The principle of compositionality Definition The meaning of

The principle of compositionality: Definition The meaning of a grammatically complex form is a compositional function of the meanings of its grammatical constituents. This definition incorporates 3 separate claims: 1. The meaning of a complex expression is determined by the meanings of its grammatical constituents. 2. The meaning of a complex expression is completely predictable by general rules from the meanings of its constituents. 3. Every constituent has a meaning which contributes to the meaning of the whole.

The principle of compositionality: Definition Claim (2) incorporates claim (1). Claim (1) could be T w/o claim (2) being T. Claim (3) is presupposed by the other two. This principle derives from 2 presuppositions: a) Language has an infinite grammatical sentences. number of b) Language has unlimited expressive power – anything which can be conceived can be expressed in language. The infinite inventory of sentences arises from rule -governed combinations of elements from a finite list, some of which are recursive.

Compositionality: Modes of combination Meanings can be combined in different ways Interactive modes Additive modes Meanings of constituents are added without radical change Meaning of at least 1 constituent is radically modified Endocentric Exocentric

Endocentric combinations An endocentric construction is one whose distribution is functionally equivalent to 1 or more of its constituents. Usually, NPs, VPs & APs belong to endocentric types because the constituent items are subordinate to the Head: ØThese two oldest stone bridges Head

Endocentric combinations Øwill be leaving Head Øvery late Head If the head is removed from compound phrase, then so is meaning. the

Endocentric combinations: types 1. Boolean combination (the most elementary type): red hats are things that are simultaneously hats and red: a red hat denotes a hat (a THING) red restricts the applicability of hat. 2. Relative descriptor: a large mouse cannot be described as “sth which is large & a mouse”, because all mice are small. Large must be interpreted relative to the size of mice, i. e. “significantly larger than the average mouse”. Mouse determines how to interpret large, & large limits the application of mouse.

Endocentric combinations: types 3. Negational descriptors: the modifier negates the head, while simultaneously indicating where to look for the intended referent: ü a former President/ an ex-lover üan imitation fur coat: an imitation but not strictly a fur coat. 4. Indirect types : a beautiful dancer sb simultaneously beautiful & a dancer (Boolean type) sb who dances beautifully (semantic

Exocentric combinations An exocentric construction consists of 2 or more parts, whereby the one or the other of the 2 parts cannot be viewed as providing the meaning of the whole: in denotes a relation the box denotes a thing (NP) in + the box denotes a place (PP) Hannibal a person (a N) destroyed Rome an action (a VP) Hannibal destroyed Rome a. S The whole is unlike either of its parts. Practice 1

Limits to compositionality I: Idioms Some aspects of the combination of meanings seem to question the principle of compositionality. ØNon-compositional expressions: The principle of compositionality isn’t universally valid, because of the existence of expressions whose constituents don’t contribute an identifiable component of its meaning: – paint the town red elephant – useless possession. go out & celebrate

Limits to compositionality I: Idioms The principle can be reformulated to cover such cases: The meaning of a complex expression is a compositional function of the meanings of its semantic constituents, that is, those constituents whose meanings yield the full global meaning. A semantic constituent can be substituted by something else (from the same class), giving a different meaning: Ø

Limits to compositionality I: Idioms Idiom: A grammatically complex expression not all of whose grammatical constituents are semantic: ØJane pulled Ann’s leg about her boyfriend. Changing pull or leg destroys the idiom meaning Idioms’ constituents have no (independently active) meaning. Characteristics: 1. Constituents aren’t separately modifiable without losing idiomatic meaning, but idiom as a whole: * She pulled her brother’s left leg. She pulled her brother’s leg mercilessly.

Limits to compositionality I: Idioms 2. Constituents don’t coordinate with others: * She pulled & twisted her brother’s leg. She pulled her brother’s and her father’s leg. 3. Constituents cannot be referred to anaphorically: * Mary pulled her brother’s leg; John pulled it, too. Mary pulled her brother’s leg; John did, too. 4. Constituents cannot be substituted by synonyms without losing idiomatic meaning: * She pulled his lower limb about it.

Limits to compositionality I: Frozen metaphors Idiom-like, non-compositional expressions, which differ from idioms in that synonym substitution doesn’t block the non-literal meaning: He has one foot in the grave both feet tomb The literal meanings of the constituents of frozen metaphors are not always completely inactive to the metaphoric reading. The relatedness between literal & nonliteral meanings of idioms varies from none to a high degree: Zero relatedness a red herring high degree blackbird bread & butter

Limits to compositionality I: Clichés Fully compositional phrases but stored as complete units in the brain to be easily retrieved while speaking and understood by hearer: ØEvery cloud has a silver lining. ØTime will tell. ØBrave as a lion. ØAll’s well that ends well. ØRead between the lines. ØI’ve made my position clear. They function as default encodings of certain meanings. Practice 2

Limits to compositionality II: Noun compound Many noun compounds satisfy the criteria for semantic constituents, but display unpredictable semantic properties: ØPocket knife: “knife to be carried in the pocket” same relation as pocket calculator, hand gun ØKitchen knife: “knife for use in the kitchen” same relation as kitchen paper, garden knife. ØMeat knife: “knife for cutting meat” same relation as in bread knife. No obvious way of predicting that a tablecloth is used to cover a table but a dishcloth is used to wipe dishes.

Limits to compositionality II: Active zones Interaction between 2 combined meanings: an adjective & its noun, or a verb & its complement. For instance, often the colour only applies to a part of the object denoted by the head noun: ØA red hat A red pencil ØA red book A red pencil ØA red apple Red eyes ØA yellow peach Blue eyes ØA red traffic sign The adjective indicates that the referent of the N has an area with some perceptual properties.

Some reflections on compositionality 3 positions regarding compositionality: 1. The building-block model: the meaning of an expression is totally accounted for by compositional processes acting on the meanings of its constituent parts. 2. The scaffolding model: compositionality gives the bones of a semantic structure for an expression, which is fleshed out by less predictable pragmatic means, using encyclopedic knowledge, context, etc. (weaker version of compositionality) 3. The holistic model: the meaning of every item consists of its relations with all other items in the language. All the effects of combination with other items are present in the meaning (strong version of compositionality).

REFERENCIAS Ø Allan, K. 2000, Natural Language Semantics. Cornwall: Blackwell. Ø Cruse, A. 2004. Meaning in language. Oxford: O. U. P. Ø Saeed, J. I. 1997. Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.