CONNOTATION, DENOTATION AND IMPLICATION

• ·     The definition of denotation, connotation and implication

Denotation is when you mean what you say, literally. Connotation is created when you mean something else, something that might be initially hidden. The connotative meaning of a word is based on implication, or shared emotional association with a word. Greasy is a completely innocent word: Some things, like car engines, need to be greasy. But greasy contains negative associations for most people, whether they are talking about food or about people. Often there are many words that denote approximately the same thing, but their connotations are very different. Innocent and genuine both denote an absence of corruption, but the connotations of the two words are different: innocent is often associated with a lack of experience, whereas genuine is not. Connotations are important in poetry because poets use them to further develop or complicate a poem's meaning.

• ·       Connotation and Implication

 

A connotation can just be an idea that we associate with another word, phrase or sentence. So for example the phrase bucket and spade will have connotations of beaches, sunshine, childhood, seaside holidays and so forth. If you're writer and you want to talk about a grave-robber stealing a body from a cemetery, you probably won't want to say:

He picked up his bucket and spade.

There's nothing wrong with the grammar of this sentence, but when you say bucket and spade it might make people think about happy things, not grave, serious and scary ones. It's probably important for your story for people to be a little bit scared, not happy and comfortable. Notice that nobody would think that the grave-robber was at the beach in that sentence. It is just that using that phrase will make people think about beaches for a second.

An implication is something slightly different. If I imply something, I am saying something specific to somebody, without actually using that sentence this might be an accident. We might not want the listener to have this idea. Usually, an implication is a proposition - something that can be expressed as a sentence. So for example, if I say:

• ·         If you don't do your homework, you won't get any ice cream.

then I am implying that:

• ·         If you do your homework you will get some ice-cream.

But notice that I did not say that. That second sentence is not part of what I said. If I am a mean and horrible person, I may have deliberately tricked you. But I did not lie. The truth may well be that:

• ·         If you don't do your homework you won't get any ice-cream and if you do your homework, you still won't get any ice-cream.

 

The reason might be for example, that you are not allowed ice-cream because you're allergic to dairy products. Notice that if I say the whole of the last example, the implication is cancelled. We no longer think that the speaker will give any ice-cream to anyone if the homework is done. We can cancel implications easily. It is difficult to cancel connotations. We may still be reminded of something, like holidays, for example, even if the actual word or phrase is being used in a completely different way.

• ·       Definition Of Denotation And Connotation By Expert

    a.  Denotation

According to Abdul Chaer (2003:292), a denotation is a real meaning of a lexeme. Denotation is one of the types of meaning that is explained in semantics. The explanation of denotation by Abdul Chaer is similar with the one by O’Grady (1997:273), that denotation is a semantic attempt to equate the meaning of a word or phrase with the entities; and Richards (1985:76), that denotation is the part of the meaning of a word or phrase that relates it to the phenomena in the real world or in a fictional or possible word  which all of them point out that the denotation meaning is quiet the same as a dictionary or lexical meaning. For example, the denotation of the word lean (kurus) corresponds to the condition of someones body which is smaller than a normal size.

   b.  Connotation

    According to Abdul Chaer (2003:292), a connotation is a different meaning which is “added” to the last denotation meaning that is related with a sense from a person or group that uses the word.

Connotation is another type of meaning that is also learned in semantics. But  according to Abdul Chaer, the connotation meaning is divided into a neutral, positive, and negative one. For example, the word lean (kurus) has a neutral connotation, which means that it does not have an unfavorable sense.

But the word slender (ramping), which is the synonym of lean, has a positive connotation which is a favorable sense. On the contrary, the word thin (kerempeng), which is the synonym from thin and slender, has a negative connotation, an unfavorable sense.

From the example that is given above, the word lean, slender, and thin can be concluded that in a denotation meaning, three of them have the same meaning, but three of them have different connotations; lean is a neutral connotation, slender is a positive connotation, and thin is a negative connotation.

If conceptual meaning remains the same forever, connotative meaning may change from one time to another. Connotative meaning may also differ from one society to another because meanings have many other characteristics which different people associate with.

• ·       The difference between Connotation and Denotation

 

1.     Denotation

•   It refers to the primary, literal meaning or the dictionary meaning of a word.

•   Denotation is not thus classified.

•    It remains the same regardless of culture and personal experiences.

2.   Connotation

•   It refers to the personal and cultural meaning in addition to their primary, literal meaning of a word.

•    It can be classified as positive connotation and negative connotation.

•   It can change according to culture and personal experiences.
  
  

Conclusion

In the normal uses of these words, a connotation is an association that we have with a word, phrase or sentence. It is not necessarily a proposition. It is not usually the kind of idea we can express in a sentence.

In contrast, an implication is usually a proposition. It is an idea we could express as a sentence. Sometimes the listener may want us to understand this proposition. Sometimes it may be accidental. We can cancel implications. It is difficult, if not impossible sometimes, to cancel connotations.

SEMANTIC (ARTICLE REVIEW)

     

     ARTICLE REVIEW

   Title of Journal : Understanding Semantics Relationship

   Veda.C Storey

\

•    Background of Study

Semantic relationships are the associations that there exist between the meanings of words (semantic relationships at word level), between the meanings of phrases, or between the meanings of sentences (semantic relationships at phrase or sentence level).One advance needed in database management systems (DBMS) is the capture of some of the semantics of an application for which a database is developed. In particular, there is a need within the database community to extend the relational model to accommodate more real world knowledge (Reiter, 1984). Some initial steps have been taken through the incorporation of certain semantic relationships into DBMS designs, commonly referred to as data abstractions. In general, an abstraction is a simplified description, or specification, of a system that emphasizes some of the system's details or properties while suppressing others (Shaw, 1984).

•     Explanation

I.        Semantic Relationships
Figure 1 presents a taxonomy of the seven types of semantic relationships analyzed here (inclusion, possession, attachment, attribution, antonym, synonym, and case). The taxonomy is based on the work of Winston et al. (1987) and Chaffin et al. (1988), but is expanded to include the other classes of semantic relationships identified by Landis et al. (1987). An interesting feature of the taxonomy is that it places the well-known data abstractions within the context of a broader set of semantic relationships. In particular, inclusion as found in the database literature corresponds to class inclusion in the taxonomy; aggregation corresponds to component-object; and association to member-collection.
II.      Database Design
This relationship is interpreted to mean that each company employs between one and many (*) employees; each employee is employed by one and only one company. In general, when an entity-relationship model is converted to a relational model, each entity becomes a separate entity relation (Teorey et al., 1986) that looks exactly the same as the entity (i.e., it has the same key and non-key attributes.) This entity relation may then be modified if a relationship is represented by adding another entity type's key to it as a foreign key. Teorey et al. (1986) refer to this modified entity relation as an extended entity relation. Alternatively, a relationship may be represented by creating a separate relationship relation whose key is the concatenation of the keys of the involved entity types and whose non-keys are the relationship's attributes. In general, when the min/max cardinalities of one entity type are (1,1) in a relationship, the key of the other entity type is added as a foreign key to the entity type with the (1,1) cardinalities.    
Meronymic Inclusion. Meronymic (from the Greek word "meros" for part) relationships occur between something and its parts (Winston et al., 1987). Seven different types of meronymic relationships, based on Storey (1991b), are discussed below
1.    Component-Object
2.    Feature-Event.
3.    Member-Collection.
4.    Portion-Mass
5.    Phase-Activity
6.    Place-Area
7.    Stuff-Object

III.   General Relationships
Some relationships are very general, leading to ambiguity in a design, particularly, have~has relationships of the form A have B or A has B. Although this relationship is often used in the entity-relationship model, it can easily be seen to have multiple interpretations (Storey, 1988). The verb phase have~has can be used to convey either an attribute, or a relationship in which the best interpretation could be almost any of the semantic relationships previously discussed. It would, therefore, be beneficial to use the interpretation that best reflects the semantics of the application and reserve the general form of this relationship for situations where it is not possible to clarify the semantics further. Various interpretations and types of difficulties associated with the have~has relationship are outlined below. These also illustrate why it is important to understand the semantics of an application and the sometimes subtle differences among the relationships.
IV.   The Semantic Relationship Analyzer
A prototype system, the Semantic Relationship Analyzer, has been developed that implements the preceding analysis. 8 The system elicits relationships of the form A verb phrase B from a user who is either a database designer or an end-user. For each relationship, the Semantic Relationship Analyzer obtains the min/max cardinalities and then tries to capture the best interpretation for the relationship. For example, because a have~has relationship is ambiguous, the system determines whether such a relationship would be better expressed bypart-of or one of the other relationships that can easily be confused with have~has.

    

    Summary 

      So data abstractions are often used in data modeling, research in linguistics, logic, and cognitive psychology has identified many more semantic relationships. The objective of this article has been to analyze a number of these lesser-known relationships in terms of their design implications and ways they could be employed by database design systems to capture some of the semantics of an application. It is hoped that the Semantic Relationship Analyzer, or its knowledge base, could eventually be incorporated into a database design system to assist the user in providing the best input. Ideally, this would result in more of the semantics of the real world being captured in the final design.

   Source


(1)http://www.vldb.org/journal/VLDBJ2/P455.pdf

Writing 2

Report Text 

Forest fires

Forest fires are one of the causes of forest destruction and the nature and most are very detrimental. Repairing damage to forests from fires require a long time, moreover, to turn them into the woods again. Therefore, we need to consider several things that can cause fires.

One of the causes of forest fires are due to the volcanic activity of the volcano like a burning forest because of a lava flow or heat (wedus trash) of volcanic eruptions. Based on the experience that there is a fire like this difficult to anticipate, but may be diminimaliasir.

The one that caused the forest fire was caused by human hands as clean up agricultural land, open agricultural land even to acts of vandalism of a handful or a group of people. Such measures must be curbed with socialization to the community.

Forest fires caused by humans not only the deliberate sifanya as described in the previous, but also because of human negligence or carelessness. The act of human carelessness among others dispose of cigarette butts and forgot to put the fire ungun.

The impact of wildfires would have been detrimental to the life, therefore we must not let the forest burn and always sustainable, the impact among others: Produces gas emissions of carbon dioxide the main cause of global warming, Deadly various types of flora and fauna that are in the forest, damaging homes , and many other distinguished anymore ..

We as human beings should not be careless and keep our forests so that no forest fires.

Discusstion Text 

Giving Children Homework 

There are a lot of discussion as to whether children should be given homework or not. Is it enough for children having time to study at school or needing additional time in home for study after school time?

Some people claim that children do enough work in school already. They also argue that children have their hobbies which they want to do after school, such as sport or music. A further point they make is that a lot of homeworks are pointless and does not help the children learn at all.

However, there are also strong arguments against this point of view. Parents and teachers argue that it is important to find out whether children can work on their own without the support from the teacher. They say that the evening is a good time for children to sit down and think about what they have learned in school.

Furthermore they claim that the school day is too short to get anything done. It makes sense to send home tasks like independent reading or further writing task which do not need the teacher support.

I think, on balance, that some homework is good idea but that should only given at the weekend when children have more time.