words are symbols in any case, e.g. happiness. Indexes are indicatory(demonstrative), e.g. jestures. Icons are signs whose form resembles the object they denote. They are typical of primitive languages, but exist everywhere., e.g. pictures of telephones. Speaking about the iconic development of an utterance Jacobson gives the example: Veni,vidi, vici.

The branch of science that deals with meanings is called semasiology or semantics. S emasia means “signification” (from Greek sema ‘sign’ and semantikos ‘significant’). The traditional point of view is that semasiology is a branch of lexicology, though many scholars think differntly and speak about semasiolgy in general. M. Breal, for instance, devoted much attention to a semasiological treatment of grammar. H. Hatzfeld said that semasiology should include syntax.

If treated diachronically, semasiology studies the change in meaning which words undergo. Descriptive (synchronic) approach demands a study not of individual words but of semantic structures typical of the language studied.

The main objects of semasiological study are: semantic development of words, its causes and classification, types of lexical meaning, polysemy and semantic structure of words, semantic grouping and connections in the vocabulary system, i.e. synonyms, antonyms, terminological systems, etc.

“Semasiology”is often used as a synonym to “semantics”. They are synonyms but the second word has abroder meaning and is found not only in linguistics but also in logic

Besides the term “semantics” is used to denote the meaning itself. Normally we speak about semantics of the word and not semaseology, but the latter studies the former. The term “semanthology”also exists.

The definition of lexical meaning has been given more than once by different linguistic schools. It is one of the most complicated problems. The key problem connected with it is the differentiation of meaning and concept (notion) which should not be identified. Concept is mostly extralinguistic, the idea of the object, stating its essential features.

Meaning in the traditional approach of F. de Saussure`s followers is considerd as the relation between the object or notion named, and the name itself. Descriptive linguistics, among them L Bloomfield, considered meaning to be an exralinguistic factor and defined it as the situa­tion in which the word is uttered.

In this country definitions given by the majority of authors, however different in detail, agree in one basic principle: they all point out that lexical meaning is the realization of the notion by means of a definite language system.

A.I.Smirnitsky defined meaning as a certain reflection in our mind of objects, phenomena or relations that makes part of the linguistic sign-its so-called inner facet, where the sound form forms its outer facet.

In general two main approaches to the problem of meaning can be mentioned: the so-called referential approach and the functional approach.

The referential approach tries to formulate the essence of meaning by establishing the interdependence between words and things (notions, concepts) they denote. The scholars who developed these ideas were C.K. Ogden and I.A Richards, who suggested a model of relations between the meaning and the sign, the so-called “basic” or “semantic” triangle.

The sign, or symbol is a lexical item, the referent or denotatum is a real object, the thought of reference or concept (notion) is the thought of this object. According to this theory the relations between names and things are viewed as a link through concepts in our mind, which brings differences in people`s perception. So reality can be seen differently by people speaking differnt languages: e.g. house and home=дом. According to A. Palmer language helps to categorize reality. This idea of the influence of language on our conception of the world is called the concept of linguistic relativity. E.g. colours in English and in Russian: blue, red= синий/ голубой; красный, рыжий.

The relation between the sign and the referent is also regulated by the lexical system of the concrete language. That is why we speak about the reference (a real thing in the world) and sense (meaning) (in the language). Meaning is linguistic, the referent is beyond it. There are words that have a distinct meaning, but no definite object can be distinguished, e.g. mermaid, and words that are applied to a concrete denotatum (referent), but no exact meaning, e.g., Jane. So according to Ogden and Richards, meaning is a relation in the mind between the facts and events, on the one hand, and symbols on the other.

The referntial approach has been criticized. The main counterarguments are 1) meaning in this approach comprises the interrelation of linguistic signs with categories outside the scope of language (associations); 2) linguists operate with subjective mental processes and the result of investigation depends on intuition.

The functional approach is connected with American structuralism andlies in the idea that the meaning of the word may be studied only through its relations to other linguistic units, i.e it is based on the distribution of the word. Distribution is a position of a word in relation to other words. E.g. The meanings of the words to hammer and hammer are different because these words function in speech differently. The first word can be followed by a noun and preceded by a prounoun: to hammer a nail; he hammered smth.The second word can be followed by a preposition and preceded by an adjective: with a hammer; a new hammer. Here the term context is used. Context is defined as the minimum stretch of speech necessary and sufficient to determine which of the several meanings of the word is used. This method itself is sometimes called contextual. Meaning in this approach is understood as the function of the linguistic item (unit). J.R. Firth defined meaning as function in a context.

One more important term in semasio l ogy is seme, which is the minimal unit of meaning. It shouldn`t be confused with morpheme, which is the smallest unit having the meaning.

Aspects of meaning

Word-meaning is not homogeneous and it consists of several components. We speak about grammatical, lexical and lexico-grammatical meaning.

Grammatical meaning is defined as an expression in speech of relations between word-forms. It is the component of meaning recurrent in identical sets of individual forms of different words, e.g. the meaning of plurality in nouns.

Lexical meaning is the meaning proper, e.g. the meaning of the process of movement in the word to go (a meaning from a dictionary). The lexical meaning of every word depends upon the part of speech to which the word belongs. Every word may be used in a limited set of syntactical functions, and with a definite valency. It has a definite set of grammatical meanings, and a definite set of forms.

