Appunti di Modulo Teorico Inglese III MT

REPETITION

: a lexical cohesive device through which words or phrases are repeated throughout

the text. Not grammatical, but lexical: use of the same words in the same text. No grammatical

means, but lexical. We may need repetition sometimes because it’s necessary

Focus on a word/phrase, use of repetition to make sure we make our point clear. It’s used in specific

text types, and not in general: examples are poetry or class.

Poem, Ancient Mariner: I fear, I fear, I fear… A ballad uses lots of repetitions because they are long

and some elements must be remembered. The stanza flows because of repetition, but also because

of lexical reiteration, made with words in violet. These are linked to this body. This body includes all

the other violet words, which are physical qualities.

LEXICAL REITERATION

: cohesion achieved not through grammar but through lexical words.

What is the difference between repetition and reiteration? Reiteration is reference achieved

through lexical words all from the same group/category. Reiteration avoids unnecessary repetitions,

so it uses synonyms, antonyms, superordinates/hypernyms, hyponyms, general words…

- Synonymy: sometimes the difference in synonyms are matter of collocation. We only have

close synonyms

- Antonymy: exact antonyms like dead/alive; gradable like big/small

- Hypernyms and hyponyms: words which are bigger in meaning vs words which have less

meaning. This body is the hypernym; skinny hand and glittering eye are the hyponyms;

animal > dog, cat, mouse; rose > petal

- General words: ranging in meaning, they can mean anything. Thing, stuff, do, happen, guy…

The use of these elements allows lexical reiteration to exist without grammatical cohesive devices.

In lexical reiteration, one word reiterates others.

Cohesion in an extremely communicative tool. The use of grammatical and lexical cohesive devices

varies from co-text to co-text, from genre to genre, and purpose of the text type.

Legal documents: repetition to avoid obscurity; essay: conjunctions to give a clear structure; ellipsis

to create ambiguity…

COHERENCE AND RELEVANCE

Column A

1) Repetition: is it > it’s

it > time, anaphoric reference

2) Repetition, or ellipsis if there

isn’t “My name is”

3) Repetition: can > can

Ellipsis

Personal deixis: you, I

These examples are cohesive and coherent. There is relevance between the sentences.

Column B

1) No cohesion

2) If we take the option “Richard” out, is there cohesion? No.

3) No cohesion

In 1, What time is it? is asked instead of “Has my letter arrived?”

In 2, an effort is needed to understand if it’s a joke.

3 could be relevant, the intended meaning is implied. I can’t go if I fly Alitalia.

The interactions in B aren’t cohesive and not even coherent. They are coherent if we assume that

there are missing links, the speakers are being reduced in explicitness and are sharing coherent

information that allows A to decode what B is saying.

When there’s cohesion, relevance is automatic

When there’s no cohesion, relevance is on the table but not explicit.

If there is no cohesion, an effort is needed. 16/11

Column A

Cohesion and coherence/relevance

Lexical and grammatical cohesion

Column B

No grammatical or lexical cohesion between utterances

If we take the utterances for what they are, without a contest, it seems that B replies unrelatedly,

irrelevantly.

To fully understand the communicative exchange, we need more contextual information!

rd

Column B, 3 conversation:

If B doesn’t fly with Alitalia, the reply is not relevant.

The intended meaning is not explicit, but it is implied. An effort needs to be made by A to retrieve

the intended meaning. It’s not explicit, but implied.

st

Column B, 1 conversation:

Important letter: if the knowledge is shared/known, B knows A is waiting for a letter. So, B replies

not to what A says, but to A’s intended meaning. Intended meaning is created by both A & B.

In both columns, we have communicative interactions which are successful. The intended meaning

is understood.

In column A the intended meanings are explicit. In column B efforts are needed by both parts.

The links in meaning: relevance is the link in meaning.

Relevance directly links what one says and the other replies.

Lack of cohesion (lack of grammatical and lexical links in utterances) will almost certainly decrease

the degree of relevance.

Lack of cohesion > lack in relevance > need to retrieve the intended meaning.

Column B is less relevant than column A.

A: cohesive and coherent

B: not cohesive and apparently not even coherent. They are coherent if we assume that there are

missing links, that A & B are being reduced in explicitness and are sharing coherent/relevant

information. LEXICAL MEANING

DIMENSION OF (only in 1 text, found on AW, by Douthwaite: How text mean.)

The very lexical meaning of items can be re-negotiated in context and co-text. There are 5

dimensions of lexical meaning:

- Denotation - Idiomatic expression

- Connotation - Semantic field

- Collocation

- Denotation

Sense, descriptive/ideational/cognitive/referential/designative/propositional meaning.

