NMTS-Group0: Difference between revisions
| (26 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
== Our exercises == | == Our exercises == | ||
<!-- Provide links to all the exercises that your group has created.--> | <!-- Provide links to all the exercises that your group has created.--> | ||
Online exercises can be created using the quiz formats from: | |||
http://de.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Quiz | |||
To include logical symbols, use the html tags: ∀ ∃ ∧ ∨ ⊂ ⊃ ¬ | |||
* Exercise on types of ambiguities. [[Determine_the_type_of_ambiguity|Link to the exercise]] (only one example so far). | * Exercise on types of ambiguities. [[Determine_the_type_of_ambiguity|Link to the exercise]] (only one example so far). | ||
<quiz> | |||
{ (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> | |||
<quiz> | |||
{ Cloze text | |||
| type="{}" } | |||
Synonyms are words that have the same { denotation }. | |||
|| see [[Glossary:Antonym|synonym]] | |||
</quiz> | |||
== Other material == | == Other material == | ||
Latest revision as of 19:13, 15 March 2013
Warning:
The material on this page has been created as part of a seminar. It is still heavily under construction and we do not guarantee its correctness. If you have comments on this page or suggestions for improvement, please contact Manfred Sailer.
This note will be removed once the page has been carefully checked and integrated into the main part of this wiki.
(Back to the group overview)
Wikipage of Group 0
Overview
Members
List the members of your group here
Short description of the topic
References and links
References
Links
Our e-learning objects
Our wiki pages
- in the Glossary:
- Glossary:Synonym: the entry for synonym
Our podcasts
Our material for an interactive whiteboard
The files used in the class can be downloaded in notebook format:
- October 16: Slides01.notebook
- October 23: Slides02.notebook
- October 30: Slides03.notebook
- November 6: Slides04.notebook
- November 13: Slides05.notebook
- November 20: Slides06.notebook
- November 27: Slides07.notebook
Our pictures
Eleris
Manfred Sailer
Our exercises
Online exercises can be created using the quiz formats from: http://de.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Quiz
To include logical symbols, use the html tags: ∀ ∃ ∧ ∨ ⊂ ⊃ ¬
- Exercise on types of ambiguities. Link to the exercise (only one example so far).
Other material
(copied from NMTS-InferencePage#Dialogue_by_User:Manfred)
Dialogue by User:Manfred
The following passage is taken from David Mitchell Cloud Atlas, London: Sceptre, 2004, p.33f.
(Comment: this is not a real dialogue, but the text is clear enough so that it is easy to see what has been said in the described situtation.)
- Along the gangway I stepped (Prophetess was bucking like a
- young bronco) to the officers' mess, knocked & entered. Mr
- Roderick & Mr Boerhaave were listening to Cpt. Molyneux. I
- cleared my throat and bade all good morning, at which our ami-
- cable captain swore, `You can better my morning by b-ing
- off, instanter!´
- Coolly, I asked when the captain might find time to hear news
- of an Indian stowaway who had just emerged from the coils of
- hawser taking up my `so-called cabin´. During the ensuing silence
- Cpt. Molyneux's pale, horny-toad complexion turned roast beef
- pink. Ere his blast was launched, I added the stowaway claimed
- to be an able-seaman & begged to work his passage.
Entailment: Line 4: I bade all good morning entails I said something
Presupposition:
Lines 8/9: hear news of an Indian stowaway .... Presupposes: there is an Indian stowaway ....
Type of presuppostion: factive
Note 1: it is remarkable that in this case the presupposition projects over a modal (might) and an embedded question (when ...).
Note 2: the factive presupposition with hear is not as strong as with know, realize or the other predicates discussed in class.
Note 3: In line 12, the verb claim is used. Its complement clause's content (the stowaway is an able-seamben) is not presupposed.
Implicature:
Lines 10: my so-called cabin. Implicature: my cabin is not a proper cabin (because of all the stored hawser)
Type of implicature: particularized conversational implicature.
Calculation: The maxim of manner seems to be flouted (be brief) by the apperantly superfluous so-called. The addressee understands that the speaker wants to communicate more than just saying that the stowaway was in his cabin. The attribute so-called indicates that the object does not fully satisfy the criteria of what would count as a real cabin.