By I. Comorovski
Interrogative words and the Syntax-Semantics Interface begins by means of studying the translation of interrogative words in unmarried and a number of constituent questions, together with their interpretation less than adverbs of quantification. the consequences are then placed to paintings in a unique method of a few of the constraints on dependencies among fronted interrogative words and the linked gaps: superiority, susceptible crossover, in addition to the so-called `weak islands' (the WH-island, the damaging island and the Factive Island). it's argued that the potential of fronting an interrogative word out of those configurations depends upon a semantic/pragmatic situation on questions, which calls for them to be answerable. The research is labored out largely on Romanian, a language which permits a number of wh-fronting. the consequences are then prolonged to English.
Audience: Researchers and scholars in syntax, semantics and their interface, in addition to linguists learning the relation among the acceptability of sentences and the bigger discourse context.
Read Online or Download Interrogative Phrases and the Syntax-Semantics Interface PDF
Similar semantics books
This paintings provides a unified idea of element inside of common Grammar. It presents an strange blend of syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic ways to a unmarried area, and provides exact linguistic analyses of 5 languages with very diversified aspectual structures: English, French, Mandarin chinese language, Navajo and Russian.
During this brief monograph, John Horty explores the problems awarded for Gottlob Frege's semantic concept, in addition to its glossy descendents, via the therapy of outlined expressions. The e-book starts off via targeting the mental constraints governing Frege's thought of experience, or that means, and argues that, given those constraints, even the therapy of straightforward stipulative definitions led Frege to special problems.
Linguistic research of the discussion of Italian cinema, utilizing thoughts and methodologies from pragmatics, dialog research and discourse research.
- Greek Interjections
- Semantical Investigations in Heyting’s Intuitionistic Logic
- Key Terms in Pragmatics
- Componential Analysis of Kinship Terminology: A Computational Perspective
Additional resources for Interrogative Phrases and the Syntax-Semantics Interface
Plural Wh-NPs and Quantificational Variability Our account for the quantification variability of wh-phrases under adverbs of frequency will make use of Engdahl's (1980, 1986) analysis of wh-phrases as functions from individuals to individuals (Skolem functions). Engdahl (1980, 1986) argues that wh-phrases must be allowed to denote Skolem functions, in view of question-answer pairs like the following: (62) Q: What woman does every man love best? A: His mother. According to Engdahl, what woman in (62) denotes a function from the set of men to the woman they love best; the question simply asks for the identification of this function.
If every man would love his wife, women would be happier. (50a) presupposes that John is married. The elementary presupposition John has a wife is globally accommodated. However, if the elementary presupposition of (SOb) that every man has a wife were globally accommodated, the result would be a non-existent interpretation, since the truth of (SOb) does not require that every man be married; rather, (SOb) says that women would be happier if every man who has a wife loved her. In van der Sandt's (1992) model, the processing of a sentence starts with the deepest embedded anaphor.
Uttered in a context where speaker and hearer share knowledge of the membership of the set of students, will consist of an enumeration of the members of the maximal subset of the given set of students that are also members of the set denoted by the predicate came. 3. 4. The Presupposition of Wh-Questions and Anaphora to Wh-Phrases Karttunen and Peters (1976) rule out the possibility that the existential presupposition of wh-questions is a conversational implicature. Conversational implicature may appear as a candidate in view of the felicity of negative answers, which might give one the impression that what is implicated can be cancelled: (36) Q: Who smokes?