Discourse Structure and the Structure of Context - Multiple Choices

More documents

Recommendations

Info

24 represents an entity named N (or when it is clear for other reasons that the one or ones represented in KEnc cannot be what the speaker intended). In contrast, non-initial uses of N, in the sense elucidated above, never require accommodation, since by definition a suitable representation of the referent (according to the recipient's interpretation) will always already belong to KDis. 19 We conclude this section with a statement of the interpretation rules for proper names and a summary. Interpretation rules for proper names: (a) a Discourse-initial uses of a proper name N. We distinguish three cases. (i) There is one discourse referent x in KEnc which is accompanied by the condition "Named(x,N)" and which is also compatible (given the further conditions involving x that KEnc contains) with the other constraints imposed on the interpretation of the given occurrence of N. In this case x is chosen as the interpretation of the given use of N. We implement this by stipulating that the given act of interpretation introduces discourse referent xN for the given occurrence of N into the universe of the DRS K representing the content of the utterance of which the given occurrence of N is part, and that it adds to the condition set of K the equation "xN = x" (See (Kamp & Reyle, 1993). Furthermore x is added to the universe of KDis. (ii) There are two or more discourse referents x1, .., xn in KEnc which all satisfy the conditions stated in (a.i). In this case interpretation of N must choose between these. If no particular choice can be justified, the interpretation remains ambiguous. The effect is a set of k alternative interpretations (ideally a singleton), where xi1 , ...,x ik (k £ n) are those discourse referents which cannot be eliminated as unintended interpretations for N. 19 In this regard the anaphoric uses of names differ from anaphoric pronoun uses. A pronoun can be used in a situation where no suitable antecedent for it is present in KDis. In such a situation accommodation would be the only way of saving the interpretation. Recall in this connection footnote ??, which refers to discussions in the literature whether and to what extent accommodation of pronouns is possible at all.
25 The ij-th interpretation (j = 1,..,k) involves adding the condition " xN = xij " to the DRS K of the given utterance, while x ij is included in the universe of KDis. (iii) There is no x in KEnc which satisfies the conditions of (a.i). In this case a referent for N must be accommodated. We distinguish two cases: (iii.i) A new discourse referent x is introduced into KEnc together with the condition "Named(x,N)". In all other respects we proceed as under (a.i). (iii.ii) A discourse referent x from the universe of KEnc is chosen for which "Named(x,N)" is not a condition in KEnc. In this case only the condition "Named(x,N)" is accommodated. Again we proceed in all other respects as under (a.i). (b) Non-discourse-initial uses of a proper name N. Given the way in which we have defined non-discourse-initial uses of names, KDis always contains a discourse referent xN with the accompanying condition "Named(x,N)". We distinguish two cases. (i) If there is just one such discourse referent xN, then it will be taken to represent the referent of the given use of N. In this case we introduce a new discourse referent x'N into the representation of the utterance containing N and add the condition "x'N = xN". (ii) If KDis contains several discourse referents x1,N, ..., xn,N which satisfy the above conditions, then again there is a need for disambiguation. In this case we proceed as under (a.ii). (It should be noted that cases of type (b.ii) will in general about as infelicitous as the repeated uses of names which are discourse-initial in our technical sense. In the present case too one would preferably use some larger NP of which the name is a constituent.) Summary of Subsection 3.1:
Page 1 and 2: 1 Discourse Structure and the Struc
Page 3 and 4: 3 cumulative nature of interpretati
Page 5 and 6: 5 as the preceding sentence provide
Page 7 and 8: 7 function as representations of pa
Page 9 and 10: 9 "week-before-that-of n"(t) "the-d
Page 11 and 12: 11 There has been a tendency within
Page 13 and 14: 13 actual time of the represented u
Page 15 and 16: 15 however, that as things stand I
Page 17 and 18: 17 (1) Singular third person person
Page 19 and 20: 19 In normal language use most disc
Page 21 and 22: 21 (It is this commitment which mak
Page 23: 23 1999 (?)).) Within the present s
Page 27 and 28: 27 time and (in those cases where t
Page 29 and 30: 29 So far in this section we have o
Page 31 and 32: 31 below; and question its general
Page 33 and 34: 33 The possibility of selecting one
Page 35 and 36: 35 presented as something that is g
Page 37 and 38: 37 case of now too. And indeed ther
Page 39 and 40: 39 utterance time. Among these are
Page 41 and 42: 41 clear conception of who he means
Page 43 and 44: 43 which a single speaker may shift
Page 45 and 46: 45 One implication of this is that
Page 47 and 48: 47 interpreting D refer to this sam
Page 49 and 50: 49 members of which are discourse r
Page 51 and 52: 51 (ii) The indexical correspondenc
Page 53 and 54: 53 have discussed already - or of t
Page 55 and 56: 55 representing the demonstrative's
Page 57 and 58: 57 believe that there are no such c
Page 59 and 60: 59 is represented in at least one o
Page 61 and 62: 61 neither of us ever knew personal
Page 63 and 64: 63 choice of determiner will serve
Page 65 and 66: 65 is an indexical with equal right
Page 67 and 68: 67 There is a second point connecte
Page 69 and 70: 69 These are imponderabilia just pe
Page 71 and 72: 71 3.4 Definite Descriptions. Some
Page 73 and 74: 73 same semantic or pragmatic effec
Page 75 and 76:
75 b. C y x }, > president(y) presi
Page 77 and 78:
seem to support the view that the c
Page 79 and 80:
79 Similar considerations apply to
Page 81 and 82:
81 sentence as a whole, or are ther
Page 83 and 84:
83 descriptions, demonstratives) th
Page 85 and 86:
85 which, they rightly observed, ma
Page 87 and 88:
87 Sometimes the topic situation is
Page 89 and 90:
89 with a supporting demonstration)
Page 91 and 92:
91 these entities belong to the top
Page 93 and 94:
93 in which the discourse tawhat is
Page 95 and 96:
95 Call a discourse referent x belo
Page 97 and 98:
97 "Look, there is a blackbird with
Page 99 and 100:
99 That notions of context vary is
Page 101 and 102:
101 There is a second distinction,
Page 103 and 104:
103 important are the different way
Page 105 and 106:
105 intensonal model MWe may assume
Page 107 and 108:
107 Justifications of (3) within a
Page 109 and 110:
109 utterance of sentence (2.a.i) (
Page 111 and 112:
111 present tense. (i) is appropria
Page 113 and 114:
113 whole, these times shift as the
Page 115 and 116:
115 the statements we make. This ma
Page 117 and 118:
117 always committed to having a pa
Page 119 and 120:
119 domain - is an aspect of the im
Page 121 and 122:
121 Meaning depends on context. The
Page 123 and 124:
123 Intuitively there seems t be a
Page 125 and 126:
125 Not that I will go very far. I
Page 127:
127 In Section 1 mentioned the prob
show all

Discourse Structure and the Structure of Context - Multiple Choices

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?