True to Form ─ Rising and Falling Declaratives As Questions in English
商品資訊
系列名:Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics
ISBN13:9780415967815
出版社:Taylor & Francis
作者:Christine Gunlogson
出版日:2003/09/01
裝訂/頁數:精裝/144頁
規格:23.5cm*15.9cm*1.3cm (高/寬/厚)
定價
:NT$ 7650 元優惠價
:90 折 6885 元
若需訂購本書,請電洽客服 02-25006600[分機130、131]。
商品簡介
作者簡介
相關商品
商品簡介
This book is concerned with the meaning and use of two kinds of declarative sentences:
1) It's raining?
2) It's raining.
The difference between (1) and (2) is intonational: (1) has a final rise--indicated by the question mark--while (2) ends with a fall.
Christine Gunlogson's central claim is that the meaning and use of both kinds of sentences must be understood in terms of the meaning of their defining formal elements, namely declarative sentence type and rising versus falling intonation. Gunlogson supports that claim through an investigation of the use of declaratives as questions. On one hand, Gunlogson demonstrates that rising and falling declaratives share an aspect of conventional meaning attributable to their declarative form, distinguishing them both from the corresponding polar interrogative (Is it raining?) and constraining their use as questions. On the other hand, since (1) and (2) constitute a minimal pair, differing only in intonation, systematic differences in character and function between them--in particular, the relative "naturalness" of (1) as a question compared to (2) --must be located in the contrast between the fall and the rise.
To account for these two sets of differences, Gunlogson gives a compositional account of rising and falling declaratives under which declarative form expresses commitment to the propositional content of the declarative. Rising versus falling intonation on declaratives is responsible for attribution of the commitment to the Addressee versus the Speaker, respectively. The result is an inherent contextual "bias" associated with declaratives, which constitutes the crucial point of difference with interrogatives. The compositional analysis is implemented in the framework of context update semantics (Heim 1982 and others), using an articulated version of the Common Ground (Stalnaker 1978) that distinguishes the commitments of the individual discourse participants.
Restrictions on the use of declaratives as questions, as well as differences between rising and falling declaratives as questions, are shown to follow from this account. Gunlogson argues that neither rising nor falling declaratives are inherently questioning--rather, the questioning function of declaratives arises through the interaction of sentence type, intonation, and context.
1) It's raining?
2) It's raining.
The difference between (1) and (2) is intonational: (1) has a final rise--indicated by the question mark--while (2) ends with a fall.
Christine Gunlogson's central claim is that the meaning and use of both kinds of sentences must be understood in terms of the meaning of their defining formal elements, namely declarative sentence type and rising versus falling intonation. Gunlogson supports that claim through an investigation of the use of declaratives as questions. On one hand, Gunlogson demonstrates that rising and falling declaratives share an aspect of conventional meaning attributable to their declarative form, distinguishing them both from the corresponding polar interrogative (Is it raining?) and constraining their use as questions. On the other hand, since (1) and (2) constitute a minimal pair, differing only in intonation, systematic differences in character and function between them--in particular, the relative "naturalness" of (1) as a question compared to (2) --must be located in the contrast between the fall and the rise.
To account for these two sets of differences, Gunlogson gives a compositional account of rising and falling declaratives under which declarative form expresses commitment to the propositional content of the declarative. Rising versus falling intonation on declaratives is responsible for attribution of the commitment to the Addressee versus the Speaker, respectively. The result is an inherent contextual "bias" associated with declaratives, which constitutes the crucial point of difference with interrogatives. The compositional analysis is implemented in the framework of context update semantics (Heim 1982 and others), using an articulated version of the Common Ground (Stalnaker 1978) that distinguishes the commitments of the individual discourse participants.
Restrictions on the use of declaratives as questions, as well as differences between rising and falling declaratives as questions, are shown to follow from this account. Gunlogson argues that neither rising nor falling declaratives are inherently questioning--rather, the questioning function of declaratives arises through the interaction of sentence type, intonation, and context.
作者簡介
Christine Gunlogson teaches in the Department of Linguistics at University of California, Los Angeles. She is currently Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Rochester.
主題書展
更多
主題書展
更多書展今日66折
您曾經瀏覽過的商品
購物須知
外文書商品之書封,為出版社提供之樣本。實際出貨商品,以出版社所提供之現有版本為主。部份書籍,因出版社供應狀況特殊,匯率將依實際狀況做調整。
無庫存之商品,在您完成訂單程序之後,將以空運的方式為你下單調貨。為了縮短等待的時間,建議您將外文書與其他商品分開下單,以獲得最快的取貨速度,平均調貨時間為1~2個月。
為了保護您的權益,「三民網路書店」提供會員七日商品鑑賞期(收到商品為起始日)。
若要辦理退貨,請在商品鑑賞期內寄回,且商品必須是全新狀態與完整包裝(商品、附件、發票、隨貨贈品等)否則恕不接受退貨。