Referential & Representational Theories

9

Referential and Representational Theories in Semantic

H.A. Nelumi Bandara

"Semantics is the study of the meaning communicated through language" (Saeed, 2008, p: 3). "The traditional descriptive aims of lexical semantics have been: a) to represent the meaning of each word in the language; and b) to show how the meanings of words in a language are interrelated" (Saeed, 2008, p: 53). English language allows speakers to describe or to talk about the world through two theories in lexical semantics. "There are different views of how semanticists should approach to talk about the world. Two of these are particularly important in current semantic theories: we call them the referential (or denotation) approach and representational approach" (Saeed, 2008, p: 24). The referential theory involves in meaning as putting words into relationships with the world, i.e. meaning derives from language being attached to reality. "Theories of meaning can be called referential (or denotation) when their basic premise is that we can give the meaning of words and sentences by showing how they relate to situations" (Saeed, 2008, p: 24). The representational theory of meaning involves our ability to talk about the world depends on our models of it (i.e. what we have in our mind connected to mental concepts). "Theories of meaning can be called representational when their emphasis is on the way that our reports about reality are influenced by the conceptual structures conventionalized in our language" (Saeed, 2008, p: 25). The two theories can be defined, compare and contrast in between, language being attached to the real world (referential) and language being a reflection of our conceptual structure (representational).

When defining referential theory, words denote¹ entities in the real world. "The referential approach to meaning is, in a sense a folk theory of meaning. Most people believe that the meaning of words can be equated with the fact that they name, or refer to, objects in the real world" (Lyons, 1968, p: 424-427, De Stadler, 1986, p: 9). It includes three main types. First, it includes referring and non-referring expressions. When analyzing referring and non-referring expressions, "There are linguistic expressions which can never be used to refer, for example the words so, very, maybe, if, not, all. These words do of course contribute meaning to the sentences they occur in and thus help sentences denote, but they do not themselves identify entities in the world" (Saeed, 2008, p: 26). These are called non-referring expressions. Referring expressions are "When someone says the noun cat in a sentence like That cat looks vicious, the noun is a referring expression since it is being used to identify an entity" (Saeed, 2008, p: 26). It can be considered nouns are referring expressions in the English language, but it distinguishes between instances when speakers use them to refer and instances they do not. In the sentence "2.9 They performed a cholecystectomy this morning" (Saeed, 2008, p: 26), hear the noun phrase a cholecystectomy is a referring expression, where the speaker is referring to an individual operation. In the sentence "2.10 A cholecystectomy is a serious procedure" (Saeed, 2008, P: 26), hear the noun phrase a cholecystectomy is a non-referring expression as it has a relating or characteristic of 'a cholecystectomy'.

Second, the referential theory includes constant versus variable reference. "Some expressions will have the same referent across a range of utterances, e.g. The Eifel Tower or the Pacific ocean" (Saeed, 2008, P: 26). These are described as having constant reference and they are context independent. "Others have their reference totally dependent on context... where to identify the referents we need to know who is speaking to whom, etc." (Saeed, 2008, P: 27). These are called variable references. The sentence "2.11 I wrote to you" (Saeed, 2008, p: 26) includes pronouns, where the readers obviously need to know about the context (context dependent) to describe the situation in the real world.

Third, referential theory includes referents and extensions. We can make distinctions among things referred to by expressions. "We use the term referent of an expression for the thing picked out by uttering the expressions in a particular context" (Saeed, 2008, p: 26). This is the actual thing referred to at the moment of uttering. "The term extension of an expression is the set of things which could possibly be the referent of that expression" (Saeed, 2008, p: 26).

When defining representational theory, "For semanticists adopting the second approach our ability to talk about the world depends on our mental models of it. In this view a language represents a theory about reality about the types and situations in the world" (Saeed, 2008, p: 24). In the sentences "2.5 a.John is sleeping and b.John is asleep" (Saeed, 2008, p: 24), the sentence a views the situation as an activity and b as a state. The decision making of a particular situation is influenced by each language's conventional ways (i.e. they conjure in our mind as pictures of things, happenings, and ideas). We can compare three ways of saying that someone has a cold as sited by Saeed, 2008, p: 24) to illustrate how language represents situations in the world. In English, the person possesses the cold: I have cold. In Somali, the person is possessed by the cold: Hargab ba ku haya. In Irish, the person is the location of the cold: Ta` slaghda`n ort. It can be noted that different conceptualizations influence the description of the real world situations.

