17.12.2012 Views

Routledge dictionary of language and linguistics - Developers

Routledge dictionary of language and linguistics - Developers

Routledge dictionary of language and linguistics - Developers

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

programming <strong>language</strong><br />

A-Z 587<br />

References<br />

interpreting<br />

The practice <strong>of</strong> (oral) translation <strong>of</strong> one <strong>language</strong> into another. Two types <strong>of</strong> interpreting<br />

are distinguished: (a) simultaneous interpreting, in which smaller semantic units are<br />

translated in synchrony with the actual production <strong>of</strong> the foreign <strong>language</strong> text; <strong>and</strong> (b)<br />

consecutive interpreting in which a large portion <strong>of</strong> closed text is translated. ( also<br />

translation)<br />

interpretive semantics<br />

In the framework <strong>of</strong> generative grammar, position held by N.Chomsky, J.J.Katz, <strong>and</strong><br />

others according to which syntax is considered an autonomous generative component,<br />

while the semantic component has a purely interpretive character in that it interprets the<br />

syntactically motivated abstract deep structures through semantic rules, i.e. gives them<br />

one or more readings. The aim <strong>of</strong> interpretive semantics is to describe the competence <strong>of</strong><br />

the ideal speaker/hearer who ‘can semantically interpret any sentence…under any <strong>of</strong> its<br />

grammatical derivations. He can determine the number <strong>and</strong> content <strong>of</strong> the readings <strong>of</strong> a<br />

sentence, tell whether or not a sentence is semantically anomalous, <strong>and</strong> decide which<br />

sentences…are paraphrases <strong>of</strong> each other’ (Katz <strong>and</strong> Fodor 1963:182). The semantic<br />

representation <strong>of</strong> interpretive semantics rests initially <strong>and</strong> above all upon three now<br />

widely debated hypotheses: (a) the meaning <strong>of</strong> linguistic expressions can be completely<br />

described on the basis <strong>of</strong> a limited inventory <strong>of</strong> semantic features <strong>of</strong> a largely universal<br />

nature; (b) the syntactically motivated deep structure supplies all the necessary semanticsyntactic<br />

information for the semantic interpretation; <strong>and</strong> (c) transformations between<br />

deep <strong>and</strong> surface structures are semantically neutral. The semantic theory <strong>of</strong> interpretive<br />

semantics consists <strong>of</strong> two components, the lexicon 3 <strong>and</strong> projection rules. The lexicon<br />

supplies both syntactic <strong>and</strong> semantic information. The semantic information is composed<br />

<strong>of</strong> (a) systematic semantic relationships between individual lexemes <strong>and</strong> the rest <strong>of</strong> the<br />

vocabulary <strong>of</strong> the <strong>language</strong> ( semantic feature); (b) the idiosyncratic, non-systematic<br />

features ( distinguisher); <strong>and</strong> (c) selectional features. The lexicon entries are placed<br />

in the syntactic deep structure, with polysemic lexemes ( polysemy) having a<br />

corresponding number <strong>of</strong> readings. These potential readings are selected via projection<br />

rules on the basis <strong>of</strong> conditions <strong>of</strong> grammaticality, <strong>and</strong> the individual lexical elements are<br />

summarized with consideration <strong>of</strong> their grammatical relations (as depicted in their tree) to<br />

the whole meaning <strong>of</strong> the sentence, that is, they are ‘amalgamated’ ( amalgamation).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!