What Is Meaning? - IELTS Reading Answers & Explanations
From IELTS Recent Actual Test 5 Academic Reading Test 6 · Part 3 · Questions 27–40
Reading Passage
You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 27-40, which are based on Reading Passage 3 below.
What is Meaning?
-Why do we respond to words and symbols in the ways we do?
The end product of education, yours and mine and everybody's, is the total pattern of reactions and possible reactions we have inside ourselves. If you did not have within you at this moment the pattern of reactions that we call “the ability to read,” you would see here only meaningless black marks on paper. Because of the trained patterns of response, you are (or are not) stirred to patriotism by martial music, your feelings of reverence are aroused by symbols of your religion, you listen more respectfully to the health advice of someone who has “MD” after his name than to that of someone who hasn't. What I call here a “pattern of reactions”, then, is the sum total of the ways we act in response to events, to words, and to symbols.
Our reaction patterns or our semantic habits, are the internal and most important residue of whatever years of education or miseducation we may have received from our parents' conduct toward us in childhood as well as their teachings, from the formal education we may have had, from all the lectures we have listened to, from the radio programs and the movies and television shows we have experienced, from all the books and newspapers and comic strips we have read, from the conversations we have had with friends and associates, and from all our experiences. If, as the result of all these influences that make us what we are, our semantic habits are reasonably similar to those of most people around us, we are regarded as “normal,” or perhaps “dull.” If our semantic habits are noticeably different from those of others, we are regarded as “individualistic” or “original,” or, if the differences are disapproved of or viewed with alarm, as “crazy.”
Semantics is sometimes defined in dictionaries as “the science of the meaning of words”—which would not be a bad definition if people didn't assume that the search for the meanings of words begins and ends with looking them up in a dictionary. If one stops to think for a moment, it is clear that to define a word, as a dictionary does, is simply to explain the word with more words. To be thorough about defining, we should next have to define the words used in the definition, then define the words used in defining the words used in the definition and so on. Defining words with more words, in short, gets us at once into what mathematicians call an “infinite regress”. Alternatively, it can get us into the kind of run-around we sometimes encounter when we look up “impertinence” and find it defined as “impudence,” so we look up “impudence” and find it defined as “impertinence.” Yet—and here we come to another common reaction pattern—people often act as if words can be explained fully with more words. To a person who asked for a definition of jazz, Louis Armstrong is said to have replied, “Man, when you got to ask what it is, you'll never get to know,” proving himself to be an intuitive semanticist as well as a great trumpet player.
Semantics, then, does not deal with the “meaning of words” as that expression is commonly understood. P. W. Bridgman, the Nobel Prize winner and physicist, once wrote, “The true meaning of a term is to be found by observing what a man does with it, not by what he says about it.” He made an enormous contribution to science by showing that the meaning of a scientific term lies in the operations, the things done, that establish its validity, rather than in verbal definitions.
Here is a simple, everyday kind of example of “operational” definition. If you say, “This table measures six feet in length,” you could prove it by taking a foot rule, performing the operation of laying it end to end while counting, “One…two…three…four…”. But if you say—and revolutionists have started uprisings with just this statement “Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains!”—what operations could you perform to demonstrate its accuracy or inaccuracy?
But let us carry this suggestion of “operationalism” outside the physical sciences where Bridgman applied it, and observe what “operations” people perform as the result of both the language they use and the language other people use in communicating to them. Here is a personnel manager studying an application blank. He comes to the words “Education: Harvard University,” and drops the application blank in the wastebasket (that's the “operation”) because, as he would say if you asked him, “I don't like Harvard men.” This is an instance of “meaning” at work—but it is not a meaning that can be found in dictionaries.
If I seem to be taking a long time to explain what semantics is about, it is because I am trying, in the course of explanation, to introduce the reader to a certain way of looking at human behaviour. I say human responses because, so far as we know, human beings are the only creatures that have, over and above that biological equipment which we have in common with other creatures, the additional capacity for manufacturing symbols and systems of symbols. When we react to a flag, we are not reacting simply to a piece of cloth, but to the meaning with which it has been symbolically endowed. When we react to a word, we are not reacting to a set of sounds, but to the meaning with which that set of sounds has been symbolically endowed.
A basic idea in general semantics, therefore, is that the meaning of words (or other symbols) is not in the words, but in our own semantic reactions. If I were to tell a shockingly obscene story in Arabic or Hindustani or Swahili before an audience that understood only English, no one would blush or be angry; the story would be neither shocking nor obscene-indeed, it would not even be a story. Likewise, the value of a dollar bill is not in the bill, but in our social agreement to accept it as a symbol of value. If that agreement were to break down through the collapse of our government, the dollar bill would become only a scrap of paper. We do not understand a dollar bill by staring at it long and hard. We understand it by observing how people act with respect to it. We understand it by understanding the social mechanisms and the loyalties that keep it meaningful. Semantics is therefore a social study, basic to all other social studies.
