THE SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS OF THE SUBJUNCTIVE IN MODERN GREEK: A RELEVANCE-THEORETIC APPROACH VASSILIKI ROUCHOTA Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD University College London May 1994 SIBL LONDON UNIV For my parents ABSTRACT The aim of this thesis is to propose a semantic analysis of the subjunctive mood in Modem Greek and to show how the various interpretations subjunctive clauses may have can be accounted for in terms of independently motivated communicative principles. My analysis is based on relevance-theoretic assumptions about semantics and pragmatics (Sperber and Wilson 1986, Wilson and Sperber 1988a, 1993). In chapter 1 some of the existing accounts of the subjunctive are considered and found inadequate. A new semantic account, based on the relevance-theoretic approach to semantics, is put forward and discussed, with special reference to the subjunctive in Modern Greek. It is argued that the subjunctive encodes procedural meaning about propositional attitude, which is non- truth-conditional. In particular, it constrains the interpretation of an utterance by indicating that the proposition expressed is entertained as a description of a state of affairs in a possible world. In chapters 2 and 3 the issue addressed is how we can account for the various interpretations of subjunctive clauses. Imperative-like subjunctive clauses, and subjunctive clauses expressing wishes, potentiality and possibility are discussed in chapter 2; expressive, narrative and interrogative subjunctive clauses are dealt with in chapter 3. It is shown that the way subjunctive clauses are interpreted in a particular context is a function of their semantically encoded meaning and considerations of optimal relevance. Chapter 4 prepares the ground for chapter 5. It is argued that definite and indefinite descriptions are not semantically ambiguous; their various interpretations are accounted for by a univocal semantics interacting with context and relevance considerations, i.e. pragmatically. In chapter 5 the interpretation of Modern Greek restrictive relatives in the indicative and subjunctive is discussed. It is shown that the restrictions on the possible interpretations of the description which the relative clause accompanies fall out from the semantic contrast between the indicative and the subjunctive as defined in chapter 1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1 am deeply grateful to my supervisor, Robyn Carston, who has been an invaluable source of inspiration and constructive criticism throughout the preparation of this thesis. My intellectual debt to her is great. Her commitment to my work, her wise guidance, her friendship and her unfailing faith in me saw me safely to the end of this project. I want to thank her for everything she has done for me. I was very fortunate to have the additional guidance of Deirdre Wilson, whose stimulating presence has had a great impact on this work. I want to thank her for the many ways in which she has supported me and my research. I would like to thank Neil Smith for reading everything I have ever written and providing me with many insightful comments; his support and encouragement throughout the time I have known him are much appreciated. I have greatly benefitted from many discussions with Billy Clark, Diane Blakemore, Ruth Kempson and Wynn Chao. I want to thank them for their active interest in my work. I am also indebted to Misi Brody, Rita Manzini and Hans van de Koot for their advice on syntactic problems, and to Jill House for useful tuition on intonation. A special word of thanks goes to Irene Philippaki-Warburton for her enthusiastic support of my ideas and many fruitful discussions. Also, to my professors at Athens University, George Babiniotis, John Papademetriou and Dimitra Theophanopoulou-Kontou, for encouraging me to pursue postgraduate research. I am very grateful to the British Academy and the State Scholarship Foundation in Greece for financially supporting my research at UCL. I also want to thank my friends at UCL for creating the right working environment: lanthi Tsimpli, Georgia Agouraki, Anna Roussou and all the members of the Relevance reading group for many interesting discussions; Gary Holden for enjoyable chats over cups of coffee; Stefanie Anyadi and Kay Dawson for their good humour. Also, Anastasia Giannakidou for useful discussions, and, especially, Elena Anagnostopoulou and Angeliki Tzanetou for their help and, above all, for our entertaining e-mail exchanges. I want to thank my parents whose love, care and support sustained me throughout these years; a big kiss, also, to my sister, Hans, and my auntie, Aspasia. Finally, I want to thank my husband, Hans van de Koot, for bringing playfulness into my life, for taking care of me when I came home distressed or overjoyed, for believing in me and my work, for making me understand that mornings and afternoons are to be spent working, but (at least some) evenings are for listening to music, seeing friends or simply being with each other, and for much much more. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 3 Acknowledgements 4 Introduction 8 Chapter 1: The semantics of na-clauses 13 1.1. Introduction 13 1.2. Earlier approaches to the subjunctive 13 1.2.1. The performative analysis 14 1.2.2. Assertion vs nonassertion 21 1.2.3. A speech act semantic account 25 1.3. Earlier semantic approaches to na-clauses 29 1.3.1. A tense analysis 29 1.3.2. A propositional attitude analysis 32 1.3.3. A polysemy analysis 41 1.4. A relevance-oriented semantic account of mood 45 1.4.1. Semantics and relevance theory 46 1.4.2. Relevance theory and the semantics of na-clauses 57 1.4.3. Mood indicators and procedural meaning 70 1.5. Summary 76 Chapter 2: On the Interpretation of na-clauses: Na-clauses and enrichment 78 2.1. Introduction 78 2.2. Interpreting utterances 78 2.2.1. Relevance theory 78 2.2.2. Relevance and explicatures 87 2.3. Pragmatically enriching the semantics of na-clauses 94 2.3.1. Declarative and interrogative na-clauses 94 2.3.2. The role of processing effort considerations 102 2.3.3. Na-clauses with imperatival force 108 2.3.4. Na-clauses and the imperative in MG 116 2.3.5. Na-clauses and the expression of wishes 121 2.3.6. Na-clauses and the expression of potentiality 125 2.3.7. Na-clauses and the expression of possibility 127 2.4. Summary 128 Chapter 3: On the Interpretation of na-clauses: Na-clauses and interpretive use 129 3.1. Introduction 129 3.2. Na-clauses and actual states of affairs 129 3.3. Description, interpretation and the mood indicators 135 3.4. Na-clauses and interpretive use 142 3.5. Na-clauses and the expression of emotions 150 3.6. Na-interrogatives 156 3.6.1. The data and a possible classification 156 3.6.2. A relevance-theoretic account of na-interrogatives 160 3.6.3. Pavlidou's criteria as aspects of interpretation 171 3.6.4. On NrhetoricalN questions 173 3.7. Summary 184 Chapter 4: On definite and Indefinite descriptions 185 4.1. Introduction 185 4.2. The referential-attributive distinction 186 4.3. On the semantics of definite and indefinite descriptions 188 4.3.1. General considerations 188 4.3.2. Truth conditions 192 4.3.3. Anaphora 194 4.3.4. Scope constraints 196 4.4. A sketch of the semantics of descriptions 197 4.5. The pragmatics of definite and indefinite descriptions 203 4.5.1. Attributive use 204 4.5.2. Specific use 207 4.5.3. Referential use 214 4.5.4. Relevance and the referential use 222 4.5.5. The referential use and explicit content 229 4.6. Summary 237 Chapter 5: The interpretation of non na- and na-restrictive relatives 239 5.1. Introduction 239 5.2. Grammaticalisation of the referential-attributive distinction? 241 5.2.1. Definite descriptions and non na-restrictive relatives 241 5.2.2. Indefinite descriptions and non na-restrictive relatives 248 5.2.3. Na-restrictive relatives 250 5.3. The wide vs narrow scope distinction 259 5.3.1. Donnellan's distinction and the wide-narrow scope contrast 259 5.3.2. Existential generalisation and the choice of mood 261 5.3.3. The responsibility for the description and the choice of mood 267 5.4. Summary 280 Epilogue 282 Bibliography 288 INTRODUCTION In Modem Greek the subjunctive does not take the form of a distinct verbal ending but is realised by the particle na, which may occur both in independent and in subordinate clauses1 2: (1) na spoudasis na study-2s-PF You should study (2) Thelo na spoudaso want-is na study-is-PF I want to study The verb following the subjunctive particle is inflected for person, number, aspect, tense and voice, as in the indicative: 1The source of Modern Greek na is the Classical Greek conjunction hina, which was typically used as a conjunction introducing purpose clauses and was followed by a verb in the subjunctive (in Classical Greek the subjunctive was manifested by specific verb endings). There is an issue as to whether Modem Greek na is a complementizer or part of the projection of the verb. For syntactic analyses of the subjunctive in Modern Greek see Philippaki-Warburton (1987, 1992), Tsimpli (1990), Agouraki (1991), Roussou (forthcoming). The first systematic approach to the syntax and semantics of the subjunctive was proposed in Veloudis and Philippaki-Warburton (1983). The main points of that paper are repeated in Philippaki-Warburton (1992). Whatever the syntactic status of na, there is agreement between these authors that it is the marker of subjunctive mood. A different view is put forward by Lightfoot (1975, 1979), who takes the na+verb complex to be a kind of future.