Show Less

Meaning and Translation

Part 1: Meaning


Tomasz P. Krzeszowski

Since translation cannot be approached in isolation from meaning, anything that is said about translation must necessarily be placed in the context of meaning. Accordingly, the first volume of the book concerns this necessary context, while the second volume will view translation in terms of the semantic framework presented in the first volume. Both volumes are to a large extent consistent with major tenets of cognitive linguistics. The work is addressed primarily to students pursuing translation studies but also to all those persons who are interested in semantics and translation for whatever other reasons. The main aim of the book is to provide the prospective reader with a quantum of knowledge in the two areas. A subsidiary aim is to tidy up the metalinguistic terminology, replete with such deficiencies as polysemy, whereby one term is laden with a number of senses, as well as synonymy, due to which one sense is connected with more than one term.


Show Summary Details
Restricted access

Chapter Two: Aspects of linguistic meaning 97


Chapter Two Aspects of linguistic meaning 7. Semantic relations between sentences and words 7.1 Semantic relations between sentences Truth-conditional semantics provides a means to define a number of semantic rela- tions between declarative sentences and between separate words. These relations are products of logical theories and ideally fit only analytical sentences which make up formal, artificial languages such as those used in logic. Therefore, they must be treated as a priori formal objects, elements of formal logic (or indeed mathematics), which only partly fit actual semantic relations obtaining in natural languages. This is so because attempting to describe a natural language in mathematical or logical terms is tantamount to applying a well-defined system to ill-defined phenomena. A well-defined system is isolated from real physical situations, contains no moving parts and is static as well as unchanging. (cf. Hockett 1968). According to Hockett, language, like all natural phenomena, is ill-defined and for this reason cannot be completely and exactly characterized by deterministic (rather than probabilistic) systems. A great number of interesting facts, especially those concerning the actual use of language in communication, which constitute ill-defined data, must be left out of account if a well-defined system is applied to such data. What may be de- scribed is “merely the best that language can do” (Bloomfield 1933: 512), mathe- matics being “the ideal use of language (Bloomfield 1933: 29) as well as “the spe- cially accurate form of speech” (Bloomfield 1933: 147). The limitations inherent in applying well-defined systems to ill-defined phe-...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.