Distinguishing Semantics and Pragmatics in Studying Meanings
Sandi Ferdiansyah
Universitas Islam Malang
Abstract
Meaning is a part of language. The communication will be meaningful if the people who use the language are precisely able to convey meanings. There are two braches of the linguistic study which concern in the study of meanings, namely semantics and pragmatics. Those two linguistics fields enable people to find the meanings of a word, sentence, and utterance with, however, different approaches and analysis. This article describes briefly the very basic concepts of between semantics and pragmatics which generate different theories and approaches in studying meanings which is, moreover, useful to develop the notion of second language learners in understanding meaning and carrying out the problems of meaning in language faced by L2 learners under the distinction usage of semantics and pragmatics analysis.
Key Words: semantics, pragmatics, theories, approaches
Introduction
Understanding meanings in communication is felt difficult for those who learn second language. There is no doubt that L2 learners often find it relatively difficult to understand meanings due to their awareness of the linguistic variability of the second language has not been well maintained yet. Furthermore, L2 learners sometimes misuse the vocabulary in a sentence, a sentence or utterance in a communication with or without a certain context. This is in line with (Mackay, 1980, p.17) in Lee (2010) who states that the problems of appropriate lexical choice and near synonym distinction are especially daunting for second language learners. As a result, L2 learners become so limited in term of receiving as well as producing the language. Therefore, to attain an appropriate communication, the L2 learners are necessary to build the knowledge of the academic disciplines in linguistics particularly semantics and pragmatics. In accordance, Brown (1987) in Budiharso (2006:15) defines the communicative competence as the aspect of competence that enables us to convey and interpret messages and to negotiate meaning interpersonally within specific competence.
The ability to communicate meanings of language in communication will depend on how well the L2 learners master the academic disciplines of linguistic study which deals with meaning. The academic disciplines that are meant previously are semantics and pragmatics. Semantics and pragmatics are two main branches of the linguistic study of meaning. However, it is obvious that both of them have different approaches to study and analyze the meanings. In relation to sentence meaning, Hymes (1974) in Siahaan (2007:109) states that the function of the semantic meaning of a given sentence must not be interpreted in isolation; rather it is in its proper language community. In addition, Griffiths (2006:1) illustrates that semantics is the study of the “toolkit” for meaning, while pragmatics is concerned with the use of these tools in meaningful communication. Furthermore, in brief, Adisutrisno (2008:63) says that according to linguists, semantics is defined as the study of word meaning and sentence meaning without any relation to a context, meanwhile pragmatics is the study of utterances meaning used in communication and also the study of meaning in language interaction between a speaker and hearer. The purpose of this study is to describe how pragmatics and semantics are different in linguistic study of meaning, as it is useful to avoid misusing of each to study and understand meaning. Kearns (2000:1) provides the following illustration, “I forgot the paper.” Simply, from the example given by Kearns, semantically it can be meant that the person who is speaking at the time before now forgot an item which is a paper, however pragmatically, it tends to require in what such context the man was saying.
Theories: semantics and pragmatics definitions
According to Griffiths (2006:6) semantics is the study of sentence meaning and word meaning. To support this idea, Kearns (2000:1) states that semantics deals with the literal meaning of words and the meaning of way they are combined, which taken together form the core of meaning, or the starting point from which the whole meaning of a particular utterance is constructed. It means that semantics is the study of linguistic meaning which is dealt with word meaning and words that are combined which has a complete sense. From the sentence, I forgot the paper, semantics provide the literal meaning of the elements, I, forget, past tense, the, and paper, and the meaning drawn from the order of the words. On the other hand, Servius and Donatus in Horn (2006:1) say that pragmatics is as a figure in which we say less but mean more. In addition, Griffiths (2006:6) defines pragmatics as linguistic study of utterance meaning. In advanced, Cruse (2000:16) in Cummings (2005:2) defines that pragmatics can be taken to be concerned with aspect of information (in the widest sense) conveyed through language which (a) are not encoded by generally accepted convention in the linguistic forms used, but which (b) none the less arise naturally out of and depend on the meanings conventionally encoded in the linguistic forms used, taken in conjunction with the context in which the forms are used.
From the above definitions, between semantics and pragmatics, it can be briefly figured out that both of linguistic studies of meaning are absolutely distinctive. The notion of linguistic study of meaning should be disintegrated in term of sentence meaning particularly in semantics and utterance meaning in pragmatics. In other words, it can be said that if it dealt with meaning and there is not context to consider, then semantics is used, however, if there is a context to be brought into consideration, pragmatics is used (Griffiths, 2006:6).
Semantics and pragmatics approaches
Devitt and Stereny (1999) in Adisutrisno (2008:43), state that human beings use the principle of referent and structure to understand the conceptual meaning of a sentence. Furthermore, Adisutrisno states one of principles in studying meaning in semantics that is called as principle of referent. He states that the principle of referent refers to the conceptual meaning of the words which are embodied in the sentence, while the principle of structure refers to the organization or combination of words to form a sentence by means of structural rules. In the sentence, the knife is sharp (Adisutrisno, 2008:43) two words have conceptual meaning: knife and sharp. Furthermore, the pen is good provides two conceptual meaning: pen and good. In this sentence, the conceptual meaning of pen is inanimate, a tool, made of plastic, there is a tip at one of the edge, fill in with ink, used to write. Meanwhile, the conceptual meaning of good is having high quality, of an acceptable standard, and satisfactory. While the word is is a word to carry the tense and other inflectional units (Chafe, 1970:160). So that, the conceptual meaning of the sentence, the pen is good is the is inanimate, a tool, made of plastic, there is a tip at one of the edge, fill in with ink, used to write which is having high quality, of an acceptable standard, and satisfactory.
The concept of pragmatics is by analyzing meaning beyond the utterance. Cummings (2005:6) presents speech act theory concepts by John Austin that contributes to pragmatics which are known as locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary act theory. According to Austin (1975:109) in Cummings (2005:6) locutionary act is roughly equivalent to uttering a certain sentence with a certain sense and reference, which again is roughly equivalent to meaning in traditional sense. For an example, “the beach has a huge wave”. It produces a sentence meaning which is based on the reference of a particular beach and wave in the external world. Moreover, besides producing locutionary act, the speaker also performs illocutionary act. Illocutionary act, according to Austin is performing an utterance such as informing, warning which have a certain force. In the sentence, “The wave is dangerous”, the speaker may producing illocutionary act which warns some one not to swim in the beach because the wave is dangerous. Finally, the speaker also performs the perlocutionary act (Austin, 1975:109) which means that the speaker achieves what the speaker wants the listener to do. From this brief explanation of Austin’s concept it is clear that conventionality plays an important role in an account of language meaning. Pragmatics, furthermore, also presents implicature and explicature theory. Horn (2006:1) states that implicature is a component of speaker meaning that constitutes an aspect of what is meant in speaker’s utterance without being part of what is said. Explicature, according to Griffiths (2006:6) is a basic interpretation of an utterance, using contextual information and world knowledge to work out what is being referred to and which way to understand ambiguous expressions. Meanwhile, Grice (1957:358) in Cummings (2005:9) emphasizes on intentions in communication is reflected in his account of non natural meaning. It means that the speaker intends to cause through his or her utterance a certain effect in the listener. Cummings (2005:10) presents a dialog between A and B:
A: do you want to come round to my place tonight?
B: John’s mother is visiting this evening
B’s utterance can be variously interpreted to be performing a number of different speech acts. Perhaps A had asked B the previous day when John’s mother would next be visiting. In such case, B’s utterance is serving to inform A of that event. Perhaps B knows that A is quite fond of John’s mother and has produced this utterance with a view to suggesting that A come round to see her. Perhaps B knows that A considers John’s mother to be a quite unpleasant woman. With this knowledge in mind B trying to warn A not to visit this evening (Cummings, 2005:10).
In sum, Griffiths (2006:3) presents the board distinction of semantics and pragmatics in studying the meaning can be drawn in the following utterance, “Hold out your arm. That’s it!”, which is quoted from the first J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter book.
Semantics | Pragmatics |
Arm-“upper limb” or horizontal side bar on some types of chair | Mr. O’s earlier question was about wand wielding, so arm is most likely “upper limb” |
Your arm- “left upper limb or right upper limb” Holds out- ‘extent’, or ‘refuse to capitulate’ | Preferred hand is probably the one for wands and Harry is right-handed. Mr. O has a tape measure out and measuring Harry’s arm will require access to his arm, so Mr. O wants to extend his right upper limb |
That denotes something obvious in the situation | If Harry just compiled and moved his arm outwards, that would be noticeable event so the word probably denotes the act. |
Is- ‘equates to’ (there are other meanings of is, but they are not relevant here It usually denotes something previously mentioned | It would fit if Mr. O, now means that Harry’s act with his right arm is what was wanted, so the word it probably recalls the previous specification; and or Mr. O is acknowledging Harry’s compliance |
From the above explanations, it is clear that both Semantics and Pragmatics present different points of view in employing the meaning of weather sentence meaning and utterance meaning.
Discussion
Griffiths (2006:3) distinguishes pragmatics from semantics in the study of meaning by three classifications, they are utterance and sentences, three stages of interpretation, a first outline of pragmatics. Utterance is quite different with sentence. In accordance to, Adisutrisno (2008:63) when a sentence is spoken in a particular context by a certain speaker and is directed to a hearer, the sentence is called an utterance. In addition, Griffiths (2006:4) says that utterances are the raw data of linguistics. It means there are numbers of interpretation which employs in the utterance. The following expression, I forgot the paper, is a sentence. However, it will be an utterance if it is spoken in a certain context or situation. Further, let’s take a look at the following sentence, Jane is with a boy. Semantically, it is clear that Jane is a name of a girl, is carries the tense, with is comitative (the case of ‘being together’), a indefinite article, boy is a male at young age. In other words, through semantics, the sentence can mean that a girl named Jane is at the time of speaking being together with a boy at young age. Moreover, in pragmatics, the meaning of the utterance cannot be drawn that simple. The brief explanation of using pragmatics in the study of the meaning of the above utterance as suggested by Griffiths in three stages of interpretation is, firstly, the utterance implies that Jane is with a boy who is not her relative, boyfriend, or husband as the utterance uses article ‘a’ which is indefinite. Gazdar (1979) in Cummings (2005:16) states that the referent of the noun that is modified by the indefinite article ‘a’ is not closely associated with any person who is contextually identifiable. Secondly, the implicature of the utterance is generated differently if the utterance is added by another utterance such us, Jane is with a boy. It’s her brother. We finally are able to recognize who the boy is in the former utterance.
Next, the following is utterance that is often heard during the teaching and learning process:
The student : it’s twelve o’clock sir
The teacher : alright, I think we can finish now
Literal meaning of the sentence, it’s twelve o’clock sir, is based on just the semantic information that we have heard from our knowledge of English. L2 learner will be able to explain that ‘it’ is equated, ‘is’ carries the tense, ‘twelve o’clock’ shows the time, and sir is regarded to a person (teacher). This sentence meaning is analyzed semantically.
Furthermore, pragmatically, it’s twelve o’clock indicates a basic interpretation of an utterance. The student who says such an utterance is performing illocutionary which brings the act of warning or informing. It is, therefore, the impact of saying this will produce various interpretations. In other contexts, it may mean that the class used to finish at such a time. When the student tried to inform the teacher, the teacher directly ended the class. This also may mean that on the previous day the teacher promised to go somewhere, then he asked the students to warn him or her about the time so he could make the appointment. So the implicature that comes is when the students had warned the teacher, he or she directly ended the lesson. According to Grice (1975:45), the cooperative principle in a speaker-directed imperative should make the conversational contribution such as is required at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which the people are engaged.
It is strongly believe that the communication is going to run smoothly if the speaker and the listener are able to transfer the massage and carry out the meanings to each other. Recognizing meaning of a particular sentence or utterance requires knowledge of the study of meanings. It is, then, suggested to utter or produce sentence or utterance as clear and informative as possible which does not require more interpretation and avoid ambiguity. In accordance to, the communication that is conducted should consider four maxims that Levinson (1983:101-2) in Cummings (2005:10), namely maxim of quality (what is said is believed to be false or wrong), quantity (it should be as informative as required), relevance (the contribution should be relevant), and manner (it should avoid and obscurity). In other words, the participants in communication should speak sincerely, relevantly, and clearly, while providing sufficient information (Cummings, 2005:10). Therefore, communicative competence is required to undergo the understanding meaning in communication. In relation to this, in short, the meaning of a sentence can be generated literally which is theoretically called as semantics, while if it requires the notion of its speech act and implicature theory, pragmatics theory is applied.
REFERENCES
Adisutrisno, W. 2008. Semantics. An Introduction to the Basic Concepts.
Yogyakarta: CV Andi Offset
Cummings, L. 2005. Pragmatics: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh Press
Griffiths, P. 2006. An Introduction to English Semantics and Pragmatics.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press
Horn, R.L. and Ward, G. 2006. The Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing
Kearns, K. 2000. Semantics. London: Macmillan Press Ltd
Siahaan, S. 2008. Issues in Linguitics. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu
