We have discussed the relation between words and the world extensively, but recall from Section 2.3, that we use language not only to describe entities and situations, but also to express our attitude towards them. We may express such attitudes explicitly — imagine that Zoe comes home to find Aylin in the kitchen cooking, and that she says one of the following:
Zoe uses the same word smell in both cases, but in (1a) we know that she likes the smell and in (1b) we know she does not like it. The reason we know is that she says so explicitly.
Again, if Zoe says (2a) we know that she likes the smell and if she says (2b) we know she does not like it at all. But how? No part of these sentences refers to Zoe or mentions the idea of liking. The only difference between the two sentences is the word that Zoe uses to refer to the smell of the food — aroma in (2a) and odour in (2b), so it must be the word choice that is telling us.
How can the choice of a word tell us something about a language user’s attitude? The extension of the words smell, aroma and odour are identical: if we can truthfully say ‘x is a smell’, then we can truthfully say ‘x is an aroma’ or ‘x is an odour’ as well. This suggests that the words have the same intension, too — something like ‘a property detected by breathing in through the nose’.
Could the word smell be a hyperonym of the words aroma and odour? This would account for the fact that they share part of their intension — ‘a property detected by breathing in through the nose’ —, but not others — aroma adding the feature ‘is good’ and odour adding the feature ‘is bad’. While this is a plausible way of thinking about these words, there is a problem: we can use the word smell in all situations where we can use aroma and odour, but we can also use the words aroma and odour in all situations where we can use the word smell. The former is expected if smell were a hyperonym, but the latter is not! We can even use the words odour and aroma interchangeably — again, this is not typical for co-hyponyms.
The reason is that the the features ‘is good’ and ‘is bad’ work differently from the other features we have seen so far: they are based on an evaluation by the language user, and while such evaluations may be shared by smaller or larger groups within a language community, they are necessarily subjective. The reason we can exchange all three of the words discussed here freely is that we are describing the same situation in each case, but are expressing a different subjective evaluation of that situation.
So, the intension of a word includes a descriptive component that allows us to determine their extension — this is sometimes called the (primary) denotation of the word. In addition, the intension of a word can (but does not have to) include expressive components that allow us to determine what the language user thinks or feels about the referent — this is sometimes called the connotation (or secondary denotation). Such connotations can be graded — if we really don’t like a smell, we can call it a stench, and if we really, really like a smell, we can call it a fragrance.
Note that the word connotation is used in different ways in different disciplines — in logic, it is sometimes used to refer to what we call intension here (while denotation is used to refer to what we call extension), in rhetoric and literary studies it is sometimes used to refer to any non-literal, evocative aspect of meaning. That different disciplines use terms in different ways is often not a problem, but it can become one in overlapping disciplines like logic, linguistics and literary studies, so make sure that you always know in which sense an author uses the term connotation!
The reason that connotation is sometimes called “secondary” denotation is that it works differently from denotation proper. Imagine that Zoe comes into the kitchen as Aylin is cooking and says one of the following:
If there is a smell of garlic and Aylin wants to be truthful, she has to respond with yes to any one of these questions, whether or not she herself likes the smell of garlic. In contrast, if what Zoe smells is not garlic but, for example, chives, Aylin would have to respond with no to all these questions, whether or not she likes the smell of garlic.
In other words, the primary denotation of a word is involved in whether or not you can truthfully apply a word to a particular referent (or class of referents), and we can confirm or deny questions about it. The connotation (or secondary denotation), in contrast, is not involved in determining the truth of a statement, and we cannot confirm or deny it. Imagine the following dialogue:
Aylin’s answer to Zoe’s question would be considered a lie, and her justification feels more like word-play than like a contribution to the conversation. A full account of this difference between denotation and connotation will have to wait until Chapter 4, but for now, we can say that the connotation is an incidental thought that is communicated along with the main idea — as though it were enclosed in parentheses. The meaning of the word stench would be something like this:
Connotations can involve any aspect of meaning that goes beyond the components of a word that outline its extension. This includes value judgments, emotional attitudes, and ideological stances.
For each set, think of a sentence where all of the words could occur in a particular position, and describe the value judgments that are expressed by each choice of word.
A special case of connotation is the class of words known as slurs — derogatory words for groups of people. If you are interested in these, read Section 4.6.
