通过以太进行比较

IF 2 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Journal of Semantics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1093/jos/ffab021
C. Umbach, S. Solt
{"title":"通过以太进行比较","authors":"C. Umbach, S. Solt","doi":"10.1093/jos/ffab021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper is about the semantics of the German adverb eher, which has three, or perhaps four, readings: temporal, epistemic, metalinguistic and -depending on whether it is accepted as a genuine reading -preference. In its epistemic reading, eher gained prominence in semantics because it was used by Kratzer (1981) to argue that the notion of possibility is gradable. Eher has also received attention from a diachronic perspective, where it has been compared to the English adverb rather (Gergel 2009). Our analysis starts from the temporal reading which, first of all, expresses temporal precedence. We argue that temporal eher is indexical (unlike früher / 'earlier'), comparing closeness to a perspectival center, and that the non-temporal readings inherit their basic structure from the temporal one. The analysis of the non-temporal readings will be embedded in a Kratzer-style ordering semantics, deviating from the standard picture in assuming (i), that both the modal base and the ordering source are relativized to a perspective holder and (ii), that in the case of metalinguistic eher, interpretations (in the sense of Barker 2002 / Krifka 2012) are compared instead of worlds. Our analysis is different from that developed by Herburger & Rubinstein (2018), which ignores the temporal as well as the metalinguistic reading and takes recourse to \"degrees of belief\". At the end of the paper, we briefly look at expressions related to eher, including English more and its German counterpart mehr as well as English rather, and also at the modal reading of German schon (‘already’).","PeriodicalId":46947,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Semantics","volume":"39 1","pages":"39-85"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison via eher\",\"authors\":\"C. Umbach, S. Solt\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jos/ffab021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper is about the semantics of the German adverb eher, which has three, or perhaps four, readings: temporal, epistemic, metalinguistic and -depending on whether it is accepted as a genuine reading -preference. In its epistemic reading, eher gained prominence in semantics because it was used by Kratzer (1981) to argue that the notion of possibility is gradable. Eher has also received attention from a diachronic perspective, where it has been compared to the English adverb rather (Gergel 2009). Our analysis starts from the temporal reading which, first of all, expresses temporal precedence. We argue that temporal eher is indexical (unlike früher / 'earlier'), comparing closeness to a perspectival center, and that the non-temporal readings inherit their basic structure from the temporal one. The analysis of the non-temporal readings will be embedded in a Kratzer-style ordering semantics, deviating from the standard picture in assuming (i), that both the modal base and the ordering source are relativized to a perspective holder and (ii), that in the case of metalinguistic eher, interpretations (in the sense of Barker 2002 / Krifka 2012) are compared instead of worlds. Our analysis is different from that developed by Herburger & Rubinstein (2018), which ignores the temporal as well as the metalinguistic reading and takes recourse to \\\"degrees of belief\\\". At the end of the paper, we briefly look at expressions related to eher, including English more and its German counterpart mehr as well as English rather, and also at the modal reading of German schon (‘already’).\",\"PeriodicalId\":46947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Semantics\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"39-85\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Semantics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffab021\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Semantics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffab021","RegionNum":2,"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: 2

摘要

本文是关于德语副词eher的语义,它有三种或四种阅读方式:时间、认知、元语言和——取决于它是否被接受为真正的阅读偏好。在认识论阅读中,eher在语义学中获得了突出地位,因为它被克拉泽(1981)用来论证可能性的概念是可分级的。从历时的角度来看,Eher也受到了关注,人们将其与英语副词rather进行了比较(Gergel 2009)。我们的分析从时间读法开始,时间读法首先表达了时间优先性。我们认为,时间阅读是索引的(不像之前的她/“早期”),比较了与视角中心的接近程度,非时间阅读继承了时间阅读的基本结构。非时间解读的分析将嵌入到克拉泽式的排序语义中,在假设(i),模态基础和排序源都相对于一个视角持有者,以及(ii),在元语言的情况下,解释(在Barker 2002 / Krifka 2012的意义上)是比较的,而不是世界。我们的分析与Herburger & Rubinstein(2018)的分析不同,后者忽略了时间和元语言阅读,并求助于“信仰程度”。在本文的最后,我们简要地看了一下与eher相关的表达,包括英语中的more和德语中的mehr以及英语中的rather,以及德语中schon(“已经”)的情态阅读。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison via eher
This paper is about the semantics of the German adverb eher, which has three, or perhaps four, readings: temporal, epistemic, metalinguistic and -depending on whether it is accepted as a genuine reading -preference. In its epistemic reading, eher gained prominence in semantics because it was used by Kratzer (1981) to argue that the notion of possibility is gradable. Eher has also received attention from a diachronic perspective, where it has been compared to the English adverb rather (Gergel 2009). Our analysis starts from the temporal reading which, first of all, expresses temporal precedence. We argue that temporal eher is indexical (unlike früher / 'earlier'), comparing closeness to a perspectival center, and that the non-temporal readings inherit their basic structure from the temporal one. The analysis of the non-temporal readings will be embedded in a Kratzer-style ordering semantics, deviating from the standard picture in assuming (i), that both the modal base and the ordering source are relativized to a perspective holder and (ii), that in the case of metalinguistic eher, interpretations (in the sense of Barker 2002 / Krifka 2012) are compared instead of worlds. Our analysis is different from that developed by Herburger & Rubinstein (2018), which ignores the temporal as well as the metalinguistic reading and takes recourse to "degrees of belief". At the end of the paper, we briefly look at expressions related to eher, including English more and its German counterpart mehr as well as English rather, and also at the modal reading of German schon (‘already’).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Journal of Semantics aims to be the premier journal in semantics. It covers all areas in the study of meaning, with a focus on formal and experimental methods. The Journal welcomes submissions on semantics, pragmatics, the syntax/semantics interface, cross-linguistic semantics, experimental studies of meaning (processing, acquisition, neurolinguistics), and semantically informed philosophy of language.
期刊最新文献
Russian Disjunction To li To li and Obligatory Ignorance The Interpretation of Relative and Absolute Adjectives Under Negation X- vs. O-marked want Negative strengthening: The interplay of evaluative polarity and scale structure The Domains of Monotonicity Processing
×
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