Join for free

Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg

Department of English and American Studies

Winter semester 2017

Thomas Maisel M.A.

PS Lexicology

The Pregnant of Meaning: Leech's Seven Types of Meaning in Comparison

to Palmer'due south and Lyons' Approaches

Nikola Zdravkovic

Wichernstraße 18, 91052 Erlangen

zdravkovic.nikola3@gmail.com

22458653

EMLex (European Primary in Lexicography), kickoff semester

24.03.2018

2

Table of contents

one. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………..3

ii. Leech's Seven Types of Significant……………………………………………………………4

2.1 The Complexity of "Meaning"……………………………………………………..4

2.two The Classification of "Meanings"…………………………………………………..5

ii.2.1 Conceptual Meaning……………………………………………………...5

2.ii.two Connotative Meaning……………………………………………………..6

two.two.three Social Meaning…………………………………………………………...7

2.2.4 Affective Significant………………………………………………………..7

2.ii.5 Reflected Significant………………………………………………………..eight

two.2.6 Collocative Pregnant……………………………………………………...8

2.2.7 Thematic Meaning………………………………………………………..9

2.two.8 Summary……………………………………………………………….....9

3. Other Authors and Their "Types of Significant"……………………………………………..10

3.ane Palmer'due south Arroyo………………………………………………………………...10

3.2 Lyons' Approach………………………………………………………………….12

4. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………….one4

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………..i5

Affidavit……………………………………………………………………………………….16

three

1. Introduction

This paper shall appoint in a comparing between seven types of meaning created by

Geoffrey Leech on one side and the semantic approaches regarding the topic of the

classification of meaning in the works of Frank Palmer and John Lyons on the other side.

To achieve its becomeal, the paper will exist structured in two primary parts with the description

of Leech's types of meaning in the first and the description and comparison of Palmer's and

Lyons' true categorizations in the second part. The two subparts will each be concluded with a

brief summary of the chapter, and at the very terminate, a conclusion will follow.

The methodology westwardhich is going to exist used in order to provide a comparison will

include a description and comparative and contrastive analysis of the topics depicted.

The main goal of the paper is to give a clear overview of all the three approaches and

distinguish between them when necessary. Having in mind the scope of this work and its

limitations, one of the aims is to equip the reader westith the basic knowledge of "the pregnant of

meaning" and perhaps initiate a further discussion on this subject.

Although every term will be explained in the chief part of the work, it needs to be

pointed out that the word "sense" in this paper will in most cases refer to the "dictionary

significant" or the pure linguistic one, unless stated otherwise. All the other terms will be

described and explained.

four

ii. Leech's Seven Types of Meaning

two.1 The Complication of "Meaning"

In his piece of work "Semantics. The Study of Meaning" published in the yr 1981, Geoffrey

Leech establishes at that time one of the nigh thorough classifications of the term "Meaning"

from a semantic point of view.

In order to practice so, Leech first puts emphasis on the problematics of the term itself and

names different authors who dealt with this subject so as to accentuate the complication of the

topic. With regards to this, he mentions the book written past C.Chiliad. Ogden and I.A. Richards,

published in 1923, who plant xx-two definitions for the give-and-take "thoueaning". (1981, i)

Leech and then states that 10 years after Ogden's and Richards' publishing, in 1933,

Leonard Bloomfield in his work "Language" shared the same viewpoint regarding the future

of the "Meaning" as the ii aforementioned authors. The main point of both southides was that

the scientific advancements would be of neat help in defining the term "Meaning".

(1981, 2):

"The argument of meanings is therefore the weak point in language-study, and wil50

remain so united nationstil homo mnowledge advances very far beyond its present- land" (Bloomfield

1933, 140)

Ane might ask himself wlid the importance of the establishing a theory of semantics

is, and Leech has the answer. He states that the main signal regarding this question is to

provide "a systematic account of the nature of pregnant". (1981, 4) Additionally, he explains

how this can be practisene, namely past semanticists focusing on studying the relations within the

language. The whole concept in Leech's opinion rests onorthward the distinction betwixt meaningful

and meaningless utterances in relation to "the cognition of language" and "the knowledge of

the real earth". (1981, iv-6)

To exemplify this statement, Leech provides two opposed sentences, each of which is

characterized by the discrepancies relating to either "real world" or "language":

ane) My uncle e'er sleeps on i toe. (inconsistent with the "existent world")

two) My uncle ever sleeps awake. (inconsistent with the "language") (1981, half-dozen)

Information technology would be interesting to eastwardngage in a detailed diachronic assay of thursdaye definition of the term "Significant",

which would include the time catamenia of almost a hundred years (1923, i.e. Ogden and Richards - 2018), but the

telescopic of this paper cannot incorporate a piece of work of that corporeality.

