Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Tbilisi Symposium on Logic, Language, and Computation

TbiLLC 2013: Logic, Language, and Computation pp 290–309Cite as

On the Licensing of Argument Conditionals

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 8984))

Abstract

The paper focusses on the syntactic and semantic licensing conditions of constructions like Max akzeptiert es, wenn Lea Geige spielt. ‘Max accepts it if Lea plays the violin’. The clause introduced by wenn ‘if’ has a double function in that it is an adverbial that provides the protasis of an implication as well as the propositional argument of a matrix predicate. The paper argues against Pullum [15], Pesetsky [14], and Hinterwimmer [8], suggesting that the conditional conjunction wenn encodes two implication types: the classic type: if p is contingent and true, then q(p) and the preference type: if p is contingent, then q(p). Additionally, the paper focusses on the characteristic properties of the matrix predicates that license argument conditionals.

The author gratefully acknowledges the helpful discussions with Robert Fittler and Hubert Truckenbrodt, as well as the comments of the anonymous reviewers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Each construction type shown here can be exemplified by a corpus example provided by the ZAS-Database on clause-embedding predicates.

  2. 2.

    Note that Eisenberg [4] regards es-correlates as obligatory and that Fabricius-Hansen [5] considers constructions without them as very marked. However, it can be shown that constructions without an es-correlate are quite frequent.

  3. 3.

    As to m-command, Pesetsky proposes two versions, me- and md-command. Since the difference between them is not relevant for our purposes, we neglect it at this place.

  4. 4.

    (19a) corresponds to Hinterwimmer's [8] (31a) and (19b) corresponds to his (24a).

  5. 5.

    Sudhoff [26] provides a similar proposal for embedded dass-clauses in German.

  6. 6.

    This view differs from Sudhoff's [26]. He assumes that the es-correlate is a part of a DP-shell so that it cannot leave the shell when moving to the left – see the arguments against this analysis in Schwabe [21].

  7. 7.

    The motivation for assuming ellipsis is due to Hubert Truckenbrodt (p.c.).

  8. 8.

    Regarding German NPI-elements see Richter & Soehn [16].

  9. 9.

    Contingent propositions are neither tautological nor contradictory. The fact that the proposition has to be true lead some authors, as for instance Pesetsky [14], Hinterwimmer [8] and Kaiaty [9], to regard "factivity" as a necessary condition for licensors of argument conditionals.

  10. 10.

    According to Égré [3], a predicate is veridical if A predicate dass σ ⇒ σ and a predicate is factive if A (non) predicate dass σ ⇒ σ.

  11. 11.

    Predicates licensing a non-reducible ob-form correspond to Groenendijk & Stokhof’s [6] question intension embedding predicates, and predicates allowing a reducible ob-form are consistent with Groenendijk and Stokhof 's question extension embedding predicates.

  12. 12.

    Zweifeln dass σ is consistent with zweifeln dass ¬σ. Thus, zweifeln ob construes the reducible ob-form [A zweifelt dass σ] [A zweifelt dass ¬σ], but is not related to question extensions – cf. Schwabe & Fittler [23].

