This paper demonstrates that the progressive interpretation in Ga is an effect of the interaction between the imperfective aspect and a definite description of events. Crucially, the data from Ga point to the consequences of the view that definite descriptions of events encode the familiarity of the discourse referent and its uniqueness in bearing the property in question. Namely, they yield direct evidentiality and the necessary ongoingness of the event at the topic time. Thus, the paper identifies previously unattested variation in the semantics of the progressive in a cross-linguistic perspective and shows that not only lexical but also grammatical aspect exhibits striking parallelisms with the nominal domain.
Arkoh, R., & Matthewson, L. (2013). A familiar definite article in Akan. Lingua, 123, 1–30.
Boadi, L. (1974). Focus-marking in Akan. Linguistics, 12(140), 5–57.
Bourns, S. K. (2014). Contrasting c’est-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. In S. K. Bourns & L. Myers (Eds.), Perspectives on linguistic structure and context: Studies in honor of Knud Lambrecht (pp. 199–222). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Büring, D. (2011). Conditional exhaustivity presuppositions in clefts (and definites). Ms., Universität Wien.
Cable, S. (2013). Beyond the past, present, and future: Towards the semantics of ‘graded tense’ in Gĩkũyũ. Natural Language Semantics, 21(3), 219–276.
Casati, R., & Varzi, A. (1999). Parts and places: The structures of spatial representation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Chemla, E. (2008). An epistemic step for anti-presuppositions. Journal of Semantics, 25(2), 141–173.
Cipria, A., & Roberts, C. (2000). Spanish imperfecto and pretérito: Truth conditions and Aktionsart effects in a situation semantics. Natural Language Semantics, 8(4), 297–347.
Dakubu, M. E. K. (1992). Contrast in context: Topic, focus, and definiteness in Ga. Journal of West African Languages, 22(2), 3–16.
Dakubu, M. E. K. (2005). The syntax of focus in Ga and the significance of related constructions. Paper presented at the conference on Focus in African Languages, Humboldt University, Berlin.
Dakubu, M. E. K. (2008). Ga verb features. In F. K. Ameka & M. E. K. Dakubu (Eds.), Aspect and modality in Kwa languages (pp. 91–134). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Deo, A. (2009). Unifying the imperfective and the progressive: Partitions as quantification domains. Linguistics and Philosophy, 32(5), 475–521.
Deo, A. (to appear). Imperfectivity. In L. Matthewson, C. Meier, H. Rullmann, & T. E. Zimmermann (Eds.), Blackwell companion to semantics. Oxford: Wiley.
Deo, A. (2015). The semantic and pragmatic underpinings of grammaticalization paths: The progressive to imperfective shift. Semantics and Pragmatics, 8(14), 1–52.
Destruel, E. (2013). An empirical study on the meaning and use of the French c’est-clefts. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Texas at Austin.
Dowty, D. (1982). Tense, time adverbs, and compositional semantic theory. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5(1), 45–78.
Dowty, D. (1986). The effects of Aspectual class on the temporal structure of discourse: Semantics or pragmatics? Linguistics and Philosophy, 9, 37–61.
Elbourne, P. (2005). Situations and individuals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Faller, M. T. (2002). Semantics and pragmatics of evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University.
Ferreira, M. (2005). Event quantification and plurality. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Ferreira, M. (2016). The semantic ingredients of imperfectivity in progressives, habituals, and counterfactuals. Natural Language Semantics, 24(4), 353–397.
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In D. Davidson & G. H. Harman (Eds.), The logic of grammar (pp. 64–75). Encino, CA: Dickenson Publishing Company.
Grubic, M. (2015). Focus and alternative sensitivity in Ngamo (West Chadic). Ph.D. thesis, University of Potsdam.
Grubic, M., Renans, A., & Duah, R. A. (2019). Focus, exhaustivity and existence in Akan, Ga and Ngamo. Linguistics, 57(1), 221–268.
Grubic, M., & Zimmermann, M. (2011). Conventional and free association with focus in Ngamo (West Chadic). Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 15, 291–305. Retrieved from https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/sub/index.php/sub/article/view/382.
Heim, I. (1991). Artikel und Definitheit. In A. von Stechow & D. Wunderlich (Eds.), Semantik: ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung (pp. 487–535). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Heim, I., & Kratzer, A. (1998). Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hinrichs, E. (1981). Temporal anaphora in discourse of English. Linguistics and Philosophy, 9(1), 63–82.
Hole, D. (2011). The deconstruction of Chinese shì... de clefts revisited. Lingua, 121, 1707–1733.
Horn, L. (1984). Ambiguity, negation and the London School of Parsimony. In C. Jones, & P. Sells (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th annual meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 14) (pp. 108–131). Amherst: GLSA.
Izvorski, R. (1997). The present perfect as an epistemic modal. In A. Lawson, & E. Cho (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 7 (pp. 222–239). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Klein, W. (1994). Time in language. London: Routledge.
Kratzer, A. (1998). More structural analogies between pronouns and tenses. In D. Strolovitch & A. Lawson (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 8 (pp. 92–110). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Kratzer, A. (2007). Situation semantics in natural language semantics. In E. Zalda (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Spring 2007 edition. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2007/entries/situations-semantics/.
Kratzer, A. (2008). On the plurality of verbs. In J. Dölling, T. Heyde-Zybatow, & M. Schäfer (Eds.), Language context and cognition (pp. 269–299). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Krifka, M. (1992). Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In I. A. Sag & A. Szabolcsi (Eds.), Lexical matters (pp. 29–53). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Lambrecht, K. (2001). A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics, 39(3), 463–5016.
Landman, F. (1997). Plurality. In S. Lappin (Ed.), The handbook of contemporary semantic theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Larson, R. K. (2003). Event descriptions in Fon and Haitian Creole. In D. Adon (Ed.), Recent development in Creole studies (pp. 67–90). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Matthewson, L. (2004). On the methodology of semantic fieldwork. International Journal of American Linguistics, 70, 369–415.
Matthewson, L. (2006). Temporal semantics in a superficially tenseless language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 29(6), 673–713.
Moens, M., & Steedman, M. (1988). Temporal ontology and temporal reference. Computational Linguistics, 14(2), 15–28.
Parsons, T. (1990). Events in the semantics of English. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Partee, B. H. (1984). Nominal and temporal anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy, 7(3), 243–286.
Partee, B. H. (1986). Noun Phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles. In J. Groenendijk, D. de Jongh, & M. Stokhof (Eds.), Studies in discourse representation theory and the theory of generalized quantifiers (pp. 115–143). Dordrecht: Foris.
Reichenbach, H. (1947). Elements of symbolic logic. New York: Dover.
Renans, A. (2016a). A cross-categorial definite determiner: Evidence from Ga (Kwa). In M. Moroney, C.-R. Little, J. Collard, & D. Burgdorf (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 26 (pp. 23–42). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Renans, A. (2016b). Exhaustivity. On exclusive particles, clefts, and progressive aspect in Ga (Kwa). Ph.D. thesis, Universität Potsdam.
Renans, A. (2016c). Modeling the exhaustivity inference of clefts: evidence from Ga (Kwa). Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 20, 569–588. Retrieved from https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/sub/index.php/sub/article/view/282.
Roberts, C. (2003). Uniqueness and definite noun phrases. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26(3), 287–350.
Schein, B. (1993). Plurals and events. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Schwarz, F. (2009). Two types of definites in natural language. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Singh, R. (2011). Maximize Presupposition! and local contexts. Natural Language Semantics, 19(2), 149–168.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
For insightful comments and discussion, I would like to thank Joseph P. De Veaugh-Geiss, Mira Grubic, Anne Mucha, Jacopo Romoli, Radek Šimík, Judith Tonhauser, Marta Wierzba, and Malte Zimmermann as well as audiences in Belfast, York, Sinn und Bedeutung 19 and Triple A 1. The paper has also considerably benefited from the suggestions and comments of the Linguistics and Philosophy editor Craige Roberts and the anonymous reviewers, for which I am very grateful. This work was supported by the German Research Foundation DFG as part of the Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 632 ‘Information Structure,’ Project A5 ‘Focus realization, focus interpretation, and focus use from a cross-linguistic perspective’.
About this article
Cite this article
Renans, A. Definite descriptions of events: progressive interpretation in Ga (Kwa). Linguist and Philos (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-019-09287-2
- Progressive aspect
- Definite descriptions
- Fieldwork semantics
- Ga language