Cover not available
Part of
The Grammatical Realization of Polarity Contrast: Theoretical, empirical, and typological approaches
Edited by Christine Dimroth and Stefan Sudhoff
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 249] 2018
► pp. 109–128

Veridicality and sets of alternative worlds

On embedded interrogatives and the complementizers that and if

| University of Wuppertal

This paper explores three related phenomena. First, not all embedded formal interrogatives (i.e. clauses introduced by if or whether) have the function of an indirect question. Second, the complementizers if and that may occur in identical syntactic contexts. Third, if-clauses may be licensed by certain (discourse) semantic factors, like negation, modality, and also verum focus, where otherwise that-clauses are preferred. The approach taken is based on epistemic logic, especially on the notion of relativized veridicality, the notion of possible worlds and the formal semantics of the complementizers that and if.

Keywords: interrogative semantics, complementizers, epistemic logic, veridicality
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Embedding clause types
    • 2.1The use of that and if
    • 2.2Interrogative clauses as syntactic objects
    • 2.3Polarity and relativized veridicality
    • 2.4Scope of the nonveridical operation
  • 3. That vs. if: What do the complementizers denote?
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 November 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.249.04ohl
References
Adger, David & Quer, Joseph
2001 The syntax and semantics of unselected embedded questions. Language 77(1): 107–133.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Altmann, Hans
1987 Zur Problematik der Konstitution von Satzmodi als Formtypen. In Satzmodus zwischen Grammatik und Pragmatik, Jörg Meibauer (ed.), 22–56. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Bayer, Josef
2004 Decomposing the left periphery. Dialectal and cross-linguistic evidence. In The Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery, Horst Lohnstein & Susanne Trissler (eds), 59–95. Berlin: De Gruyter.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bierwisch, Manfred
1980 Semantic structure and illocutionary force. In Speech Act Theorie and Pragmatics, John R. Searle, Ferenc Kiefer, Manfred Bierwisch (eds), 1-35. Dordrecht: Foris.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1978 Yes/no questions are not alternative questions. In Questions, Henry Hiz (ed.), 87–105. Dordrecht: Reidel.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borchert, Donald M.
2006 Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol. 7. Detroit MI: Macmillan Reference.Google Scholar
Eckardt, Regine
2007 The syntax and pragmatics of embedded yes/no questions. In On Information Structure, Meaning and Form [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 100], Kerstin Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds), 447–467. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, Anastasia
1998 Polarity Sensitivity as (Non)veridical Dependency [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 23]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 Inquisitive assertions and nonveridicality. In The Dynamic, Inquisitive, and Visionary Life of Phi, ?Phi, and Possibly Phi. A Festschrift for Jeroen Groenendijk, Martin Stokhof and Frank Veltman, Maria Aloni, Michael Franke & Floris Roelofsen (eds), 115–126. Amsterdam: ILLC Publications.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Janet
1979 Complement selection and the lexicon. Linguistic Inquiry 10(2): 279–326.Google Scholar
Groenendijk, Jeroen & Stokhof, Martin
1982 Semantic analysis of wh-complements. Linguistics and Philosophy 5(2): 175–233.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamblin, Charles L.
1976 Questions in Montague English. In Montague Grammar, Barbara H. Partee (ed)., 247–259. New York NY: Academic Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Höhle, Tilman N.
1988 Vorwort und Nachwort zu Verumfokus. Sprache und Pragmatik 5(1): 1–7.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney D.
1994 The contrast between interrogatives and questions. Journal of Linguistics 30(2): 411–439.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karttunen, Lauri
1977 Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1(1): 3–44.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika
1978 Semantik der Rede. Kontexttheorie – Modalwörter – Konditionalsätze. Königstein im Taunus: Scriptor.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred
2011 Questions. In Semantics. An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning Vol. 2, Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn & Paul Portner (eds), 1742–1758. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lahiri, Utpal
2002 Questions and Answers in Embedded Contexts. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Lohnstein, Horst
2005 Sentence connection as quantificational structure. In Event Arguments. Foundations and Applications, Claudia Maienborn & Angelika Wöllstein (eds), 113–138. Tübingen: Niemeyer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 On clause types and sentential force. Linguistische Berichte 209: 63–86.Google Scholar
2016 Verum focus. In Oxford Handbook of Information Structure, Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds), 290–313. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Meibauer, Jörg, Altmann, Hans & Steinbach, Markus
2013 Kontroversen in der Forschung zu Satztypen und Satzmodus. In Satztypen des Deutschen, Jörg Meibauer, Hans Altmann & Markus Steinbach (eds), 1–19. Berlin: De Gruyter.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montague, Richard
1969[1974] On the nature of certain philosophical entities. In Formal Philosophy. Selected Papers of Richard Montague, Richmond H. Thomason (ed.), 148–187. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Öhl, Peter
2007 Unselected embedded interrogatives in German and English: S-Selection as dependency formation. Linguistische Berichte 212: 403–437.Google Scholar
2009 Sprachwandel und kognitive Ökonomie: Zur Grammatikalisierung und Substitution von Satzkonnektoren. Linguistische Berichte 220: 393–438.Google Scholar
2017 Zur Akzeptanz der Einbettung von ob-Sätzen unter veridischen Prädikaten. Eine Hypothese bezogen auf epistemische Weltenmodelle – mit einem Seitenblick auf das Persische. In Deutsch als Bindeglied zwischen Inlands- und Auslandsgermanistik. Beiträge zu den 23. GeSuS-Linguistik-Tagen in Sankt Petersburg, 22.–24. Juni 2015, Sergej Nefedov, Ljubov Grigorieva & Bettina Bock (eds), 385–394. Hamburg: Kovač.Google Scholar
2018 Zum Denotat von Subjunktionen. In Sprachen verbinden. Beiträge der 24. Linguistik- und Literaturtage, Brno/Tschechien, 2016, Vera Janikova, Alice Brychová, Jana Veličková & Roland Wagner (eds), 107–118. Hamburg: Kovač.Google Scholar
Reis, Marga
1999 On sentence types in German: An enquiry into the relationship between grammar and pragmatics. Interdisciplinary Journal for Germanic Linguistics and Semiotic Analysis 4: 195–236.Google Scholar
Schwabe, Kerstin
2016a Irritierende ob-Sätze. Paper presented at Wuppertaler Linguistisches Forum, 28 Januar.
2016b Towards a typology of German ob-interrogatives embedding predicates. Paper presented at SLE 2016, University of Naples, 1 September.
Spector, Benjamin & Egré, Paul
2015 A uniform semantics for embedded interrogatives: An answer, not necessarily the answer. Synthese 192(6): 1729–1784.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Schwabe, Kerstin
2019. Misfits: On Unexpected German Ob-Predicates. In Language, Logic, and Computation [Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 11456], ► pp. 253 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.