On believing and hoping whether

IF 1.4 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Semantics & Pragmatics Pub Date : 2021-06-04 DOI:10.3765/SP.14.6
Aaron Steven White
{"title":"On believing and hoping whether","authors":"Aaron Steven White","doi":"10.3765/SP.14.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Theories of clause selection that aim to explain the distribution of interrogative and declarative complement clauses often take as a starting point that predicates like think , believe , hope , and fear are incompatible with interrogative complements. After discussing experimental evidence against the generalizations on which these theories rest, I give corpus evidence that even the core data are faulty: think , believe , hope , and fear are in fact compatible with interrogative complements, suggesting that any theory predicting that they should not be must be jettisoned. \n \nEARLY ACCESS","PeriodicalId":45550,"journal":{"name":"Semantics & Pragmatics","volume":"14 1","pages":"6"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Semantics & Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3765/SP.14.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Theories of clause selection that aim to explain the distribution of interrogative and declarative complement clauses often take as a starting point that predicates like think , believe , hope , and fear are incompatible with interrogative complements. After discussing experimental evidence against the generalizations on which these theories rest, I give corpus evidence that even the core data are faulty: think , believe , hope , and fear are in fact compatible with interrogative complements, suggesting that any theory predicting that they should not be must be jettisoned. EARLY ACCESS
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
关于相信和希望
旨在解释疑问从句和陈述性补语从句分布的从句选择理论通常以think、believe、hope和fear等谓词与疑问补语不相容为出发点。在讨论了反对这些理论所依据的概括的实验证据后,我给出了语料库证据,证明即使是核心数据也是错误的:思考、相信、希望和恐惧事实上与疑问补语是兼容的,这表明任何预测它们不应该被抛弃的理论都必须被抛弃。早期访问
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
50 weeks
期刊最新文献
Using the Anna Karenina Principle to explain why cause favors negative-sentiment complements Putting oughts together Probabilities and logic in implicature computation: Two puzzles with embedded disjunction Context Dynamics Pair-list answers to questions with plural definites
×
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:604180095
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