Other papers on formal semantics
- Towards a uniform analysis of any . (Nat. Language Semantics (2008), 297-315) pdf file
In this paper, Universal {\it any} and Negative Polarity Item {\it any} are uniformly analyzed as `counterfactual' donkey sentences (in disguise). Their difference in meaning is reduced here to the distinction between {\it strong} and {\it weak} readings of donkey sentences. It is shown that this explains the {\it universal} and {\it existential} character of Universal- and NPI-{\it any}, respectively, and the positive and negative contexts in which they are licensed. Our uniform analysis extends to the use of {\it any} in command and permission sentences. It predicts that whereas the use of {\it any} in permission sentences is licensed and gives rise to a universal reading, it is not licensed in command sentences.
- Topic, Focus, and Exhaustive Interpretation . (in Chungmin (ed.), Proceedings of CIL 18 workshop) pdf file
In this paper we proposed that a sentence like `John_T ate broccoli_F' should pragmatically be interpreted as follows: (a) Focus should be interpreted exhaustively: John ate only broccoli; (b) Topic must be interpreted exhaustively: Only John ate (only) broccoli; and (c) The speaker takes it to be possible (or even knows, if he is competent) that at least one alternative of the form `x ate y' not entailed by the sentence is true.
- Comparatives and Quantifiers. (in Bonani and Hofherr (eds), Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 7) pdf file
A traditional issue in the analysis of comparatives is whether or not degrees are essential. In the first part of this paper I discuss the traditional analyses that account for comparatives with (Seuren, von Stechow) and without (Klein) degrees, and remind the reader that these are very similar to each other. A more recent issue is how to account for quantifiers in the {\it than}-clause. The traditional analyses account well for Negative Polarity Items in comparative clauses, but have problems with conjunctive quantifiers. The strength of the proposals of Larson (1988) and Schwarzchild \& Wilkinson (2002), on the other hand, goes exactly in the opposite direction. I will discuss two types of strategies so as to account for both types of quantifiers: (i) one based on the traditional analysis, but by making use of more coarse-grained models or of intervals, (ii) one where comparatives are taken to be ambiguous between the traditional reading and the Larson-reading, and where the actual reading is selected with the help of the strongest meaning hypothesis.
- How to donkey FC and NPI any. (in proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 2006) pdf file
Free Choice {\it any} and Negative Polarity Item {\it any} are uniformly analyzed as counterfactual donkey sentences (in disguise). Their difference in meaning will be reduced to the distinction between {\it strong} and {\it weak} readings of donkey sentences. It is shown that this explains the {\it universal} and {\it existential} character of FC- and NPI-{\it any}, respectively, and the positive and negative contexts in which they are licensed.
- Free Choice Counterfactual Donkeys. (Journal of Semantics, 2006, 23: 383-402) pdf file
We propose a straightforward analysis of counterfactual donkey sentences, by combining the Lewis/Stalnaker analysis of counterfactuals with standard dynamic semantics. The main idea is to define a similarity relation between world-assignment pairs such that two such pairs are unconnected if their assignments differ. We show that with the help of this ordering relation we can also account for a number of related problems involving disjunctions and the use of {\it any} in counterfactuals and permission sentences.
- Free Choice Items and Alternatives (With Maria Aloni, in Proceedings of KNAW Academy Colloquium: Cognitive Foundations of Interpretation (2004), pdf file
Extending the proposal made by Schulz (2003), we put forward a pragmatic account of the meaning of existential and universal FC items, where the `ignorance or indifference' inference triggered by the former and the `universal' inference triggered by the latter are treated as implicatures obtained by standard gricean reasoning formalized in terms of the two operations {\it grice} and {\it competence}. On this account, the implicatures of a sentence are generated with respect to a number of relevant alternatives. The difference between existential and universal FCs is due only to the choice of these alternatives.
- A modal analysis of presupposition and modal subordination (Journal of Semantics, 2005, 281-306. pdf file )
In this paper I give a
modal two-dimensional analysis of presupposition and
modal subordination. I will think of presupposition as a non-veridical propositional attitude. This allows me to evaluate what is presupposed and what is asserted at different dimensions without getting into the binding problem. What is presupposed will be represented by an accessibility relation between possible worlds. The major part of the paper consists of a proposal to account for the
dependence of the interpretation of modal expressions, i.e. modal subordination, in
terms of an accessibility relation as well. Moreover, I
show how such an analysis can be extended from the
propositional to the predicate logical level.
- On Polar Questions (With Marie Safarova, In R. Young and Y. Zhou (eds.), Salt 13: Semantics and Linguistic Theory, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University). Here is an almost final version: pdf
file
We first show on a number of examples that positive polar questions, negative polar questions and alternative questions (containing a proposition and its negation) are not interchangeable in context. We will account for the
differences pragmatically, using decision theory. We offer a
simple classification of three types of use, which covers a number
of phenomena hitherto not systematically dealt with. Finally, we
do away with Ladd's typology of negative polar questions and give
a more systematic interpretation of the data.
An earlier version of this paper appeared as `No's no Good Alternative (With Marie Nilsenova, Stuttgart workshop on Info-structure, 2002); pdf
file
- The dynamics of questions and focus; With Maria Aloni, In: B. Jackson (ed.), Salt 12: Semantic and Linguistic Theory}, 2002, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University. Here is an almost final version: ps
file
This article presents a {\it dynamic} account of questions and focus which combines the logical appeal of the {\it partition theory} of questions with the empirical strength of the {\it structured meaning} account of questions and focus.
- Permission to Change (Journal of Semantics, 2000, 17, pp. 119-145) pdf
file
In this paper I discuss how to account for the
performative effects of imperatives, and concentrate
mainly on permission sentences. In the first part of the
paper I argue that the performative effects of
permission sentences should be accounted for in terms of
a context change theory by making use of {\it
contraction} defined in terms of an ordering relation,
and show also how this ordering relation evolves from
permission to permission. In the second part a problem
for this analysis is discussed, i.e. the problem of
conjunctive permission sentences. I develop two ways to
solve this problem. First, I suggest that this problem
is due to the wrong way of accounting for contraction,
and propose an alternative way in which contraction can
be defined that accounts for the performative effects of
conjunctive permissions in a more satisfactory way.
Although the analysis is appealing, I will argue that we
should account for the problem by means of a type-shift
analysis.
- Some analyses of pro-attitudes. In: H. de Swart (ed.) Logic, Game Theory, and Social Choice, Tilburg University Press, Tilburg, 1999; ps
file dvi
file
- Exhaustivity in Dynamic Semantics; Referential and Descriptive Pronouns (Linguistics and Philosophy, 2001, 24: 621-657)pdf
file
In this paper I argue that {\it anaphoric
pronouns} should always be interpreted {\it
exhaustively}. I propose that pronouns are either used
{\it referentially} and refer to the speaker's referents
of their antecedent indefinites, or {\it descriptively}
and go proxy for the description recoverable from its
antecedent clause. I show how this view can be
implemented within a dynamic semantics, and how it can
account for various examples that seemed to be
problematic for the view that for all unbound pronouns
there always should be a notion of
exhaustivity/uniqueness involved. The uniqueness
assumption for the use of singular pronouns is also
shown to be important to explain what the discourse
referents used in dynamic semantics represent.
- Modal Subordination in Questions (Twendial '98, Recently, Something very close to this analysis has become popular via work of Adrian Brasoveanu) pdf
file
In this paper it is discussed how questions should change information
states in dynamic semantics. The main claim is that the meaning of
following utterances can be dependent on questions in a similar way as
these meanings can be dependent on quantificational sentences, or more
broadly, that this dependence is one of Ômodal subordinationÕ. The most
important contribution of this paper, however, is to show how this dependence
between questions and later utterances can be accounted for in a
general and systematic way.
E-mail: |
R.A.M.VanRooijATuva.nl |