SemPrag03.Progr.pdf - Institut für Linguistik/Germanistik - Universität ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Referential Expressions and Syntax-Semantics(-Pragmatics) Interface The exact nature of referential possibilities of the so-called reflexive jibun (or zibun) has been a contentious issue throughout the history of Japanese linguistics. This is mainly because this expression has a wider referential than other languages such as English. The dialectal and idiolectal variation also accounts for the controversy. There have been many attempts to capture the behaviour of jibun by syntactic constraints. One such example, which is relatively comprehensive, is proposed by Kameyama (1984: 228). She proposed that the antecedent for jibun (a) must be the subject of the sentence; (b) need not be in the same clause as jibun; (c) must ‘command’ jibun; and (d) must be animate. Such conditions alone cannot explain the following examples: (1) Taroo-ga Jiroo-ni jibun-no-koto-wo hanas-ase-ta. Taroo-NOM Jiroo-DAT jibun-GEN-COMP-ACC tell-PASS-PAST “Taroo i had Jiroo j talk about self i/j ” (2) Taroo-ga Jiroo-ni jibun-no-koto-wo hanasite-morat-ta. Taroo-NOM Jiroo-DAT jibun-GEN-COMP-ACC tell-BENE-PAST “Taroo i benefited from Jiroo j talking about self i/j ” (3) Taroo-ga Jiroo-ni jibun-to-sokkurina-otoko-ga-iru-koto-wo Taroo-NOM Jiroo-DAT jibun-COMP-resemble-man-NOM-exist-COMP-ACC shiras-are-ta. inform-PASS-PAST “Taroo i was informed by Jiroo j of the fact that there is a man resembling self i/j ” (4) Taroo-wa Jiroo-kara Saburoo-ga jibun-wo bengosuru-koto-wo Taroo-NOM Jiroo-from Saburoo-NOM jibun-ACC defend-NOM-ACC kiita. heard “Taroo i heard from Jiroo j that Saburoo k would defend self i/j/k ” (5) Taroo-wa Jiroo-ni Saburoo-ga jibun-wo nikundeiru-koto-wo Taroo-NOM Jiroo-DAT Saburoo-NOM jibun-ACC hate-NOM-ACC kiita. heard “Taroo i heard from Jiroo j that Saburoo k hated self i/j/k ” (6) Taroo-wa Jiroo-ni Saburoo-ga jibun-wo nikundeiru-koto-wo Taroo-NOM Jiroo-DAT Saburoo-NOM jibun-ACC hate-NOM-ACC hanashita. told “Taroo i told Jiroo j that Saburoo k hated self i/*j/k ”
(7) Jibun-ga gandearu-toiu-shindan-ga Taroo-wo jibun-NOM has cancer-COMP-diagnosis-NOM Taroo-ACC zetsuboo-ni-oiyatta. despair-DAT-sent “The diagnosis that self i has cancer despaired Taroo i . (1)-(3) may be explained by extending the condition (a): ‘the sentence’ can cover an embedded one as in the case of (1) and (2) or ‘the subject’ could be changed to ‘the agent’ as in (3). Others, however, do not seem to be accounted for by such modification. For instance, Jiroo in (4) and (5) is neither the subject nor the agent in any conceivable sense. In (6), on the other hand, the seemingly same Jiroo cannot act as the antecedent. Finally, in (7), there is no real antecedent, for jibun appears in the sentence-initial position. To account for these examples, Kameyama (1984: 230-1) revises her conditions, employing the following features: [+/- sb] whether or not the antecedent must be a grammatical subject [+/- ncl] whether or not the antecedent must be in the same clause nucleus as the anaphor [+/- log] whether or not the anaphor must lie in an indirect discourse structure with respect to the antecedent that designates the “logophoric” subject Logophoric pronouns, as originally proposed by Hagege (1974), are those pronouns which refer to the author of a discourse or someone whose thoughts are reported. Clements (1975: 141) slightly extends this, stating that the antecedent of the logophoric pronoun must be “the individual (other than the speaker) whose speech, thoughts, feelings, or general state of consciousness are reported”. Following Clements, Kameyama’s main proposal is that jibun has the disjunctive feature [+sb/+log]. In the version of Lexical Functional Grammar in which Kameyama’s account is given, the deep-structure subjects of transformational grammar correspond to XCOMP SUBJ, i.e. the subject of an open complement, which has the feature [+sb]. This means that noun phrases in the problematic examples will have the following features: (4) Taroo [+sb]; Jiroo [+log]; Saburoo [+sb] (5) Taroo [+sb]; Jiroo [+log]; Saburoo [+sb, +log] (6) Taroo [+sb]; Jiroo OBJ2; Saburoo [+sb, +log] (7) Taroo [+log] The proposed feature can thus explain the fact that Jiroo cannot be the antecedent of jibun in (6). It should be noted here that by adding the feature [+ log], Kameyama’s account no longer remains purely syntactic. So far so good. There are, however, examples that suggest it is not sufficient. (8) Hanako-wa Masako-ni jibun-ga kimeta-jikan-ni Hanako-TOP Masako-DAT jibun-NOM decided-time-at kuukoo-ni airport-to mukaenikite-morat-ta. come and meet-BENE-PAST
Page 1 and 2:
Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics Fi
Page 3 and 4:
Saturday, 12 - July - 2003 9.00-10.
