Exercise Presuppositions: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(14 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{CreatedByStudents1213}}<br />''Involved participants: [[User:Katharina_D| Katharina]], [[User:Caterina| Caterina]], [[User:DaniKe| Daniela]], [[User:Eva Kotsikopoulou|Eva]] | {{CreatedByStudents1213}}<br />''Involved participants: [[User:Katharina_D| Katharina]], [[User:Caterina| Caterina]], [[User:DaniKe| Daniela]], [[User:Eva Kotsikopoulou|Eva]] | ||
The following sentences make certain presuppositions. | ===Presuppositions=== | ||
The following sentences make certain presuppositions. Indicate which of the given candidate inferences are presuppositions? | |||
<quiz display=simple> | <quiz display=simple> | ||
{ Would you mind washing up the dishes this time? | { Would you mind washing up the dishes this time? | ||
|type="[]"} | |||
+ There are dishes that need to be washed up. | |||
- I do not have time to do the dishes. | |||
|| This inference would be an implicature. | |||
+ The dishes needed to be washed up before. | |||
||''this time'' triggers a presupposition, just as ''again'' does. | |||
- Someone didn't wash up the dishes the last time they needed to be washed up. | |||
|| If this can be inferred at all, it would be an implicature. | |||
{ I want more milk for my tea! | |||
|type="[]"} | |||
- I hate tea with milk. | |||
|| This is not an inference of the given sentence at all. | |||
+ I am having tea. | |||
|| A presupposition because it follows from the negation of the sentence as well: (''I don't want more milk for my tea'' +> ''I am having tea.'') | |||
+ Someone has already put milk in his/her tea. | |||
|| This presupposition is triggered by ''more''. | |||
- I do not like my tea with the amount of milk that is currently in the tea. | |||
|| This is an implicature. | |||
{ Alex's wife has called. | |||
|type = "[]"} | |||
+ Alex is married. | |||
|| Negation test: The inference also holds for ''Alex's wife hasn't called.'' | |||
- Alex is male. | |||
|| This is an implicature based on heuristic world knowledge that in most cases, the spouse of a woman is a man. | |||
- Alex's wife has called the speaker. | |||
|| This is an implicature, as we can only guess who was called from the context. | |||
+ There exists a married woman. | |||
</quiz> | |||
===Presupposition or entailment?=== | |||
<quiz display=simple> | |||
{Is the '''B''' sentence a presupposition or an entailment of the '''A''' sentence? | |||
|type="()"} | |type="()"} | ||
| presupposition | entailment | |||
|| | +- '''A''': Where is the man with the megaphone? '''B''': There is a man with a megaphone. | ||
|| Questions never have entailments, only assertions do. Also: A definite NP presupposes the existence (and uniqueness) of an individual with the described property. | |||
|| | -+ '''A''': At least three students solved the problem. '''B''': At least two students solved the problem. | ||
|| The inference disappears if we negate '''A''', i.e., ''It is not true that at least three students solved the problem.'' does not allow us to infer '''B'''. | |||
|| | +- '''A''': The Queen of England attended a cooking workshop. '''B''': There is a queen of England. | ||
|| | || Negation test: The '''B''' sentence can also be inferred from the negation of the '''A''' sentence (''The Queen of England did not attend a cooking workshop.''). Also: A definite NP has an existential presupposition. | ||
-+ '''A''': My dog Richard was killed in a car accident. '''B''': My dog Richard is dead. | |||
|| The negation test does not work here: The negation of '''A''' (''My dog Richard was not killed in a car accident.'') does not allow us to infer '''B'''. However, '''B''' is not cancellable: We cannot, without creating a contradiction, continue '''A''' by ''but, in fact, Richard isn't dead.'' | |||
</quiz> | |||
===Types of presuppositions=== | |||
<quiz display=simple> | |||
{ | {The sentences in '''A''' presuppose the sentence '''B'''. Determine the type of presupposition. | ||
|type=" | |type="[]"} | ||
+ | | existential | factive | lexical | structural | non-factive | counterfactual | ||
|| The | +----- '''A''': The fair boy shook his head. '''B''': There is a boy who is fair. | ||
|| | || Definite NPs make an existential presupposition. | ||
|| | --+--- '''A''': I stopped eating meat. '''B''': I used to eat meat | ||
|| | || The presupposition trigger is the word ''stop''. | ||
|| | ---+-- '''A''': What movie did you end up watching last friday? '''B''': The addressee watched a movie last friday. | ||
|| Wh-questions presuppose that there is an instance of what is being asked for. | |||
--+-+- '''A''': I wish I wouldn't have eaten these delicious fries with extra ketchup, now I have to get changed. '''B''': The speaker has eaten these delicious fries with extra ketchup. | |||
|| ''wish'' presupposes the non-factivity of its complement. | |||
---+-+ '''A''': If I would not have eaten so much over the holidays I would still fit my favorite jeans. '''B''': The speaker has eaten so much over the holidays. | |||
|| The counterfactual ''if'' clause structurally triggers that the negation of the proposition in the ''if'' clause is presupposed. | |||
-++--- '''A''': Alex knew that Chris didn't call. '''B''': Chris didn't call. | |||
|| ''know'' is a factive verb, i.e., the truth of its complement is presupposed. | |||
---+-- '''A''': It was in the opera that I have lost my glasses. '''B''': I have lost my glasses somewhere. | |||
|| In an''it''-cleft the truth of the ''that''-clause is structurally presupposed. | |||
</quiz> | </quiz> |
Latest revision as of 14:47, 14 November 2013
The following material is an adapted form of material created by student participants of the project e-Learning Resources for Semantics (e-LRS).
Involved participants: Katharina, Caterina, Daniela, Eva
Presuppositions
The following sentences make certain presuppositions. Indicate which of the given candidate inferences are presuppositions?
Presupposition or entailment?
Types of presuppositions