Rational use of prosody predicts projection in manner adverb utterances

Speakers can be taken to be committed to utterance content even when that content is contributed in the scope of an entailment-canceling operator, like negation (e.g., Chierchia & McConnell-Ginet, 1990). We develop a probabilistic model of this phenomenon, called ‘projection’, that relies on the prosodic realization of utterances. We synthesize existing theoretical claims about prosody, information structure and projection into a model that assumes a rational speaker (Frank & Goodman, 2012) who produces utterances with prosodic melodies that can signal which utterance content she is committed to. Predictions of the probabilistic model are compared to the responses of an experiment designed to test the effect of prosody on projection in manner adverb utterances. Key behaviors of the model are borne out empirically, and the quantitative fit is surprisingly good given that the model has only one free parameter. Our findings lend support to analyses of projection that are sensitive to the information structure of utterances (e.g., Simons, Beaver, Roberts, & Tonhauser, 2017).

[1]  David I. Beaver,et al.  Sense and Sensitivity: How Focus Determines Meaning , 2008 .

[2]  Márta Abrusán,et al.  A Note on Quasi-Presuppositions and Focus , 2013, J. Semant..

[3]  Michael Wagner,et al.  Contrastive topics decomposed , 2012 .

[4]  David I. Beaver,et al.  Questions Under Discussion: Where Information Structure Meets Projective Content , 2017 .

[5]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Predicting Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Games , 2012, Science.

[6]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  The strategic use of noise in pragmatic reasoning , 2015, CogSci.

[7]  H. Paul Prinzipien Der Sprachgeschichte , 2009 .

[8]  Arnim von Stechow,et al.  Focusing and background operators , 1991 .

[9]  Elisabeth Selkirk,et al.  Sentence Prosody: Intonation, Stress and Phrasing , 1996 .

[10]  W. Cooper,et al.  Speech intonation and focus location in matched statements and questions. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  David I. Beaver,et al.  The Best Question: Explaining the Projection Behavior of Factives , 2017 .

[12]  Mats Rooth A theory of focus interpretation , 1992, Natural Language Semantics.

[13]  Gennaro Chierchia,et al.  Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics , 1990 .

[14]  Mandy Simons,et al.  On the Conversational Basis of Some Presuppositions , 2013 .

[15]  Craige Roberts Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated for-mal theory of pragmatics , 1996 .

[16]  G. Ayers,et al.  Guidelines for ToBI labelling , 1994 .

[17]  H. Savin,et al.  The projection problem for presuppositions , 1971 .

[18]  Robert B. Most,et al.  Information Structure in Sentences: New Information , 1979 .

[19]  Catherine Lai,et al.  Rises all the way up: The interpretation of prosody, discourse attitudes and dialogue structure , 2012 .

[20]  Rob A. van der Sandt,et al.  Presupposition Projection as Anaphora Resolution , 1992, J. Semant..

[21]  Craige Roberts,et al.  Information Structure: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics , 2012 .