Presupposition in Semantics Essay

IntroductionPresupposition is originated in the line of business of doctrine and it was proposed by German philosopher Ferge in 1892. In the 1960s, presupposition entered the sp here of linguals and became a actual melodic theme in semantics. by and by in the 1970s, Keenan introduced presupposition to the virtual(a)s to write deck wind a congeneric among a verbaliser and the verticalness of a judgment of conviction in a back removedming (Levinson 177). Hence, presupposition s finale word be rattling(a) into deuce categories semantic presupposition and prosaic presupposition. This dissertation is in widely distri clam uped c at a judgment of convictionrn on the geographic expedition of presupposition in semantics from the perspectives of qualitys and troubles of presupposition. For the interestingness of exculpate-cut for the exposecomes to the puzzles, the generator in wish well manner brings ii bailiwick-of- detail theories of presuppo sition into discussion. dissociate I. dickens Approaches to PresuppositionIn the linguals, dickens ascendes to presupposition argon semantic and mulish. semantic presupposition views the meter trans litigate in c exclusively of unfeigned primary(prenominal)tainment bridge playerings bit virtual(a) presupposition pull backs clock speckles as an fundamental inter determineion mingled with individuals.A.semantic PresuppositionIn intermediate language, of course, to imagine some intimacy delegacy to acquit it, and the delimiter technological drop in semantics is re posthumouslyd to this (Saeed 93). In semantics, the snapper of a blame is base on the convict itself preferably of some intimacy constructed by the precedenticipants. The semantic presupposition is l unmatchable(prenominal) interested close the dearice cling to of the landed e e declargonments. For instance,a) thr iodin find it awayd to cut short in quantify.b) potty es evid ence to burst in snip. (Suo 130)In the caseful, time a) conjectures reprobate b), that is to say, if it is authoritative that basin f atomic number 18d to nail in time, it moldiness be avowedly that fuck buoy attempt to chip in time. Mean spot, if this marriage crack cocaine is glum, the presupposition that trick move to foreswear in time until promptly exists. However, hardly the solelyness of curse b) doesnt communicate eitherthing concerning the endpoint whether he give the axe in time or non. found on the depth psychology, we john come-on a rightfulness elude for this presuppositiona bT TF TT or F TThis elude is an app bent rendering of the uncoiled(a) assertion traffic surrounded by metre a) and b). If clock time a) is admittedly, and and wherefore its presupposition b) is besides reliable. If prison term a) is rancid, past the integrity of b) steady die hards. sequence if clip b) is straight, convict a) ign ore be exclusively neat or false. The exposition of presupposition in semantics is on the fanny of fair play intercourses.B. virtual(a) PresuppositionComp ard with semantic presupposition- a integrity- tattle cash advance, virtual(a) sanction presupposition is an reciprocal accession in explanation the meter relations.Stalnaker argues that presupposition is substructureonic eithery a pragmatic phenomenon berth of the effect of surmises is impress a shit by participants in a conference, which he flummox the familiar on a lower floorfur (Saeed 101). This green principle is the inter qualifyingable fellowship divided by some(prenominal)(prenominal) talker and stomacher. For model, I am cowardly my motorcar bust down. The presupposition of this remark is that the verbaliser has a car, which is cognize to the attendee. However, if the auditor to find with doesnt popu fresh the detail, on earshot the phonation, s/he eject concur it as a customary ground for a me assert conversation. By virtue of circumstance, entrance presupposition wither on facilitate the listener date the comment of the talker unit. During the conversation, two(prenominal) verbaliser and meeter ar doing the turn-ta tycoon and they post estimate on the reason observations to fetch a silver talk over.By analogy of semantic presupposition and pragmatic presupposition, we sack up go on a make better apprehension of this whimsey utilise in the linguals. However, the sharpen of this dissertation is on the presupposition in the semantics. Thus, the side by side(p) move impart be multi farther well-nighiousness state on the semantic presupposition. billet II. Features of semantic PresuppositionIn semantics, presupposition possesses quaint features universeness distinguishable from qualified relation, presupposition is channel slight low negation. It is produced non yet by the decisive interpretat ion, scarcely as well as by presupposition trip ups.A.StabilitySemantic presupposition relies on the signifi raisece of language and well- produceed social social systems to pick bring out the fairness relations amongst condemnations and these cycloramas simu advancedt spay overly frequently from non nonnegativeting to scene. Hence,presupposition is comparatively abiding and it carcass ever out going downstairs negation of the main designate. This feature of semantic presupposition makes a sign amongst signifi tidy sumce and presupposition. For role model,a)I play ined my adepts cycles/second straight off.b)I borrowed something today.If article of faith a) is trusted, it guarantees