On the meaning of some focus-sensitive particles

Ippolito, Michela

doi:10.1007/s11050-007-9004-0

Cited by 36 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We can then model additivity as a presupposition that there is a focus alternative, which is false, and we can model marginality as a presupposition that of all true focus alternatives, the modified proposition is the strongest. 119 This analysis for marginality already in minimal sufficiency conditionals shares with Ippolito's (2007) analysis of concessive still (in (i)+(ii)) the idea that already is a propositional operator.…”

Section: The Same Sensitivity Of Imoodassert To Its Local Context Is mentioning

confidence: 86%

On the Grammar of Optative Constructions

Grosz

2012

Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary aim of this dissertation is to present an analysis for so-called optative constructions, clauses that express a wish, hope or desire without containing a lexical item that means 'wish', 'hope' or 'desire'. A secondary aim is to contrast optative constructions with so-called polar exclamatives, clauses that express surprise, shock or dismay at a given fact without containing a lexical item that means 'surprise', 'shock' or 'dismay'. The goal is to better understand the way in which syntax, semantics and pragmatics interact in order to yield the meanings and uses that these constructions have.The core claim is that we can understand optative constructions by virtue of exploring three properties that they share. First, I argue that optatives (and polar exclamatives) contain a generalized exclamation operator EX, which serves to express an emotion towards the status of the modified proposition on a contextually provided scale. Second, I argue that semantic mood (including factivity and counterfactuality) is encoded in a distinguished Mood head, the content of which co-determines both morphological mood and the material that overtly surfaces in the position of C. Third, I argue for a generalized analysis of prototypical particles, including non-exclusive ONLY, concessive AT LEAST and unstressed DOCH. My analysis treats these particles as truth-conditionally vacuous presupposition triggers, which interact with optativity in three different ways. First, they convey additional information with respect to the modified proposition. Second, they eliminate alternative readings for an ambiguous clause, due to incompatibility. Third, this disambiguating role makes them ideal licensors for a marked utterance type.Chapter 1 of this dissertation is an introductory chapter that presents the core proposal in a nutshell. After this coarse overview, chapter 2 reviews some basic definitions and background on optatives and polar exclamatives. Subsequently, I proceed to a presentation of my entire system in chapter 3. The following chapters discuss each of the three core parts in turn, starting with the EX operator in chapter 4, followed by semantic mood in chapter 5 and finally I discuss particles in chapter 6. Chapter 7 concludes.

show abstract

Section: The Same Sensitivity Of Imoodassert To Its Local Context Is mentioning

confidence: 86%

On the Grammar of Optative Constructions

Grosz

2012

Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(9) is my version of the semantics assigned to this use of noch/still in the literature (compare e.g. Löbner 1990 andIppolito 2007).…”

Section: Temporal Continuative Noch/stillmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…König 1977, Löbner 1990, Ippolito 2007) that noch/still can work with scales other than temporal precedence. A fairly obvious example is paths, as in (28).…”

Section: Other Scalesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse related readings of scalar particles

Beck¹

2016

SALT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is not immediately clear what it means to talk about an event in more than one possible world, and the answer will depend on one's ontological view of events. The works I cited above do not answer this question: Ippolito (2007) has a formally precise theory of 'still', but is not concerned with its behavior in modal contexts (in fact, it is incompatible with these, as we will see). Condoravdi (2002), on the other hand, discusses the interaction of 'still' with modals, but does not provide a formally precise theory of 'still'.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

"Still" as an additive particle in conditionals

Tellings

2017

SALT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies a hitherto unexplored reading of 'still' as an additive particle, attested when it appears in the consequent of a conditional. A standard existing approach to the meaning of 'still' is couched in terms of events. I argue that the additive reading of 'still' is the result of an additive focus particle taking wide scope over the conditional. This reading is also attested in the wellstudied case of semifactual conditionals, and hence this analysis contributes to the open question about the role of 'still' in semifactual conditionals.

show abstract

On the meaning of some focus-sensitive particles

Cited by 36 publications

References 19 publications

On the Grammar of Optative Constructions

On the Grammar of Optative Constructions

Discourse related readings of scalar particles

"Still" as an additive particle in conditionals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About