Module 1: Semantics · Section exam
Semantics exam
A 10-question review of all 7 lessons in Module 1: Semantics. Answer every question, then check your answers: each one comes with an explanation, and you can retake the exam as often as you like.
Semantics exam Module 1: Semantics review
10 questions · self-graded
1 Which statement best summarizes the task of doing semantics? Cataloguing every interpretation a word receives in context Determining whether each sentence spoken is actually true Separating a morpheme's invariable contribution from what the context contributes Tracing how each word developed historically
Semantics parses out the meaningful elements a morpheme contributes in every context and separates them from what the surrounding context supplies.
2 Which of these are given as examples of functional morphemes? Select all that apply Tense marking on verbs Negation Nouns such as bear Wh-elements such as who and where Adjectives such as black Determiners
Tense, negation, wh-elements, and determiners are grammatical elements with logical meanings; nouns and adjectives are lexical morphemes.
3 Wittgenstein's argument about the word game illustrates the fuzzy boundaries typical of functional morphemes. True or false True False
Fuzzy boundaries are characteristic of lexical meanings; functional morphemes do not behave this way and can be given logical definitions.
4 If every word's meaning were set entirely by its context, what problem would result? Idioms could no longer be understood An infinite loop, since context gets its meaning from words whose meanings come from context Every sentence would have identical truth conditions Sense and reference would become the same thing
Pure context-dependence is circular; a stable contribution from each word is what breaks the loop, which is part of the case for compositionality.
5 Asked "What escaped from the zoo?", a speaker says, "The bear escaped from the zoo, and in fact a lion escaped also." Which statements are correct? Select all that apply The inference that no lion escaped was an implicature The continuation contradicts the first clause The inference that no lion escaped has been canceled The inference that an animal escaped could be canceled in the same way
The no-lion inference is a context-based implicature and is canceled without contradiction; that an animal escaped is an entailment, which cannot be canceled.
6 After "The bear was too fast for the zookeepers," a hearer takes he escaped from the zoo to mean the bear moved quickly. How should this inference be classified? Part of the invariable meaning of escape An entailment of the past-tense morpheme A use of escape prompted by context, not part of its meaning A difference in the reference of bear
The quick-movement inference is genuine in this context but disappears in others, so it belongs to the use of escape rather than its entailed meaning.
7 Consider "If the bear escaped from the zoo, we would have heard reports about it." Which statements match the lesson's analysis? Select all that apply The sentence implies the bear did not escape The past tense here simply locates the escape before the moment of speaking One option is to revise the past tense's meaning so it accounts for both uses This counterfactual use of the past tense appears across many languages The example proves the past tense has no invariable meaning
Embedded under if , the past tense yields a counterfactual reading found cross-linguistically; the analyst can revise the proposed meaning to cover both the ordinary and counterfactual uses.
8 The bear escaped from the zoo and the bear ran away from the zoo can describe the very same event. How do they relate?They share reference but differ in sense They share sense but differ in reference They differ in both sense and reference They are identical in meaning
Both pick out the same event, but run away has a slightly different sense from escape , so their meanings are not identical.
9 Deciding whether the bear escaped from the zoo is true if a red panda got out, or if a trainer led the bear out, shows what? Lexical morphemes can be fully captured by logical formulas Judging a sentence's truth requires knowing what its words mean Implicatures alone determine whether a sentence is true Sentences with non-referring terms are meaningless
One must know the meaning of bear and escape to decide whether the thought the sentence expresses corresponds to the world.
10 Truth conditions connect closely to compositionality, because a sentence's truth conditions are built from the meanings of its parts and the way they combine. True or false True False
The truth conditions of a whole sentence are composed from the meanings of its parts and their structural combination.
Become a fluent reader of the biblical languages Biblingo is the only language-learning app (mobile and web) that provides everything you need to go from zero knowledge of Greek, Hebrew, and Latin to reading the Bible in its original and historic languages — all in one place.
Start Free Trial