Page 5 and 6:
MOOD, PROPOSITIONAL ATTITUDES AND M
Page 7 and 8:
Most: Reversing some of the roles o
Page 9 and 10:
In fact, Table 2 shows that the 93.
Page 11 and 12:
6. Benny Avraham, Adi Avitan, Omar
Page 13 and 14:
Scalar Implicature 1 The Time Cours
Page 15 and 16:
Scalar Implicature 3 times for the
Page 17 and 18:
Scalar Implicature 5 more available
Page 19 and 20:
1 Anaphora resolution Nominals are
Page 21 and 22:
For aspectual adverbials, (i) the o
Page 23 and 24:
—, but cannot be used to directly
Page 25 and 26:
the acts are perceived. In particul
Page 27 and 28:
negation (see Cormack & Smith 1998)
Page 34 and 35: ÀÓÛ ØÓ ÒÝ ÈÖ×ÙÔÔÓ×
Page 36 and 37: ÇÒ ×Ù Ø×Ø × ÒØÓÒ Û Ò
Page 38 and 39: ÊÖÒ× ÙÖØÓÒ¹ÊÓÖØ×¸
Page 40 and 41: metonymy here, hence, it is (perhap
Page 42 and 43: prominent features (e.g. looking fo
Page 44 and 45: the complete lack of suggestion tha
Page 46 and 47: Tolerating exceptions with „descr
Page 48 and 49: considering (3a), for example, it w
Page 50 and 51: SUPERLATIVE QUANTIFIERS AND THE DYN
Page 52 and 53: Groenendijk, Jeroen, Martin Stokhof
Page 54 and 55: Furthermore, propositions, facts, a
Page 56 and 57: 4 (13) The electrical poles are per
Page 58 and 59: Gundel, Jeanette K., Kaja Borthen a
Page 60 and 61: y them, at least two more members o
Page 62 and 63: (9) Tā bìxū qù dàshĭguăn, c
Page 64 and 65: implicatures. BUCLD 25 Proceedings,
Page 66 and 67: 2 properties of mental states. The
Page 68 and 69: 4 Fig. 2 These three indices corres
Page 70 and 71: Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. McTagg
Page 72 and 73: From (3) we can come up with an alt
Page 74 and 75: single S but L+H* compositionally s
Page 76 and 77: 1 The Hidden Path of Semantic Conte
Page 78 and 79: 3 their semantic contents. A sample
Page 82 and 83: “Hanako i benefited from Masako j
Page 84 and 85: On the Properties of a Semantics-Pr
Page 86 and 87: (ii) Juan entró a su oficina camin
Page 88 and 89: The extractions that GPs allow are
Page 90 and 91: General Number and the Semantics an
Page 92 and 93: . Zuotian, wo mai le yixie shu. Wo
Page 94 and 95: We propose that the only mode of co
Page 96 and 97: account assume the existence of con
Page 99: meaningful way to connect the two s
show all

SemPrag03.Progr.pdf - Institut für Linguistik/Germanistik - Universität ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?