Questions
Questions 27–31 Multiple Choice (One Answer)
Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.
Questions 32–35 True / False / Not Given
Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 3?
Questions 36–40 Matching Sentence Endings
Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-H, below.
A. is meaningless.
B. has lasting effects on human behaviours.
C. is a symbol that has lost its meaning.
D. can be understood only in its social context.
E. can provide inadequate explanation of meaning.
F. reflects the variability of human behaviours.
G. emphasises the importance of analysing how words were used.
H. suggests that certain types of behaviours carry more meanings than others.
Answers & Explanations Summary
| # | Answer | Evidence | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q27 | C | If you did not have within you at this moment the pattern of reactions that we call “the ability to read,” you would see here only meaningless black marks on paper | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that if a person doesn't have the learned skill of 'reading,' they would only see black shapes on the paper that do not mean anything to them. Answer Explanation: The answer means that written words only have meaning for people who have learned the right way to understand them. If someone hasn't learned this, the words will just look like random marks without any sense. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer explains that written text, or 'print,' only makes sense to those who have developed the necessary skills to understand it. The first paragraph clearly states that if a person does not have 'the ability to read,' then the words on the page would appear as 'meaningless black marks.' This shows that understanding written text depends on having certain 'trained patterns of response' or ways to react to words. |
| Q28 | C | If, as the result of all these influences that make us what we are, our semantic habits are reasonably similar to those of most people around us, we are regarded as “normal,” or perhaps “dull.” If our semantic habits are noticeably different from those of others, we are regarded as “individualistic” or “original,” or, if the differences are disapproved of or viewed with alarm, as “crazy.” | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage states that if our ways of reacting and thinking (called 'semantic habits') are very much like what most people do, others will see us as 'normal.' But if our reactions are very different from what others do, we might be seen as special or even strange. This means that people are judged by how common or unusual their reactions are. Answer Explanation: The answer says that people are judged based on how usual or common their reactions and ways of thinking are, compared to what most other people do. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is C because the second paragraph explains that people are judged by their 'semantic habits' or 'reaction patterns.' It states that if these habits are 'reasonably similar to those of most people around us,' then people consider us 'normal.' However, if our 'semantic habits are noticeably different from those of others,' we might be seen as 'individualistic' or 'crazy.' This clearly shows that people are judged based on how conventional, or similar to others', their responses are. |
| Q29 | A | If one stops to think for a moment, it is clear that to define a word, as a dictionary does, is simply to explain the word with more words. To be thorough about defining, we should next have to define the words used in the definition, then define the words used in defining the words used in the definition and so on. Defining words with more words, in short, gets us at once into what mathematicians call an “infinite regress” | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that using a dictionary to explain a word means using other words. If you want to explain really well, you would then have to explain the new words, and then the words used for those explanations, and so on forever. This never-ending process of defining words with more words is called an “infinite regress”. Answer Explanation: The answer means that common ways of defining words, like using a dictionary, cannot explain them perfectly or exactly. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is A because the third paragraph explains that when you try to define words using more words, you get into a never-ending cycle, or 'infinite regress.' This shows that simply using more words to define a word, as dictionaries often do, fails to explain its meaning in a precise and complete way. The paragraph provides examples of this problem, such as continuously needing to define new words used in definitions, or getting stuck in a circle where two words define each other. |
| Q30 | C | Yet—and here we come to another common reaction pattern—people often act as if words can be explained fully with more words. To a person who asked for a definition of jazz, Louis Armstrong is said to have replied, “Man, when you got to ask what it is, you'll never get to know,” proving himself to be an intuitive semanticist as well as a great trumpet player | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that people often think words can be completely explained by using other words. But then it gives an example: when someone asked Louis Armstrong to define jazz, he replied that if you have to ask, you will never truly know. The passage says this shows Armstrong was very good at understanding meaning without formal definitions, proving he was an 'intuitive semanticist'. This segment shows that some things cannot be explained by just more words. Answer Explanation: The answer means that Louis Armstrong's example helps us understand more about how things, especially words and ideas, are explained or defined. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is C because the passage uses Louis Armstrong's quote about jazz right after talking about how trying to define words with more words can be an 'infinite regress' and not always helpful. Armstrong's reply, 'when you got to ask what it is, you'll never get to know,' suggests that some meanings are understood through experience or intuition, not just definitions. The writer then calls Armstrong an 'intuitive semanticist,' meaning he instinctively understood how meaning works beyond simple verbal explanations. This shows that his example gives 'insights' into the true nature of meaning and thus how things are 'defined' or understood, which is deeper than just using a dictionary. |
