0% found this document useful (0 votes)
46 views6 pages

Understanding Predicates and Predicators

Semantics 2nd Edition Chapter 5 Predicates

Uploaded by

ai4238973
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
46 views6 pages

Understanding Predicates and Predicators

Semantics 2nd Edition Chapter 5 Predicates

Uploaded by

ai4238973
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Unit 5 : Predicates

Here are the entry test questions with justifications:

Is “a tall tree” a referring expression? Answer: (c) sometimes a referring expression and sometimes not, depending on context and
circumstances of use

Justification: “A tall tree” can be referring (e.g., “I saw a tall tree yesterday”) or non-referring (e.g., “I want to plant a tall tree”).

Does the presence of referring expressions in a sentence depend on time and place? Answer: No (replace ‘sentence’ with
‘utterance’ for a correct statement)

Justification: Referring expressions depend on the context of the utterance, not the sentence itself.

Which sentence is equative? Answer: (c) Mahmoud is the Egyptian I was telling you about

Justification: Equative sentences equate two referring expressions, identifying the same entity.

Does “if” have sense like “dog”? Answer: No

Justification: “If” is a logical operator, whereas “dog” is a noun with descriptive sense.

Do “big” and “large” have the same sense? Answer: Yes

Justification: In these sentences, “big” and “large” are synonyms.

Which words can be referring expressions? Answer: John, Venus

Justification: Proper nouns (“John”, “Venus”) can be referring expressions.

Review Units 3 and 4 if you scored less than 5/6. Otherwise, proceed to the introduction.

Unit 3: Reference and Sense : Reference: relationship between words and entities / Sense: conceptual meaning of words

Unit 4: Referring Expressions : Referring expressions: words/phrases identifying entities / Equative sentences: identify same entity
using different expressions

Semantic Structure of Simple Declarative Sentences

Simple declarative sentences, such as: My dog bit the postman. Mrs Wraith is waiting for the downtown bus

Typically contain: Referring expressions (e.g., “My dog,” “the postman,” “Mrs. Wraith”) / Non-referring words (e.g., “bit,” “is waiting”)

Practice Exercise: Identify Non-Referring Words

Delete referring expressions and write the remainder to the right.

My dog bit the postman. (Bit)

Mrs. Wraith is writing the Mayor’s speech (Is writing)

Cairo is in Africa (Is in)

Edinburgh is between Aberdeen and York (Is between)

This place stinks (Stinks)

John’s car is red (Is red)

Einstein was a genius (Was a genius)

Analysis: Non-referring words convey relationships, actions, or states, essential to sentence meaning. Referring expressions
identify entities involved. Understanding this distinction clarifies sentence semantics.

Analyzing Sentence Remainders


The remainders in the right-hand column exhibit varied syntax, but each contains a word carrying more specific information.

Example Analysis:

Is writing → write (predicator). /. Is in → in (predicator) / Is between, and → between (predicator). /. Stinks → stink (predicator) Is
red → red (predicator) / Was a genius → genius (predicator)

These isolated words, called predicators, convey essential meaning in their respective sentences.

Predicators : In a sentence, the predicator is the word (or part of a word) carrying the most specific information, typically conveying
actions, states, or [Link] play a crucial role in sentence semantics, providing core meaning that combines with
referring expressions to express propositions.

By identifying predicators, we can distill sentence meaning into a concise, albeit ungrammatical, “Tarzan jungle talk” form (e.g.,
“Woman write speech”).

Identifying Predicators in Simple Declarative Sentences

Predicator : The predicator is the word (or partial group of words) not part of any referring expression, making the most specific
contribution to sentence meaning. It describes states or processes involving referring expressions.

Examples: Mummy is asleep: asleep (predicator) describes Mummy’s state. The white man loved the Indian maiden: love
(predicator) describes the process between the two referring expressions. Jimmy was waiting for the downtown bus: wait for
(predicator) describes Jimmy’s action.

Note: Tense indicators (e.g., past, present) convey meaningful information but contribute differently than predicators. Verb “be” (is,
was, are, were, am) is not the predicator in provided examples.

Practice Exercise: Identify Predicators

Strip away referring expressions and verb “be” (and other elements) to find predicators:

I am hungry. Hungry (predicator)

Joe is in San Francisco. In (predicator)

The Mayor is a crook . Crook (predicator)

The man who lives at number 10 Lee Crescent is whimsical. Whimsical (predicator)

The Royal Scottish Museum is behind Old College. Ans . Behind (predicator)

By isolating predicators, we clarify sentence meaning and distinguish it from other semantic contributions.

Semantic Analysis of Simple Declarative Sentences

Predicators can be various parts of speech: Adjectives (red, asleep, hungry, whimsical) / Verbs (write, stink, place) / Prepositions
(in, between, behind) ,/ Nouns (crook, genius)

Conjunctions (and, but, or) and articles (the, a) cannot serve as predicators.

Semantic Roles:

1. Predicator: illustrates state or process. 2. Argument(s): referring expression(s) involved

Examples:

Juan is Argentinian Ans . Predicator: Argentinian / Argument: Juan

Juan arrested Pablo. Ans . Predicator: arrest / Arguments: Juan, Pablo

Juan took Pablo to Rio Ans . Predicator: take / Arguments: Juan, Pablo, Rio

Practice Exercise:

Dennis is a menace. Ans . Predicator: menace / Argument(s): Dennis


Fred showed Jane his BMW. Ans .Predicator: show / Argument(s): Fred, Jane, his BMW

Donald is proud of his family. Ans . Predicator: proud / Argument(s): Donald, his family

The hospital is outside the city. Ans . Predicator: outside / Argument(s): the hospital, the city

Note:Semantic analysis (predicator/argument) differs from traditional grammatical analysis (subject/predicate). We focus on
semantic analysis, using the term “predicate” in a semantic sense, defined within Logic.

Semantic Analysis: Predicates and Predicator

Predicate : A predicate is a word (or sequence of words) functioning as a predicator in a sentence, with a single sense.

Examples of Predicates: - hungry - in / crook – asleep – hit - show – bottle - dusty – drink – woman - about

Non-Predicates: - and - or - but - not - you (as a pronoun) - Fred (as a proper noun)

Important Notes:

1. Predicates can be sequences of words (e.g., wait for, in front of). 2. Predicates must have a single sense, avoiding ambiguity. 3.
Context clarifies predicate meaning; subscripts distinguish senses (e.g., bank1, bank2).

Predicate vs. Predicator: Predicate: language system element (listed in dictionaries). / Predicator: semantic role in a particular
sentence.

Key Differences: Predicate is abstract, predicator is specific. - One can list predicates, but not predicators.

Sentence Structure: One predicator per simple sentence. Multiple predicate instances possible.

Understanding predicates and predicators clarifies sentence semantics, distinguishing between language system elements and their
roles in specific sentences.

Predicate and Predicator Identification Practice

Example: “A tall, handsome stranger entered the saloon” Predicator: enter / Predicates (potential predicators in other sentences):

tall (John is tall) / handsome (He is handsome) / stranger (He is a stranger) / saloon (That building is a saloon)

Exercises:

Which sentences feature “male” as predicator?

(a) The male gorilla at the zoo had a nasty accident yesterday (b) The gorilla at the zoo is a male (c) The gorilla at the zoo is male

Answer: (b), (c)

Which sentences feature “human” as predicator?

(a) All humans are mortal (b) Socrates was human (c) These bones are human. Answer: (b), (c)

Analysis: In (1), “male” is a predicate in (a) but functions as predicator in (b) and (c). In (2), “human” is a predicate in (a) but
functions as predicator in (b) and (c).

Understanding the distinction between predicates and predicators clarifies sentence semantics and word functions.

Degree of Predicates

Degree of a Predicate : The degree of a predicate indicates the number of arguments it typically has in simple sentences.

Examples:- Asleep (one-place predicate, degree 1) - Love (verb, two-place predicate, degree 2)

Practice Exercises: Acceptability of sentences:

(a) Thornbury sneezed (Yes) (b) Thornbury sneezed a handful of pepper (No) (c) Thornbury sneezed his wife a handful of pepper
(No) Is sneeze a one-place predicate? (Yes)

Acceptability of sentences:
Martha hit (No) (b) Martha hit the sideboard (Yes) (c) Martha hit George the sideboard (No)

Is hit a one-place predicate? (No)/ Is die a one-place predicate? (Yes) / Is come a one-place predicate? (Yes)/ Is murder (verb) a
one-place predicate? (No)

Analysis:Sneezing typically requires one argument (degree 1). - Hitting requires two arguments (degree 2). - Dying and coming
typically require one argument (degree 1)..- Murdering requires two arguments (degree 2).

Understanding predicate degrees clarifies semantic relationships and argument requirements.

Understanding the degree of a predicate is crucial in semantics. Here’s a detailed explanation with examples:

Degree of a Predicate : The degree of a predicate indicates the number of arguments it typically requires in a sentence.

Types of Predicates by Degree

One-place predicate (Degree 1)*: Requires one argument.

Examples: Sleep (John sleeps) - Happy (John is happy) - Tall (John is tall)

Two-place predicate (Degree 2)*: Requires two arguments.

Examples: Love (John loves Mary) Hit (John hit Mary) - Give (John gave Mary a gift)

*Three-place predicate (Degree 3)*: Requires three arguments.

Examples:- Give (John gave Mary a book) - Show (John showed Mary the picture) - Invite (John invited Mary to dinner)

Determining Degree

To determine the degree of a predicate: 1. Identify the predicate (verb, adjective, or noun). 2. Analyze the sentence structure. 3.
Count the number of arguments required.

