DOCSLIB.ORG

The Structure of Attitude Reports: Representing Context in Grammar

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Structure of Attitude Reports: Representing Context in Grammar The Structure of Attitude Reports: Representing Context in Grammar by Carolyn Spadine B.A., University of Minnesota (2013) Submitted to the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY September 2020 c Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2020. All rights reserved. Author............................................................. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy January 17, 2020 Certifiedby......................................................... David Pesetsky Professor of Linguistics Thesis Supervisor Acceptedby......................................................... Kai von Fintel Andrew W. Mellon Professor of Linguistics Linguistics Section Head, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy 2 The Structure of Attitude Reports: Representing Context in Grammar by Carolyn Spadine Submitted to the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy on January 17, 2020, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Abstract This dissertation argues for a view of grammar that encodes certain facts about the dis- course context in the narrow syntax. In particular, the recurring claim that there are clause peripheral elements that correspond to a kind of perspectival center is supported by novel evidence that this perspectival element can be overt in certain languages. This is shown using data from attitude reports in Tigrinya (Semitic, Eritrea), which overtly realizes a perspective holder, as well as a diverse collection of other languages, including Ewe and Malayalam. In analyzing this construction, I propose that the certain complementizers have a sec- ondary use as a marker of reported speech. I unify this use of complementizers with their more common clausal subordination use by adopting the proposal in Kratzer (2006), which argues that the modal quantification component of attitude reports is in the complementizer, rather than the attitude predicate, as is commonly assumed. I also analyze two unique prop- erties of these reportative complementizer constructions, indexical shift and logophoricity. In Tigrinya, indexical shift can be accounted for by allowing these reportative com- plementizers to quantify over contexts, rather than worlds, and by introducing a context- shifting operator. From a morphosyntactic perspective, I find evidence from indexical shift that person features must be assigned throughout the course of the derivation, rather than at the point of lexical insertion. I also find that these constructions create contexts for matrix clause indexical shift in Tigrinya, something that has not previously been observed. Evi- dence from Ewe and other languages suggests a correlation between logophoric domains and the presence of a complementizer with reportative properties. Based on this distinction, I argue that Condition A-violating reflexives in languages like French and English are not reducible to logophors, based on their distribution, as well as other syntactic properties. Thesis Supervisor: David Pesetsky Title: Professor of Linguistics 3 4 Acknowledgments I would like to thank my committeemembers, David Pesetsky, Norvin Richards, and Sabine Iatridou, for their generosity with their time and ideas, as well as their inexhaustible pa- tience with me. I also owe a huge debt of gratitude to my friends and colleagues at both MIT and Harvard, as well as my family and friends. Without my Tigrinya consultants, Ruth Worrede and Lwam and Amanuael Gidey, well as Athulya Aravind, Abby Bimpeh and Es- ther Desiadenyo Dogbe, this dissertation would not have been possible. Finally, Gunnar Lund, Liz Johnson, and Dylan Baker deserve special acknowledgement. 5 6 Contents 1 Introduction 11 1.1 Contextingrammar,andwhyitmatters . ... 11 1.2 Mainproposal................................. 17 1.3 Notes on data collection, glosses, and transcription . ........... 19 2 The role of complementizers in attitude reports 21 2.1 Complementizersandverbsofspeech . ... 21 2.2 Thedata.................................... 23 2.3 Properties of perspectival clauses in Tigrinya . ......... 26 2.3.1 VerbalMorphology. 27 2.3.2 Indexicalshift............................. 29 2.3.3 Distribution.............................. 31 2.3.4 Binding................................ 33 2.3.5 Summary: Pil- vs. k1m-z1- clauses .................. 35 2.4 Pil- clausescontainattitudeholders. 35 2.4.1 Adverbialmodification. 36 2.4.2 Agreement .............................. 42 2.4.3 Proposal ............................... 44 2.4.4 Embedded Pil- ............................ 44 2.4.5 Perspectival complementizers cross-linguistically.......... 48 2.4.6 Evidence against a complementizer/reportative markerhomophony 53 2.5 Discourseprojectionsinsyntacticstructure . ......... 55 2.5.1 Background: pragmatic projections in syntactic structure . 55 7 2.5.2 The author argument and perspective-sensitive phenomena . 58 2.6 Optionalityofattitude-holders . ..... 60 2.7 Semanticsofperspectivalclauses. ..... 62 2.7.1 Decompositionofattitudepredicates. .... 63 2.7.2 Proposal ............................... 65 2.7.3 Reportative complementizers without author arguments....... 69 2.7.4 ReportativeEvidentiality . 70 2.8 Conclusion .................................. 76 3 Indexical Shift 77 3.1 Overview ................................... 77 3.1.1 Whatisanindexical?. 79 3.1.2 Backgroundonindexicalshift . 84 3.2 Variation in indexical shift cross-linguistically . ............. 86 3.2.1 Syntacticconstraintsonindexicalshift. ...... 92 3.2.2 Summary: Cross-linguistic constraints on indexical shift . 97 3.3 IndexicalShiftinTigrinya . .. 98 3.3.1 Summary:IndexicalshiftinTigrinya . 121 3.4 Formalmodelsofindexicalshift . .122 3.4.1 Contextshifttheoriesofindexicalshift . .129 3.4.2 ThesemanticsofTigrinyaindexicalshift . .137 3.5 Themorphosyntaxofindexicalshift . .146 3.5.1 The division of labor between syntax, semantics, and morphology . 146 3.5.2 Mismatchesinverbalmorphology . 146 3.5.3 Analysis ...............................162 3.6 Conclusions..................................175 A Logophoricity 185 A.1 IntroductiontoLogophoricity. .185 A.2 Logophoriccontextsandcomplementizers . .. ..189 A.3 LogophoricityinEwe. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..191 8 A.4 FormalmodelsofLogophoricity . 197 A.5 Logophoricityvs.ExemptAnaphora . .199 A.5.1 Malayalam ..............................201 A.5.2 ConditionAandexemptanaphora . 202 A.5.3 Distinguishingexemptanaphors from logophors . .208 A.5.4 De re blocking ............................213 A.5.5 BacktoMalayalam. .217 9 Glossing conventions ABS absolutive ACC accusative ALLO allocutive ALLOfem allocutive - feminine agreement ALLOmasc allocutive - masculine agreement ALLOvouv allocutive - plural or formal agreement APPL applicative AUX auxiliary verb COMP complementizer COP copula DET determiner DIR direct DOM differential object marking ERG ergative FUT future F feminine HON honorific LOG logophoric M masculine NEG negative NOM nominative PST past PERF perfective PL plural PREP preposition PRS present Q question QUOT quotative REFL reflexive REL relative REP reportative SG singular SBJ subject TOP topic 10 Chapter 1 Introduction This dissertation argues for a model of grammar where the narrow syntax has access to certain discourse-contextual properties in the course of the derivation. Specifically, the au- thor of a proposition can be encoded in a position of the clause periphery, and that author argument can interact with other elements of the syntax. The proposal that syntactic struc- ture includes some kind of clause peripheral point-of-view argument is not novel, but this dissertation describes a construction where this kind of argument is overt. These configurations, where an author argument is present overtly in the clause periph- ery, correlate with two morphosyntactic processes that have been considered point-of-view phenomena: indexical shift and logophoricity. 1.1 Context in grammar, and why it matters A recurring but controversial suggestion in syntactic research is that some kind of con- textual information needs to be represented in syntactic structure, and accessible to mor- phosyntactic processes. This proposal is at odds with the prevailing understanding of the distribution of labor in grammar: we typically think of syntax being extremely constrained, in that the only information it can interact with is the content of the lexicon, without any access to information about discourse context. Context, on this model, interacts with gram- mar only on the pragmatic level, which filters out certain sentences after they have been constructed, based on whether they are contextually appropriate. However, there is ev- 11 idence that the introduction of contextual information cannot be post-syntactic, and this dissertation adds to that body of evidence. In particular, it is important to differentiate between the (widely