Semantics
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
74 BASIC SEMANTICS<br />
Saeed also touches the problem of the different ways of approaching<br />
the issue of defining meaning and how this influences other problems<br />
such as the difference between entailment and presupposition. He takes<br />
two approaches to presupposition.<br />
In the first approach, closely related to the philosophical tradition in<br />
the line of Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein etc, sentences are viewed as external<br />
objects where we don’t worry too much about the process of producing<br />
them, or the individuality of the speaker or writer and their context<br />
or their audience. Meaning is seen as an attribute of sentences rather<br />
than something construed by the participants. <strong>Semantics</strong>, then consists of<br />
relating a sentence-object to other sentence-objects and to the world.<br />
As above mentioned, another approach, also discussed by Saeed,<br />
views sentences as the utterances of individuals engaged in a communication<br />
act, where the aim is to identify the strategies that speakers and<br />
hearers use to communicate with one another. Then communication is<br />
seen from the speaker’s viewpoint and we talk about presupposition as<br />
part of the task of packaging an utterance; or we adopt the listener’s<br />
viewpoint and see presupposition as one of a number of inferences the listener<br />
might make on the basis of what the speaker has just said. Saeed<br />
then discusses the following example:<br />
i(i) John’s brother has just got back from Nigeria<br />
(ii) John has a brother<br />
and analyzes it as a truth relation in the following terms:<br />
Step 1: if p ( the presupposing sentence) is true then q ( the presupposed<br />
sentence) is true<br />
Step 2: if p is false, the q is still true<br />
Step 3: if q is true, p could be either true or false<br />
and produces a first truth table for presupposition<br />
p<br />
q<br />
T → T<br />
F → T<br />
T or F ← T<br />
discussing the table as follows: If it is true that John’s brother has just<br />
come back from Nigeria, it must be true that John has a brother. Similarly,<br />
if it is false that John’s brother has come back from Nigeria ( if he’s still<br />
there, for example), the presupposition that John has a brother still holds.