Determine the type of ambiguity: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
{ Determine which element in the sentence causes the ambiguity. | { Determine which element in the sentence causes the ambiguity. | ||
| typ="()" } | | typ="()" } | ||
- the word know | - the word ''know'' | ||
||Check again which type of ambiguity we have in this sentence. This may help you to answer this question, too. You can also consult the page with the [[Types of ambiguity|explanations]]. | ||Check again which type of ambiguity we have in this sentence. This may help you to answer this question, too. You can also consult the page with the [[Types of ambiguity|explanations]]. | ||
||Of course, the word know is highly ambiguous: To mention just one example, there are cases of structural ambiguity which are caused by different complementation possibilities of the word know. One example would be I know what Alex wrote to Chris. Here the verb know either combines with an embedded interrogative clause or with a free relative, i.e., know either combines with a CP or an NP. This can be disambiguated by adding else (for the embedded interrogative reading) or ever (for the free relative). | ||Of course, the word ''know'' is highly ambiguous: To mention just one example, there are cases of structural ambiguity which are caused by different complementation possibilities of the word ''know''. One example would be ''I know what Alex wrote to Chris''. Here the verb know either combines with an embedded interrogative clause or with a free relative, i.e., know either combines with a CP or an NP. This can be disambiguated by adding ''else'' (for the embedded interrogative reading) or ''ever'' (for the free relative). | ||
+ the negation and the indefinite | + the negation and the indefinite | ||
||The sentence shows a scope ambiguity, so the scope-bearing elements are responsible for the ambiguity. In the sentence, the negation (expressed by didn't) and the indefinite NP (a guest) are scope-bearing elements. If a sentence contains two scope-bearing elements, it will usually be scopally ambiguous. | ||The sentence shows a scope ambiguity, so the scope-bearing elements are responsible for the ambiguity. In the sentence, the negation (expressed by ''didn't'') and the indefinite NP (''a guest'') are scope-bearing elements. If a sentence contains two scope-bearing elements, it will usually be scopally ambiguous. | ||
- the preposition at | - the preposition ''at'' | ||
||In this example, the preposition at is used as the head of the location modifier at the party. | ||In this example, the preposition ''at'' is used as the head of the location modifier ''at the party''. | ||
||In other examples, the prepositions at can be responsible for ambiguities. The sentence Pat was laughing at the party, is ambiguous. The preposition at, here, could either be the head of a location modifier, as in our example above, or the head of a complement PP at the party. In this second reading at the party is the theme of the laughing, not the location of the laughing. | ||In other examples, the prepositions ''at'' can be responsible for ambiguities. The sentence ''Pat was laughing at the party'', is ambiguous. The preposition ''at'', here, could either be the head of a location modifier, as in our example above, or the head of a complement PP ''at the party''. In this second reading ''at the party'' is the theme of the laughing, not the location of the laughing. | ||
</quiz> | </quiz> | ||
Latest revision as of 10:28, 7 January 2014
Each of the following sentences is ambiguous.
- Determine the type of the ambiguity and
- determine which element in the sentence causes the ambiguity.
Choose the right option.