This paper addresses certain restrictions on the use of declaratives as questions in English. Declaratives are taken to express commitment by the speaker, even in a questioning use. The analysis traces the restrictions to two distinct contextual factors: (i) a general principle requiring that a commitment have a recognized source, i.e., a discourse agent who plausibly has independent evidence supporting the content committed to; (ii) specific to a questioning interpretation, the need for the context to support the inference that the speaker’s commitment depends upon the addressee’s anticipated confirmation. Rising intonation contributes a very general element of meaning, indicating that the utterance it marks is contingent upon some discourse condition obtaining; the specific conditions required for a questioning interpretation instantiate one such type of contingency. The proposals are modeled via elaboration of standard contextual structures in a possible-worlds framework.
[1]
C. L. Hamblin.
Mathematical models of dialogue1
,
2008
.
[2]
Christine A. Gunlogson.
True to Form: Rising and Falling Declaratives as Questions in English
,
2003
.
[3]
Rodney Huddleston,et al.
The contrast between interrogatives and questions
,
1994,
Journal of Linguistics.
[4]
Robbert-Jan Beun,et al.
Context and form : declarative or interrogative, that is the question
,
2000
.
[5]
D. Bolinger.
Interrogative structures of American English : the direct question
,
1957
.
[6]
C. Bartels,et al.
Towards a compositional interpretation of English statement and question intonation
,
1997
.
[7]
Daniel Hirst,et al.
Interpreting Intonation: A Modular Approach
,
1983
.
[8]
Eun-Ju Noh.
Echo Questions: Metarepresentation and Pragmatic Enrichment
,
1998
.