5

two.two The Nomenclature of "Meanings"

Leech created seven types of meaning (1981, 9):

i) Conceptual significant

2) Connotative meaning

iii) Social significant

4) Affective pregnant

5) Reflected meaning

6) Collocative meaning

7) Thematic significant

2.ii.1 Conceptual Meaning

As Leech underlines in "Semantics. The Report of Meaning", the emphasis in this

classification should be put on the logical or conceptual meaning (also called "denotative" or

"cognitive") (1981, 9). The reason for this is his statement that conceptual pregnant "is widely

causeless to be the cardinal cistron in linguistic communication". (Leech 1981, ix)

He goes further to explain that conceptual pregnant plays an enormous role in

linguistic communication for it "has a complex and sophisticated organization which may be

compared with, and cantankerous-related to, a like organization on the syntactic and phono logical

levels of language". (Leech 1981, 9) This idue south connected, accordink to Leech, with "two

principles of all linguistic patterning" (1981, 9), i.e. the principle of contrastiveness and the

principle of structure . (1981, 9)

Leech asserts that contrastiveness is based on the classification of sounds in

phonology, namely the binary opposition of characteristics of sounds – positive (present) and

negative (absent) features. He depicts that using the case of the sound /b/ and,

furthermore, with the example of the meaning of the word "woman". According to these two

comparable subjects, the and thenund /b/ tin can exist described adue south +bilabial, + voice, + spinnacle, - nasal,

whereas the word "woman" includes following elements: + human, - male, + adult. (1981, 10)

The principle of structure, on the other hand, is in this case simply described as "the

principle by which larger linguistic units are congenital upwards out of smaller units". (Leech 1981, 10)

6

In addition to this, Leech expresses that, in order to comprehend or generate a

linguistic utterance, at least three levels of language demand to exist nowadays. These are: A) the levefifty

of phonology (a phonological representation), B) the level of syntax (a syntactic presentation)

and C) the level of semantics. In what order these three levels are going to be used depends on

the office in linguistic communication. As a speaker, the process starts from the level of

semantics, undergoes structural formation onorth the level of syntax and becomes phonologically

formed. This C-B-A order is called "encoding". Different in "speaker-situation", the whole

process is upside-downwards in the role of the listener when the order is A-B-C, i.e. grasping the

phonological construction, tfuture the syntactic one and in the end realizing the significant of the

utterance. The A-B-C society is then called "decoding". (1981, 11) However, this thought has

progressed over years and therefore this Leech'due south structure tin can be regarded as somewhat

obsolete.

two.two.2 Connotative Meaning

For the sake of precisely defining this type of meaning, Leech's book on semantics

needs to be consulted once again: "Connotative meaning is the communicative value an

expression has past virtue of what information technology refers to, over and above its purely conceptual content."

(Leech 1981, 12)

As information technology tin can be seen from the definition, connotative pregnant unavoidably overlaps with

certain aspects of the conceptual meaning. Therefore, the "reference" overlaps with the

elements of conceptual meaning, as in when the contrastive features of conceptual meaning

become attributes of the "real world" referent. But additional attributes expected from the

referent depend on diverse other factors, such equally age or society, and they canorthward also depend on

the private, equally claimed by Leech. (1981, 12)

In this context, the relationship between conceptual and connotative meaning can

easily be compared to the one between the language (conceptual) and the "real earth"

(connotative). For this reason, connotative pregnant can exist seen as an open-concluded and unstable

category in comparison to conceptual pregnant. (Leech 1981, 12)

The development of this concept may exist a topic for some of the papers in the future.

seven

two.2.3 Social Meaning

Leech stresses that the social type of meaning includes all the social circumstances

regarding the use of a slice of language. (1981, 14) Since these areast closely related to various

social groups who are parts of those circumstances, David Crystal and Derek Davy established

a classification of socio-stylistic variations which vary according to

(1969, 66):

i) Dialect (The language of a geographical region or social class)

2) Fourth dimension (east.g. The language of the 18th century)

3) Province (Language of law, scientific discipline, advert, etc.)

iv) Status (Polite, colloquial, slang, etc.)

5) Modality (Language of memoranda, lectures, jokes, etc.)

half-dozen) Singularity (The style of Dickens, Hemingway, etc.)

Therefore , it tin can be said that the words with the same conceptual and social significant

are peculiarly rare, and, to prove that point, Leech introduces a number of examples westwardhile

contrasting conceptual synonyms with different stylistic meanings. (1981, fourteen)

Illust. Leech 1981, 14

Depending on the state of affairs the social yardeaning can also include what is called the

illocutionary force of an utterance, which tin can then be interpreted as a request, an apology, a

threat, etc., as stated past Leech. (1981, xv)

ii.two.4 Affective Meaning

Some other blazon of significant which is closely related to the social meaning is the 1

which, according to Leech, deals with the way a linguistic communication can reflect personal feelings of the

speaker that may include attitude to a listener or something he is talking nearly. (1981, 15)

The explanations of the variations are to be found in: Leech, Geoffrey. 1981 . Semantics. The Study of Significant.

Second edition – revised and updated. p. 15. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

8

Furthermore, melancholia meaning tin can be expressed straight and indirectly, one time once more

depending on the context.

i) Y'all are a horrible person and I hate you. (Direct bulletin)

2) Boyfriend: "What'southward wrong?"

Girlfriend (in a conspicuously nervous tone): "Nothing."

As it can be seen from the examples mentioned above, the factors such as tone of

voice, mimic and gestures tin be significant when "decoding" the bulletin of an utterance.

(Leech 1981, 16)

ii.ii.five Reflected Meaning

In a instance of reflected meaning, information technology can be explained as the one appearing in situations of

multiple conceptual meanings, when one sense of a give-and-take influences our response to some other

sense, as stated by Leech. (1981, 16)

Furthermore, he exemplifies the statement above in the cases of The Comforter and

The Holy Ghost where, although both terms refer to the third chemical element in the Holy Trinity, there

are certain semantic differences betwixt those two expressions. Thereby is The Comforter

described by Leech as something "warm and comforting" while The Holy Ghost he perceives

as "crawly". (1981, 16)

Lastly, he points out that in similar cases words tin also impose the suggestive power

with a little help of the power of associations. (1981, 16)

2.2.six Collocative Meaning

To clearly ascertain what constitutes the collocative type of meaning a quotation from

Leech needs to exist mentioned:

"Collocative meaning consists of the associations a give-and-take acquires on account of the

meanings of words which tend to occur in its surround." (Leech 1981, 17)

To clarify his definition, he used the examples of the adjectives "pretty" and

"handsome" and the words which normally find themselves in their vicinity.

The post-obit examples are the ones I came upward with.

9

Illust. Leech 1981, 17

In the instance of collocative meaning, the quasi-synonyms need to be mentioned, such as

"to wander" and "to stroll", whereby Leech explains that "cows may wander, but granday non

stroll". (1981, 17) Besides that, a person can only "tremble" with fearfulness and, on the other hand,

only "quiver" with excitement. (1981, 17)

two.ii.7 Thematic Meaning

The thematic type of pregnant provides an answer to the question: "What is

communicated past the way the author formed and organized the message?", i.e. can be

considered as a part of sentence semantics. (Leech 1981, xix) There are multiple examples of

these occurrences, such equally the ones where the active and passive sentence constructions are

confronted, east.g. Mr. 10 donated the first prize. (Active) vs. The start prize was donated by Mr.

X. (Passive) (Leech 1981, 19)

In its core, however, Leech states that thematic significant is "matter of option between

culling grammatical construction", for instance in sentences "A man is hither to see you."

and "At that place is a human hither to run into you". (1981, 19) Moreover, emphasis past substituting one

element with another or stress and intonation can also be of dandy importance when dealing

with this blazon of significant. (1981, 19-twenty)

2.2.eight Summary

The epitomize of the vii types of meaning described in this piece of work tin all-time exist outlined in

a tabular form.

10

Illust. Leech 1981, 23

It is noticeable that Leech introduced another term in his illustration – the associative

meaning. This was done in order to establish a summary terthou for connotative, social,

affective, reflected and collocative meaning which are, excluding the first ane, much closer to

connotative than to conceptual meaning because of certown factors they contain, such equally

open-endedness, variable grapheme, etc. (1981, 18) The associative meaning is, as Leech

states, comprised of "so many imponderable factors that it can be studied southwardystematically only

by approximative statistical techniques." (1981, 18)

Leech discusses demarcation problems between certain types of pregnant equally well, and

virtually of those include the conceptual type of meaning on 1 side, and other, more than peripheral

categories, on the other side. (1981, 20)

3. Other Authors and Their "Types of Pregnant"

This part will exist dedicated to the comparative and contrastive analysis of approaches

regarding the subject area of this paper which were established past other linguists and semanticists.

