The following passage contains examples of all of the semantic and pragmatic phenomena discussed in the module:
There was a knock on the door. Jim stared at the mirror, examining the bags round his eyes. Three towns to go, he thought. Just three. His gaze
still fixed on the mirror, he cupped his hands under the running water and splashed his face. The veins on his temples continued to throb. Another
knock on the door. “Jim? Is everything alright? We need to make tracks if we are going to catch the churchgoers coming out of the Sunday service.”
It was Martin, Jim’s special adviser, or ‘spad’ as he liked to call him. Jim didn’t like ‘special adviser.’ It sounded pathetic. He didn’t need an
adviser, he needed an assistant. Martin was nice, but useless. He should have left him at the offices in Edinburgh and brought Angela. Angela might
have been better with the elderly. She always manages to get a laugh out of them. “Just a second Martin.” He grabbed the irn bru crates
begrudgingly, banging them off the radiator. The bang left a mark. If they notice it I’ll bill the party, he thought. “The papers are saying you
want the leadership,” Martin said, panting slightly. “Johann has rubbishedit,andEdhasclaimednothingischangingtoo. Angelahasbeengettingseveralcalls
every hour. Most are coming from the Murdoch press.” “Is The Daily Mail running with it?” asked Jim. He had to be on top of the Mail. He had their
chief political reporter in his pocket, but no journalist can be trusted. Martin shook his head. “Right, tell Angela to keep on top of that.” They
approached the supermarket where they were to set up shop today. It was quiet, even for 10am on a Sunday. This is pointless, he thought. I should
have gone home for the weekend. No one would have noticed. No one is keeping count of how many towns I visit. The action is all in the cities, in
Glasgow and Edinburgh and Dundee. “Jim! Jim! Jim!” He looked round, but couldn’t see who was shouting. Then he emerged from behind a white van.
“Jim! Jim Murphy! Fancy meeting you here in Angus.” Jim dropped the plastic crates, then shook himself. It was Eric Joyce, the MP for Falkirk. Once
a good guy to have around, now one more fight away from prison. He couldn’t be seen with him, the press would have a field day. “Why are you carrying
Irn Bru crates?” Joyce stared at Jim’s face. Jim couldn’t believe it. Is Joyce that disconnected, or has this tour been a complete waste of time?
Then he noticed Joyce’s appearance. He was wearing a shellsuit and Doc Marten boots. The shellsuit was a kind he hadn’t seen since the 80s, and the
boots were scuffed and dirty. He needed a shave too. Clearly Joyce was not keeping up with the news.
Using examples from the text above, write an essay on semantics, pragmatics and the role of context in determining linguistic meaning. Specifically,
identify examples of four specific linguistic phenomena – (i) at least one sentence containing a quantificational determiner, (ii)at least one
sentence containing a modalised expression, (iii) at least one sentence which gives rise to a presupposition, and (iv) at least one sentence which
give rise to an implicature – and on the basis of these examples, write an essay which describes how linguistic information (the denotations of
linguistic expressions) and non-linguistic information (context) combine to create meaning in linguistic communication. In this essay you should
demonstrate your understanding of the key issues in semantics and pragmatics as outlined in the module, and you should show a clear understanding
of what each of the phenomena listed above are, what properties they share in common or distinguish them (where appropriate), and how they interact
with each other. The essay should be 3000-4000 words long
. Identify a quantificational determiner in the text and give its set-theoretic denotation. Indicate whether it is proportional or cardinal and
describe any contextual restrictions that apply to the restriction of the determiner.
. Identify at least one sentence in the text which gives rise to a presupposition, and identify that presupposition clearly in a predicate logic
formula (with an appropriate key). Provide evidence for analysing this as a presupposition, rather than an entailment.
Place this order with us and get 18% discount now! to earn your discount enter this code: special18 If you need assistance chat with us now by clicking the live chat button.