Editing Semantics (section)

== Branches ==
=== Lexical semantics ===
{{main|Lexical semantics}}

Lexical semantics is the sub-field of semantics that studies word meaning.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Geeraerts|2017|loc=Lead Section}} | {{harvnb|Taylor|2017|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/cambridge-handbook-of-cognitive-linguistics/lexical-semantics/798AB6901B9AD5B0AC42C94A52EC8ECF 246–247]}} | {{harvnb|Pustejovsky|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=cxYGQfiD_1oC&pg=PT11380 98–100]}} | {{harvnb|Pustejovsky|2009|p=476}} | {{harvnb|Márquez|2011|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=TkKVwYcG8Q4C&pg=PA146 146]}} }}</ref> It examines semantic aspects of individual words and the [[vocabulary]] as a whole. This includes the study of lexical relations between words, such as whether two terms are synonyms or antonyms.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Geeraerts|2017|loc=Lead Section, § 1. The Descriptive Scope of Lexical Semantics}} | {{harvnb|Pustejovsky|2009|p=476}} | {{harvnb|Márquez|2011|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=TkKVwYcG8Q4C&pg=PA146 146–147]}} }}</ref> Lexical semantics categorizes words based on semantic features they share and groups them into semantic fields unified by a common subject.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Geeraerts|2017|loc=Lead Section, § 1.3 Lexical Fields and Componential Analysis}} | {{harvnb|Yule|2010|pp=113–115}} }}</ref> This information is used to create taxonomies to organize lexical knowledge, for example, by distinguishing between physical and [[Abstract object|abstract entities]] and subdividing physical entities into [[Mass noun|stuff]] and [[Count noun|individuated entities]].<ref>{{harvnb|Pustejovsky|2009|p=479}}</ref> Further topics of interest are polysemy, ambiguity, and [[vagueness]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Pustejovsky|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=cxYGQfiD_1oC&pg=PT11380 98–100]}} | {{harvnb|Geeraerts|2017|loc=§ 1.1 Polysemy and Vagueness}} }}</ref>

Lexical semantics is sometimes divided into two complementary approaches: [[semasiology]] and [[onomasiology]]. Semasiology starts from words and examines what their meaning is. It is interested in whether words have one or several meanings and how those meanings are related to one another. Instead of going from word to meaning, onomasiology goes from meaning to word. It starts with a concept and examines what names this concept has or how it can be expressed in a particular language.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Geeraerts|2017|loc=§ 1. The Descriptive Scope of Lexical Semantics}} | {{harvnb|Noth|1990|p=106}} | {{harvnb|Taylor|2017|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/cambridge-handbook-of-cognitive-linguistics/lexical-semantics/798AB6901B9AD5B0AC42C94A52EC8ECF 246–247]}} }}</ref>

Some semanticists also include the study of lexical units other than words in the field of lexical semantics. [[Compound (linguistics)|Compound expressions]] like ''being under the weather'' have a non-literal meaning that acts as a unit and is not a direct function of its parts. Another topic concerns the meaning of morphemes that make up words, for instance, how negative [[prefix]]es like ''in-'' and ''dis-'' affect the meaning of the words they are part of, as in ''inanimate'' and ''dishonest''.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|L'Homme|2020|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=jdbHDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT89 67–69]}} | {{harvnb|Trips|2009|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=gsNjdT8iArQC&pg=PA236 236]}} | {{harvnb|Andreou|2015|loc=Abstract}} }}</ref>

=== Phrasal semantics ===
Phrasal semantics studies the meaning of sentences. It relies on the principle of compositionality to explore how the meaning of complex expressions arises from the combination of their parts.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fasold|Connor-Linton|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=E85VAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA141 141, 156]}} | {{harvnb|Jackendoff|2002|p=378}} | {{harvnb|Park-Johnson|Shin|2020|pp=103–104}} | {{harvnb|Riemer|2010|p=21}} | {{harvnb|Bieswanger|Becker|2017|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=Tzg8DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA128 128]}} | {{harvnb|Jacobson|2014|p=5}} }}</ref>{{efn|Some authors use the term ''compositional semantics'' for this type of inquiry.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fasold|Connor-Linton|2006|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=E85VAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA156 156]}} | {{harvnb|Bagha|2011|pp=1414–1415}} }}</ref>}} The different parts can be analyzed as [[Subject (grammar)|subject]], [[Predicate (grammar)|predicate]], or [[Argument (linguistics)|argument]]. The subject of a sentence usually refers to a specific entity while the predicate describes a feature of the subject or an event in which the subject participates. Arguments provide additional information to complete the predicate.<ref name="auto1">{{harvnb|Fasold|Connor-Linton|2006|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=E85VAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA141 141–143]}}</ref> For example, in the sentence "Mary hit the ball", ''Mary'' is the subject, ''hit'' is the predicate, and ''the ball'' is an argument.<ref name="auto1"/> A more fine-grained categorization distinguishes between different semantic roles of words, such as agent, patient, theme, location, source, and goal.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Fasold|Connor-Linton|2006|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=E85VAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA143 143]}} | {{harvnb|Park-Johnson|Shin|2020|pp=103–104}} }}</ref>

[[File:ParseTree.svg|thumb|alt=Diagram of a parse tree|[[Parse tree]]s, like the constituency-based parse tree, show how expressions are combined to form sentences.]]

[[Verb]]s usually function as predicates and often help to establish connections between different expressions to form a more complex meaning structure. In the expression "Beethoven likes Schubert", the verb ''like'' connects a liker to the object of their liking.<ref>{{harvnb|Jackendoff|2002|pp=378–380}}</ref> Other sentence parts modify meaning rather than form new connections. For instance, the [[adjective]] ''red'' modifies the color of another entity in the expression ''red car''.<ref>{{harvnb|Jackendoff|2002|pp=382–383}}</ref> A further compositional device is variable binding, which is used to determine the reference of a term. For example, the last part of the expression "the woman who likes Beethoven" specifies which woman is meant.<ref>{{harvnb|Jackendoff|2002|pp=384–385}}</ref> [[Parse tree]]s can be used to show the underlying hierarchy employed to combine the different parts.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Valin|2008|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=a4X2oVrrz-EC&pg=PT466 466]}} | {{harvnb|Berwick|Stabler|2019|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=bPerDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA110 110]}} }}</ref> Various grammatical devices, like the [[gerund]] form, also contribute to meaning and are studied by grammatical semantics.<ref>{{harvnb|Wierzbicka|1988|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=f2G3RFoxk84C&pg=PA3 3]}}</ref>

=== Formal semantics ===
{{main|Formal semantics (natural language)}}
Formal semantics uses formal tools from [[logic]] and [[mathematics]] to analyze meaning in natural languages.{{efn|The term ''formal semantics'' is sometimes used in a different sense to refer to compositional semantics or to the study of meaning in the formal languages of systems of logic.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Bohnemeyer|2021|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=HLJFEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA24 24]}} | {{harvnb|Pollock|2017|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=UIwrDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA172 172]}} }}</ref>}} It aims to develop precise logical formalisms to clarify the relation between expressions and their denotation.<ref name="auto4">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Geeraerts|2010|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=JC8TDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA118 118–119]}} | {{harvnb|Moeschler|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=h3SpC0oBc_AC&pg=PA31 31–33]}} | {{harvnb|Portner|Partee|2008|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ptgUWREtAkMC&pg=PA1 1–2]}} }}</ref> One of its key tasks is to provide frameworks of how language represents the world, for example, using [[Model theory|ontological models]] to show how linguistic expressions map to the entities of that model.<ref name="auto4"/> A common idea is that words refer to individual objects or groups of objects while sentences relate to events and states. Sentences are mapped to a [[truth value]] based on whether their description of the world is in correspondence with its ontological model.<ref>{{harvnb|Moeschler|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=h3SpC0oBc_AC&pg=PA31 31–33]}}</ref>

Formal semantics further examines how to use formal mechanisms to represent linguistic phenomena such as [[Quantifier (linguistics)|quantification]], [[intensionality]], [[noun phrases]], [[plural]]s, mass terms, [[Grammatical tense|tense]], and [[Modality (linguistics)|modality]].<ref>{{harvnb|Portner|Partee|2008|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ptgUWREtAkMC&pg=PA3 3, 8–10, 35, 127, 324]}}</ref> [[Montague semantics]] is an early and influential theory in formal semantics that provides a detailed analysis of how the English language can be represented using mathematical logic. It relies on [[higher-order logic]], [[lambda calculus]], and [[type theory]] to show how meaning is created through the combination of expressions belonging to different syntactic categories.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Portner|Partee|2008|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ptgUWREtAkMC&pg=PA3 3–4]}} | {{harvnb|Janssen|Zimmermann|2021|loc=Lead Section, § 1. Introduction, § 2.3 Logic and Translation}} }}</ref>

[[Dynamic semantics]] is a subfield of formal semantics that focuses on how information grows over time. According to it, "meaning is context change potential": the meaning of a sentence is not given by the information it contains but by the information change it brings about relative to a context.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Groenendijk|Stokhof|2009|pp=272–273}} | {{harvnb|Nouwen|Brasoveanu|van Eijck|Visser|2022|loc=Lead Section}} }}</ref>

=== Cognitive semantics ===
{{main|Cognitive semantics}}

[[File:Hypotenuse.svg|thumb|alt=Diagram of a hypotenuse|Cognitive semantics is interested in the conceptual structures underlying language, which can be articulated through the contrast between profile and base. For instance, the term [[hypotenuse]] profiles a straight line against the background of a [[right-angled triangle]].]]

Cognitive semantics studies the problem of meaning from a psychological perspective or how the mind of the language user affects meaning. As a subdiscipline of [[cognitive linguistics]], it sees language as a wide cognitive ability that is closely related to the conceptual structures used to understand and represent the world.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Li|2021}} | {{harvnb|Taylor|2009|pp=73–74}} | {{harvnb|Croft|Cruse|2004|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=I6Z9H-eRSgoC&pg=PA1 1–3]}} }}</ref>{{efn|Cognitive semantics does not accept the idea of [[linguistic relativity]] associated with the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis and holds instead that the underlying cognitive processes responsible for conceptual structures are independent of the language one speaks.{{sfn|Kortmann|2020|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=0PoFEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA165 165]}}}} Cognitive semanticists do not draw a sharp distinction between linguistic knowledge and knowledge of the world and see them instead as interrelated phenomena.<ref>{{harvnb|Taylor|2009|pp=73–74}}</ref> They study how the interaction between language and human cognition affects the conceptual organization in very general domains like space, time, causation, and action.<ref>{{harvnb|Li|2021}}</ref> The contrast between profile and base is sometimes used to articulate the underlying knowledge structure. The profile of a linguistic expression is the aspect of the knowledge structure that it brings to the foreground while the base is the background that provides the context of this aspect without being at the center of attention.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Taylor|2009|pp=74–75}} | {{harvnb|Enfield|2002|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ei4CErNyxp0C&pg=PA152 152]}} }}</ref> For example, the profile of the word ''[[hypotenuse]]'' is a straight line while the base is a [[right-angled triangle]] of which the hypotenuse forms a part.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Taylor|2009|pp=74–75}} | {{harvnb|Taylor|2013|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=MZYgAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA38 38–40]}} }}</ref>{{efn|Other examples are the word ''island'', which profiles a landmass against the background of the surrounding water, and the word ''uncle'', which profiles a human adult male against the background of kinship relations.<ref>{{harvnb|Taylor|2009|pp=74–75}}</ref>}}

Cognitive semantics further compares the conceptual patterns and [[Linguistic typology|linguistic typologies]] across languages and considers to what extent the cognitive conceptual structures of humans are universal or relative to their linguistic background.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Taylor|2009|p=85}} | {{harvnb|Li|2021}} }}</ref> Another research topic concerns the psychological processes involved in the application of grammar.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Li|2021}} | {{harvnb|Taylor|2009|pp=83–84}} }}</ref> Other investigated phenomena include categorization, which is understood as a cognitive heuristic to avoid information overload by regarding different entities in the same way,<ref>{{harvnb|Taylor|2009|pp=76–77}}</ref> and [[Embodied cognition|embodiment]], which concerns how the language user's bodily experience affects the meaning of expressions.<ref>{{harvnb|Taylor|2009|p=82}}</ref>

[[Frame semantics (linguistics)|Frame semantics]] is an important subfield of cognitive semantics.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Mushayabasa|2014|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=2QcSBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA21 21]}} | {{harvnb|Shead|2011|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=feR5DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA34 34–35]}} }}</ref> Its central idea is that the meaning of terms cannot be understood in isolation from each other but needs to be analyzed on the background of the conceptual structures they depend on. These structures are made explicit in terms of semantic frames. For example, words like bride, groom, and honeymoon evoke in the mind the frame of marriage.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Gawron|2011|pp=664–665, 669}} | {{harvnb|Fillmore|2009|pp=330–332}} }}</ref>

=== Others ===
[[Conceptual semantics]] shares with cognitive semantics the idea of studying linguistic meaning from a psychological perspective by examining how humans conceptualize and experience the world. It holds that meaning is not about the objects to which expressions refer but about the cognitive structure of human concepts that connect thought, perception, and action. Conceptual semantics differs from cognitive semantics by introducing a strict distinction between meaning and syntax and by relying on various formal devices to explore the relation between meaning and cognition.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Riemer|2010|pp=261–263}} | {{harvnb|Jackendoff|2011|p=688}} }}</ref>

[[Computational semantics]] examines how the meaning of natural language expressions can be represented and processed on computers.<ref name="auto">{{multiref | {{harvnb|Geeraerts|2010|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=JC8TDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA118 118]}} | {{harvnb|Bunt|Muskens|1999|pp=[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-4231-1_1 1–2]}} }}</ref> It often relies on the insights of formal semantics and applies them to problems that can be computationally solved.<ref>{{harvnb|Bunt|Muskens|1999|pp=[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-4231-1_1 1–2]}}</ref> Some of its key problems include computing the meaning of complex expressions by analyzing their parts, handling ambiguity, vagueness, and context-dependence, and using the extracted information in [[automatic reasoning]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Geeraerts|2010|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=JC8TDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA118 118]}} | {{harvnb|Bunt|Muskens|1999|pp=[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-4231-1_1 1–2]}} | {{harvnb|Erk|2018|loc=Summary}} }}</ref> It forms part of [[computational linguistics]], [[artificial intelligence]], and [[cognitive science]].<ref name="auto"/> Its applications include [[machine learning]] and [[machine translation]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Erk|2018|loc=Summary}} | {{harvnb|Geeraerts|2010|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=JC8TDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA118 118]}} }}</ref>

Cultural semantics studies the relation between linguistic meaning and culture. It compares conceptual structures in different languages and is interested in how meanings evolve and change because of cultural phenomena associated with [[politics]], religion, and [[customs]].<ref>{{harvnb|Zhao|2023|loc=[https://brill.com/display/book/9789004535183/front-10.xml Preface]}}</ref> For example, address practices encode cultural values and social hierarchies, as in the difference of politeness of expressions like ''{{lang|es|tu}}'' and ''{{lang|es|usted}}'' in Spanish or ''{{lang|de|du}}'' and ''{{lang|de|Sie}}'' in German in contrast to English, which lacks [[T–V distinction|these distinctions]] and uses the pronoun ''you'' in either case.<ref>{{harvnb|Farese|2018|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=NsllDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 1–3]}}</ref> Closely related fields are intercultural semantics, cross-cultural semantics, and comparative semantics.<ref>{{harvnb|Peeters|2006|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=MsIFbHm0_lcC&pg=PT25 25]}}</ref>

Pragmatic semantics studies how the meaning of an expression is shaped by the situation in which it is used. It is based on the idea that communicative meaning is usually context-sensitive and depends on who participates in the exchange, what information they share, and what their [[intention]]s and background assumptions are. It focuses on communicative actions, of which linguistic expressions only form one part. Some theorists include these topics within the scope of semantics while others consider them part of the distinct discipline of pragmatics.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Márquez|2011|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=TkKVwYcG8Q4C&pg=PA149 149]}} | {{harvnb|Bublitz|Norrick|2011|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XgYP7AKeoKwC&pg=PA215 215–216]}} }}</ref>