1. UNIT 11
SENSE RELATIONS (2)
1

2. Sense Relations
(oppositeness
of Meaning)
Individual
predicates
(Antonymy)
Whole sentences
(contradictoriness)
2

3. Antonymy
The traditional view of antonymy
 simply ‘oppositeness of meaning’
 not adequate
 Some words may be opposite in meaning in
different ways
 some words have no real opposites.
 E.g. Thick is not the opposite of thin in the same
way as dead is the opposite of alive.
 4 basic types of antonymy (or semantic
incompatibility).
121
3

4. 1- BINARY ANTONYMY
 also called complementarity
 BINARY ANTONYMS are predicates which
come in pairs and between them exhaust all the
relevant possibilities. If the one predicate is
applicable, then the other cannot be, and vice
versa.
 Another way to view this is to say that a
predicate is a binary antonym of another
predicate if it entails the negative of the other
predicate.
e.g. 121 122
4

5. 1- BINARY ANTONYMY
 The natural way to pair off pairs of antonyms  is
along the same dimension
 man vs woman  (along the male/female dimension)
 A four-way contrast (not natural) two different
binary antonyms combine in a set of predicates
  more complicated systems of contrast
 man vs girl  (cutting across both dimensions)
5
122

6. 2- CONVERSES
 If a predicate describes a relationship
between two things (or people) and some
other predicate describes the same
relationship when the two things (or people)
are mentioned in the opposite order, then the
two predicates are CONVERSES of each
other.
 applies when three things (or people) are
mentioned.
E.g. buy & sell
6
e.g. 123 123
123

7. Semantic Fields
 miniature semantic systems
 in antonymy & converseness
 the antonyms come in pairs or more between
them, the members of a pair of binary antonyms
fully fill the area to which they can be applied.
 E.g. the sex system in English
7
femalemale
124

8. 3- Multiple Incompatibles
(systems)
a) All the terms in a given system are mutually
incompatible
 e.g. a playing card cannot belong to both the hearts
suit and the spades suit
b) together, the members of a system cover all the
relevant area.
 e.g. And besides hearts, clubs, diamonds, and
spades, there are no other suits.
 There are large numbers of open-ended systems
of multiple incompatibility.
8
124

9. 4- GRADABLE ANTONYMY
 Two predicates are GRADABLE antonyms if they
are at opposite ends of a continuous scale of
values (a scale which typically varies according to
the context of use).
 Gradability test:
 Check whether a word can combine with
(very, or very much, or how? or how much?)
E.g. How tall is he?  is acceptable,
 How top is that shelf?  is not acceptable.
9
e.g. 125 Hot warm Cool Tepid cold
125-
126

10. Sense Relations
(oppositeness
of Meaning)
Individual
predicates
(Antonymy)
Whole sentences
(contradictoriness)
10

11. Contradictoriness
 A proposition is a CONTRADICTORY of another
proposition if it is impossible for them both to be
true at the same time and of the same
circumstances.
 The definition can naturally be extended to
sentences thus: a sentence expressing one
proposition is a contradictory of a sentence
expressing another proposition if it is impossible
for both propositions to be true at the same time
and of the same circumstances.
 Alternatively (and equivalently) a sentence
contradicts another sentence if it entails the
negation of the other sentence.
11
127
e.g. 127

12. The Relationship between
Contradictoriness & Antonymy (&
Incompatibility)
 Statement A
Given two sentences, both identical except that:
(a) one contains a word X where the other
contains a word Y, and (b) X is an antonym of Y
(or X is incompatible with Y), then the two
sentences are contradictories of each other (i.e.
contradict each other).
• Does it work correctly for all the previous types?
• We shall not pursue the matter here!
12
127

13. Ambiguity
 Describing and explaining ambiguities in
words and in sentences  is one of the
goals of a semantic theory.
 A word or sentence is AMBIGUOUS when
it has more than one sense. A sentence is
ambiguous if it has two (or more)
paraphrases which are not themselves
paraphrases of each other.
13
128e.g. 128

14. Ambiguity
Defining ‘sentence’:
 1- A sentence is a particular string of words
associated with one particular sense a sentence
cannot be ambiguous  Some semanticists
E.g. The chicken is ready to eat  represents two
different sentences
 2- We adopt a usage that has been current in recent
Linguistics
E.g The chicken is ready to eat  is a single
ambiguous sentence
 This is essentially a matter of terminology.
14

15. Ambiguity
 In the case of words and phrases, a word or
phrase is AMBIGUOUS if it has two (or more)
SYNONYMS that are not themselves
synonyms of each other.
15
e.g. 129 129

