101K - views

UNTIL Aspect and Negation A Novel Argument for Two Until Anastasia Giannakidou University of Chicago and University of Groningen

Outline of the argument The puzzle of English until is wellknown Karttunen 1974 argues that until is ambiguous between a durative and a punctual negative polarity NPI meaning Mittwoch 1977 claims that there is no ambiguity and that the two meanings

Embed :
Pdf Download Link

Download Pdf - The PPT/PDF document "UNTIL Aspect and Negation A Novel Argume..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.

UNTIL Aspect and Negation A Novel Argument for Two Until Anastasia Giannakidou University of Chicago and University of Groningen






Presentation on theme: "UNTIL Aspect and Negation A Novel Argument for Two Until Anastasia Giannakidou University of Chicago and University of Groningen "— Presentation transcript:

UNTIL, Aspect, and Negation:sMittwoch 1977 claims that there is no ambiguity and that the two meanings arethat ÔstativizesÕ verb meanings (a position recently argued for in de Swart 1996,to the Greek can be helpful because this mexridid first. This result is furthersupported by the usual diagnostics of that not the NPI-analysis, posits a true that past sentences in English lack. This rendersMittwochÕs account untenable for two- of Greek is on the until, mexriis and prinbeforebefore. 2. The until-debate Until. ÔstativesÕ for states and that introduces an bsay forphrasal a ...______a b a: ls [P(s) Ù $t AT (s,t)]; b: ltÕQ (t a,bls$t$tÕ$ [P(s) Ù AT (s,tÕÕÕ) Ù Q(tÕ) Ù t Í tÕÕÕÙ "tÕÕ[[t tÕÕ Õ] ® $sÍ s Ù P(sÕ) Ù AT (sÕ, tÕÕ)]]]ThettÕ(7)t tÕÕ tÕ instead of the existing t state become important later in the discussion of the impact of negation.fine because they.ab$s$t$$tÕÕÕ [( Ù AT) Ù tÕÕÕn Ù() Ù t Í tÕÕÕÙ "tÕÕ tÕÕ tÕ] ® $sÕ[sÕÍ Ù ) Ù AT (sÕ, tÕÕ)]]]Here the princess was in a state of not sleeping that stretches at the interval that $s$t$$tÕÕÕ [( arrive) (princess, s) Ù AT (s,tÕÕÕ) Ù tÕÕÕn Ù() Ù t Í tÕÕÕÙ "tÕÕ [[t tÕÕ tÕ] ® $sÕ[sÕ Í Ù ) Ù AT (sÕ, tÕÕ)]]] ...______ also two-to than 2.1 There is scope the abthe to the justØ arrived (the princess)] = $s$t$$tÕÕÕ [( arrive) (princess, s) Ù AT (s,tÕÕÕ) Ù tÕÕÕn Ù() Ù t Í tÕÕÕÙ "tÕÕ [[t tÕÕ tÕ] ® $sÕ[sÕ Ù ) Ù AT (sÕ, tÕÕ)]]]Ø slept (the princess)]= $$t [ (tÙ t Ù arrive (princess, e,t )] Ù Ø$eÕ$tÕ [tÕ ÎC ÙtÕ Ù arrive,tÕ) ]In the the at most anto an this regular external negation. This is not an option with eventives: in this positionØ [arrived (the princess)]]=Ø [slept (the princess)]] =here can also be read upper-boundreading (Horn 1989): the princess may have woken up later than midnight; butignore. The $s$t$tÕ$tÕÕÕ [sleep (princess, s) Ù AT (s,tÕÕÕ) Ù tÕÕÕn Ù ()Ù t Í tÕÕÕ Ù "tÕÕ ® $sÕ[sÕ Ù (princess,sÕ) ÙAT (sÕ, tÕÕ)]]]s: sleep (19)... tÕÕ midnightIf a language has a connective UNTIL which conforms to the pattern inother aspect should not