1. Introduction:
Every language plays the role of communication only because it manages to
convey what the speaker means. Words have a great effect depending on what
meaning are they conveying. Jokes, satire, philosophy etc can only be
distinguished on the bases of their meanings. Thus everyone is interested in
meaning.
Linguistic studies are interested in the meaningful aspect of any language.
It also studies how the same words can convey different meaning with the change
of context or intonation. Semantics is the branch of linguistics which involves
systematic meaning of language and linguistic semantics is concerned with the
organization of language to express meaning. 1
Semantics:
The word semantics is derived from the Greek word, semanino, meaning, to
signify or mean. Semantics is part of larger study of signs semiotics. It is he part
that deals with words as signs (symbols) and language as a system of signs (words
as symbols).2
Semantics as a term was first formally used by Breal in 1897. He was the
first to bring to the fore in a formally acceptable way, the nature of meaning in
language. The first attempt to study meanings was by Philosophers which
examines the relationship between linguistic expressions and the phenomena they
refer to in the external world.. This can be traced to as far back as Plato’s and
Aristotle’s works. Linguistic semantics emphasizes the properties of natural
languages while pure or logical semantics is the study of the meaning of
expressions using logical systems or calculi.3
Area:
The area of focus in this project is the ‘semantic roles’. But before that a
general introduction is needed about the basic organization of grammar that
conveys meaning. It can be roughly termed as sentence and proposition.
A sentence contains certain information, but the same information can be
presented in different sentences and in parts of sentences; the information
presented, apart from the way it is presented, is called a ‘proposition’.
A proposition can be seen as consisting of a predicate and various noun
phrases (referring expressions), each of which has a different role.
1
Kreidler, Charles W, Introducing English Semantics, London EC4P 4EE, Routledge, 11 New Fetter
Lane
2
Robert A. Hipkiss, Robert A. Semantics Defining the Disciplines. New Jersey 07430:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, inc., Publishers 10 Industrial Avenue Mahwah.
3
Palmer, Frank Robert. Semantics. New York: Cambridge University Press 1976, 1981.

2. Sentence and Proposition:A traditional way of defining a sentence is ‘something
that expresses a complete thought.’ This definition is a rather strange way of
explaining since it assumes that we know what a complete thought is and with this
knowledge can determine whether something is or is not a sentence. But surely the
procedure must be reverse. Sentences are more knowable than thoughts. In spite
of individual differences, speakers of a language generally agree about what is or is
not a sentence in their language. For example,
• Gregor Samsa woke from troubled dreams.
• waking from troubled dreams
The first example is a complete sentence as it begins with a capital letter and end
with a full stop. However, both have the same semantic content i.e conveying the
same meaning. They have same relation to an action or possible action performed
in certain place by a single person. It can be said that both the examples are
referring to the waking up of the same person i.e Gregor Samsa. The difference is
grammatical. The first example declares something, makes a sentence.
The second expression can be part of statement like,
Waking from troubled dreams, Gregor Samsa felt distressed.
The semantic content shared by this expression is a ‘proposition’. A proposition
can be verified as true or false. E.g Gregor Samsa didn’t up from troubled dreams
is the negation of this proposition, and did Gregor Samsa wake from troubled
dreams? is a question about it.
A proposition can be expressed in different sentences. For example,
• The bedding was hardly able to cover it.
• The bedding was able to cover it hardly.
A single proposition can be expressed in different sentences through different
‘focus.’ For example,
• Drops of rain made him feel sad.
• Drops of rain were the ones which made him feel sad.
In the approach taken here, first proposition has a focus on sad and the second’s
focus is on drops of rain. A sentence may add a focus and may add the in different
places and in different ways. A proposition, then, can be realized as several
different sentences. A proposition is something abstract but meaningful. It can be
expressed in different sentences and in parts of sentences, perhaps with
differences of focus but always with the same basic meaning.
An English sentence has certain kinds of modification that, together, are
called inflection. It includes tense (the distinction between present troubles, past
troubled); aspect which usually shows the continuity of an action (is waking) and
modality which refers to auxiliary words (may wake, could wake, should wake).
The description of a sentence is a syntactic analysis while the description
of a proposition is a semantic analysis. A syntactic analysis is the account of the
lexemes and function words in a sentence, describing how these combine into
phrases, and shows the functions that these lexemes and phrases have in the
sentence. These functions are recognized as subject, predicate, object,
complement and adverbial.

