Thetics and Categoricals

Editors
| Groningen University & University of Vienna
| University of Munich
| Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
HardboundAvailable
ISBN 9789027207401 | EUR 99.00 | USD 149.00
 
e-Book
ISBN 9789027260871 | EUR 99.00 | USD 149.00
 
Thetics and Categoricals do not belong to the categories of German grammar. Thetics were introduced in logic as impersonal and broad focus constructions. They left profound and extensive traces in the logic of the late 19th century. For the class of thetic propositions, the criterion of textual exclusion plays the major role, i.e. the absence of any common grounds and of any anaphorism and background. In the foreground are sentences with sub­ject inversion, subject suppression and detopicalization. These and only these are suitable for text begin­nings, jokes, stage advertisements and solipsistic exclamatives, thus speech acts without com­mu­nicative goals – free expressives in the true sense of the word. The contribu­tions in this volume not only guide the reader through the history of philosophical logic and distributions of impersonals in contrast to Kantian categorical sentences, but also the correspondences in Japanese and Chinese which, in contrast to German and English, sport specific morphological markers for thetics as opposed to categoricals.
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 262]  2020.  vii, 390 pp.
Publishing status: Available
Table of Contents
Preface
Introduction : What this volume is about
Werner Abraham
2–10
Part 1. Logic and philosophical background
14–29
Categorical versus thetic sentences in the Universal Grammar of Realism
Elisabeth Leiss
14–29
Part 2. Impersonal constructions
34–140
Are theticity and sentence-focus encoded grammatical categories of Dutch?
Thomas Belligh
34–68
Presentational and related constructions in Norwegian with reference to German
Lars Hellan and Dorothee Beermann
70–103
Copulas and information structure in Tanti Dargwa
Nina R. Sumbatova
106–140
Part 3. From logic content to linguistic form
144–222
Infinitive constructions and theticity in German
Yukari Isaka
144–153
Strong and weak nominal reference in thetic and categorical sentences: sampling German and Chinese
Meng-Chen Lee
156–177
Adjectives and mode of expression: Psych-adjectives in attributive and predicative usage and implications for the thetic/categorical discussion
Yoshiyuki Muroi
180–197
Unaccusativity and theticity
Patricia Irwin
200–222
Part 4. The logic-linguistics across languages
226–333
From philosophical logic to linguistics: The architecture of information autonomy: Categoricals vs. Thetics revisited
Werner Abraham
226–281
Pseudocategorical or purely thetic?: A contrastive case study of how thetic statements are expressed in Japanese, English, and German
Yasuhiro Fujinawa
284–309
The thetic/categorical distinction as difference in common ground update: With application to Biblical Hebrew
Daniel J. Wilson
312–333
Part 5. Lexical links to attitudinality
338–385
B-grade subjects and theticity
Shin Tanaka
338–350
Perception description, report and thetic statements: Roles of sentence-final particles in Japanese and modal particles in German
Junji Okamoto
352–385
Index
Index
387
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Belligh, Thomas
2020. Dutch thetic and sentence-focus constructions on the semantics-pragmatics interface. Studies in Language  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Lee, Meng-Chen
2020.  In Thetics and Categoricals [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 262],  pp. 156 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 04 september 2020. 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.

Subjects
BIC Subject: CFK – Grammar, syntax
BISAC Subject: LAN009060 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / Syntax
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number:  2020022070