Re: semantics vs. pragmatics

From: Clayton Bartholomew (
Date: Wed Aug 06 1997 - 05:57:44 EDT

Mari Broman Olsen Wrote:

Semantics is the 'uncancelable' meaning of a word/sentence/grammatical
form, the meaning it must have, in each context of use [something
students can write in their notebooks for the next aorist form, e.g.,
and not be surprised by exceptions, such as 'perfective aspect'].

This appears to be the very issue we are arguing about, is it not? The
whole notion that there is an * 'uncancelable' meaning of
word/sentence/grammatical form, the meaning it must have, in each

By defining semantics this way, have we not shortcircuited the question?
I could be wrong but I suspect that there are a number of folks other than
myself (see postscript) who question the very existence of an
*invariant* component of meaning in a word or grammatical form.

Thanks for the definition.

Clay Bartholomew
Three Tree Point


Please See: Page 511 of D. Wallace's *Beyond the Basics* a footnote to
Moises Silva from Silva's article *A Response to Fanning and Porter on
Verbal Aspect* included in the book edited by D.A. Carson and Stanely E.
Porter, Biblical Greek Language and Linguistics: Open Questions in
Current Research, Sheffield, 1993.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:24 EDT