Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pragmatic Connectives as Predicates. The Case of Inferential Connectives

  • Chapter
Predicative Forms in Natural Language and in Lexical Knowledge Bases

Part of the book series: Text, Speech and Language Technology ((TLTB,volume 6))

Abstract

This chapter investigates the linguistic description and formal representation of some pragmatic inferential connectives in French. We show that connectives expressing consequence, opposition or reformulation (like anyway in English) presuppose an abstract relation between propositional arguments of certain semantic types. We first contrast inferential and non-inferential connectives, then we turn to the semantic types of the propositional arguments to lay down some basic distinctions. Finally we substantiate the relations themselves. We use a version of generalized quantification over proofs to describe the inferential constraints which define the various relations presupposed by the connectives. The very possibility of such a description suggests that inferential connectives have a genuine (presupposed) predicative content.

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

Access this chapter

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Allen J.F. (1981) An interval—based representation of temporal knowledge, 7th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 221–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson A.R., Belnap N.D. (1975) Entailment. The Logic of Relevance and Necessity, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anscombre J.C., Ducrot O. (1983) L’argumentation dans la langue, Bruxelles: Mardaga.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asher N. (1993) Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse, Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Austin J.L. (1962) How to Do Things with Words, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise J., Cooper R. (1981), Generalized quantifiers and natural language, Linguistics and Philosophy 4, pp. 159–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bierwisch M. (1980) Semantic structure and illocutionary force, in Searle J.R., Kiefer F., Bierwisch M. (eds) Speech Act Theory and Pragmatics, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blakemore D. (1987) Semantic Constraints on Relevance, Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonomi A., Casalegno P. (1993) Only: Association with focus in event semantics, Natural Language Semantics 2, pp. 1–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Cornulier B. (1985) Effets de sens, Paris: Editions de Minuit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducrot O. (1980) Les mots du discours, Paris: Editions de Minuit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducrot O. (1995) Les modificateurs déréalisants, Journal of Pragmatics 24, pp. 145–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elhadad M. (1993) Generating argumentative judgment determiners, in Proceedings of the 11th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Menlo Park: AAAI Press and the MIT Press, pp. 344–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez X. (1996) Les particules énonciatives, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari A. (1995) Connessioni. Uno Studio Integrato Della Subordinazione Avverbiale, Geneva: Slatkine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gärdenfors P. (1988) Knowledge in Flux, Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil A. (1995) Textadverbiale in den Romanische Sprachen, Bonner Romanistische Arbeiten 53, Berne: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grieve J. (1996), A Dictionary of French Connectors, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grote B., Lenke N. (1995) Ma(r)king concessions in English and German, in Proceedings of the Fifth European Workshop on Natural Language Generation, May 1995, Leiden, Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasbey S. (1993) Distinguishing between events and times: some evidence from the semantics of then, Natural Language Semantics 1, pp. 285–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halliday M. A. K., Hasan R. (1976) Cohesion in English, London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka J. (1962) Knowledge and Belief, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirst G. (1995) Near—synonymy and the structure of lexical knowledge, Working Notes of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Representation and Acquisition of lexical Knowledge: Polysemy, Ambiguity, and Generativity, 27–29 March 1995, Stanford University, pp. 51–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs J.R., Stickel M.E., Appelt D.E., Martin P. (1993) Interpretation as abduction, Artificial Intelligence 63, pp. 69–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hybertie C. (1995) La conséquence en français, Paris: Ophrys.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iatridou S. (1994) On the contribution of the conditional then, Natural Language Semantics 2, pp. 171–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jayez J. (1988) L ‘inférence en langue naturelle. Le problème des connecteurs, Paris: Hermès.