Semantics vs. Pragmatics
The fundamental distinction between what words mean by convention (semantics) and what speakers mean by using them in context (pragmatics). This category covers the core concepts needed to understand how phrase analysis separates literal meaning from contextual meaning — and what happens when meaning erodes.
15 terms across 3 subcategories
Semantic Concepts
The building blocks of literal, context-independent meaning — what words and constructions contribute to truth conditions regardless of who says them or when.
Word → referent class — literal reference relationship
The literal, dictionary meaning of a word or phrase — the set of entities or concepts it refers to in the world, independent of context, attitude, or connotation.
Word → emotional/cultural associations — meaning beyond the literal
The associations, attitudes, and emotional overtones that a word carries beyond its literal meaning. Connotations are culturally shaped and can be positive, negative, or domain-specific.
One form → multiple related meanings — meaning proliferation from common source
A single word having multiple related meanings that have developed historically from a common source. Unlike homonymy (unrelated meanings), polysemous meanings share a semantic connection.
{word₁, word₂, word₃...} → shared domain — meaning cluster
A set of words that share a common area of meaning and are organized by relationships of similarity, contrast, and inclusion. Words in the same semantic field define each other through their differences.
Meaning of whole = f(parts + combination rules) — or breakdown thereof
The principle that the meaning of a complex expression is determined by the meanings of its parts and the way they are combined. When compositionality breaks down (idioms, metaphors), the phrase means something its parts don't predict.
Semantic Bleaching
The process by which words and phrases lose semantic specificity, vividness, or force through overuse, conventionalization, or grammaticalization — leaving behind shells of meaning that function more as social or structural signals than as carriers of propositional content.
Full semantic load — all components contribute specific meaning
A phrase that retains its full semantic weight — every word contributes specific, non-redundant meaning, and the phrase could not be replaced by a vaguer alternative without genuine information loss.
Mostly meaningful — one element weakening toward convention
A phrase where one or more words have begun to lose specificity through frequent use but still retain most of their meaning. The phrase is recognizable as somewhat conventional but not yet a pure formula.
Function persists, specific meaning weakened — half-empty semantic vessel
A phrase where significant semantic content has been lost through conventionalization. The phrase communicates a general function (emphasis, hedging, transition) but its specific lexical meaning has substantially weakened.
Original meaning absent — pure functional/social residue
A phrase where the original semantic content has been almost entirely lost. The phrase functions as a pure discourse marker, filler, or social signal. Its literal meaning, if considered, would be absurd or irrelevant in context.
Metaphor → literal usage — figurative origin forgotten
A metaphor that has been used so frequently that speakers no longer perceive the figurative comparison. The metaphorical origin is forgotten and the expression is processed as literal. A specific mechanism of semantic bleaching.
Once-effective expression → worn out through overuse — staleness through popularity
An expression that has been used so often that it has lost its power to surprise, move, or inform. Distinguished from mere conventionality by its staleness — a cliche was once effective but has been worn out through overuse.
Content word → function word — meaning loss through grammatical reanalysis
The historical process by which a content word (with full lexical meaning) becomes a function word (with primarily grammatical meaning). The most extreme form of semantic bleaching — a word loses its meaning entirely and becomes pure grammar.
Meaning in Context
The core concepts that distinguish context-free meaning from context-dependent meaning — the theoretical foundation for separating what a phrase says from what it does.
Sentence meaning ≠ speaker meaning — pragmatic gap
The distinction between what a sentence means by its linguistic conventions (sentence meaning) and what a speaker intends to communicate by using it in a particular context (speaker meaning). The gap between these is where pragmatics operates.
Literal: word = face value / Non-literal: word ≠ face value — convention vs. departure
The distinction between using words in their conventional, face-value sense (literal) and using them in a way that departs from convention for rhetorical effect (non-literal). Non-literal usage includes metaphor, irony, hyperbole, and understatement.
Explicature: enriched said content / Implicature: inferred unsaid content
The distinction between what is explicitly communicated (explicature — the enriched literal content after disambiguation and reference resolution) and what is implicitly communicated (implicature — meaning derived through inference beyond the explicit content).