Pengertian semantic ( hani fah & nourma) Kajian kajian dalam semantic( mang nani) Konsep=kkonsep semantic ( mela

& khayanah Definifi language teaching ( mae dan iskandar) Peranan semantic di language teaching ( widodoh)

Semantics (from Greek smantik, neuter plural of smantiks) is the study of meaning. It focuses on the relation between signifiers, such as words, phrases, signs and symbols, and what they stand for, their denotata. Linguistic semantics is the study of meaning that is used by humans to express themselves through language. Other forms of semantics include the semantics of programming languages, formal logics, and semiotics. The word "semantics" itself denotes a range of ideas, from the popular to the highly technical. It is often used in ordinary language to denote a problem of understanding that comes down to word selection or connotation. This problem of understanding has been the subject of many formal inquiries, over a long period of time, most notably in the field of formal semantics. In linguistics, it is the study of interpretation of signs or symbols as used by agents or communities within particular circumstances and contexts. Within this view, sounds, facial expressions, body language, and proxemics have semantic (meaningful) content, and each has several branches of study. In written language, such things as paragraph structure and punctuation have semantic content; in other forms of language, there is other semantic content. The formal study of semantics intersects with many other fields of inquiry, including lexicology, syntax, pragmatics, etymology and others, although semantics is a well-defined field in its own right, often with synthetic properties. In philosophy of language, semantics and reference are closely connected. Further related fields include philology, communication, and semiotics. The formal study of semantics is therefore complex.

Semantics contrasts with syntax, the study of the combinatory of units of a language (without reference to their meaning), and pragmatics, the study of the relationships between the symbols of a language, their meaning, and the users of the language. In international scientific vocabulary semantics is also called semasiology. In linguistics, semantics is the subfield that is devoted to the study of meaning, as inherent at the levels of words, phrases, sentences, and larger units of discourse (referred to as texts). The basic area of study is the meaning of signs, and the study of relations between different linguistic units and compounds: homonymy, synonymy, antonymy, hypernymy, hyponymy, meronymy, metonymy, holonymy, paronyms. A key concern is how meaning attaches to larger chunks of text, possibly as a result of the composition from smaller units of meaning. Traditionally, semantics has included the study of sense and denotative reference, truth conditions, argument structure, thematic roles, discourse analysis, and the linkage of all of these to syntax. Semantic fields In studying the lexicon of English (or any language) we may group together lexemes which inter-relate, in the sense that we need them to define or describe each other. For example we can see how such lexemes as cat, feline, moggy, puss, kitten, tom, queen and miaow occupy the same semantic field. We can also see that some lexemes will occupy many fields: noise will appear in semantic fields for acoustics, pain or discomfort and electronics (noise = interference). Although such fields are not clear-cut and coherent, they are akin to the kind of groupings children make for themselves in learning a language. An entertaining way to see how we organize the lexicon for ourselves is to play word-association games.

Semantics versus Pragmatics Next explain the difference between semantics and pragmatics. While semantics is the study of meaning in a language, pragmatics is the study of language from the point of view of language users. Semantic meaning focuses on the meaning of words, phrases, clauses, and speech acts and pragmatic meaning on how speakers and addressees perceive language use. Semantics is concerned with meaning regardless of context while pragmatics is concerned with communication within a specific context. Take, for example, the following sentence: Can you pass the salt? Semantically, the sentence Can you pass the salt? Is a question that asks about the ability of the addressee to pass the salt? Pragmatically, however, the same sentence can be a question of ability as well as a request for the addressee to pass the salt. Understanding the semantic meaning of utterances tends to be much easier for language students than discerning pragmatic meaning

Theories of meaning The term theory of meaning has figured, in one way or another, in a great number of philosophical disputes over the last half-century. Unfortunately, this term has also been used to mean a great number of different things. Here I focus on two sorts of theory of meaning. The first sort of theory a semantic theory is a theory which assigns semantic contents to expressions of a language. Approaches to semantics may be divided according to whether they assign propositions as the meanings of sentences and, if they do, what view they take of the nature of these propositions. The second sort of theory a foundational theory of meaning is a theory which states the facts in virtue of which expressions have the semantic contents that they have. Approaches to the foundational theory of meaning may be divided into theories which do, and theories which do not, explain the meanings of expressions of a language used by a group in terms of the contents of the mental states of members of that group

Semantic theories The task of explaining the main approaches to semantic theory in contemporary philosophy of language might seem to face an in-principle stumbling block. Given that no two languages have the same semantics no two languages are comprised of just the same words, with just the same meanings it may seem hard to say how we can say anything about different views about semantics in general, as opposed to views about the semantics of this or that language. This problem has a relatively straightforward solution. While it is of course correct that the semantics for English is one thing and the semantics for French something else, most assume that the various natural languages should all have semantic theories of (in a sense to be explained) the same form. The aim of what follows will, accordingly, is to introduce the reader to the main approaches to natural language semantics the main views about the right form for semantics for a natural language to take rather than a detailed examination of the various views about the semantics of some particular expression. (For some of the latter, see names, descriptions, propositional attitude reports, and natural kinds.) One caveat before we get started: before a semantic theorist sets off to explain the meanings of the expressions of some language, she needs a clear idea of what she is supposed to explain the meaning of. This might not seem to present much of a problem; aren't the bearers of meaning just the sentences of the relevant language, and their parts? This is correct as far as it goes; but the task of explaining what the semantically significant parts of a sentence are, and how those parts combine to form the sentence, is an enterprise which is both far from trivial, and has important consequences for semantic theory. Unfortunately, discussion of theories of this sort, which attempt to explain the logical form, or syntax, of natural language sentences, is well beyond the scope of this entry. As a result, figures like Richard Montague, whose work on syntax and its connection to semantics has been central to the development of semantic theory over the past few decades, are passed over in what follows. (Montague's essays are collected in Montague 1974; for a discussion of the importance of his work, see 3.3 of Soames 2010.)

Most philosophers of language these days think that the meaning of an expression is a certain sort of entity, and that the job of semantics is to pair expressions with the entities which are their meanings. For these philosophers, the central question about the right form for a semantic theory concerns the nature of these entities. Because the entity corresponding to a sentence is called a proposition, I'll call these propositional semantic theories. However, not all philosophers of language think that the meanings of sentences are propositions, or even believe that there are such things. Accordingly, in what follows, I'll divide the space of approaches to semantics into propositional and non-propositional semantic theories. Proposional semantic theories The easiest way to understand the various sorts of propositional semantic theory is by beginning with another sort of theory: a theory of reference The theory of reference A theory of reference is a theory which, like a propositional semantic theory, pairs the expressions of a language with certain values. However, unlike a semantic theory, a theory of reference does not pair expressions with their meanings; rather, it pairs expressions with the contribution those expressions make to the determination of the truth-values of sentences in which they occur. (Though later we will see that this view of the reference of an expression must be restricted in certain ways.) Teaching people to speak and understand a foreign language a more significant distinctinon 163 The corelation between language teahing and semantic In language teaching semantic is an important parrtr which cant be separated. We can find it out in translation. When translations want to trasnlate from english to their language they must undersatan meaning fully to misunderstanding is avoidable. Based on Hockets point of views, when we must to know what is an

apple we have to present an apple fruit in font of us. Therefore we must present a thing firstly , we know what is the meaning of that thing finally but based on Ferdinand Ds when we wait to know meaning of thing we dont need to see a thing dirictly but simply we just know from what the speaker said.