3.one Palmer's Arroyo

Like to Leech, Frank Palmer in his book "Semantic. A New Outline" published in

the year 1976 signifies the difference betwixt the conceptual and connotative types of

meaning, which are in his work named sense and reference, simply also states that these terms are

related. (1976,30) The main point in distinguishing them, according to Palmer, lies in the fact

11

that sense is only occupied with the linguistic communication whereas reference focuses on the "real world".

(1976, thirty)

"Reference deals with the human relationship betweedue north the linguistic elements, words,

sentences, etc., and the non-linguistic world of feel. Sense relates to the

complex system of relationships that hold between the linguistic elements themselves

(mostly the words); it is concerned only with intra-linguistic relations." (Palmer 1976,

xxx)

Furthermore, what Leech regarded equally "social pregnant" appears also to be part of

Palmer'southward arroyo since he calls this type also "social" or "inter-personal" which too includes

the "melancholia meaning" mentioned before, where he points out the importance of intonation as

well. (1976, 35-37)

Palmer also names certain example pairs of southynonyms which are perceived differently

by the society, fifty-fifty though their "conceptual meaning" or "sense" is near the same. The

case pairs are: politician and statesman ; hide and conceal ; liberty and freedom. (1976, 35)

These examples can also exist regarded as having elements of Leech's reflected meaninchiliad.

One type that is mentioned inorth Palmer's work, only not in Leech's, is the one which

includes presuppositions. To explain this, Palmer uses example questions which are formed in

a way that they already presuppose a certain fact. A question such as "When did yous terminate

chirapsia your wife?" presupposes that the person asked trounce his married woman in the past. (1976, 37)

Lastly, he introduces an example statement "There is a house over there." which then

demands a question relating to it in order to obtain the precise message the speaker wanted to

convey. Palmer states that this kind of meaning belongs in the area exterior of semantics

because it is mainly a matter for utterance-meaning. (1976, 37) In terms of Leech, this tin to a

certain extent be considered as the "thematic" type of meaning.

In determination, Palmer, although describing the bulk of types Leech analyzed, did

not introduce collocative meaning and tried to include reflected meaning to southwardome caste.

However, he did consider presuppositions which are not part of Leech's approach. Apart from

that, his nomenclature cannot be considered nearly every bit systematical and precise as the one of

Geoffrey Leech because it is not conspicuously separated into different thematic chapters and there is

a scarcity of precise terms regarding different kinds of meaning.

12

3.2 Lyons' Arroyo

John Lyons has a similar opening argument equally Leech regarding the topic of meaning in

semantics. In his book "Linguistic communication and Linguistics. An Introduction" from the year 2002 he

also points out that the definition of "meaning" in semantic terms cannot exist established.

Instead, an respond to the question "What is the meaning of meaning?" should exist sought afterward.

Additionally, he puts emphasis on the complexity of the topic and, only every bit Leech and Palmer

did, sees the borders of meaning much further than the conceptual versiodue north of it. (2002, 136-

138)

First, he finds it important to divide the spectrum of meaning according to its form into

two essential groups – lexical meaning and judgement-meaning. Moreover, he then introduces

the grammatical and utterance-meaning which tin be regarded in terms of sentence-meaning

with each type having its own specific aspects and factors tlid need to be observed. (2002,

139-140)

In improver to the previous classification, he forms another i based on the "variety of

semiotic, or communicative, functions that languages are used for". (Lyons 2002, 140)

In this regard he mentions, in the first place, the function of language carrying

propositional, or factual, information, which he would afterward place nether the term "descriptive

function". Besides this being the core function of language, Lyons insists on a language

having other semiotic functions. A number of these are, as stated by him, in some kind of

relationship with the descriptive function, and this is based onorthward the correlation between the

functional differences between, for instance, commands, statements and questions, and the

structural differences between imperative, declarative and interrogative sentences. (2002, 141)

Additionally, Lyons mentions that these are only some of the many speech communication-acts that are

comprehensively related to each other in various means. (2002, 141)

The third blazon of distinction between types of meanings leads to two groups –

descriptive and non-descriptive meaning. While describing descriptive significant, Lyons

acknowledges that this type mainly includes propositional statements or questions, which

incorporate a definite "truth - value", and that means that they can either exist true or false. With

the non-descriptive meaning, as it tin can be seen from the proper noun itself, there is but a small function

of the descriptive pregnant that plays a role. This type is non a propositional one, so it cannot

13

be characterized as true or false. To explain this, Lyons uses 2 example sentences – "Good

heavens!" and "John is surprised." – where the outset one represents an exclamation which may

depict speaker'south feelings but cannot be placed in the "truthful/fake" c ategories. On the other

side, the 2d one is without a doubtfulness propositional. (2002, 141-142)

The commencement example sentence introduces the expressive blazon of grandeaning, which, by

farther examining it every bit a superordinate term, leads us to the "well - known" emotive ( affective )

meaning that is in Lyons' work regarded as the same blazon of meaning Leech was writing

almost. Furthermore, Lyons kentions the social pregnant which, according to him, is in an

interdependent relationship with the expressive significant. (2002, 143) Social meaning for him

"has to do with the use of language to establish and maintain social roles and social relations."