3. The Syntactic Analysis of Sentences
Subject Predicate Object Adverbial
He thought.
It showed a lady.
He Lay on his armour-like
back.
He Felt itch upon his belly.
Subject Predicate Complement
Samsa was a travelling salesman.
When inflection-including Tense-is separated from proposition, we see that
the forms of the verb be (am, is, was, were) have no meaning. They are clearly
part of the syntactic structure of sentences but not of the semantic structure. In
semantic analysis every proposition contains one predicate and a varying number
of referring expressions (noun phrases) called arguments, like he thought. The
predicate may be verb, an adjective, a preposition, or a noun phrase.
Semantic Roles:
Every single sentence-every proposition has one predicate and a varying
number of referring expressions or ‘arguments’. The meaning of a predicate is
determined by how many arguments it may have and what role those arguments
have.
An account of the number of arguments that a predicate has is called the
‘valency’ of that predicate. Valency theory is a description of the semantic potential
of predicates in terms of the number and types of argument which may co-occur
with them.
The valency may vary from zero, one and two. They are briefly defined as
follows:
• Valency zero: it refers to the predicate that has no particular
subject. Hence the verb it contains is a zero-argument verb.
• Valency one: one-argument predicates contain a verb that has a
subject but no object which means it is an intransitive verb. The
argument contains a subject and a predicate in the roles of
o actor/action
o affected/event
o theme/description
o theme/identity

4. • Valency two: the sentences having subject and object both are
known to have two-argument predicates. The arguments may occur
in the role of
o Agent/action/affected
o Agent/action/effect
o Actor/action/place
o Affecting/affect/affected
o Affected/affect/affecting
o Theme/link/associate
The possible Semantic relations were introduced in generative grammar
during the mid-1960s and early 1970s as a way of classifying the arguments of
natural language predicates into a closed set of participant types which were
thought to have a special status in grammar. A list of possible semantic roles is as
follows:
• Actor: the role of an argument that performs some action without affecting
any entity.
• Affected: the role of an argument that undergoes a change due to some
event or is affected by some other entity.
• Affecting: the role of an argument that, without any action, affects another
entity.
• Agent: the role of an argument that by its action affects some other entity.
• Associate: the role of an argument that tells the status or identity of
another argument.
• Effect: the role of an argument that comes into existence through the action
of the predicate.
• Place: the role of an argument that names the location in which the action
of the predicate occurs.
• Theme: the role of an argument that is the topic of a predicate that does
not express any action, a stative predicate.
Introduction to text:
Application:
1. Valency zero:
a) It’s shocking.
Here ‘it’ is the subject but ‘it’ doesn’t name anything, its neutral. Shocking is
a zero-argument verb. In the text, ‘it’s shocking’ is a clause of the sentence
‘It’s shocking, what can suddenly happen to a person’. Here this clause has
no particular subject. It is Gregor Samsa’s dialogue, addressing the head
clerk and explaining his change of condition. This clause refers to the whole
situation but not naming one particular subject, yet it has a predicate
conveying a meaning.
2. Valency one:
a) ‘What’s happened to me?’ he thought.
Argument + predicate

