On the characterization of alternatives

We present an argument for revising the theory of alternatives for Scalar Implicatures and for Association with Focus. We argue that in both cases the alternatives are determined in the same way, as a contextual restriction of the focus value of the sentence, which, in turn, is defined in structure-...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Natural language semantics Jg. 19; H. 1; S. 87 - 107
Hauptverfasser: Fox, Danny, Katzir, Roni
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Dordrecht Springer 01.03.2011
Springer Netherlands
Springer Nature B.V
Schlagworte:
Alternatives
Broken symmetry
Constraints
Context
Definitions
Focus
Formal languages and grammars
Homework
Implicature
Inference
Linguistics
Mathematics and linguistics
Philosophy of Language
Pragmatics
Relevant alternatives
Restrictions
Saliency
Scalarity
Scalarity (Semantics)
Scalars
Semantics
Social Sciences
Stoles
Symmetry
Syntax
Scalar implicature
Relevance
Contextual restriction
Focus semantics
Alternatives
Semantics
Focus
Assertion
Scalarity
Implicature
Formal semantics
Symmetry
ISSN:0925-854X, 1572-865X
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We present an argument for revising the theory of alternatives for Scalar Implicatures and for Association with Focus. We argue that in both cases the alternatives are determined in the same way, as a contextual restriction of the focus value of the sentence, which, in turn, is defined in structure-sensitive terms. We provide evidence that contextual restriction is subject to a constraint that prevents it from discriminating between alternatives when they stand in a particular logical relationship with the assertion or the prejacent, a relationship that we refer to as symmetry. Due to this constraint on contextual restriction, discriminating between alternatives in cases of symmetry becomes the task of focus values. This conclusion is incompatible with standard type-theoretic definitions of focus values, motivating our structure-sensitive definition instead.
Bibliographie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0925-854X
1572-865X
DOI:10.1007/s11050-010-9065-3