Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 333–379 | Cite as

The inheritance of presuppositions

  • Paul Kay
Article

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akmajian, A.: 1984, ‘Sentence Types and the Form-Function Fit’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2, 1–23.Google Scholar
  2. Ducrot, O.: 1972,Dire et ne pas dire: Principes de sémantique linguistique, Hermann, Paris.Google Scholar
  3. Fauconnier, G.: 1985,Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  4. Fillmore, C. J.: 1985, ‘Frame Semantics and the Semantics of Understanding’,Quaderni di Semantica VI, 222–54.Google Scholar
  5. Fillmore, C. J.: 1986, ‘Varieties of Conditional Sentences’,Proceedings of the Third Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, Ohio State University Department of Linguistics, Columbus, Ohio, pp. 163–82.Google Scholar
  6. Fillmore, C. J., P. Kay and M. C. O'Connor: 1988, ‘Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions, the Case oflet alone’,Language 64, 501–38.Google Scholar
  7. Foeglin, R.: 1967,Evidence and Meaning, Humanities Press, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Gazdar, G.: 1979a,Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Gazdar, G.: 1979b, ‘A Solution to the Projection Problem’, in Ch.-K. Oh and D. Dineen (eds.),Presupposition, Syntax and Semantics 11, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Green, G. M.: 1986, ‘On Horn's “Presupposition, Theme and Variations”’,Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 22, 193–4.Google Scholar
  11. Heim, I.: 1983, ‘On the Projection Problem for Presuppositions’, in M. Barlow, D. P. Flickinger, and M. T. Wescoat (eds.),Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Vol. 2, Stanford Linguistics Association, Stanford, California.Google Scholar
  12. Horn, L. R.: 1986, ‘Presupposition, Theme and Variation’,Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 22, 168–92.Google Scholar
  13. Karttunen, L.: 1973, ‘Presuppositions of Compound Sentences’,Linguistic Inquiry 4, 169–93.Google Scholar
  14. Karttunen, L.: 1974, ‘Presupposition and Linguistic Context’,Theoretical Linguistics 1, 181–94.Google Scholar
  15. Karttunen, L. and S. Peters: 1975, ‘Conventional Implicature in Montague Grammar’,Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 1, 266–78.Google Scholar
  16. Karttunen, L. and S. Peters: 1977, ‘Requiem for Presupposition’,Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 3, 360–371.Google Scholar
  17. Karttunen, L. and S. Peters: 1979, ‘Conventional Implicature’, in Ch.-K. Oh and D. Dineen (eds.),Presupposition, Syntax and Semantics 11, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Kay, P.: 1983: ‘Linguistic Competence and Folk Theories of Language, Two English Hedges’,Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 9, 157–71.Google Scholar
  19. Kay, P.: 1984, ‘Thekinda/sorta Construction’,Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 10, 128–37.Google Scholar
  20. Kay, P.: 1989: ‘Contextual Operators,respective, respectively, andvice versa’,Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 15, 181–93.Google Scholar
  21. Kay, P.: 1990a, ‘EVEN’,Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 59–111.Google Scholar
  22. Kay, P.: 1990b, ‘At Least’, to appear in A. Lehrer and E. F. Kittay (eds.),Frames, Fields and Contrasts, Earlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  23. Kay, P.: 1991, ‘ConstructionalModus Tollens and Level of Conventionality’,Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 27, [page numbers to be supplied]Google Scholar
  24. Langendoen, D. T. and H. B. Savin: 1971, ‘The Projection Problem for Presuppositions’, in C. J. Fillmore and D. T. Langendoen (eds.),Studies in Linguistic Semantics, Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York.Google Scholar
  25. Lambrecht, K.: 1986,Topic, Focus and the Grammar of Spoken French, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  26. Lambrecht, K.: 1987, ‘On the Status of SVO Sentences in French Discourse’, in R. S. Tomlin (ed.),Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  27. Lambrecht, K.: 1988, ‘Presentational Cleft Constructions in Spoken French’, in J. Haiman and S. A. Thompson (eds.),Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  28. Lambrecht, K.: (forthcoming),Information Structure and Sentence Form, the Pragmatics of Syntax in Spoken French, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  29. Levinson, S. C.: 1983,Pragmatics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  30. Matsumoto, Y.: 1990, ‘Logophoric Conditions on Reflexives in Malayalam’, manuscript. Department of Linguistics, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  31. Prince, E.: 1978, ‘A Comparison ofwh-clefts andit-clefts in Discourse’,Language 54, 883–906.Google Scholar
  32. Prince, E.: 1981a, ‘Topicalization, Focus-Movement, and Yiddish-Movement: A Pragmatic Differentiation’,Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 7, 249–64.Google Scholar
  33. Prince, E.: 1981b, ‘Toward a Taxonomy of Given-New Information’, in P. Cole (ed.),Radical Pragmatics, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Prince, E.: 1986, ‘On the Syntactic Marking of Presupposed Open Propositions’,Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 22, 208–22.Google Scholar
  35. Soames, S.: 1979, ‘A Projection Problem for Speaker Presupposition’,Linguistic Inquiry 10, 623–666.Google Scholar
  36. Soames, S.: 1982, ‘How Presuppositions are Inherited’,Linguistic Inquiry 13, 483–545.Google Scholar
  37. Soames, S.: 1989, ‘Presupposition’, in D. Gabbay and F. Guenther (eds.),Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Volume IV: Topics in the Philosophy of Language, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  38. Stalnaker, R.: 1973, ‘Presuppositions’,Journal of Philosophical Logic 2, 447–457.Google Scholar
  39. Stalnaker, R.: 1974, ‘Pragmatic Presuppositions’, in M. K. Munitz and P. K. Unger (eds.),Semantics and Philosophy, New York University Press, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Kay
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of LinguisticsUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations