KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL

SCIENCES
DEPARTMENT OF LITERATURE AND
LANGUAGES

ENG 310: SEMANTICS

(MODULE)

Prepared by:
KANGWA K.N.

(PhD LINGUISTIC SCIENCE, M.A. LINGUISTIC SCIENCE, BA ED, DIP

EDU-UNZA)

1
ENG 310: SEMANTICS

Introduction:

Semantics and pragmatics is a course that dells on the meaning of languages that the
teachers will be teaching. The main purpose of giving it is to give students skills of
interpreting language so that in turn they (teachers) should go and help pupils interpret the
languages they will be learning correctly. The differences between semantics and pragmatics
will also be explained and exemplified for deeper understanding.

Aims:

The main aim of giving this course to students is to avail students with interpretative
skills from given texts and any other utterances. By the end of the course students should
demonstrate knowledge of semantics and pragmatics.

Learning Objectives
Besides the specific objectives of each unit, the general objectives of this course are
presented below. It is expected that at the end of this course, you should be able to:
 trace the development of linguistic semantics
 highlight the scope and concepts of linguistic semantics
 explore the nature and meaning of English semantics
 identify different types of meaning
 explain the different theories of meaning
 highlight the major thrust in the various approaches to the study of semantics
 discuss the sense relations in the study of words
 identify practical manifestations of semantic principles in literary and non-literary
communication
 highlight some semantic problems of Zambian English.
WORKING THROUGH THIS COURSE
To succeed in this course, you will be expected to study the units thoroughly, refer to the
recommended texts and complete all the assignments. You will also need to attempt the self-
assessment exercises. This course will take about 16 weeks to complete. You will discover
that the units have been presented in simple and logical forms to enable you benefit
maximally from them.

2
UNIT1: DEFINITION AND BRIEF HISTORY OF SEMANTICS
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
3.1 The Concept of Semantics
3.2 The Definition of Semantics
3.3 Brief history of semantics
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Semantics simply implies the study of how meaning in language is produced or created.
Semantics encompasses how words, phrases and sentences come together to make meaning
in language. The term semantics simply means the study of meanings. It has been the subject
of discourse for many years by philosophers and other scholars but later was introduced
formally in literature in the late 1800s. Hence, we have philosophical semantics, linguistic
semantics among other varieties of semantics. For the purpose of the present discourse, we
shall be focusing on the development and nature of semantics. Hence, we shall be learning
the definition and beginnings of linguistic semantics.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
 define and explain the meaning of semantics
 trace the beginnings of linguistic semantics.
Semantics is the area of linguistics dealing with the meaning of words or the meaning
attached to words or symbols. This view places semantics at the core of communication in
language. Indeed, there is no communication without the sharing of meaning.
3.0 The Definition of Semantics
Semantics as a term was first formally used by Breal in 1897. Hence, we can deduce that
Breal was the first to bring to the fore in a formally acceptable way, the nature of meaning in
language. Though the quest for the understanding of meaning has always been of interest to
scholars, semantics was not mentioned as a term and did not come up in literature until 1897
when it was first used by Breal. This first attempt to study meanings by philosophers brought

3
about the area of semantics called philosophical semantics, which examines the relationship
between linguistic expressions and the phenomena they refer to in the external world.
Philosophical semantics focuses on examining the conditions under which such linguistic
expressions and the phenomena they refer to are true or false. This can be traced to as far
back as Plato and Aristotle’s works.
However, contemporary philosophical semantics can be traced to the works of the following
authors: Rudolf Carnap (1891 - 1970), Alfred Tarski (Born 1902) and Charles Peirce (1839 -
1914). According to Peirce, philosophical semantics developed as Semiotics in America
while with the influence of Saussure in France, the term “semiology” was used. However, the
idea of truth-based semantics was Tarski’s major contribution.
Linguistic semantics emphasises the properties of natural languages while pure or logical
semantics is the study of the meaning of expressions using logical systems or calculi.
Examining semantics in this dimension makes it more mathematically related than linguistic
in nature. It is important to note that the discussion of semantics as a branch of linguistics
began recently and this shall be our next focus.

Assessment
What do you understand by the word “semantics?”
3.1 Brief history of semantics
Alfred Korzybski was the first person to attempt studying semantics as a distinct discipline,
separate from the discipline of philosophy. Incidentally, Korzybski was a non-linguist who
was passionate about introducing a generally acceptable science of communication. Prior to
the work of Korzybski, semantics has been looked at from a non-scientific perspective but
Korzybski’s work was the first formal attempt at bringing in a scientific model to the study of
semantics. Korzybski started by describing all entities and realities by assigning labels to
them. He went further to group the names into three. He had names for common objects such
as chair, stone, cow and so on. He also had labels for groups and collections like nations,
animals, people and so on. Korzybski’s third group of labels do not have identifiable referents
in the outside world. These labels are highly abstract and do not readily lend themselves to
the assignment of concrete reality. These labels are only assignable to concrete realities by
imagination. Such labels include but are not limited to freedom, love, and democracy among
others. They feature in aesthetics, philosophy and politics. However, this is not the same with

4
common objects since there seems to be a direct correspondence between items and linguistic
expressions. It is interesting to also know that a serious difficulty tends to be posed by labels
for groups as a result of the wide range of items within the group. The main challenge with
abstract labels stems from the fact that meaning does not have an objective reference in
reality because different people will react to different words differently. For instance, the
word “love” would be viewed differently by different people as a result of their circumstance
or present reality. One person who probably is in a loving relationship will view it positively
while another in an unfulfilled relationship will view it negatively. Hence, their reactions will
be different and will therefore evoke different emotions from them.
Two other scholars, Odgen and Richards came very close to the analysis of meaning by
combining philosophical processes and linguistic methodologies. How did they do this? They
introduced the concept “referent” to describe the physical object or situation which the word
identifies in the real world. They pointed out that the representation or situation should be
seen as a referent while the actual pronunciation or orthographic representation will constitute
the symbol. For example, the figure or silhouette of an adult female human being will be the
referent while the word used to describe the referent will constitute the symbol. The symbol
is similar to Korzybski’s concept of label.
Since the world is dynamic, the study of semantics has not been left out. One of such areas
that have remained dynamic among others is the concept of change in meaning. Semantics
has been at the fore in the study of change in meaning. As early as 1933, Bloomfield
observed a system of change in the meaning of words. Instances of change in meaning of
words overtime:
i. Meat used to represent all types of food
ii. Bitter derives from the metaphor of biting
iii. The meaning of astound derives from the weakened meaning of thunder
iv. The meaning of knight has been an elevation of the concept of boy
The word “money” relates to the Latin word moneo (warn) or admonish because money was
made in Rome at the temple of the goddess, Junto Moneta Tanks in modern warfare derived
their names from the 1914 – 1918 war in which the Germans were deceived into believing
that the structures being moved around were just water tanks The modern word “car”
originated from the word “chariot” Etymology, which focuses on the discovery of the origin
and earlier meanings of words, also played an important role in earlier studies in semantics.
However, it should be noted that there is a challenge with etymological studies. The major
one being that no one can state with certainty the origin of the meaning of any word.

5
 Assessment
Mention five scholars who have been associated with the development of semantics.
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have tried to explain the concept of semantics as the study of how words,
phrases and sentences come together to create meaning in language. We have also tried to
examine the history of semantics from its first appearance in literature and the contributions
of scholars like Breal, Bloomfield and Korzybski among others.

5.0 Summary
In this unit, you have learnt:
• the definition and explanation of the word semantics
• the history of semantics
• how scholars contributed and what they contributed to the history of linguistic semantics.

6
UNIT 2: THE SCOPE OF SEMANTICS
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
3.1 The Nature of Semantics
3.2 Semantics and Other Disciplines
3.3 Major Concerns of Semantics
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
We have noted that semantics has its origin in philosophy. Earlier scholars in philosophical
semantics were interested in pointing out the relationship between linguistic expressions and
identified phenomena in the external world. In the contemporary world, especially in the
United States (US), philosophical semantics has led to the development of semiotics. In some
other parts of the world, and especially, France, the term “semiology” has been favoured. The
reliance on logical calculations in issues of meaning has led to the development of logical
semantics. However, for our purpose in this course, emphasis is on linguistic semantics –
with our interest on the properties of natural languages. We shall see how this study relates to
other disciplines. We shall also examine the real issues in linguistic semantics.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
 explain how semantics relates to other discipline
 discuss the main areas of focus in semantics.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 The Nature of Semantics
In semantics, we study the meaning of words and sentences of languages. Linguistic
semantics studies meaning in a systematic and objective way. Since meaning as a concept is
not static, a great deal of the idea of meaning still depends on the context and participants in
the act of communication. There is a strong connection between meaning and
communication. Communication as used here is the exchange or relay of information,
message, attitude, feelings or values from one person to another. This is done mainly by the

7
use of language. It is often expressed that language is a system, which uses a set of symbols
agreed upon by a group. These symbols can be spoken or written, expressed as gestures or
drawings. The symbols employed in language must be patterned in a systematic way. Indeed
language is organised at four principal levels – sounds (that is phonetics/phonology), words
(that is phonology, sentences (that is syntax) and meaning (that is semantics). Indeed,
phonology and syntax are concerned with the expressive power of language while semantics
studies the meaning of what has been expressed. Knowledge of grammar is an aspect of the
innate cognitive ability of human beings. The power of interpretation complements that
innate ability. Interpretation is an aspect of semantics. Therefore, language acquisition or
learning includes not only the knowledge of the organisation of sounds and structures, but
also how to associate meaning to the structures. Semantics can, therefore, be characterised as
the scientific study of meaning in language.
3. 2 Semantics and other Related Disciplines
We recall that philosophy has been linked to the earliest postulation about meaning. There are
still other disciplines that are relevant to semantics. A very strong ally of semantics is logic- a
branch of philosophy. Logical systems are known to exhibit coherent and consistent models
for evaluating thought. Thus, logical postulations are the ideal but may not always reflect the
real world in matters of language. Semantics is also related to sociology and anthropology
because of the connection between language and culture. The whole essence of cultural
relevance in language justified the reliance on context for the meaning of expressions. Of
particular interest to semantics is the intricate system of kinship terms and colour expressions.
By relying on the distinction between deep and surface meaning and the power of the human
brain to generate many paraphrases of a single structure, semantics is related to psychology.
Indeed, the mentalistic approach to meaning and language use in the tradition of generative
grammar is a psychological issue. Furthermore, the approaches adopted by behavioural
semantics in the stimulus – response connection in meaning are a purely psychological affair.
Semantics is also related to communication theory. Information is carried and processed in
the communication system passing through the channel and the medium. The minimalisation
of noise and the processing of feedback are aspects of the communication system. These are
achieved by ensuring logical thinking.

Assessment
List other disciplines related to semantics.

8
3.3 Major Concerns of Semantics
Semantics is associated with different issues related to meaning including naming, concept,
sense and reference. Naming as a semantic process derives from the understanding that words
are names or labels for things. The major problem with this naming view of semantics is
that, it is only nouns and nominal expressions that can be analysed semantically. In addition,
abstract nouns like love, hatred, truth will be difficult to explain since they are not living
things.
a) There is a red bull in the park
This will have meaning, only if there is a red bull in a particular park. Thus, sentences that
are lies may not be interpreted. Concepts mediate between the mind constructs and objects in
the real world. Saussure’s sign theory and Ogden and Richards, semantic triangle derives
from the conceptual approach to semantics. The approach emphasises the power of the mind
to make images and to associate these images to objects and ideas. The approach is highly
mentalistic, relying on the ability to associate one thing with another. This ability of
association may not yield universal understanding. That explains why language experts
develop dictionaries to aggregate meaning on a universal basis. Interestingly, the production
of dictionaries relies heavily on denotations and connotations, two major angles to the study
of meaning. Reference relates to things, people and events in the world. It is the object or
entity to which a linguistic expression relates. Thus, the referent of the word “boy” is a
human being called boy. If meaning were restricted to reference, many words without
obvious referents will be left out. It will be difficult to explain the meaning of prepositions,
conjunctions and other grammatical units.
Again, several linguistic expressions may relate to single referents. To avoid these
limitations, semanticists use the words denotation and connotation to distinguish between
meaning based on ostensiveness (that is, pointing) or reference and extension.

Another interesting area of concern for semantics is sense. Sense explains the system of
linguistic relationships, which a lexical item contracts with others. If that relationship is
paradigmatic, we have synonymy, antonymic, and so on. However, if the relationship is
syntagmatic, we have collocation. The scope of semantics covers a wide range of issues
related to meaning. These issues are discussed in the different segments of this book.

9
 Assessment
What are the main areas of the concern of semantics?
4.0 CONCLUSION
Semantics has been found to be related to a wide range of disciplines because of the general
interest in meaning. In specific terms, semantics has been formed to be relevant to naming,
reference and sense. It is also concerned with the interpretation of sentences.

5.0 Summary
In this unit, we have discussed the following:
 the place of linguistic semantics in the study of meaning
 semantics and other related disciplines
 the major concerns of semantics.

10
UNIT 3: APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF SEMANTICS
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
3.1 Transitional Semantics
3.2 Behavioural Semantics
3.3 Structural Semantics
3.4 Generative Semantics
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
You have learnt that the study of meaning in language has been of interest to both the linguist
and the philosopher. It has also interested the general communicator. Since meaning has
occupied a central position in communication, there have been different perspectives to the
study of meaning. That means over the ages, different approaches to the study of semantics
have emerged. In this unit, we shall focus on some of the time-tested approaches to the study
of semantics. The study of semantics has developed from the earliest times to the modern
period, giving it a historical view. That way, we can focus on four major approaches –
traditional, behavioural, structural and generative perspectives.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
 highlight different approaches to the study of semantics
 point out the merits and demerits of each of the approaches.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Transitional Semantics
Traditional semantics is associated with the works of such great philosophers as Socrates,
Plato and Aristotle as well as many others who came after them. Their focus was on the
nature of human language itself. Based on their views of the nature of human language, these
early philosophers were into two – the naturalists and the nurturists. To the naturalists,
language was God-given such that there was hardly anything anybody could do to understand
language. Man was not expected to make alterations, but should concern himself with merely

11
observing and describing the rules of language. The Greek language was perceived to be the
chosen language upon which all other languages should be based. Later, Latin became the
focus of philosophical analysis.
The nurturists on the other hand viewed language as a social property common to a speech
community. Language was therefore perceived to be man’s creation for the convenience of
communication. Thus, in spite of difference in languages, the uniting point is that they are all
for communication.
Traditional semantics was also concerned with the relationship between form and meaning.
Following Carnap (1927), Firth (1957) and Ayer (1936), the meaning of a word is actually
what it refers to. Ogden and Richards (1933) have also shared this view. There have also been
later scholars – Grice (1957) and Katz (1972) who believed that the image of a word takes
shape in the speaker’s or hearer’s mind. Another major view of traditional semantics is that
the meaning of a word can be decoded from its shape or sound. Words in this category are
onomatopoeic. The major ideas in traditional semantics are reference, concepts, truth
conditions, and so on.
3.2 Behavioural Semantics
This approach has been influenced by the works of Watson Bloomfield and Skinner. Idealism
or mentalism in traditional semantics looks at meaning as something established in the
hearer’s or speaker’s mind. There is usually a non-physical process of thought, concept or
feeling generating a mental experience. On the other hand, behaviourism relies on
observables and records of utterances. These observables and records are linked to their
relationships with the immediate situations that produce them.
To the behaviourist, there is no belief in such mentalistic constructs as mind, concept and
ideas. As a result, there is no room for introspection as a means of obtaining valid
information since thoughts and feelings are usually personal. As a result of the highly
psychological dimension of this theory, human and animal behaviour is identical.
Experiences coming through the senses are the major sources of knowledge. There is
determinism in the affairs of the world. There are universal laws governing every situation.
As a result of this reliance on determinism, there is no predictability in evaluating human
behaviour. The external environment is perceived to be the major stimulus to all human
utterances. The stimulus-response scenario is synonymous with the cause and effect
connection in most natural situations. Those who favour the behavioural approach to
semantics have argued that by reducing meaning to observable entities, language, as an
aspect of human favour can lend itself to examination. They also argue that meaning is

12
influenced by reinforcement. The theory stresses nurture rather than nature. Thus, the
physical environment is perceived to contribute to meaning rather than the internal thought
processes. Though behaviourism tends to lend meaning to experimental explanation, it has
been criticised for its rejection of introspection, concepts and ideas. It is not everything in
language that can be observed physically. The over-reliance on reinforcement tends to
present animal and human behaviour as identical.
3.3 Structural Semantics
The father of structuralism is Ferdinand de Saussure. Structuralism as a linguistic theory
considers the structures and systems in language. Emphasis is on the process of segmenting
and classifying the features of utterances. Under structuralism, emphasis is on the analysis of
sense relations that connect words and meaning. Sense is an expression of the system of
semantic relationships a given word keeps with other expressions in a given language. This
relationship is usually paradigmatic in terms of similarity and dissimilarity. The relationship
of similarity occurs as synonymy, while the relationship of dissimilarity is referred to as
antonymy. Structural processes are useful in lexical relations in the study of words.
3.4 Generative Semantics
Noam Chomsky is the father of generative grammar. According to the theory of
transformational generative grammar, knowledge of language is generated in the mind. A
language user has a finite set of rules from which he can generate an infinite number of
sentences. This power of generations is facilitated by the power of transformational rules,
which convert deep structure sentence types into other various forms via transformations. At
the beginning of Chomsky’s generative grammar, there was the assertion that syntax was
autonomous and independent of semantics. It was only later in Aspects of the theory of Syntax
(1965) that Chomsky pointed out that the semantic component specifies the rules necessary
for the interpretation of deep structures. This observation enhanced the semantic
representation of sentences. Deep structures specify the original meaning of sentences before
the application of transformations.
There was the immediate problem of explaining the meaning of multiple paraphrases from a
single deep structure. Thus, generative semantics would be concerned with sentence meaning
and interpretation. This will require the interpretation of functional roles in sentences. This
interpretation has been explained by the Case theory as propounded by Charles Fillmore, and
further elaborated in Chomsky’s case theory and thematic theory. The semantic component
has been presented as being partially dependent on syntax and at the same time distinct. This
produces a composite relationship between grammar and meaning. The deep structure is

13
deemed to determine how sentence parts combine to make meaning for the whole. The
syntactic component is the generative source of grammar. Thus, the output of syntax forms
the input to the semantic component. The semantic component is perceived to operate on the
structural description of sentences to provide a representation of the meaning of sentences.
Grammar as used here is the totality of the mechanism and rules of language organisation
including meaning. As a result of the complexity of this theory, we shall have a more
elaborate discussion of its implication in another unit. Perhaps the philosophical postulations
of Aristotle provided impetus to critical thinking in semantics. Based on the major areas of
concern, there have been traditional semantics, behavioural semantics, structural semantics
and generative semantics.

Assessment
a) List the different approaches to the study of semantics.
b) State the contribution of the naturalists and the nurturists.
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have observed the progression in the development of semantic thought. We have noted
the positive relationship between semantics and other components of the language system.
We can safely conclude that while syntax, for instance provides the basis for the structure of
the sentence, it is semantics that holds the key to meaning. This means that semantics is
critical to communication.

4.0 Summary
In this unit, you have learnt the approaches of the traditionalists, the behaviourists, the
structuralists and the generativists to the study of semantics. You learnt that the traditionalists
were related to the early philosophers, while the behaviourists were more concerned with
psychology, with the object of study being what is observed. Structrualists emphasised the
sense relations between words while the generativists depended on the deep structures of
sentences for meaning. It would be possible to identify the essential ingredients of these
approaches to the study of semantics.

14
UNIT 4: THE STUDY OF MEANING
THE NATURE OF MEANING
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
3.1 Schools of Thought in Meaning
3.2 Types of meaning – Thematic and Conceptual
3.3 Types of Meaning – Associative
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
We have observed that semantics is the linguistic study of meaning. We have also noted that
meaning is central to the process of communication. Interestingly, there is usually the
controversy about the nature of meaning. Meaning is at the centre of the study of semantics –
for both the philosopher and the linguist. However, there are differences in opinion based on
approaches and methods. We shall explore meaning from the perspectives of the different
schools of thought.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
 explain different schools of thought in the study of meaning
 describe the different types of meaning.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Schools of Thought in Meaning
Both linguists and philosophers agree that meaning is central to semantics. However, there is
considerable disparity among different scholars on the exact conception of meaning. Based
on their understanding of the meaning of meaning and procedures, there are different schools
of thought in relation to meaning. These are the naturalists, the conventionalists and the
contextualists. According to the naturalists with Plato as the chief proponent, the meaning of
a word is the entity or thing it represents. There is an intrinsic relationship between sound and
meaning. The major criticism of this view is that there exist very many words in natural
languages without physical entities.

15
To the conventionalists, words and their meaning do not necessarily have any direct link.
Whatever connection existing between a word and meaning is through a concept formed in
the minds of the users of the language. Conventionalism derived from the works of Aristotle.
According to J. Firth and other contextualists, the meaning of a word derives from its usage.
Each of these approaches has had a profound impact on the practice of linguistics. Their
contributions shall become apparent as the text progresses. Apart from focusing on the three
principal approaches to the study of meaning, there are thematic, conceptual and associative
types of meaning.

Assessment
Mention the different schools of thought in the study of meaning.
3.2 Types of Meaning: Thematic and Conceptual
There are three basic types of meaning, these are thematic, conceptual and associative.
Associative meaning can further be divided into connotative, collocative, affective, reflected
and stylistic meanings. We shall for this section concentrate on thematic and conceptual
meaning.
Thematic Meaning
Thematic meaning derives from the organisation of the message presented in a language. It is
the arrangement of the components of communication that determine the point of emphasis.
This arrangement may take the form of passivisation, topicalisation or focus. In the sentences
that follow, different items have been made more prominent by merely re-ordering them.
1. Jane bought the house – normal SVO order
2. It was Jane that bought the house – topicalised
3.The house was bought by Jane – passivised.
4. The house, Jane painted – focused
In sentence (1), the sentence is in the normal subject verb object order without any special
meaning. Sentences (2) and (4) tend to lay emphasis on Jane, the doer of the action being
referred to. In sentence (3), emphasis is on the house, which was bought. Indeed, focused and
topicalised elements in a structure are given prominence within an information structure. A
component of the bit of information can also be made more prominent by stressing it.
Consider the following:
5. She BOUGHT my newspaper (She did not STEAL it)

16
6. She bought my NEWSPAPER (not my textbook)
7. SHE bought my newspaper (not any other person)
Conceptual Meaning
Conceptual meaning is synonymous with primary, central, logical, cognitive or denotative
meaning of a word. It is the first ordinary meaning listed in dictionaries, which is not affected
by the context, or emotional overtones associated with the act of communication. There is
an assumed shared conceptual meaning of every word of a language. There is a universal
implication of the conceptual meaning. It is possible to express the conceptual meaning of a
word using contrastive semantic features. Such features indicate the attributes present and
those that are absent. If a feature is present, it is specified as (+ ); if absent, it is ( - ). These
contrastive features specifying the attributes of the words provide the necessary criteria for
the correct use of words. The feature specifications for the words man and woman are as
follows.
Man
+ HUMAN
+ MALE
+ ADULT
Woman
+ HUMAN
- MALE
+ ADULT
The conceptual meaning of a word constitutes a major part of the shared system of a language
for all speakers. It is a criteria element of human communication since it is a major factor in
language. The use of this process has been described as componential analysis. It is a major
process in structural semantics.
3. 3 Associative Meaning
The meaning of a word is affected by the context, background, time and the cultural realities
of the users of language. This type of meaning is not static. It is variable and open ended.
Certain words, structures and styles are usually employed to arouse some emotional reactions
in the hearer. Certain attitudes and forms of behaviour are elicited by the associative meaning
of the words used in communication. These different reactions are derived from the
associations which the words cerate in the minds of language users. As a result of the great
variation in associative meaning, it is not always easy to express that form of meaning in
terms of contrastive semantic features. Indeed, associative meaning reflects individual

17
differences. There are individualised intentions and interpretations. There is therefore, the
need for all participants in communication to share common reference points, symbols and
background for there to be any meaningful interaction.

Most of the problems of communication arise when associative meaning is assumed to be

shared by all concerned. There must be a way of ensuring actual sharing of background. For
second language learners, this problem is profound. This explains the enormous difficulty
second language learners’ encounter with decoding the meaning of idioms and figurative
expressions. They also find it difficult to apply appropriate idioms to diverse situations.
Associative meaning can be any of the following.
 Connotative Meaning
 Collocative Meaning
 Reflected Meaning
 Stylistic or Social Meaning
Connotative Meaning
Connotative meaning contains elements of the conceptual meaning of a word and the
individual’s personal interpretation of what is communicated. That interpretation is based on
the personal experience of the hearer. This means that connotative meaning varies with the
experience of people in communication. It may also vary from society to society. There are
additional semantic features that are associated with connotative meaning. Thus, a great deal
of the meaning of idioms and figurative expressions derive from connotation. There are
symbols in literature, which have different connotations in different cultures. For instance,
among the Hausa in Zambia, the cricket is associated with the tricks, whereas among the Igbo
and the Yoruba, it is the tortoise that has that attribute. In the Western world, it is the fox is
considered very cunning.
Collocative Meaning
Collocation is the natural association and sequence of words in longer structures. Collocative
meaning is therefore the meaning of a lexical item deriving from other lexical items with
which it is associated in a longer structure. The collocative meaning of lexical items in a
language is based on related semantic fields. For instance, job, employment, engagement, and
work are all related. There are also associations that are perceived to be more natural.
Consider the following examples:
 August visitor

18
  Auspicious occasion
 Sympathise with
 Nutritious food
Some of the structures are restricted to certain circumstances as in
Stroll vs wander
For people
Tremble
Affective Meaning
for animals
quiver
Affective meaning is related to the feelings and attitudes of the speaker towards the subject or
the audience. This meaning is achieved by the choice of words. Certain words suggest
positive feelings – love,attraction, happiness, exciting etc. Some others stir up negative
reactions – disgusting, nauseating, disappointing, etc. Interjections like ah!, oh!, uh!, mmn!,
often suggest the emotional state of the mind.

Other words like darling, daddy, mummy, and so on, give an impression
of endearment.
Reflected Meaning
Reflected meaning relates to expressions with multiple meanings. Words with several
meanings (polysemous words), have reflected meaning. There is, however, a dominant
meaning among these several meanings. As a particular sense of a word begins to assume
prominence, all other senses begin to be de-emphasised and with time, these other senses
disappear. Meat used to refer to all forms of food and flesh for nourishment. The later
meaning seems to have caught on.
Stylistic (or Social) Meaning
When a particular pattern of speech, language variety or speech form is associated with a
specific social context, stylistic or social meaning is achieved. It is common knowledge that a
speaker’s choice of words and structures reveals his or her social, regional, geographical or
even economic background. The choices can also reveal the level of familiarity between the
speaker and the hearer. Emphasis is usually on the different stylistic variations open to
language users. Based on the level of familiarity, users have the following possibilities in
making requests.

19
(1) I wonder if I could see you later today (indirect question) used for extreme politeness
(2) May I see you later today (very formal)
(3) Can I see you later today (causal and less formal)

Assessment
List the different types of meaning discussed in the unit.
4.0 CONCLUSION
Meaning has been presented to be at the centre of semantics. Meaning can be thematic,
conceptual, associative, connotative, collocative, affective, reflected or stylistic.

5.0 Summary
In this unit, we have studied the:
 different schools of thought in the study of meaning
 different types of meaning – thematic, conceptual, and associative
 range of associated meanings – connotative, collocative and stylistic meaning.

20
UNIT 5: THEORIES OF MEANING
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 The Main Content
3.1 The Nature of Semantic Theories
3.1.1 The Ideational Theory of Meaning
3.1.2 The Referential Theory of Meaning
3.2 The Usage Theory
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
We have learnt that semantics deals with meaning in language. Just like every other
discipline, there are theories to explain in detail the nature of meaning in a principled way.
The most enduring semantic theories will be presented in this unit. It will be recalled that
language as a system is organised along the structures of sound, words, sentences and
meaning. Each of these levels can be studied in some details, following specified
formulations or theories. For the purpose of a detailed study of semantics, the theories we
shall explore are expected to explain the nature of word and sentence meaning, among
several other things.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
 state the functions of semantic theories
 identify specific theories in semantic
 explain the ideational, referential and usage theories of meaning.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 The Nature of Semantic Theories
Semantic theories explain the nature of meaning by utilising a finite set of rules to explain a
variety of semantic phenomena. Any theory of semantics should provide statements that
explain meaning relationship – such as ambiguity, anomaly, contradiction, tautology,
paraphrase, entailment, synonymy, hyponymy. This means that such a theory should be able
to explain the inherent meaning characteristics of words and sentences. Any reliable theory of

21
semantics should relate meaning to syntax, highlighting the relationship between them. This
means that the rules of sentence construction and those of word meaning should relate to
explain in full the meaning of the sentence.
A viable semantic theory should also relate meaning to the contexts and situations of word
and sentence usage for appropriate interpretation. There should also be a record of facts of
meaning, linguistic reference and truth conditions. These requirements suggest that such a
theory should be a part of the general linguistic theory. That means that semantic rules must
have universal applications. Such rules must give clues to the nature of semantic features,
which distinguish lexical items of different languages of the world. Since the theory should
account for meaning properties on all languages, it helps to explain the structure of human
languages. These expectations have been met at different levels by different theories of
meaning, including:
 the Ideational Theory
 the Referential Theory
 the Usage Theory
3. 1.1 The Ideational Theory of Meaning
This theory was developed by the British empiricist philosopher, John Locke. The theory
explains that the meaning attached to words can be separated from the word themselves. This
means that meaning originates in the mind in the form of ideas. Words are just sensible signs
for the convenience of communication. Language is therefore, a mechanism for expressing
thoughts and thought is viewed as a succession of conscious ideas. The ideational theory is
mentalistic. Thus, the meaning of a word is the mental image or idea of the word or the
expression generated in the mind of the speaker or hearer. There is no attempt to define
words and expressions using physical associations. Rather, the range of possible meanings
ascribed to a given word is that set of available feelings, images, ideas, concepts, thoughts
and inferences that can be produced as soon as a word is heard. The ideational theory is
perceived to be abstract or imprecise because of dependence on mental images for decoding
the meaning of words. Ideas may be too vague to comprehend. There are also many words
(especially the abstract ones) that do not have specific physical realities, let alone mental
manifestations. It is unthinkable that the mind can create an image of what the senses cannot
perceive. The theory may not be able to account for synonymous expressions. It may also be
difficult to use the theory to explain the mental image conjured by sentences. Indeed,
sentences derive their meaning more from the word order.

22
3. 1.2 The Referential Theory of Meaning
This theory is associated with Ogden and Richards (1922). According to the referential
theory, the meaning of a word is the object it refers to in the external world. That actual
object is the referent. The connection between the words or expressions and their referents is
through the process of thought. The words or expressions are just symbols.One major
criticism of this theory is that there are many words without physical objects they refer to.
Such words as intelligent, ugly, rich, poor, and so on, which do not have the concrete
qualities of nouns may not have referents. Again, polysemous words (words with more than
one meaning) may have the additional problem of having more than one referent. Items that
belong to groups may not have physical objects that are identical. Every sub-group has
specific feature. Individual members of the smallest sub-groups also have their identities.
Therefore, we cannot talk about absolute identification for referents. The referential theory
may not have a way to explain the meaning of words in the categories of adjectives, adverbs,
prepositions and conjunctions.
3.2 The Usage Theory of Meaning
The German scholar, Wittgenstein (1953) developed this theory. It has been elaborated upon
by J. Firth and M. A. Haliday. The usage theory is also referred to as the contextual or
operational theory of meaning. The major motivation was fear that the meaning of certain
classes of words could be lost if meaning were treated as just entities. According to the
theory, the meaning of a word or an expression is determined by the context of its use. It is
the effect created by a linguistic unit within a given context that expresses its full meaning.

Assessment
i. List any three theories of semantics.
ii. State any three characteristics of semantic theories.
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have observed that theories provided a concise framework of analysis in semantics. There
are a number of theories in semantics, each with its own merits and shortfalls. We have
discussed the ideational, referential and usage theories of meaning.

5.0 Summary
In this unit, you have learnt the:
 nature of semantic theories
 origin and features of the ideational referential and usage theories

23
 criticisms against these theories, as well as their major areas of application.

24
UNIT 6: WORD AND SENTENCE MEANING
SEMANTICS AND THE STUDY OF THE WORD: SENSE RELATIONS
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
3.1 Sense/Lexical Relations Used in Explaining Meaning of English Word
3.1.1 Synonymy
3.1.2 Antonymy
3.1.3 Hyponymy
3.1.4 Homonymy
3.1.5 Polysemy
4.0 Conclusion
6.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In our study of semantic theories, we noted that viable theories of meaning should be able to
explain the nature of the meaning of words as well as that of sentences. You have learnt that
the meaning of a word may not always be realised from its referential or denotational
characteristics. Indeed, there are many words whose basic characteristics may not be easily
analysed. Such words are best studied by focusing on the kind of relationship they create with
other words. These relationships are based on the sense of the words. Therefore, we study
words from their sense relations or lexical relations. At this level, we shall study sense
relations along the following lines:
 Synonymy
 Antonymy
 Hyponymy
 Polysemy, and
 Homophony
In this unit, we shall explore the meaning of words, using principally the principle of sense
relations.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:

25
  explain sense/lexical relations
 discuss key concepts in sense/lexical relations
 apply sense relations in explaining the meaning of English words.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Sense/Lexical Relations Used in Expalining Meaning of English Word
We shall examine different sense/lexical relations used in explaining the meaning of English
words.
3.1.1 Synonymy
When reference is made to lexical relation or close relatedness in the meaning of words, we
deal with synonymy. We can therefore, describe pairs of words that have very close
similarities in meaning as synonyms. For example, we can have the following pairs of words
as synonyms. Friend/ally: boss/master; amiable/friendly It has often been observed that words
may not always have exact substitutes in all contexts. This observation means that we may
have absolute, complete and total synonyms when there are exact substitutes as in:
 Everybody/Everyone
 Bandit/Brigand
There are also broad or near synonyms as in:
 rich / sumptuous
 mature / ripe
3.1.2 Antonymy
The relationship of oppositeness is referred to as antonymy. You will observe that in public
and professional examinations in which knowledge of English is tested, there are sections on
words and opposites. Antonymy occurs in two forms – gradable and non-gradable antonyms.
For adjectives and adverbs, gradable antonyms show degrees and can be compared with
suffixes –er, and –est as well as with the words, more and most – as in:
 Tall
 Taller
 Tallest
 intelligent
 dangerously
 more intelligent most intelligent
 more dangerously most dangerously

26
On the other hand, non-gradable antonyms do not occur as comparative constructions. Words
in this category are expressed as complementary pairs – such that their exact opposites are the
only options. For example, someone can be male or female, father or mother, dead or alive,
married or single. Other examples of non-gradable antonyms are – close or open, found or
lost. There are also relational opposites, which convey the meaning of reciprocal, bilateral or
social relationships. Such meanings are interdependent such that membership of one of the
pairs suggests the other. The following are common examples.
Teacher – student
Parent – child
Brother – sister
Buy – sell
Servant – master
Wife – husband
Employer - employee
3.1.3 Hyponymy
When the meaning of one form is included in the meaning of another, we have hyponymy.
For instance, included in animals are dogs, elephants, goat, and so on. We can also relate
hyponymy to professions to include law, medicine, teaching, banking, and so on. There is
always a hierarchical relationship drawing from the general to samples.
3.1.4 Homonymy
Homonymy explains a situation of identical spelling or pronunciation but with different
unrelated meanings. Such words usually create problems of ambiguity. Consider the
following examples.
 Bank (of a river)
 Bank (financial institution)
 Fly (an insect)
 Fly (to move in the air)
 Lead (verb to guide)
 Lead (an element used in making pencil)
When homonymy is partial, we have heteronymy. It is possible to have a situation of
homonymy at one medium of language – such as in writing – but pronounced differently as in
Lead - /li:d/ and Lead - /led/.

27
This situation is referred to as homography. With this distinction, it has become more
common to reserve the term “homophony” – when reference is made to identical
pronunciation as in:
Key and quay /ki:/
Been and bean /bi:n/
Court and caught /k :t/
3.1.5 Polysemy
A situation of polysemy arises when one form of a word has multiple meanings, which are
related by extension. Words that are polysemous have single entries in the dictionary.
However, there are numbers that suggest the list of possible meanings – as shown below.
Foot
1 - of a person
2 – of a bed
3 – of a mountain
It should be noted that homonyms are listed as different lexical items in the dictionary.

Assessment
i. List different sense/lexical relations, which English words attract.
ii. Provide two examples each for antonyms and synonyms.
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have observed that words may not be profitably analysed through their reference or
comportments. This observation has favoured the relevance on the sense relations holding
among words.

5.0 Summary
In this unit, you have studied the meaning of words from the perspective of sense relations
with emphasis on synonymy antonymy, hyponymy, homophony and polysemy. We have also
illustrated each of these concepts with examples from English.

28
UNIT 7: SEMANTICS AND THE NATURE OF THE LEXICON
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
3.1 The Nature of the Lexicon and the Feature of Words
3.2 Subcategorising English Words
3.3 Role Relations of Lexical Items
3.4 The Nature of Empty Categories
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Recall that we have discussed semantics in relation to word and sentence meaning. It is even
more profitable to examine how semantics relates to the structure of the sentence. This
requires some understanding of the characteristics of words. We have consistently noted that
semantics deals with the study of meaning in natural language. Meaning is conveyed by
words and their combination. There are usually deep structure forms of the meaning of
sentences from which many surface forms can derive via transformation. The combinations
that are permissible for words are based on the features of specific words. At the personal
level, information about words constitutes the. Interestingly, when the lexicon has been
externalised and organised, we have the dictionary. Indeed, the richer and the more
comprehensive the dictionary of a language, the more it has the capacity to express meaning.
This study is connected with syntax and we shall, for the purpose of this unit, discuss aspects
of semantics relevant to the study of syntax.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
 describe the nature of the lexicon
 explain the features of words
 explore the sub categorisation of English words
 identify role relations of lexical items
 examine the nature of empty categories.

29
3.1 The Nature of the Lexicon and the Feature of Words
The lexicon presents an ordered mental list of words available to a language user. As we have
observed earlier, when the lexicon is externalised and generalised, it becomes the dictionary.
The information provided in the lexicon or the dictionary covers the phonological,
morphological, syntactic and semantic characteristics of the lexical items. Phonological
information guides us in pronunciation; morphological information refers to the formation of
the word while syntactic information focuses on the categorical features as well as the
distributional possibilities of the word. Semantic information relates to the meaning of the
word. When we focus on the features of words, we deal on the specific groups such as nouns,
verbs, adjectives, adverbs, pronouns, conjunctions, prepositions, and so on. It is possible to
classify words as content and form words. Content words have independent meaning, even in
isolation. Content words have an open class system as they can accept new entries. For
instance, in the age of Information and Communication Technology (ICT), such new words
as laptop, facebook (an example of social media), and disc drive have been added to the
dictionary of English. Form words also called function or grammatical words do not have
independent meaning when they occur in isolation. Such words are used to signal syntactic or
grammatical relationship within larger structures. Form words belong to a closed system
because they cannot be expanded. They are also very few in number. They include-pronouns,
auxiliaries, conjunctions, prepositions, determines and particles. Another way to classify
words is to describe them as transparent or opaque. The meaning of transparent words can be
deduced from the meaning of their constituent parts – for example:
Prefix
un -
Stem
god
Suffix
- liness
dis -
satisfy(y) action
The meaning of opaque words cannot be determined from their constituent parts. Most
opaque words are also structural, grammatical or form words.

Assessment

30
Describe the nature of the lexicon
3.2 Subcategorising English Words
We have noted that words of any language can be grouped into specific categories – nouns,
verbs, adjectives – and so on. Apart from these groups, often referred to as parts of speech,
we can highlight the properties of individual words. The process of highlighting the
properties of individual words is referred to as sub categorisation. For instance, a noun can be
subcategorised as proper or common, concrete, or abstract, count or mass, human or non-
human. When the rules of sub categorisation relate to all words in a class- for example,
nouns, as we have observed above, we describe the rule as context-free. When there are
conditions specifying how the rules will operate, we have context – sensitive conditions. For
instance, it is possible to have a verb – (such as discuss) that must take an obligatory object.
There are certain nouns that may not select indefinite determiner for example, information
and news.
We should be able to provide some generalisations about context-sensitive characteristics of
some words. For example, the verb “discuss” must take an object, which is a noun or a noun
phrase. The adjective “fond” must be followed by a preposition. The information can be
represented in a systematic way.
Discuss
V-
(NP)
Fond
Adj - (of NP)
Every lexical item establishes some constraints on syntactic categories with which it
associates. Context-sensitive generalisations are part of what we describe as strict
subcategorisation. Words are further constrained by semantic considerations. These
restrictions are referred to as selectional restriction. The rule of selectional restriction shows
the semantic properties of lexical items – in terms of + concrete + abstract + human. Words
like tree and stone are (-ANIMATE), while fox, man are (+ANIMATE). Some abstract
words like love, eat, run will be marked as (+ANIMATE + HUMAN).
It will therefore be anomalous to present the following sentences
(i) The tree loves them
(ii) The stone ate rice
Meaning is therefore predictable from observing the nature of the complete semantic
environment as well as from an assessment of syntactic well-formedness.

31
 Assessment
Identify the different ways we can classify English words.
3.3 Role Relations of Lexical Items
It may not be enough to limit our knowledge of words to their basic characteristics. It is
necessary to examine the functions of lexical items in a systematic way. This can be achieved
by focusing on the role relations of lexical items. Indeed, role relations provide information
on semantic relationships among lexical items. In doing so, role relationships help to
highlight functions of lexical items. The functions of lexical items are referred to as
arguments – such as agent, instrument, experience, source, goal, path, location, possessor,
patient, and so on.
Nouns and noun phrases are described as arguments in relation to the verbs in the sentence.
Verbs are central in determining semantic roles. These roles relate to processes, events and
state of affairs associated with participants in the sentence. The agent is usually a noun phrase
marked as (+ANIMATE), and which instigate an action or an event as shown below.
(i) John boiled eggs (John as agent)
When entities designated as (-ANIMATE) initiate some action, we describe the entities as
force For example:
(ii) Radiation caused some damage (Radiation as force)
That entity that is affected by the action of the agent or force is referred to as patient e.g.
(iii) John boiled eggs (eggs as patient)
The entity that undergoes some psychological state is the experience
(iv) Juliet became happy (Juliet as experience)
The instrument is the semantic role for what is used to carry out a piece of action
(v) She cleaned the chair with a brush (brush as instrument)
Source indicates the origin or direction from which an entity comes. The source is usually a
location.
(vi) The teacher took out the duster from the cupboard. (the cupboard as source)
We can, however refer to the place an entity is situated. That is usually the location as a
thematic role. The semantic role goal shows the direction towards which an entity goes.
(vii) The mango rolled into a basket.
The path shows the route along which an entity moves e.g.
(viii) They reached the town through the unused road.

32
We also have the possessor or the beneficiary, describing the entity benefiting from an action.
The beneficiary is always (+ANIMATE)

3.4 The Nature of Empty Categories

Sentence varieties are achieved by transformations some of which involve rearrangement,
deletion, additional and replacement of linguistic items. These transformations involve the
movement of items. When these items are moved, spaces are left. These spaces are referred to
as empty categories. In order to realise the full meaning of any sentence that has undergone
transformation, there is the need to explain the nature of these empty categories. Empty
categories are of the following types:
(i) The non-anaphoric null pronominal (PRO)
(ii) Anaphors
(iii) Traces
PRO – This empty category occurs as the subject of the infinitive clause as shown below:
(i) Peter promised (PRO to return)
(ii) Anaphors such as themselves, each other and one another.
(iii) NP Trace
In transformations involving passive structures, we always have traces as shown below.
(i) The men were promoted -t. Note that the space after the verb promoted has been left
empty Wh Trace- when we have WH-Questions and relative clauses, among other structures,
WH- traces occur:
(i) What did the lady cook -t-?
(ii) You said the man who I described -t-?
4.0 CONCLUSION
I have observed that our knowledge of semantics will be more fulfilling with a more detailed
analysis of words in their combination in sentences. This demand has been pursued in this
unit as we have explored the nature of the lexicon, the features of words, the sub
categorisation of words, role relations of lexical items and the place of empty categories in
interpreting the meaning of sentences.

5.0 Summary
In this unit, we have examined the place of the structure of words in the study of semantics.
We have discussed:
 the nature of the lexicon

33
 the features of words
 the process of sub categorisation
 role relations of lexical items
 some empty categories.

34
UNIT 8: ASPECTS OF SENTENTIAL MEANING
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
3.1 Paraphrase
3.2 Ambiguity
3.3 Vagueness
3.4 Tautology
3.5 Presupposition
3.6 Entailment
3.7 Anomaly
3.8 Contradiction
3.9 Analyticity
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Sense or lexical relations are concerned with the meaning of individual words. However, as
we observed in the unit on semantic theories, the function of theories of meaning includes the
explication of sentences. A great deal of the problems of communication derives from the
confusion at the level of sentences. It is, therefore, important that you explore sources of
these problems. We do not communicate with isolated words. Indeed, knowledge of language
and the art of communication depend on our ability to combine words in a systematic way.
When words are confined, we achieve sentential meaning. The study of semantics is also
expected to explore meaning at this level. This is the purpose of this unit.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
 identify different issues related to the meaning of the sentence
 explain major concepts in the meaning of English sentences
 demonstrate the ability to apply these concepts in real language situation.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Paraphrase

35
In the study of meaning processes in the sentence, we shall discuss these concepts in the
sections that follow. Paraphrase is to the sentence what synonymy is to words. This means
that the paraphrase explains a situation in which two or more sentences have one meaning.
Indeed, a sentence can have many paraphrases. There are two types of paraphrases: lexical
and structural paraphrases. In lexical paraphrases, we have two or more sentences giving the
same interpretation as a result of the replacement of one word or phrase by another. The
following are examples.
(i) The chef hired a bachelor
(ii) The chef hired an unmarried man
In the two sentences above, the change in their structure is as a result of the substitution of a
bachelor for an unmarried man. Both a bachelorand unmarried man are phrases. Consider
further the following sentences.
(i) The man was agitated
(ii) The man was anxious
We have achieved the paraphrase by the substitution of the word “agitated” for another,
“anxious.” Structural paraphrase is achieved when we alter the arrangements of the sentences
through transformations. The following are examples:
(i) They bought a new apartment (Basic –subject + Verb+ object)
(ii) It was a new apartment that they bought (Cleft)
(iii) What they bought was a new apartment (Pseudo cleft)
(iv) A new apartment was what they bought (topicalised)
3.2 Ambiguity
When an expression can be given more than one interpretation ambiguity arises. Therefore,
why polysemy relates to words, ambiguity is concerned with sentences. We have two types of
ambiguity – lexical and structural.
Lexical ambiguity occurs when the presence of just a specific word leads to multiple
interpretations. Consider the following examples.
(i) The team has many goals
(ii) She prepared tables
It should be noted that “goals” and “tables” can be interpreted in different easy based on the
contexts. Structural ambiguity is achieved by the organisation of the elements of the sentence.
It is possible to interpret these elements in different ways. Consider these examples.
(i) They promoted all English teachers
(ii) Boiling water can be dangerous

36
The ambiguity in the second sentence drives from the possibility of reading the sentence as:
(i) Water that is boiling (i.e. hot) can be dangerous
(ii) The act of boiling water can be dangerous
The first interpretation makes boiling water as the subject noun phrase whereas in the second
interpretations, boiling water is the complement.

Assessment
State the two types of ambiguity that can occur in a sentence.
3.3 Vagueness
A sentence is vague when it has no definite meaning. This lack of meaning may derive from
the incompatibility of the semantic properties of some of the words. Sometimes, a vague
expression may be grammatically well formed, yet its meaning may be farfetched. Consider
the following classical example taken from Chomsky (1965).
(i) Colourless green ideas sleep furiously together
It should be noted that many of what we describe as literary language would have been vague
except that we understand the background as literary. Consider further the following
example.
(ii) The stones consoled her
This expression is clearly a personification since stones which are inanimate have been
endued with the characteristics of consoling. A situation of tautology arises when we have
unnecessary repetition of elements in communication. There is undue emphasis without
necessarily making meaning any clearer. Tautology is closely associated with redundancy,
which is the introduction of linguistic units, which do not affect the status, or meaning of the
larger construction. The following are examples of tautology.
(i) This bachelor has not been married
(ii) The congregation are members of a church
Other instances of tautology are:
 circumnavigate around
 unlawful theft
 can be able
3.5 Presupposition
In presupposition, there is usually a piece of information, which the speaker assumes the
hearer already knows. This assumption is based on some shared background knowledge

37
between the speaker and the hearers. An outsider in the circle of communication may be at a
loss. Let us illustrate this situation with the following sentences.
(i) John: Are you able to bring Harry along?
(ii) Peter: That will be splendid. On our way, we shall pick up the drinks.
The presupposition in this conversation is that both John and Peter know who Harry is. They
both have an idea of the drinks, and the source from where to bring them.
3.6 Entailment
In entailment, there is usually a pair of sentences and the truth of one derives from the truth
of other. Consider the following sentences.
(i) Tracy is a spinster
(ii) Tracy is a female
Sentence (i) derives from the meaning of sentence (ii). This means that if sentence (i) entails
sentence (ii) then, sentence (ii) is necessarily the implication of sentence (i).
3.7 Anomaly
Anomaly results from the combination of two semantic features that are not compatible in
describing a phenomenon. Words attract specific selectional restrictions. For instance, trees
are vertical while rulers, ropes and snakes are horizontal. For vertical items, we describe them
in terms of tall, while for the horizontal ones we talk of long. Thus, we can have tall trees, tall
buildings, tall people, but long ropes, long snakes, long rulers, and so on. It will therefore be
anomalous to have:
 a long man
 a tall snake
3.8 Contradiction
Contradictory expressions present two opposing proposition at the same time. Thus, a person
cannot be dead and alive at the same time. Other examples of anomaly are:
(i) That circular house is rectangular
(ii) The drains are flooded because there are no rains
3.9 Analyticity
We talk about analyticity when we have sentences in the grammatical forms and lexical
meanings of their proposition, which make them necessarily true. Consider the following
examples.
(i) Churches are usually attended by Christians
(ii) Unmarried ladies are spinsters

38
 Assessment
List the different areas of interest in the study of the meaning of the sentence.
4.0 CONCLUSION
A great deal of the problems of communication derives from the misinterpretation of the
meaning of the sentence. It is always profitable to explore the full range of meaning,
potentials in the sentence.

5.0 Summary
We have studied in this unit, different area of emphasis in the mechanisms for deriving the
meaning of sentences. We have focused attention on paraphrase, ambiguity, vagueness,
tautology, presupposition, entailment, anomaly, and analyticity.

39
UNIT 9: PRAGMATICS: CONVENTIONAL IMPLICATURE AND SPEECH
THEORIES
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
ACTS
3.1 The Speech Acts Theory and Types of Acts in Language
3.2 Levels of Speech Acts
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Pragmatics is concerned with the range of choices and constraints available to users, and
based on the context. In pragmatics, emphasis is on the pairing of sentences and their
appropriate contexts. The choices made in language have been found to affect the listeners
and their responses. It is possible to observe norms of politeness, appropriateness, formality
and respect in the way language is used. It is believed that pragmatics determines the
appropriate interpretation of sentences since there could be differences between literal and
implied meanings. Differences in meaning are at the instance of the situation, the shared
background and the linguistics context of the expression. It will be most inconceivable to
limit the study of semantics to the abstract study of meaning. Indeed, a dependable theory of
meaning should explore language use. The relationship between semantics and language use
is referred to as pragmatics. We shall explore this relationship in the course of this unit.

Pragmatics, according to Kempson (1986) is the study of the general principles necessary for
retrieving information from a specific utterance based on the context. Emphasis is not
necessarily on the grammatical or structural properties of the sentence. Indeed, a great deal of
what we do in human communication is determined from the context. This means that the
meaning of any stretch of communication is based on the interpretation of the listener. We
also lay emphasis on the message, the participants, the deductions to be made from the
utterance, the implications of what is said or assumed and the impact of the non-verbal
aspects of the interaction on the meaning.
In terms of objectives, pragmatics deals with the totality of the processes through which
utterances convey meaning, bearing in mind the context and how participants respond to the

40
meanings intended. It will therefore be easy to say that the common tie between pragmatics
and semantics is language.
However, while semantics is concerned with language meaning, pragmatics is concerned
with language use. This will necessarily mean that the contextual approach to meaning will
be relevant to pragmatics. Since the full manifestation of language from the point of use deals
on the implied processes, we shall explore the nature of implicature. It is always common to
hear people argue over what is meant, and what is implied. This means that there could be
differences between what a speaker says and how the listener interprets it. However, success
in communication depends on how well the meaning intended by the speaker and how the
implicature of the listener converge. This is usually possible when participants in
communication obey principles of conversational implicature. Implicture, a term coined by
H.P. Grice, refers to what is suggested in an utterance and which may not have been
expressed. The speaker deliberately breaks the rules of a conversational maxim to convey
additional meaning. For instance, it is possible to respond to the question:
1. Do you really believe Betty?
The answer could be : She was speaking grammar.
The answer implies, among other things that Betty was not telling the whole story. It is
expected of people in communication to obey certain co-operative principles. These
principles have been presented as maxims of quantity, quality, relation and manner
Quantity – provide the right quantity of information; that is:
i. Make your contribution information enough
ii. Do not make your contribution more informal than necessary.
Quality – make your contribution true; that is:
i. Do not say what you believe is not rue
ii. Do not say that for which you lack evidence.
Relation – Be relevant
Manner – be perspicuous, that is:
i. Avoid obscurity of expression;
ii. Avoid ambiguity
There are also conventional implicatures used for communicating non-truth-conditional
meaning for specific linguistic expressions. For example:
1. Paul is an Lusaka businessman, he is very rich
This will have the conventional implicature that all Lusaka businessmen are rich; however,
this is not always the case.

41
2.0 Learning Objectives
At the end of this unit, you shall be able to
 define pragmatics
 relate pragmatics to the meaning of sentences
 explain the three levels of speech acts.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 The Speech Acts Theory and Types of Acts in Language
Austin (1962) describes the Speech Acts theory as an approach that explains the roles of
utterances in shaping the attitudes of participants in interpersonal communication. Speech
acts reveal the intentions of speakers and the effects the speaker’s utterances and expressions
have on the hearers. The implication of speech acts is that every utterance has a purpose,
which derives from the specific context. It has been observed that language use depends on
such contextual factors as social and physical conditions, attitudes, abilities, beliefs and the
relationship existing between the speaker and the listener. There are different types of speech
acts, the most common being the following.
(a) Representative Acts;
(b) Declarative Acts
(c) Directive Acts
(d) Expressive Acts; and
(e) Commissive Acts.
Representative Acts – These acts describe events, processes and states. Usually, the speaker
is committed to the truth of the assertion, claim, report, suggestion, prediction, description,
hypothesis or conclusion.
Declarative Acts – These are acts that immediately change the state of affairs to which they
apply. These acts are used in arresting, christening, marriage, sentencing, acquittal and so on.
Consider the following.
(i) I discharge and acquit the accused
(ii) I hereby name this baby Amanda
Directive Acts – In directive acts, the addressee is instructed to carry out some instruction by
responding verbally to an utterance or by performing some physical actions. The acts can be
questions, commands, requests, pleas or invitation. For example:
(i) Kindly lend me some money!