When comparing the two theories, we look at the basic question 'how it is that we can use language to describe the world'. "Clearly all languages allow speakers to describe or as we might say model, aspects what they perceive" (Saeed, 2008, p: 24). In referential theory meaning denotes entities in the world and sentences because they denote situations and events. The sentences, "2.3 There is a casino in Grafton street and 2.4 Thee isn't a casino in Grafton street" (Saeed, 2008, p: 24), describes different situations. If the two sentences were spoken at the same time, they can be incompatible i.e. one may be a false description of the situation. The representational theory adopts new places of new level between words and world: a level of mental representation. "Thus a noun is said to gain its ability to denote because it is associated with something in the speaker's/hearer's mind" (Saeed, 2008, p: 32). Although, the nouns are used in describing the world with conventionalized ideas, speakers existing knowledge is important to describe the world according to the representational theory. "Thus if all you know about peccary is that a king of wild pig and pecorino that it is a kind of Italian cheese 'inherits' knowledge you have about pigs and cheese ... It suggests that the crucial element is not the amount of knowledge but its integration into existing knowledge" (Saeed,2008, p:38). The study of the two theories on lexical semantics or word meaning to describe the world aims to represent meaning of each word in the language and to show how the meanings of words in a language are interrelated with the world.

When contrasting the two theories, they varies in the way how meaning is putting words into relationship with the world (referential) and our ability to talk about the world depends on our models (representational). Though, the two theories describe the world using language, how they describe the world is different according to semanticists. According to Kempson,R (1977, p:13) sited by Saeed, (2008), referential theory claims that a proper noun denote individuals, common nouns denote set of individuals, verbs denote actions, adjectives denote properties of individuals and adverbs denote properties of actions in English language. "The simples' case of nominal which have reference might seem to be names" (Saeed, 2008, p: 37). In sentence, "He looks just like Eddie Murphy" (Saeed, 2008, p: 37), the speaker is assuming you can identify the American comedian. "Nouns and noun phrases can be used to refer indefinite and definite expressions. "Definite NP can also form definite descriptions, where the referent o whoever or whatever, fits the description, as in 2.15 She has a crush on the captain of the hockey team" (Saeed, 2008, p: 32).

When classifying the way the referential theory describes the world, there are a number of problems. "Firstly, it seems to predict that many words have no meaning...it is very difficult to find a real world referent for the words like so, not, very, but, of" (Saeed,2008, p: 30). The second issue with the theory is, "Many nominal expressions use by speakers do not have a referent that exists or has ever existed" (Saeed, 2008, p: 30). When describing the world, meaning is taken to be a relation between words and items in the real world and it may be meaningless with the nominal expressions 'a unicorn, World War Two, The Father Christmas'. There is a possibility to use different expressions to identify the same referent, and even use tow expressions share the same referent (i.e. in the sentence, The morning star is the evening star, that have a very different meaning from the referentially equivalent sentence 'Venus is Venus'" (Saeed,2008, p: 32).

The question that, meaning and reference is not exactly the same thing comes into contradiction, "There is more to meaning than reference" (Saeed, 2008, p: 32). "Then, our semantic theory is going to be complicating than the simple referential theory: the meaning of an expression will be arise both from it sense and reference" (Saeed, 2008, p: 32). "Sense² places a new level between words and the world: a level of mental representation" (Saeed, 2008, p: 33), which is the representational theory.

"One simple very old idea is that the mental entities are images. Presumably the relationship between the mental representation (the image) and the real world entity would then be the resemblance" (Saeed, 2008, p: 32). This was running with problems because variation in images those speakers might have of a common noun like a tree, a house depending on their experience. "Different languages, reflecting their speaker's cultural practices, might embody different conceptual classifications of the world" (Boas, 1966, p: 22). Images cannot be considered a whole story in our mind as what kind of image one might have for words like 'food, love, justice'. The meaning of the words was considered not visual but a more abstract element 'a concept'. "Linguists who favor a representational approach have gone on to set up models of concepts to form the basis of semantics" (Saeed, 2008, p: 33).

In conclusion, "The traditional descriptive aims of lexical semantics have been: a) to represent the meaning of each word in the language; and b) to show how the meanings of words in a language are interrelated" (Saeed, 2008, p: 53). Words stand in a relationship to the world (referential) or our mental classification (representational) parts of the world and to describe the world. As discussed, referential theory emphasizes the links between language and external reality (i.e. entities in the world) and representational theory emphasizes the link between language and conceptual structure. When defining the theories with what the scope contains and in comparison, the relationship between language, thought, and reality are considered illustrate how the theories describe the world. In contrast, the theories try to develop to cope with different issues in describing the world. Finally, the two theories in lexical semantics are used to describe the world in different perspectives.

References

Frege, G. (1980). Translations for the Philosophical Writing of Gottlob Frege. Oxford: Blackwell.

Hofmann, R. (1993). Realms of Meaning: An Introduction to Semantics. London: Longman. Huddleston, R. (1969). "Some observations on tense and deixis in English," Language, 45:777- 806.

Jackendoff, R. (1976). Toward an explanatory semantic representation. Linguistic Inquiry 7(1). 89-150.

Jackendoff, R. (1985). Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1990. Semantic Structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Kempson, R. M. (1975). Presupposition and the delimitation of semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kempson, R. M. (1977). Semantic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leech, G, N. (1969). Toward a Semantic Description of English. London: Longman.

Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Saeed, J. (1997). Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.

1 Emphasizes links between language and the external world

2 The linguistic knowledge which allows the act of reference