References

  1. Nicholas, A.: Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Breindl, E.: Präpositionalobjekte und Präpositionalobjektsätze im Deutschen. Niemeyer, Berlin (1989)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Égré, P.: Question-embedding and factivity. Grazer Philosophische Studien 77, 85–125 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Eisenberg, P.: Grundriß der deutschen Grammatik. In: 2., überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. J.B: Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fabricius-Hansen, C.: Sogenannte ergänzende wenn-Sätze. Ein Beispiel syntaktisch-semantischer integration. In: Bech, G., Dyhr, M., Hyldgaard-Jensen, K., Olsen, J. (eds.) Festschrift für Gunnar Bech: zum 60. Geburtstag am 23. März, (Kopenhagener Beiträge zur germanistischen Linguistik, Sonderband 1), pp. 61–83. København, Institut for germansk filologi (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Groenendijk, J., Stokhof, M.: Martin: Question. In: van Benthem, J., ter Meulen, A. (eds.) Handbook of Logic and Language, pp. 1055–1124. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Haider, H.: The Syntax of German. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Hinterwimmer, S.: When-clauses, factive verbs and correlates. In: Fanselow, G., Hanneforth, T. (eds.) Language and Logos: Festschrift for Peter Staudacher on his 70th Birthday (Studia Grammatica 72), pp. 176–189. Akademie Verlag, Berlin (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kaiaty, M.: Überlegungen zu sog. ergänzenden wenn-Sätzen im Deutschen. Deutsche Sprache 4/10, 287–308 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kratzer, A.: Conditionals. In: Farley, A.M., Farley, P., McCollough, K.E. (eds.) Papers From the Parasession on Pragmatics and Grammatical Theory, pp. 115–135. Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Müller, G.: On extraposition & successive cyclicity. In: Lutz, U., Pafel, J. (eds.) On Extraction and Extraposition in German, pp. 213–243. Benjamins, Amsterdam (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Müller, G., Sternefeld, W.: Improper movement and unambiguous binding. Linguistic Inquiry 24, 461–507 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pasch, R., Brauße, U., Breindl, E., Waßner, U.H.: Handbuch der Deutschen Konnektoren. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin (2003)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Pesetsky, D.: Zero Syntax, Part II. MIT (1991) (Unpublished manuscript). http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/people/faculty/pesetsky/publications.html

  15. Pullum, G.: Implications of english extraposed irrealis clauses. In: Miller, A., Powers, J. (eds.) ESCOL 1987: Proceedings of the Fourth Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, pp. 260–270. The Ohio State University, Columbus (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Richter, F., Soehn, J.-P.: Braucht niemanden zu scheren: A survey of NPI licensing in German. In: Müller, S. (ed.) Proceedings of the 13th International conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 421–440. CSLI Publications, Stanford (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rocchi, M.: A Third If? Master’s thesis, University of Edinburgh (2010). http://hdl.handle.net/1842/5350 (Accessed: 28 March 2012)

  18. Rothstein, S.: Adverbial quantification over events. Nat. Lang. Seman. 3, 1–31 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Schmid, H.U.: Überlegungen zu Syntax und Semantik ergänzender wenn-Sätze. Sprachwissenschaft 12, 265–292 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Schwabe, K.: Old and new propositions. In: Späth, A. (ed.) Language, Context and Cognition, pp. 97–114. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schwabe, K.: Eine uniforme Analyse sententialer Proformen im Deutschen. Deutsche Sprache 41, 142–164 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Schwabe, K.: Sentential Proforms and Argument Conditionals. ZAS, Berlin (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Schwabe, K., Fittler, R.: Über semantische Konsistenzbedingungen deutscher Matrixprädikate. Teil 1. Sprachtheorie und germanistische Linguistik 24.1, 45–75. Teil 2. Sprachtheorie und germanistische Linguistik 24.2, 123–150 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Schwabe, K., Jędrzejowski, Ł., Kellner, E.: A cross-linguistic perspective on complement-like if-clauses. In: Workshop (Mis-) Matches in Clause Linkage, 13–14 April. ZAS, Berlin (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sternefeld, W.: Syntax. Eine morphologisch motivierte generative Beschreibung des Deutschen. Stauffenburg, Tübingen (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sudhoff, S.: Argumentsätze und es-Korrelate – zur syntaktischen Struktur von Nebensatzeinbettungen im Deutschen. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, Berlin (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Thompson, A.: Deriving Some Properties of Protasis-Referring Conditionals. In: Choi, J., Hogue, E.A., Punske, J., Tat, D., Schertz, J., Trueman, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 29th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, pp. 250–258 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Zifonun, G., Hoffmann, L., Strecker, B.: Grammatik der Deutschen Sprache, vol. II. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin (1997)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft Berlin, Schützenstraße 18, 10117, Berlin, Germany

    Kerstin Schwabe

Authors
  1. Kerstin Schwabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kerstin Schwabe .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia

    Martin Aher

  2. Universität Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany

    Daniel Hole

  3. Institute of Mathematics, AS CR, Prague, Czech Republic

    Emil Jeřábek

  4. University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom

    Clemens Kupke

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Schwabe, K. (2015). On the Licensing of Argument Conditionals. In: Aher, M., Hole, D., Jeřábek, E., Kupke, C. (eds) Logic, Language, and Computation. TbiLLC 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8984. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46906-4_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46906-4_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-46905-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-46906-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation