Abstract

While presuppositions are often thought to be lexically encoded, researchers have repeatedly argued for ‘triggering algorithms’ that productively classify certain entailments as presuppositions. We provide new evidence for this position and sketch a novel triggering rule. On the empirical side, we show that presuppositions are productively generated from iconic expressions (such as gestures) that one may not have seen before, which suggests that a triggering algorithm is indeed called for. Turning to normal words, we show that sometimes a presupposition p is triggered by a simple or complex expression that does not even entail p: it is only when contextual information guarantees that the entailment goes through that the presupposition emerges. On standard theories, this presupposition could not be hardwired, because if so it should make itself felt (by way of projection or accommodation) in all cases. Rather, a triggering algorithm seems to take as an input a contextual meaning, and to turn some contextual entailments into presuppositions. On the theoretical side, we propose that an entailment q (possibly a contextual one) of an expression qq’ is treated as a presupposition if q is an epistemic precondition of the global meaning, in the following sense: usually, when one learns that qq’ (e.g. x stops q-ing), one antecedently knows that q (e.g. x q-ed). Presuppositions thus arise from an attempt to ensure that information that is cognitively inert in general experience is also trivial relative to its linguistic environment. On various analyses, q is trivial in its linguistic environment just in case q is entailed by its local context; this provides a direct link between presupposition generation and presupposition projection. (An appendix discusses the relation between this proposal and an alternative one in terms of entailments that are in some sense counterfactually stable.)

Highlights

  • Most presupposition research of the last 50 years has focused on the Projection Problem: taking as given the presuppositions of elementary expressions, how are those of complex sentences derived from the meanings of their parts?1 This leaves another question open: why do some expressions trigger presuppositions in the first place? While this is often taken to be an irreducibly lexical fact, several researchers have argued that this view is insufficiently explanatory and possibly incorrect, a ‘Triggering Problem’: given some information that a linguistic expression conveys about the world, can we predict which part is at-issue and which part is presupposed?

  • Our first goal is to summarize recent and new data that highlight the need for a triggering algorithm, for two reasons: presuppositions are productively generated from iconic expressions one may not have encountered before, a productive mechanism is called for; in addition, a presupposition p is sometimes triggered by a conventional word that does not even entail p: it is only when contextual information guarantees that the entailment goes through that the presupposition emerges

  • There is a serious risk of circularity if we reduce triggering to the expected behavior of expressions which themselves trigger presuppositions: it could be that the triggering rule in (51)b is correct for the uninteresting reason that pp’ is typically conveyed with an expression that presupposes p (one could imagine that this bivalent content can be expressed as (p and pp’), which doesn’t trigger a presupposition, but this could be rare for a variety of reasons)

Read more

Summary

The Triggering Problem for presuppositions

Most presupposition research of the last 50 years has focused on the Projection Problem: taking as given the presuppositions of elementary expressions, how are those of complex sentences derived from the meanings of their parts?1 This leaves another question open: why do some expressions trigger presuppositions in the first place? While this is often taken to be an irreducibly lexical fact, several researchers have argued that this view is insufficiently explanatory and possibly incorrect, a ‘Triggering Problem’: given some information that a linguistic expression conveys about the world, can we predict which part is at-issue and which part is presupposed?. Our first goal is to summarize recent and new data that highlight the need for a triggering algorithm, for two reasons: presuppositions are productively generated from iconic expressions one may not have encountered before, a productive mechanism is called for; in addition, a presupposition p is sometimes triggered by a conventional word that does not even entail p: it is only when contextual information guarantees that the entailment goes through that the presupposition emerges. Both lines of argumentation are illustrated in (2).

Characterizing presuppositions
Local triviality
Traditional arguments
Arguments from pro-speech gestures
Arguments from pro-speech visual animations
Arguments from iconic uses of classifier predicates
Further arguments pertaining to temporal asymmetries
Arguments from contextual triggers
Arguments from complex triggers
A: What just happened?
Presupposed implicatures
Interim summary
Theories and challenges: a summary
Requirements and motivations
Sketching a ‘bare bones’ theory for the propositional case
Assessing probabilities and probabilistic thresholds
Applications of the proposal
The issue of context-dependency
The case for context-dependency
Excessive context-dependency
Alternatives and restatements
A restatement in terms of counterfactual reasoning?
A communicative reinterpretation?
10 Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.