It’s the literal meaning, the one found in the dictionary. Words stand for people, action, abstract

notions in the world. Words can be polysemic or can have multiple membership (one element

belongs to more than one class).

Signifiers/words usually have more than one signified/literal meaning.

Floor: flat surface; floor of the ocean; the permission/right to speak; level of a building

Polysemy: more than one meaning within the same class (floor)

Multiple membership: more meanings in different classes (chair)

- Connotation

Literal meaning starts cooperating with non-literal information. Connotations are information not

found in a dictionary, but retrieved by our background knowledge. All the associations, cultural

associations, made with the literal meaning of a word. Still part of lexical meaning.

Connotation isn’t linguistic, but social, cultural, emotive associations made with the denotational

meaning of an item.

Grey day denotatively: dark colour; unit of measure of time

connotatively: sad day; in western world grey is associated with sadness

Connotational meaning is strongly culture-bound and may change from one culture to another.

Value-free value-loaded

vs words: words which don’t pass judgements vs words that do.

Co-text can influence connotation greatly. Some words are value-free, meaning they are used

mostly for their denotational meaning, and there is no direct cultural association/connotation.

Some other words are value-loaded: they have a strong connotative meaning, bad or good, also if

outside of any context. If used, they automatically pass a judgment.

Based on context, a value-free word can become value-loaded, or there could be an inversion in

loading.

Table: value-free Operational table: value-loaded, negative

à

Killer: value-loaded, negative Killer song: value-loaded, positive

à

Victory: value-loaded, positive Moral victory: value-loaded, negative

à

High powered: value-loaded, positive But in V for Vendetta’s co-text, also value-free words

Unarmed: value-loaded, positive become value-loaded. The semantic field of violence/

Report: value-free terrorism also turns the positive into negative. The

Message: value-free co-text is about the opposition between heroic

Civilians: value-loaded, positive authorities (US) vs the psychiatric terrorist (him).

Broadcast: value-free

Connotation is important in pragmatics: it allows to create meaning without actually saying

something.

Value-loaded words and a case of associative endophora:

War: value-loaded, negative

Presuppositional pool of war: weapons, fight, machine gun, tank, helicopter, bomb, sword, horse,

knight… “War in 1945” has a presuppositional pool, “war in 1700” has a different one.

If you say war on fat, meaning fighting against obesity, war loses the negative value, and the

presuppositional pool changes. The change from good to bad value is made by context itself.

- Collocation

Lexical items are not free to be arranged with other lexemes as we want, but are placed, collocated,

in meaningful relationship with a restricted number of other lexical items. So they often co-occur:

words have a collocational range.

We are free to make decisions, but we have to follow a collocational range: make friends, mistakes,

decisions, promises; do favours, research; propositional verbs in general have their collocation…

Beautiful woman & handsome man are near synonyms. If we say handsome woman we create extra,

unconventional, meaning. Collocations are expected combinations. You can change the collocation

to create extra meaning and make jokes: A: The bed of this river is quite large! B: Its floor, you mean!

(Joke on the fact the river is so big that it’s almost an ocean, and oceans’ beds are called floors).

21/11

- Idiomatic expressions

Idioms are fixed expressions which exploit the connotation of an item. They need to be

contextualized to be fully understood.

She’s a pearl of a child! pearl > precious. Not a round, pale, worthy child, but lovable

Do no cast pearls before swine! pearl > swine; contrast between precious and dirty

The intended meaning doesn’t stand for the propositional meaning. We must know the fixed

expression and the fixed intended meaning attached to that expression.

Idiomatic expressions always have the same order, and their intended meaning is fixed as the order

of the words.

Attention: collocation is different from idioms. Collocations aren’t fixed: there is only a statistical

expectancy that a certain word can occur after another one. Idioms are fixed; collocation are

combination that frequently occur and may or may not occur, and aren’t fixed.

Semantic field

-

The semantic field includes all the previous lexical meanings. Words can group together according

to the meanings they hold in common.

Within texts in general, if they are coherent, if there’s progression, it’s highly probable that the

words used can be grouped together, because they belong to the same area, on their denotational,

connotational, collocational, idiomatical meaning.

The same item can belong to more than one semantic field: context and co-text clarify which

meaning and semantic field we are intending.

Elegant party example: A: What do I wear? B: Black (black > party, elegance)

Funeral and wake example: A: What do I wear? B: Black (black > death, funeral, wake)

In the semantic field of funeral, black is related to connotational meaning; death and wake are

denotational meanings. Same field, different source. In the semantic field of elegance, black is

associated with a dress code.

If a text is united by a semantic field, then there