Chapter published in:
Focus Realization in Romance and Beyond
Edited by Marco García García and Melanie Uth
[Studies in Language Companion Series 201] 2018
► pp. 203–228

Chapter 7
Presupposed modality

| FU Berlin

My contribution explores the possibility to treat meanings that have intuitively been called surprise and obviousness within a theory of presupposed modal operators. A bird’s eye review of the literature on relevant intonational, morphological and syntactic expressions gathered from a broad range of languages is meant to give an impression both of the importance of these meanings as well as of the lack of a common pragmatic account. The case of miratives in Quechua is discussed considering some new data. The theory is developed in the form of language games and compares the behavior of presupposed modal operators both with the behavior of canonical modal expressions and with presuppositions triggered by lexical items.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Expressions of surprise and obviousness in the linguistic literature
    • 2.1Phonology: Epistemic tunes
    • 2.2Morphology: Mirativity – and some obviousness
    • 2.3Syntax
    • 2.4Empirical trouble
  • 3.Presupposed modality
    • 3.1Expected worlds
    • 3.2Forbidden worlds
    • 3.3Emotional worlds
    • 3.4Presupposed modality mirrors the logical and pragmatic relations of modal operators in at-issue meanings
    • 3.5Heritage properties
    • 3.6Rhetorical uses
  • 4.Conclusions and perspectives
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 28 November 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.201.07rei
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra
2004 Evidentiality. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2012 Essence of mirativity. Linguistic Typology 16: 435–485.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bänziger, Tanja & Scherer, Klaus R.
2005 The role of intonation in emotional expressions. Speech Communication 46(3–4): 252–267.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Behrens, Leila
2012 Evidentiality, modality, focus and other puzzles. In Practical Theories and Empirical Practice [Human Cognitive Processing 40], Andrea C. Schalley (ed.), 185–243. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina, Bocci, Giuliano & Cruschina, Silvio
2016 Focus fronting, unexpectedness, and evaluative implicatures. Semantics and Pragmatics 9(3): 1–54.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1989 Intonation and Its Uses: Melody in Grammar and Discourse. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace
1976 Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics and point of view. In Subject and Topic, Charles Li (ed.), 27–55. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro & McConnell-Ginet, Sally
1990 Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, Alan
1986 Intonation. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
1997 Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 1: 33–52.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Estebas-Vilaplana, Eva & Prieto, Pilar
2010 Castilian Spanish intonation. In Transcription of Intonation of the Spanish Language, Pilar Prieto & Paolo Roseano (eds), 17–48. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Faller, Martina T.
2002 Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. PhD dissertation, Stanford University. http://​personalpages​.manchester​.ac​.uk​/staff​/Martina​.T​.Faller​/documents​/Thesis​-A4​.pdf
Faller, Martin
2004 The deictic core of ‘Non-Experienced Past’ in Cuzco Quechua. Journal of Semantics 21(1): 45–85.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Féry, Caroline
1993 German Intonational Patterns. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grice, Herbert Paul
1989 Logic and conversation. In Studies in the Way of Words, Herbert Paul Grice, 22–40. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Grice, Martine & Baumann, Stefan
2002 Deutsche Intonation und GToBI. Linguistische Berichte 191: 267–298.Google Scholar
Grice, Martine & Savino, Michelina
1995 Intonation and communicative function in a regional variety of Italian. Phonus 1: 19–32.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos
2004 The Phonology of Tone and Intonation. Cambridge: CUP.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & Olbertz, Hella
2012 Didn’t you know? Mirativity does exist! Linguistic Typology 17: 487–503.Google Scholar
Hintz, Daniel & Hintz, Diane
2017 The evidential category of mutual knowledge in Quechua. Lingua 186–187: 88–109.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence R.
1989 A Natural History of Negation. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kadmon, Nirit
2001 Formal Pragmatics. Semantics, Pragmatics, Presupposition, and Focus. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Karttunen, Lauri
1974 Presuppositions and linguistic context. Theoretical Linguistics 1: 181–194.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kohler, Klaus
1987 Categorical pitch perception. Proc. XIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences 5, 331–333. Tallinn.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred
2007 Basic notions of information structure. In The Notions of Information Structure [Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 6], Caroline Féry, Gisbert Fanselow & Manfred Krifka (eds), 13–56. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert
1996 Intonational Phonology. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Leonetti, Manuel & Escandell Vidal, Victoria
2009 Fronting and Verum-Focus in Spanish. In Focus and Background in Romance Languages [Studies in Language Companion Series 112], Andreas Dufter & Daniel Jacob (eds), 155–204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
2000 Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Language, Speech, and Communication. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Liberman, Mark
1979 The Intonational System of English. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar
Moraes, João
2008 The pitch accents in Brazilian Portuguese: Analysis by synthesis. In Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2008, Plinio Barbosa, Sandra Madureira & César Reis (eds.), 389–398. Campinas: Unicamp.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank R.
2 2001 Mood and Modality. Cambridge: CUP.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Parker, Gary
1976 Gramática quechua: Ancash-Huailas. Lima: Ministerio de Educación.Google Scholar
Portner, Paul
2009 Modality. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Potts, Christopher
2007 Conventional implicatures, a distinguished class of meanings. In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces, Gillian Ramchand & Charles Reiss (eds), 475–501. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2015 Presupposition and implicature. In The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, 2nd edn, 168–202, Shalom Lappin & Chris Fox (eds), Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, Elizabeth
2002 Contrastive FOCUS vs. Presentational Focus: Prosodic evidence from the right node raising in English. In Speech Prosody 2002, 643–646, Bernard Bel & Isabelle Marlien (eds). Aix en Provence.Google Scholar
Scherer, Klaus R.
2003 Vocal communication of emotion: A review of research paradigms. Speech Communication 40: 227–256.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert C.
1973 Presuppositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 2(4): 447–457.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1974 Pragmatic presuppositions. In Semantics and Philosophy, Milton K. Munitz & Peter K. Unger (eds), 197–213. New York NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
2002 Common ground. Linguistics and Philosophy 25: 701–721.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tonhauser, Judith, Beaver, David, Roberts, Craige & Simons, Mandy
2013 Toward a taxonomy of projective content. Language 89(1): 66–109.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Uth, Melanie
2014 Spanish preverbal subjects in contexts of narrow information focus: Non-contrastive focalization or epistemic-evidential marking? Grazer Linguistische Studien 81: 87–104.Google Scholar
In press. F0 contours in data from picture-based elicitation experiments: Evidence from contrastive cleft sentences in Yucatecan Spanish. In Empirical Methods in Romance Prosody Research, Ingo Feldhausen, Jan Fließbach & Maria del Mar Vanrell Bosch eds Berlin Language Science Press
Vanrell Bosch, Maria del Mar
2011 The Phonological Relevance of Tonal Scaling in the Intonational Grammar of Catalan. PhD dissertation, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Malte
2008 Contrastive focus and emphasis. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55: 347–360.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Favaro, Marco
2020.  In Information-Structural Perspectives on Discourse Particles [Studies in Language Companion Series, 213], ► pp. 112 ff. Crossref logo
García García, Marco
2018.  In Focus Realization in Romance and Beyond [Studies in Language Companion Series, 201], ► pp. 229 ff. Crossref logo
Uth, Melanie & Marco García García
2018.  In Focus Realization in Romance and Beyond [Studies in Language Companion Series, 201], ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 05 december 2022. 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.