| Q31 | B | This is an instance of “meaning” at work—but it is not a meaning that can be found in dictionaries | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage states that the manager's action (throwing away the application) is an example of 'meaning' happening. However, this meaning—his personal bias against 'Harvard men'—is not a common or official definition that you would find in a dictionary. It shows that meaning can be personal and not always understood by everyone. Answer Explanation: The answer means that what words or symbols really mean to people is often different for each person. It's not always something everyone agrees on or can find in a book like a dictionary. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is B because the passage uses the example of the personnel manager to show that meaning is not always fixed or universal. The manager had a personal dislike for 'Harvard men,' which made him throw away the application. This meaning—his personal bias—is not something generally shared or written in a dictionary. The passage highlights that this is 'an instance of “meaning” at work' that 'is not a meaning that can be found in dictionaries,' indicating that meaning can be very individual and not easily shared or understood by everyone. |
| Q32 | TRUE | But if you say—and revolutionists have started uprisings with just this statement “Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains!”—what operations could you perform to demonstrate its accuracy or inaccuracy | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage provides an example of a statement, 'Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains!', and then asks what actions could be done to prove if this statement is true or not true. This shows that some statements cannot be checked or proven using actions. Answer Explanation: The answer, 'TRUE,' means that it is correct to say that some things people say or write cannot be shown to be true or false. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is TRUE because the passage explains that while some ideas can be checked to see if they are correct, others cannot. The author gives an example of a statement like 'Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains!' and asks what actions one could do to show if it is 'accuracy or inaccuracy'. This directly supports the idea that some statements are impossible to prove or disprove. |
| Q33 | NOT GIVEN | A basic idea in general semantics, therefore, is that the meaning of words (or other symbols) is not in the words, but in our own semantic reactions. If I were to tell a shockingly obscene story in Arabic or Hindustani or Swahili before an audience that understood only English, no one would blush or be angry; the story would be neither shocking nor obscene-indeed, it would not even be a story. Likewise, the value of a dollar bill is not in the bill, but in our social agreement to accept it as a symbol of value. If that agreement were to break down through the collapse of our government, the dollar bill would become only a scrap of paper. We do not understand a dollar bill by staring at it long and hard. We understand it by observing how people act with respect to it. We understand it by understanding the social mechanisms and the loyalties that keep it meaningful. Semantics is therefore a social study, basic to all other social studies | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that meaning comes from our own reactions (personal meaning) and from what we agree on as a group (shared meaning), like how a dollar bill has value because everyone agrees it does. It describes both these ideas but does not say that one type of meaning is better or more important to study than the other. Answer Explanation: The answer is 'NOT GIVEN'. This means the passage does not tell us if learning about personal meanings is less important than learning about shared meanings. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is 'NOT GIVEN' because the passage explains what meaning is, how our reactions form it, and how both individual reactions and social agreements play a role. However, it *never compares* the importance or 'worthiness' of studying personal meanings versus shared meanings. The passage describes different aspects of meaning but does not offer an opinion on which is more valuable to study. |
| Q34 | TRUE | When we react to a flag, we are not reacting simply to a piece of cloth, but to the meaning with which it has been symbolically endowed. When we react to a word, we are not reacting to a set of sounds, but to the meaning with which that set of sounds has been symbolically endowed | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that when we see a flag, we don't just see a piece of cloth. We see the special meaning people have given it. In the same way, when we hear a word, we don't just hear sounds. We understand the special meaning people have given to those sounds. So, for both flags and words, our reaction comes from the 'meaning' they carry as symbols, not from their physical form. Answer Explanation: The answer is 'TRUE,' which means the statement is correct and matches the information in the reading passage. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is 'TRUE' because the passage explains that both flags and words make us react for the same main reason: they are symbols with special meaning given to them. We don't just react to a flag's fabric or a word's sound, but to the ideas and feelings they represent that people have put into them. This means the reason we react is because of their 'symbolic meaning'. |
| Q35 | FALSE | If I were to tell a shockingly obscene story in Arabic or Hindustani or Swahili before an audience that understood only English, no one would blush or be angry; the story would be neither shocking nor obscene-indeed, it would not even be a story | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage means that if a person tells a story in a different language, and the people listening don't understand that language, then the story won't make anyone feel anything, like being surprised or upset. In fact, if people don't understand it, it's not even really a story to them. Answer Explanation: The answer 'FALSE' means that the statement is not true. It suggests that a story cannot be fun or interesting if people don't understand it. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is FALSE because the passage explains that if people don't understand the language a story is told in, it won't even be considered a story. For example, if someone tells a story in a language an audience doesn't understand, the audience won't be able to react to it, making it impossible for the story to be 'shocking,' 'obscene,' or 'entertaining.' The passage implies that understanding is essential for a story to have any impact or meaning. |
| Q36 | B | Our reaction patterns or our semantic habits, are the internal and most important residue of whatever years of education or miseducation we may have received from our parents' conduct toward us in childhood as well as their teachings, from the formal education we may have had, from all the lectures we have listened to, from the radio programs and the movies and television shows we have experienced, from all the books and newspapers and comic strips we have read, from the conversations we have had with friends and associates, and from all our experiences | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that our 'reaction patterns' (how we react) and 'semantic habits' (our ways of understanding things) are the most important lasting results from all our life experiences, including reading 'comic strips'. This means comic strips help to build who we are and how we act. Answer Explanation: The answer means that reading comic strips changes how people act and think for a long time. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is B because the passage explains that comic strips, along with many other things like books and movies, help to form our 'semantic habits' or 'reaction patterns'. These habits are described as 'the internal and most important residue' of our experiences, meaning they are lasting parts of us that shape how we behave and react to the world. Therefore, reading comic strips has a lasting effect on our behaviors. |
| Q37 | E | Defining words with more words, in short, gets us at once into what mathematicians call an “infinite regress”. Alternatively, it can get us into the kind of run-around we sometimes encounter when we look up “impertinence” and find it defined as “impudence,” so we look up “impudence” and find it defined as “impertinence.” | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that when a dictionary defines a word, it uses other words. This can create a never-ending chain, like an 'infinite regress,' where you always need to look up more words. It also shows that dictionaries can sometimes define two words using each other, like defining 'impertinence' as 'impudence' and 'impudence' as 'impertinence,' which doesn't really help you understand what either word means. Answer Explanation: The answer E means that a dictionary cannot fully or properly explain what words truly mean. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is E because the passage explains that dictionaries define words by using other words. This process can go on forever, or it can lead to circular definitions where words define each other. This shows that dictionaries give an incomplete, or 'inadequate,' explanation of meaning. The passage suggests this means dictionaries don't truly capture the full 'meaning of words' because you have to keep looking up more words to understand the first one. |
| Q38 | G | P. W. Bridgman, the Nobel Prize winner and physicist, once wrote, “The true meaning of a term is to be found by observing what a man does with it, not by what he says about it.” He made an enormous contribution to science by showing that the meaning of a scientific term lies in the operations, the things done, that establish its validity, rather than in verbal definitions | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that Bridgman, a scientist, said that to know what a word truly means, you should watch what someone *does* with it, not just listen to what they claim it means. He showed that the meaning of a science word comes from the actions or 'operations' people do with it, not from simple word definitions. Answer Explanation: The answer means that Bridgman highlighted how important it is to look at how words are actually used, not just what they seem to mean at first glance. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is G because the passage states that P. W. Bridgman believed the true meaning of a word comes from watching what a person 'does with it,' not just 'what he says about it.' This idea is about understanding meaning through actions or 'operations' people perform, which is the same as 'analysing how words were used' in real situations rather than just their definitions. |
| Q39 | D | A basic idea in general semantics, therefore, is that the meaning of words (or other symbols) is not in the words, but in our own semantic reactions. If I were to tell a shockingly obscene story in Arabic or Hindustani or Swahili before an audience that understood only English, no one would blush or be angry; the story would be neither shocking nor obscene-indeed, it would not even be a story | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage explains that words and other symbols don't have meaning on their own. Their meaning comes from how people react to them. For example, if someone tells a story in a language that the listeners don't know, a story that might shock people who understand it will not make the ignorant audience blush or be angry. To that audience, it isn't even truly a story. Answer Explanation: The answer means that people can only understand a story if they share a common understanding of its language and the social situation it's in, not just by looking at the words alone. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is D because the passage explains that the 'meaning of words' (like a story) does not come from the words themselves. Instead, it comes from our 'semantic reactions' and the 'social agreement' to understand them. When an audience cannot understand a language, they lack this shared 'social context' and 'semantic reactions,' which means the story 'would not even be a story' and thus cannot be understood in any meaningful way by them. |
| Q40 | C | If that agreement were to break down through the collapse of our government, the dollar bill would become only a scrap of paper | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that if people stop agreeing on the value of money, for example, if the government fails, then a dollar bill would just be a piece of paper with no special worth. Answer Explanation: The answer means that a dollar bill is like a sign or a picture (a symbol) that people no longer agree to give value to. It would become something without its original purpose or importance. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is 'C' because the passage explains that a dollar bill only has value because people agree it does. If this 'social agreement' breaks down, for example, if the government falls apart, then the dollar bill would stop being money and would just be 'a scrap of paper'. This means it would lose its special meaning as a symbol of value. |