Upload
vanngoc
View
217
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Darou as an entertain modal
with a shiftable deictic agentan inquisitive approach
Yurie Hara
Waseda/Hokkaido University
The 25th Japanese/Korean Linguistics Conference
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 1 / 48
Outline
1 Basic Paradigm
2 Experiments
3 Proposal: Darou as an Entertain Modality
Sub-Proposal 1: darou as a root-level modal
Sub-Proposal 2: ↑ as a deictic shifter
Sub-Proposal 3: Darou as an Entertain Modal
4 Deriving the interpretations
5 Conclusion
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 2 / 48
Falling Declaratives: darou↓
a sentence-final auxiliary that has a modal-flavor.
darou in a plain declarative → the speaker’s bias
(1) John-ga
Jonn-NOM
kuru
come
darou↓DAROU
‘John is coming, I bet.’
‘Probably, John is coming.’
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 3 / 48
Rising Declaratives: darou↑
(2) Yurie-wa
Yurie-TOP
wain-o
wine-ACC
nomu
drink
darou↑DAROU
‘Yurie drinks wine, right?’
H*L H%L%
o no mu da rou
Time (s)
0 0.6947
Time (s)
0 0.6947
Pit
ch
(Hz
)
0
500
Figure: Rising Declarative
Play rising declarative
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 4 / 48
Falling Interrogatives: darou ka↓
(3) Yurie-wa
Yurie-TOP
wain-o
wine-ACC
nomu
drink
darou
DAROU
ka↓Q
‘I wonder if Yurie drinks wine.’
H*L L%
no mu da rou k a
Time (s)
0 0.931
Time (s)
0 0.931
Pit
ch
(Hz
)
0
500
Figure: Falling Interrogative
Play falling interrogative
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 5 / 48
Rising Interrogatives: darou ka↑
(4) #Yurie-wa
Yurie-TOP
wain-o
wine-ACC
nomu
drink
darou
DAROU
ka↑Q
H*L L%H%
o no mu da rou k a
Time (s)
0 0.8246
Time (s)
0 0.8246
Pit
ch
(Hz
)
0
500
Figure: Rising Interrogative
Play rising interrogative
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 6 / 48
Summary
Falling Rising
darou↓ darou↑Declarative statement tag/confirmation Q
(‘I bet’) (‘... right?’)
darou ka↓ darou ka↑Interrogative self-addressing Q #
(‘I wonder’)
Table: Meaning of darou according to sentence type and intonation
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 7 / 48
Darou can take an interrogative or declarative as its argument.
Darou express either the speaker or the addressee’s bias.
Proposal
Darou is a root-level modal operator E⊙, which expresses epistemic
issues associated to the deictic center, ⊙.
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 8 / 48
Outline
1 Basic Paradigm
2 Experiments
3 Proposal: Darou as an Entertain Modality
Sub-Proposal 1: darou as a root-level modal
Sub-Proposal 2: ↑ as a deictic shifter
Sub-Proposal 3: Darou as an Entertain Modal
4 Deriving the interpretations
5 Conclusion
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 9 / 48
Experiment I
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 10 / 48
Falling Rising
DeclarativeInterrogative
Na
tura
lne
ss r
atin
g
12
34
5
Figure: Average Naturalness Ratings of Experiment I
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 11 / 48
Experiment II
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 12 / 48
falling darou falling darou ka rising darou
Answer
Self−addressing
Confirmation
Natu
raln
ess r
ating
12
34
56
7
Figure: Average Naturalness Ratings of Experiment II
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 13 / 48
Falling Rising
darou↓ darou↑Declarative statement tag/confirmation Q
(‘I bet’) (‘... right?’)
darou ka↓ darou ka↑Interrogative self-addressing Q #
(‘I wonder’)
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 14 / 48
Outline
1 Basic Paradigm
2 Experiments
3 Proposal: Darou as an Entertain Modality
Sub-Proposal 1: darou as a root-level modal
Sub-Proposal 2: ↑ as a deictic shifter
Sub-Proposal 3: Darou as an Entertain Modal
4 Deriving the interpretations
5 Conclusion
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 15 / 48
Proposal
Darou is a root-level modal operator E⊙, which expresses epistemic
issues associated to the deictic center, ⊙.
