– NPIs are acceptable in (Strawson) downward entailing contexts2
(Ladusaw 1996, von Fintel 1999)
– Polarity items are sensitive to (non-)veridicality.3 (Giannakidou
1998, 2002)
Beyond “ever” and “any” - Challenging theories of NPI licensing
Jan. 14-15, 2011
Göttingen, Germany
Revisiting the Licensing Problem and the Issue on
Understatement:
The Case of Ammari ‘All that’ in Japanese1
• Setting that aside for the moment, I use the list of grammatical patterns in (1) just so we can test the distribution of ammari.
(1)
Ai Matsui
Michigan State University
1
Introduction
• Some broad questions:
2.2
– Why not NPIs are all alike (w.r.t. their distributions and meanings) cross-linguistically and within languages? What is the underlying uniformity of NPIs and how do the variations occur?
– How can the widening+strengthening account be incorporated to
degree/scalar semantics?
(2)
• Agenda:
– The data: Distribution of ammari in comparison with sonnani
and all that
– Some background: The widening and strengthening condition and
degree modifiers (Kadmon & Landman 1993, Krifka 1995)
– An analysis: The meaning of ammari, building on the analysis
of degree modifiers by Kennedy & McNally (2005) and adopting
the idea of strength-as-relevance by van Rooy (2003)
– Summary and outlook: Summary and remaining issues
a. *It is all that hot today.
b. It isn’t all that hot today.
c. If it’s all that hot, turn on the air conditioner.
d. ? I was surprised that it really was all that hot.
e. ? I’ll go out before it really gets all that hot.
f. Is it all that hot today?
g. *I turned on the air conditioner, because the room really was
all that hot.
• The status of ‘?’ sentences?: The speaker’s disbelief about the existence of such degree interfering the interpretation??
2.3
Distribution of ammari and sonnani
• Hanaoka-McGloin (1986) introduces ammari and sonnani 4 as NPIs
that may appear in sentences other than negation, noting that they
contribute to the speaker’s negative expectation or the speaker’s surprise of disbelief.
2 Context X...Y is downward entailing (DE) iff we can tell the truth of XαY from
the truth of XβY and the fact that α entails (⇒) β.
3 An operator O is veridical iff OP entails the truth of P , otherwise it is nonveridical.
English any, however, cannot be captured in terms of non-veridicality, and it is proposed
that the condition for any is the ‘anti-licensing’ condition:
Any must not be in the scope of veridical expression. (Giannakidou 2002)
4 Ammari/anmari derived from amari. They basically share the same meaning,
although the former could carry some more emphatic flavor and may be used more
often in colloquial casual speech. Amari, by the way, also has the meaning ‘extra’ when
it is used as a noun. Sonnani has a deictic word sonna ‘so’ or ‘that’ as part of itself.
The data
2.1
Distribution of all that
• Here’s a landscape of all that, a degree word which I thought would
be equivalent to ammari.
• Topic of the talk:
Japanese ammari, a degree modifier seemingly similar to, but
not quite the same as all that and sonnani (another similar Japanese
degree word that patterns together with all that)
2
a. *I have any potatoes.
b. I don’t have any potatoes.
c. If you have any potatoes, let me know.
d. It is surprising that anyone could go out in this weather.
e. I’ll leave before anyone visits me.
f. Do you have any potatoes?
g. *I turned on the air conditioner, because anyone came.
Some Typical NPI Licensing Environments
• A general question which I cannot answer: What is the licensing condition for NPIs?
1I
would like to thank Marcin Morzycki, and the members of Semantics Group at
Michigan State, Yusuke Kubota, Osamu Sawada, and Wataru Uegaki for discussions
and data confirmations.
1
(3)
(4)
(5)
• If the distribution of any shows the most typical NPI licensing environments that can be captured in terms of DE-ness or some other
notion, the distribution of all that and sonnani may not be all that
surprising (setting aside the status of ‘?’5 ).
Kyoo-wa {*ammari/*sonnani} atsui.
Today-top ammari /sonnani
hot
Intended: ‘It’s very hot today.’
Kyoo-wa {ammari/sonnani} atsuku-nai.
Today-top ammari /sonnani hot-not
‘It isn’t very hot today.’
Heya-ga
{ammari/sonnani} atsukat-tara eakon-o
Room-nom ammari /sonnani hot-if
A/C-acc
tsukete-kudasai
turn.on-please
‘If the room is very hot, please turn on the air conditioner.’
• Ammari shows somewhat unexpected behavior w.r.t. questions and
the because clause.
3
In case of the determiner any:
(11)
Note: Difference in the meaning? With sonnani, just like all that, there is a flavor
of the speaker’s disbelief: ‘If the room is all that hot (as you say, which
I don’t believe), then turn on the damn air conditioner’. With ammari,
there is no such disbelief of the speaker, and it is completely compatible in
a situation where you want to make a nice offer.
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
2.4
a. I don’t have any potatoes.
b. *I have any potatoes.
Kadmon & Landman (1993)
Heya-ga
{ammari/?sonnani} atsuku-te odoroita.
hot-and be.surprized
Room-nom ammari /sonnani
‘I was surprised that the room was very hot.’
Soto-ga
{ammari/sonnani} atsuku-naru-mae-ni
Outside-nom ammari /sonnani hot-become-before-at
dekake-yoo.
go.out-volitional
‘Let’s go out before it gets very hot outside.’
Soto-wa
{*ammari/sonnani} atsui-no?
Outside-top ammari /sonnani
hot-Q
Intended: ‘Is it very hot outside?’
Heya-ga
{ammari/*sonnani} atsui-kara eakon-o tsuketa.
Room-nom ammari /sonnani
hot-because A/C-acc turned.on
‘I turned on the air conditioner, because the room was very hot.’
(12)
The meaning of any NP :
a. Basic meaning: same as the indefinite (a) NP
b. Widening: Any widens the interpretation of the common noun
phrase along a contextual dimension (kinds, amount,...).
c. Strengthening: The domain widened statement must entail
(⇒) the narrower one.
(13)
a.
(11)a: Conditions satisfied
Wide: I don’t have potatoes, cooking or non-cooking
⇒Narrow: I don’t have cooking potatoes
b. *(11)b: Strengthening not met
Wide: I have potatoes of some kind, cooking or non-cooking
6⇒Narrow: I have cooking potatoes
Application to the degree modifier at all :
(14)
a. John isn’t tired at all.
b. *John is tired at all.
In spirit of Krifka (1995):
Summary
(15)
(10)
any
all that
sonnani
ammari
The Domain Widening & Strengthening Approach
Aff.
Neg.
if..
surprise
before...
Q
because...
*
*
*
*
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
?
?
3
3
?
3
3
3
3
3
*
*
*
*
3
The meaning of AP at all :
a. Basic meaning: same as AP
b. Widening: At all relaxes the interpretation of AP by making
the precision/evidence standard less strict. AP is “interpreted
in the most liberal way or requiring the least evidence”
c. Strengthening: The statement with a relaxed precision/evidence standard must entail the ones with stricter standards
5 For the ones with ‘?’, the judgement ranged from ? to 3. It seemed that the overall
acceptability gets better by putting stress/emphasis on all that or adding really.
2
(16)
(19)
i is at least strict as (≤) j iff,
(i) i and j are different at most in their precision/evidence standard, and
(ii) for all constants α APs, αi ⊆ αj
(20)
tiredj
tiredi
(17)
a.
The degree modifier very also provides the standard degree, but restricts
the comparison class so that the standard degree is based on those that
are already considerably ‘pos f ’. It raises the standard degree. (Kennedy
& McNally 2005, Klein 1980)
(14)a: Conditions satisfied
Wide(Lax): John isn’t tiredj
⇒Narrow(Strict): John isn’t tiredi
(21)
b. *(14)b: Strengthening not met
Wide(Lax): John is tiredj .
6⇒Narrow(Strict): John is tiredi .
(17)a
tiredj
tiredi
(22)
(17)b
tiredj
An attempt: the basic case
Ammari is essentially the same as very. But because of the lexically
encoded additional requirement, it behaves as NPI.
An Analysis
(23)
• How can the widening + strengthening view incorporated into degree
semantics, e.g. analysis of degree modifiers by Kennedy & McNally
(2005)?
• Part of the reason why I think their work important in analyzing
ammari is because, to my intuition, ammari is a variant of very in
some sense.
4.1
JveryK
=λfhd,he,tii λx.∃d[Standard(d)(f )(λy.JposK(f )(y)) ∧ f (d)(x)]
‘There’s a standard degree d of f -ness with respect to a comparison class based on the objects that have the property of f -ness
determined by C, and x is f to degree d.’
Jtoday very hotK
=∃d[Standard(d)(hot)(λy.JposK(hot)(y)) ∧ hot(d)(today)]
‘Today is hot to degree d (the standard of hotness determined
by the comparison class based on the individuals that have the
property of hotness)’
tiredi
4.2
4
JposK =λfhd,he,tii λx.∃d[Standard(d)(f )(C) ∧ f (d)(x)]
‘There’s a standard degree d of f -ness with respect to a comparison
class determined by C, a variable over properties of individuals
whose value is determined contextually, and x is f to degree d.’
