By Gennaro Chierchia
Within the Dynamics of that means, Gennaro Chierchia tackles significant concerns in dynamic semantics and extends the overall framework.Chapter 1 introduces the inspiration of dynamic semantics and discusses intimately the phenomena which have been used to inspire it, akin to "donkey" sentences and adverbs of quantification. the second one bankruptcy explores in higher intensity the translation of indefinites and matters concerning presuppositions of area of expertise and the "E-type strategy." In bankruptcy three, Chierchia extends the dynamic method of the area of syntactic thought, contemplating a variety of empirical difficulties that comes with backwards anaphora, reconstruction results, and susceptible crossover. the ultimate bankruptcy develops the formal procedure of dynamic semantics to accommodate principal problems with definites and presupposition. Chierchia indicates that an technique according to a principled enrichment of the mechanisms facing that means is to be most well-liked on empirical grounds over methods that depend upon an enrichment of the syntactic apparatus.Dynamics of which means illustrates how likely summary stances at the nature of that means may have major and far-reaching linguistic results, resulting in the detection of latest evidence and influencing our figuring out of the syntax/semantics/pragmatics interface.
Read or Download Dynamics of Meaning: Anaphora, Presupposition, and the Theory of Grammar PDF
Best semantics books
Utilizing a cognitive linguistics point of view, this paintings offers the main complete, theoretical research of the semantics of English prepositions on hand. All English prepositions are initially coded as spatial family among actual entities. whereas conserving their unique which means, prepositions have additionally built a wealthy set of non-spatial meanings.
Within the Dynamics of which means, Gennaro Chierchia tackles valuable concerns in dynamic semantics and extends the overall framework. bankruptcy 1 introduces the proposal of dynamic semantics and discusses intimately the phenomena which have been used to inspire it, equivalent to "donkey" sentences and adverbs of quantification.
This article deals a philosophical exam of the fundamental conceptual framework of pragmatic thought, and contrasts this framework with designated descriptions of our daily practices of language use. whereas the consequences might be hugely appropriate to pragmatics, the research isn't a contribution to pragmatic conception.
A frightening new method of how we comprehend metaphors completely evaluating and contrasting the claims made through relevance theorists and cognitive linguists. The ensuing hybrid concept indicates the complementarity of many positions in addition to the necessity and risk of accomplishing a broader and extra reasonable conception of our figuring out.
- Language and History Integrationist Perspectives (Routledge Advances in Communication and Linguistic Theory)
- Pragmatics (Language Workbooks)
- On Puns: The Foundation of Letters
- Defining Pragmatics
- Metasemantics: New Essays on the Foundations of Meaning
Additional info for Dynamics of Meaning: Anaphora, Presupposition, and the Theory of Grammar
Here is the boy that Mary think John will not invite 1. b. Who does Mary think that John will not invite t? c. This boy Mary thinks that John will not invite 1. In order to interpret dislocated constituents one needs to link their meaning to the position of the gaps (indicated by 't' in the above examples). I assume that gaps are encoded in the syntax by phonologically null elements and that each dislocated constituent is associated with one such element. The relation between dislocated constituents and the corresponding gaps is subject to locality conditions, which have been widely studied in the literature.
Vi) Every man sings when he showers. It is not hard to see that the LFs generated by these rules are designed to make the interpretation procedure as direct as possible. Even though it is pretty clear where this approach is headed, it might be worth going through some of the steps needed to spell out the interpretation. 2 The Interpretive Component We will first consider how to give a direct semantics for the LFs we have set up, following Heim (1982). We will then provide a semantics via translation, following Kamp (1981).
In fact, when simplicity calls for it, I will switch back from the notation in (74) to the more traditional one using Sand S'. The other modules of the Principles and Parameters approach are organized in a similar manner. " What I have to say is consistent with such a "minimalistic" revision of the model. However, I will keep referring to D-structure or S-structure on occasion, for purely expository purposes. Also, I will introduce further notions as needed. What I have presented above should suffice to give a rough indication of the main mechanisms that we will be relying on in subsequent discussion.