16. The Term ‘Word’
 1- Some semanticists  a more abstract notion of word
 a word-form is associated with a particular sense, or
group of related senses,  to give a ‘word’.
e.g. sage corresponds to two different words
 2- We use the term ‘word’ in the sense of ‘word-form’ 
anything spelled and pronounced the same way (in a given
dialect)  is for us the same word
e.g. sage is a single word with different senses, i.e. an
ambiguous word
 We use ‘predicate’  for ‘word-in-a-particular-sense’.
 Predicates cannot be ambiguous, according to this
definition.
16

17. Ambiguous words
(the closeness, or relatedness, of
the senses of the ambiguous
words)
Homonymy
(different senses)
Polysemy
(closely related
senses )
17

18. HOMONYMY
 A case of HOMONYMY is one of an ambiguous
word whose different senses are far apart from
each other and not obviously related to each
other in any way with respect to a native
speaker’s intuition.
 Mug (drinking vessel vs gullible person)
 Bank (financial institution vs the side of a river
or stream)
 Homonymy seems to be a matter of accident or
coincidence  There is no obvious
conceptual connection between the two
meanings of either word.
18

19. POLYSEMY
 A case of POLYSEMY is one where a word has
several very closely related senses. In other
words, a native speaker of the language has clear
intuitions that the different senses are related to
each other in some way.
 E.g. Mouth (of a river vs of an animal) is a case of
polysemy.
  the concepts of an opening from the interior of
some solid mass to the outside, & of a place of
issue at the end of some long narrow channel.
 Polysemy in nouns is quite common in human
languages.
19
e.g. 130 131

20. 20

21. Homonymy & Polysemy
 Polysemy is much more common in human
language  most words have related variations
in sense that depend on the particular
linguistic context in which they are used.
 It is nearly impossible to draw a clear line
between homonymy and polysemy  they
occupy places along a graded continuum of
meaning
21
homonymy polysemy vagueness

22. Vague Words
 A vague word appears to have one basic
sense (monosemy) which is nevertheless
flexible enough to allow for minor variations
in meaning or use which are not particularly
entrenched in the mind of the speaker.
E.g. Aunt
 most speakers feel it has one fairly unified
sense
 it can be used to refer to the sister of either a
person’s father or his or her mother.
22
132

23. Homonymy
 It is not always possible to find an exactly synonymous
phrase for a given word
  yet it is possible to indicate different senses of a word by
giving different environments in which the word may be used.
 E.g. sage
 we had to resort to the Latin botanical label
 (cheating)  synonymy is usually a relation between words
(and phrases) in the same language.
 E.g. Grass
has two senses which are indicated by the following
environments:
(a) Please keep off the grass
(b) The informer grassed on his partners-in-crime
23
133

24. Homonymy
 In many cases, a word used in one sense
belongs to one part of speech, and used in
another sense, it belongs to a different part
of speech.
 E.g. long
in the sense of yearn  a verb
in the sense of not short  an adjective
24
133

25. The Relationship Between
Ambiguous
Sentences & Ambiguous Words Statement A  All sentences which contain one or
more ambiguous words are ambiguous, and every
sentence which contains no ambiguous words is
unambiguous.
 Statement B  Some sentences which contain
ambiguous words are ambiguous while others are not,
and some sentences which contain no ambiguous
words are ambiguous while others are not.
 Statement C  Some sentences which contain
ambiguous words are ambiguous while some are not,
but all sentences which contain no ambiguous words
are unambiguous.
 Statement D  All sentences which contain
ambiguous words are ambiguous, but some
sentences which contain no ambiguous words are
also ambiguous while others are not.
25
134
-135

26. Sentence Ambiguity
Structurally
(Grammatically)
Ambiguous
Lexical Ambiguity
26

27. LEXICAL AMBIGUITY
 Any ambiguity resulting from the ambiguity
of a word is a LEXICAL AMBIGUITY.
 E.g. The captain corrected the list
27

28. STRUCTURALLY (or GRAMMATICALLY)
AMBIGUOUS
 A sentence which is ambiguous because its words
relate to each other in different ways, even though
none of the individual words are ambiguous, is
STRUCTURALLY (or GRAMMATICALLY)
AMBIGUOUS.
 E.g. The chicken is ready to eat
 a question of ‘what goes with what’ in a sentence
 can be shown by using constituency diagrams
 square brackets around the relevant parts of the
sentence (or phrase).
28
e.g. 136

29. Things that Must not be Confused with
Ambiguity
 A phrase is REFERENTIALLY VERSATILE if it can be
used to refer to a wide range of different things or persons.
 E.g.
she
tall and short (adjectives)
mountain and hill (nouns)
Aunt  does not have more than one sense
 can be used to refer to more than one distinct member of a
kinship system.
 There is no absolute distinction or line drawn between
them + interchangeable depending on the occasion
 Referential vagueness is not the same thing as ambiguity.
29
e.g. 136