Towards a taxonomy of projective content

Manuscript, U. of Stirling, 2003

In some recent developments of semantic theory, in particular certain versions of dynamic semantics, 'internal' contexts, that is, contexts defined in terms of the interlocutors' pragmatic presuppositions or the information accumulated in the discourse have come to play a central role, replacing the notion of propositional content in favor of a notion of context change potential as the meaning of sentences. I will argue that there are a number of fundamental problems with this conception of sentence meaning and outline a way of dealing with the 'dynamic phenomena' from the perspective of the traditional distinctions between propositional content and (internal) context as well between propositional content and illocutionary force, using structured propositions and minimal discourse-driven internal context.

De Gruyter eBooks, 2019

Journal of Semantics, 2013

Kaplanian, two-dimensional theories secure rigidity for indexicals by positing special contexts and semantic mechanisms reserved only for indexicals. The result is a deep and unexplained chasm between expressions that depend on the extra-linguistic context and expressions that depend on the discourse context. Theories that treat indexicals as anaphoric, presuppositional expressions (e.g. Hunter & Asher 2005, Maier 2006 and 2009, Roberts 2002, Zeevat 1999) have the potential to be more minimal and general than Kaplanian, two-dimensional theories-the mechanism of presupposition, unlike that of Kaplanian character, is useful for the semantics of a great many expressions. Maier (2006, 2009), however, has argued that presuppositional theories of indexicals must be supplemented with a twodimensional semantics in order to secure rigidity for indexicals. If this is right, then presuppositional theories of indexicals will suffer from the limitations of Kaplan's system. This article argues that Maier is not right on this point: presuppositions can completely replace Kaplanian characters. A presuppositional theory can secure rigidity for indexicals without positing two independent dimensions of meaning that can never interact; in particular, it can do so without positing that indexicals have a special kind of meaning that by its nature can never interact with the kind of meaning that Kaplan called 'content'. The result is a more general, minimal, and flexible theory that better handles the data on indexicals.

This paper focuses on one small part of the research process in a study that I undertook on the use of projecting clauses ) in a small corpus of texts drawn from three pedagogic legal genres: the textbook, the computer-based learning (CBL) tutorial, and the seminar. The main focus today though will be on the difficulties of adapting a coding system from two previous studies to accommodate the corpus data that I was working with. These practical difficulties of an inexperienced text analyst in dealing with this crucial step in the research process will then be used to approach some broader questions of the position of methodology in text/discourse analysis in the field of Applied Linguistics.

Language, 2019

Peter Hanks has written an immensely thought-provoking book, of great originality and vast ambition. At the heart lies a novel conception of content, based on rejecting one of the most deeply entrenched distinctions in analytic philosophy: the content-force distinction. Much space will be needed here for presenting and discussing the basic ideas due to their originality. Their application to outstanding problems in the philosophy of language can therefore be mentioned only briefly. H himself sums them up as follows: Over the course of this book I have advanced an account of the semantic contents of proper names, a solution to Frege's puzzle about identity sentences, a theory of empty names and true negative existentials, a semantic analysis of propositional attitude reports, a solution to Kripke's puzzle about belief, an approach to the semantic contents of indexicals and demonstratives, a solution to the problem of de se belief, a proposal about the contents of interrogatives and imperatives, and, in outline, a new taxonomy of speech acts. This is rather a lot. It is a testament to the power of the general conception of content in which these views are framed that it lends itself so easily to solving these problems. But none of these views is as important to me as this general conception of content. (205)

STUDIA SEMIOTYCZNE, 2019

"A priori theories of justification of logic based on meaning often lead to troubles, in particular to issues concerning circularity. First, I present Boghossian’s a priori view. Boghossian maintains the rule-circular justifications from a conceptual role semantics. However, rule-circular justifications are problematic. Recently, Boghossian (Boghossian 2015) has claimed that rules should be thought of as contents and contents as abstract objects. In this paper, I discuss Boghossian’s view. My argumentation consists of three main parts. First, I analyse several arguments to show that in fact, Boghossian’s inferentialist solution is not fully satisfying. Second, I discuss the matter further, if one accepts that basic logical rules are constitutive of meaning, that is, they constitute the logical concepts and the content of a rule is an abstract object, then abstract objects – like, for example, rules – could be constitutive of meaning. The question is whether conceptual priority is in the judgment or in the object and what theory of content is pursued. Grasping content as a matter of knowing how a word or concept behaves in inferences is not completely explicative. Finally, I contend that rules come to exist as a result of certain kinds of mental action. These actions function as constitutive norms. Logical rules are not abstract objects but ideal. What one construes as norms or rules of content may involve idealization, but this is because we share a language." http://studiasemiotyczne.pts.edu.pl/ ISSN 0137-6608, e-ISSN 2544-073X;