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 16 / 48
Outline
1 Basic Paradigm
2 Experiments
3 Proposal: Darou as an Entertain Modality
Sub-Proposal 1: darou as a root-level modal
Sub-Proposal 2: ↑ as a deictic shifter
Sub-Proposal 3: Darou as an Entertain Modal
4 Deriving the interpretations
5 Conclusion
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 17 / 48
Darou ka cannot be embedded
(5) Emi-ga
Emi-NOM
igirisu-ni
England-DAT
itta
went
nichigainai/kamoshirenai
must/may
ka
Q
douka
or.not
kiite
to.ask
mita.
tried
‘I asked whether Emi must/may have left for England or not.’
(6) *Emi-ga
Emi-NOM
igirisu-ni
England-DAT
itta
went
darou
DAROU
ka
Q
douka
or.not
kiite
to.ask
mita.
tried
Intended: ‘I asked whether Emi probably left for England or not.’
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 18 / 48
Speaker-orientation
(7) Boku-wa
I-TOP
ame-ga
rain-NOM
furu
fall
darou
DAROU
kara
because
kasa-o
umbrella-ACC
mot-te
have-and
it-ta.
go-PAST
‘Because it will rain (I bet), I took an umbrella with me.’
(8) #John-wa
John-TOP
ame-ga
rain-NOM
furu
fall
darou
DAROU
kara
because
kasa-o
umbrella-ACC
mot-te
have-and
it-ta.
go-PAST
‘Because it will rain (I bet), John took an umbrella with him.’
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 19 / 48
Root phenomenon
Sub-proposal 1:
Darou is a root-level operator, which moves to [Spec CP] to check off
its uninterpretable feature, [uROOT].
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 20 / 48
Surface form
CProot
CP
C′
TP C
darou
[uROOT]∅DECL/kaINTEROG
Croot
[ROOT]
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 21 / 48
LF
CProot
CP
darou
[uROOT]C′
TP C
ti ∅DECL/kaINTEROG
Croot
[ROOT]
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 22 / 48
Outline
1 Basic Paradigm
2 Experiments
3 Proposal: Darou as an Entertain Modality
Sub-Proposal 1: darou as a root-level modal
Sub-Proposal 2: ↑ as a deictic shifter
Sub-Proposal 3: Darou as an Entertain Modal
4 Deriving the interpretations
5 Conclusion
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 23 / 48
Speaker → Subject of the attitude predicate
(9) a. Mary-wa
Mary-TOP
John-ga
John-NOM
kuru
come
darou
DAROU
to
COMP
omot-teiru.
think-PROG
‘Mary thinks that probably, John will come.’
b. Boku-wa
I-TOP
sou-wa
so-TOP
omow-anai-kedo.
think-NEG-though
‘I don’t think so (that he will come), though.’ (Hara, 2006,
128-129)
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 24 / 48
Speaker → Addressee
(10) Marie-wa
Marie-TOP
wain-o
wine-ACC
nomu
drink
darou↑DAROU
‘Marie drinks wine, right?’
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 25 / 48
Deictic Projection
(11) a. Can I go to your office tomorrow?
b. Can I come to your office tomorrow? (Huang, 2007)
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 26 / 48
↑ as a deictic shifter
Sub-proposal 2:
The rising intonation ↑ is a Kaplanian monster that shifts the deictic
center from the speaker to the addressee.
(12) g = [⊙ 7→ SPKR]
(13) Falling interrogative
a. LF: p-darou ka↓ E⊙?p
b. JE⊙?pKg = Eg(⊙)?p = ESPKR?p
(14) Jϕ ↑Kg = JϕKg[⊙7→ADDR]
(15) Rising declarative
a. LF: p-darou↑ E⊙p ↑b. JE⊙p ↑Kg = JE⊙pKg[⊙7→ADDR] = EgADDR/⊙(⊙)p = EADDRp
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 27 / 48
Falling Rising
Declarative p-darou↓ p-darou↑ESPKRp EADDRp
Interrogative p-darou ka↓ p-darou ka↑ESPKR?p EADDR?p
Table: Translations of darou-sentences and interpretations of the deicticcenter
Darou can take both a declarative and interrogative as its
argument.
The modal E can embed both p and ?p.
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 28 / 48
Outline
1 Basic Paradigm
2 Experiments
3 Proposal: Darou as an Entertain Modality
Sub-Proposal 1: darou as a root-level modal
Sub-Proposal 2: ↑ as a deictic shifter
Sub-Proposal 3: Darou as an Entertain Modal
4 Deriving the interpretations
5 Conclusion
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 29 / 48
Inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic (IDEL)
Ciardelli & Roelofsen (2015)
Inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic (IDEL) can model:
the information available to a set of agents
the issues that the agents entertain
(16) a. An information state s is a set of possible worlds (s ⊆ W).
b. An issue I ⊆ ℘(W) is a non-empty, downward closed set
of information states.
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 30 / 48
Information and Issue
p
¬p
q ¬q
11 10
01 00
At w11 and w10
◮ the agent’s information state: {w11,w10}◮ the agent knows that p.◮ the agent is interested in whether q or ¬q
At w01 and w0
◮ the agent’s information state: {w01,w00}◮ the agent knows that ¬p◮ the agent doesn’t care whether q or ¬p
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 31 / 48
Knowledge and Entertain
There are two modal operators
Knowledge operator K an agent’s information state
Entertain operator E an agent’s inquisitive state
the issues that the agent entertain.
(17) darou E⊙
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 32 / 48
Example 1: 〈M, s〉 |= Kap
The speaker knows that p
p
¬p
q ¬q
11 10
01 00
Figure: 〈M, s〉 |= Kap
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 33 / 48
Example 2: 〈M, s〉 |= Ka?pThe speaker knows the answer to ?p
p
¬p
q ¬q
11 10
01 00
Figure: 〈M, s〉 |= Ka?p
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 34 / 48
Example 3: 〈M, s〉 |= Ea?pThe agent doesn’t know the answer to ?p.
The agent entertains an issue ?p.
p
¬p
q ¬q
11 10
01 00
Figure: 〈M, s〉 6|= Ka?p, 〈M, s〉 |= Ea?p
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 35 / 48
Fact
For any declarative α, Kaα ≡ Eaα
(Ciardelli & Roelofsen, 2015, 1659)
Sub-proposal 3: Semantics of darou
For any sentence ϕ (i.e., a declarative α or an interrogative µ):
ϕ-darou E⊙ϕ
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 36 / 48
Outline
1 Basic Paradigm
2 Experiments
3 Proposal: Darou as an Entertain Modality
Sub-Proposal 1: darou as a root-level modal
Sub-Proposal 2: ↑ as a deictic shifter
Sub-Proposal 3: Darou as an Entertain Modal
4 Deriving the interpretations
5 Conclusion
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 37 / 48
Proposals
Semantics of darou
For any sentence ϕ (i.e., a declarative α or an interrogative µ):
ϕ-darou E⊙ϕ
Semantics of the deictic center
g = [⊙ 7→ SPKR]
Semantics of rising intonation
Jϕ ↑Kg = JϕKg[⊙7→ADDR]
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 38 / 48
Falling declarative: α-DAROU ↓
(18) John-ga
Jonn-NOM
kuru
come
darou↓DAROU
‘John is coming, I bet./Probably, John is coming.’