adopted) assumption that the meaning of lexical items can make reference to context, and the claim (which I advocate for in this dissertation) that some contextual factors are represented as syntactic objects. The difference between these two positions is can be clarified by looking closely at two different types of analysis of exempt reflexives in English. Exempt reflexives (also called long-distance reflexives, perspectival reflexives) are those that appear to be exempt from Condition A of binding theory, which requires that all re- flexive pronouns are bound within their local domain. For example: (1) Criticisms of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Definiteness Determined by Syntax: a Case Study in Tagalog 1 Introduction
    Definiteness determined by syntax: A case study in Tagalog1 James N. Collins Abstract Using Tagalog as a case study, this paper provides an analysis of a cross-linguistically well attested phenomenon, namely, cases in which a bare NP’s syntactic position is linked to its interpretation as definite or indefinite. Previous approaches to this phenomenon, including analyses of Tagalog, appeal to specialized interpretational rules, such as Diesing’s Mapping Hypothesis. I argue that the patterns fall out of general compositional principles so long as type-shifting operators are available to the gram- matical system. I begin by weighing in a long-standing issue for the semantic analysis of Tagalog: the interpretational distinction between genitive and nominative transitive patients. I show that bare NP patients are interpreted as definites if marked with nominative case and as narrow scope indefinites if marked with genitive case. Bare NPs are understood as basically predicative; their quantificational force is determined by their syntactic position. If they are syntactically local to the selecting verb, they are existentially quantified by the verb itself. If they occupy a derived position, such as the subject position, they must type-shift in order to avoid a type-mismatch, generating a definite interpretation. Thus the paper develops a theory of how the position of an NP is linked to its interpretation, as well as providing a compositional treatment of NP-interpretation in a language which lacks definite articles but demonstrates other morphosyntactic strategies for signaling (in)definiteness. 1 Introduction Not every language signals definiteness via articles. Several languages (such as Russian, Kazakh, Korean etc.) lack articles altogether.
    [Show full text]
  • Logophoricity in Finnish
    Open Linguistics 2018; 4: 630–656 Research Article Elsi Kaiser* Effects of perspective-taking on pronominal reference to humans and animals: Logophoricity in Finnish https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2018-0031 Received December 19, 2017; accepted August 28, 2018 Abstract: This paper investigates the logophoric pronoun system of Finnish, with a focus on reference to animals, to further our understanding of the linguistic representation of non-human animals, how perspective-taking is signaled linguistically, and how this relates to features such as [+/-HUMAN]. In contexts where animals are grammatically [-HUMAN] but conceptualized as the perspectival center (whose thoughts, speech or mental state is being reported), can they be referred to with logophoric pronouns? Colloquial Finnish is claimed to have a logophoric pronoun which has the same form as the human-referring pronoun of standard Finnish, hän (she/he). This allows us to test whether a pronoun that may at first blush seem featurally specified to seek [+HUMAN] referents can be used for [-HUMAN] referents when they are logophoric. I used corpus data to compare the claim that hän is logophoric in both standard and colloquial Finnish vs. the claim that the two registers have different logophoric systems. I argue for a unified system where hän is logophoric in both registers, and moreover can be used for logophoric [-HUMAN] referents in both colloquial and standard Finnish. Thus, on its logophoric use, hän does not require its referent to be [+HUMAN]. Keywords: Finnish, logophoric pronouns, logophoricity, anti-logophoricity, animacy, non-human animals, perspective-taking, corpus 1 Introduction A key aspect of being human is our ability to think and reason about our own mental states as well as those of others, and to recognize that others’ perspectives, knowledge or mental states are distinct from our own, an ability known as Theory of Mind (term due to Premack & Woodruff 1978).
