Jan van Eijck
Abstract
Abstract
Presuppositions of utterances are the pieces of information you convey with an utterance no matter whether your utterance is true or not. We first study presupposition in a very simple framework of updating propositional information, with examples of how presuppositions of complex propositional updates can be calculated. Next we move on to presuppositions and quantification, in the context of a dynamic version of predicate logic, suitably modified to allow for presupposition failure. In both the propositional and the quantificational case, presupposition failure can be viewed as error abortion of procedures. Thus, a dynamic assertion logic which describes the preconditions for error abortion is the suitable tool for analysing presupposition.
- [Bar87] Noun phrases, generalized quantifiers and anaphoraGeneralized Quantifiers: linguistic and logical approaches1987DordrechtD. Reidel Publishing Company13010.1007/978-94-009-3381-1_1Google Scholar
- [Bea92] Beaver, D.I.: The kinematics of presupposition. In P. Dekker and M. Stokhof, editors,Proceedings of the Eighth Amsterdam Colloquium, pp. 17–36. ILLC, University of Amsterdam, 1992.Google Scholar
- [Bea93] Beaver, D.I.:What Comes First in Dynamic Semantics. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, 1993.Google Scholar
- [Ben89] Semantic parallels in natural language and computationLogic Colloquium, Granada, 19871989AmsterdamElsevier331375Google Scholar
- [Ben91a] General dynamicsTheoretical Linguistics19911715920110.1515/thli.1991.17.1-3.1590743.030191144506Google Scholar
- [Ben91b] Language in Action: categories, lambdas and dynamic logicStudies in Logic 1301991AmsterdamElsevierGoogle Scholar
- [BEI93] Bouchez, O., van Eijck, J. and Istace, O.: A strategy for dynamic interpretation: a fragment and an implementation. In S. Krauwer, M. Moortgat, and Louis des Tombe, editors,Sixth Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics —Proceedings of the Conference, pp. 61–70. ACL, 1993.Google Scholar
- [Eij93a] The dynamics of descriptionJournal of Semantics19931023926710.1093/jos/10.3.239Google ScholarCross Ref
- [Eij94a] Axiomatizing dynamic predicate logic with quantified dynamic logicLogic and Information Flow1994Cambridge, Mass.MIT Press3048Google Scholar
- [Eij94b] van Eijck, J.: Presuppositions and dynamic logic. Technical Report CSLI-94-186, CSLI, Stanford, February 1994. To appear in M. Kanazawa, C. Piñon, H. de Swart (eds.),Papers from the 2nd CSLI Workshop on Logic, Language and Computation, June 1993.Google Scholar
- [EiC93] Dynamic modal predicate logicDynamics, Polarity, and Quantification1994StanfordCSLI251276Google Scholar
- [EiV92] Dynamic interpretation and Hoare deductionJournal of Logic, Language, and Information1992114410.1007/BF002033850793.030331292354Google Scholar
- [EiV93] Reasoning about update logicTechnical Report CS-R93121993AmsterdamCWIGoogle Scholar
- [Gaz79] Gazdar, G.: A solution to the projection problem. In C.-K. Oh and D. Dinneen, editors,Syntax and Semantics 11: Presupposition, pp. 57–89. Academic Press, 1979.Google Scholar
- [Gol92] Logics of Time and ComputationCSLI Lecture Notes1992Second EditionStanfordCSLIGoogle Scholar
- [GrS91] Dynamic predicate logicLinguistics and Philosophy1991143910010.1007/BF006283040726.03024Google ScholarCross Ref
- [Hei83] On the projection problem for presuppositionsProceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics19832114126Google Scholar
- [Kar73] Presuppositions of compound sentencesLinguistic Inquiry19734169193Google Scholar
- [Kar74] Karttunen, L.: Presupposition and linguistic context.Theoretical Linguistics, pp. 181–194, 1974.Google Scholar
- [KaP79] Karttunen, L. and Peters, S.: Conventional implicature. In C.-K. Oh and D. Dinneen, editors,Syntax and Semantics 11: Presupposition, pp. 1–56. Academic Press, 1979.Google Scholar
- [Kra94] Partiality and dynamics; theory and application1994AmsterdamILLC391410Google Scholar
- [Lew79] Score keeping in a language gameJournal of Philosophical Logic1979833935910.1007/BF00258436Google ScholarCross Ref
- [Mus91] Muskens, R.: Anaphora and the logic of change. In J. van Eijck, editor,Logics in AI / European Workshop JELIA '90 / Amsterdam, The Netherlands, September 1990 / Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 478, pp. 412–427. Springer Verlag, 1991.Google Scholar
- [Pet77] Peters, S.: A truth-conditional formulation of Karttunen's account of presupposition.Texas Linguistic Forum, pp. 137–149, 1977.Google Scholar
- [Pra76] Pratt, V.: Semantical considerations on Floyd-Hoare logic.Proceedings 17th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 109–121, 1976.Google Scholar
- [Rus05] On denotingMind19051447949310.1093/mind/XIV.4.479Google ScholarCross Ref
- [San88] Context and Presupposition1988LondonCroom HelmGoogle Scholar
- [Seu91] PräsuppositionenSemantics, An International Handbook of Contemporary Research1991De GruyterBerlin286318Google Scholar
- [Soa84] Soames, S.: Presupposition. In D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, editors,Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pp. 553–616. Reidel, 1984. Volume IV.Google Scholar
- [TuZ88] Tucker, J.V. and Zucker, J.I.:Program Correctness over Abstract Data Types, with Error State Semantics. North Holland, 1988.Google Scholar
- [Vel91] Veltman, F.: Defaults in update semantics. Technical report, Department of Philosophy, University of Amsterdam, 1991. To appear in theJournal of Philosophical Logic.Google Scholar
- [Vis94] Visser, A.: Actions under presuppositions. In J. van Eijck and A. Visser, editors,Logic and Information Flow, pp. 196–233. MIT Press, 1994.Google Scholar
- [Zee92] Presupposition and accommodation in update semanticsJournal of Semantics19929437941210.1093/jos/9.4.379Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Presupposition failure — A comedy of errors
Recommendations
A Higher-Order Theory of Presupposition
So-called `dynamic' semantic theories such as Kamp's discourse representation theory and Heim's file change semantics account for such phenomena as crosssentential anaphora, donkey anaphora, and the novelty condition on indefinites, but compare ...
Can negation negate presupposition?
A construction in which negation, at first glance, negates presupposition is considered. It is shown that, even in this construction, presupposition retains its chief property of not being negated when the sentence is negated.
On the Completeness of Dynamic Logic
Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Foundations of Software Science and Computational Structures - Volume 5504The impossibility of semantically complete deductive calculi for logics for imperative programs has led to the study of two alternative approaches to completeness: "local" semantic completeness on the one hand Cook's relative completeness, Harel's ...
Comments