Understanding Core French Grammar
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Dec 0 1 2009 Libraries
Constraining Credences MASSACHUS TS INS E OF TECHNOLOGY by DEC 0 12009 Sarah Moss A.B., Harvard University (2002) LIBRARIES B.Phil., Oxford University (2004) Submitted to the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the ARCHIVES MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Apn1 2009 © Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2009. All rights reserved. A uthor ..... ......... ... .......................... .. ........ Department of Linguistics and Philosophy ... .. April 27, 2009 Certified by...................... ....... .. .............. ......... Robert C. Stalnaker Laure egckefeller Professor of Philosophy Thesis Supervisor Accepted by..... ......... ............ ... ' B r I Alex Byrne Professor of Philosophy Chair of the Committee on Graduate Students Constraining Credences by Sarah Moss Submitted to the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. April 27, 2009 This dissertation is about ways in which our rational credences are constrained: by norms governing our opinions about counterfactuals, by the opinions of other agents, and by our own previous opinions. In Chapter 1, I discuss ordinary language judgments about sequences of counterfactuals, and then discuss intuitions about norms governing our cre- dence in counterfactuals. I argue that in both cases, a good theory of our judg- ments calls for a static semantics on which counterfactuals have substantive truth conditions, such as the variably strict conditional semantic theories given in STALNAKER 1968 and LEWIS 1973a. In particular, I demonstrate that given plausible assumptions, norms governing our credences about objective chances entail intuitive norms governing our opinions about counterfactuals. I argue that my pragmatic accounts of our intuitions dominate semantic theories given by VON FINTEL 2001, GILLIES 2007, and EDGINGTON 2008. -
French Grammar Basics and Beyond
French Grammar Basics and Beyond Easy explanations in English of French Grammar with more than 200 exercises, and solutions! This grammar book is for students of the A1 levels (total beginners) to B1 level (intermediate level). Click here to order this e-book at Special Price Only $24.50/ 21.90 € / £18.99! Paperback and Kindle version also available – Details here French Grammar Basics and Beyond ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ©ȱ2020ȱbyȱLearn French at Home.ȱAllȱrightsȱreserved.ȱ NoȱpartȱofȱthisȱeȬbookȱmayȱbeȱreproducedȱinȱanyȱwriĴen,ȱelectronic,ȱrecording,ȱorȱphotocopyingȱwithȬ outȱwriĴenȱpermissionȱofȱtheȱpublisherȱorȱauthors.ȱȱ ȱ Publishedȱby:ȱLearn French at Home www.learnfrenchathome.comȱ Authors:ȱCélineȱVanȱLoanȱandȱAnnickȱStevensonȱ 3rdȱedition.ȱ1stȱeditionȱpublishedȱinȱ2011.ȱ ȱ DateȱofȱPublication:ȱ2020.ȱ ISBN:ȱ9798664830743ȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Coverȱphoto:ȱȱ Paris,ȱtheȱRodinȱMuseumȱ©ȱCélineȱVanȱLoanȱ Backȱcoverȱphoto:ȱ CélineȱVanȱLoanȱ©ȱMartyȱVanȱLoanȱ 2 French Grammar Basics and Beyond AboutLearn French at Home Learn French at Home,ȱ createdȱ inȱ 2004ȱ byȱ Célineȱ andȱ Vincentȱ Anthonioz, hasȱ helpedȱ thousandsȱ ofȱ Frenchȱlearners,ȱeachȱwithȱveryȱdiěerentȱlearningȱgoals.ȱTheȱmainȱingredientȱofȱourȱsuccessȱliesȱinȱourȱ teamȱofȱprofessionalȱandȱfriendlyȱnativeȱFrenchȱteachersȱwhoȱtakeȱtheȱtimeȱtoȱpersonalizeȱeveryȱsingle lessonȱaccordingȱtoȱtheȱstudentȇsȱpersonalȱandȱprofessionalȱgoal.ȱOurȱmainȱpurposeȱisȱtoȱdeliverȱtrueȱ qualityȱserviceȱtoȱeachȱstudent.ȱ ȱ Sinceȱtheȱlessonsȱtakeȱplaceȱinȱtheȱstudentȇsȱhomeȱorȱworkplace,ȱitȱdoesnȇtȱmaĴerȱwhereȱyouȱlive.ȱ -
(2012) Perspectival Discourse Referents for Indexicals* Maria
To appear in Proceedings of SULA 7 (2012) Perspectival discourse referents for indexicals* Maria Bittner Rutgers University 0. Introduction By definition, the reference of an indexical depends on the context of utterance. For ex- ample, what proposition is expressed by saying I am hungry depends on who says this and when. Since Kaplan (1978), context dependence has been analyzed in terms of two parameters: an utterance context, which determines the reference of indexicals, and a formally unrelated assignment function, which determines the reference of anaphors (rep- resented as variables). This STATIC VIEW of indexicals, as pure context dependence, is still widely accepted. With varying details, it is implemented by current theories of indexicali- ty not only in static frameworks, which ignore context change (e.g. Schlenker 2003, Anand and Nevins 2004), but also in the otherwise dynamic framework of DRT. In DRT, context change is only relevant for anaphors, which refer to current values of variables. In contrast, indexicals refer to static contextual anchors (see Kamp 1985, Zeevat 1999). This SEMI-STATIC VIEW reconstructs the traditional indexical-anaphor dichotomy in DRT. An alternative DYNAMIC VIEW of indexicality is implicit in the ‘commonplace ef- fect’ of Stalnaker (1978) and is formally explicated in Bittner (2007, 2011). The basic idea is that indexical reference is a species of discourse reference, just like anaphora. In particular, both varieties of discourse reference involve not only context dependence, but also context change. The act of speaking up focuses attention and thereby makes this very speech event available for discourse reference by indexicals. Mentioning something likewise focuses attention, making the mentioned entity available for subsequent dis- course reference by anaphors. -
Pronominal Typology & the De Se/De Re Distinction
Pronominal Typology & the de se/de re distinction Pritty Patel-Grosz 1. Introduction This paper investigates how regular pronominal typology interfaces with de se and de re interpretations, and highlights a correlation between strong pronouns (descriptively speaking) and de re interpretations, and weak pronouns and de se interpretations. In order to illustrate this correlation, I contrast different pronominal forms within a single language, null vs. overt pronouns in Kutchi Gujarati, and clitic vs. full pronouns in Austrian Bavarian. I argue that the data presented here provide cross-linguistic comparative support for the idea of a dedicated de se LF as argued for by Percus & Sauerland. The empirical findings in this paper reveal a new observation regarding pronominal typology, namely that stronger pronouns resist a de se construal. Contrastively, the “weaker” a pronoun is (in comparison to other pronouns in the same language), the more likely it is to be interpreted de se. To analyse this, I propose that pronominal strength correlates with structural complexity (in terms of Cardinaletti & Starke 1999), i.e. overt pronouns have more syntactic structure than null pronouns; similarly, non-clitic pronouns have more structure than clitic pronouns. The correlation between de se readings and weakness follows from an analysis in the spirit of Percus & Sauerland (2003a,b), which assumes that de se pronouns are uninterpreted and merely serve to trigger predicate abstraction. Stronger pronouns, which have more structure, can be taken to simply resist being uninterpreted, given that the null hypothesis is that the additional structure has some effect or other on the semantics of the pronoun. -
INTERSECTING CONSTRAINT FAMILIES: an ARGUMENT for HARMONIC GRAMMAR KIE Zuraw BRUCE HAYES University of California, Los Angeles U
INTERSECTING CONSTRAINT FAMILIES: AN ARGUMENT FOR HARMONIC GRAMMAR Kie Zuraw Bruce Hayes University of California, Los Angeles University of California, Los Angeles In the analysis of free variation in phonology, we often encounter the effects of intersecting constraint families: there are two independent families of constraints, each of which has a quantifiable effect on the outcome. A challenge for theories is to account for the patterns that emerge from such intersection. We address three cases: Tagalog nasal substitution, French liai- son/elision, and Hungarian vowel harmony, using corpus data. We characterize the patterns we find as across-the-board effects in both dimensions, restrained by floor and ceiling limits. We ana- lyze these patterns using several formal frameworks, and find that an accurate account is best based on harmonic grammar (in one of its two primary quantitative implementations). Our work also suggests that certain lexical distinctions treated as discrete by classical phonological theory (e.g. ‘h-aspiré’ vs. ordinary vowel-initial words of French) are in fact gradient and require quanti- tative treatment.* Keywords: harmonic grammar, noisy harmonic grammar, maximum entropy grammars, Tagalog, French, Hungarian, intersecting constraint families 1. Introduction. A key debate in constraint-based linguistic frameworks concerns ranking versus weighting. Optimality theory (OT; Prince & Smolensky 2004 [1993]) uses strict ranking: candidate A is preferred to candidate B if the highest-ranked constraint that distinguishes between them prefers A. In harmonic grammar (Le- gendre et al. 1990, Legendre et al. 2006, Potts et al. 2010, and others), the constraints bear numeric weights, and the winner is the candidate with the best harmony value (a weighted sum of constraint violations). -
Xxth-Century Theories of Language: an Epistemological Diagnosis
Pierre Swiggers CDU 801 11 19 11 Belgian National Science Foundation XXTH-CENTURY THEORIES OF LANGUAGE: AN EPISTEMOLOGICAL DIAGNOSIS O. Introduction. This article is intended as a study in the methodology and epistemology of linguist ics, a field which developed out of theoretical linguistics in the past thirty years. Meth odology and epistemology (or philosophy)1 of linguistics can be subsumed under the general domain of 11 philosophical linguistics 11 (cfr. Kasher - Lappin 1977), which also includes a theory of meaning and reference, a theory of linguistic ( or, more generally semiotic) communication, and - in some cases - a formalization of linguistic subsys tems. The specific contribution of methodology and epistemology of linguistics lies in the definition of the object of linguistics, in the determination and justification of its re search techniques, in the appreciation of its results with respect to a broader field of in vestigation, in the reflection on the nature, status, and variability of approaches to lan guage. 2 The history of general linguistics (which is still an ill-defined concept) since the 11 11 11 11 beginning of this century shows that the basic notions - such as language , grammar , 11 11 11 11 (linguistic) meaning , (linguistic) structure - underwent a radical change in inten sion and extension, and have been focused upon from different points of view, in varie gated perspectives (cfr. Swiggers 1989). It would be presumptuous to analyse the vari ous 11 transformations of linguistics113 in this article; our aim here isto offer some ge- I am taking epistemology here in its "correlative" acceptation (viz. "epistemology of -"; cfr. -
Analyticity, Necessity and Belief Aspects of Two-Dimensional Semantics
!"# #$%"" &'( ( )#"% * +, %- ( * %. ( %/* %0 * ( +, %. % +, % %0 ( 1 2 % ( %/ %+ ( ( %/ ( %/ ( ( 1 ( ( ( % "# 344%%4 253333 #6#787 /0.' 9'# 86' 8" /0.' 9'# 86' (#"8'# Analyticity, Necessity and Belief Aspects of two-dimensional semantics Eric Johannesson c Eric Johannesson, Stockholm 2017 ISBN print 978-91-7649-776-0 ISBN PDF 978-91-7649-777-7 Printed by Universitetsservice US-AB, Stockholm 2017 Distributor: Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Cover photo: the water at Petite Terre, Guadeloupe 2016 Contents Acknowledgments v 1 Introduction 1 2 Modal logic 7 2.1Introduction.......................... 7 2.2Basicmodallogic....................... 13 2.3Non-denotingterms..................... 21 2.4Chaptersummary...................... 23 3 Two-dimensionalism 25 3.1Introduction.......................... 25 3.2Basictemporallogic..................... 27 3.3 Adding the now operator.................. 29 3.4Addingtheactualityoperator................ 32 3.5 Descriptivism ......................... 34 3.6Theanalytic/syntheticdistinction............. 40 3.7 Descriptivist 2D-semantics .................. 42 3.8 Causal descriptivism ..................... 49 3.9Meta-semantictwo-dimensionalism............. 50 3.10Epistemictwo-dimensionalism................ 54 -
Fre 121 Course Material
FRE 121: FRENCH GRAMMAR 1 NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COURSE CODE: FRE 121 COURSE TITLE: FRENCH GRAMMAR I COURSE GUIDE FRE 107 COURSE GUIDE FRE 121 FRENCH GRAMMAR I COURSE DEVELOPER LUCY JUMMAI JIBRIN SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA LAGOS . UNIT WRITER LUCY JUMMAI JIBRIN SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA LAGOS . COURSE EDITOR DR. OLU AKEUSOLA FRENCH DEPARTMENT ADENIRAN OGUNSANYA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION OTTO / IJANIKAN LAGOS . COURSE COORDINATOR LUCY JUMMAI JIBRIN NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA LAGOS . ii COURSE GUIDE FRE 107 NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA HEADQUARTERS 14/16 AHMADU BELLO WAY VICTORIA ISLAND LAGOS ABUJA ANNEX 245 SAMUEL ADESUJO ADEMULEGUN STREET CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT OPPOSITE AREWA SUITES ABUJA E-MAIL : CENTRALINFO @NOU .EDU .NG URL: WWW .NOU .EDU .NG NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA 2006 FIRST PRINTED 2006 ISBN: 978-058-519-2 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED PRINTED BY …………….. FOR NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA iii COURSE GUIDE FRE 107 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION ...................................................................... 1 COURSE OBJECTIVES .............................................................. 1 - 2 WORKING THROUGH THIS COURSE ............................................. 2 COURSE MATERIALS ................................................................ 2 STUDY UNITS ....................................................................... -
What Is the Problem of De Se Attitudes?∗
Penultimate draft. Forthcoming in About Oneself: De Se Attitudes and Communication, M. Garcia-Carpintero and S. Torre (eds.), Oxford University Press. What is the Problem of De Se Attitudes?∗ Dilip Ninan [email protected] 1 Introduction 1.1 Skepticism and exceptionalism It is widely thought that de se attitudes (aka indexical or self-locating atti- tudes) are special in some way, and that their distinctive features require some alteration to (once) standard philosophical views about propositional attitudes. This sort of claim was first made in contemporary philosophy in the 1960s and 1970s by, among others, Casta~neda,Perry, and Lewis.1 This work has proven influential, and the idea that de se attitudes pose a challenge to theories of attitudes is now the received view. But despite widespread agreement that there is a problem of de se attitudes (`the problem of the essential indexical' to use Perry's term), the literature on these topics has been less than completely clear on just what that problem is supposed to be. More specifically, what is unclear is what the distinctive problem of de se attitudes is, what problem such attitudes raise over and above other more familiar problems facing theories of propositional attitudes (e.g. Frege's Puzzle). Of course, one reason it might be difficult to unearth a distinctive problem in this vicinity is that, contra the received view, there simply is no distinctive problem of de se attitudes. This is the view of the de se skeptic, the philosopher who flouts the Perry-Lewis orthodoxy and holds that any problem raised by de se attitudes is really just instance of a more general problem. -
Collins Easy Learning French Grammar
OVER TWO M I LLION COPIES SOLD .Fllftarnin- o"'.. t4...'l Collins Collins French Crammar Harpercollins Publishers When you buy a Collins dictionary Westerhill Road or thesaurus and register on Bishopbriggs wurw.collinslanguage,com for the free clasgow online and digital services, you will not CONTENTS G64 2qT be charged by HarperCollins for access to Creat Britain Collins free Online Dictionary content or Foreword for language teachers V Collins free OnlineThesaurus content on First Edition 2oo4 that website. However, your operator's Introduction for students vi charges for using the internet on your Reprint 15 14 13 12 11 10 computer will apply, Costs vary from Glossary of grammar terms vill operator to operator. Harpercollins is not Nouns 1 o HarperCollins Publishers zoo4 responsible for any charges levied by online service providers for accessing Collins free Using nouns 1 rsBN 978-o-oo-219644-9 Online Dictionary or Collins free Online Gender 2 Thesaurus on www.collinslanguage.com Forming plurals 9 Collins@ and Bank ofEnglish@ are using these services. registered trademarks of Articles 12 HarperCollins Publishers Limited HarperCollins does not wafiant Different types of article 12 that the functions contained in The definite article: le, la, l' and les 13 www.collinslanguage.com www.collinslanguage.com content 't9 will be uninterrupted or error free, The indefinite article: un, une and des A catalogue record for this book is avaiiable that defects wiII be corrected, or that The partitive article: du, de la, de l'and des 22 from the British Library www.collinslanguage.com or the server that makes it available are free of viruses Adjectives 25 Typeset by Davidson Pre-Press, Clasgow or bugs. -
Binding, Compositionality, and Semantic Values
volume 19, no. 2 I. Introduction: the plan1 january 2020 Assume that propositions — things that are or determine functions from possible worlds to truth-values — are the objects of the attitudes, the possessors of modal properties like being possible or necessary, the things we assert by uttering sentences in contexts, and perhaps more. Suppose we have a compositional semantics that assigns se- mantic values relative to contexts to the well-formed expressions of Binding, Compositionality, a natural language.2 What is the relation between the proposition ex- pressed by a sentence in a context and the semantic value assigned to the sentence in that context? Surely the simplest view, and so the one we should prefer, other things being equal, is that the relation is and Semantic Values identity: the proposition expressed by a sentence in a context just is the semantic value of that sentence in that context. We’ll call this the clas- sical picture. Lewis [1980] claimed that the proper semantics for certain expressions precluded identifying the compositional semantic values of sentences relative to contexts with propositions as the classical pic- ture does. King [2003, 2007] and Glanzberg [2011] argued that Lewis’s argument ultimately fails and that the classical picture can be upheld. Call this exchange the old debate. It is worth noting that the dialectic of 1. Thanks to Chris Barker, Ezra Cook, Josh Dever, Geoff Georgi, Hans Kamp, Peter Pagin, Bryan Pickel, Brian Rabern, Anders Schoubye, Dag Westerståhl, Malte Willer, Seth Yalcin, Juhani Yli-Vakkuri, Zoltán Szabó, and two anony- Michael Glanzberg & Jeffrey C. -
French Grammar in a Nutshell
Chapter 1 French Grammar in a Nutshell In This Chapter ▶ Getting to know French parts of speech ▶ Building and embellishing sentences ▶ Moving through verb tenses and moods rench grammar is somewhat complex, and this book gives you plenty of material to dig Finto, little by little. I start you off easy in this chapter, providing an overview of what’s to come so you’ll feel a little more familiar with the topics throughout the book. If you take the time to read this chapter, you get a good grammar primer to help you through the jour- ney you’re about to embark on. The Parts of Speech Learning a language is easier if you know what it’s made of. To grasp the fundamentals of any language, your native language as well as French, you need to recognize the parts of speech, the various types of words that compose a language and how they work. The follow- ing sections give you the scoop. Nouns You should know three essential things about a French nom (noun): ✓ It refers to people,COPYRIGHTED places, things, or concepts. MATERIAL ✓ It has a gender (masculine, he, or feminine, she), and a number (singular or plural). You need to know the noun’s characteristics to make other elements of a sentence match it. That’s called agreement in gender and number. ✓ It can have different roles (called functions) in a sentence: • It can be the subject of the verb, as the noun professeur in this sentence: Le professeur parle. (The professor speaks.) • It can be the object of the verb, as the noun lune in: Nous regardons la lune.