Presuppositions Can Be Disruptors Too:A Case against Strawson-Entailment
暂无分享,去创建一个
This paper has one main goal, which is a negative one. It aims at showing that the theory of NPI licensing defended in von Fintel (1999) is empirically inadequate. In essence, the theory we’re discussing relies on so-called Strawson-entailment, a device which ensures that weak NPIs are licensed despite the presence of presuppositions. We level two main criticisms against von Fintel’s theory. First, the empirical claim underlying the theory has exceptions left unnoticed until now. Among the facts that we bring to light, there is an important discovery, namely the disruption caused by the presupposition trigger too:
[1] Yael Sharvit,et al. A question of strength: on NPIs in interrogative clauses , 2007 .
[2] J. Gajewski. Neg-raising : polarity and presupposition , 2005 .
[3] Kai von Fintel,et al. NPI Licensing, Strawson Entailment, and Context Dependency , 1999, J. Semant..
[4] Vincent Homer. Disruption of NPI Licensing: the Case of Presuppositions , 2008 .
[5] Utpal Lahiri. Focus and Negative Polarity in Hindi , 1998 .