42
(ii) Please, be my guest!
(iii) What is your name!
Expressive Acts - Expressive acts show the psychological states – feelings and attitudes
towards some events and affairs. These usually occur in greetings, scolding, condoling,
appreciating, thanking, congratulating, apologising, and so on. For example:
(i) We congratulate you on your success
(ii) I apologise for my mistakes
Commissive Acts - In commissive acts, the speaker is committed to some future action as in
challenging, betting, promising, offering, threatening, vowing, warning, etc.
(i) I pledge a hundred thousand Naira
(ii) We promise to build them a house
It should be noted that commissive acts carry specific performative verbs – promise, swear,
name, pledge, warn, advise, declare, bet.

Assessment
List the types of speech acts.
3.2 Levels of Speech Acts
There may be some confusion regarding types and levels of speech acts. We have already
discussed types of speech acts – representative, declarative, directive, expressive and
commissive. For levels of speech acts, emphasis is on the different stages of interaction
between the speaker and the listener using speech acts. Three distinct levels are usually
observed – locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary acts.
Locutionary Acts – These are observed as the processes of producing grammatical and
meaningful utterances, which can be recognised by the hearer.
Illocutionary Acts – Illocutionary acts are the force behind the utterances. Indeed, the
speaker performs these acts to achieve the purpose of communication as a statement, a
question, a command, an invitation, a threat, a request, an apology, and so on. It is possible,
for instance, to use a sentence that has the structure of a statement for the purpose of a
warning – e.g.
(i) You will lose all your deposits – (from a financial adviser to a client)
This sentence may be a warning or a piece of advice. Therefore, it is possible to use identical
utterance types for different tokens based on the intentions of the speaker and the context.

43
Perlocutionary Acts – These are the effects of the speaker’s utterance on the behaviour of
the hearer. They are the acts performed by the hearer as a result of the effect of the speaker’s
utterances. It is assumed, for instance, that the hearer will respond to a question of the
speaker in a specific way, or behave in accordance with the demands of the context. It should
be noted that the illocutionary force is the intended effect of an utterance on the hearer from
the point of view of the speaker. The perlocutionary effect is the actual effect of the speaker’s
utterance on the action, behaviour, attitude or belief of the hearer. Maximum communication
is achieved when there is illocutionary uptake. This situation arises when the listener
understands the intended effect of the speaker. This demand is at the core of semantics since
meaning must be shared.

Assessment
Identify the levels of speech acts.
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have explored meaning beyond the abstract level of deep structure sentences. Indeed, we
have examined language in use. This is the core of pragmatics. Our focus in this unit has been
on speech acts.

5.0 Summary
In this unit, we have explored different dimensions of the speech acts theory. In specific
terms, we have discussed:
 the concept of pragmatics
 types and levels of speech acts
 the place of illocutionary uptake in achieving maximum communication.

44
UNIT 10: LOGIC AND FALLACIES
BASIC ASPECTS OF LINGUISTICS
FALLACIES
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
3.1 The Nature and Forms of Fallacies Relevant to Semantics
3.2 Fallacies of Misinterpretation
3.3 Fallacies of Misunderstanding of Language
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
A major thrust of semantics is to ensure that the meaning of linguistics units is maximally
accessible. One way to achieve this is to ensure that we have logical arguments in our
presentations. Logic deals with the process of evaluating the truth and falsity of arguments.
What is logical is deemed to have the right reasoning. There are, however, times when the
strength of an argument is weakened by fallacies.
A fallacy, from its original Latin origin, fallor is any error of reasoning, which can lead to
deception. Quite a number of fallacies are derived from language use.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
 state the forms of fallacy relevant to semantics
 describe these fallacies,
 illustrate their manifestation in language with good examples.
3.1 The Nature and Forms of Fallacies Relevant to Semantics
Fallacies can be formal, material or linguistic/verbal. Formal fallacies occur when
conclusions assert what have not been included in the premises. Therefore, the structural
validity of the expression is weakened. It also means that the deductive argument presented
cannot hold. Material fallacies derive from irrelevance. Such fallacies cannot prove the
material truth of the arguments or propositions. The appeal of material fallacies depends on
some mistakes related to the truth of the premises or the possibility of such truth being

45
known. Therefore, material fallacies often fail to prove the material truth of their arguments.
Thus, the conclusions drawn are usually not true. Linguistics or verbal fallacies derive mainly
from ambiguity as a result of the change or shift created by the formulation of the meaning of
words and phrases used in the proposition. There are two main forms of the verbal or
linguistics fallacy, which are of interest to semantics. We shall examine them briefly.
3.2 Fallacies of Misinterpretation
Under these general fallacies are:
 Amphiboly
 Accent
 Figure of speech
 Hypostalisation.
Amphiboly
In amphiboly, there is ambiguity arising from a loose or inappropriate grouping of words in a
structure. There is usually the potential for multiple interpretations. Consider the following.
(i) Zambian educated men are weak
The confusion derives from the interpretations below.
a) Men educated in Zambia
b) Zambian men who are educated
c) They are physically weak
d) They are morally weak.
Accent
The fallacy of accent arises as a result of misplaced emphasis. There is usually the
misinterpretation of the original meaning of the sentence as a result of the wrong emphasis or
the challenge of quoting one out of context. Emphasis can be achieved in the print media by
the use of font types and sizes, both of which can mislead the reader. For instance, during the
screening for ministerial appointment in Zambia, some newspapers carried a screaming
headline such as:
(i) “Phiri Chikondi Missing” (whereas what they meant was that her name was not on the list
of nominees presented to the senate)
(ii) Another example was noted in another newspaper-“UNILAG Vice-Chancellor in Police
Net” (a fake Vice-Chancellor apprehended)
Most readers would be carried away by the capital letters, whereas the real message is in the
small letters.

46
Figures of Speech (Figure Dictions)
In a specialised way, figures of speech derive from the confusion over words, which are
perceived to be similar in sound or structure – as in
 Accent
 Council
 Eligible
 Illicit
 assent
 counsel
 illegible
 elicit
Greater import of the figure of speech occurs in the literal interpretation of metaphorical
expressions, including the following.
(i) John kicked the bucket
(ii) He swallowed his pride
Hypostalisation
Wherever abstract concepts are presented as if they have the capacity to produce empirical
evidence, we have hypostalization. Consider the following example.
(i) Experience taught him great lessons

Assessment
List the different forms of the fallacy of misinterpretation.
3.3 Fallacies of the Misuse or Misunderstanding of Language
We shall explore the following four fallacies under this category.
 Equivocation
 Composition
 Division, and
 Bifurcation
Equivocation – double talk or equal voice (aeques vox in Latin) described the possibility of
using the same term for different senses in the same discourse. Consider the following
example.
Rich men enjoy rich meals

47
The use of the word “rich” in the two instances will definitely cause confusion if “rich”
means related to involving enormous wealth. The illustration will be clearer with this
example taken from Ogbulogo (2005).
(i) People should obey every good law
(ii) The law of identity of reference is a good one
(iii) Therefore, people should obey the law of identity of reference.
The fallacy of the conclusion derives from the variation in the meaning of law in the two
preceding sentences. The fallacy of composition derives from the assumption that what
applies to a part of an element applies to the totality of that element. If we assume that since
players in a team are skilful, the entire team would be harmonious and visionary. It will be
fallacious to argue that since those who provide instructions at the primary, secondary and
tertiary levels of education are all teachers, they should all be equally remunerated. This
fallacy arises principally from neglect of the collective and distributive uses of such general
terms as all and every. Collective terms relate to the whole while distributive terms make
reference to each and separate members. The fallacy of division arises when it is believed that
the elements of a whole should be shared by all its constituent part. It will be fallacious to
assume that since Judith comes from a family of beautiful ladies, she should also be beautiful.
It is easy to observe that the fallacy of division is the converse of composition. The fallacy of
bifurcation (false dilemma) manifests when the full range of possible options to a question is
erroneously reduced to just two alternatives. This reality is evident in the choice of many
words occurring in pairs, suggesting just opposites. Consider the following.
(i) If she is not wise, then she must be foolish.
(ii) The members will be either rich or poor.

Assessment
Highlight some fallacies of misunderstanding of language.
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have explored basic fallacies associated with meaning in language use. We
noted that fallacies occur as errors in reasoning, which can lead to deception. Indeed fallacies
weaken the force of an argument. Therefore, our study of semantics is found more profitable
if we devise ways of maximising access to the intended meaning.

5.0 Summary

48
In this unit, we have studied the nature of fallacies related to semantics. We have also
examined fallacies associated with the misunderstanding and misinterpretation. Dwelling
centrally on semantics, we have discussed formal, material and linguistic fallacies. In all this,
we noted that it is the irrelevance of the material in a structure that creates fallacies. However,
linguistic or verbal fallacies derive from ambiguity or shift of emphasis. Fallacies of
misinterpretation find expression as amphiboly, accent, figures of speech and hypostatisation.
Fallacies of misunderstanding of language occur as equivocation, composition, division and
trifurcation.

49
UNIT 11: ASPECTS OF MATERIAL FALLACIES RELEVANT TO SEMANTICS
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Content
3.1 Fallacies of Accident
3.2 Question Begging Fallacies
3.3 The Complex Question
3.4 False Causal Relationship
3.5 Attacking the Straw Man
3.6 The Bandwagon
3.7 Fallacies of Appeals
3.8 Irrelevant Conclusion
3.9 Argumentative Leap
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
It will be recalled that on our discussion of linguistic fallacies, we made reference to material
fallacies. In this unit, we shall explore in some detail different manifestations of material
fallacy. The study of meaning will not be complete if we focus mainly on linguistic fallacies.
There are indeed other forms of fallacies, which derive from a compromise in the truth of the
premises of the arguments.

2.0 Learning Objectives

At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
 discuss fallacies of accident
 explain question begging fallacies
 give examples of fallacies of accident and fallacy of converse accident
 discuss fallacies associated with the bandwagon and attracting the straw man
 explain how fallacies of appeals weaken the logic of argument.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT

50
A premise is the basic idea on which other ideas and conclusions are based. If the premise of
an argument is false, the conclusion cannot be valid. Material fallacies are classified based on
their structures. Presented below are the common examples.
3.1 Fallacies of Accident
Fallacies in this category are of two forms – fallacy of accident and fallacy of converse
accident. Fallacy of accident occurs when a general rule is applied to a specific case – where
such a rule would not be applicable. This form of fallacy is common in political and legal
arguments. For instance, while most constitutions will provide for the protection of personal
freedom, there may be the tendency to argue that even offenders and criminals should not
have their freedom curtailed by terms of imprisonment. The fallacy of converse accident is
also referred to as the fallacy of hasty generalisation. It occurs when we take specific
incidents to be the basis of universal conclusions. Thus, the evidence of that specific event is
always restricted, thus making whatever generalisation hasty and invalid. Consider the
following generalisation.
(i) All great footballers are charming
(ii) Single women cannot be good leaders
3.2 Question Begging Fallacies
We shall consider under this heading, Fallacies of begging the question and fallacies of
question begging epithets. The fallacy of begging the question arises when what is intended
to be proved as the conclusion is assumed the premise. The fallacy may also occur if one of
the truth of the premises cannot be established without the conclusion being found to be true.
There may also be a situation where an issue perceived to be true under particular
circumstances inferred from a universal premise. Usually that universal premise is also
inferred from a specific case. Thus, a universal proposition is assumed to derive from a case
that is only true in certain circumstances. Consider the following examples.
(i) That utterance comes from men ruled by their wives, because only a man ruled by his wife
can say such things.
(ii) You know he is the wealthiest man in the village because he is the strongest.
Question begging epithets are expressed as adjectives, which carry with them, value
judgements. In each of these judgements, there are conclusions that are yet to be proved.
Most forms of propaganda exhibit instances of question begging epithets. Consider further,
this example:
These shameless university teachers will always line their pockets with ill-gotten wealth from
unholy sales of handouts.

51
3.2 The Complex Question
There is a complex question when we assume a yes or no as the answer to a question that has
far greater implications. In many instances of questions, there is the assumption that the basic
fact has been established in a yes – no scenario. This situation is apparent in the following
questions.
(i) Why are Blacks interested in self-perpetuation in office? (Has it been proved?)
(ii) Why do academics turn out to be poor leaders? (Is it always the case?)
It is a common knowledge that questions elicit answers. The real meaning of a question
derives from the assumptions it makes. When people are unwary of the full implications of
questions, they fall into the trap of creative and crafty users of language, like lawyers.
3.4 False Causal Relationship
There is a false causal relationship when what is assumed the cause of an action is actually
not. It may also be a situation when what follows an event is assumed to be caused by that
event. In medical circles, this fallacy may link a symptom to an ailment when in fact
something else may be happening. Consider this situation:
They became successful after they left the scene of war. Therefore, their success is linked to
their new location.
3.5 Attacking the Straw Man
This fallacy also referred to as the smear technique is the practice of attacking the personality
or circumstances of the opponent in an argument rather than focusing on the issues. This
attack may manifest in the use of offensive language, insults and abuse, rather than proving
or disproving the logic of the argument.
There are three variants of this fallacy – the genetic, relational and the well poisoning
fallacies. The object of attack in the genetic fallacy is the source or the origin of an argument.
There is usually the assumption that good ideas can only come from the good mind-often
associated with members of a special group. Often, politicians and administrators who are
interested in discrediting opposition deploy this fallacy. At the relational level, there is the
assumption that one’s ideas, opinions or arguments are related to one’s circumstances. People
who have some substance in society are usually perceived to have brighter ideas. For fallacies
that poison the well, there is a deliberate attempt to discredit the source of a supporting piece
of evidence. This makes the evidence unaccepted. The following are examples of fallacies
that attack the straw man.
(i) Who would believe the self-imposed leader who is a drunkard and a brute?

52
(ii) It will be inconceivable for people to follow the opinions of Mr. Banda, where parents
could hardly train beyond the primary school.
(iii) I am sure you are not expecting us to follow the logic of this argument since we know
that the data have been compromised all through.
3.6 The Bandwagon
The fallacy of the bandwagon, also described as the snob appeal or the appeal to the people
involves the play on the emotions of the people instead of addressing the issues at stake.
Emphasis is on appealing to the fears, prejudices, passions and problems of the people even
to the detriment of the logic. Politicians, propagandists, lawyers and marketers use this appeal
to sway public opinions. Consider the following.
(i) “Come out of poverty in a grand style; subscribe to be a distributor of our products.”
(ii) “Enjoy the secrets of longevity with our New Life products.”
(iii) “Join the team of high fliers in your examinations, enrol in our tutorial centre.”
3.7 Fallacy of Appeals
Apart from the fallacy of the bandwagon, there are a number of fallacies that appeal to pity,
authority and ignorance. The fallacy of appeal to pity is intended to arouse emotions of pity
and sympathy. The aim is to achieve favourable conclusions or desired actions, even when
the facts of the arguments may have been left out. Particular appeal is common in situation
that will require dire consequences. Thus, defence counsels resort to it to whip up sentiments.
Consider this example.
The accused is the only surviving son of a widow. He has suffered a great deal of deprivation
as a youth. If he is convicted and imprisoned, his poor mother will not survive the shock.
The fallacy of the appeal to authority draws its strength by referring to a respected authority
or a group of people whose opinions count. Often, such a reference is not relevant, unlike
what we have in academic circles when experts build their arguments on the strength of
existing authorities. Consider these arguments.
(i) Even Bill Gates would envy this computer.
(ii) Shakespeare would even have endorsed this pen
Note that both Bill Gates and Shakespeare have become names noted in computing and
writing respectively. There is the fallacy of the appeal to ignorance when we assume that
every proposition without immediate supporting evidence must be false. It may also occur
when a proposition is assumed true if there is no evidence to disprove it. Therefore, the only
point of proof is one’s ignorance. Consider this example:
If you do not believe in witches, you must bring evidence that they do not exist.

53
There is also the fallacy of the appeal to force. It is also referred to as the fallacy of swinging
the big stick, which occurs when one uses intimidation or threats to force the acceptance of a
conclusion. This technique manifests when rational arguments have failed- for example:
If you don’t sign to break the strike, you must vacate your accommodation
3.8 The Fallacy of Irrelevant Conclusion
In this fallacy, there is usually the evasion of the real issues. The conclusion to be proved or
disproved is ignored and an entirely new conclusion is introduced. Consider the following
illustration.
Mr. A: How can you prove the case of sexual harassment against the accused?
Mr. B: How can he be ignorant while he had in the past been charged with aiding and
abetting examination misconduct?
Note the two issues being raised.
3.9 The Fallacy of the Argumentative Leap
The fallacy of the argumentative leap occurs when the conclusion drawn from the premises of
an argument is not relevant to that conclusion. Indeed, the argument fails to establish the
conclusion. That lady is morally sound, that is why her neighbours suspect her.

Assessment
i. List any five material fallacies.
ii. Give two examples for each of fallacy of accident and fallacy of converse accident.
4.0 CONCLUSION
It has been observed that the strength of an argument is weakened not only by the nature of
the structure of the language. The weakness in an argument can also be introduced by
extraneous elements brought in. These elements are referred to as material fallacies.

5.0 Summary
In this unit, you have learnt how the introduction of irrelevant material can weaken the logic
of an argument. You have considered the fallacies of accident, converse accident, begging the
question, the complex question, false causal relationship, attacking the straw man, the
bandwagon and appeals. You have also noted examples of each of them.

54
 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: M.I.T Press.

Introduction to semantics and translation. Summer Institute of Linguistics.

Kempson, R. (1977). Semantic Theory. London: Cambridge University Press.

Lech, G. (1981). Semantics. London: Penguin Books.

Leech, G. (1981). Semantic. London: Penguim Book

Microsoft Encarta. (2009). “Semantics." Microsoft® Student 2008 [DVD]. Redmond, WA:
Microsoft Corporation, 2007.

Ndimele, O. M. (1998). Semantics and Frontiers of Communication. Port Harcourt:

University of Port Harcourt Press.

Ogbulogo, C. U. (2005). Concepts in Semantics. Lagos: Sam Iroanusi Publications.

Palner, F.R. (1996). Semantics. London: Cambridge University Press

55