    [Show full text]
  • Minimal Pronouns, Logophoricity and Long-Distance Reflexivisation in Avar
    Minimal pronouns, logophoricity and long-distance reflexivisation in Avar* Pavel Rudnev Revised version; 28th January 2015 Abstract This paper discusses two morphologically related anaphoric pronouns inAvar (Avar-Andic, Nakh-Daghestanian) and proposes that one of them should be treated as a minimal pronoun that receives its interpretation from a λ-operator situated on a phasal head whereas the other is a logophoric pro- noun denoting the author of the reported event. Keywords: reflexivity, logophoricity, binding, syntax, semantics, Avar 1 Introduction This paper has two aims. One is to make a descriptive contribution to the crosslin- guistic study of long-distance anaphoric dependencies by presenting an overview of the properties of two kinds of reflexive pronoun in Avar, a Nakh-Daghestanian language spoken natively by about 700,000 people mostly living in the North East Caucasian republic of Daghestan in the Russian Federation. The other goal is to highlight the relevance of the newly introduced data from an understudied lan- guage to the theoretical debate on the nature of reflexivity, long-distance anaphora and logophoricity. The issue at the heart of this paper is the unusual character of theanaphoric system in Avar, which is tripartite. (1) is intended as just a preview with more *The present material was presented at the Utrecht workshop The World of Reflexives in August 2011. I am grateful to the workshop’s audience and participants for their questions and comments. I am indebted to Eric Reuland and an anonymous reviewer for providing valuable feedback on the first draft, as well as to Yakov Testelets for numerous discussions of anaphora-related issues inAvar spanning several years.
    [Show full text]
  • Definiteness and Determinacy
    Linguistics and Philosophy manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Definiteness and Determinacy Elizabeth Coppock · David Beaver the date of receipt and acceptance should be inserted later Abstract This paper distinguishes between definiteness and determinacy. Defi- niteness is seen as a morphological category which, in English, marks a (weak) uniqueness presupposition, while determinacy consists in denoting an individual. Definite descriptions are argued to be fundamentally predicative, presupposing uniqueness but not existence, and to acquire existential import through general type-shifting operations that apply not only to definites, but also indefinites and possessives. Through these shifts, argumental definite descriptions may become either determinate (and thus denote an individual) or indeterminate (functioning as an existential quantifier). The latter option is observed in examples like `Anna didn't give the only invited talk at the conference', which, on its indeterminate reading, implies that there is nothing in the extension of `only invited talk at the conference'. The paper also offers a resolution of the issue of whether posses- sives are inherently indefinite or definite, suggesting that, like indefinites, they do not mark definiteness lexically, but like definites, they typically yield determinate readings due to a general preference for the shifting operation that produces them. Keywords definiteness · descriptions · possessives · predicates · type-shifting We thank Dag Haug, Reinhard Muskens, Luca Crniˇc,Cleo Condoravdi, Lucas
    [Show full text]
  • Pronouns, Logical Variables, and Logophoricity in Abe Author(S): Hilda Koopman and Dominique Sportiche Source: Linguistic Inquiry, Vol
    MIT Press Pronouns, Logical Variables, and Logophoricity in Abe Author(s): Hilda Koopman and Dominique Sportiche Source: Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 20, No. 4 (Autumn, 1989), pp. 555-588 Published by: MIT Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178645 Accessed: 22-10-2015 18:32 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Linguistic Inquiry. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 128.97.27.20 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:32:27 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Hilda Koopman Pronouns, Logical Variables, Dominique Sportiche and Logophoricity in Abe 1. Introduction 1.1. Preliminaries In this article we describe and analyze the propertiesof the pronominalsystem of Abe, a Kwa language spoken in the Ivory Coast, which we view as part of the study of pronominalentities (that is, of possible pronominaltypes) and of pronominalsystems (that is, of the cooccurrence restrictionson pronominaltypes in a particulargrammar). Abe has two series of thirdperson pronouns. One type of pronoun(0-pronoun) has basically the same propertiesas pronouns in languageslike English. The other type of pronoun(n-pronoun) very roughly corresponds to what has been called the referential use of pronounsin English(see Evans (1980)).It is also used as what is called a logophoric pronoun-that is, a particularpronoun that occurs in special embedded contexts (the logophoric contexts) to indicate reference to "the person whose speech, thought or perceptions are reported" (Clements (1975)).
    [Show full text]
  • Context Pragmatics Definition of Pragmatics
    Pragmatics • to ask a question: Maybe Sandy’s reassuring you that Kim’ll get home okay, even though she’s walking home late at night. Sandy: She’s got more than lipstick and Kleenex in that purse of hers. • What is Pragmatics? You: Kim’s got a knife? • Context and Why It’s Important • Speech Acts – Direct Speech Acts – Indirect Speech Acts • How To Make Sense of Conversations – Cooperative Principle – Conversational Maxims Linguistics 201, Detmar Meurers Handout 3 (April 9, 2004) 1 3 Definition of Pragmatics Context Pragmatics is the study of how language is used and how language is integrated in context. What exactly are the factors which are relevant for an account of how people use language? What is linguistic context? Why must we consider context? We distinguish several types of contextual information: (1) Kim’s got a knife 1. Physical context – this encompasses what is physically present around the speakers/hearers at the time of communication. What objects are visible, where Sentence (1) can be used to accomplish different things in different contexts: the communication is taking place, what is going on around, etc. • to make an assertion: You’re sitting on a beach, thinking about how to open a coconut, when someone (2) a. Iwantthat book. observes “Kim’s got a knife”. (accompanied by pointing) b. Be here at 9:00 tonight. • to give a warning: (place/time reference) Kim’s trying to bully you and Sandy into giving her your lunch money, and Sandy just turns around and starts to walk away. She doesn’t see Kim bring out the butcher knife, and hears you yell behind her, “Kim’s got a knife!” 2 4 2.
    [Show full text]
  • File Change Semantics and the Familiarity Theory of Definiteness Irene Heim
    9 File Change Semantics and the Familiarity Theory of Definiteness Irene Heim 1 Introduction What is the difference in meaning between definite noun phrases and indefinite ones? Traditional grammarians, in particular Christophersen and Jespersen, worked on this question and came up with an answer that nowadays finds little favor with semanticists trained in twentieth century logic. It amounts to the following, in a nutshell: (1) A definite is used to refer to something that is already familiar at the current stage of the conversation. An indefinite is used to introduce a new referent. This has been labeled the ``familiarity theory of definiteness.'' 1 When confronted with (1), the logically minded semanticist will notice immediately that it presumes something very objectionable: that definites and indefinites are referring expressions. For only if there is a referent at all can there be any question of its familiarity or novelty. Advocates of (1) cannot happily admit that there are non- referring uses of definites or indefinites (or both), because that would be tantamount to admitting that their theory leaves the definite-indefinite-contrast in a significant subset of NP uses unaccounted for. But the existence of nonreferential uses of definite and indefinite NPs can hardly be denied, and I will take it for granted without repeating the familiar arguments. 2 Just think of examples like (2) and (3). (2) Every cat ate its food. (3) John didn't see a cat. (2) has a reading where ``its'', a personal pronoun, i.e. a type of definite NP, functions as a so-called ``bound variable pronoun'' and doesn't refer to any particular cat.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward a Shared Syntax for Shifted Indexicals and Logophoric Pronouns
    Toward a Shared Syntax for Shifted Indexicals and Logophoric Pronouns Mark Baker Rutgers University April 2018 Abstract: I argue that indexical shift is more like logophoricity and complementizer agreement than most previous semantic accounts would have it. In particular, there is evidence of a syntactic requirement at work, such that the antecedent of a shifted “I” must be a superordinate subject, just as the antecedent of a logophoric pronoun or the goal of complementizer agreement must be. I take this to be evidence that the antecedent enters into a syntactic control relationship with a null operator in all three constructions. Comparative data comes from Magahi and Sakha (for indexical shift), Yoruba (for logophoric pronouns), and Lubukusu (for complementizer agreement). 