<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div>So, if I&#39;ve understood correctly:<br><br>- using a scopal modifier for negation only leaves one variable for non-scopal modifiers<br></div>- using a modal for negation would allow non-scopal modifiers to take either the main verb&#39;s variable, or the modal&#39;s variable<br><br></div>But then, what about &quot;Kim didn&#39;t speak for a long time&quot;, which I think can have two readings:<br><br></div>1. Kim spoke for only a short time<br></div><div>2. Kim was silent for a long time<br><br></div><div>It looks like the ERG just gets the first reading.<br></div><div><div><div><div><div><br><br></div></div></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2017-05-11 13:55 GMT-07:00 Ann Copestake <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk" target="_blank">aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk</a>&gt;</span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
  
    
  
  <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <p>I think <i>unexpectedly</i> is scopal in at least some
      circumstances.  Specifically I would say the semantics of <i>unexpectedly</i>
      is modal (in a broad sense) - e.g., I could treat it in terms of
      possible worlds that I&#39;m considering at some timepoint t - if in
      only 1% of possible worlds does P happen, and P actually happens
      by t&#39; (where t&#39; &gt; t) then unexpected(P).  This is very crude
      and incomplete, but all I&#39;m trying to do here is convey the modal
      intuition.<br>
    </p>
    <p> Under this interpretation:<br>
    </p>
    <p>  unexpected(not(win(Kim))) <br>
    </p>
    <p>means that at time t I thought not(win(Kim)) had 1% chance, but
      at t&#39; not(win(Kim)) has come to pass</p>
    <p>this isn&#39;t the same as:<br>
    </p>
    <p>  not(unexpected(win(Kim)))<br>
    </p>
    which means it-is-not-the-case that [ at time t I thought win(Kim)
    had 1% chance and at t&#39; win(Kim) has come to pass ]  i.e., either I
    expected Kim to win all along or Kim actually didn&#39;t win<span><br>
    <br>
    <blockquote type="cite">Also, in (3), unexpectedly could be a
      sentence-initial discourse
      <div>adverb (scopal?) or an adverb extracted from lower in the
        clause...</div>
    </blockquote>
    <br></span>
    As I remember it, the discussion about possible sentence situation
    meaning is a semantic one rather than depending on whether there&#39;s
    extraction or not.  <br>
    <br>
    All best,<br>
    <br>
    Ann<div><div class="m_-310726251724269823h5"><br>
    <br>
    <div class="m_-310726251724269823m_-1602240225619716942moz-cite-prefix">On 11/05/2017 21:13, Emily M. Bender
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">Thanks, Ann, for the quick reply!  This connects to
        other things I&#39;ve been
        <div>curious about recently, including how we decide if
          something like &quot;unexpectedly&quot;</div>
        <div>is scopal or not. Also, in (3), unexpectedly could be a
          sentence-initial discourse</div>
        <div>adverb (scopal?) or an adverb extracted from lower in the
          clause...</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>Emily</div>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Ann
          Copestake <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk" target="_blank">aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk</a>&gt;</span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
              <p>I think the idea is to represent the contrast between:<br>
              </p>
              <p>1   We could unexpectedly close the window.</p>
              <p>either ability to close or actual closure is unexpected<br>
              </p>
              <p>2   We did not unexpectedly close the window.</p>
              <p>only the closure (if it had happened) would be
                unexpected.</p>
              <p>I don&#39;t think this is actually the best analysis.  For
                instance, for me,<br>
              </p>
              <p>3   Unexpectedly we did not close the window.</p>
              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.<br>
              <br>
              I&#39;m afraid I don&#39;t have time to discuss this properly at
              the moment, though.  I feel such a discussion has taken
              place, but don&#39;t remember the venue.<br>
              <br>
              All best,<br>
              <br>
              Ann
              <div>
                <div class="m_-310726251724269823m_-1602240225619716942h5"><br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <div class="m_-310726251724269823m_-1602240225619716942m_6920975839983985265moz-cite-prefix">On
                    10/05/2017 01:13, Emily M. Bender wrote:<br>
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="ltr">Dear all,
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>I&#39;m curious about the different in analysis
                        between neg_rel and (other) scopal adverbial </div>
                      <div>modifiers on the one hand and modals on the
                        other in the treatment of the INDEX:</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>In (1) and (2), the INDEX of the whole MRS
                        points to the ARG0 of _sleep_v_rel:</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>(1) Kim doesn&#39;t sleep.</div>
                      <div>(2) Kim probably sleeps.</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>... where in (3) and (4) it points to the
                        ARG0 of _can_v_rel and _would_v_rel
                        respectively:</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>(3) Kim can sleep.</div>
                      <div>(4) Kim would sleep.</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>I&#39;m wondering what difference we intend to
                        model here.  (This question comes up now</div>
                      <div>because we&#39;re looking at negation in my
                        grammar engineering class, and the
                        out-of-the-box</div>
                      <div>analysis for languages which express negation
                        with an auxiliary has neg_rel falling</div>
                      <div>in the latter class.)</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>Thanks,</div>
                      <div>Emily</div>
                      <div><br clear="all">
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        -- <br>
                        <div class="m_-310726251724269823m_-1602240225619716942m_6920975839983985265gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
                          <div dir="ltr">
                            <div>
                              <div dir="ltr">
                                <div>
                                  <div dir="ltr">Emily M. Bender<br>
                                    Professor, <span style="font-size:12.8px">Department
                                      of Linguistics</span></div>
                                  <div dir="ltr">Check out CLMS on
                                    facebook! <a href="http://www.facebook.com/uwclma" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/uwclma</a><br>
                                  </div>
                                </div>
                              </div>
                            </div>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
        <br clear="all">
        <div><br>
        </div>
        -- <br>
        <div class="m_-310726251724269823m_-1602240225619716942gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
          <div dir="ltr">
            <div>
              <div dir="ltr">
                <div>
                  <div dir="ltr">Emily M. Bender<br>
                    Professor, <span style="font-size:12.8px">Department
                      of Linguistics</span></div>
                  <div dir="ltr">Check out CLMS on facebook! <a href="http://www.facebook.com/uwclma" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/uwclma</a><br>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </div></div></div>

</blockquote></div><br></div></div>