CAS LX 502 Semantics

1. CAS LX 502Semantics 10a. Presupposition 10.2

2. Presupposition • Frege 1892: • Referring expressions (names, definite descriptions) carry the presupposition that they do in fact refer. • For a sentence to have a truth value, its presupposition must hold. • A presupposition of a sentence is also a presupposition of its negation.

3. Presupposition triggers • Lexical triggers: • Definite noun phrases: • The student fell asleep. • The student didn’t fall asleep. • Factive verbs: • Pat wanted to eat a sandwich. • Tracy thought Pat ate a sandwich. • Tracy realized Pat ate a sandwich. • Pat regretted eating a sandwich. • Pat liked eating a sandwich. • Pat ate a sandwich.

4. Presupposition triggers • Lexical triggers: • Change of state verbs: • Pat stopped eating a sandwich (at 2pm). • Pat started eating a sandwich (at 2pm). • Verbs of judgment: • Tracy blamed Pat for eating the sandwich. • Tracy faults Pat for eating the sandwich.

5. Presupposition triggers • Structural triggers: • Cleft constructions and focus: • It was Tracy that ate the sandwich. • Tracy ate the sandwich. • The sandwich was eaten. • It was the sandwich that Tracy ate. • What Tracy ate was the sandwich. • Tracy ate the sandwich. • Tracy ate something. • Too, even: • Even Tracy ate a sandwich. • Tracy ate a sandwich too.

6. Presupposition survival • Families of sentences. • The Queen of America is bald. • The Queen of America isn’t bald. • Is the Queen of America bald? • Perhaps the Queen of America is bald. • If the Queen of America is bald, I will not wear a wig. • Joan has stopped drinking wine for breakfast. • Joan hasn’t stopped drinking wine for breakfast. • Has Joan stopped drinking wine for breakfast? • Perhaps Joan has stopped drinking wine for breakfast. • If Joan has stopped drinking wine for breakfast, I will celebrate.

7. Non-presupposition non-survival • Families of sentences. • It’s cold in here. • It’s not cold in here. • Is it cold in here? • Perhaps it’s cold in here. • If it’s cold in here, John loses the bet. • Rocky is a squirrel. • Rocky is not a squirrel. • Is Rocky a squirrel? • Perhaps Rocky is a squirrel. • If Rocky is a squirrel, I will celebrate.

8. Non-presupposition survival • Families of sentences. • Pat, who bought something here, ate lunch. • Pat, who bought something here, didn’t eat lunch. • Did Pat, who bought something here, eat lunch? • Perhaps Pat, who bought something here, ate lunch. • If Pat, who bought something here, ate lunch, I will not cook the spinach. • What Pat bought here was a fork. • What Pat bought here wasn’t a fork. • Was what Pat bought here a fork? • Perhaps what Pat bought here was a fork. • If what Pat bought here was a fork, I will celebrate.

9. So… • The “families of sentences” test can tell us when something is not a presupposition (a presupposition will always survive). • Or will it? • The Queen of America isn’t bald—there is no Queen of America.

10. Metalinguistic negation, etc. • Matt [groaning] isn’t standing over there, Matt [grayning] is. • He isn’t adequate at painting eggs—he’s fantastic at it. • Objecting to the sentence, on various grounds (pronunciation, implicature, connotation, register, …). • Usually comes with a special intonation. • If the Queen of America just opened the window, America must have a Queen.

11. ps projection: holes and plugs • Joan has stopped drinking wine for breakfast. • Joan previously drank wine for breakfast. • Pat knows that Joan has stopped drinking wine for breakfast. • Joan previously drank wine for breakfast. • Pat believes that Joan has stopped drinking wine for breakfast. • (No presupposition) • Plugs:Do not let presuppositions through (believe) • Holes:Let presuppositions through (know)

12. ps projection: filters • JOHN drinks too. • JOHN drinks too and Mary doesn’t like it. • Bill is not present and JOHN drinks too. • Somebody else drinks besides John. • Bill drinks and JOHN drinks too. • No constraint on the context? • If JOHN drinks too, then the bottle will not last long. • If the bottle is already empty, then JOHN drinks too. • Somebody else drinks besides John. • If Bill drinks, then JOHN drinks too. • No constraint on the context? • Generalization so far: pq and pq inherit the presuppositions of both p and qexcept any pss of q entailed by p. Conjunctions and conditionals are filters (letting some pss through and others not).

13. ps projection: filters refined • If there is a depression, the president of GM will lose his job too. • Someone besides the president of GM will lose his/her job? • Well, no, not really. But why? There being a depression doesn’t logically entail that someone loses his/her job. • But the normal context is one in which it is assumed that when there is a depression, many people lose their jobs. In that context, p entails the presupposition of q—and so it is filtered out. • If there is a thunderstorm, the president of GM will lose his job too. • Filter out any ps of q which is entailed by the context+p.

14. ps projection: local contexts • If there is a depression, the president of GM will lose his job too. • Someone besides the president of GM will lose his/her job? • A way to look at this: local contexts • Suppose c is the context, pq is our sentence. • To be felicitous, c must entail ps(p). • Add p to c, and c+p is now the context against which q is evaluated. • To be felicitous, c+p must entail ps(q). • So: in a normal context where when there’s a depression all sorts of people lose their jobs, c+p will be a context in which all sorts of people lose their jobs, and this entails ps(q). So, the overall c is fine so long as c+p entails ps(q).

15. ps projection: filters refined • Bill is absent and JOHN drinks too • Someone besides John drinks? • Actually, that one was a bit misleading. • A: I need a non-drinker to support me in avoiding alcohol. It is known that Bill does not drink, and you’ve just mentioned the known fact that Mary drinks. • A kind of normal context, compatible. Because ps(q). • B: I need a non-drinker to support me in avoiding alcohol. The only possible reason for anybody to not be present (in this room) is to drink vodka in the other room. • But here, ps(q) seems not to be presupposed. Why? • The difference is that in this context p entails ps(q). • So, really, it didn’t presuppose ps(q) after all, but rather that c+p entails ps(q). If p is deemed irrelevant, then the context by itself has to entail ps(q).

16. Some difficulties with filters • I haven’t told the truth. • I realize that I haven’t told the truth. • I didn’t realize that I haven’t told the truth. • I regret that I haven’t told the truth. • If JOHN sings too then I will celebrate. • If I regret that I haven’t told the truth, I will confess it to everyone. • If I realize that I haven’t told the truth, I will confess it to everyone. • If Frank realizes that he hasn’t told the truth, he will confess it to everyone.

17. A cancellation view • Triggers yield potential presuppositions. A potential ps may or may not become an actual ps. In particular, not if it is canceled. This happens when: • The ps is inconsistent with assumptions in the context. • The ps is inconsistent with one of the conversational implicatures of the matrix sentence containing the trigger. • If the problem has been solved, then it is Lauri who solved it. • Implicature: truth value of the problem has been solved (somebody has solved the problem) not assumed.

18. A cancellation view • Triggers yield potential presuppositions. A potential ps may or may not become an actual ps. In particular, not if it is canceled. This happens when: • The ps is inconsistent with assumptions in the context. • The ps is inconsistent with one of the conversational implicatures of the matrix sentence containing the trigger. • I don’t have a dog. • So at least you don’t have to walk your dog. • Problems here too. • If John has twins, Mary will not like his children.

19. Projection into one’s beliefs? • The unicorn is waiting in the garden. • #Yet there are no unicorns. • Pat knows that the unicorn is waiting in the garden. • #Yet there are no unicorns. • Pat thinks that the unicorn is waiting in the garden. • Yet there are no unicorns (silly Pat). • #Yet, Pat believes there are no unicorns. • Pat wants the unicorn to sleep in the garden. • If the unicorn is in the garden, Pat will be happy.

20. Attitude verbs • Patrick wants to sell his cello. • Patrick is under the mistaken belief that he owns a cello, and he wants to sell his cello. • Embed q under an attitude verb (SVq) requires that ps(q) be entailed by S’s beliefs.

21.          