This paper is concerned with the relation between semantics and non-linguistic practice and with change in that relation. The particular case involves two classes of clausal constructions that have lay as their verb and are used in initiating bets. One class involves lay a wager and the other involves lay stake. Associated with the use of these constructions are a number of practices that have to do with what is done with the stakes of the bet. The crucial distinction among these practices in terms of the semantics of lay is whether or not stakes are physically laid down. If they are, then lay is interpretable as naming the physical action. Otherwise, some other interpretation must be sought for lay. I show that, over three centuries, there is a decline in the practice of laying stakes down when lay stake is used. With lay a wager there is no significant change. The result of the changing use of lay stake is that lay is increasingly interpreted as having a metaphoric or abstract meaning. Where the new meaning is metaphoric, this is due not to a deliberate expressive choice on the part of the speaker – as is usually assumed for metaphoric use – but to change in non-linguistic practice.

中文翻译：

---

通过改变非语言实践来改变语义

本文关注语义学和非语言实践之间的关系以及这种关系的变化。特殊情况涉及两类分句结构，它们以“lay”作为动词并用于启动赌注。一类涉及下注，另一类涉及下注。与这些结构的使用相关的是许多与赌注的做法有关的做法。这些实践之间在放置语义方面的关键区别在于是否实际放置了赌注。如果是，则lay 可以解释为命名物理动作。否则，必须为外行寻求其他解释。我表明，在三个多世纪以来，当使用木桩时，木桩的做法有所减少。下注没有重大变化。外行的变化使用的结果是，外行越来越多地被解释为具有隐喻或抽象的意义。在新含义是隐喻的地方，这不是由于说话者的故意表达选择——正如通常假设的隐喻使用——而是由于非语言实践的变化。