Preconditions and projection: Explaining non-anaphoric presupposition

IF 1.1 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Linguistics and Philosophy Pub Date : 2024-08-28 DOI:10.1007/s10988-024-09413-9
Craige Roberts, Mandy Simons
{"title":"Preconditions and projection: Explaining non-anaphoric presupposition","authors":"Craige Roberts, Mandy Simons","doi":"10.1007/s10988-024-09413-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p> In this paper we articulate a pragmatic account of the projection behavior of three classes of non-anaphoric projective contents: the pre-states of change of state (CoS) predicates, the veridical entailments of factives, and the implication of satisfaction of selectional restrictions. Given evidence that the triggers of these implications are not anaphoric, hence do not impose presuppositional constraints on their local contexts, we argue that the projection behavior of these implications cannot be explained by the standard Karttunen/Heim/van der Sandt proposals. But we recognize that parallels between the projection behavior of these implications and the projection behavior of anaphorically-triggered implications must be explained. The current account offers a unified explanation of why the predicates in question give rise to projection at all; why projection of these implications is susceptible to contextual suppression; and why projection is systematically filtered in the standard Karttunen filtering environments, despite the absence of contextual constraints. We demonstrate that our account largely makes the same predictions for filtering of anaphoric and non-anaphoric presuppositions, and briefly support the claim that in the case of disjunction, filtering in the two cases is not fully parallel, as predicted by our account. We also briefly discuss how the well-documented variability in projection across predicates in the same semantic class can be understood within our approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":47748,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics and Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistics and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-024-09413-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper we articulate a pragmatic account of the projection behavior of three classes of non-anaphoric projective contents: the pre-states of change of state (CoS) predicates, the veridical entailments of factives, and the implication of satisfaction of selectional restrictions. Given evidence that the triggers of these implications are not anaphoric, hence do not impose presuppositional constraints on their local contexts, we argue that the projection behavior of these implications cannot be explained by the standard Karttunen/Heim/van der Sandt proposals. But we recognize that parallels between the projection behavior of these implications and the projection behavior of anaphorically-triggered implications must be explained. The current account offers a unified explanation of why the predicates in question give rise to projection at all; why projection of these implications is susceptible to contextual suppression; and why projection is systematically filtered in the standard Karttunen filtering environments, despite the absence of contextual constraints. We demonstrate that our account largely makes the same predictions for filtering of anaphoric and non-anaphoric presuppositions, and briefly support the claim that in the case of disjunction, filtering in the two cases is not fully parallel, as predicted by our account. We also briefly discuss how the well-documented variability in projection across predicates in the same semantic class can be understood within our approach.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
先决条件与投射:解释非隐喻预设
在本文中,我们对三类非隐喻投射性内容的投射行为进行了语用解释:状态变化(CoS)谓词的前状态、事实蕴涵和满足选择限制的蕴涵。鉴于有证据表明这些蕴涵的触发器不是拟喻的,因此不会对其局部语境施加预设性限制,我们认为这些蕴涵的投射行为无法用标准的 Karttunen/Heim/van der Sandt 提议来解释。但我们承认,必须解释这些蕴涵的投射行为与隐喻触发蕴涵的投射行为之间的相似之处。目前的解释提供了一个统一的解释,说明了为什么有关谓词会产生投射;为什么这些蕴涵的投射容易受到语境的抑制;以及为什么在标准的卡图宁过滤环境中,尽管没有语境限制,投射还是会被系统地过滤掉。我们证明了我们的论述在很大程度上对拟喻预设和非拟喻预设的过滤做出了相同的预测,并简要地支持了这样一种说法,即在析取的情况下,两种情况下的过滤并不完全平行,正如我们的论述所预测的那样。我们还简要讨论了如何在我们的方法中理解有据可查的同一语义类别中不同谓词之间的投射差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Linguistics and Philosophy focuses on issues related to structure and meaning in natural language, as addressed in the semantics, philosophy of language, pragmatics and related disciplines, in particular the following areas: philosophical theories of meaning and truth, reference, description, entailment, presupposition, implicatures, context-dependence, and speech actslinguistic theories of semantic interpretation in relation to syntactic structure and prosody, of discourse structure, lexcial semantics and semantic changepsycholinguistic theories of semantic interpretation and issues of the processing and acquisition of natural language, and the relation of semantic interpretation to other cognitive facultiesmathematical and logical properties of natural language and general aspects of computational linguisticsphilosophical questions raised by linguistics as a science: linguistics methodology, properties of linguistic theories and frameworks, and the relation of linguistics to other fields of inquiryContributions may be in the form of articles, replies, or review articles. Linguistics and Philosophy is indexed in the ISI/Social Science Citation Index.
期刊最新文献
Sense-based low-degree modifiers in Japanese and English: their relations to experience, evaluation, and emotions Preconditions and projection: Explaining non-anaphoric presupposition A distributed analysis of only Negation and modality in unilateral truthmaker semantics Verb roots encode outcomes: argument structure and lexical semantics of reversal and restitution
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1