- Sep 2021
I’ve written a few thousand words on why traditional “semantic class names” are the reason CSS is hard to maintain, but the truth is you’re never going to believe me until you actually try it.
- Mar 2021
The hierarchical structure of semantic fields can be mostly seen in hyponymy.
Good explanation about semantic fields.
I assume the same or an even stronger statement can be made about semantic classes (which to me are like more clear-cut, distinct semantic fields), then? ￼
Is this topic part of linguistics too? Or only semantics?
A semantic class contains words that share a semantic feature.
For example within nouns there are two sub classes, concrete nouns and abstract nouns.
The concrete nouns include people, plants, animals, materials and objects while the abstract nouns refer to concepts such as qualities, actions, and processes.
Semantic classes may intersect. The intersection of female and young can be girl.
More examples are given at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_feature:
- 'female' + 'performer' = 'actress'
(Not answered on this stub article)
What, precisely, is the distinction/difference between a semantic class and a semantic field? At the very least, you would say that they are themselves both very much within the same semantic field.
So, is a semantic class distinct from a semantic field in that semantic class is a more well-defined/clear-cut semantic field? And a semantic field is a more fluid, nebulous, not well-defined field (in the same sense as a magnetic field, which has no distinct boundary whatsoever, only a decay as you move further away from its source) ("semantic fields are constantly flowing into each other")?
If so, could you even say that a semantic class is a kind of (hyponym) of semantic field?
Maybe I should pose this question on a semantics forum.
- concrete noun
- relationship between
- to do
- intersection (semantic classes)
- abstract noun
- I have a question about this
- semantic field
- good example
- semantic feature
- important point
- semantic class
Some types exist as descriptions of objects, but not as tangible physical objects. One can show someone a particular bicycle, but cannot show someone, explicitly, the type "bicycle", as in "the bicycle is popular."