Presuppositions and Pronouns - Nijmegen Centre for Semantics

72 Presuppositions and Pronouns
this theory cannot account for such cases, as we will see in the next chapter
(§ 3.5). It is good news for the binding theory, which explains the preferred
interpretations of the examples in (62) without further ado.
Before we leave this subject, at least for a while, let us consider why (62b)
requires a marked intonation pattern, while (62a) does not. The answer to
this question is not hard to find. In (62a) and (62b) the information that
Harry doesn't have a wife is already in at the point at which the definite NP
Harry's wife is evaluated, and therefore the issue of where the corresponding
presupposition must be accommodated is settled right away. In (62b), by
contrast, the hearer doesn't know for sure that the speaker intends this
presupposition to be accommodated locally until the second sentence has
been received. That is to say, the final interpretation of the first half of (62b)
)
is partly dependent upon the interpretation of the second half. It is to signal
this that the intonation contour required by denials like (62b) is a marked
one, with a final rise within the negative clause, which the speaker uses to
indicate that his contribution is not yet finished (cf. Horn 1989: 374; Ladd
1980: 145ff). In cases like (62b), by contrast, this signal is not required, and
therefore this sentence can be pronounced with the more common falling
intonation contour.
2.4.3 Bridging
Some presuppositions are harder to accommodate than others; for example,
the presuppositions triggered by pronouns are rarely construed by way of
accommodation. When produced 'out of the blue' the following will
generally be felt to be infelicitous, presumably because it isn't clear what the
speaker is referring to:
(65) It's yellow.
By and large, a pronoun requires that an explicit antecedent be available,
and as long as we ignore the possibility that antecedents are furnished by the
context of discourse, this means that, generally speaking, a pronoun requires
an antecedent expression for it to be interpretable. However, there are cases
in which a pronoun can be used even in the absence of an antecedent
expression. (65) might be the beginning of a riddle, for example:
(66) It's yellow with black dots and two feet tall. What is that
Here the only way to interpret the pronoun is by means of accommodation,
obviously. The same holds, in my opinion, for what is sometimes called
'kataphora', that is, cases in which, informally speaking, a pronoun 'refers
forward' to an antecedent that is yet to be formally introduced.