Download A Compositional Semantics for Multiple Focus by Manfred Krifka, Austinlsaarbriicken PDF

By Manfred Krifka, Austinlsaarbriicken

Show description

Read or Download A Compositional Semantics for Multiple Focus PDF

Best semantics books

The Limits of Language

The boundaries of Language issues itself with the character and bounds of language at a time while our knowing of the area and of ourselves is in detail with regards to what we comprehend of language.

Semantic Externalism

Semantic externalism is the view that the meanings of referring phrases, and the contents of ideals which are expressed via these phrases, will not be totally made up our minds through elements inner to the speaker yet are as an alternative sure up with the surroundings. the controversy approximately semantic externalism is among the most crucial yet tricky themes in philosophy of brain and language, and has results for our figuring out of the function of social associations and the actual setting in constituting language and the brain.

Pragmatics in Language Teaching

Pragmatics in Language instructing examines the purchase of language use in social contexts in moment and overseas language school rooms. incorporated are 2 cutting-edge survey chapters, and eleven chapters reporting the result of empirical learn. The empirical experiences conceal 3 parts: incidental acquisition of pragmatics in recommended contexts, the consequences of guide in pragmatics, and the evaluation of pragmatics skill.

Extra info for A Compositional Semantics for Multiple Focus

Sample text

Ii. They sell better shirts than they sell ties. 46 A-Movement in Pseudogapping reconstruct, the scope ambiguity can be derived: whereas in the (a) example, negation scopes over the quantifier, this is not possible in the (b) example. (24) a. (it seems that) everyone isn’t there yet b. everyone seems [t not to be there yet] This behaviour is reflected in the contrast between (25) and (26) below (Lasnik 2001a: 114, his (51) and (53)). e. that the subject takes scope under negation, resulting in the (possible, if somewhat disfavoured) interpretation that ‘not everyone has arrived yet’.

41) Beth was there, but you’ll never guess who else. (42) Jack called, but I don’t know when/how/why/where from. (43) Sally’s out hunting—guess what! (44) A car is parked on the lawn—find out whose. 15 Fragment answers, on the other hand, strand a single constituent as an answer to a previous question, as illustrated in the dialogue in (45) and the ‘implicit’ dialogue in (46) (both examples from Merchant (2004: 661: his (1) and (2)). (45) Abby and Ben are at a party. ’ (46) Abby and Ben are at a party.

Pétur vill leika lengur við Maríu en Páll vill_ við Jóni. Peter wants-to play longer with Maria than Paul wants-to with John. ’ (57) a. María myndi skila fleiri bókum til Péturs en Páll myndi_ til Jóns. Maria will return more books to Peter than Paul will to John. ’ b. María myndi skila fleiri bókum til Péturs en Páll myndi blöðum _ Maria will return more books to Peter than Paul will newspapers til Jóns. to John. ’ c. *María myndi gefa Pétri fleiri bækur en Páll myndi _ blöð. Mary will give Peter more books than Paul will newspapers.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.62 of 5 – based on 35 votes