that both fails on The two untilUntil with negation is not durative1:in indeed the reading that Punctual an argues also that NPI- before underab$$e $eÕ [die eÙ Ù get-marriedÙØ$eÕÕ$tÕ [tÕ Ù get-married)]] $ss $e: die e) É... tIf not get married as arguedyields a getting married event. So, Nancy doesnÕt get married at the moment ofthere may be languages 3 Greek tense and aspect. The four graf--o(INP)b.grap-s--o (PNP) -1sg.nonpast .1sg.nonpast (24) a.e- graf- -a(IP)b.e- grap- s- a (PP) -1sg.past.1sg.past ÔI used to write.ÕÔI wrote.Õ ÔI was writing.Õ e). Aspectual choice in Greek I proposed in takes a bare 2 a.PFT [P ] = lxlyle$ÙÍ t] (Giannakidou 2002) b.[[ PFT]] = lP le $t [ P (e) Ù e Í t ] c.[[ P (x,y) ]] = lxly P(y,x) Events can take t is anÍ 3 a b$e $t [ÙÙÍ t] in this case the a. . = $e $t [loveÙÙÍ t] This is the inchoative reading: there is a falling in love event which is seen as ana a. = $e $t [sleepÙÙÍ t Ù t= 9 oÕclock)] a. = ÔAriadne slept for an hour.Õ b.$e $t [sleepÙÍ t Ù one-hour (i) Ù 4 the the states) in that . it maps a state onto thethe I that the (quite [P ] = ls $i "t [( tÎ C Ùt Í i ) ® P (s,t) ] (31)a. $s $i [ Ù Ù "tÎ C Ù t Í i ) ® To summarize, Greek verb forms, unlike English, are unambiguouly stative orcheck the effects of a Mexri and para monon which, as we see in the examples below,until: I prigipisa egrafe wrote.imperf. I prigipisa mexri * I prigipisa eftase mexri princess arrived.perf.3sg cannot be used with a negated achievement, which appears in the perfective, as * I prigipisa not arrived.perf.3sg seems unable to ÔstativizeÕ an unambiguously : I prigipisa *(dhen) eftase para monon not arrived.perf.3sgI prigipisa dhen (para monon not ÔThe princess didnÕt fall asleep until midnight.arrived.perf.3sg Ô# The princess did not arrive until midnight. In fact she didnÕt P para monon l$t [Q (t) Ù PÙ Ø $$ C Ù tÕÙ P(eÕ,tÕ)]] This is a purely scalar reading-- it is noit expression-- para monon-- that is scalar but notGreekconfirms the two ). Para monon 5 another such language (and so is Czech; Hana Filip, p.c.). The data below, from (43)Prinsessansvaf{(ßanga) }sleptmexriPrinsessan{(ßanga) }was{(ßanga) }arrived untilPrinsessankom*(ekki)fyrr enarrived notpara monon The expressions (mexrien not a* Marie kwam tot band German NPI-UNTIL] in a pas, erst, mexri:(48)I prigipisa dhen kimotane mexrinot I prigipisa dhen not slept.perf.3sgof a the NPI-UNTIL These equivalent under negation (pace 4.1 Negation with imperfective: wide scope until$s$t$$tÕÕÕØ (princess, s) Ù AT) Ù tÕÕÕn Ù() Ù t Í tÕÕÕÙ "tÕÕ tÕÕ tÕ] ® $sÕ[sÕ ÙØ)) Ù AT (sÕ, tÕÕ)]]]a the becomes I prigipisa not ÔThe princess was in a state of not-sleeping until midnight.