The Semantics and Pragmatics of Clausal Question-Answer Pairs in ASL

A question and its answer are closely related at the discourse level: a (non-rhetorical) question requires an answer and an answer is appropriate only with respect to a question. Still, a question and its answer are associated with two independent objects at the syntactic and semantic level. A question is often realized as a matrix interrogative clause and is commonly assumed to denote a set of propositions (e.g. Hamblin 1973, Karttunen 1977), while an answer is a declarative clause (or often a smaller constituent) denoting a single proposition. In this paper, we study a construction in American Sign Language (ASL) that superficially resembles a question-answer pair at the discourse level, but exhibits two crucial differences: (i) it is uttered by the very same speaker, and (ii) we argue that it forms a syntactic and semantic unit – a declarative clause – by combining an interrogative clause (the "question") and a declarative clause (the "answer"). We call this construction a Clausal Question-Answer pair (CQA). In Section 2, we introduce CQAs and briefly summarize the arguments in favor of the syntactic and semantic analysis we present in Section 3. In Section 4, we discuss a pragmatic property of CQAs and suggest an account within a larger approach to discourse structuring. In Section 5, we compare CQAs to a construction for which a similar analysis has been suggested, namely specificational pseudoclefts in English (and other languages). Section 6 concludes.

[1]  Ivano Caponigro,et al.  The non concealed nature of free relatives: Implications for connectivity crosslinguistically , 2007 .

[2]  Keith Allan,et al.  Semantics in Generative Grammar [Book Review] , 1997 .

[3]  Pauline Jacobson,et al.  Binding Connectivity in Copular Sentences , 1994 .

[4]  R. Wilbur,et al.  Stress in A SL: Empirical Evidence and Linguistic I ssues , 1999, Language and speech.

[5]  Diane C. Lillo-Martin,et al.  WH-MOVEMENT AND THE POSITION OF SPEC-CP : EVIDENCE FROM AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE , 1997 .

[6]  H. Rullmann,et al.  A Flexible Approach to Exhaustivity in Questions , 1999 .

[7]  Veneeta Dayal Locality in WH Quantification: Questions and Relative Clauses in Hindi , 2010 .

[8]  Patricia Siple,et al.  Understanding language through sign language research , 1978 .

[9]  Daniel Büring,et al.  On D-Trees, Beans, And B-Accents , 2003 .

[10]  P. Siple,et al.  Theoretical issues in sign language research , 1990 .

[11]  Daphna Heller,et al.  On The Relation of Connectivity and Specificational Pseudoclefts , 2002 .

[12]  Pauline Jacobson On the Quantificational Force of English Free Relatives , 1995 .

[13]  André Meinunger,et al.  Pseudoclefts and ellipsis , 2000 .

[14]  Benjamin Spector,et al.  An Unnoticed Reading for Wh-Questions: Elided Answers and Weak Islands , 2008, Linguistic Inquiry.

[15]  R. Wilbur Foregrounding structures in American sign language , 1994 .

[16]  Jeroen Groenendijk,et al.  On the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers , 1984 .

[17]  C. L. Hamblin QUESTIONS IN MONTAGUE ENGLISH , 1976 .

[18]  P. Schlenker Clausal Equations (A Note on the Connectivity Problem) , 2002 .

[19]  Robin Cooper,et al.  The syntax and semantics of when-questions , 1982 .

[20]  Yael Sharvit,et al.  Connectivity in Specificational Sentences , 1999 .