Herodotus’s Scythians and Ptolemy’s Central Asia: Semasiological and Onomasiological Studies. By Helmut Humbach and Klaus Faiss. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 2012. Pp. xii + 91.

The current work represents a piece of research on the family firm of the semasiological, interpretive or culture creation type. In it we carry out a comparative analysis of the organizational culture of this type of firm along with firms not considered to be family firms, using as theoretical framework generally accepted theories in business administration, such as the systems, neoinstitutional, transformational leadership, and social identity theories. Our findings confirm the existence of certain elements of culture, especially values and allow (...) us to propose a value-based model to help family firms to survive through different family generations. (shrink)

According to a common opinion, the word ‘semantics’ , derived from the Greek word semantikos , appeared for the first time, at least in modern times, in the book Essai de semantique, science de significations by M. J. A. Bréal . However, Quine says in his lectures on Carnap:As used by C. S. Peirce, “semantic” is the study of the modes of denotation of signs: whether a sign denotes its object through causal or symptomatic connection, or through imagery, or through (...) arbitrary convention and so on. This sense of semantic, namely a theory of meaning, is used also in empirical philology: empirical semantic is the study of historical changes of meanings of words.1For Bréal, semantics was a branch of general linguistics. In particular, semantics was occupied with so-called lexical meaning and its changes through time. Thus, semantics in this sense belonged to what was called “the diachronic treatment of language”. This tradition is fairly alive in contemporary linguistic theory. Quine’s description of the word ‘semantic’ in Peirce corresponds, which Quine explicitly states, to its use in philology. However, some linguists ascribe a more theoretical role to lingustic semantics. Karl Bühler is an example. In his Sprachtheorie he says that a theory of semantic functions of language is a part of theory of language.2 This account is to be found also among philosophers. It is also rather obvious that Peirce did not limit his semantic only to empirical studies. Linguists also use the word ‘semasiology’ instead of ‘semantics’; Bühler proposed the term ‘sematology’ for a general theory of symbols. (shrink)

Anton Marty (Schwyz, 1847–Prague, 1914) contributed significantly to some of the central themes of Austrian philosophy. This collection contributes to assessing the specificity of his theses in relation with other Austrian philosophers. Although strongly inspired by his master, Franz Brentano, Marty developed his own theory of intentionality, understood as a sui generis relation of similarity. Moreover, he established a comprehensive philosophy of language, or "semasiology", based on descriptive psychology, and in which the utterer’s meaning plays a central role, anticipating (...) Grice’s pragmatic semantics. The present volume, including sixteen articles by scholars in the field of the history of Austrian philosophy and in contemporary philosophy, aims at exposing some of Marty’s most important contributions in philosophy of mind and language, but also in other fields of research such as ontology and metaphysics. As archive material, the volume contains the edition of a correspondence between Marty and Hans Cornelius on similarity. This book will interest scholars in the fields of the history of philosophy in the 19th and 20th centuries, historians of phenomenology, and, more broadly, contemporary theoretical philosophers. (shrink)

In this article we tackle the issue of diachronic variation in constructional semantics through an exploration of the (recent) semantic history of the well-established English ditransitive or double object argument structure construction. Starting from the assumption that schematic syntactic patterns are not fundamentally different from lexical items, we will show that — similar to the diachronic semantic development of lexemes — the semantics of argument structure constructions in general and that of double object constructions in particular, is vulnerable to semasiological (...) shifts as well. More specifically, the analysis, which compares data from 18th-century Late Modern English with present-day English, shows that the double object construction's semantic evolution presents a case of specialization, in which the construction has come to be associated with a significantly narrower range of meanings. It will further be argued that such patterns of semantic change are best captured in a model of argument structure semantics which discriminates between central and lesscentral or prototypical and non-prototypical uses. (shrink)

Since language is the collective focus of this series, the present paper follows both historiographical and theoretical perspectives. The first deals with Prague as a Middle-European town, with a German and Czech University from 1882, where a philosopher, Anton Marty, from the Brentano school, focuses on language and semasiology in the framework of a psychology from an empirical standpoint. He cites Christian von Ehrenfels, and underscores the relational approach to psychic dynamism but, crucially, he emphasises the oscillations between linguistic (...) “sketches” and semantic comprehension. Sprache ist eine Skizze, listeners are lead through suggestions, Nebenvorstellungen, to grasp meanings, Bedeutungen which do not coincide with the mere addition of explicit, variable components. Simultaneously, Vilém Mathesius, forthcoming founder (1926) of the Prague Linguistic Circle, dealing with English language and literature, enquires into the spontaneous ability of listeners to grasp, infer, integrate ellipsis in a sentence, consisting of a missing word, in omissione vocabuli, quod non dictum tamen cogitatur. Language enquiries will then require psychology, will aim to explain inferences, to infer implicit from explicit. The effort to obtain the whole, via super- or even subsummativity processes, has been a special topic for Gestalt psychology. Context being the proper habitat for both language and mind, we follow the fil rouge which leads directly to Gestalt contributions and further developments, e.g., inferential semantics and pragmatics. In conversation, as in architecture, less is more. We strive to prove this. (shrink)

Εἰς τὴν παρούσαν ἐργασίαν ἐκτίθενται ἐνδεικτικὰ χωρία τοῦ ὅρου μύστης, ἔτσι ὅπως εἶχε διαμορφωθεῖ ἡ χρήση του καὶ oἱ σημασιολογικὲς ἀποχρώσεις ποὺ λαμβάνει σὲ χωρία ἀρχαίων συγγραφέων. Παρουσιάζονται ἕξι χωρία, τὰ ὁποῖα ἀποδεικνύουν ὅτι ὁ μύστης ἦταν μέτοχος καὶ πλῆρες μέλος τῶν μυστηριακῶν λατρειῶν, ὄχι μόνο τῶν Μυστηρίων, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ὀργίων. Κάθε χωρίο ἀκολουθείται ἀπὸ μετάφραση σὲ μία ἀπὸ τὶς σύγχρονες γλῶσσες. Ἀπὸ τὸ χωρίο τοῦ Ἀριστοφάνη προκύπτει ὅτι ὁ ὅρος ἀρχικὰ εἶχε διατυπωθεῖ ὡς ἐπίθετο καὶ ὄχι ὡς οὐσιαστικό. (...) Ὡς τέτοιο μέρος τοῦ λόγου, λειτουργεῖ καὶ ὡς προσωνυμία (ἐπωνυμία) τῶν ἀρχαίων θεοτήτων. Παρ΄ὅλο ποὺ ἡ σημασιολογία του δείχνει νοηματικὴ διαφάνεια, ἡ ἐτυμολογία τοῦ ὅρου παραμένει ἀνεπαρκῶς προσδιορισμένη. Στὰ ἐτυμολογικὰ λεξικὰ δὲν ἀποτελεῖ ξεχωριστὸ λῆμμα, ἀλλὰ συγκαταλέγεται στὰ ὀνοματικὰ παράγωγα τοῦ ῥήματος μύω.This paper presents indicative quotations of the term mystes. They are taken from the texts of ancient writers, focusing on the way its use and its semasiological aspects were formed. Six excerpts are selected to assess the fact that mystes was an active participant and a full member of the ancient Mystery cults, not only of the Mysteries, but of the Orgies, too. Most quotations are followed by their interpretation in English or French. Aristophanes’ fragment leads to conclusion that initially the term was introduced and formulated rather as an adjective, than as a noun. As such, it serves as a name, title, or cognomen, referring to ancient deities. Although its semasiology indicates rather intelligible transparency, its etymology remains insufficiently determined. In etymological dictionaries it is not presented as a separate lemma, but is assumed to be a noun derivative of a verb, thus presented s.v. μύω [mýō]. (shrink)

In a high-context culture like Chinese, the linguistic code encompasses only part of the message and is incomplete without context. One of the implicit codes embedded in high-context communication is color tropes. Highly recognizable in the Sinophone world, color tropes often manifest themselves in the forms of metaphor, metonymy, allusions, and similes and are often related to the conveyance of emotional content. This paper provides a selection and discussion of such color tropes, demonstrates that color in a language inspires associations (...) and connotations that are often very subtle and determined by deep cultural memory, and, giving several Chinese examples, shows how the primary semasiology of a color term often influences its subsequent semantic extension. (shrink)

This study draws upon the techniques of corpus linguistics, discourse analysis and historical pragmatics to provide an account of the ways in which speakers recruit markers of epistemic stance to capture their construction of the attitudes of their interlocutors, addressees, or audience. It then examines the ways in which selected markers lose their subjective force over time, whether expressive of the speaker’s attitude or the speaker’s sense of the interlocutor’s attitude, to become interactive markers of the exchange involved in an (...) exchange. The article thus tracks the subtle shifts from speaker subjectivity to the speaker’s projection of subjectivity to the addressee, to the association of an expression with the dynamics of the interactive process itself. The article examines instances of semasiological change, that is, changes of meaning associated with the lexical expressions, you know, you see, and you say. (shrink)

It would surely have been better to entitle this work ‘Reflexions on ethical theories’, for it cannot in any true sense of the word be called a study, a scientific study which entails detailed analysis and positive criticism. In fact Professor Mackinnon presents us with a series of considerations, highly personal and at times indeed penetrating and instructive, on the moral theories of certain British and continental philosophers—of the 19th century utilitarians ; of Kant, Hegel and their followers; of the (...) theologianphilosopher bishop of Durham, Joseph Butler; of Russell, Moore and others. The impression left on one after a careful perusal of the work is that it is no more than an agglomeration of ‘mights’ and ‘perhaps’, never a clear–cut judgment. The chief general defect of the book and the cause of much obscurity is certainly this: the absence of any welldefined distinction between exposé and critique. As often as not one does not know what the opinion of the author is as distinct from his interpretation of the authors he is studying. This defect would seem to be characteristic of a great part of the ethical writing produced by the Scottish and British schools, when they do not reduce ethical theory to anything better than semasiology, to a study of ethical language or linguistic usage. Prof. Mackinnon has certainly not freed himself from the ‘present confused state of moral philosophy in this country’, which he so rightly condemns. I had thought that all philosophers, of whatever ilk, were agreed that ethical science or moral philosophy was nothing more than the study of the human being on its way towards completeness in human being, from an initial embryonic stage, as it were, to the full flowering of human perfection, manifested in perfect human being and perfect human life—a journey or precess directed and controlled by the human subject itself, fully conscious of the end to be achieved and conscious too of the steps or means towards it. I would have thought too that if we are to set up moral science as distinct from mere semasiology, or from psychology, biology, zoology or botany, then all were agreed that we have to do with the domain of free activity, of voluntary conscious activity, which obviously brings with it the order of responsibility and willed subjection to a given objective order of things, that is, of human nature itself and human perfection. I would have taken for granted too that one could study all this field of the free development of the human being towards its ultimate perfection either with a view to the acquisition of knowledge and nothing more, or precisely with a view to being in a position to direct oneself and others towards that fullness of being. That would give us two distinct modes of moral or ethical theory, the speculative or theoretical and the practical and normative, the resolutive and the compositive. I am not so sure that Professor Mackinnon is ready to admit these presupposita. He speaks of the ‘curious and almost silly claim that we are free’, and at the same time he can write about the ‘frankly metaphysical reality of freedom’, or its ‘near–metaphysical reality’. This, in the language of the author, is just another way of proclaiming that human freedom is no more than a myth, lacking all substance and reality. Moral science as distinct from all other sciences, one would think, presupposes that the moral subject be conscious of itself and its activity, that is, that it fully and clearly know that its life and its activity is its own. It must be master of its own actions, and in that sense truly master of its own destiny. Then and only then are we in the order of moral activity. However, we are warned by Professor Mackinnon that “to know that an action is mine is a very strange sort of knowledge, quite different from knowing that an apple or a book is mine: to use the word ‘know’ in such a context is a venture fraught with intellectual peril”. I sincerely think it would have been better had the author denied straight out the possibility, not just of metaphysics, but of ethical theory tout court; for he denies often enough the existence of the moral subject, namely, man freely and deliberately ordaining himself towards human consummation. Had he done that at the outset he would have been spared the trouble of writing his book. All in all, one gets the distinct impression that the author is just not sure of his ground and has no really sound criterion whereby to judge of various ethical theories. In fact the book ends with a big question–mark: ‘If we speak and write thus, do we speak and write sound and fury signifying nothing?’. Reluctantly I am constrained to answer in the affirmative. And I should like to add, so as not to appear completely destructive, but in some way constructive: if, instead of dismissing Aristotle and his followers, ancient and modern, as mere ‘intuitionists’, Professor Mackinnon would only study them seriously he would first of all find out how unjustified is his condemnation of them and then, I venture to suggest, he would acquire a light to guide him surely through the maze of ethical theory with which he grapples aimlessly and would thus be enabled to extricate himself from ‘the present confused state of moral philosophy’ in Britain. (shrink)

A l’heure où des travaux importants tendent à renouveler sensiblement un certain nombre de disciplines, au nombre desquelles la sémantique lexicale et la lexicologie diachronique, il apparaît intéressant de faire le point au plan conceptuel sur une autre discipline connexe, la dialectologie, puisque celle-ci est au centre de ce numéro de Corpus. La dialectologie a pour objet majeur, à notre sens, l’étude comparative de langues qui se présentent sous forme d’entités disséminées – convenons de les appeler langues dialectales – dans (...) l’espace géographique et/ou temporel. La démarche a pour ambition, ce faisant, de démontrer qu’elles sont, les unes avec les autres, dans un rapport de parenté génétique, ou plus précisément d’établir le degré de celle-ci lorsque la parenté est un fait déjà avéré. La modélisation de ces langues dialectales sous forme de corrélations de traits permet alors d’aboutir à la reconstruction de l’ensemble dialectal considéré : hypothèse d’un protosystème et de faisceaux de règles d’évolution dont l’application combinée rend compte des observables. Mais ce schéma, valide pour des reconstructions phonologiques et morphologiques, doit être réaménagé si l’on veut envisager des reconstructions lexicales. Cet article constitue une discussion sur l’apport novateur de la dialectologie à ce problème. (shrink)

Cet article poursuit un objectif méthodologique, la présentation comparée de trois modes de représentation de la polysémie d’un item : grille, carte et arbre sémasioogique et son illustration autour d’un phylum étymologique, celui du verbe latin tornare qui est à la source, entre autres des verbes français tourner, italien tornare et anglais to turn et de leurs dérivés et composés. Dans l’éventail des sens et des constructions des trois verbes, tourner occupe une position intermédiaire, mais se révèle plus proche de (...) to turn que de l’italien tornare. A partir du sens unique du verbe latin (« fabriquer sur un tour de pottier ») chacun des trois verbes à configuré son espace sémantique en fonction de l’ensemble de ses concurrents, y compris les verbes morphologiquement apparentés. (shrink)