In the lexical meaning of every separate word t he lexico-grammatical meaning c ommon to all the words of the class to which this word belongs becomes particularized. E.g. The meaning of a specific property in such words as bright, clear, good is a particular realization of the lexico-grammatical meaning of qualitative adjectives.

The lexical meaning of the word is not homogeneous either. Various linguists suggest different approaches. But traditionally such phenomena as denotative aspect, significative aspect, connotative aspect and pragmatic aspect of meaning are discussed. It is important that all the aspects are closely linked and distinguishe only for scientific purposes.

The denotative aspect (component) of meaning (also called referential or extensional meaning) is formed by the features forming denotation, which is defined as the part of the word`s semantics which involves the relationship between a linguistic unit and the non-linguistic entities to which it refers. Normally it is the denotative aspect that forms dictionary definitions. E.g. a stool - a seat without a supporting fot the back and arms. (табурет). The significative aspect is often considered as reference not to a concrete object but a class of objects. E.G. Belyevskaya gives an example: a concrete cat - denotative aspect (all cats realised in one). I.V. Arnold considers it in a different way- significative aspect evokes a general idea. Words in their significative meanings can be found in aphorisms and sayings, here also belong abstract notions: philosophy, happiness. The demonstrative aspect of meaning is revealed when the word serves to name individual elements of reality: a table, a copy-book. Pronouns possess the demonstrative function and almost exclude the significative function, i.e. they only point out, they do not give any information about the object.

The meaning of many words can have complex associations which form the connotational or connotative component of meaning. The connotative component includes emotive, evaluative expressive and intensitive aspects.

The emotional content of the word is its capacity to evoke or directly express emotion. Emotions expressed in words can be positive and negative: admiration, respect, tenderness and other positive feelings on the one hand, and scorn, irony, loathing, etc. on the other, e.g. garish, notorious.

Evaluation is understood as the component of meaning that gives information about the positive or negative attitude to the object or phenomenon. There are 2 types of evaluation: logical (intellectual) and emotional. The former is the part of the denotative meaning: to boss, to fuss, to deceive. The latter shows the emotional attitude of the speaker: to whine. The emotive and evaluative aspects are so tightly connected, that often it is difficult to discriminate between them.

The intensive aspect of meaning accentuates the features typical of the denotative meaning. Intensity correlates with evaluation. Elements of connotation are gradual, e.g. small- tiny-minute; large-immense-huge-gigantic.

Types of connotations

Connotations can be of different types, the most usual are 5: a) emotion, e.g. daddy as compared to father, b) evaluation, e.g. clique as compared to group, c) intensity, e.g. adore as compared to love, d) stylistic colouring, e.g. slay as compared to kill e) duration, e.g. to glance instead of to look f) cause e.g. shiver (cold) compared with shudder (fear)

The pragmatic aspect of meaning forms the additional iformation about the circumstances of communication and its participants. Information about the circumstances of communication shows the register of communication: formal, neutral and informal: e.g. infant-child –kid, buy-purchase, brotherly-fraternal. Territorial variants of language can also be of importance: lift-elevator; underground-subway. Speaking about the participants of communication we should speak about their age – e.g. mummy (only a child can say); education, social status etc.

Speaking about the meaning we should mention such an important phenomenon as motivation.

The term motivation is used to denote the relationship exis­ting between the morphemic or phonemic composition and structural pattern of the word and its meaning. When the connection between the phonetical and morphological struc­ture of the word and its meaning is conventional and not synchro­nously perceptible, the word is non-motivated: e.g. table

There are three main types of motivation: phonetical motiva­tion, morphological motivation and semantic motivation

The word buzz is motivated by a certain similarity between the sounds which make it up, and those referred to by the sense, this type of motivation is called phonetical. Examples are also: bang, cuckoo, giggle, purr, whistle, etc.

Morphological motivation can be seen in the derived word rethink in which its morphological structure suggests the idea of thinking again.

Semantic motivation is based on the co-existence of direct and fig­urative meaning, e.g. mouth (a part of the face) - any opening or outlet the mouth of a river. In its direct meaning the word mouth is not motivated, so that semantic motivation is also only relative.

The motivation of compound words is morphological if the meaning of the whole is based on the literal meaning of the components, and se­mantic if the combination of components is used figuratively. I.V.Arnold give en example eyewash as “a lotion for the eyes” is motivated morphologically. If, eyewash is used metaphorically and means “some­thing said to deceive”, the motivation is semantic.

Some linguists consider one more type of motivation that is called sound symbolism or phonosemantics: flap, flip, flop, where fl is associated with quick movement, gl with light and fire etc.

Words that are non-motivated at present may have lost their motivation. due to changes in the vocabulary, their motivation is faded.

Speaking about the meaning of the word we also speak about its collocability or valency which is realizationof the meaning of the word which depends on the word`s association with other words. E.g. a handsome man, a pretty girl. We also speak about free meanings and phraseologicaly bound ones. The latter are realized only in set phrases or phraseological units. e.g. to raise – to show surprise (in the phrase “to raise one`s eyebrows”)