[developers] Difference between neg_rel/modifiers and modals

[Guy Emerson]

So, if I've understood correctly:

- using a scopal modifier for negation only leaves one variable for
non-scopal modifiers
- using a modal for negation would allow non-scopal modifiers to take
either the main verb's variable, or the modal's variable

But then, what about "Kim didn't speak for a long time", which I think can
have two readings:

1. Kim spoke for only a short time
2. Kim was silent for a long time

It looks like the ERG just gets the first reading.



2017-05-11 13:55 GMT-07:00 Ann Copestake <aac10 at cl.cam.ac.uk>:

> I think *unexpectedly* is scopal in at least some circumstances.
> Specifically I would say the semantics of *unexpectedly* is modal (in a
> broad sense) - e.g., I could treat it in terms of possible worlds that I'm
> considering at some timepoint t - if in only 1% of possible worlds does P
> happen, and P actually happens by t' (where t' > t) then unexpected(P).
> This is very crude and incomplete, but all I'm trying to do here is convey
> the modal intuition.
>
> Under this interpretation:
>
>   unexpected(not(win(Kim)))
>
> means that at time t I thought not(win(Kim)) had 1% chance, but at t'
> not(win(Kim)) has come to pass
>
> this isn't the same as:
>
>   not(unexpected(win(Kim)))
> which means it-is-not-the-case that [ at time t I thought win(Kim) had 1%
> chance and at t' win(Kim) has come to pass ]  i.e., either I expected Kim
> to win all along or Kim actually didn't win
>
> Also, in (3), unexpectedly could be a sentence-initial discourse
> adverb (scopal?) or an adverb extracted from lower in the clause...
>
>
> As I remember it, the discussion about possible sentence situation meaning
> is a semantic one rather than depending on whether there's extraction or
> not.
>
> All best,
>
> Ann
>
>
> On 11/05/2017 21:13, Emily M. Bender wrote:
>
> Thanks, Ann, for the quick reply!  This connects to other things I've been
> curious about recently, including how we decide if something like
> "unexpectedly"
> is scopal or not. Also, in (3), unexpectedly could be a sentence-initial
> discourse
> adverb (scopal?) or an adverb extracted from lower in the clause...
>
> Emily
>
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Ann Copestake <aac10 at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> I think the idea is to represent the contrast between:
>>
>> 1   We could unexpectedly close the window.
>>
>> either ability to close or actual closure is unexpected
>>
>> 2   We did not unexpectedly close the window.
>>
>> only the closure (if it had happened) would be unexpected.
>>
>> I don't think this is actually the best analysis.  For instance, for me,
>>
>> 3   Unexpectedly we did not close the window.
>> has another reading, which we are not capturing in MRS.  Claudia
>> Maiernborn would (perhaps) treat this as a sentential situation rather than
>> an event modification and it may be that analysis is also available for 1
>> instead of the modal modification analysis.
>>
>> I'm afraid I don't have time to discuss this properly at the moment,
>> though.  I feel such a discussion has taken place, but don't remember the
>> venue.
>>
>> All best,
>>
>> Ann
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/05/2017 01:13, Emily M. Bender wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I'm curious about the different in analysis between neg_rel and (other)
>> scopal adverbial
>> modifiers on the one hand and modals on the other in the treatment of the
>> INDEX:
>>
>> In (1) and (2), the INDEX of the whole MRS points to the ARG0 of
>> _sleep_v_rel:
>>
>> (1) Kim doesn't sleep.
>> (2) Kim probably sleeps.
>>
>> ... where in (3) and (4) it points to the ARG0 of _can_v_rel and
>> _would_v_rel respectively:
>>
>> (3) Kim can sleep.
>> (4) Kim would sleep.
>>
>> I'm wondering what difference we intend to model here.  (This question
>> comes up now
>> because we're looking at negation in my grammar engineering class, and
>> the out-of-the-box
>> analysis for languages which express negation with an auxiliary has
>> neg_rel falling
>> in the latter class.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Emily
>>
>>
>> --
>> Emily M. Bender
>> Professor, Department of Linguistics
>> Check out CLMS on facebook! http://www.facebook.com/uwclma
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Emily M. Bender
> Professor, Department of Linguistics
> Check out CLMS on facebook! http://www.facebook.com/uwclma
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.delph-in.net/archives/developers/attachments/20170516/f93d263d/attachment.html>