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jayez J., Rossari C. (1996) The semantic of pragmatic connectives in tree adjoining grammars. The French donc example, to appear in Abeillé A., Rambow O. (eds), Proceedings of the Tag-I-4 Conference, Stanford: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan E.L., Westerstâhl D. (1997) Generalized quantifiers in linguistics and logic, in van Benthem J., ter Meulen A. (eds) Handbook of Logic and Language, AmsterdamNorth-Holland, pp. 837–893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knott A. (1996) A Data-Driven Methodology for Motivating a Set of Coherence Relations, Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • König E. (1981) The meaning of scalar particles in German, in Eikmeyer H.J., Rieser H. (eds) Worlds, Words and Contexts, Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 107–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • König E. (1986) Conditionals, concessive conditionals and concessives: areas of contrast, overlap and neutralization, in Traugott E.C., ter Meulen A., Reilly J.S., Ferguson C.A. (eds) On Conditionals, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 229–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff R. (1971) If’s, and’s and but’s about conjunction, in Langendoen D.T. (ed) Studies in Linguistic Semantics, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 114–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang E. (1984) The Semantics of Coordination,Amsterdam John Benjamins (Translation from the German original Semantik der koordinativen Verknüpfung).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindström P. (1966) First-order predicate logic with generalized quantifiers, Theoria 35, pp. 186–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manzotti E. (1995) Aspetti linguistici dell’esemplificazione, Versus 70–71, pp. 49–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merin A. (1994) Decision-Theoretic Pragmatics,unpublished manuscript of an ESSLI advanced course, Copenhagen, 8–19 August 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moeschler J. (1989) Modélisation du dialogue, Paris: Hermès.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morel M.A. (1996) La concession en français, Paris: Ophrys.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemo F. (1992) Contraintes de pertinence et compétence énonciative. L’image du possible dans l’interlocution, Thèse de Doctorat, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasch R. (1989) Ueberlegungen zum Begriff des Satzmodus, Linguistische Studien 193 A, pp. 1–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi L., Scha R. (1984) A syntactic approach to discourse semantics, in Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 413–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi L. (1985) A theory of discourse structure and discourse coherence, in Proceedings of the 21’t Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 306–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichman R. (1985) Getting Computers to Talk Like You and Me, Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossari C. (1994) Les opérations de reformulation, Berne: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossari C., Jayez J. (1997) Connecteurs de conséquence et portée sémantique, Cahiers de Linguistique française 19, to appear.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein S. (1995) Adverbial quantification over events, Natural Language Semantics 3, pp. 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roulet E. et al. (1985) L ‘articulation du discours en français contemporain, Berne: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders T. J. M., Spooren W. P. M., Noordman L. G. M. (1993) Coherence relations in a cognitive theory of discourse representation, Cognitive Linguistics 4, pp. 93–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiffrin D. (1987) Discourse Markers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd edition.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schurz G. (1991) Relevant deduction, from solving paradoxes towards a general theory, Erkenntnis 35, pp. 391–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle J.R, Vanderveken D. (1985) Foundations of Illocutionary Logic, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperber D., Wilson D. (1986) Relevance. Communication and Cognition, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweetser E. (1990) From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structures, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thistlewaite P.B., McRobbie M.A., Meyer R.K. (1988) Automated Theorem-Proving in Non-Classical Logics, London: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traum D., Heeman P (1996) Utterance units and grounding in spoken dialogue, to appear in the Proceedings of ICSLP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzouvaras A. (1996) Aspects of analytic deduction, Journal of Philosophical Logic 25, pp. 581–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veltman F. (1986) Data semantics and the pragmatics of indicative conditionals, in Traugott E.G., ter Meulen A., Reilly J.S., Ferguson A.C. (eds) On Conditionals, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 147–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veltman F. (1996) Defaults in Update Semantics, Journal of Philosophical Logic 25, pp. 221–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. EHESS-CELITH, Paris 54, Boulevard Raspail, 75006, Paris, France

    Jacques Jayez

  2. Département de Linguistique Française, Université de Genève, 1211, Genève 4, Switzerland

    Corinne Rossari

Authors
  1. Jacques Jayez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Corinne Rossari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. IRIT-CNRS, Toulouse, France

    Patrick Saint-Dizier

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1999 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jayez, J., Rossari, C. (1999). Pragmatic Connectives as Predicates. The Case of Inferential Connectives. In: Saint-Dizier, P. (eds) Predicative Forms in Natural Language and in Lexical Knowledge Bases. Text, Speech and Language Technology, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2746-4_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2746-4_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5146-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-2746-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation