SoSe21: Semantics 1
General information
Please register at the olat course before the first meeting to get the information on the virtual meeting room!
Course description
Semantics is the study of the (literal) meaning of words and sentences. The meaning of a sentence is usually predictable from the words in the sentence and its syntactic structure. Yet, this relationship between form and meaning is not a simple one-to-one mapping. Instead, it is rich in ambiguities, pleonastic marking and elements without any identifiable meaning contribution. We will work on an account that is founded on classical tools of semantic research but still directly addresses these empirical challenges. After the class, the participants will be able to identify - and partly analyze - interesting semantic phenomena in naturally occurring texts. They will have acquired a basic working knowledge in formal logic, which they will be able to apply in the description of meaning
Time and place
- Tuesday 08:15-9.45
- Starting: 3.11.2020
- online via zoom
Olat course
Direct link: https://olat-ce.server.uni-frankfurt.de/olat/auth/RepositoryEntry/8836120582
Password: Sailer-WiSe2021
Modules
- Lehramt Englisch (L2/5, L3): FW 2A, FW 2B
- BA English Studies: 3.4(1)
- BA Empirische Sprachwissenschaft: K 6.1
Contact
Manfred Sailer
e-mail: sailer@em.uni-frankfurt.de
office: IG 3.214
office hours: contact via e-mail!
www: http://user.uni-frankfurt.de/~sailer/index.htm
Course requirements
L1
you cannot get any credits in this course
L2/L5
- Modules: FW 2A.1, FW 2B.1
- 3 CP (=75h) for Teilnahme- and Leistungsnachweis (TN, LN)
- TN: active participation
- LN: pass take home exam
- Modulprüfung (optional): (not ideal)
- + 2CP (50h)
- short term paper (9-11 pages), Deadline: 18.10.2021
L3
- Modules: FW 2A.1, FW 2B.1
- 3 CP (=75h) for Teilnahme- and Leistungsnachweis (TN, LN)
- TN: active participation
- LN: pass take home exam
- Modulprüfung (optional): (not ideal)
- + 4CP (100h)
- long term paper (19-21 pages), Deadline: 18.10.2021
WiPäd
- Modules: FW 2A.1, FW 2B.1
- 3 CP (=75h) for Teilnahme- and Leistungsnachweis (TN, LN)
- TN: active participation
- LN: pass take home exam
- Modulprüfung (optional): (not ideal)
- + 2CP (50h)
- short term paper (9-11 pages), Deadline: 18.10.2021
BA English Studies
- Module: BAES 3.4 (1) Vertiefungsmodul Sprachwissenschaft 1
- 4 CP = 100 hours
- Teilnahmenachweis: active participation and additional task
- Leistungsnachweis: pass take home exam
- Modulprüfung: not possible! (The Modulprüfung will be done in BAES 3.4 (2))
BA Empirische Sprachwissenschaften
Module K 6.1
- Module K6.1
- 2.5 CP = 62.5 hours
- Teilnahmenachweis: active participation
- Modulprüfung: graded take home exam
Module En 4.1
- Module: En 4.1 Vertiefungsmodul Sprachwissenschaft 1
- 4 CP = 100 hours
- Teilnahmenachweis: active participation and additional task
- Leistungsnachweis: pass take home exam
- Modulprüfung: not possible! (the Modulprüfung will be done in En 4.2)
Erasmus
Contact me directly!
Example course requirements: 6 CP, graded
- active participation and additional task
- graded take home exam (50% of the grade)
- graded short term paper (50% of the grade)
Others?
Contact me to talk about your requierments.
Types of tasks
Take home exam
Deadline:
Term paper
The term paper consists of summaries of chapters from a semantics textbook. Each chapter summary should be 4-5 pages long. The number of chapters that you have to summarize will, then, depend on the length requirements of your Studienordnung:
- WiPäd, L2/L5, Erasmus: Short term paper, 9-11 pages -> 2 chapters
- L3: Long term paper, 19-21 pages -> 4 chapters
Suitable textbooks (available online via the university library or as open access books):
- Löbner, Sebastian. 2013. Understanding semantics. London: Routledge.
- Kearns, Kate. 2000. Semantics. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
- Kroeger, Paul. 2019. Analyzing meaning: An introduction to semantics and pragmatics. 2nd ed. Berlin: Language Science Press.
URL: https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/231
Please inform me on time about which chapters you will summarize.
Respect the conventions for formatting and for references specified at: https://www.english-linguistics.de/style-sheets/
Meeting 14
Video
The video shows how argument linking can be done within LRS (20'). The video was produced by Clemens Naumann in the context of the seminar Semantics 1, summer term 2021, Goethe-University Frankfurt a.M.
Meeting 11
Video
The video shows the basic combinatorics of LRS (15'). The video was produced by Clemens Naumann in the context of the seminar Semantics 1, summer term 2021, Goethe-University Frankfurt a.M.
Basic combinatorics: Canonical examples
(the following exercises are adapted from the textbook material to Chapter 5.
Possible EX-CONT values
Given the following PARTS lists, what are possible EX-CONT values (if we do not assume other restrictions)
1. PARTS < pat, alex,like, __ (__,__) >
Check your answer
like(pat,alex)
like(alex,pat)
2. PARTS < alex,snore, __(__), ¬(__) >
Check your answer
¬(snore(alex))
3. PARTS < alex,alex,snore >
Check your answer
There is no possible EX-CONT value because the three elements on the PARTS list cannot be combined.
3. PARTS < alex,alex,snore, __ (__) >
Check your answer
snore(alex)
4. PARTS < alex,alex,snore, __ (__), __ ∧ __ >
Check your answer
snore(alex) ∧ snore(alex)
Meeting 10
The video shows the HPSG analysis of sentences (38').
Meeting 9
The following video (21') introduces the way we will write down lexical entries in our course.
Meeting 8
Watch the following video (33') on the basic step in a syntactic analysis as we need it in our course.
The next video (14') introduces the way we talk about syntactic trees. Please watch it.
Meeting 7
Video
Watch the following video on logical determiners:
Exercises
After having watched the video, work on the following tasks.
Task 1 Identify the logical determiners in the following sentence.
(a) Juliet talked to some stranger at the party.
(b) Every Capulet is an enemy to some Montague.
(c) Many people in Verona are not happy about the Capulet-Montague feud.
Check your solutions here:
(a) some
(b) every, some
(c) many
Task 2 Identify the formula that corresponds to the translation of the sentence.
Task 3 The sentence: Some Tybalt loved some Montague. is translated into the formula
∃ y (montague1(y) : love2(tybalt,y).
Given this table, is the overall formula true or false? (Give a reason for your answer.)
Check your solutions here:
The formula is false, because there is no individual in our model for which both the restrictor and the scope are true.
Meeting 6
Homework from week 6 (preparation for week 7): Watch the video on logical determiners.
Meeting 5
Formulae with one connective
The following video presents the step-by-step computation of the truth value of two formulae with connectives. The example uses a model based on Shakespeare's play Macbeth. The two formulae are:
- ¬ king(lady-macbeth)
- king(duncan) ∨ king(lady-macbeth)
Formulae with two connectives
The next video shows how the truth value of a more complex formula can be computed. The example contains two connectives:
kill(malcom,lady-macbeth) ∨ ¬thane(macbeth)
The video shows two different methods: top down and bottom up.
Truth tables
Truth tables are also useful to compute the truth value of complex formulae. This is shown in the following podcast, created by Lisa Günthner.
Variable assignment funcion
Task Variable assignment function
Start with the following variable assigment function g:
g(u) = Romeo, g(v) = Juliet, g(w) = Romeo, g(x) = Laurence, g(y) = Mercutio, g(z) = Juliet
Provide the changed variable assignment function g[v/Paris].
