Sentences with slifting parentheticals (such as The dean greeted the secretary, Jill said; Ross, in: Gross, Schützenberger (eds) The formal analysis of natural language, Mouton, The Hague, 1973) grammaticalize an intriguing interaction between truth-conditional meaning and speech act function. In such sentences, the assertion strength of the slifted clause (the non-parenthetical part of the sentence) is modulated by the parenthetical, which provides evidential support (Urmson in Mind 61(244):480–496, 1952; Asher in J Semant 17:31–50, 2000; Rooryck in Glot Int 5(4):125–133, 2001; Jayez and Rossari in: Corblin, de Swart (eds) Handbook of French semantics, CSLI, Stanford, 2004; Davis et al. in Proc Semant Linguist Theory 17:71–88, 2007; Simons in Lingua 117:1034–1056, 2007; Murray in Semant Pragmat 7(2):1–53, 2014; Maier and Bary in: Brochhagen et al. (eds) Proceedings of the 20th Amsterdam colloquium, 2015; AnderBois in Semant Pragmat 9(19):1–55, 2016; Hunter in Dialogue Discourse 7(4):1–35, 2016). Starting with the idea that assertability comes in degrees (Lewis in Philos Rev 85:297–315, 1976; Davis et al. in Proc Semant Linguist Theory 17:71–88, 2007), this paper develops a probabilistic updatemodel that captures the role of parentheticality as a language tool for qualifying commitments. A crucial role here is played by the rule of Jeffrey conditionalization (Jeffrey in The logic of decision, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1990), which factors in the uncertainty of the parenthetical information itself. The model also derives certain effects of parenthetical modification not found in regular embedding constructions, including the fact that slifting parentheticals are limited to creating upward-entailing environments.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Aikhenvald, A. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
AnderBois, S. (2016). Semantics and pragmatics of (not-)at-issueness in Yucatec Maya attitude reports. Semantics & Pragmatics, 9(19), 1–55.
Asher, N. (1987). A typology for attitude verbs and their anaphoric properties. Linguistics and Philosophy, 10(2), 125–197.
Asher, N. (2000). Truth conditional discourse semantics for parentheticals. Journal of Semantics, 17, 31–50.
Asher, N., & Lascarides, A. (2003). Logics of conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bach, K. (1999). The myth of conventional implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy, 22, 327–366.
Bach, K., & Harnish, R. M. (1979). Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Beaver, D. I., Roberts, C., Simons, M., & Tonhauser, J. (2017). Questions under discussion: Where information structure meets projective content. Annual Review of Linguistics, 3, 265–284.
Bellert, I. (1977). On semantic and distributional properties of sentential adverbs. Linguistic Inquiry, 8(2), 337–351.
Bradley, S. (2019). Imprecise probabilities. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/imprecise-probabilities/.
Brown, J., & Cappelen, H. (2004). Assertion: An introduction and overview. In J. Brown & H. Cappelen (Eds.), Assertion: New philosophical essays (pp. 1–17). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Büring, D. (2003). On d-trees, beans, and b-accents. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26(2), 511–545.
Culicover, P. W. (1992). English tag questions in universal grammar. Lingua, 88, 193–226.
Davis, C., Potts, C., & Speas, M. (2007). The pragmatic values of evidential sentences. Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory, 17, 71–88.
DeRose, K. (2004). Assertion, knowledge, and context. The Philosophical Review, 111(2), 167–203.
Douven, I. (2006). Assertion, knowledge, and rational credibility. The Philosophical Review, 115(4), 449–485.
Grimshaw, J. (2011). The place of slifting in the English complement system. Paper presented at Generative Initiatives in Syntactic Theory 3. Gent University.
Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1984). On the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. In F. Landman & F. Veltman (Eds.), Varieties of formal semantics (pp. 143–170). Dordrecht: Foris.
Haddican, B., Holmberg, A., Tanaka, H., & Tsoulas, G. (2014). Interrogative slifting in English. Lingua, 138, 86–106.
Halpern, J. Y. (2003). Reasoning about uncertainty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Heycock, C. (2006). Embedded root phenomena. In H. van Riemsdijk & M. Everaert (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax (Vol. II, pp. 174–209). Oxford: Blackwell.
Hindriks, F. (2007). The status of the knowledge account of assertion. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30, 393–406.
Hooper, J. B. (1975). On assertive predicates. In J. Kimball (Ed.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 4, pp. 91–124). New York: Academic Press.
Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. (2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hunter, J. (2016). Reports in discourse. Dialogue & Discourse, 7(4), 1–35.
Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jayez, J., & Rossari, C. (2004). Parentheticals as conventional implicatures. In F. Corblin & H. de Swart (Eds.), Handbook of French semantics (pp. 211–229). Stanford: CSLI.
Jeffrey, R. (1990). The logic of decision. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Koev, T. (2018). Notions of at-issueness. Language and Linguistics Compass, 12(12), 1–16.
Lackey, J. (2007). Norms of assertion. Mind, 41, 594–626.
Ladusaw, W. A. (1980). Polarity sensitivity as inherent scope relations. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
Lewis, D. (1976). Probabilities of conditionals and conditional probabilities. The Philosophical Review, 85, 297–315.
MacFarlane, J. (2005). Making sense of relative truth. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 105, 321–339.
MacFarlane, J. (2011). What is assertion? In J. Brown & H. Cappelen (Eds.), Assertion: New philosophical essays (pp. 79–96). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maier, E., & Bary, C. (2015). Three puzzles about negation in non-canonical speech reports. In T. Brochhagen, F. Roelofsen, & N. Theiler (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Amsterdam colloquium (pp. 246–255). Amsterdam: ILLC.
McCready, E. (2015). Reliability in pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McCready, E., & Ogata, N. (2007). Evidentiality, modality and probability. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30, 147–206.
Morzycki, M. (2016). Modification. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moss, S. (2015). On the semantics and pragmatics of epistemic vocabulary. Semantics & Pragmatics, 8(5), 1–81.
Murray, S. (2014). Varieties of update. Semantics & Pragmatics, 7(2), 1–53.
Potts, C. (2002). The syntax and semantics of as-parentheticals. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 20, 623–689.
Potts, C. (2005). The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rooryck, J. (2001). Evidentiality I. Glot International, 5(4), 125–133.
Ross, J. R. (1973). Slifting. In M. H. M. Gross & M. P. Schützenberger (Eds.), The formal analysis of natural language (pp. 133–169). The Hague: Mouton.
Rudin, D. (2018). Uncertainty and persistence: A Bayesian update semantics for probabilistic expressions. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 47(5), 365–405.
Scheffler, T. (2009). Evidentiality and German attitude verbs. Proceedings of Penn Linguistics Colloquium, 32, 183–192.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Simons, M. (2007). Observations on embedding verbs, evidentiality, and presupposition. Lingua, 117, 1034–1056.
Simons, M., Tonhauser, J., Beaver, D., & Roberts, C. (2010). What projects and why. Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory, 20, 309–327.
Slote, M. (1975). Assertion and belief. In J. Dancy (Ed.), Papers on language and logic: Proceedings of the conference on the philosophy of language and logic (pp. 94–102). Keele: Keele University Library.
Stalnaker, R. (1978). Assertion. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics, volume 9: Pragmatics (pp. 315–332). New York: Academic Press.
Stenius, E. (1967). Mood and language-game. Synthese, 17, 254–274.
Szabolcsi, A., & Zwarts, F. (1993). Weak islands and an algebraic semantics for scope taking. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 235–284.
Unger, P. (1975). Ignorance: A case for scepticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Urmson, J. O. (1952). Parenthetical verbs. Mind, 61(244), 480–496.
Weiner, M. (2007). Norms of assertion. Philosophy Compass, 2(2), 187–195.
Weiner, M. (2013). Must we know what we say? The Philosophical Review, 114(2), 227–251.
Williamson, T. (2004). Knowing and asserting. The Philosophical Review, 105(4), 489–523.
Yalcin, S. (2010). Probability operators. Philosophy Compass, 5(10), 916–937.
I would like to thank Dan Lassiter, Roger Schwarzschild, Peter Sutton, the audiences at Backgrounded Reports 2016 and Sinn und Bedeutung 21, two anonymous reviewers at Linguistics and Philosophy, and the managing editor Patrick Grosz. For judgments, I am indebted to Christopher Barron, Kurt Erbach, Barbara Mergelsberg, Jeremy Perkins, and Peter Sutton. The experimental study reported in Sect. 2 benefited a lot from the contributions of undergraduate research assistant Olga Dmitrieva. This research was funded by DFG grant KO 5704/1-1.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Koev, T. Parentheticality, assertion strength, and polarity. Linguist and Philos 44, 113–140 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-019-09285-4
- Jeffrey conditionalization
- Common ground update