Abstract
In an unpublished manuscript [1], Kripke argues against the usual view on the presupposition of too, according to which too induces a presupposition that there is an object different from the referent of the focus which satisfies the unfocused part of the sentence to which too applies. Rather, too has a presupposition that has to be anaphoric to particular objects which are parallel with the referent of the focus. Van der Sandt and Geurts try to formulate this observation in their binding theory of presupposition, which, though, fails to capture the full range of Kripke’s original observation. This paper proposes a simple formulation of the observation by using Rooth’s Alternative Semantics for focus and Stalnaker’s ideas concerning presuppositions and context.
I’m very grateful to Chris Tancredi for his comments. I also appreciate the members of semantics reading group at Komaba and the audience of LENLS 2005. All errors are, of course, mine.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kripke, S.: Remarks on the formulation of the projection problem. (Unpublished manuscript 1990)
Karttunen, L., Peters, S.: Conventional implicature. In: Oh, C.K., Dinneen, D.A. (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 11: Presupposition, pp. 1–56. Academic Press, New York (1979)
van der Sandt, R., Geurts, B.: Too. In: Proceedings of the 13th Amsterdam Colloquium, University of Amsterdam (2001)
van der Sandt, R.: Presupposition projection as anaphora resolution. Journal of Semantics 9, 333–377 (1992)
Geurts, B.: Presuppositions and Pronouns. Elsevier, Oxford (1999)
Geurts, B., van der Sandt, R.: Interpreting focus. Theoretical Linguistics 30, 1–44 (2004)
Beaver, D., Zeevat, H.: Accommodation. In: Ramchand, G., Reiss, C. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces, OUP, Oxford (to appear)
Rooth, M.: Association with Focus. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst (1985)
Rooth, M.: A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1, 75–116 (1992)
Stalnaker, R.: Context and Content. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)
Büring, D.: The Meaning of Topic and Focus - The 59th Street Bridge Accent. Routledge, London (1997)
Soames, S.: Presupposition. In: Gabbay, D., Guenthner, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, vol. VI, pp. 553–616. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1989)
Zeevat, H.: Explaining presupposition triggers. In: van Deemter, K., Kibble, R. (eds.) Information Sharing: Reference and Presupposition in Language Generation and Interpretation, CSLI, Stanford, pp. 61–87 (2002)
Schwarzschild, R.: Focus interpretations: comments on Geurts and van der Sandt. Theoretical Linguistics 30, 137–147 (2004)
Kratzer, A.: Interpreting focus: Presupposed or expressive meanings? a comment on Bart Geurts and Rob van der Sandt. Theoretical Linguistics 30, 123–136 (2004)
Büring, D.: Focus suppositions. Theoretical Linguistics 30, 65–76 (2004)
Geurts, B., van der Sandt, R.: Interpreting focus again. Theoretical Linguistics 30, 149–161 (2004)
Giannakidou, A.: Polarity Sensitivity as (Non) Veridical Dependency. Benjamins, Amsterdam (1998)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Suzuki, S. (2006). A Note on Kripke’s Observation. In: Washio, T., Sakurai, A., Nakajima, K., Takeda, H., Tojo, S., Yokoo, M. (eds) New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. JSAI 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 4012. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11780496_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11780496_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-35470-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-35471-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)