On NPI-Licensing and the semantics of Because -Sentences

1. On NPI-Licensing and the semantics of Because-Sentences I-Ta Chris Hsieh University of Connecticut, Storrs

2. The Goal: An adequate analysis for the licensing of minimizers and weak NPIs in because-sentences How: By investigating the semantic and syntactic properties of because- sentences.

3. Basic Facts Weak-NPIs (1) a. *John did not marry any woman because he had money, but because he was afraid of being alone. b. John did not marry Sue because she had any money, but because he loves her.

4. Basic Facts Minimizers (2) a. *John did not even lift a finger to help Sue because he married her, but because he was intimidated by her. b. *John did not marry Sue because she even lifted a finger to help him, but because he loved her.

5. Basic Facts Minimizers and Yes-No Questions: (3) a. *Did John even lift a finger to help Sue because he married her? b. *Did John marry Sue because she even lifted a finger to help him?

6. Basic Facts Mimimizers, Weak NPIs and Negation (4) a. John didn’t marry any woman. b. John didn’t (even) lift a finger to help Mary.

7. Basic Facts Minimizers and Weak NPIs in Questions (5) a. S: Did John (even) lift a finger to help Mary? A: #Yes, he did. A: No, he didn’t. b. S: Did John ever help Mary? A: Yes, he did. A: No, he didn’t.

8. Basic Facts (1) b. John did not marry Sue because she had any money, but because he loves her. (2) b. *John did not marry Sue because she even lifted a finger to help him, but because he loved her.

9. Why does Because block the licensing of weak NPIs in the mian clause and minimizers? Why is the licensing of weak NPIs in the reasoning adjunct not influenced by the intervention of Because?

10. The Licensing Condition for NPIs Fauconnier-Ladusaw-von-Fintel Poposal (6) a. An NPI is only grammatical if it is in the scope of  such that [[  ]] is SDE. b. S(trwason-)D(ownward)E(ntailing) : A function f of type <, > is Strawson-downward entailing (SDE) iff For all x, y of type  such that xy and f(x) is defined: f(y)f(x)

11. Example: (7) Only John ate any vegetables for breakfast. (8) a. [[ only]](x)(P) is defined only if P(x)=1 If defined, [[ only]] (x)(P)=1 iff ¬yx: P(y)=1

12. Assumptions on NPIs (8)b. Only John ate vegetables for breakfast. Presupposition: John ate vegetables for breakfast. c. Only John ate kale for breakfast. Presupposition: John ate kales for breakfast. (8b)+ the presupposition of (8c)  (8c)

13. Note: SDE is just a necessary condition. Crucially, A licensing environment can never be (S)UE.

14. (9) a. *The student who has any books on NPIs is selling them. b. The students who have any books on NPIs are selling them.

15. Assumptions on Because Lewis-Style Semantics: (10)[[ because ]]w,A,R(p)(q) is defined in w only if: a. wq, and b. wp; when defined, [[ because ]]w,A,R(p)(q)=1 iff wMax((A(w))p )(R(w)): wq

16. Problems for Lewis’s Because Problem 1: Because and Causation (12) a. Mary’s being in a bad mood caused John’s complaining. b. John complained because Mary was in a bad mood.

17. Problems for Lewis’s Because Problem 1: Because and Causation (13) a. It is not the case that any storms caused any floods. b. *It is not the case that there were any floods because there were any storms.

18. Problem 2: the Entailment Property According to (10), The main clause of a because-sentence is (only) SDE.

19. Prediction: Weak-NPIs are licensed in the main clause of a because-sentence. But: (15) a. *John read any book because he was bored. b. *John had ever read a book because he was bored.

20. New Semantics for Because (16) [[ because]]A,R, w(p)(q) is defined only if: a. wq and wMax(A(w))(R(w)), and b. Max(A(w))(R(w))q If defined, [[ because]]A,R,w(p)(q)=1 iff w’Max(A(w))(R(w)): w′(qp) (i.e.w′p)

21. New Semantics for Because -The main clause (in the scope of negation) is UE, SDE, SUE. -The reasoning adjunct is UE and DE under negation.

22. On Licensing of Weak-NPIs In the Main Clause (18) a. *John did not marry any woman because he had money, but because he was afraid of being alone. -The main clause is UE, SDE, and SUE. -(S)UE-contexts do not license NPIs.

23. On Weak-NPI Licensing In the Reasoning Adjunct (18b) John did not marry Sue because she had any money, but because he loves her. -The reasoning adjunct is UE and DE under negation. -(S)DE-contexts license NPIs.

24. On the Licenisng of Minimizers -Lift a finger, Give a damn -Even+Low Endpoint (Heim 1984, a.o.) (19) [[even]]w(p) is defined only if q[qC &qp Likelihood(p)(w) < Likelihood(q)(w)] (Scalar Presupposition) If defined, [[even]]w(p)=1 iff p(w)=1

25. At LF, even moves across DE-operators. The alternative set is determined by the scope of even. TheScalar Presupposition can only be satisfied in a proposition with the low endpoint if it is a DE-context.

26. On the Licenisng of Minimizers (20) a. John didn’t (even) lift a finer to help Mary. b. LF: [even [NOT [John helped Mary to the [minimal]F degree]]] c. The Alternative Set C: {John did not help Mary to the minimal degree, John did not help Mary to a certain degree, …………………………………………….. John did not help Mary a large degree}

27. On the Licenisng of Minimizers (21) a. *John (even) lifted a finer to help Mary. b. LF: [even [John helped Mary to the [minimal]F degree]] c. The set of alternatives C: {John helped Mary to the minimal degree, John helped Mary to a certain degree, ……………………………………… John helped Mary to the maximal degree}

28. On the Licenising of Minimizers Through LF-movement of Even, not…even….because But *even…not….because See (22)

29. On the Licenising of Minimizers In a Negated Because-sentences, Minimizersin the Main Clause (23) *John did not even lift a finger to help Sue because he married her, but because he was intimidated by her.

30. LF1 : not because…… even[…help..to the [minimal]Fdegree]

31. The set of alternatives C: {John helped Mary to the minimal degree, John helped Mary to a certain degree, ……………………………………… John helped Mary to the maximal degree}  The Scalar Presupposition fails.

32. LF2 : not even because…… [….the [minimal]F degree]

33. On the Licensing of Minimizers The alternative set C: {John helped Sue to the minimal degree because he married her; John helped Sue to a certain degree because he married her; …………………………………………… John helped sue to the maximal degree because he married her}  The Scalar Presupposition fails.

34. On the Licensing of Minimizers In a Negated Because-sentence, Minimizersin the Reasoning Adjunct (24) *John did not marry Sue because she even lifted a finger to help him, but because he loved her.

35. LF1 : not Because[even…[…[minimal]F]] ……………………

36. The set of alternatives C: {John helped Mary to the minimal degree, John helped Mary to a certain degree, ……………………………………… John helped Mary to the maximal degree}  The Scalar Presupposition fails in LF1.

37. LF2 : not even because [… [Minimal]F] …………………

38. The Alternative set C: {John married Sue because she helped him to the minimal degree; John married Sue because she helped him to a certain degree; …………………………………………… John married Sue because she helped him to the maximal degree}  The Scalar Presupposition fails in LF2.

39. On the Licensing of Minimizers In a Yes-No Question of Because-sentences, Minimizersin the Main Clause (26) *Did John even lift a finger to help Sue because he married her? Minimizers in theReasoning Adjunct (27) *Did John marry Sue because she even lifted a finger to help him?

40. Guerzoni (2003, 2004): Scope Interaction of Evenand the Trace of Whether (25) Did John (even) lift a finger to help Mary? a. LF: [Whether1[even [t1 John helped Mary to the [minimal]F degree]] b. {p1=even[John helped Mary to the [minimal]F degree], p2=even[not [John helped Mary to the [minimal]F degree]]} The ScalarP fails in p1.

41. On the Licensing of Minimizers Further Assunption based on (22): In a Yes-No Question of Because-sentences, Through LF-Movement, Whether…t1… even…because But *Whether…even…t1…because

42. On the Licensing of Minimizers In a Yes-No Question of Because-sentences, Minimizersin the Main Clause (26) *Did John even lift a finger to help Sue because he married her?

43. LF1 : Whether1 t1 because…. even[…help..to the [minimal]Fdegree]

44. Extension: {p1=[[because John married Sue][even [John helped Sue to the [minimal]F degree]]]; p2= [not [[because John married Sue][even [John helped Sue to the [minimal]F degree]]]]} ScalarP fails in both p1 and p2.

45. LF2 : Whether1 t1 even because…… [….the [minimal]F degree]

46. Extension: {p1=[even [[because John married Sue][John helped Sue to the [minimal]F degree]]; p2=[not[even[[because John married Sue][John helped Sue tothe [minimal]F degree]]]} ScalarP fails in both p1 and p2.

47. On the Licensing of Minimizers In a Yes-No Question of Because-sentences, Minimizers in theReasoning Adjuncts (27) *Did John marry Sue because she even lifted a finger to help him?

48. LF1 : Whether1 t1 Because[even…[…[minimal]F]] ……………………

49. Extension: {p1=[[because [even [Sue helped John to the [minimal]F degree]][John married Sue]]]; p2=[not [[because[even Sue helped John to the [minimal]F degree]][John married Sue]]]]} ScalarP fails in both p1 and p2.

50. LF2 : Whether1 t1 even because..[Minimal]F …………………