Distances of meaning and semantical tests

Abstract

The vast field of semantics may be divided into empirical semantics and philosophical semantics. In empirical semantics the central aim of research is to find out how different people at different times and speaking or writing different languages use or intend to use particular linguistic forms. For the purpose of attaining this aim two classes of research techniques have been devel oped so far, namely lexicographoid techniques and interview techniques. The most important kind of lexicographoid techniques includes the time-honoured lexicographical techniques which have been employed mainly for the making of dictionaries. Recently another kind of lexico graphoid technique has been developed by Arne Naess)2 called 'occurrence analysis'. Naess has also made extensive use of interview techniques and has developed the use of semantical questionnaires to a high methodol ogical level. Only a part of empirical semantics has traditionally been classified as linguistic research. The field of philosophical semantics is much more heterogeneous than empirical semantics. When conceptual analysis is not deductive in character, it is semantical in character being either a proposal of usage, or involving an assertion of intended or actual usage, or presenting a translation of a sentence from the natural languages in terms of logical or mathematical symbols. Conceptual analysis is largely concerned with the clarification of fundamental logical and philosophical concepts, such as, e.g. deduction, probability, modality, synonymity, truth, existence, meaningfulness, denotation, analyticity, implication, etc. We may distinguish two trends. One group of philosophers expects much for clarificatory purposes from the construction of artificial languages. Another group turns to methods