Jtoday pos hotK =∃d[Standard(d)(hot)(C) ∧ hot(d)(today)]
‘Today is hot to degree d (the contextually determined standard
of hotness)’
(To be revised)
a. Basic meaning: JammariK = λfhd,he,tii λx.JveryK(f )(x)
=λf λx.∃d[Standard(d)(f )(λy.JposK(f )(y)) ∧ f (d)(x)]
b. Widening: Ammari relaxes the interpretation of ‘very hot’ by
making the standard less strict, to mean something like ‘pos
hot’. (Widen the comparison class)
c. Strengthening: The statement with a relaxed standard must
entail the ones with stricter standards.
pos(hot)
Degree/Scaler semantics
Gradable predicates denote a relation between individuals and degrees.
(Cresswell 1977)
(18)
JatsuiK = λdλx.hot(d)(x)
very(hot)
‘x is hot to degree d’
How does this work?
The positive form, e.g. Today is hot, without any overt degree modifier,
has a null morpheme pos. (von Stechow 1984, Kennedy & McNally 2005)
It provides the standard degree d, i.e. what counts as hot in the context of
utterance.
(4)
3
Kyoo-wa ammari atsuku-nai.
Today-top ammari hot-not
‘It isn’t very hot today.’
(24)
a.
b.
c.
(27)
Basic meaning: It’s not very hot today.
Widening: It’s not pos hot today.
Strengthening:
It’s not pos hot today ⇒ It’s not very hot today.
• The widening+strengthening condition itself satisfied.
• However, what the speaker actually says, the basic meaning (24)a, is
the weaker
statement: ‘It’s not very hot today’.
::::::
4.3
• Why does the speaker choose to make a weaker claim? Why say
something less informative even though there is an option for saying
something more informative (i.e. by not saying ammari )?
(4)
(26)
(5)
(28)
The meaning of ammari hot (revised)
a. Basic meaning: very hot
b. Widening: Ammari relaxes the interpretation of ‘very hot’ by
making the standard less strict, to mean something like ‘pos
hot’.
c. :::::::
Quality Strengthening: The statement with a lax standard
requires more evidence (in other words, it is something you
can say less certainly, less confidently etc. than) the ones with
stricter standards. (So say the one you can be more sure of.)6
(6)
Kyoo-wa ammari atsuku-nai.
Today-top ammari hot-not
‘It isn’t very hot today.’
a. Basic meaning: It isn’t very hot.
b. Widening: It isn’t pos hot.
c. :::::::
Quality Strengthening: ‘It isn’t pos hot’ requires more
evidence (in other words, it is something you can say less
certainly, less confidently etc.) than ‘it isn’t very hot’. You
can be more confident to say ‘it isn’t very hot’ than ‘it isn’t
pos hot’.
(29)
(7)
(30)
What about the one without negation?
(3)
Basic meaning: It is very hot.
Widening: It is pos hot.
Quality Strengthening: ‘It is pos hot’ requires more evidence
:::::::
(in other words, it is something you can say less certainly,
less confidently etc.) than ‘it is very hot’. Making the claim
‘it is very hot’ requires less evidence, and can be said more
confidently, than ‘it is hot’. → ?
Other cases?
What about other cases (e.g. conditionals, surprise, before, questions...)?
• This seems to be a general problem for other NPIs that have this
kind of ‘weakening’ effect (Israel 2006, van Rooy 2003). van Rooy
(2003) suggests to take the notion of ‘strength’ in terms of ‘relevance’
or ‘utility’, i.e. how relevant/useful it is for the speaker to say.
(25)
a.
b.
c.
*Kyoo-wa ammari atsui.
Today-top ammari hot
6 Thanks to Marcin Morzycki for helping me figuring out how to put the idea into
words.
Heya-ga
ammari atsukat-tara eakon-o tsukete-kudasai
Room-nom ammari hot-if
A/C-acc turn.on-please
‘If the room is very hot, please turn on the air conditioner.’
a. Basic meaning: If the room is very hot, please turn on the air
conditioner.
b. Widening: If the room is pos hot, please turn on the air conditioner.
c. :::::::
Quality Strengthening: Assuming that the hotter it is, the
more likely or natural to allow to turn on the air conditioner.
The speaker can more confidently and naturally say that the
one can turn of the air conditioner if it’s really hot (say 100
degrees and up), than that to do so if it’s hot (say 80 degrees
and up).
ammari atsuku-te odoroita.
Heya-ga
Room-nom ammari hot-and be.surprized
‘I was surprised that the room was very hot.’
a. Basic meaning: I was surprised that the room was very hot.
b. Widening: I was surprised that the room was pos hot.
c. :::::::
Quality Strengthening: Assume that the hotter it is the
more likely for one to be surprised. So, you can say for sure
that you are surprised because the room was very hot (100degrees), compared to because the room was hot (80- degrees).
Soto-ga
ammari atsuku-naru-mae-ni dekake-yoo.
Outside-nom ammari hot-become-before-at go.out-volitional
‘Let’s go out before it gets very hot outside.’
a. Basic meaning: Let’s go out before it gets very hot.
b. Widening: Let’s go out before it gets pos hot.
c. :::::::
Quality Strengthening: Assume that the temperature is rising
and the hotter it gets the more likely people avoid going out.
You can certainly suggest strongly to go out before it gets very
hot (100- degrees) than before it gets hot (80- degrees).
• The speaker wants to be more responsible for what s/he claims..?
4
compatible with gradable predicates with an open scale as they
predict for very?
The problematic cases:
(9)
Heya-ga
ammari atsui-kara eakon-o tsuketa.
Room-nom ammari hot-because A/C-acc turned.on
‘I turned on the air conditioner, because the room was very hot.’
(31)
a. Basic meaning: Because the room was very hot, I turned on
the air conditioner.
b. Widening: Because the room was pos hot, I turned on the air
conditioner.
c. :::::::
Quality Strengthening: Assume that the hotter it is, the more
likely people to turn on the air conditioner. You can be more
sure of the reasoning that your turning on the air conditioner
is caused by extreme hotness (100- degrees), than by regular
non-significant hotness (80- degrees).
ammari atsui-no?
(8) *Soto-wa
Outside-top ammari hot-Q
Intended: ‘Is it very hot outside?’
References
Cresswell, Maxwell John. 1977. ‘The semantics of degree’. In Barbara Partee
(ed.), Montague grammar, pp. 261–292. Academic Press.
von Fintel, Kai. 1999. ‘Npi licensing, strawson entailment, and context dependency’. Journal of Semantics 16, 97–148.
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 1998. Polarity Sensitivity as (Non)veridical Dependency. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2002. ‘Licensing and sensitivity in polarity items: from
downward entailment to (non)veridicality’. In Chicago Linguistic Society 39.
Hanaoka-McGloin, Naomi. 1986. Negation in Japanese. Boreal Scholarly Publisher and Distributors.
Israel, Michael. 2006. ‘Saying less and meaning less’. In Betty Birner & Gregory
Ward (eds.), Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning: Neo-Gricean Studies in
Pragmatics and Semantics in Honor of Laurence R. Horn, pp. 143–162. John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
• The question ‘is it very hot?’ is a more specific, riskier question, that
requires some evidence already to assume that is could be very hot,
than the question ‘is it hot?’, which is more general. Asking a general
question rather than a specific one is preferred (Krifka 1995, van Rooy
2003).
5
Kadmon, Nirit & Fred Landman. 1993. ‘Any’. Linguistics and Philosophy 16(4),
353–422.
Kennedy, Christopher & Louise McNally. 2005. ‘Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradale predicates’. Language 81, 345–381.
Summary and Remarks
Klein, Ewan. 1980. ‘A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives’. Linguistics & Philosophy 4, 1–45.
• Summary
– Polarity sensitive degree modifiers that contribute to the understatement, such as ammari, sonnani, and all that, are not all alike
in terms of their distribution and their meaning.
– One way to extend the widening and strengthening analysis of
NPIs to degree modifiers is to make use of comparison class that
can adjust the standard degree.
– The strengthening condition may be calculated in terms of something other than entailment (‘speaker’s commitment’ van Rooy
(2003)).
Krifka, Manfred. 1995. ‘The semantics and pragmatics of polarity items’. Linguistic Analysis 25(3-4), 209–257.
Ladusaw, William. 1996. ‘Negation and polarity items’. In Shalom Lappin (ed.),
The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, pp. 321–341. Blackwell.
van Rooy, Robert. 2003. ‘Negative polarity items in questions: Strength as
relevance’. Journal of Semantics 20, 239–273.
von Stechow, Arnim. 1984. ‘Comparing semantic theories of comparison’. Journal
of Semantics 3, 1–77.
• Remaining issues:
Ai Matsui
[email protected]
http://www.msu.edu/∼ matsuiai
A-535 Wells Hall
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
– What do sonnani and all that mean then? why ammari and
sonnani /all that show different distributions w.r.t. questions and
the adverbial because-clauses? How do we incorporate the notion
of speaker’s disbelief or expectation to the lexical semantics of
degree modifying NPIs? (An additional constraint in the widening requirement, e.g. ‘widen the domain so that it includes the
degree that speaker does not believe it to be’ ?)
– Is the basic meaning of ammari really the denotation suggested
for very in K & M? Wouldn’t that predict that it can only be
5