(Lyons 2002, 143)

The bottom line when explaining the trichotomy of descriptive, expressive and social

meaning is that the social aspect is and volition be eastwardver-nowadays in communication, co-ordinate to

Lyons. Moreover, he states that, while the descriptive meaning is unique for humans since it is

leap to verbal interaction, the non-descriptive types of significant cannot be considered equally

unique for humankind since the non-verbal communication crosses the borders of our society.

(2002, 143-144)

Lyons also deals thoroughly with the terms "reference" and "sense" in his work

"Semantics . Volume I" from the year 1996, which can exist regarded as what Leech called

connotative and conceptual meaning. Also, Lyons does not brand a signifideceit difference

between the terms "sense" and "meaning" and stresses that in his work sense can be

understood as descriptive or cerebral meaning. Additionally, he includes the terms

"connotation" and "denotation" to distinguish between reference and sense respectively.

(1996, 174-206)

In summary, John Lyons has provided in his two works mentioned above a solid

classification of meanings due westith anorth elaborate assay and description for each of the types.

What can be ended from the aforementioned text is that his partition of meanings differs

from Leech's in a way that he establishes not one, but few classifications based on multiple

factors. Still, his conclusions more often than not practise non dissimilarity Leech's statements. In addition to

In his work, Lyons goes deeper into allocateing and explaining types of pregnant but the scopeastward of thursdayis paper

cannot include such a detailed discussion about this matter.

fourteen

that, Lyons uses unlike terms to mark specific types of meaning and that is coherent with

him having a completely separate categorization of its phenomenon.

4. Conclusion

In determination, it should be primarily stated that all 3 authors certainly have one

common point – they all concur on the complexity of the topic, especially with regards to the

difficulties numerous linguists and semanticists had with trying to define the word "meaning".

Therefore, information technology should not wait surprising when each and every one of them has established his

own theory and, in this case, classification. It should also not wonder when nosotros have a look at

these theories and see tremendous differences between approaches considering the basic term, the

one which represents the core of every inquiry conducted in relation to this topic, is withal to be

precisely divers and adopted past linguists worldwide. The controversy that engulfs "the

meaning" has to exist resolved for it is one of the main problems in semantics.

When all three approaches are compared, it can be said that Palmer has given probably

the simplest overview of the categorization of meaning only the lack of precisely defined terms

which would be used to designate a specific type of thoueaning is certainly and something that

should have been avoided.

On the other side, Lyons has endeavored to found a comprehensive, or "all-

inclusive", approach while dissecting every possible aspect of pregnant and also to provide a

linguistic and philosophical background for his classification. With his system of

classifications and subclassifications, he managed to create something similar to the syntax

tree with various constituents of the phenomenon "meaning" included.

Lastly, between Lyons and Palmer, Leech's approach appears to be the "mid -level"

one on the scale where the complexity minimum and maximum are Palmer's and Lyons'

approaches respectively. However, it can be stated that his overview might be the one which is

formed in the clearest mode with fewest ambiguities. Additionally, the structure of his approach

may announced to be the user-friendliest one and the linguistic communication used to describe his viewpoint

might be considered equally simple every bit Palmer'due south.

xv

Bibliography

Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Crystal, David., Davy, Derek. 1969. Investigating English Style. Bloomington: Indiana

Academy Press.

Leech, Geoffrey. 1981. Semantics. The Study of Meaning. Second edition – revised and

updated. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

Lyons, John. 1996. Semantics. Volume I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lyons, John. 2002. Language and Linguistics. An Introduction, First South Asian Edition.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Palmer, Frank. 1976. Semantics. A New Outline. Cambridge: Cambridge Academy Press.

... In connection with this, the connotative meaning of a give-and-take or phrase is the secondary significant of what it is associated with within the sense that it can be something suggested or implied by a discussion or thing, and not something which is explicitly named or described. Connotative pregnant is the communicative value of an expression based on what it refers to, over, and in a higher place its pure concept [4]. For case, a rose is indeed a type of flower. ...

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve whatever references for this publication.