(19) a. p-darou↓ E⊙p
b. JE⊙pKg = Eg(⊙)p = ESPKRp ≡ KSPKRp
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 39 / 48
Falling interrogative: µ-DAROU ↓
(20) Yurie-wa
Yurie-TOP
wain-o
wine-ACC
nomu
drink
darou
DAROU
ka↓Q
‘I wonder if Yurie drinks wine.’
(21) a. p-darou ka↓ E⊙?p
b. JE⊙?pKg = Eg(⊙)?p = ESPKR?p
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 40 / 48
The bias meaning disappears in falling interrogatives
(22) Ashita
tomorrow
hareru
sunny
darou
DAROU
ka.
Q
Zenzen
at.all
wakar-anai.
understand-not
‘I wonder if it will be sunny tomorrow. I have no idea.’
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 41 / 48
Rising declarative: α-DAROU ↑
(23) Yurie-wa
Yurie-TOP
wain-o
wine-ACC
nomu
drink
darou↑DAROU
‘Yurie drinks wine, right?’
(24) a. p-darou↑ E⊙p ↑b. JE⊙p ↑Kg = JE⊙pKg[⊙7→ADDR] = EgADDR/⊙(⊙)p = EADDRp ≡
KADDRp
‘Am I right in saying that you know Yurie drinks wine?”
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 42 / 48
Rising interrogative: µ-DAROU ↑
(25) *Yurie-wa
Yurie-TOP
wain-o
wine-ACC
nomu
drink
darou
DAROU
ka↑Q
(26) a. p-darou ka↑ E⊙?p ↑b. JE⊙?p ↑Kg = JE⊙?pKg[⊙7→ADDR] = EgADDR/⊙(⊙)?p = EADDR?p
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 43 / 48
Rising interrogative: µ-DAROU ↑
If we have an appropriate context, the rising interrogative
µ-DAROU ↑ becomes possible.
a quiz show or an instructive/Socratic questioning
(27) Doitsu-no
Germany-GEN
shuto-wa
capital-TOP
doko
where
deshou
DAROU.POLITE
ka↑Q
‘Where is the capital of Germany?’
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 44 / 48
Summary
(28) Interpretations of darou-sentences
Falling Rising
darou↓ darou↑Declarative p ESPKRp ≡ KSPKRp EADDRp ≡ KADDRp
(‘I bet’) (‘... right?’)
darou ka↓ darou ka↑Interrogative ?p ESPKR?p EADDR?p
(‘I wonder’) (# or a quiz question)
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 45 / 48
Why IDEL?
1 darou can embed both declaratives and interrogatives.◮ IDEL: the modal operator E can embed both p and ?p
2 The seat of knowledge is the speaker by default but it can beshifted to the addressee.
◮ IDEL models the knowledge and inquisitive states of an agent a.
3 darou appears to denote different modals,i.e., bias and question.◮ E⊙p ≡ K⊙p: a bias toward p◮ E⊙?p: entertaining an issue ?p
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 46 / 48
Concluding Remarks
Darou moves to [Spec CP]
Darou can embed a declarative or an interrogative.
ϕ-DAROU translates to E⊙ϕ in IDEL.
ϕ can be a declarative or an interrogative.
⊙ is a deictic center variable
By default, ⊙ is the speaker.
Rising intonation ↑ shifts the deictic center ⊙ to the addressee,
i.e., g[⊙7→ADDR].
declarative E⊙α ≡ K⊙α
The speaker’s or the hearer’s bias
interrogative E⊙α
The speaker’s or the hearer’s issue
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 47 / 48
References I
Ciardelli, Ivano A. & Floris Roelofsen. 2015. Inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic.
Synthese 192(6). 1643–1687.
Hara, Yurie. 2006. Japanese Discourse Items at Interfaces. Newark, DE: University of
Delaware dissertation.
Huang, Yan. 2007. Pragmatics Oxford Textbooks in Linguistics. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Hara (W/H) Darou JK25 48 / 48