Õb jusquÕnot (54)[[(48) ]] = [Ø sleep (the princess)]$s$t$tÕ$tÕÕÕ [sleep (princess, s) Ù AT (s,tÕÕÕ) Ù tÕÕÕn Ù ()Ù t Í tÕÕÕ Ù "tÕÕ tÕÕ tÕ] ® $sÕ[sÕ Ù (princess,sÕ) ÙAT (sÕ, tÕÕ)]]] the regular versus para mononI prigipisa dhen kimithike not slept.perf.3sgcontrast ??I prigipisa ipie enan kafe mexri tamesanixta on the UNTIL the extend that such now (56) to the monon, is(39). We a I prigipisa not slept.perf.3sg$e $t [ (tÙ t Ù )] Ù Ø$eÕ$tÕ [tÕÎC Ù tÕ Ù ,tÕ) ]para monon does 2. Only reading.now be and $s$t$tÕ$tÕÕÕ [sleep (princess, s,tÕÕÕ) Ù tÕÕÕn Ù () Ù t Í tÕÕÕÙ "tÕÕ [[t tÕÕ tÕ] ® $sÕ[sÕ s Ù sleep)]]] is not allowed:a.aused to hit bSpace prevents more discussion-- but recall that Dutch and German, which are$e $t [ (tÙ t Ù arrive)] Ù Ø$eÕ$tÕ [tÕ ÎC Ù tÕ Ù arrive,tÕ) ]The conclusion is unavoidable: MittwochÕs wide scope conclusion a recently revived in de Swart 1996 and de Swart Molendijk 1999, lP ls [MAX (s) Ù Ø $e [P(e) Ù e Í s]]"e [MAX (e) « $t [e = supe (leÕ$tÕ(AT (eÕ,tÕ)Ù tÕÍt ))]] (based on Krifka 1989)here thata(Ja) Posi ora kimotane b not threw.perfcdhen petuse not threw.imperfof an how long, and its GreekNext, consider a b not threw.perfc not threw.imperf. The not: did not throw the ball in (68b) is not and forthe A. was unhappy for/in many yearsa b c Ariadne -known to not beIf a we a*b(perf.c(perf.are Mexri, para monon and prin ÔbeforeÕof KarttunenÕs before under negation. I point and dhen princlause becomes reading.(72) princess did not $t [(tÙt Ù Ø$e$tÕ [tÕ Ù arrive)]]The beforeis NOT and anthe mexri the I prigipisa mexrinot ÔThe princess was in a state of not-sleeping until midnight.Õ$s$t$$tÕÕÕØ (princess, s) Ù AT) Ù tÕÕÕn Ù midnight () Ù t Í tÕÕÕÙ "tÕÕ tÕÕ ® $sÕ[sÕ Ù ) Ù AT (sÕ, tÕÕ)]]]I prigipisa not I prigipisa .b$$e [die ) Ù t Ù Ø$eÕ$tÕ [tÕ Ù get-marriede)]] (78) a.b#$$e $eÕeÙ t Ù get-married (princess,eÕ,t ) Ù Ø$eÕÕ$tÕ [tÕ Ù get-married)]] and until/para monon.7. on the fact that there is a that the two UNTILs are not and Greek suggests that the English simple past has anot futurate reading, then, seems to block stative notwe consider the larger UNTIL ab and bis. It is easy to see the UNTIL-by and stative UNTIL: they both introduce an interval with the UNTIL contributescore: UNTIL This research is supported by the Royal Dutch Academy of (hence itis more languages such as eventives not the present-- episodic as their own do not or ofeach aspect triggers the comes from UNTILaDhen itan { para monon/mexri}(s)tis 10 pu dhen efijeba Logic for Tense andJournal ofSemantics 14: 173-205.Linguistics 33: 51-98.22: 367-421.The free andPhilosophy 24: 659-735.appear in and(non)veridicality. To appear in Alessandra Giorgi, James Higginbotham,and Fabio Pianesi (eds). Oxford UPress.Oxford University Press. Discourse to Logic. Chapter 5: Katz, Graham. 2000. On the stativity of the English Perfect. Paper presented atof Language.Nominal Boas (eds) Semantics and . Foris, Oxford Univ. Press.Seuren, Pieter. 1974. ÒNegativeÕs travelsÓ. : 221-263.de 1999. Negation and the 1-43.1993. A Theory of the and jusqu'a19991998. In Susan and 7: 179-215.