Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
OK, yes - this document does use the word semantical, but in a very different sense - Actually, strangely enough, I read sections from the same source that this author used in a modern philosophy seminar I took some years ago. Carnap is very interesting stuff - but this is most definately not descriptive linguistics. Actually, I'm not even sure how this kind of study is classified. Maybe "the philosophy of language" - rather different from linguistics as no one is making any scientific or empirical observations about structure or derivation. Still, I get your point! Surely, in this sort of field "semantical" would be a correct translation. Perhaps with such limited context in my example, what was looking for was unclear. Thanks for the heads-up!