Semantic Field : An Integrated System

Vocabulary used in speech or writing organizes itself in seven parts of speech… Communication composed of these parts of speech must be organized by rules of grammar upon

While familiarizing myself with context clues and connotation in this unit, I have discovered that it enriches your vocabulary immensely. Context clues give you the ability to find the definitions of words you never knew the meaning of. You can practice this skill by using word association, or by thinking of synonyms for a word or phrase. Another skill that helps with finding new definitions of words is connotation. Connotation can aid in finding new words and their definitions by letting you see how the word fits in and what the use of the word is alongside another phrase or word.

The semantic is the study of the relationship between words and what we construe meaning. We also know how we understand ourselves or others. Semantic have two principal methods. One is denotative, and second is connotative. Denotative is the general meaning of a word, likewise dictionary definition. For example, if we look up the word “home”. It means a place where we live; a residence. However, the connotative is an emotional suggestion related to the meaning of the word. For example, the meaning of a word “home”. In connotative meaning means that it means a place of security, family or comfort place. As being a human, we need to understand the feelings and thoughts of partner in order to have a conversation because one word can be a meaningful to someone.

Semantics are often dismissed as unimportant. However, when it comes to effectively communicating meaning, semantics are vital. When the sender of information uses the wrong words to convey their message, the

How we form and describe a sentence plays a major role towards determine the meaning of the sentence. This results in making each sentence very important to structure correctly so as to harness the most powerful meaning from the words used on the sentence (Iny 2006). To understand how word structure affects a sentence, we shall examine 5 sentences from a paper “the Purpose of Government written by Anon. A. Moss.

Nevertheless, the most complex level of usage that McCrimmon discusses is the formal level of usage. One point of the formal structure is that the sentences are “relatively long and involved” (193). The sentences in scholarly articles typically follow rules, which makes them more difficult to read than other types of writing. Further, these writings also use “extensive vocabulary” (193). There are often words that most people would not know the meaning of unless they are professionals in that field. In addition, sentences in the formal level “make no attempt to establish

| |in the identification of meaning. The field notes were also analysed along with the |

of a word. Also, the Yerkes (2011) text defines Lexicology as a study focusing on the meaning of words. Thus, we see a lexicon as an area in the human brain which stores the meaning, and all aspects, associated with a word. However, to reach the point where a lexicon may be used language must be acquired. To acquire such a skill, one must master the four levels associated with language.

Frye begins by exploring the relation of language and literature. “What is the relation of English as the mother tongue to English as a literature?” he asks (p. 16), and before he can give an answer, he has to explain why people use words. He identifies three different uses of language, which he also terms types or levels of language.

0 Semantics is the study of effect of the arrangement of words in a sentence.

b) with forms and the structure of words (morphology) and with their customary arrangement in phrases and sentences (syntax )

Diction: the denotative and connotative meanings of words! What specific words did the author choose? Consider her word choice compared to another. Why did the author choose that particular word? What are the connotations of that word choice? • different words for the same thing often suggest different attitudes (happy vs. content vs. ecstatic) • denotative vs. connotative (dead vs. passed away) • concrete vs. abstract (able to perceive with 5 senses, tangible, vs. an idea or concept that exists in one’s mind, intangible) • monosyllabic vs. polysyllabic (Cats eat meat; felines are carnivorous animals.) • simple vs. ornate • positive vs. negative (slender vs. skinny, determined vs. stubborn) • colloquial / informal / formal / technical • cacophonous vs. euphonious (e.g., harsh sounding, raucous, croak or pleasant sounding, languid, murmur)

The Language Wars have been waged in the realm of English Literature, Language and Linguistics for years. Both sides of the argument are staunch believers in their position, but are more than willing to concede points to the other sides’ favour. In Bryan A. Garner’s essay, “Making Peace in the Language Wars”, he describes himself as a ‘descriptive prescriber’ (Garner, Making Peace in the Language Wars 2008, 270), and offers a truce that fulfils both sides of the argument as the crux of his essay. While the separate sides of the argument are relatively easy to define, it seems that no one sticks to them religiously, and the argument is between individuals fighting over individual points. The two sides are that of the descriptivist and that

Key features of language include its words and their sub structures such as morphemes, graphemes and syllables at the writing level as well as reading or speaking, words, their meanings and contexts in which the words get spoken or read. Language has to be interpreted as a whole, and not just as the specific word. There must be an explicit pattern or structure. In order for language to be understood correctly, the meaning of words must be arranged in a given context. This is what constructs language; even though words are arbitrary themselves, in order to integrate as a language, they must be used in the appropriate context. This pre-established cultural context is what will enable effective communication. (Daniel Willingham, 2007, p. 1).

It has been noted that while considering changing word meanings is vital to the diachronic study of language, the notion and practice of studying them has been historically belittled as an intellectual pursuit. Semantic change is often irregular and arbitrary as a concept, as its causes are wide-ranging and multi-faceted. However, critics such as Willem B. Hollmann now give weight and notoriety to studying semantics synchronically . By considering individual cases, one can explain some word changes and apply common rules. These often occur intra-linguistically or through common social or political changes, especially surrounding class conflict. However, although we can catalogue the semantic change of similar or groups of words, word