The Referential Approach to Meaning

The referential approach to meaning distinguishes between the three components closely connected with meaning: the sound-form of the linguistic sign, the concept underlying the sound-form, and the actual referent, i.e. the part of reality to which the linguistic sign refers (i.e. object, phenomena, quality, action, etc. denoted by the word). Hence meaning is defined as the interrelation of the sound-form, concept and referent. The best known referential model of meaning is the so-called “basic triangle”.

concept

[kQt] sound-form                                                        referent ö

As can be seen from the diagram the sound form of the linguistic sign, e.g. [kQt], is connected with our concept of the animal which it denotes and through it with the referent, i.e. the actual cat. The dotted line shows that there is no immediate relation between word and referent: it is established only through the concept.

Meaning is not to be identified with any of the three points of the triangle. The connection between sound-form and meaning is arbitrary. The same sound-clusters possess different meanings in different languages. Compare the meaning of sound-cluster [kt] in Russian (‘male cat’) and in English (‘a small, usually swinging bed for a child’). The sound-cluster in the same language may denote different things. Compare homonyms spring ¹ «источник, ключ», spring ² «пружина», spring ³  «весна».

Meaning should not be identified with the underlying concept. As a category of human cognition concepts are the same for the whole humanity living in the same historical period, but words expressing identical concepts may have different semantic structures in different languages. The semantic range of many words expressing identical concepts in English and in Russian may differ considerably, e.g. one English word may combine the meanings of two or more Russian words and vice versa: boat - судно, шлюпка, лодка, пароход; coat - пальто, пиджак, китель, тужурка; gun - пушка, ружьё; нога - foot, leg; часы - watch, clock; высокий - high, tall; blue - голубой, синий; spill - рассыпать, разлить. The difference between meaning and concept can also be observed in the semantic range of verbs of motion (cf. come, go, run and идти, ехать, бежать) or traced in synonymous words in the same language that may differ in their distribution or stylistic value, e.g. child, kid, infant.

If we assume that there is a direct relation between the meaning and the referent, how should we explain the fact that the same referent is designated by different sound groups in different languages’ Moreover, different words in the same language may have the same referent. In a speech situation an apple can be denoted by different words: apple, fruit, this, etc. Meaning cannot be equated with the actual properties of the referent. For example, compare words denoting substances and their chemical formulas.

The mechanism by which concepts (i.e. mental phenomena) are converted into words (i.e. linguistic phenomena) and the reverse process by which a heard or a printed word is converted into a kind of mental picture are not yet understood or described.

The modern approach to word studies is based on distinguishing between the external and the internal structures of the word — its morphological structure and word-formation pattern vs. its semantic structure (meaning). Words can serve the purpose of human communication solely due to their meanings.