Pragmatics in the interpretation of scope ambiguities

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 421-461
Author(s):  
Valentina Apresjan

Abstract This paper presents a corpus study of pragmatic factors involved in interpreting potentially ambiguous sentences with negation and universal quantifiers, as demonstrated by the Russian sentence Oni ne uspejut vsjo eto sdelat’ ‘They won’t have time to do all this.’ Ambiguity in such sentences results from potential differences in scope assignment. If negation scopes over the quantifier, we get the interpretation of partial negation: ‘They will manage to do some of these things, but not everything.’ If negation scopes over the verb, we get total negation: ‘They won’t manage to do anything.’ This study is based on Russian and English data extracted from a variety of corpora. We demonstrate that while syntactic conditions where scope ambiguity is possible are different for Russian and English, in situations when both languages allow it, speakers rely on the same pragmatic mechanisms for disambiguation that are based on Gricean cooperation principle and shared background knowledge. Disambiguation is facilitated by lexical markers, different for verb-negated and quantifier-negated readings, and similar in Russian and English. We show that the interpretation of the quantifier is pragmatically different for verb-negated and quantifier-negated readings (emphatic in the former case and quantificational in the latter), and lexical markers of each reading are semantically and pragmatically consistent with this difference. Namely, verb-negated readings occur primarily in the context of demonstrative pronouns in their pragmaticalized meaning of negative assessment and negatively connoted nouns, while quantifier-negated readings occur in the context of verbs with quantitative semantics and quantitative implicatures that consolidate the interpretation of quantification.

2007 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 39-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Bosch ◽  
Carla Umbach

This paper discusses results from a corpus study of German demonstrative and personal pronouns and from a reading time experiment in which we compared the interpretation options of the two types of pronouns (Bosch et al. 2003, 2007). A careful review of exceptions to a generalisation we had been suggesting in those papers (the Subject Hypothesis: "Personal pronouns prefer subject antecedents and demonstratives prefer non-subject antecedents") shows that, although this generalisation correctly describes a tendency in the data, it is quite wrong in claiming that the grammatical role of antecedents is the relevant parameter. In the current paper we argue that the generalisation should be formulated in terms of in-formation-structural properties of referents rather than in terms of the grammatical role of antecedent expressions.  


2008 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 459-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin B. Paterson ◽  
Ruth Filik ◽  
Simon P. Liversedge

We investigated the processing of sentences containing a quantifier scope ambiguity, such as Kelly showed a photo to each critic, which is ambiguous between the indefinite phrase ( a photo) having one or many referents. Ambiguity resolution requires the computation of relative quantifier scope, with either a photo or each critic taking wide scope, thereby determining the number of referents. Using eye tracking, we established that multiple factors, including the grammatical function and surface linear order of quantified phrases, along with their lexical characteristics, interact during the processing of relative quantifier scope, with conflict between factors incurring a processing cost. We discuss the results in terms of theoretical accounts attributing sentence-processing difficulty to either reanalysis (e.g., Fodor, 1982) or competition between rival analyses (e.g., Kurtzman & MacDonald, 1993).


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 100
Author(s):  
Keunhyung Park ◽  
Stanley Dubinsky

This paper addresses the effects of focus-marking (i.e. nun-marking) on the scope of quantified expressions in Korean negation constructions and shows how these inform the analysis of Korean negation constructions generally. Specifically, highlighting the “Rigid Scope” properties of Korean (in contrast with English), focus-marking in Korean negation constructions eliminates quantifier/negative scope ambiguities. In all cases but one, a focus-marked element has scope over all others. The anomalous case involving contrastive focus of object universal quantifiers brings the semantics of quantifiers into opposition with the semantics of contrastive focus.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document