Check your solutions here:
g[v/Paris](u) = g(u) = Romeo
g[v/Paris](v) = Paris
g[v/Paris](w) = g(w) = Romeo
g[v/Paris](x) = g(x) = Laurence
g[v/Paris](y) = g(y) = Mercutio
g[v/Paris](z) = g(z) = Juliet
Meeting 4
Computing the truth value of complex formulae
The following video presents the step-by-step computation of the truth value of two formulae with connectives. The example uses a model based on Shakespeare's play Macbeth. The two formulae are:
- ¬ king(lady-macbeth)
- king(duncan) ∨ king(lady-macbeth)
Meeting 3
Computing the truth value of atomic formulae
The following video presents the step-by-step computation of the truth value of two atomic formulae. The example uses a model based on Shakespeare's play Macbeth. The two formulae are:
- kill2(macbeth,duncan)
- kill2(lady-macbeth,macbeth)
Meeting 2
Our literary scenario
Literary scenario for this course is The Lion King: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King
Why it is too difficult to go directly from language to the world
The following properties of natural language make it useful to use the intermediate step of a logical language:
- The same expression can have different meanings (ambiguity).
- Different expressions can have the same meaning (synonyms, paraphrases)
Find examples for the above-mentioned properties (ambiguity, synonymy, paraphrases).
Check your answers
1. one form, two meaingns: Ambiguity: (see earlier in this meeting and the slides of last week's meeting)
1.a Ambiguous words: date (fruit or point in time); bank (financial institute or bank of a river)
1.b. Ambiguous sentences: Sycorax and Prospero were stranded on the island with their children.
2. two forms, one meaning:
2.a Synonymous words: couch - sofa; instant - moment
2.b Paraphrases:
- active-passive pairs: Prospero set Ariel free. - Ariel was set free by Prospero.
- cleft sentences: Prospero set Ariel free. - It was Prospero who set Ariel free.
- different ways to express a possessor: Sycorax was the first inhabitant of the island. and Sycorax was the island's first inhabitant.
Towards a formal model
First steps
The following material is an adapted form of material created by student participants of the project e-Learning Resources for Semantics (e-LRS). Involved participants: Lisa, Marthe, Elisabeth, Isabelle.
You can think of building a formal model like being the producer of a film who has to collect everything that should be included in the film.
Here is a very simple story from which we can derive an example model.
The universe and name symbols
Task: Assume three individuals from our Harry Potter-scenario.
Formally we collect the individuals of our model in a so-called universe (U). For the fairy-tale story, we can define the universe as follows:
U = {Redridinghood, Grandmother, Wolf}
Do a similar definition for your own scenario.
We can introduce name symbols for some of our individuals. For example: redridinghood, grandmother, wolf.
We link the name symbols to the individuals in our modal. To do this, we introduce the interpretation function. We will written the interpretation function as as I.
This function can be defined in the following way:
I(grandmother) = Grandmother
I(redridinghood) = Red Riding Hood
I(wolf) = Wolf
Properties and predicate symbols
A property is a specification that either holds of an individual or not. In the little story, having a big mouth is a property of the Wolf, but of noone else in the story. Being female holds of both Little Red Riding Hood and the Grandmother.
We can think of a property as the set of individuals that have this property. Under this view, the property of being female would be the set {Redridinghood, Grandmother}.
Alternatively it is convenient to think of properties as 1-place relations. Under this view, the property of being female would be a set of lists of length 1. This is what the property of being female then looks like: { <Redridinghood>, <Grandmother> }
Task: Using your Game of Thrones universe, define two properties in the format of 1-place relations.
Just like before, we want to have symbols that we can use in the logical language. For our example, let's take the predicate symbols female_1 and has-big-mouth_1. There interpretation is defined as follows:
I(female_1) = { < x > | x is female } = { <Redridinghood>, <Grandmother> }.
Task: For each of your properties, invent an appropriate predicate symbol. Define its interpretation.
Meeting 1
Course requirement
Challenging phenomena at the syntax-semantics interface