Presuppositions and Pronouns - Nijmegen Centre for Semantics
Presuppositions and Pronouns - Nijmegen Centre for Semantics
Presuppositions and Pronouns - Nijmegen Centre for Semantics
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Presupposition 33<br />
of this complexity, it is natural that the interlocutors will concentrate their<br />
attention on selected parts of the content conveyed by an utterance; the rest<br />
is of secondary importance, it is backgrounded. There may be many factors<br />
that can influence this selection process, but once the focal points have been<br />
identified, what remains tends to be presupposed.<br />
This picture is admittedly vague, <strong>and</strong> it certainly does not deserves to be<br />
called a theory, but it is not entirely without substance. The main idea is that,<br />
although there may be many different reasons <strong>for</strong> backgrounding part of the<br />
content of an expression, what is judged to be of secondary interest will be<br />
presupposed if it can be presupposed. This allows us make some sense of the<br />
bewildering variety of presupposition triggers. It may be that, say, factives<br />
<strong>and</strong> aspectual verbs have little in common. But both types of expressions<br />
focus on certain parts of the in<strong>for</strong>mation they contain, <strong>and</strong> allow the<br />
remainder to be presupposed, <strong>and</strong> if I am right, this is why it will be<br />
presupposed. It will be evident that there is much more to say about this<br />
subject. Un<strong>for</strong>tunately, however, I don't have much more to say about it.<br />
1.6 A note on presupposition failure<br />
Of the three main problems that I mentioned at the beginning of this chapter,<br />
the problem of presupposition failure is the oldest, <strong>and</strong> in my opinion it is<br />
also the least interesting. What happens if a presupposition turns out to be<br />
false Suppose that Betty isn't married. Is (68) then false or just meaningless<br />
Will a speaker who uttered this sentence have said something in any non-<br />
nontrivial<br />
sense of the word, or not<br />
(68) Betty's husb<strong>and</strong> is a teetotaler.<br />
It is over questions like these that the famous battles between Fregeans,<br />
Russellians, <strong>and</strong> Strawsonians have raged, but despite the controversy<br />
caused by the issue of presupposition failure, I feel that its importance has<br />
been overrated. To begin with, taking a purely observational stance, it is by<br />
no means clear what the issue is supposed to be, with in<strong>for</strong>mants being<br />
inconsistent over what the consequences of presupposition failure are. Given<br />
that Betty isn't married, some native speakers of English will say that (68) is<br />
false, while others will prefer to say that it doesn't make any sense. The<br />
empirical bottom line is that the opinions about the effects of presupposition<br />
failure are divided, <strong>and</strong> to the extent that a consensus can be attained, it<br />
appears that speakers' intuitions are dependent on contextual factors of a<br />
such a kind that only further doubt is cast upon the presumption that there is<br />
a substantial issue. At any rate, this is the moral I draw from Strawson's