Abstract
Van der Sandt’s (1992) anaphoric account of presupposition is generally considered to be the theory which makes the best empirical predictions about presupposition projection (see e.g. Beaver 1997:983). The main insight is that there is an interesting correspondence between the behavior of anaphoric pronouns in discourse and the projection of presuppositions in complex sentences. Van der Sandt proposes to ‘resolve’ presuppositions just like anaphoric pronouns are resolved in Discourse Representation Theory (DRT, Kamp & Reyle, 1993). Van der Sandt contends that there is also an important difference between pronouns and presuppositions: when there is no antecedent for an anaphoric pronoun, the sentence containing the pronoun cannot be interpreted. However, when there is no antecedent for a presupposition — and the presupposition has sufficient descriptive content — then the presupposition can be accommodated and, as it were, create its own antecedent. This combination of resolution and accommodation constitutes the empirical strength of van der Sandt’s approach.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ahn, R. (1994) Communicating Contexts: a Pragmatic Approach to Information Exchange. In: Proceedings of the BRA workshop: Types of Proofs and Programs. Sweden:Baastad.
Ahn, R. & H-P. Kolb (1990) Discourse Representation meets Constructive Mathematics. In: L. Kálmán & L. Pólos (1990) Papers from the 2nd Symposium on Logic and Language. Budapest.
Asher, N. & A. Lascarides (1998) Bridging. Journal of Semantics 15:83–113.
Barendregt, H.P. (1992) Lambda Calculi with Types. In: Abramsky, S., D. Gabbay and T. Maibaum (eds.), Handbook of Logic in Computer Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Beaver, D. (1995) Presupposition and Assertion in Dynamic Semantics. Ph.D. thesis, Edinburgh.
Beaver, D. (1997) Presupposition. In: J. van Benthem and A. ter Meulen (eds.), Handbook of Logic and Language. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 939–1008.
Beun, R.J. & L. Kievit (1995) Resolving Definite Descriptions in dialogue. DenK-report 16, Tilburg.
Bos, J., P. Buitelaar & M. Mineur (1995) Bridging as Coercive Accommodation. In: E. Klein, S. Manandhar, W. Nutt and J. Siekmann (eds.), Edinburgh Conference on Computational Logic & Natural Language Processing. Edinburgh: HCRC.
Bunt, H.C., Ahn, R., Beun, R.J., Borghuis, T. & Overveld, K. van (1998) Multimodal Cooperation with the DenK System. In: H.C. Bunt, R.J. Beun & T. Borghuis (eds.) Multimodal Human-Computer Communication. Berlin: Springer.
Clark, H. (1975) Bridging, In: R. Schank and B. Nash-Webber (eds.) Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing. MIT.
Curry, H.B. & R. Feys (1958) Combinatory Logic. Vol. 1, Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Hobbs, J.R. (1987) Implicature and Definite Reference. Stanford: Report No. CSLI-87-99.
Hobbs, J.R., M. Stickel, D. Appelt & P. Martin (1993) Interpretation as Abduction. In: Artificial Intelligence, 63:69–142.
Kamp, H. & U. Reyle (1993) From Discourse to Logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Krahmer, E. (1995) Discourse and presupposition. PhD. thesis, Tilburg University.
Krahmer, E. (1998) Presupposition and Anaphora. CSLI Lecture Notes, Number 89. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Krahmer, E. & K. van Deemter (1998) On the Interpretation of Anaphoric Noun Phrases: Towards a Full Understanding of Partial Matches. Journal of Semantics 15: 355–392.
Krause, P. (1995) Presupposition and Abduction in Type Theory. In: E. Klein, S. Manandhar, W. Nutt and J. Siekmann Edinburgh Conference on Computational Logic and Natural Language Processing. Edinburgh: HCRC.
Martin-Löf, P. (1984) Intuitionistic Type Theory. Napels: Bibliopolis.
Milward, D. (1996) Integrating Situations into a Theory of Discourse Anaphora. In: P. Dekker and M. Stokhof (eds.) Proceedings of the Tenth Amsterdam Colloquium, Amsterdam: ILLC. 538–519.
Piwek, P. (1997) The Construction of Answers, In: A. Benz and G. Jäger (eds.) Proceedings of MunDial: the München Workshop on the Formal Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue, CIS-Bericht 97–106, University of Münich: Department of Computational Linguistics.
Piwek, P. (1998) Logic, information and conversation. PhD. thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology.
Piwek, P. & E. Krahmer (1999) Presuppositions in Context: Constructing Bridges. In: P. Brézilon and M. Cavalcanti (eds.) Formal and Linguistic Aspects of Context, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Ranta, A. (1994) Type-theoretical grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Saurer, W. (1993) A Natural Deduction System for Discourse Representation Theory. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 22:249–302.
Stalnaker, R. (1974) Pragmatic Presuppositions. In: M.K. Munitz & P.K. Unger (eds.) Semantics and Philosophy. New York: New York University Press, 197–213.
van der Sandt, R. (1992) Presupposition Projection as Anaphora Resolution, Journal of Semantics, 9:333–377.
Zeevat, H. (1992) Presupposition and Accommodation in Update Semantics. Journal of Semantics, 9:379–412.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1999 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Krahmer, E., Piwek, P. (1999). Presupposition Projection as Proof Construction. In: Bunt, H., Muskens, R. (eds) Computing Meaning. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, vol 73. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4231-1_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4231-1_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-0290-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-4231-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive