Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The plain meaning rule dictates that statutes are to be interpreted using the ordinary meaning of the language of the statute. In other words, a statute is to be read word for word and is to be interpreted according to the ordinary meaning of the language, unless a statute explicitly defines some of its terms otherwise or unless the result ...
If it is replaced by other words, the idiomatic meaning cannot be activated. The Conceptual Metaphor Hypothesis. The conceptual metaphor hypothesis proposes that metaphors are fundamental to human thought and they influence the comprehension of many aspects of language, including idioms. [9] An example of a conceptual metaphor is “love is a ...
For example, an interpretation function could take the predicate T (for "tall") and assign it the extension {a} (for "Abraham Lincoln"). All our interpretation does is assign the extension {a} to the non-logical constant T, and does not make a claim about whether T is to stand for tall and 'a' for Abraham Lincoln. Nor does logical ...
For example, if the domain of discourse is the set of integers, a function symbol f of arity 2 can be interpreted as the function that gives the sum of its arguments. In other words, the symbol f is associated with the function which, in this interpretation, is addition.
In other words, one should be in a position to understand the whole if one understands the meanings of each of the parts that make up the whole. For example, if the phrase "Fred kicked the bucket" is understood compositionally, it means that Fred has literally kicked an actual, physical bucket. The idiomatic reading, however, is non ...
Wilhelm Dilthey used the example of understanding a sentence as an example of the circular course of hermeneutic understanding. He particularly stressed that meaning and meaningfulness were always contextual. Thus the meaning of any sentence cannot be fully interpreted unless we know the historical circumstances of its utterance.
Context is "a frame that surrounds the event and provides resources for its appropriate interpretation". [1]: 2–3 It is thus a relative concept, only definable with respect to some focal event within a frame, not independently of that frame.
In syntactic ambiguity, the same sequence of words is interpreted as having different syntactic structures. In contrast, in semantic ambiguity the structure remains the same, but the individual words are interpreted differently. [15] [16] Controlled natural languages are often designed to be unambiguous so that they can be parsed into a logical ...