1. LIN 1180 – Semantics Lecture 8
Albert Gatt

2. Hyponymy and other relations
Part 1
Hyponymy and other relations

3. Definition of hyponymy
Hyponymy is a relation of inclusion.
Arrows can be interpreted as “IS-A” relations.
Unlike taxonomic sisterhood, which is horizontal, hyponymy is vertical.
ANIMAL
BIRD
MAMMAL
CANARY
SPARROW
LIN Semantics

4. Elements of hyponymy If Y IS-A X then: Inclusion: Transitivity:
X is the superordinate or hypernym of Y
Y is a subordinate or hyponym of X
e.g. HUMAN is the hypernym of MAN, TOOL is the hypernym of CHAINSAW
Inclusion:
if Y is a hyponym of X then Y contains the meaning of X (plus something extra)
e.g. MAN includes all the features of HUMAN, plus the specification of ADULT and MALE.
Transitivity:
if X IS-A Y and Y IS-A Z, then X IS-A Z
LIN Semantics

5. Transitivity -- illustration
A CANARY IS-A BIRD
A BIRD IS-A ANIMAL
Therefore, a CANARY IS-A ANIMAL
ANIMAL
BIRD
MAMMAL
CANARY
SPARROW
LIN Semantics

6. Hierarchical representations and inheritance
A node in a conceptual network inherits some properties from its superordinate
It can also add new properties of its own
It can override properties of the superordinate
Moves
Eats
breathes
ANIMAL
BIRD
Flies
Has feathers
Does not fly
OSTRICH
Semantics -- LIN 1180

7. Levels of conceptual representation
Rosch et al propose 3 levels
Superordinate
Or “top” level
FURNITURE
Basic level:
This is the level we tend
to use and think about
CHAIR
TABLE
Subordinate level:
Much more specific
ARMCHAIR
Semantics -- LIN 1180

8. Properties of the basic level
The easiest to visualise:
easier to imagine a CAR (basic) than a FIAT PUNTO (subordinate)
Used for neutral, everyday usage:
we’re more likely to say “that’s a dog” than “that’s a dachshund” or “that’s an animal”
Names of basic-level categories tend to be morphologically simple
Compare: spoon vs. teaspoon, soup spoon…
Semantics -- LIN 1180

9. More properties of the basic level
high distinctiveness
maximally different from other categories
strong within-category resemblance
objects within the category resemble eachother more than they do objects outside the category
optimal level of informativeness:
it’s more informative to say “x is a dog” than “x is an animal”
but in most cases, saying “x is a dachshund” is too specific…
Semantics -- LIN 1180

10. Special cases of taxonomic relations
Sometimes, language exhibits special cases of relations that are:
well-established and lexicalised
seem to depend on an underlying taxonomy or hierarchy
ADULT-YOUNG
dog – puppy, duck – duckling, etc
MALE-FEMALE
woman – man, dog – bitch, drake – duck, etc
NB: These pairs are often asymmetric. The unmarked case in the MALE- FEMALE is the MALE.
We tend to use it for the name of the species.
LIN Semantics

11. Meronymy or part-whole
A different kind of taxonomic relationship. Arrows are interpreted as “HAS-A”
LEG
ANIMAL
HAS-A
IS-A
WING
BIRD
HAS-A
LIN Semantics

12. Meronymy vs. Hyponymy Meronymy tends to be less regular than hyponymy:
NOSE is perceived as a necessary part of a FACE
CELLAR may be part of HOUSE, but not necessarily
Meronymy need not be transitive:
If X HAS-A Y and Y HAS-A Z, it does not follow that Y HAS-A Z
window HAS-A pane
room HAS-A window
??room HAS-A pane
Common-sense knowledge plays a very important role in acceptability of these relations.
LIN Semantics

13. Member-collection relations
We often lexicalise names of collections of specific things:
flotta (fleet) : a collection of ships
merħla (flock): a collection of sheep
Native speakers know there is a member-collection relation:
flotta (fleet) – vapur (ship)
armata (army) – suldat (soldier)
merħla (flock) – nagħġa (sheep)
Can be viewed as a special, lexicalised case of meronymy.
LIN Semantics

14. Are collections singular or plural?
In many languages, there is the possibility of switching from:
a view of a collection as a single entity vs. the “contents” of the collection as a group or set
English:
The band played well tonight.
It drove the crowd nuts [SG]
They drove the crowd nuts [PL]
Maltese:
L-armata rtirat (The army retreated.SG)
?L-armata rtiraw. (The army retreated.PL)
Perhaps not as acceptable? Only with some nouns?
LIN Semantics

15. Beyond the lexicon: Overview of sentence relations
Part 2
Beyond the lexicon: Overview of sentence relations

16. In this lecture
Having looked in some detail at properties of the lexicon, we now turn to sentences.
We discuss
meaning relations between sentences
truth conditions
presupposition
LIN Semantics

17. Sentence relations
Just as lexical items stand in various relations to one another (hyponymy, etc), so do sentences:
Relations between sentences arise due to:
the lexical items in them
their grammatical structure
LIN Semantics

18. Sentence synonymy My brother is a bachelor
My brother is an unmarried man
(1) and (2) seem to have the same meaning (or almost... Cf. Our discussion of synonymy)
LIN Semantics

19. Entailment My sister assassinated the president.
The president is dead.
(1) entails (2), primarily because of the meaning of assassinate.
if (1) is true, then (2) must be true
The following are not in an entailment relationship:
My sister shot the president.
If (1) is negated, it no longer entails (2):
My sister did not assassinate the president.
LIN Semantics

20. Important properties of entailment
A sentence p entails a sentence q if, and only if:
q is true whenever p is true
q is false whenever p is false
This is why entailment is cancelled by negation.
LIN Semantics

21. How does entailment arise?
Lexical, e.g. hyponymy
My sister assassinated X  X died.
assassinate Y includes Y dies
I bought a dog  I bought an animal
dog is a hyponym of animal
Syntactic, e.g. active/passive
My sister assassinated the president 
The president was assassinated by my sister.
LIN Semantics

22. Contradiction My canary has just escaped from its cage.
My canary has never been in a cage.
If (1) is true, then (2) cannot be true (and vice versa)
(2) contradicts (1)
He is a murderer but he’s never killed anyone.
(3) is also a contradiction
LIN Semantics

23. Tautology Albert is Albert This classroom is this classroom.
Both (1) and (2) are necessarily true
In fact, both are highly uninformative sentences.
LIN Semantics