scholarly journals The Pragmatics of Word Meaning

2015 ◽  
pp. 204
Author(s):  
Alex Lascarides ◽  
Ann Copestake
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Semantics ◽  
Logical Form ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Linguistic Processing ◽  
Discourse Context ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
Lexical Semantic Knowledge

In this paper, we explore the interaction between lexical semantics and pragmat­ics. Linguistic processing is nformationally encapsulated and utilises relatively simple 'taxonomic' lexical semantic knowledge. On this basis, defeasible lexical generalisations deliver defeasible parts of logical form. In contrast, pragmatics is open-ended and involves arbitrary knowledge. Two axioms specify when pragmatic defaults override lexical ones. We demonstrate that modelling this interaction al­lows us to achieve a more refined interpretation of words in a discourse context than either the lexicon or pragmatics could do on their own.

scholarly journals The Pragmatics of Word Meaning

1995 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Lascarides ◽  
Ann Copestake
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Semantics ◽  
Logical Form ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Linguistic Processing ◽  
Discourse Context ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
Lexical Semantic Knowledge

In this paper, we explore the interaction between lexical semantics and pragmat­ics. Linguistic processing is nformationally encapsulated and utilises relatively simple 'taxonomic' lexical semantic knowledge. On this basis, defeasible lexical generalisations deliver defeasible parts of logical form. In contrast, pragmatics is open-ended and involves arbitrary knowledge. Two axioms specify when pragmatic defaults override lexical ones. We demonstrate that modelling this interaction al­lows us to achieve a more refined interpretation of words in a discourse context than either the lexicon or pragmatics could do on their own.

scholarly journals Pragmatics and word meaning

1998 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 387-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALEX LASCARIDES ◽  
ANN COPESTAKE
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Logical Form ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
World Knowledge ◽  
Linguistic Processing ◽  
Discourse Context ◽  
Pragmatic Inference ◽  
Semantics And Pragmatics ◽  
Lexical Semantic Knowledge

In this paper, we explore the interaction between lexical semantics and pragmatics. We argue that linguistic processing is informationally encapsulated and utilizes relatively simple ‘taxonomic’ lexical semantic knowledge. On this basis, defeasible lexical generalisations deliver defeasible parts of logical form. In contrast, pragmatic inference is open-ended and involves arbitrary real-world knowledge. Two axioms specify when pragmatic defaults override lexical ones. We demonstrate that modelling this interaction allows us to achieve a more refined interpretation of words in a discourse context than either the lexicon or pragmatics could do on their own.

scholarly journals Settling into Semantic Space: An Ambiguity-Focused Account of Word-Meaning Access

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer M Rodd
Keyword(s):  
Dimensional Space ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Semantic Space ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Learning Mechanisms ◽  
Stable States ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
Lexical Semantic Knowledge

Most words are ambiguous: individual wordforms (e.g., “run”) can map onto multiple different interpretations depending on their sentence context (e.g., “the athlete/politician/river runs”). Models of word-meaning access must therefore explain how listeners and readers are able to rapidly settle on a single, contextually appropriate meaning for each word that they encounter. This article presents a new account of word meaning that places semantic disambiguation at its core, and integrates evidence from a wide variety of experimental approaches to explain this key aspect of language comprehension. The model has three key characteristics. (i) Lexical-semantic knowledge is viewed as a high-dimensional space; familiar word meanings correspond to stable states within this lexical-semantic space. (ii) Multiple linguistic and paralinguistic cues can influence the settling process by which the system resolves on one of these familiar meanings. (iii) Learning mechanisms play a vital role in facilitating rapid word-meaning access by shaping and maintaining high quality lexical-semantic knowledge. Several key areas for future research are identified.

scholarly journals Settling Into Semantic Space: An Ambiguity-Focused Account of Word-Meaning Access

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 411-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer M. Rodd
Keyword(s):  
Dimensional Space ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Semantic Space ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Learning Mechanisms ◽  
Stable States ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
Word Forms ◽  
Lexical Semantic Knowledge

Most words are ambiguous: Individual word forms (e.g., run) can map onto multiple different interpretations depending on their sentence context (e.g., the athlete/politician/river runs). Models of word-meaning access must therefore explain how listeners and readers can rapidly settle on a single, contextually appropriate meaning for each word that they encounter. I present a new account of word-meaning access that places semantic disambiguation at its core and integrates evidence from a wide variety of experimental approaches to explain this key aspect of language comprehension. The model has three key characteristics. (a) Lexical-semantic knowledge is viewed as a high-dimensional space; familiar word meanings correspond to stable states within this lexical-semantic space. (b) Multiple linguistic and paralinguistic cues can influence the settling process by which the system resolves on one of these familiar meanings. (c) Learning mechanisms play a vital role in facilitating rapid word-meaning access by shaping and maintaining high-quality lexical-semantic knowledge throughout the life span. In contrast to earlier models of word-meaning access, I highlight individual differences in lexical-semantic knowledge: Each person’s lexicon is uniquely structured by specific, idiosyncratic linguistic experiences.

scholarly journals Why swimming is just as difficult as dying for Japanese learners of English

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 85-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Gabriele ◽  
Gita Martohardjono ◽  
William McClure
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Study ◽  
Lexical Semantics ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
The Past ◽  
Japanese Learners Of English ◽  
Change Of State ◽  
Lexical Semantic Knowledge ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Japanese Learners

While both Japanese and English have a grammatic al form denoting the progressive, the two forms (te-iru & be+ing) interact differently with the inherent semantics of the verb to which they attach (Kindaichi, 1950; McClure, 1995; Shirai, 2000). Japanese change of state verbs are incompatible with a progressive interpretation, allowing only a resultative interpretation of V+ te-iru, while a progressive interpretation is preferred for activity predicates. English be+ing denotes a progressive interpretation regardless of the lexical semantics of the verb. The question that arises is how we can account for the fact that change of state verbs like dying can denote a progressive interpretation in English, but not in Japanese. While researchers such as Kageyama (1996) and Ogihara (1998, 1999) propose that the difference lies in the lexical semantics of the verbs themselves, others such as McClure (1995) have argued that the difference lies in the semantics of the grammatical forms, be+ing and te-iru. We present results from an experimental study of Japanese learners’ interpretation of the English progressive which provide support for McClure’s proposal. Results indicate that independent of verb type, learners had significantly more difficulty with the past progressive. We argue that knowledge of L2 semantics-syntax correspondences proceeds not on the basis of L1 lexical semantic knowledge, but on the basis of grammatical forms.  

scholarly journals Lexical Semantic Knowledge of Children with ASD—a Review Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nufar Sukenik ◽  
Laurice Tuller
Keyword(s):  
Children With Autism ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
Children With Asd ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Lexical Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Review Study ◽  
Linguistic Impairment ◽  
Semantic Skills

AbstractStudies on the lexical semantic abilities of children with autism have yielded contradicting results. The aim of the current review was to explore studies that have specifically focused on the lexical semantic abilities of children with ASD and try to find an explanation for these contradictions. In the 32 studies reviewed, no single factor was found to affect lexical semantic skills, although children with broader linguistic impairment generally, but not universally, also showed impaired lexical semantic skills. The need for future studies with young ASD participants, with differing intellectual functioning, longitudinal studies, and studies assessing a wide range of language domains are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document