Presupposition and Entailment - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Presupposition and Entailment

Description:

Presupposition and Entailment James Pustejovsky September 23, 2005 Truth and falsity Pat is hungry. True under some possible circumstances, false under others. – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:134
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 30
Provided by: PaulHa53
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Presupposition and Entailment


1
Presupposition and Entailment
James Pustejovsky September 23, 2005
2
Truth and falsity
  • Pat is hungry.
  • True under some possible circumstances, false
    under others.
  • True if the actual world is in the Pat is
    hungry half.

Pat is hungry
Pat isnot hungry
3
Truth and falsity
  • Pat is hungry.
  • Pat is sleepy.
  • If we know the truth value of each of these
    sentences, we know in which quadrant of the
    space of possible worlds we can find the actual
    world.

Pat ishungry
Pat isnot hungry
Pat issleepy
Pat issleepy
Pat isnot sleepy
Pat isnot sleepy
Pat isnot hungry
Pat ishungry
4
Knowledge/belief
  • We can use this kind of diagram to characterize
    what we know, our knowledge state.
  • If we know the following two things (to be true)
  • Pat is not hungry.
  • Pat is sleepy.
  • then we have narrowed down the possible worlds
    in which the actual world must lie.

Pat ishungry
Pat isnot hungry
Pat issleepy
Pat issleepy
Pat isnot sleepy
Pat isnot sleepy
Pat isnot hungry
Pat ishungry
5
Assertion
  • We can think of assertion of a proposition as
    being the communication of an aspect of the
    speakers knowledge state to the hearer.
  • Here, both believe that Pat is not sleepy, and
    the speaker is asserting that Pat is hungry
    (about which the hearer has no prior belief).

Pat is hungry.
6
Presuppositions vs. entailments
  • Some utterances have a presupposition.
  • He had stopped stealing office supplies.
  • He used to steal office supplies.
  • My dog ate my homework.
  • I have a dog, and I have (er, had) homework.
  • This similar, but distinct from, entailment.
  • The emperor was assassinated.
  • Someone was assassinated.
  • The emperor died.

7
Presuppositions vs. entailments
  • Presuppositions have a different status from
    entailments. Consider
  • He hasnt stopped stealing office supplies.
  • He used to steal office supplies.
  • My dog didnt eat my homework.
  • I have a dog, and I (still, it seems) have
    homework.
  • The emperor wasnt assassinated.
  • ? Someone was assassinated.
  • ? The emperor died.

8
Presuppositions vs. entailments
  • If p entails q, q does not follow from ?p.
  • If p presupposes q, q still follows from ?p.
  • That is, the presupposition of an utterance is
    taken as part of an assumed background that is
    not affected by the truth/falsity of the asserted
    proposition.
  • Have you stopped stealing office supplies?

9
Presupposition failure
  • So, what happens if the presupposition isnt met?
  • My great-granddaughter is boisterous.
  • The King of France is bald.
  • These dont seem really to be true or falsethey
    just seem like presupposition failures. A truth
    value gap.

10
Presupposition triggers
  • Lexical triggers
  • Definite noun phrases
  • The student fell asleep.
  • The student didnt fall asleep.
  • Factive verbs
  • Pat wanted to eat a sandwich. Non-F
  • Tracy thought Pat ate a sandwich. Non-F
  • Tracy realized Pat ate a sandwich.F
  • Pat regretted eating a sandwich.F
  • Pat liked eating a sandwich.F
  • Pat ate a sandwich. presupposed

11
Presupposition triggers
  • Lexical triggers
  • Change of state verbs
  • Pat stopped eating a sandwich (at 2pm).
  • Pat started eating a sandwich (at 2pm).
  • Verbs of judgment
  • Tracy blamed Pat for eating the sandwich.
  • Tracy faults Pat for eating the sandwich.

12
Presupposition triggers
  • Structural triggers
  • Cleft constructions and focus
  • It was Tracy that ate the sandwich.
  • Tracy ate the sandwich.
  • The sandwich was eaten.
  • It was the sandwich that Tracy ate.
  • What Tracy ate was the sandwich.
  • Tracy ate the sandwich.
  • Tracy ate something.

13
Implicatures
  • There is a weaker relation that sometimes holds
    between a proposition p and a related proposition
    q as well. An implicature.
  • Pat used to smoke. (Pat does not now smoke.)
  • And in fact, Pat still does / But now, Pat no
    longer does.
  • In general, an implicated proposition can be
    defeated or reinforced, whereas an
    implied/entailed proposition cannot.
  • Fido is a dog. (Fido is an animal)
  • But, Fido is not an animal / And in fact, Fido
    is an animal.
  • An implicature does not follow logically, but
    rather seems to follow usually.

14
Presuppositions and defeasibility
  • Presuppositions, like entailments, are generally
    not defeasible or reinforceable.
  • That Pat has stopped smoking is well known. (Pat
    used to smoke.)
  • In fact, Pats never smoked. Moreover, Pat used
    to smoke.
  • That Pat hasnt stopped smoking is well known.
  • That Pat ate the sandwich is well known.(There
    is a unique sandwich.)
  • In fact, there never was a sandwich.Moreover,
    there is a unique sandwich.
  • That Pat didnt eat the sandwich is well known.

15
Implicatures
  • Why does Pat used to smoke implicate Pat no
    longer smokes? It isnt an entailment or
    presuppositionit need not hold logically, rather
    it seems to usually hold.
  • It depends on what were talking about, really.
  • I remember back in the old days. Remember Pat? I
    wonder what happened to Pat
  • You know what I just heard about Pat? You wont
    believe this, knowing him now

16
Implicatures
  • The answer seems to be that we consider why
    someone would say Pat used to smoke.
  • We assume (among other things) that the speaker
    is saying the most informative (strongest)
    statement s/he can, while still saying something
    that is true (as far as s/he knows).
  • If Pat smokes now, then (probably) Pat used to
    smoke too, (at some point). So, saying Pat smokes
    now and Pat used to smoke too is effectively the
    same as just saying Pat smokes now. On the other
    hand, saying Pat used to smoke doesnt say
    whether Pat smokes nowit is a weaker statement.
  • If the speaker knows that Pat smokes now, s/he
    would have said Pat smokes. The fact that s/he
    didnt suggests that s/he would not be speaking
    truthfully if she said Pat smokes. So, Pat must
    not smoke now. (Cf. Reminiscing about the past,
    where now is not at issue.)

17
Modeling conversation
  • A more sophisticated model of conversation
    (generally attributed to Stalnaker) involves an
    additional knowledge state common ground.
  • The common ground is a set of shared assumptions
    between speakers (we might think of this as the
    presupposed information).
  • CG Pat is either hungry or sleepy (or both). A
    believes Pat is sleepy but not hungry. B believes
    Pat is sleepy.

18
Modeling conversation
  • In this game, the goal is to build up the common
    ground.
  • A asserts Pat is not hungry.
  • B accepts this.
  • Pat is not hungry is added to the common ground.

Pat is not hungry.
19
Modeling conversation
  • So, the way the game works is that A asserts p
    (which might presuppose q).
  • B adds any presupposition q to the CG, then
    evaluates p, and accepts it if consistent with
    Bs beliefs, or rejects it if not.

Pat is not hungry.
20
Modeling conversation
  • In this game, the goal is to build up the common
    ground.
  • A asserts Pat is not hungry.
  • This is counter to Bs beliefsB challenges this.
  • Pat is not hungry is not added to the common
    ground.

Pat is not hungry.
21
Modeling conversation
  • Presuppositions are acceptable if they are
    compatible with the common ground.
  • A asserts I didnt realize that Pat is sleepy.
  • Presupposes Pat is sleepy. This is compatible
    with the CG.
  • B accepts this.
  • A did not realize that Pat is sleepy is added to
    the common ground.

I didnt realizethat Pat is sleepy.
22
Accommodation
  • Something that presupposes something not in the
    common ground can be added to the common ground
    (accommodation).
  • B believes that Pat is sleepy. The CG has that
    Pat is sleepy.
  • A asserts I didnt realize that Pat is not
    hungry.
  • Presupposes Pat is not hungry. This is not in
    the CG, but isnt contrary to it.
  • B adds the presupposition to the CG, and accepts
    it.

I didnt realizethat Pat is not hungry.
23
Presupposition failure
  • Something that presupposes something contrary to
    the common ground results in presupposition
    failure.
  • B believes that Pat is sleepy. The CG has that
    Pat is sleepy.
  • A asserts I didnt realize that Pat is not
    sleepy.
  • Presupposes Pat is not sleepy. This is
    inconsistent with the CG.
  • B adds the presupposition to the CGresulting in
    contradiction. B cannot either accept or reject.

I didnt realizethat Pat is not sleepy.
?!
24
Common ground?
  • How could presupposition failure arise?
  • Perhaps A is simply not playing the game, but
    more likely, what A thinks the CG is differs from
    what B thinks the CG is.
  • Presupposition failure occurs when the
    interlocutors views of the CG get out of sync.

?!
I didnt realizethat Pat is not sleepy.
25
Focus and discourse
  • Focus can be thought of as splitting up a
    sentence into given (presupposed) and new
    (focused) information, a way of directly
    signaling a presupposition.
  • Who bought a book?
  • Presupposes Somebody bought a book.
  • What did Pat buy?
  • Presupposes Pat bought something.
  • Pat bought a book.
  • Presupposes Somebody bought a book.
  • Pat bought a book.
  • Presupposes Pat bought something.

26
Focus and discourse
  • Pat bought a book.
  • Entails Someone bought a book, Pat bought
    something, etc.
  • And also Tracy bought a book.
  • Presupposes Someone bought a book.
  • And also Tracy bought a pet snake.
  • Presupposes Someone bought a pet snake.

27
What does focus do?
  • Pat bought a book.
  • Pat bought something. Of all the things Pat might
    have bought, Pat bought a book.
  • Pat only bought a book.
  • Pat bought something. Of all the things Pat might
    have bought, Pat bought a book and nothing else.
  • Pat even bought a book.
  • Pat bought something. Of all the things Pat might
    have bought, ordered from most to least likely,
    with a book being least likely, Pat bought a book
    (so probably other more likely things as well).

28
Focus and alternatives
  • Pat did not buy a book.
  • Of all the things Pat might have bought, Pat did
    not buy a book. Implicature Pat bought something
    else.
  • Focus seems to evoke a set of alternatives (with
    the non-focused part presupposed).

29
Focus and implicature
  • How did you do on the exam?
  • Well, I passed.
  • Of all the ways I might have done on the exam,
    ordered from best to worst, I passed.
    Implicature I did not ace the exam.
  • For ordered alternatives (failed, did poorly,
    passed, did great, aced), the higher grades imply
    the lower grade (if you ace it, you at least pass
    it, and at least did poorly, and at least failed
    it).
  • If youre conversing cooperatively, you are as
    informative as you can be, remaining truthful.
  • How many books did you buy?
  • I bought eight.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com