Title: Meaning and Grammar : an Introduction to Semantics Author: Chierchia, Gennaro.; Mcconnell-Ginet, Sally

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Title: Meaning and Grammar : an Introduction to Semantics Author: Chierchia, Gennaro.; Mcconnell-Ginet, Sally title: Meaning and Grammar : An Introduction to Semantics author: Chierchia, Gennaro.; McConnell-Ginet, Sally. publisher: MIT Press isbn10 | asin: 0262031620 print isbn13: 9780262031622 ebook isbn13: 9780585077567 language: English subject Semantics, Semantics (Philosophy) publication date: 1990 lcc: P325.C384 1990eb ddc: 401/.43 subject: Semantics, Semantics (Philosophy) Page v For Isa and Carl Page iii Meaning and Grammar An Introduction to Semantics Gennaro Chierchia and Sally McConnell-Ginet The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England Page iv Fifth printing, 1996 © 1990 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. This book was set in Times Roman by Asco Trade Typesetting Ltd., Hong Kong, and printed and bound in the United States of America. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Chierchia, Gennaro. Meaning and grammar: an introduction to semantics / Gennaro Chierchia and Sally McConnell-Ginet. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-262-03162-0 1. Semantics. 2. Semantics (Philosophy) I. McConnell-Ginet, Sally. II. Title. P325.C384 1990 401'.43dc20 89-39283 CIP Page v For Isa and Carl Page v For Isa and Carl Page vii Contents Preface xi Chapter 1 The Empirical Domain of Semantics 1 1 1. Introduction 6 2. General Constraints on Semantic Theory 16 3. Intuitions about Semantic Properties and Relations 44 4. Summary Chapter 2 Denotation, Truth, and Meaning 46 46 1. Introduction 48 2. Denotation 61 3. Truth 77 4. Problems Chapter 3 Quantification and Logical Form 90 90 1. Introduction 114 2. Quantification in English Page viii 140 3. Logical Form Chapter 4 Speaking, Meaning, and Doing 147 147 1. Introduction 148 2. Expression Meaning and Speaker's Meaning 163 3. Sentential Force and Discourse Dynamics; 170 4. Speech Acts 187 5. Conversational Implicatures Chapter 5 Intensionality 204 204 1. Introduction 213 2. IPC: An Elementary Intensional Logic 223 3. Some Intensional Constructions in English 252 4. Problems with Belief Sentences Chapter 6 Contexts: Indexicality, Discourse, and Presupposition 262 262 1. Introduction 263 2. Indexicals 280 3. Presuppositions and Contexts 295 4. Projecting Presuppositions Recursively Page ix Chapter 7 Lambda Abstraction 318 318 1 An Elementary Introduction to Lambda Abstraction 323 2. Semantics via Translation 330 3. Relative Clauses 334 4. VP Disjunction and Conjunction 339 5. VP Anaphora 348 6. Conclusions Chapter 8 Word Meaning 349 349 1. Introduction 350 2. How Words Are Semantically Related 370 3. Distinctions in Logical Type 377 4. Further Aspects of Lexical Semantics 389 5. Semantic Imprecision Chapter 9 Generalized Quantifiers 406 406 1. The Semantic Value of NPs 412 2. IPCGQ and F4 415 3. Generalized Conjunction Page x 421 4. Generalized Quantifiers and Empirical Properties of Language 430 5. Concluding Remarks Appendix Set-Theoretic Notation and Concepts 431 Notes 443 References 449 Index 461 Page xi Preface There are many phenomena that could reasonably be included in the domain of semantic theory. In this book we identify some of them and introduce general tools for semantic analysis that seem promising as components of a framework for doing research in natural language. Rather than discussing the many diverse approaches to meaning that have been proposed and are currently pursued, we focus on what has come to be known as logical, truth-conditional, or model-theoretic semantics. This general approach to meaning was developed originally within the tradition of logic and the philosophy of language and over the last twenty years or so has been applied systematically to the study of meaning in natural languages, due especially to the work of Richard Montague. As we will see, logical semantics as currently conceived leaves many problems with no solution. The role of semantics in a grammar is the center of much controversy. And the relation between syntax and semantics is still not well understood, especially within some of the research paradigms currently dominant (including the one we adopt in this book). Nevertheless, we think that research in logical semantics has generated enough results to show that there are fundamental empirical properties of language that cannot be properly understood without such an approach to meaning. The present book can be viewed as an attempt to substantiate this claim. We have tried to keep prerequisites at a minimum. The reader will find helpful some minimal acquaintance with syntactic theory, such as what can be acquired from an elementary introduction like Radford (1988). Basic set-theoretic notions and notational conventions are presented in an appendix. We do not assume any knowledge of formal logic, presenting what is needed directly in the text. Each logical tool is first introduced directly and then applied to relevant areas of natural language semantics. For example, in chapter 2 we present the basic semantic concepts associated with propositional logic without quantification. We then describe the Page xii syntax of a small fragment of English and use our logical tools to provide an explicit specification of how this fragment is to be interpreted. As we acquire more logical techniques, our fragments become progressively richer; that is, the range of structures analyzed becomes more varied and comprehensive, with later analyses building on earlier results. Those with linguistic backgrounds but no logic will find the formal techniques new but will recognize many of the kinds of data and arguments used in application of these new techniques to linguistic phenomena. The syntax of our fragments is designed to employ as far as possible widely shared syntactic assumptions. Those with backgrounds in logic but not linguistics will probably encounter unfamiliar facts about language and ways in which logic can be used in empirical arguments. We also introduce a few of the most accessible and interesting ideas from recent research to give the reader some exposure to current work in semantics. Our hope is that the material presented here will give a fair idea of the nature of semantic inquiry and will equip the reader interested in pursuing these topics with the tools needed to get rapidly into what is now happening in the field. The fragment technique we have adopted from Dowry, Wall, and Peters (1980), and our presentation, though different in many respects, owes much to their work. We use this technique not because we think it is the only way to do semantics but because it seems to us pedagogically so very useful. Fragments force us to show just how the formal theory will work for a very small part of a natural language. To understand how logical tools can be transferred to linguistic semantics and why they might be useful, some experience with this kind of detailed formulation seems essential. For much the same reasons we also provide exercises throughout the text. Readers need to try out for themselves the techniques we are introducing in order to appreciate what is involved in their application to natural language semantics. In presenting this material, we have also tried to explore the interaction of meaning with context and use (that is, the semantics- pragmatics interface) and also to address some of the foundational questions that truth-conditional semantics raises, especially in connection with the study of cognition in general. This does not stem from any ambition to be comprehensive. But in our experience we find that the truth-conditional approach can be understood better by trying to set it in a broader perspective. To put our lecture notes in the present form was no easy task for us. Some of the difficulties lie in the nature of things: we are dealing with a subject matter ridden with controversy and constantly shifting. Some of the difficulties were in us: writing this up just wouldn't fit easily with the Page xiii rest of our research and lives. There has been a lot of back and forth between us on each chapter, although Sally is primarily responsible for chapters 1, 4, 6, 8, and the appendix and Gennaro for chapters 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9. The organization of the material reflects closely the way we have come to like to teach semantics; we can only hope that others may also find it useful. Teachers may wish to omit parts of the book or to supplement it with readings from some of the classic papers in semantics. We have been helped in various ways by many people. Erhard Hinrichs put an enormous amount of work into commenting on a previous draft; only our recognition that he should not be held responsible for our mistakes kept us from co-opting him as coauthor. Craige Roberts has also provided us with a wealth of helpful and detailed comments. Leslie Porterfield and Veneeta Srivastav have directly inspired many improvements of substance and form at various stages; Leslie did most of the work involved in preparing the separately available answers to the exercises. Much good advice and help also came from Nirit Kadmon, Fred Landman, Alice ter Meulen, Bill McClure, Steve Moore, Carl Vikner, Adam Wyner, and our students in introductory semantics at Cornell and at the 1987 LSA Summer Institute at Stanford (where Gennaro used a draft of the book in the semantics course he taught). Many other friends and colleagues have encouraged us as we worked on this book. We have each also been supported by our families; our spouses in particular have been very close to us through the ups and downs of this project. We have written this book for the same reasons we chose this field for a living: we want to be rich and famous. Page 1 Chapter 1 The Empirical Domain of Semantics 1 Introduction Semantics is the branch of linguistics devoted to the investigation of linguistic meaning, the interpretation of expressions in a language system.
Recommended publications
  • A Birelational Analysis of the Russian Imperfective
    A birelational analysis of the Russian imperfective Daniel Altshuler Dept. of Linguistics Rutgers University [email protected] Abstract This paper provides two puzzles for a theory of aspect. The first concerns the quirky behavior of the Russian imperfective with regard to its culmination properties: it seems to function like the perfect aspect in certain cases, but like the progressive in others. The other puzzle concerns how the Russian imperfective constrains the temporal location of a described event: it relates distinct event parts to a given temporal parameter. Which part is at play depends on how this parameter is specified. If it is specified by an adverbial, then an event is located in time. If it is specified by the discourse context, then a consequent state is located in time. I solve the former puzzle by appealing to the structure of atomic vs. non-atomic events and solve the latter by appealing to two temporal inputs required by an aspectual marker. These inputs reveal that aspectual meaning involves both temporal information and information about discourse connectivity. 1 Introduction Moens & Steedman 1988 proposed that events have the tripartite structure shown below in Fig.1. The culmination point of an event is its inherent telos—i.e. a point at which an event ceases to take place. An achievement solely consists of a culmination point—i.e. it is over as soon as it is instantiated. An accomplishment (or culminated process), on the other hand, consists not only of a culmination point, but also a preparatory process, which in turn consists of a series of preparations leading to a culmination and in certain cases, the consequence of this culmination or an event’s consequent state (cf.
    [Show full text]
  • Syntactic Architecture and Its Consequences I
    Syntactic architecture and its consequences I Syntax inside the grammar Edited by András Bárány Theresa Biberauer Jamie Douglas Sten Vikner language Open Generative Syntax 9 science press Open Generative Syntax Editors: Elena Anagnostopoulou, Mark Baker, Roberta D’Alessandro, David Pesetsky, Susi Wurmbrand In this series: 1. Bailey, Laura R. & Michelle Sheehan (eds.). Order and structure in syntax I: Word order and syntactic structure. 2. Sheehan, Michelle & Laura R. Bailey (eds.). Order and structure in syntax II: Subjecthood and argument structure. 3. Bacskai-Atkari, Julia. Deletion phenomena in comparative constructions: English comparatives in a cross-linguistic perspective. 4. Franco, Ludovico, Mihaela Marchis Moreno & Matthew Reeve (eds.). Agreement, case and locality in the nominal and verbal domains. 5. Bross, Fabian. The clausal syntax of German Sign Language: A cartographic approach. 6. Smith, Peter W., Johannes Mursell & Katharina Hartmann (eds.). Agree to Agree: Agreement in the Minimalist Programme. 7. Pineda, Anna & Jaume Mateu (eds.). Dative constructions in Romance and beyond. 8. Kastner, Itamar. Voice at the interfaces: The syntax, semantics, and morphology of the Hebrew verb. 9. Bárány, András, Theresa Biberauer, Jamie Douglas & Sten Vikner (eds.). Syntactic architecture and its consequences I: Syntax inside the grammar. ISSN: 2568-7336 Syntactic architecture and its consequences I Syntax inside the grammar Edited by András Bárány Theresa Biberauer Jamie Douglas Sten Vikner language science press Bárány, András, Theresa
    [Show full text]
  • Modes of Comparison∗ Christopher Kennedy University of Chicago To
    To appear in the Proceedings of CLS 43. Modes of Comparison∗ Christopher Kennedy University of Chicago 1Introduction The ability to establish orderings among objects and make comparisons between them according to the amount or degree to which they possess some property is a basic component of human cognition. Natural languages reflect this fact: all lan- guages have syntactic categories that express gradable concepts, and all languages have designated comparative constructions, which are used to express orderings be- tween two objects with respect to the degree or amount to whichtheypossesssome property (Sapir 1944). In many languages, comparatives are based on specialized morphology and syn- tax. English exemplifies this type of system: it uses the morphemes more/-er, less and as specifically for the purpose of establishing orderings of superiority, infe- riority and equality, respectively, and the morphemes than and as to identify the STANDARD against which an object is compared, as illustrated by (1a-c). (1) a. Mercury is closer to the sun than Venus. b. TheMars Pathfindermissionwas lessexpensivethanprevious missions to Mars. c. Uranus doesn’t have as many rings as Saturn. Languages like English also allow for the possibility of expressing more complex comparisons by permitting a range of phrase types after than/as.Forexample,(2a) expresses a comparison between the degrees to which the same object possesses different properties; (2b) compares the degrees to which different objects possess different properties; and (2c) relates the actual degree that an object possesses a property to an expected degree. (2) a. More meteorites vaporize in the atmosphere than fall totheground. b. The crater was deeper than a 50 story building is tall.
    [Show full text]
  • Compositionality Without Word Boundaries
    Acknowledgments We would like to express our gratitude to the following colleagues for their valuable assistance in reviewing abstracts for Semantics and Linguistic Theory 22: Barbara Abbott Ted Fernald Andrew Koontz-Garboden Mats Rooth Dorit Abusch Tim Fernando Marcus Kracht Daniel Rothschild Maria Aloni Marcelo Ferreira Angelika Kratzer Susan Rothstein Luis Alonso-Ovalle Hana Filip Manfred Krifka Hotze Rullmann Peter Alrenaga Kai von Fintel Kiyomi Kusumoto Jerry Sadock Pranav Anand Danny Fox Bill Ladusaw Uli Sauerland Ana Arregui Itamar Francez Utpal Lahiri Philippe Schlenker Ron Artstein Lyn Frazier Fred Landman Bernhard Schwarz Nicholas Asher Jon Gajewski Peter Lasersohn Florian Schwarz Rebekah Baglini Mark Gawron Daniel Lassiter Roger Schwarzschild Alan Bale
    [Show full text]
  • Bare Nominals Are Able to Have Deictic And
    5 10 Veneeta Dayal 15 Rutgers University, Department of Linguistics 18 Seminary Place New Brunswick, NJ 08901 (USA) Ph: 732 932 7289 Fax: 732 932 1370 20 [email protected] July 3, 2009 1 45. Bare Noun Phrases 1. Introduction 25 2. Empirical landscape 3. Theories of variation: syntactic parameterization 4. Theories of variation: semantic parameterization 5. Theories of variation: number, definiteness and lexicalization 6. Challenges for theories of variation 30 7. Conclusion 8. References The distribution and interpretation of bare NPs varies across languages. This article surveys the range of these possibilities and the theoretical accounts that deal with it. 35 Bare NPs are canonically associated with reference to kinds and the semantic operations involved in kind formation are central to the discussion. Differences between singular and plural terms with respect to kind formation, the relationship between kind formation and the semantics of definite and indefinite NPs, the correlation between lexical exponents of a semantic operation and its availability as a covert type shift, and the 40 syntactic location of semantic operations are among the issues explored in these accounts. The study of bare NPs thus overlaps with the study of genericity, number marking and (in)definiteness. The primary focus here is on recent research which addresses the issue of cross-linguistic variation in semantics. Current challenges for theories of variation are also discussed. 2 45 1. Introduction The study of bare NPs spans thirty years of semantic research and can be divided almost evenly into two phases. The first focused on the proper analysis of English bare plurals, with particular emphasis on the role of reference to kinds and the principles of 50 quantification at play in statements with such NPs.
    [Show full text]