[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Words and Such
On Wed, 11 May 1994, Steven E. Rice P.E. wrote:
> bulldog
> If you argue with George, you'll find he's a { }.
> pussycat
>
> The only difference in the sentence is one word. But the meanings are
> diametrically opposed.
>
> Perhaps I do not understand the argument Keith and Bob are making.
> Would someone clarify, please?
>
It is misleading to say that the only difference is a word. That changed
word makes the difference in the meaning ofthe whole sentence. However,
if you replace "pussycat" with "tomcat," it is difficult to say what the
difference in the two sentences is, although "bulldog" and "tomcat" are
not the same word and certainly not even synonyms. However, in this
particular context, the words convey synonymous meaning vis a vis the
pragmatics of the sentence function.
No one is naive enough to suggest that singular words do not introduce
meaning to a given context in and of themselves. The point simply is
that *what* meaning a particular word brings to a particular context is
more a function of what that context is than it is of what the word is.
So even though "bulldog" and "tomcat" are not synonyms, they perform
synonymous functions in the above context.
***************************************************************
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."
--Groucho Marx
Prof. James F. Sennett
Asst. Professor of Philosophy sennett@goliath.pbac.edu
Palm Beach Atlantic College andretg@aol.com
PO Box 24708 voice: (407) 835-4431
West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4708 fax: (407) 835-4342
***************************************************************
References: