What words mean and express: semantics and pragmatics of kind terms and verbs
•The issue of word meaning is examined in the context of pragmatic theories.•It is suggested that not all classes of words have the same kind of meaning.•Kind terms provide different meaning possibilities and verb meanings are enriched in composition.•Conceptual semantics has better explanations tha...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of pragmatics 2017-08, Vol.117, p.231-244 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 244 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 231 |
container_title | Journal of pragmatics |
container_volume | 117 |
creator | Vicente, Agustín |
description | •The issue of word meaning is examined in the context of pragmatic theories.•It is suggested that not all classes of words have the same kind of meaning.•Kind terms provide different meaning possibilities and verb meanings are enriched in composition.•Conceptual semantics has better explanations than some new approaches to semantics.
For many years, it has been common-ground in semantics and in philosophy of language that semantics is in the business of providing a full explanation about how propositional meanings are obtained. This orthodox picture seems to be in trouble these days, as an increasing number of authors now hold that semantics does not deal with thought-contents. Some of these authors have embraced a “thin meanings” view, according to which lexical meanings are too schematic to enter propositional contents. I will suggest that it is plausible to adopt thin semantics for a class of words. However, I’ll also hold that some classes of words, like kind terms, plausibly have richer lexical meanings, and so that an adequate theory of word meaning may have to combine thin and rich semantics. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.07.007 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2061520075</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S037821661730214X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2061520075</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-fcd6e30212d45d243538aa71d339d764d1637cdf6355e2ee33520f7d6a494af43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UEtLxDAQDqLguvoPPBQ8t04eTboeBFl8wYoXxWOIyURb7cOkrvrvzW49CwPDzHwP5iPkmEJBgcrTphiCeWlNwYCqAlKB2iEzWqlFTnmldskMuKpyRqXcJwcxNgBABYcZuXt6NWP21QcXsxZNl5nOZfg9BIzxLIvYmm6sbdyuJ5Pt2PvsrU6rEUM7HdcYnuMh2fPmPeLRX5-Tx6vLh-VNvrq_vl1erHLLKxhzb51EDowyJ0rHBC95ZYyijvOFU1I4KrmyzktelsgQOS8ZeOWkEQthvOBzcjLpDqH_-MQ46qb_DF2y1AwkTWhQZUKJCWVDH2NAr4dQtyb8aAp6E5xu9PST3gSnIRWoRDufaJg-WNcYdLQ1dhZdHdCO2vX1_wK_pP93qw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2061520075</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>What words mean and express: semantics and pragmatics of kind terms and verbs</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Vicente, Agustín</creator><creatorcontrib>Vicente, Agustín</creatorcontrib><description>•The issue of word meaning is examined in the context of pragmatic theories.•It is suggested that not all classes of words have the same kind of meaning.•Kind terms provide different meaning possibilities and verb meanings are enriched in composition.•Conceptual semantics has better explanations than some new approaches to semantics.
For many years, it has been common-ground in semantics and in philosophy of language that semantics is in the business of providing a full explanation about how propositional meanings are obtained. This orthodox picture seems to be in trouble these days, as an increasing number of authors now hold that semantics does not deal with thought-contents. Some of these authors have embraced a “thin meanings” view, according to which lexical meanings are too schematic to enter propositional contents. I will suggest that it is plausible to adopt thin semantics for a class of words. However, I’ll also hold that some classes of words, like kind terms, plausibly have richer lexical meanings, and so that an adequate theory of word meaning may have to combine thin and rich semantics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0378-2166</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1387</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.07.007</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Ad hoc concepts ; Grammar ; Linguistics ; Philosophy of language ; Polysemy ; Pragmatics ; Semantics ; Terminology ; Truth-conditions ; Word meaning</subject><ispartof>Journal of pragmatics, 2017-08, Vol.117, p.231-244</ispartof><rights>2017 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Aug 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-fcd6e30212d45d243538aa71d339d764d1637cdf6355e2ee33520f7d6a494af43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-fcd6e30212d45d243538aa71d339d764d1637cdf6355e2ee33520f7d6a494af43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.07.007$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,3539,27911,27912,45982</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Vicente, Agustín</creatorcontrib><title>What words mean and express: semantics and pragmatics of kind terms and verbs</title><title>Journal of pragmatics</title><description>•The issue of word meaning is examined in the context of pragmatic theories.•It is suggested that not all classes of words have the same kind of meaning.•Kind terms provide different meaning possibilities and verb meanings are enriched in composition.•Conceptual semantics has better explanations than some new approaches to semantics.
For many years, it has been common-ground in semantics and in philosophy of language that semantics is in the business of providing a full explanation about how propositional meanings are obtained. This orthodox picture seems to be in trouble these days, as an increasing number of authors now hold that semantics does not deal with thought-contents. Some of these authors have embraced a “thin meanings” view, according to which lexical meanings are too schematic to enter propositional contents. I will suggest that it is plausible to adopt thin semantics for a class of words. However, I’ll also hold that some classes of words, like kind terms, plausibly have richer lexical meanings, and so that an adequate theory of word meaning may have to combine thin and rich semantics.</description><subject>Ad hoc concepts</subject><subject>Grammar</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Philosophy of language</subject><subject>Polysemy</subject><subject>Pragmatics</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Terminology</subject><subject>Truth-conditions</subject><subject>Word meaning</subject><issn>0378-2166</issn><issn>1879-1387</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UEtLxDAQDqLguvoPPBQ8t04eTboeBFl8wYoXxWOIyURb7cOkrvrvzW49CwPDzHwP5iPkmEJBgcrTphiCeWlNwYCqAlKB2iEzWqlFTnmldskMuKpyRqXcJwcxNgBABYcZuXt6NWP21QcXsxZNl5nOZfg9BIzxLIvYmm6sbdyuJ5Pt2PvsrU6rEUM7HdcYnuMh2fPmPeLRX5-Tx6vLh-VNvrq_vl1erHLLKxhzb51EDowyJ0rHBC95ZYyijvOFU1I4KrmyzktelsgQOS8ZeOWkEQthvOBzcjLpDqH_-MQ46qb_DF2y1AwkTWhQZUKJCWVDH2NAr4dQtyb8aAp6E5xu9PST3gSnIRWoRDufaJg-WNcYdLQ1dhZdHdCO2vX1_wK_pP93qw</recordid><startdate>201708</startdate><enddate>201708</enddate><creator>Vicente, Agustín</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201708</creationdate><title>What words mean and express: semantics and pragmatics of kind terms and verbs</title><author>Vicente, Agustín</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-fcd6e30212d45d243538aa71d339d764d1637cdf6355e2ee33520f7d6a494af43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Ad hoc concepts</topic><topic>Grammar</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Philosophy of language</topic><topic>Polysemy</topic><topic>Pragmatics</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Terminology</topic><topic>Truth-conditions</topic><topic>Word meaning</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vicente, Agustín</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Journal of pragmatics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vicente, Agustín</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>What words mean and express: semantics and pragmatics of kind terms and verbs</atitle><jtitle>Journal of pragmatics</jtitle><date>2017-08</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>117</volume><spage>231</spage><epage>244</epage><pages>231-244</pages><issn>0378-2166</issn><eissn>1879-1387</eissn><abstract>•The issue of word meaning is examined in the context of pragmatic theories.•It is suggested that not all classes of words have the same kind of meaning.•Kind terms provide different meaning possibilities and verb meanings are enriched in composition.•Conceptual semantics has better explanations than some new approaches to semantics.
For many years, it has been common-ground in semantics and in philosophy of language that semantics is in the business of providing a full explanation about how propositional meanings are obtained. This orthodox picture seems to be in trouble these days, as an increasing number of authors now hold that semantics does not deal with thought-contents. Some of these authors have embraced a “thin meanings” view, according to which lexical meanings are too schematic to enter propositional contents. I will suggest that it is plausible to adopt thin semantics for a class of words. However, I’ll also hold that some classes of words, like kind terms, plausibly have richer lexical meanings, and so that an adequate theory of word meaning may have to combine thin and rich semantics.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.pragma.2017.07.007</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0378-2166 |
ispartof | Journal of pragmatics, 2017-08, Vol.117, p.231-244 |
issn | 0378-2166 1879-1387 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2061520075 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Ad hoc concepts Grammar Linguistics Philosophy of language Polysemy Pragmatics Semantics Terminology Truth-conditions Word meaning |
title | What words mean and express: semantics and pragmatics of kind terms and verbs |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T12%3A23%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=What%20words%20mean%20and%20express:%20semantics%20and%20pragmatics%20of%20kind%20terms%20and%20verbs&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20pragmatics&rft.au=Vicente,%20Agust%C3%ADn&rft.date=2017-08&rft.volume=117&rft.spage=231&rft.epage=244&rft.pages=231-244&rft.issn=0378-2166&rft.eissn=1879-1387&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.07.007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2061520075%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2061520075&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S037821661730214X&rfr_iscdi=true |