1. Introduction Having had an office next to Lisa Travis’s for 12 formative years, I learned many things from her that still influence my thinking. One is her example of taking semantic notions, such as aspect and event roles, and finding ways to implement them in syntactic structure, so as to advance the study of less familiar languages and topics.1 In that spirit, I offer here some thoughts about how logophoricity and indexical shift, topics often discussed from a more or less semantic point of view, might have syntactic underpinnings—and indeed, the same syntactic underpinnings. On an impressionistic level, it would not seem too surprising for logophoricity and indexical shift to have a common syntactic infrastructure. Canonical logophoricity as it is found in various West African languages involves using a special pronoun inside the finite CP complement of a verb to refer to the subject of that verb.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2106.08037V1 [Cs.CL] 15 Jun 2021 Alternative Ways the World Could Be
    The Possible, the Plausible, and the Desirable: Event-Based Modality Detection for Language Processing Valentina Pyatkin∗ Shoval Sadde∗ Aynat Rubinstein Bar Ilan University Bar Ilan University Hebrew University of Jerusalem [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Paul Portner Reut Tsarfaty Georgetown University Bar Ilan University [email protected] [email protected] Abstract (1) a. We presented a paper at ACL’19. Modality is the linguistic ability to describe b. We did not present a paper at ACL’20. events with added information such as how de- sirable, plausible, or feasible they are. Modal- The propositional content p =“present a paper at ity is important for many NLP downstream ACL’X” can be easily verified for sentences (1a)- tasks such as the detection of hedging, uncer- (1b) by looking up the proceedings of the confer- tainty, speculation, and more. Previous studies ence to (dis)prove the existence of the relevant pub- that address modality detection in NLP often p restrict modal expressions to a closed syntac- lication. The same proposition is still referred to tic class, and the modal sense labels are vastly in sentences (2a)–(2d), but now in each one, p is different across different studies, lacking an ac- described from a different perspective: cepted standard. Furthermore, these senses are often analyzed independently of the events that (2) a. We aim to present a paper at ACL’21. they modify. This work builds on the theoreti- b. We want to present a paper at ACL’21. cal foundations of the Georgetown Gradable Modal Expressions (GME) work by Rubin- c.
    [Show full text]
  • A Syntactic Analysis of Rhetorical Questions
    A Syntactic Analysis of Rhetorical Questions Asier Alcázar 1. Introduction* A rhetorical question (RQ: 1b) is viewed as a pragmatic reading of a genuine question (GQ: 1a). (1) a. Who helped John? [Mary, Peter, his mother, his brother, a neighbor, the police…] b. Who helped John? [Speaker follows up: “Well, me, of course…who else?”] Rohde (2006) and Caponigro & Sprouse (2007) view RQs as interrogatives biased in their answer set (1a = unbiased interrogative; 1b = biased interrogative). In unbiased interrogatives, the probability distribution of the answers is even.1 The answer in RQs is biased because it belongs in the Common Ground (CG, Stalnaker 1978), a set of mutual or common beliefs shared by speaker and addressee. The difference between RQs and GQs is thus pragmatic. Let us refer to these approaches as Option A. Sadock (1971, 1974) and Han (2002), by contrast, analyze RQs as no longer interrogative, but rather as assertions of opposite polarity (2a = 2b). Accordingly, RQs are not defined in terms of the properties of their answer set. The CG is not invoked. Let us call these analyses Option B. (2) a. Speaker says: “I did not lie.” b. Speaker says: “Did I lie?” [Speaker follows up: “No! I didn’t!”] For Han (2002: 222) RQs point to a pragmatic interface: “The representation at this level is not LF, which is the output of syntax, but more abstract than that. It is the output of further post-LF derivation via interaction with at least a sub part of the interpretational component, namely pragmatics.” RQs are not seen as syntactic objects, but rather as a post-syntactic interface phenomenon.
    [Show full text]
  • 30. Tense Aspect Mood 615
    30. Tense Aspect Mood 615 Richards, Ivor Armstrong 1936 The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rockwell, Patricia 2007 Vocal features of conversational sarcasm: A comparison of methods. Journal of Psycho- linguistic Research 36: 361−369. Rosenblum, Doron 5. March 2004 Smart he is not. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/smart-he-is-not- 1.115908. Searle, John 1979 Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seddiq, Mirriam N. A. Why I don’t want to talk to you. http://notguiltynoway.com/2004/09/why-i-dont-want- to-talk-to-you.html. Singh, Onkar 17. December 2002 Parliament attack convicts fight in court. http://www.rediff.com/news/ 2002/dec/17parl2.htm [Accessed 24 July 2013]. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson 1986/1995 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Voegele, Jason N. A. http://www.jvoegele.com/literarysf/cyberpunk.html Voyer, Daniel and Cheryl Techentin 2010 Subjective acoustic features of sarcasm: Lower, slower, and more. Metaphor and Symbol 25: 1−16. Ward, Gregory 1983 A pragmatic analysis of epitomization. Papers in Linguistics 17: 145−161. Ward, Gregory and Betty J. Birner 2006 Information structure. In: B. Aarts and A. McMahon (eds.), Handbook of English Lin- guistics, 291−317. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Rachel Giora, Tel Aviv, (Israel) 30. Tense Aspect Mood 1. Introduction 2. Metaphor: EVENTS ARE (PHYSICAL) OBJECTS 3. Polysemy, construal, profiling, and coercion 4. Interactions of tense, aspect, and mood 5. Conclusion 6. References 1. Introduction In the framework of cognitive linguistics we approach the grammatical categories of tense, aspect, and mood from the perspective of general cognitive strategies.
    [Show full text]
  • Intensifiers, Reflexivity and Logophoricity in Axaxdərə Akhvakh
    Conference on the Languages of the Caucasus Leipzig, 07 – 09 December 2007 Intensifiers, reflexivity and logophoricity in Axaxdərə Akhvakh Denis CREISSELS Université Lumière (Lyon2) e-mail: [email protected] 1. Introduction Akhvakh is a Nakh-Daghestanian language belonging to the Andic branch of the Avar-ADDic-Tsezic family, spoken in the western part of Daghestan and in the village of Axaxdərə near Zaqatala (Azerbaijan). The variety of Akhvakh spoken in Axaxdərə (henceforth AD Akhvakh) is very close to the Northern Akhvakh varieties spoken in the Axvaxskij Rajon of Daghestan (henceforth AR Akhvakh), presented in Magomedbekova 1967 and Magomedova & Abdullaeva 2007. AD Akhvakh shows no particular affinity with any of the Southern Akhvakh dialects spoken in three villages (Cegob, Ratlub and Tljanub) of the Šamil’kij Rajon (formerly Sovetskij Rajon). The analysis of Akhvakh intensifiers, reflexives and logophorics proposed in this paper is entirely based on a corpus of narrative texts I collected in Axaxdərə between June 2005 and June 2007.1 I will be concerned here by the uses of the pronoun ži-CL (CL = class marker) in its simple form and in the form enlarged by the addition of the intensifying particle -da. The use of identical or related forms in intensifying, reflexive, and logophoric functions is attested in many languages of the world, and pronouns cognate with Akhvakh ži-CL fulfilling similar functions are found in the other Andic languages, but in some details of its use, Akhvakh ži-CL shows features which deserve to be examined. The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 summarizes basic information about Akhvakh morphosyntax.
    [Show full text]