Skip to main content

On the Information Status of Appositive Relative Clauses

  • Conference paper
Logic, Language and Meaning

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 7218))

Abstract

Existing semantic theories of appositive relative clauses (ARCs) assume that ARCs contribute asserted but not at-issue content (Böer & Lycan [4], Bach [3], Chierchia & McConnell-Ginet [5], Potts [13], AnderBois et al. [2], Murray [12]). In this paper I demonstrate that the information status of ARCs depends on their linear position in the clause: clause-medial ARCs are not at-issue whereas clause-final ARCs can behave like regular at-issue content. I propose a uniform one-dimensional semantics under which ARCs are conjuncts that can acquire at-issue status if the issue raised by the main clause has been terminated. The idea is formally implemented in Dynamic Predicate Logic (Groenendijk & Stokhof [9]) enriched with propositional variables (AnderBois et al. [2]).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amaral, P., Roberts, C., Smith, E.A.: Review of The Logic of Conventional Implicatures by Chris Potts. Linguistics and Philosophy 30, 707–749 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. AnderBois, S., Brasoveanu, A., Henderson, R.: Crossing the Appositive/At-issue meaning Boundary. In: Proceedings of SALT 20, elanguage, pp. 328–346 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bach, K.: The Myth of Conventional Implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy 22, 327–366 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Böer, S., Lycan, W.: The Myth of Semantic Presupposition. Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chierchia, G., McConnell-Ginet, S.: Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cornilescu, A.: Non-Restrictive Relative Clauses, An Essay in Semantic Description. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 26, 41–67 (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dever, J.: Complex Demonstratives. Linguistics and Philosophy 24, 271–330 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Frege, G.: Über Sinn und Bedeutung. Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 100, 25–50 (1892)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Groenendijk, J., Stokhof, M.: Dynamic Predicate Logic. Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 39–100 (1991)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Kempson, R.: Nonrestrictive Relatives and Growth of Logical Form. In: WCCFL 22 Proceedings, pp. 301–314. Cascadilla Press, Somerville (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  11. McCawley, J.D.: The Syntactic Phenomena of English, vol. 2. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Murray, S.: Evidentiality and the Structure of Speech Acts. Unpublished Dissertation, Rutgers University (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Potts, C.: The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. OUP, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Roberts, C.: Information Structure: Towards an Integrated Formal Theory of Pragmatics. In: Yoon, J.H., Kathol, A. (eds.) OSU Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 49, pp. 91–136. The Ohio State University, Department of Linguistics (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rodman, R.: Scope Phenomenon, Movement Transformations and Relative Clauses. In: Partee, B. (ed.) Montague Grammar, pp. 165–176. Academic Press, New York (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schlenker, P.: Supplements within a Unidimensional Semantics I: Scope. In: Aloni, M., Bastiaanse, H., de Jager, T., Schulz, K. (eds.) Amsterdam Colloquium 2009. LNCS, vol. 6042, pp. 74–83. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Sells, P.: Restrictive and Non-Restrictive Modification. CSLI-85-28 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Simons, M., Tonhauser, J., Beaver, D., Roberts, C.: What Projects and Why. In: Proceedings of SALT 20, elanguage, pp. 309–327 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Stalnaker, R.: Assertion. In: Cole, P. (ed.) Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics. LNCS, pp. 315–332. Academic Press, New York (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tonhauser, J.: Diagnosing (Not-)at-issue Content. In: Proceedings of SULA 6 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Koev, T. (2012). On the Information Status of Appositive Relative Clauses. In: Aloni, M., Kimmelman, V., Roelofsen, F., Sassoon, G.W., Schulz, K., Westera, M. (eds) Logic, Language and Meaning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7218. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31482-7_41

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31482-7_41

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-31481-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-31482-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics