Introduction to Pragmatics

Transcription

1 Introduction to Pragmatics Summer 2016 Tuesdays 2321.HS 3H INSTRUCTOR Todor Koev (Todor.Koev@uni-duesseldorf.de)

2 Meaning intuitions Native speakers have pretty sharp intuitions about the different ways expressions are semantically related. These intuitions can be elucidated by applying various empirical tests /empirical diagnostics. The meaning intuitions that are brought forward by empirical tests are explained by linguistic theory. Intuitions Tests Theory (Explanation) We will classify some of the implication relations / inferences between sentences. A B means A implies B / B follows from A

3 Implication relations When we speak, listeners draw all sorts of inferences from what we say. Such inferences are not all created equal: they can have a different feel to them. (1) Today s class is going to be intense. Something is going to be intense. I am talking about the current class. Not all classes are intense. The class is taught in English. Task: Try to understand how those inferences differ from each other.

4 Entailment The most basic type of inference is that of entailment ( ). (2) Mario owns a red Ferrari. a. Mario owns a red Ferrari. b. Mario owns a Ferrari. c. Someone owns a red Ferrari. d. Entailment is about the literal meaning of words. entailment literal meaning, asserted content, truthconditional content, at-issue content, explicature,... The study of entailment and truth conditions is the task of semantics / logic.

5 Entailment 2 Entailments are lexically triggered. They are due to the meaning of certain words. All red Ferraris are Ferraris, so we can infer (3). (3) Mario owns a red Ferrari. Mario owns a Ferrari. Non-animals are not cats, so we can infer (4). (4) I didn t inherit an animal. I didn t inherit a cat. Q: How do the inferences in (3) and (4) differ?

6 Entailment 3 Definition (entailment) A B iff whenever A is true, B is true as well iff every situation in which A is true is also a situation in which B is true iff iff the info of B is contained in the info of A A and not-b cannot be both true iff is short for if and only if Those definitions are intuitively equivalent.

7 Entailment 4 Q: Are the following pairs of sentences instances of entailment? (5) a. Kevin believes that Mindy is pregnant. b. Mindy is pregnant. (6) a. It is snowing outside. b. It is cold outside. (7) a. Berlin is the capital of Germany. b. Grass is green.

8 Presupposition Certain facts need to hold true / be taken for granted / treated as uncontroversial in order for the sentence to make sense. Those facts can be thought of as inferences that necessarily hold in order for the sentence to be assigned a truth value (True or False). Such inferences are called presuppositions. (8) The present queen of France lives in Paris. France has a queen. A B means A presupposes B. But why not call this inference an entailment?

9 Presupposition 2 The S(entence) Family Test: Presuppositions are not canceled by negating (9a), modalizing (9b)-(9c), or questioning (9d) the sentence. (9) The present queen of France lives in Paris. a. The present queen of France doesn t live in Paris. b. The present queen of France might live in Paris. c. If the present queen of France lives in Paris, then we can visit her there. d. Does the present queen of France live in Paris? France has a queen. Definition (presupposition): A B iff A and all members of its family imply B.

10 Presupposition vs. entailment Unlike presuppositions, entailments do not survive embedding under operators (negation, modals, questioning). The Sentence Family Test does not apply to entailments! (10) Mario owns a red Ferrari. Mario owns a Ferrari. (11) a. Mario doesn t own a red Ferrari. b. Mario might own a red Ferrari. c. If Mario owns a red Ferrari, I want one too. d. Does Mario own a red Ferrari? Mario owns a Ferrari.

11 Presupposition or entailment? Q: Use the Sentence Family Test in order to determine whether the following implications are presuppositions or entailments. (12) That John was assaulted scared Mary. John was assaulted. (13) John managed to get the job. It was hard for John to get the job. (14) John managed to get the job. John got the job.

12 Presupposition triggers Certain lexical items or syntactic constructions give rise to presuppositions. Such elements are called presupposition triggers. Examples of presupposition triggers: o Definite NPs/Definite descriptions (the man, my lazy poodle, ) (15) Was the mathematician who proved Goldbach s Conjecture a woman? Somebody proved Goldbach s Conjecture.

13 o Factive predicates (regret, be happy that, ) (16) Do you regret selling pot on the street? You sell pot on the street. o Aspectual verbs (stop, start, ) (17) Have you stopped beating your husband? You have beaten your husband in the past. o It-clefts (it was X who ) (18) It was Jesus who set me free. Somebody set me free. Note: Entailments are lexically triggered by definition.

14 Conversational implicature Utterances often give rise to meanings that are richer/stronger than what is literally said. Such inferences are called conversational implicatures. A B means A conversationally implicates B. (19) There are two books on the table. There are no more than two books on the table. (20) You can have chicken or beef. You can t have both chicken and beef. (21) Some of the students passed the exam. Not all of the students passed the exam.

15 Conversational implicature 2 Conversational implicatures are not entailments: e.g. implicatures can be blocked by negating the original sentence. (22) The gas station around the corner is open. You can fill your gas tank there. (23) The gas station around the corner is not open. You can fill your gas tank there. Definition (conversational implicature) A B iff i. A implies B, ii. A does not entail B, and iii. one can reason that a speaker who says A must believe B

16 Properties of implicatures Unlike entailments and presuppositions, implicatures are not lexically triggered. o For example, some might suggest but it does not entail not all. Implicatures are weak inferences, they can be defeated by the speaker in the same breath. o So, implicatures are defeasible. An inference from A to B is defeasible if one can assert A and deny B without contradicting oneself. Examples: (see next slide)

17 Properties of implicature 2 (24a) implicates (24b), and (26a) implicates (26b). Yet, (25) cancels the implicature of (24a), and (27) cancels the implicature of (26a). (24) a. Joan liked some of her presents. b. Joan didn t like all of her presents. (25) Joan liked some of her presents. In fact, she liked all of her presents. (26) a. Mary used to swim a mile daily. b. Mary no longer swims a mile daily. (27) Mary used to swim a mile daily, and she still does.

18 Summary lexically triggered can be blocked defeasible entailment presupposition implicature

19 Ambiguity Ambiguity: when a sentence has more than one meaning. Ambiguity types: o lexical ambiguity: due to an ambiguous word (28). o structural ambiguity: due to an ambiguous parsing (29). o scopal ambiguity: due to a scopal interaction of two operators, e.g. two quantified NPs (30). (28) You should have seen the bull we got from the Pope. bull = papal communication; male cow; nonsense (29) Smart women and men always find jobs. [[smart women] and men] or [smart [women and men]] (30) Everyone loves someone. a. Everyone loves someone or another. b. There is a universally loved person.

20 Vagueness Vagueness: The looseness of meaning that arises through imprecision. Lexical predicates (nouns, verbs, adjectives) are naturally vague because they have non-sharp boundaries. Quantificational NPs can be vague as well. (31) Many linguistics believe vagueness is a serious challenge to pragmatics. Q: How many linguists exactly? (32) My students were falling asleep today. Q: Literally all of them? Take home message: Watch out for ambiguities or vagueness when providing semantic judgments.

21 For next time Please read Implicature. Assignment #1 will be posted on the course website later today. It is due next week on Tuesday.