The
result of the
review from 4 journal
1.Ratna Sari
“Semantic Field, Semantic Relation and
Semantic Component”
Orji Ukpabi from academia.edu.
Semantic field is a set of words or
lexemes related in meaning; also called lexical field, field, or field of
meaning. Most often, fields are defined by subject matter, such as body parts,
landforms, diseases, colours, foods, or kinship relations.
Semantic
Relations
Semantic
relations or meaning relations are words that are semantically related to other
words.
There are lexical groups or
components that made up semantic relation :
Synonym
Synonyms usually differ in at least
one semantic feature. Sometimes the feature is:
a.objective
(denotative), referring to some actual, real world difference in
the referents; example: walk, lumber, stroll, meander, lurch,
stagger, stride, mince.
b.subjective (connotative),
referring to how the speaker feels about the referent rather than any real
difference in the referent itself; example: die, pass away, give up the ghost, kick the bucket, croak.
Antonyms
This
sub-field give us definition and so many example about There are three
categories of antonyms:
a.
Graded antonyms
b.
Complementary antonyms
c.
Relational antonyms
Polysemy
This is a meaning relation whereby a
single lexical item has several (apparaently) related
meanings.
Antagonymy
Homonymy
A Homonym
is a word that is written and pronounced the same way as another, but which has
a different meaning.
Hyponymy/hypernymy
Hyponymy is
a relation between two words in which the meaning of one of the words includes
the meaning of the other word. Examples are : apple- fruit ; car-
vehicles ; chair- furniture ; cow - animal.
2.Desi Nori Sahputri
Theoris
of Semantics Merits and Limitat”
Saleh Mustafa Ramadan
Al-Zaytoonah Private University of Jordan Amman, Jordan
Taleb
I. Ababneh Irbid National University-Jordan Irbid, Jordan
Semantics
is the technical term used to refer to the study of meaning, and, since meaning
is a part of language, semantics is a
part of linguistics.
The
Referential Theory of Meaning
a. Meaning as the Relationship
between Words and Objects
Greek philosophers say that there is a relationship between words
and objects. In other words, the best way of indicating the meaning of a word
is to refer to the object represented by that word. In their points of view,
the best definition of the meaning of a word is its ostens ive definition: defining an object by pointing to
that object.
b. Meaning as a Triangular
Relationship
The symbol is the spoken or written
word; the reference is the information that the spoken or written shape of the
word conveys to the reader/ hearer; and the referent is the thing or the object
we talk about.
c. Bloomfield’s View of Meaning
Bloomfield (1933) stated that the
context of situation was an essential part of meaning.He defined the meaning of
a linguistic form as the situation in which the speaker utters it and the
response which it calls forth in the hearer. Palmer(1981) used reference in the
sense of non linguistic world of objects
and experiences.
The
Non–Referential Theory of Meaning
Bridge (1927: 6) states that “the
proper definition of a concept is not in terms of its properties,but in terms
of actual operations”. For him a concept is nothing more than a set of
operations. If the concept is physical as of length; the operations are actual
physical operations,namely,those by which length is measured: or if the concept
is mental, as of mathematical continuity, the operations are mental operations,
namely those by which we determine whether a given aggregate of magnitude is
continuous.
The
Generative Grammarian Theory
A. Interpretive Semantic Theory
B. Generative Semantic Theory
Interpretative
Semantics versus Generative Semantics
For linguists, the deep structure,
is the underlying network of syntactic relations. For generative semanticists,
the deep structure is not “deep” enough. This approach wants the deep structure of a sentence to be
so deep to be identical with its semantic representation.
The
strengthness of this journal is this journal explain the complete theory with
the word choice that simple and this journal give conclusion in the end of
journal.
The
weakness of this journal is The are some example that make the reader confuse.
3.Nabila Firda Asy’ari
“Semantics and theories of semantics”
This
is review of journal,the title is Semantics and theories of semantics by Abbas
Bukhari,uploaded by Zain Ez+1 at academia.edu. There is 15 pages in this
journal.
Semantics
is the study of meaning in language. We know that language is used to express meanings
which can be understood by others.
Difficulties in the Study of Meaning
The problem of ‘meaning’ is quite
difficult; it is because of its toughness that some linguists went on to the
extent of excluding semantics from linguistics.
Taking up some of the above
definitions of meaning, we can discuss the different aspects of meaning o a
word as follows:
The
logical or denotative meaning. This is the literal meaning of a word indicating the idea
or concept to which it refers. concept is a minimal unit of meaning which could be called a ‘sememe’.
The
connotative meaning.
This is the additional meaning that a concept carries. It is defined as ‘the
communicative value an expression has by virtue of what it refers to over and
above its purely conceptual content’ (Leech, 1981)
The
social meaning:
This is the meaning that a word or a phrase conveys about the circumstances of
its use.
The
thematic meaning:
This is the meaning which is communicated by the way in which a speaker or
writer organises the message in terms of ordering, focus and emphasis.
The
strengthness this journal is the language that use in this journal easy to
understand.And the weakness from this journal is the text in this jurnal
terlalu monoton and make the reader be bored.
Conclusion
In this journal explain the theory
well although the text is monoton and make the reader be bored.
4.Susi Lestari
“Frame semantics a brief introduction”
Gavagna
Aarhus University 2013 at academia.edu. There is 14 pages in this journal.
Frame semantics, as described by
Charles J. Fillmore, is a research program in empirical semantics that analyses
words’ meanings “emphasizing the continuities, rather than the discontinuities,
between language and experience”(Fillmore, 1982).
according to necessity one will use
some of the words of the frame to highlight elements of the frame that needs to
be focus of attention. Other elements (or arguments) will be backgrounded. So
for example I can focus on the buyer and the goods saying:
1)
John bought the car
Or I can background the buyer and
the goods and say:
2)
Susan charged 10.000€
Foregrounding the Seller and the
Money. Although the central event is the same:
3) A car is bought for 10.000€by
John from Susan.
Fillmore argues that verbs, e.g.
buy, sell, charge, are characterized by their valence.This is the argument
structure that is required by the verb, and the situational roles that the
arguments assume due to this structure. Some elements are necessary for the
sentence not to be ungrammatical, these are said the participant roles. The
valence of buy is typically ‘divalent’ that is that it requires at least two
arguments. But these are not necessarily the same arguments, example one
foregrounds the buyer and the goods but example three highlights the goods and
the money.
Conclusion : Conclusion
The
researcher has discussed the main principles of three well–known theories of
meaning, namely the referential theory to meaning, the non–referential theory
to meaning and the generative grammarian theory to meaning. None of them is
complete; each of them has strengths and weaknesses. It is hoped that students
can benefit from this study by forming some background about meaning and how it
operates since it is a complex concept and not to be taken for granted.
