不同角度理解下的語義三角

1、不同角度理解下的語義三角【】As one of the principles of general linguistics，the semantic triangle theory put forward by Ogden and Richards ， attracts a lot of attention from linguists. This thesis attempts to understand this triangle from three perspectives ，that is ，the basic structure of the semantic triangle ，

2、 Saussure's arbitrariness and the comparison between pragmatics and semantic so as to have a deeper understanding of the semantic triangle.The theory ， “semantic triangle ” was put forward by Ogden and Richards in The Meaning of Meaning . They holds the view that there is no direct relationship

3、between a linguistic form ( a word and phrase or a sentence ) and what is it refer to. Put it in another way， therelationship between a word and a thing it refers to is not direct ， and it is mediated by concept. The relationship can be illustrated by the classic triangle as follow：We can explain th

4、is diagram from different perspectives.Firstly ， it shows that the symbol(word)stands for thing(referent )， through the mediation ofcorrespondent concept of mind in language user. It can bealso explained from the following three ways. Firstly ， the word（symbol ） and concept are closely related. A wo

5、rd （ symbol ） symbolize a concept ， and a symbol （word）l is carrier of concept. There is direct relationship between symbol and concept ， so it is showed by solid line. For example ， the word dog symbolizes the concept or meaning， that is ， four-legged ， furry ， domestic ， and the concept of dog is

6、expressed through the written form of dog， andthe sound image of /d?g/. Secondly ，the concept is realized by referent. For example ，the concept of dog is generalized based on the image of different kinds of dogs， and alsorealized by a particular dog in language user mind.Therefore ， the relationship

7、 between concept and referent is direct ， and showed by solid line. Thirdly， there isno direct association between a word and referent， as itshowed by the dotted line between line. In short ， the links between words and things can be made only through the use of concept. For instance ， the word of “

8、tree ”is not related with any particular tree in the real word of experience ， but directly related with a concept in our mind， that is ， an idea of what a tree looks like.Secondly ， we can also understand this semantic trianglefrom the perspective of Saussures idea aboutarbitrariness. In order to h

9、ave a better understanding of his idea ， it is necessary for us to notice that Saussure focused on the language system itself withoutconsideringother factors outside language system. The design feature of language ， arbitrariness ， refers to the fact that the link between sound image and concept is

10、arbitrary. For example ， the English word dog is called /d?g/ in the English language system ， but the /gou/ in Chinese language system. However， the speaker from different countries can talk about dog freely. What make them to talk about dog freely is not the specific dog in the real word， but thec

11、oncept in their mind， so from this point of view， therelationship between a symbol and a concept is arbitrary.This is why he pointed out that a linguistic sign is not a link between a thing and a name， but between a conceptand a sound pattern ， or the hearer 's psychological impression of a soun

12、d. In this semantic triangle ， the left part of diagram shows that there is a close relationship between a symbol ( sound image ) and concept. To certain extent ， the semantic triangle overlaps Saussure's ideaabout arbitrariness.Thirdly ， this semantic triangle can also make difference between s

13、emantic and pragmatic. Since the semantics is the study of the meaning and is not involved in the context. The left side of the diagram shows the relationship between the word and concept in language system itself. To some extent ， the meaning equals to the concept in this semantic triangle. For exa

14、mple ， the concept or the meaning of dog is four-legged， furry ，domestic animal ， and it is not a Pekingese or a Husky dog in a particular context. However， pragmatics centers onthe meaning in specific context. The bottom line of this diagram shows that the relationship between a word and object is

15、indirect， so we use dotted line to represent.Take the English word “dog” as an example again. Whenwe talk about a dog in particular context， what comes intoour mind is not the concept of dog ，but a real dog maybe beside you. It is maybe Pekingese or Husky， which isdetermined by the real and concrete

16、 context at the moment of speaking. Therefore ， we can't use the solid line to show the relationship between the word and object it refers to ， but a dotted line， because the links between themIn conclusion ， semantic triangle is not justrestricted to explain the relationship between the word and the thing it refers to， but also provides us lots ofopportunities to analyze it. The more we analyze it ， the more new ides we