最新文档-ConditionalutterancesandconditionalthoughtsAradical有条件的与有条件的思想激进的话语-

1、Conditional utterances and conditional thoughts: A radical contextualist accountChi-He Elder & Kasia Jaszczolt University of CambridgeICL19f Geneva26 July 2019Conditional utterances in English if p (then) qConditional utterances in English Conditional constructions are not the only way to expres

2、s conditional thoughts（1）Take one more step and I'll kill you（2）Your money or your lifeConditional utterances in English Conditional constructions can be used for other purposes other than expressing conditional thoughts（3）If you would n't mind，could you close the door?（4）If that's a rea

3、l diamond，III eat my hat!A cross-linguistic perspective Guugu Yimithirr (Australian, QNL): no overt conditionals(5) The dog might bark The postman might run away(Evans & Levinson 2009: 443, after Haviland 1979)Outline Classify!ng conditionals Conditionals and speakers intentions: A corpus-based

4、account Recovering intended effects through linguistic cues Radical contextualism Representing conditional meaning in In teractive Sema nticsTheoretical assumption Want a semantics that captures intuitive mea ningsThe diversity of ways of expressing conditional nneanin6 as well as the diversity of u

5、ses to which conditional if can be put, are not a problem for a radical contextualist theory.Radical contextualism Logical form may be enriched or even overridden to give speaker's intended meaning Qaszczolt 201 9, Default Semantics)Devising criteria for classification Want to allow that conditi

6、onal meaning may or may not be speaker's primary intended meaning No conditional LF Primary meaning is conditional Conditional LF Primary meaning is conditional Primary meaning is not conditionalClassify!ng conditionals No bi-unique correlation between conditional constructions and conditional m

7、ea nings Does not make sense to talk of a category of conditionals in terms of constructions'The history of the conditional is the story of a syntactic mistake,z (Kratzer 2019:106)Criteria for classification 2 roles of the antecedent p indicates remoteness from the actual world speaker is not co

8、mmitted to its truth is a supposition restricts situations in which main clause holdsPilot Study (ICE-GB, Elder 2019) 46% of conditional utterances use if Narrowing scope to conditional con structi ons Want to look at relation between form and contentConditionals and speech acts(6) If you rang her n

9、ow she'd say yes (advice)(7) If you hit me with it once more I'll kill you (threat)(8) Be great if you would do that (request)Experimental studies in 'pragmatic condition als' Interlocutors infer pragmatic effects from particular aspects of the content of conditional clauses (Bonnefo

10、n & Politzer 2019)What lin guistic clues gen erate these in fere nces?Speech acts: A disclaimer Speech are not easily classifiable bygrammatical cues (cf. Austin 1962; Searle 1975; Searle & Vanderveken 1985) It's not a threat it's a promise If you come near my family once more III ki

11、ll you. Speakers may not be aware of the speech act they are performi ng (cf. sperbe& Wils on 2019) Illocutionary forces may be derived pragmatically Labels used are for exemplification onlyExample（9）If you drop the vase it will break >> Don't drop the vasepqhearer's actionnegative

12、 consequenee Conditional warning Main message: Don先 do pIndicators of speech acts Does p or q express volition? If so, of whom? Does the outcome described in q have a positive/negative effect on some one? If so, on whom?Threat（10）If you do that one more time HI kill youpqhearer's actionspeaker&#

13、39;s actionnegative consequenee to hearer Main message: Don先 do pConditional offer（ii）If you're hungry there are biscuits on the siaeboa rd>> If you're hungry there are biscuits which you may have on the sideboard>> If you're hungry please help yourself to biscuits on the sid

14、eboardpqhearer's actionpositive consequenee Issuing authority is speaker Main message: You may do qDiscussi on Utteranee may have conditional LF with non-conditional primary meaning LF may be overridden to give primary mea ning Constituent parts of conditional construction may been riched/overri

