The problems of Ogden and Richards's and Bloomfield's approaches to meaning arise mainly from the determination to explain semantics in terms of other scientific disciplines. One may argue that much of the apparent ambiguity of the term meaning, which bothered Ogden and Richards, has the same source.
Certainly most of the twenty-two definitions given by them are the authors' wording of technical definitions of philosophers, psychologists, philologists, literary critics, and other specialists; and much of the conflict between these definitions is explicable in terms of each specialist's need or desire to tailor the study of meaning to the requirements of his own field. So a philosopher may define meaning, for his purposes, in terms of truth and falsehood; a behaviorist psychologist in terms of stimulus and response; a literary critic in terms of the reader's response: and so on. Naturally enough, their definitions, springing from diverse frames of reference, will have little in common.
While admitting the study in related fields could provide insight for the student of semantics, many people will wonder why semantics need be considered dependent, in this way, on extrinsic considerations. In fact, as soon as we start to treat semantics as deserving its own frame of reference instead of having to borrow one from elsewhere, we dispel many of the difficulties that have beset its development in the past fifty years. An autonomous discipline begins not with answers, but with questions. We might say that the whole point of setting up a theory of semantics is to provide a 'definition' of meaning - that is, a systematic account of the nature of meaning.
To demand a definition of meaning before we started discussing the subject would simply be to insist on treating certain other concepts, e.g. stimulus and response, as in some sense more basic and more important. A physicist does not have to define notions like 'time', 'heat', 'colour' 'atom' before he starts investigating their properties. Rather, definitions, if they are needed, emerge from the study itself.
Which of the followings are true in connection with semantics?
A. A philosopher defines meaning in terms of truth and falsehood
B. A literary critic distinguishes meaning in terms of his own learning and experience
C. A behaviorist psychologist mostly takes into account stimulus and response while defining meaning
D. An autonomous discipline is the one that mostly begins with giving answer of certain questions
Choose the most appropriate answer from the options given below:
Correct Answer: 3. A and C Only
Solution:A. (A philosopher defines meaning in terms of truth and falsehood) → Correct. The passage states that a philosopher defines meaning based on truth and falsehood.
C. (A behaviourist psychologist mostly takes into account stimulus and response while defining meaning) → Correct. The passage mentions that behaviourist psychologists explain meaning in terms of stimulus and response.
(B) is incorrect because the passage states that literary critics define meaning in terms of reader response, not necessarily their own learning and experience.
(D) is incorrect because an autonomous discipline begins with questions, not answers.