Advertisement

Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 31, Issue 5, pp 523–538 | Cite as

Presuppositions and common ground

  • Barbara Abbott
Research Article

Abstract

This paper presents problems for Stalnaker’s common ground theory of presupposition. Stalnaker (Linguist and Philos 25:701–721, 2002) proposes a 2-stage process of utterance interpretation: presupposed content is added to the common ground prior to acceptance/rejection of the utterance as a whole. But this revision makes presupposition difficult to distinguish from assertion. A more fundamental problem is that the common ground theory rests on a faulty theory of assertion—that the essence of assertion is to present the content of an utterance as new information. Many examples are presented of utterances which are felicitous but not informative in this way.

Keywords

Presupposition Assertion Common ground 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abbott B. (2000) Presuppositions as nonassertions. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1419–1437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bach K., Harnish R.M. (1979) Linguistic communication and speech acts. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Birner B., Ward G. (1994) Uniqueness, familiarity, and the definite article in English. BLS 20: 93–102Google Scholar
  4. Burton-Roberts N. (1989) The limits to debate: A revised theory of semantic presupposition. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. von Fintel, K. (2006). What is presupposition accommodation, again? Cambridge: MIT. Available at http://pragmatics.osu.edu/.
  6. Gazdar G. (1979a) Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition, and logical form. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Gazdar G. (1979b) A solution to the projection problem. In: Oh C.-K., Dinneen D.A. (eds) Syntax and semantics, volume 11: Presupposition. Academic Press, New York, pp 57–89Google Scholar
  8. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, volume 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press (Reprinted in H. Paul Grice, 1989, Studies in the way of words (pp. 22–40). Cambridge: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  9. Grice, H. P. (1981). Presupposition and conversational implicature. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 183–198). New York: Academic Press (Page references are to the reprint in H. Paul Grice, 1989, Studies in the way of words (pp. 269–282). Cambridge: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  10. Lewis D. (1979) Scorekeeping in a language game. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8: 339–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Malinowski B. (1923) The problem of meaning in primitive languages. In: Ogden C. K., Richards I. A. (eds) The meaning of meaning. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, pp 451–510Google Scholar
  12. Prince E.F. (1978) A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54: 883–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Simons M. (2003) Presupposition and accommodation: Understanding the Stalnakerian picture. Philosophical Studies 112(3): 251–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Simons, M. (2006). Presupposition without common ground. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University. Available at http://www.hss.cmu.edu/philosophy/faculty-simons.php.
  15. Simons M. (2007) Observations on embedding verbs, evidentiality, and presupposition. Lingua 117(6): 1034–1056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Soames, S. (1982). How presuppositions are inherited: A solution to the projection problem. Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 483–545 (References are to the reprint in S. Davis (Ed.), 1991, Pragmatics: A reader (pp. 428–470). Oxford: Oxford University Press.)Google Scholar
  17. Soukhanov, A. (eds) (1992) The American heritage dictionary of the English language, 3rd edn. Houghton Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  18. Stalnaker R.C. (1973) Presuppositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 2: 447–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stalnaker, R. C. (1974). Pragmatic presuppositions. In M. K. Munitz & P. K. Unger (Eds.), Semantics and philosophy (197–214). New York: New York University Press (References are to the reprint in S. Davis (Ed.), 1991, Pragmatics: A reader (pp. 471–482). Oxford: Oxford University Press.)Google Scholar
  20. Stalnaker R.C. (1978) Assertion. In: Cole P. (eds) Syntax and semantics, volume 9: Pragmatics. Academic Press, New York, pp 315–322Google Scholar
  21. Stalnaker, R. C. (1998). On the representation of context. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information, 7 (Reprinted in R. C. Stalnaker, 1999, Context and content (pp. 96–113). Oxford: Oxford University Press.)Google Scholar
  22. Stalnaker R.C. (2002) Common ground. Linguistics and Philosophy 25: 701–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Szabó, Z.G. (2006). Comments on Kai von Fintel’s paper [What is presupposition accommodation, again?]. New Haven: Yale University. Available at http://pragmatics.osu.edu/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Linguistics and Languages, Department of PhilosophyMichigan State UniversityLake LeelanauUSA

Personalised recommendations