Determine the type of ambiguity: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
# Determine the type of the ambiguity and | # Determine the type of the ambiguity and | ||
# determine which element in the sentence causes the ambiguity. | # determine which element in the sentence causes the ambiguity. | ||
Choose the right option | Choose the right option. | ||
(1) ''Pat didn't know a guest at the party.'' | <quiz display=simple> | ||
{ (1) ''Pat didn't know a guest at the party.'' <br /> <br /> | |||
Determine the type of the ambiguity | |||
| typ="()" } | |||
- lexical | |||
||Of course, you could argue that the name Pat could either refer to a female person (short for Patricia) or a male person (short for Patrick). In this sense, it would be a lexical ambiguity. However, we are after a different type of ambiguity here. | |||
:: | - structural | ||
:: | ||You might argue that the preposition phrase at the party could attach to the noun guest, to the verb phrase know a guest, or to the entire sentence. In each case, the truth conditions of the sentence are the same. | ||
+ scope | |||
||This is a scope ambiguity. | |||
||The two readings are:<br /> | |||
||Reading 1: Not > Some<br /> | |||
||''Pat knew no guest at the party.''<br /> | |||
||More formally: ''It is not the case that there was a guest at the party that Pat knew.''<br /> | |||
||In this reading the negation has scope over the indefinite ''a guest''.<br /> | |||
||Reading 2: Some > Not<br /> | |||
||''There was one guest at the party Pat didn't know.''<br /> | |||
||More formally: ''There was a guest at that party such that it is not the case that Pat knew this guest.''<br /> | |||
||In this reading the indefinite ''a guest'' has scope over the negation.<br /> | |||
||Follow the link to get more [[Types of ambiguity|explanations]] | |||
- collective-distributive | |||
||For such an ambiguity to arise, we typically need at least one plural entity. | |||
{ Determine which element in the sentence causes the ambiguity. | |||
: | | typ="()" } | ||
- 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]]. | |||
||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 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 | |||
||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. | |||
</quiz> | |||
Revision as of 23:10, 6 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.