Timeline for At what point in the syntactic hierarchy inside a clause do phrases acquire ‘propositional’ status?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 30, 2015 at 17:17 | comment | added | P Elliott | Ah, well in that case I suppose it depends how seriously you take the proliferation of functional heads in the cartographic tradition. This recent paper by Ramchand and Svenonius might be of interest to you, which gives a more fine-grained compositional semantics for a more articulated phrase structure: sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0388000114000540. It seems to me like many of the functional heads posited in the cartographic tradition have no evident semantic import. Of course you have the option of just treating them as semantically vacuous, i.e. identity functions. | |
| Jan 30, 2015 at 8:27 | comment | added | user6814 | Your 1st remark does not address the real issues my question raises. I myself admit that c) might contain default polarity, so you needed not take issue with that. As to Heim's 2001 notes, what she shows how to 'interpret' is only the clause structures (CP-IP-VP) Chomsky assumed in BARRIERS! That, of course, is no problem. The clause structures that do raise problems are current Cinque-style ones, with MANY OTHER categories whose semantic import (e.g., whether, above VP, they are propositional or not) has never been properly clarified. | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 14:34 | comment | added | P Elliott | Here's some lecture notes of Irene Heim's from 2001 which lay out how to compositionally derive the semantic value of a question from the kinds of syntactic structures assumed in generative syntax: sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~astechow/Lehre/Wien/WienSS06/Heim/… | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 14:23 | comment | added | P Elliott | I'm a bit confused about why you think that polar questions can't have a positive/negative polarity. It's possible to have both positive and negative polar questions, and the interpretation of negative polar questions is actually quite well-studied: (i) "Did you go to the shops yesterday?" (ii) "Didn't you go to the shops yesterday". As an aside, the traditional approach to the semantics of questions in the Montagovian tradition is to treat them not as expressing propositions, but rather a set of propositions corresponding to their possible answers (or true answers, under some variants). | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 1:13 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackLinguist/status/560244121122922496 | ||
| Jan 27, 2015 at 14:43 | answer | added | Atamiri | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jan 27, 2015 at 12:12 | answer | added | Greg Lee | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 27, 2015 at 9:59 | history | edited | user6814 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
'r' missing in 'hierarchy' (in the title), sorry.
|
| Jan 27, 2015 at 9:52 | history | edited | user6814 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Important qualifications added concerning the analysis of c) and the purpose and import of the question
|
| Jan 27, 2015 at 9:17 | history | asked | user6814 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |