DOC PREVIEW
MIT 24 954 - Notes on Presupposition

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 7 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Fox/Menendez-Benito 11/18/06 Notes on Presupposition [this handout largely follows Kai’s notes (on the website) with some additions and changes. Most of the examples are taken from there. Parts of the handout follow the discussion in Heim 1990.] 1. Introduction Two properties of presupposition: (i) “Taken for granted” (ii) Generally – but not always– inherited by complex containing structures. Property 1 1) It was Sam who broke the typewriter. Presupposes: Somebody broke the typewriter Asserts: Sam broke the typewriter. 2) The mathematician who proved Goldbach’s conjecture is a woman. Presupposes: there is a unique mathematician who proved Goldbach’s conjecture. Asserts: She is a woman. • The “Hey, wait a minute” test (von Fintel, inspired by Shannon 1976). 3) A: B: B’: It was Sam who broke the typewriter. Hey, wait a minute! I had no idea that somebody had broken the typewriter. # Hey, wait a minute! I had no idea that Sam had broken the typewriter. A: B: B’: The mathematician who proved Goldbach’s conjecture is a woman. Hey, wait a minute! I had no idea that somebody had proved Goldbach’s conjecture. # Hey, wait a minute! I had no idea that was a woman. 1 Cite as: Daniel Fox and Paula Menendez-Benito, course materials for 24.954 Pragmatics in LinguisticTheory, Fall 2006. MIT OpenCourseWare (http://ocw.mit.edu/), Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Downloaded on [DD Month YYYY].Fox/Menendez-Benito 11/18/06 Property 2 . Existence presupposition of definites and other noun phrases 4) The mathematician who proved Goldbach’s conjecture was a woman. 5) John invited every foreign graduate student to his party. . Clefts 6) It was Sam who broke the typewriter. . Factive verbs 7) Bill is aware that Mary kissed John. 4. Additive particles (too, again) 8) John is going to drop out of school again. 9) John lives in NYC too. . Change-of-phase predicates 10) John has quit smoking. 11) a. The mathematician who proved Goldbach’s conjecture was a woman. b. The mathematician who proved Goldbach’s conjecture wasn’t a woman. c. Maybe the mathematician who proved Goldbach’s conjecture was a woman. d. It is unlikely that the mathematician who proved Goldbach’s conjecture was a woman. e. If the mathematician who proved Goldbach’s conjecture was a woman, then she will get the Fields Medal this year. 12) a. John invited every foreign graduate student to his party. b. John did not invite every foreign graduate student to his party. c. Maybe John invited every foreign graduate student to his party. d. It is unlikely that John invited every foreign graduate student to his party. e. If John invited every foreign graduate student to his party, we will need more beer. 2 Cite as: Daniel Fox and Paula Menendez-Benito, course materials for 24.954 Pragmatics in LinguisticTheory, Fall 2006. MIT OpenCourseWare (http://ocw.mit.edu/), Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Downloaded on [DD Month YYYY].Fox/Menendez-Benito 11/18/06 . Clefts 13) a. It was Sam who broke the typewriter. b. It wasn’t Sam who broke the typewriter. c. Maybe it was Sam who broke the typewriter. d. It is unlikely that it was Sam who broke the typewriter. e. If it was Sam who broke the typewriter, then he will have to fix it. . Factive verbs 14) a. Bill is aware that Mary kissed John. b. Bill is not aware that Mary kissed John. c. Maybe Bill is aware that Mary kissed John. d. It is unlikely that Bill is aware that Mary kissed John. e. If Bill is aware that Mary kissed John, then he will not talk to John tonight. 4. Additive particles (too, again) 15) a. John is going to drop out of school again. b. John isn’t going to drop out of school again. c. Maybe John is going to drop out of school again. d. It is unlikely that John is going to drop out of school again. e. If John is going to drop out of school again, his mother will be upset. . Change-of-phase predicates 16) a. John has quit smoking. b. John hasn’t quit smoking. c. Maybe John has quit smoking. d. It is unlikely that John has quit smoking. e. If John has quit smoking, then we won’t need ashtrays at the party. Compare with: Conjunction: 17) Thanksgiving will be great. The turkey is organic and Harry’s wife is a great cook. 18) Harry is married and Harry’s wife is a great cook. 19) Harry’s wife is a great cook and the turkey is organic. 20) # Harry’s wife is a great cook and Harry’s married. 3 Cite as: Daniel Fox and Paula Menendez-Benito, course materials for 24.954 Pragmatics in LinguisticTheory, Fall 2006. MIT OpenCourseWare (http://ocw.mit.edu/), Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyDownloaded on [DD Month YYYY]..Fox/Menendez-Benito 11/18/06 Generalization: (i) If A presupposes that p then A & B will also presuppose that p. (ii) If B presupposes that p, then A & B and will also presuppose that p, unless A entails p (together with assumptions in the context). Conditionals 21) If this dish wasn’t catered, then Harry’s wife is a great cook. 22) If Harry is married, then Harry’s wife is a great cook. 23) If Harry’s wife is a great cook, then Thanksgiving will be a success. Generalization (i) If A presupposes that p, then then if A, then B will also presuppose that p. (ii) If B presupposes that p, then if A, then B, then will also presuppose that p, unless A entails p (together with assumptions in the context.) Questions (i) What is the nature of presuppositions? (ii) How can we account for the inheritance patterns? The Projection Problem for Presuppositions (= the Compositionality Problem for Presuppositions). 2. The Stalnaker/Karttunen approach. Question (i) Presuppositions are admittance conditions. [Stalnaker (1973, 1974, 1979); Karttunen (1974).] • Presuppositions are requirements on the common ground: B is a presupposition of S iff S can be felicitously uttered only in contexts whose common ground entails B. • Roughly, the common ground of a context is the set of propositions that the interlocutors take for granted in that context. 4 Cite as: Daniel Fox and Paula Menendez-Benito, course materials for 24.954 Pragmatics in LinguisticTheory, Fall 2006. MIT OpenCourseWare (http://ocw.mit.edu/), Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Downloaded on [DD Month YYYY].Fox/Menendez-Benito 11/18/06 Accommodation. 24) I am sorry I am late. My car broke down (Heim 1990) "[...] it's


View Full Document

MIT 24 954 - Notes on Presupposition

Download Notes on Presupposition
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Notes on Presupposition and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Notes on Presupposition 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?