Perspectives from Systemic Functional Linguistics, 2018

Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) has throughout the years proven to be a reliable tool for the general description of languages as well as for the description of specific areas within languages. One of those areas is that of projection, where studies have for the most part been circumscribed to the description of quoting and reporting, as in examples (1) and (2), respectively, i.e. at clause nexus level (all English examples from NYU-BNC [Davies 2004-]). Yet, as shown by Matthiessen and Teruya (2014), projection is a fractal pattern, i.e.it is manifested in different environments in the lexicogrammar. We find projection not only within the clause nexus, as in (1) and (2) but also within the simple clause (3) and the group (4). In (3), the comment Adjunct reportedly, a constituent at simple clause level, makes the rest of the clause appear as a projection. This could have been expressed as they say that plans are afoot for… The same effect is achieved by the post-determiner alleged in (4); acting at group level –within the Noun Group the alleged conspiracy– it manages to provide a meaning of projection which most directly concerns the Head of the Noun Group but also affects the rest of the clause, as the statement is not about a first order reality –a conspiracy– but a second order one – an alleged conspiracy, i.e. what someone has claimed to be a conspiracy. (1) “That was probably the turning point,” said the former champion (K5J W_newsp_other_social) (2) the DRA Foreign Minister claimed that Afghanistan was ready to reach a settlement (GVK W_ac_polit_law_edu) (3) Plans are reportedly afoot for a new soap called' Ministry' (A3D W_newsp_brdsht_nat_report) (4) The overt acts of the alleged conspiracy are said to be set out in the statement of claim (FDY W_ac_polit_law_edu) The fractality of projection is a multilingual phenomenon, as shown by several researchers in Teruya (2015). Arús-Hita (2015) offers an account of projection in Spanish, where this resource is also found at different ranks, as illustrated by examples (5-8) (all Spanish examples from Corpus del Español [Davies 2002-]). As in the English examples above, (5, 6) illustrate projection within a clause nexus, quoting and reporting respectively, whereas in (7) the Comment Adjunct supuestamente (‘supposedly’) plays a similar role to allegedly in (3) and the post-determiner presunto is comparable in effect and scope to alleged in (4). (5) ¡Cuánta fe! - exclamó la mujer con renovada ansiedad (19-F la víspera y el día [‘So much faith! – exclaimed the woman with renewed anxiety’]) (6) La gente piensa que cuando hacemos publicidad es para vender (19-OR España Oral EEDU018A [‘People think that we advertise in order to sell’]) (7) Supuestamente el límite para algunos cursos son quince estudiantes (19-OR Habla Culta San Juan (PR): M2 [‘supposedly the limit for some courses is fifteen students’]) (8) El presunto abuso le provocó crisis depresivas (19N Hon: Prensa: 98May27 [‘The alleged abuse brought about bouts of depression’]) The present paper draws upon Arús-Hita’s description of Spanish projection as well as on Matthiessen and Teruya’s (2004) work for English to provide a detailed contrast of projection across ranks in English and Spanish. We will discuss the similarities and dissimilarities in terms of the semiotic potential and realization of projection in both languages. An example of dissimilarity is that where English often uses projection within the clause simple, as in (9a), Spanish typically prefers projection at clause nexus level, as shown by the translation (9b). (a) Hobbins allegedly crept into the guardroom and took the rifle. (CH2 W_newsp_tabloid)) (b) Parece ser que Hobbins subió hasta la habitación y cogió el rifle (lit. ‘it seems to be that Hobbins…’) An important conclusion drawn from the discussion in this paper will be that looking at projection as a fractal pattern allows us to ascertain the difference between projection, which is a semantic category, and quoting and reporting, which are lexicogrammatical realisations of projection at clause complex level. Because projection is usually considered at clause nexus rank, there is the risk of equating projection with quoting and reporting, when in fact these are only possible realisations of projection. Other possible realisations are by means of Comment Adjuncts at simple clause level, post-determination at group level, etc. References Arús-Hita, Jorge (2015) Projection as a fractal motif in Spanish. Presentation within Teruya (2015). Davies, Mark. (2004-) BYU-BNC. (Based on the British National Corpus from Oxford University Press). Available online at http://corpus.byu.edu/bnc/. Davies, Mark. (2002-) Corpus del Español: 100 million words, 1200s-1900s. Available online at http://www.corpusdelespanol.org. Matthiessen, Christian M.I.M. and Kazuhiro Teruya (2014) Projection as a fractal motif: semantic and lexicogrammatical manifestations. Draft. Teruya, Kazuhiro (2015) Projection as a fractal motif: multilingual studies of Arabic, Chinese, Dagaare, English, Japanese, Spanish and Thai. Colloquium held at the First Tunisian International Systemic Functional Linguistics Conference and Workshop, 26-28 March, Hammamet, Tunisia.

Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft / Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science, 2012

One of the major motivations for constructional approaches to grammar is that a given rule of syntactic formation can sometimes, in fact often, be associated with more than one semantic specification. For example, a pair of expressions like purple plum and alleged thief call on different rules of semantic combination. The first involves something closely related to intersection of sets: a purple plum is a member of the set of purple things and a member of the set of plums. But an alleged thief is not a member of the intersection of the set of thieves and the set of alleged things. Indeed, that intersection is empty, since only a proposition can be alleged and a thief, whether by deed or attribution, is never a proposition. This chapter describes the various ways meanings may be assembled in a construction-based grammar.

Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 2001

In this paper it is shown how a partial semantics for presuppositions can be given which is empirically more satisfactory than its predecessors, and how this semantics can be integrated with a technically sound, compositional grammar in the Montagovian fashion. Additionally, it is argued that the classical objection to partial accounts of presupposition projection, namely that they lack "flexibility," is based on a misconception. Partial logics can give rise to flexible predictions without postulating any ad hoc ambiguities. Finally, it is shown how the partial foundation can be combined with a dynamic system of common-ground maintenance to account for accommodation.