*Examples* “John runs” : Run (one-place predicate, degree 1) “John loves Mary” : Love (two-place predicate, degree 2) “John gave
Mary a book” : Give (three-place predicate, degree 3)

Key Points - Arguments can be entities (John, Mary) or properties (happy, tall). - Optional arguments don’t affect predicate degree
(e.g., “John ate” vs. “John ate breakfast”). Predicate degree remains constant, regardless of sentence complexity.

By understanding predicate degrees, you’ll better grasp semantic relationships and argument requirements in sentences.

Two-Place and Three-Place Predicates

Two-Place Predicates

Verbs naturally taking two arguments: subject and direct object.

Example: Martha hit the parrot - Hit (two-place predicate). Martha (subject) - the parrot (direct object)

Practice:

Acceptability of sentences: (a) Keith made (No) (b) Keith made this toy guillotine (Yes) (c) Keith made this toy guillotine his mother-
in-law (No)

Is make a two-place predicate? (Yes) / Is murder a two-place predicate? (Yes) / Is see a two-place predicate? (Yes)

Three-Place Predicates

Verbs naturally taking three arguments: subject, direct object, and indirect object.

Example: Herod gave Salome a nice present - Gave (three-place predicate) Herod (subject) - Salome (indirect object) - a nice
present (direct object)

Practice:For each sentence, indicate if it seems elliptical (omitting expected information):

(1) Herod gave (Yes) (2) Herod gave Salome (Yes) (3) Herod gave a nice present (Yes) (4) Herod gave Salome a nice present (No)
(5)Number of referring expressions in Sentence (4): 3
Analysis: - Two-place predicates require subject and direct object. - Three-place predicates require subject, direct object, and
indirect object.- Elliptical sentences omit expected information. Understanding predicate places clarifies semantic relationships and
argument requirements.

Predicates: Verbs, Prepositions, Nouns, and Adjectives

Prepositional Predicates

Referring expressions in “Your marble is under my chair”: 2 / “Your marble is under” acceptable: No / “Your marble is under my chair
the carpet” acceptable: No / of predicate “under”: 2 (two-place predicate) / Degree of predicate “near”: 2 6) “Dundee is between
Aberdeen” acceptable: No 7) “Dundee is between Aberdeen and Edinburgh” acceptable: Yes 8) Degree of predicate “between”: 3
(three-place predicate)

Adjectival Predicates

Most adjectives are one-place predicates.

Referring expressions in “Philip is handsome”: 1 / “Philip is handsome John” acceptable: No / Degree of predicate “handsome”: 1 /
Degree of predicate “rotten”: 1 / Degree of predicate “smelly”: 1

Exceptions: Adjectives with Prepositional Phrases

“John is afraid of Fido” acceptable: Yes / “John is afraid” seems elliptical: Yes / “Afraid” as two-place predicate: Yes / “Your house is
different from mine” acceptable: Yes / “Your house is different” seems elliptical: Yes / Degree of predicate “different”: 2 / Degree of
predicate “identical”: 2 / Degree of predicate “similar”: 2

Analysis:Prepositions (under, near) can be two-place [Link] adjectives (handsome, rotten, smelly) are one-place
[Link] adjectives (afraid, different, identical, similar) can be two-place predicates with prepositional phrases.

Understanding predicate degrees and types clarifies semantic relationships and argument requirements.

Practice exercises

Noun Predicates

Referring expressions in “John is a corporal”: 1. Justification: Only “John” is the referring expression.

“John is a corporal the army” acceptable: No Justification: The sentence is grammatically incorrect.

Degree of predicate “corporal”: 1 Justification: “Corporal” requires only one argument.

Degree of predicate “hero”: 1 Justification: “Hero” requires only one argument.

Degree of predicate “crook”: 1. Justification: “Crook” requires only one argument.

Referring expressions in “This object is a pitchfork”: 1. Justification: Only “This object” is the referring expression.

Degree of predicate “pitchfork”: 1. Justification: “Pitchfork” requires only one argument.

Relational Noun Predicates

“John is a brother” seems odd: Yes. Justification: The sentence lacks context.

“John is a brother of the Mayor of Miami” acceptable: Yes Justification: The sentence provides complete information.

“Brother” as two-place predicate: Yes Justification: “Brother” requires two arguments.

“Sister” as two-place predicate: Yes Justification: “Sister” requires two arguments.

Equivalent Predicates

Example analysis: Ronald is foolish / Ronald is a fool (one-place predicates)

Timothy is afraid of cats / Timothy fears cats (two-place predicates)

My parrot is a talker / My parrot talks (one-place predicates)

Identity Relation : Identity relation expressed by “be” in:


(1) This is a spider: No. (2) This is my father: Yes. (3) This is the person I was telling you about at dinner last night: Yes. (4) The
person I was telling you about at dinner last night is in the next room: No. (5) The person I was telling you about at dinner last night
is the man talking to Harry: Yes. (6) The whale is a mammal: No

Justification:Sentences (2), (3), and (5) express identity between two referring expressions.

Role of Verb “Be” : Identity predicate (sentences 2, 3, 5) Linking device for non-verbal predicates (John is a fool, John is foolish) /
Tense carrier (present or past)

Understanding predicate types, degrees, and the identity relation clarifies semantic relationships and argument requirements.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Semantic roles, as depicted by predicators, focus on the specific meaning and relationship depicted by a word within a sentence, often highlighting actions, states, or processes involving arguments . For instance, in 'Mummy is asleep,' 'asleep' is the predicator illustrating a state. This differs from traditional grammatical analysis that categorizes parts of speech without necessarily conveying semantic depth. The distinction is pivotal as semantic roles help in understanding propositions conveyed in communications, enhancing the interpretation of language beyond mere syntactic arrangements .

Context and syntax significantly influence whether a word functions as a predicate or a predicator, as predicates represent abstract language system elements, while predicators perform specific semantic roles in sentences . For instance, 'male' in 'The gorilla at the zoo is male' functions as a predicator describing a characteristic within the context, whereas in 'The male gorilla,' it serves as a predicate part of a noun phrase. The syntax provides the structure, but context determines semantic function, underscoring their interdependence in language analysis .

Predicate degree is crucial in linguistics as it indicates the number of arguments a predicate requires to convey a complete meaning . For example, a one-place predicate like 'asleep' requires one argument as in 'John is asleep,' while a two-place predicate like 'love' requires two, such as in 'John loves Mary.' Understanding predicate degrees informs how sentences are constructed to ensure they meet the semantic needs for coherence and completeness, impacting how information and relationships are represented in language .

Adjectives can serve as two-place predicates when they include prepositional phrases that add an additional argument. For example, in 'John is afraid of Fido,' 'afraid' with the prepositional phrase 'of Fido' acts as a two-place predicate, requiring 'John' and the entity referred to by 'of' . This affects sentence meaning by expanding the adjective's usual role, allowing it to convey complex states or relationships rather than simple qualities, thereby enriching the semantic content .

Equative sentences highlight semantic relationships by equating two referring expressions, which identify the same entity, thus offering a clear depiction of identity within a sentence . For example, 'Mahmoud is the Egyptian I was telling you about' equates Mahmoud with the Egyptian, providing explicit identification. This makes them distinct because they not only convey information but also establish identity-based relationships within sentence analysis, helping clarify the semantics of the entities involved .

Relational noun predicates differ from typical noun predicates in that they require additional arguments to establish relationships, unlike typical noun predicates that need only one argument. For example, 'John is a brother of the Mayor of Miami' involves the relational noun 'brother,' requiring two arguments - 'John' and 'the Mayor of Miami' - to complete the relationship . This distinction is significant in sentence semantics because analyzing relations between entities clarifies the complex network of meanings and contextual requirements inherent in noun predications .

Understanding the distinction between one-place and multi-place predicates is important because it affects how sentences are structured around the predicate's requirement for arguments to make meaningful statements. One-place predicates like 'sleep' need only one argument ('John sleeps'), whereas multi-place predicates such as 'give' require more, as in 'John gave Mary a book' . Recognizing these differences aids in grasping the semantic requirements for constructing sentences that accurately reflect intended meanings and relationships among entities .

The phrase 'a tall tree' can function as a referring expression depending on the context and circumstances of its use . In the sentence 'I saw a tall tree yesterday,' it identifies a specific entity, acting as a referring expression. Conversely, in 'I want to plant a tall tree,' it does not specify a particular entity, thus not serving as a referring expression. This distinction matters in semantics as it highlights how referring expressions are context-dependent, influencing sentence meaning and interpretation .

Semantic analysis of predicates aids in distinguishing identity relations and linking functions by evaluating the roles of words, particularly the verb 'to be' in expressions. Identity relations occur when two referring expressions are equated, as in 'This is my father,' where 'is' signifies an identity relationship . Conversely, 'John is a fool' uses 'is' as a linking device connecting 'John' to the attribute 'a fool.' Analyzing predicates thus helps clarify when connections made by 'be' represent an equation of identity or a mere linkage between subject and attribute .

Identifying predicators enhances understanding of sentence semantics by isolating the parts of a sentence that carry the core meaning related to actions, states, or relationships independent of the specific entities involved . For example, in 'Jimmy was waiting for the downtown bus,' 'waiting' serves as the predicator, indicating Jimmy's action. Recognizing predicators allows for distinguishing essential semantics from contextual or referential content, thus elucidating the underlying propositions conveyed by sentences .

You might also like