5. Actor action
He thought
In this sentence, ‘he thought’ is one argument clause. It has no object thus
thought is an intransitive verb. He is the ‘actor’, while thought is the
‘action’. Actor’s action never affects another entity like in this sentence. It
occurs in the beginning of a paragraph and is followed by the sentence
suggesting that it wasn’t a dream. Further in the paragraph there is the
description of his room. Hence, he thought is an independent clause with no
need of an object to convey its meaning, rather suggesting his through his
dialogue. It is justifying its semantic role.
b) Gregor realized that it was out of question
Argument + predicate
Affected event
Gregor realized
In this sentence, there is again one argument with no object. Yet, here the
nature of argument is different. The verb here is the event which the subject
undergoes. In this sentence, Gregor undergoes the process of realization, thus gets
affected by it. In the paragraph of the text, he realizes that letting the chief clerk
go, without any explanation was not a good idea. Hence, the subject itself is
affected by the event and is independent of an object. Justifying its semantic role,
it is conveying the correct meaning in the text.
c) Gregor is ill.
Argument + predicate
Theme description
Gregor ill
In this sentence, the predicate is not a verb, but describing Gregor’s
condition which is ill. The subject is the topic or theme of the whole argument. In
the text, it is his mother who is telling his sister that is unwell. Hence, this
information conveys a complete meaning without an object, thus justifying its
semantic role of valency one.
d) Samsa was a travelling salesman.
Argument + predicate
Theme identity
Samsa traveling salesman
This sentence gives information about the central character of the story. It
tells about his profession thus giving him an identity. The subject is no way in need
of an object to describe its identity so it is a single argument predicate. It is
contributing to the meaning of the story.
Valency two:
a) The chief clerk now raised his voice.
Argument1 + predicate + argument2
Agent action Affected
Chief clerk raised voice
Here the subject has an object to define the verb. This sentence is followed
by the fact the chief clerk calls Samsa and asks what the matter with him was.
Without the mention of second argument, the meaning would have been
incomprehensible. Thus roles of both the arguments are justified by the meanings
they convey.
b) He’s made a little frame.

6. Argument1 + predicate + argument2
Agent action effect
He made frame
Here the subject did some action as a result of which something comes into
existence. Thus he refers to Gregor whose mother was telling the chief clerk that
he likes to create things in his leisure time and he has made a little photo frame
too. Thus without second argument, the meaning would be incomplete. Hence, the
need for the role of second argument is justified.
c) He’d fall right off his desk!
Argument1 + predicate argument2
Actor action place
He fall off desk
The subject is undergoing a change with reference to a location. Gregor
thought of telling his boss that it’s easy to sit behind a desk and rebuke others. He
thought this action of his would make the boss fall off from his desk. Thus to
convey the complete meaning, a location or place was needed after the action.
Hence the second argument justifies its role.
d) You are causing serious and unnecessary concern to your
parents.
Argument1 + predicate aargument2
Affecting affect affected
You concern parents
Here you refer to Gregor whose chief clerk is telling him that his behavior is
concerning his parents i. e that they are being affected by it. He says this because
Gregor wasn’t coming out of his locked room in the morning. Only mentioning the
one argument with the role of affecting subject wouldn’t have been enough hence a
second argument was needed which conveyed the whole meaning through defining
the entity being affected. Hence the semantic role is justified.
e) Chief clerk was a lover of women.
Argumennt1 + predicate + argument2
Affected affect affecting
Chief clerk love women
Gregor thinks that his sister would be in a better position to convince his
employer. So in this sentence role of first argument is that of the affected, here the
chief clerk is affected by the love of women. ‘Women’ play the role of affecting in
the second argument. Without the presence of the latter argument, meaning would
have been incomplete. The semantic role is fulfilled in conveying the whole
meaning.
A similar example is as follows,
f) He was curious to know what they would say when they caught
sight of him.
Argument1 + predicate + argument2
Affected affect affecting
He curious what they
would say
Here the affect is an adjective followed by a preposition. Gregor is affected by the
curiosity of what everyone would think when they would see him in the form of a
vermin. He was anxious about their opinion. So the opinion is affecting Gregor. If

7. only the phrase ‘he was curious’ was used in the text, it would have been difficult
to judge what about. Hence the semantic roles are justified because they are
conveying the complete meaning.
Discussion:
The semantic roles theory can be successfully applied to a chapter of Franz
Kafka’s novella Metamorphosis. It is seen that instances of all the roles comprising
actor, action, theme, event, identity, agent, affected, affect, affecting and place
were found in the text. All of them were effectively justifying the roles in
contributing the meaning of the sentence of which they were a part as well as to
the overall meaning of the text.