15、dden giving in put to non-conditional implicatureNo consequent?（12）Now if you'd like to put on your helmet.that'd be great? .you'll be safe?.the police won't catch you? >> put on your helmet The re n eed not be one single inten ded con seque nt recoverable from the con text At

16、the level of thoughts, the re may not be an intention of a consequentNow if you'd like to put on your helmet.pq (inferred)hearer's actionpositive con sequence Main message: Do p Conventionalised use of ifIntermediary conclusions Speaker's primary intended meaning may arise at any level o

17、f pragmatic process The re are differe nt degrees of intentions associated with conditional meaningWhy would we want to capture this variety of meaning in semantics?How is it possible to capture this variety of meaning of conditionals in semantics?Conditionals in radical con textualism''whil

18、e per haps none of the logical connectives are universally lexically expressed, there is no evidenee that Ianguages differ in whether or not logical connectives are present in their logical forms/7(von Fintel & Matthewson 2019:170) Suppositions as primary or secondary meanings（12）Now if you'

19、d like to put on your helmetConditionals in Default Semantics K. M Jaszczolt，2019. Default Semantics: Foundations of a Compositional Theory of Acts of Communicatio门.Oxford: Oxford University PressfCMJaszczolt K. M Jaszczolt，2019. "Default Semanticsl In: B Heine and H Narrog (eds) The Oxford Han

20、dbook or Linguistic Analysis Oxford: Oxford University Press, 215-246.world knowledge (WK)word meaning and sentence stmctuie (WS)about society and cultuie (SC)Primary meaning:combination of word meamng and sentence stHictme (WS)Secondaty meanings: Social, cultural and world-knowledge defaultssm (SCW

21、Dsm) conscious pragmatic inferencesm (CPlsm)Fig. 2: Utterance interpretation according to the processing model of the revised version of Default Semanticssources of information U> types of processesMapping between sources and processesWKSCWD or CPIscSCWD or CPIwsWS (logical form)SDCPIISCD DS/IS m

22、akes use of the processing model and it in dexes the comp orients of Z with a subscript standing for the type of processi ngRepresenting conditional thought (two dime nsions)1 P T ? x pM'If you leave your tea on a wobbly table./2 P t ? x sm'If you'd like to put your helmet on' PM: Pu

23、t your helmet on3 P t qWS/ pm'If it rains well stay at home"4 P t qWS/ sm'If you're hungry, there are biscuits on the sideboard' PM: Help yourself to biscuits5. ? p t qz pm'Touch his iPad and hell scream' PM: If you touch his iPad hell scream'6. ? ? P t q,sm'Plea

24、se put your helmet on' SM: If you put your helmet on, youll be safer"Fig 3: Z for 2. p -? Zz Sm'If you'd like to put your helmet on'Fig 4: Z for 5. p t qPM'Touch his iPad and hell scream7Con clusi ons Conditional thought may con stitute primary or sec on dary meaning and may

25、 be expressed by a conditional or other sentence form; When conditional thought is adopted as the object of study, the category of conditionals cannot be restricted to specific constructions; The diversity of (i) uses to which conditional 汗 can be put and (ii) ways of expressing conditional meaning

26、can be represented in a radical contextualist account (DS/IS); DS/IS allows us to represent (i) the intended use of conditional sentences, as well as (ii) conditional meaning expressed in a norrconditional fomn.Re fere ncesAustin, J. L. 1962. How To Do Things With Nords、eds. J. O. Urmson & M. Sb

27、isa Harvard University PressBonnefon, J.-F. & G Politzer. 2019. 'Pragmatic conditional, conditional pragmatics, and the pragmatic comp on ent of conditional reas oning： In Cognition and Conditionals: Probability and Logic in Human Thinking, eds. M Oaksford & N Chater. Oxford: Oxford Univ

28、ersity PressElder; CH 2019 'The underlying conditionality of conditionals which do not use if eds J. Naruadol Chancharu, X. F Hu & M Mitrovic Cambridge Occasional Papers in Linguistics 6.Evans, N & S C Levins on. 2009. 'The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science,. Be