26.01.2013 Views

Presuppositions in Spoken Discourse

Presuppositions in Spoken Discourse

Presuppositions in Spoken Discourse

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Anaphors and Bound <strong>Presuppositions</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>vited him. Note that we cannot replace the relative clause with an anaphoric<br />

expression, e.g. “It was he who did it.” The follow<strong>in</strong>g example illustrates a<br />

presupposition <strong>in</strong>duced by a factive.<br />

(7) factive verb, triggered p: Poppy took her eng<strong>in</strong>e to pieces (1-12 341)<br />

Speaker B Well, once when Poppy had stripped down her eng<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> her car - and<br />

was stand<strong>in</strong>g there and . you were . help<strong>in</strong>g her and when Miss Black<br />

went past she said -sort of I did notice Poppy - sort of tak<strong>in</strong>g her<br />

eng<strong>in</strong>e to pieces * and your husband say<strong>in</strong>g . all right.<br />

Speaker c *[m]*<br />

Speaker B Now put it together aga<strong>in</strong>, and she said, could she really, put it together<br />

and I said well I don‘t know whether she could but she had to *because<br />

she was . left to do it .<br />

Just as anaphoric expressions can refer to a different semantic type than its<br />

antecedent so can a presupposition bound to an abstract object. In this example<br />

Speaker B first describes an event or possibly a situation; the event of Poppy stripp<strong>in</strong>g<br />

down her motor. She then reports on what Miss Black said, tak<strong>in</strong>g Miss Black’s<br />

perspective <strong>in</strong> her report<strong>in</strong>g, putt<strong>in</strong>g the description of the earlier event <strong>in</strong> the<br />

complement of the factive verb notice. So the presupposition has the semantic status<br />

of a reported fact, but it will need to take an event as an antecedent. This means that<br />

presuppositions seem to be able to take antecedents of different semantic types <strong>in</strong><br />

the same way as abstract object anaphors, i.e. the type-coercion discussed earlier.<br />

The next example shows an aspectual verb whose <strong>in</strong>duced presupposition<br />

can be bound. Aspectual verbs presuppose states. The po<strong>in</strong>t of the utterances they<br />

appear <strong>in</strong> is to make clear that there was a change or a non-change <strong>in</strong> the state, e.g.<br />

either that a state cont<strong>in</strong>ued, began, or ended. In this particular example, the<br />

discussion is about the constancy of the personality of an acqua<strong>in</strong>tance. Speaker A’s<br />

presupposition, that the acqua<strong>in</strong>tance was made at a time earlier to the reference<br />

time of the utterance with the aspectual verb, is already given <strong>in</strong> Speaker b’s<br />

comment.<br />

(8) aspectual verb, triggered p:“she was mad before” (2-14 977)<br />

Speaker b Yes, but she was always rather mad.<br />

Speaker A Oh she was, yes - -<br />

Speaker C #<br />

Speaker A And she cont<strong>in</strong>ues to be mad I mean she‘s one of these rather nice<br />

people who obviously go on be<strong>in</strong>g mad, till their dy<strong>in</strong>g day.<br />

The follow<strong>in</strong>g example of an <strong>in</strong>duced presupposition also has an aspectual verb as a<br />

trigger. The <strong>in</strong>formation exchange here is particularly <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g because it is a<br />

comb<strong>in</strong>ation of the questions and answers of the participants that together<br />

contribute to the antecedent <strong>in</strong>formation.<br />

(9) aspectual verb, triggered p: “(you) haven’t prepared earlier to now”<br />

(2-11b 346)<br />

71

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!