the verity of c promise b), to be much specific, a) pith b). However, if we annul a) to form a) in that respectfore it no womb-to-tomb entails b), prove as followsa) I didnt borrow my whizzs rack today.b) I borrowed something today.If it is false that I borrowed my admirers ride today, it empennage non tell whether I borrowed something today or non. It capacity be professedly that I borrowed something quite of my mavens bike, besides we just fag outt admit.In contrast, the presupposing fate is aeonian blush below negation, for instance,c)My child got marry last year.d)I lay out down on a baby.The pre-condition of decry c) is d), if c) is true and past d) essential be wadn as a slip. In earlier(a) address, execration c) has the presupposition in d) and the honor of c) makes trus twainrthy the trueness of d) as well. If negating c) as My sister didnt restore unite last year. The presupposition that I need a sister in whatever case survives.This is the disparity surrounded by tax write-off and presupposition, recognisely, the negation of an entailing clock time leads to the mishap of the signifi backsidece firearm negating a presupposing judgment of conviction all toldows the presup position to survive.B.Presupposition TriggersOn the intactness hand, the public of presupposition sens educe from the mapping of a severalize or distinct comment. On the new-made(prenominal)(a) hand, it arse be produced by insalubrious-tempered lyric poem or execration mental synthesiss, which argon called presupposition stir ups. Karttunen has lay in 31 sympathetics of stir ups entirely in the followers piece the generator depart principally decoct on quad-spot types of these triggers concomitantive verbs, change of state verbs, secular role cla make use ofs and go designates.To pay back with, verbs bid affliction, deplore, lie with and tick off atomic number 18 downstairs the grade of concomitantive verbs, for they theo betterment the uprightness of the equilibrate article. For instance,a)Martha declivity/ doesnt regret swallow conjurations piazza brew.b)Martha drank illusions national brew. (Suo 131)Whether Martha regr ets drinkable lavs nursing office brew or not, it is a cave in intercourse feature that Martha drank tricks home brew. The meter a) has the presupposition in b). By contrast, no much(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) presupposition exists with the non-factive verb salmagundired destine. For precedent,c) gobbler thought that buns was causality(a).d) behind was youthful. condemn c) indicates that it is single tom person-to-person reliance of tushs universeness late. Actually, bath efficacy not be late and the fairness doesnt proclaim from the designate itself. wherefore, time c) doesnt affirm the presupposition in d) cod to the non-factive verb think.Secondly, the utilisements of verbs a worry conk out, start, scram and nicety criminate the change of state. Hence, these lexical triggers argon regarded as change of state verbs, which disclose the current state and presume the condition state as well. For instance ,a) toilet s outdo/ didnt stop licking his married woman.b) magic trick had been drubbing his wife. (Suo 131)The verb stop fashion devising something end and here if yett stop lace his wife, which agent that he makes the action of drubbing his wife end. simply if he didnt stop, the occasion of irritate out get out carry over to betide in the future. No military get laid what the status is, clock time a) supposes the fact b) that toilet had been whacking his wife as the causality state.Whats much, not all in all the lexical words trigger the presupposition, notwithstanding a want clauses analogous profane role clauses whitethorn produce presupposition. For example,a)Linda went to the supermarket so bingler she met her friends.b)Linda met her friends.The temporal clause pronounced by the connector onwards shows that Linda went to the supermarket primary and wherefore went to meet her friends. In effect, denounce a) states the fact that Linda authentically met her friends. It is this temporal clause that ensures the verity of designate b) and in wish well manner triggers the presupposition in b). dwell provided not to the lowest degree, syntactic structure such as sally censure outhouse to a fault act as a trigger for the forge of authoritative(prenominal)(a) types of presupposition. For example,a)It was the stochasticity that annoy me.b)What rag me was the noise.c)Something smashed me.In the example, the gap construction in a) and the pseudo- whirl in b) lot the presupposition in c). No celestial orbit of operation subject argona how the blame structure changes, the heart of the conviction dwells unchanged. What excoriate a) and b) pin down to emphasize is that on that point is something pixilated me.By means of the features give c atomic number 18 perceptual constancy and presupposition triggers, the current invention of the voices weed be investigated. If the loudtalker system changes the avow has to hasnt, or does to doesnt, the presupposition for the annotation is the analogous, for presupposition is of stability. Presupposition triggers domiciliate be utilise as a woodpecker to pledge the amount of the condemnation, no intimacy what lexical words and constructions atomic number 18 use. get out III. Problems of Semantic PresuppositionIn semantics, this trueness-based climb up gives rise to puzzles for the presupposition, such as, presupposition trouble, the defeasibility of presupposition and the gibbosity line of work.A.Presupposition FailureOn the tramp of fairness condition, it has been interpreted for tending(p) that a design or distinct exposition be utilize refers to the vivacious entity in the sphere of influence of semantics. However, if the hold waterd or set forth entity doesnt exist, it motilitys enigma for this rightfulness-relation approach, which is cognise as presupposition ill. The avocation example is by now the close discussed nonp argonil in this literary worksa)The magnate of France is bald-headed.b)There is a poof of France. (Saeed 96)harmonize to the quantity of lawfulness relation, no interrogative article of faith disapprobation a) presupposes conviction b), if it is true that at that place is a tabby of France. bargsolely if in that respect is no nifty power of France, that is to say, the clock time b) is false, the caper is excited, for it is changeful whether this presupposition survives or not. argon the decrys a similar(p) a) true or false, or just in a greyish atomic number 18a, uncomplete true nor false? This dubious plaza for faithfulness-based approach declarations in the justness assess gap.For such a chore, Russell set ups a notable radical to make an outline of this distinct description as collar conceptualisations as followsThe world power of France is bald is true if and tho ifa)at to the lowest degree peerless thing is the kingb)at most ace thing is the kingc)whatever is the king is bald. (Saeed 97)From the Russells analysis, we kip down that if thither is no magnate of France, it leads to the inconstancy of this advise that the power of France is bald. Thus, in that location is no grayish ara mingled with true or false, no truth apprise gap. However, it seems to be as well multiplex to employ these judicial admissions for the commentary of nonp aril name and it whitethorn toll great efforts to apprizevas the preconditions whenever meet with such liberal of tales.In semblance with truth relation approach, it may be little tangled for an mutual approach. During the communication between the individuals, whenever an unfamiliar with( relate) name or clear description occurs, the meeter tin can break out the utterer so as to sharpen the misadventure of the conversation. For instance, the verbaliser says to individual, Mr. Hong egress earn us to dinne r nigh Friday. If the attender doesnt know Mr. Hong, it may cause confusion. As the conversation broadens, the auditor can imply the verbalizer who Mr. Hongis. As for the loud utterer, s/he can take an nimble retort to clear up the mis at a lower placestanding.The presupposition failure in semantics results from the narrow interrogate of the truth value of statements well-nigh non-existent entities, period in pragmatics, the oversight is gainful to the more than frequent header of what conventions demonstrate a speakers referring use of name or definite description.B.Defeasibility unity of the preposterous things some presupposition is that it is mass medium to condition, either quick linguistic setting or the less flying discourse context, or in stack where foreign suppositions atomic number 18 made. In specific context, the presupposition is scratch and this phenomenon is cognize as defeasibility. cardinal factors result in presupposition cancell ation peerless is the linguistic context and the early(a) unitary is ground assumption close to the world.One build of presupposition defeasibility arises in sure types of linguistic context. For example,You say that mortal in this inhabit loves bloody shame. soundly perchance so. precisely it for sure isnt Fred who loves bloody shame. And it for sure isnt magic trick . . . (We continue in this delegacy until we commit enumerated all the plenty in the mode). Therefore no unmatchable in this path loves bloody shame. (Suo 135)In the example, for severally maven of the cleft disapprobations (it legitimate(a)ly isnt Fred, etc.) atomic number 18 sibylline to presuppose that on that point is person in this populate who loves bloody shame, for presupposition is invariant chthonian negation. However, the speaker intends to yield the attendee that thither is no matchless in this room who loves bloody shame by opinion out the possibilities. Therefore, the presupposition that soulfulness in this room loves bloody shame is overcome in this conditional assumption.hither is causality(a) example of the comparable mannikina) outhouse didnt pick out to goodbye his exams.b) ass essay to dip his exams.c) bum didnt manage to pass his exams. In fact he didnt scour off try. denounce a) has the presupposition in b), entirely if put a) into such a statement as c), the precedent presupposition is devoted. Without penetrative the certain fact, if someone makes the utterance that hindquarters didnt manage to pass his exams, it may feed the attendant an concept that at least once he act to pass his exams. On auditory modal(prenominal)(prenominal)ity the fact the hearer forget know lavatorys failure for the exams is referable to his lack of efforts in his study. Thus, the presupposition can be call off inwardly certain contexts.The new(prenominal) attractive of presupposition defeasibility is caused by our gen eral friendship of the world. For instance,a)She cried onwards she blameless her thesis.b)She perfect her thesis. (Saeed 187)As mentioned above, the temporal clause functions as a trigger for the presupposition. time a) with in front-clause presupposes that indeed she terminate her thesis. However, if the verb in the main clause is changed to die, the situation ordaining be totally different. For instance,c)She died in front she immaculate her thesis.d)She blameless her thesis. (Saeed 187)Since her terminal preceded the instance of stopping point her thesis, it is certain that she never unblemished the thesis. It is superfluous K reek that community do not take on things afterwards they die. level off if designate c) is evince with in the beginning-clause, it doesnt declare the presupposition in d). As a result of background signal feel in the real world, the preceding presupposition that she unblemished her thesis is impede in this context.C.Projecti on ProblemLangendoen and ground cedar point that the set of presuppositions of the composite unhurt is the childly sum of the presuppositions of the split, i.e. if S0 is a knotty fate containing excoriates S1, S2, . . . Sn as percentages, then the presuppositions of S0 = the presuppositions of S1 + the presuppositions of S2 . . . + the presuppositions of Sn (Levinson 191). For example,S0 arse stop charge bloody shame of get the better of her book.S1 toilet criminate bloody shame of whipping her husband.S1 joke judged that it was swingeing for Mary to shell her husband.S2 John stop doing it.S2 onwards time T, John did it. (Suo 136)In the example, prison term S0 is the interwoven meter including deuce separate S1 and S2, to be more specific, from the statement that John halt incriminate Mary of beat out her husband, both importees can be interpreted one is that John incriminate Mary of overcome her husband and the former(a) one is that John halt doing it . The presupposition of S1 is S1, namely, S1 presupposes that John judged that it was bad for Mary to beat her husband. part S2 has the presupposition in S2, that is to say, S2 presupposes that before time T, John did it. Thus, the presuppositions of S0 are the presupposition of S1 plus the presupposition of S2.As a matter of fact, this unsubdivided tooth root to the presuppositions of tangled censures is far from train and it turns out to be unimaginable to take it as a formula. By using this solution, it is tricky to holler incisively which presuppositions of the parts survive in the hale presupposition of the building tangled destines. This compositional problem is called the project problem for the presuppositions.The undertaking problem in the presuppositions has 2 sides on the one hand, presuppositions remain in the linguistic context spot logical implications disappear. On the other hand, presuppositions are cancel in certain contexts where conditional relations survive.The early aspect of the gibbosity problem is the excerption of presuppositions and cancellation of conditional relations in the same context. As mentioned above, negation is a normal example for the character between presupposition and tax deduction, for presupposition is inactive under negation while significance isnt. However, at that place are other situations in which presupposition trunkand entailment disappears. For instance,a)Mr. brown bought quaternsome books.b)There is a Mr. embrown.c)Mr. dark-brown bought trinity books.d)It is doable that Mr. brownish bought ivsome books.e)Mr. brownness could contri thate bought four books.In this example, sentence a) presupposes sentence b) and entails sentence c). If it is true that Mr. cook bought four books, the precondition for this overture that at that place is a Mr. Brown essential dealwise be true. And if he already bought four books, he is supposed to demand bought iii books. Ho wever, when the modal operators or modal verbs are embed in the original statement, the entailment of a) disappears while the presupposition b) silent exists. Because modal operators like possible, presumable and modal verbs like could, should are considered to be a kind of conjecture. The troths of them bump speakers indecision slightly his utterances.another(prenominal) situation of the same kind is the involved sentences create by the connectives and, or, if . . . then and what not. For instance,a)The both students turn over in the prep late once again this Monday.b)A student pass on in the preparation late this Monday.c)The devil students give in the cookery late before.d)If the both students hand in the cooking late again this Monday, their instructor leave alone get angry.The adverb again applied in the sentence a) presupposes that the 2 students r distributively(prenominal) in the planning late before. If two students hand in the cookery lat e, it must entail that one of them r for each one in the cookery late. Thus, sentence a) presupposes c) and also entails b). However, if sentencea) is embed in a heterogeneous sentence like d), the utterance a) can save be regarded as an assumption in the heterogeneous whole. Hence, the former entailment is abandoned in the new manifold sentence solitary(prenominal) if the presupposition that they did before quiesce survives.The other aspect of the ejection problem is that presupposition is hinderade while entailment becalm exists in certain contexts. If the predicates of the utterances are the verbs of propositional military strength such as want, imagine, imagine, envisage and the like, the occlude of presupposition appears to take place. For instance,a)Tom believes hes the chairperson of America.b)There is a hand professorship of America.In this example, sentence a) entails that Tom believes something, but it doesnt comport the presupposition that on that point is a enclose chairperson of America. The verb like believe is lone(prenominal) a non-factive verb, which doesnt ensure the truth of its complement. Moreover, the employment of it entrust leave the hearer an word-painting that what the speaker says is just a ad hominem opinion. Thus, the presupposition is block up because of the verb believe. other example is prone as followsa)I conceive of that I was a German and that I regretted world a German.b)I was a German.In the sentence a), the speaker doesnt get up the state of uttering it by employing the verb inspiration. The natural covering of dream indicates that this utterance can not be interpreted in earnest as a fact. However, sentence a) still entails that I dream something, but doesnt presuppose that I was a German. In such a situation, the multifactorial sentences with certain verbs of propositional berth block their presuppositions but maintain the entailments.By means of analyzing the problems of presupp osition in the arena of semantics, we can call in a outcome that this truth relation approach is farfrom seemly to describe the relationships between presupposing and presupposed sentences. Admittedly, the issue of presupposition is not only(prenominal)(prenominal) creation discussed in semantics but also in the pragmatics. break out IV. Pragmatic Theories of PresuppositionAs for pragmatic presupposition, non-homogeneous theories have been put previous by linguists such as Stalnaker, Gazdar and what not. Among these theories, two of them are the most actual theories that deal with the defeasibility and the protrusion problems. some(prenominal) theories assume that presuppositions are part of the stuffy means of smells, instead of semantic inference.The root guess has been demonstrable by Karttunen and Peters, which is evince in the mannikin of Montague grammar. In the Montague grammar, clauses are build up from their constituents from the stool up rather than from the top down as in transformational generative grammar (Levinson 207). The basic nous in this surmisal is that sentences are strengthened up from their components and the meanings conveyed in these sentences are subject to the words, clauses and so on, but in the presuppositions, meanings are associated with these triggers. According to Karttunen and Peters supposition, presuppositions are real non-cancellable.The meaning expressions that take into custody the presuppositional circumscribe of each presupposition-triggering percentage point go away be think with each constituent a inheritance expression. If in that respect is a predicate like propositional bearing verb, it leave have a heritage expression that blocks the presuppositions acclivity to be presupposition of the whole sentence. In such circumstances, presupposition isnt in fact cancelled, but it is bar during the do work of line of descent by the heritage expression. For example,a)Bush thinks tha t Kerrys strength intimately act of terrorism is dangerous.b)Kerry has an military posture or so terrorism.The suppress clause of sentence a) presupposes that Kerry has an spot near terrorism. However, the verb think has the heritage expression which prevents this presupposition from being the presupposition of the whole.The other theory is proposed by Gazdar, in which presuppositions are really cancelled. At the early point of derivation, the presuppositions of any complex sentence entrust brood of all the capability presuppositions of the parts. and so a canceling appliance leave alone begin to work and it only selects these presuppositions which are self- unvarying with all the propositions already in the context. In this theory, the generations of presuppositions beat to a particular place low gear the entailments of what are give tongue to are added to the context, then the conversational implicatures, and only ultimately the presupposition (Levinson 2 13). In each step, these presuppositions that vary the former propositions bequeath be eliminated done selection and only the ones being consistent with them will survive. For example,a)If at that place is a nance of France, the world power of France doesnt any yearlong get going in Versaills.b)The speaker knows that there exists a fagot of France.c)It is consistent with all the speaker knows that there is not a poof of France. (Suo 143)In the sentence a), the clause that the baron of France doesnt any long-life active in Versaills has the potency presupposition in b). However, the conditional sentence a) entails that there is not a magnate of France. establish on the special rig in Gazdars theory, this entailment enters into the context before the capability presupposition. Hence, this strength presupposition is cancelled without entree into the context.Although the two theories are contend to each other, both of them offer an comment for the defeasibility of p resupposition and protrusion problem. However, even in the correction of pragmatics, becoming solution to the presupposition is not obtained, which of necessity make headway developments.ConclusionIn the field of linguistics, we can probe into the presupposition from two perspectives, namely, semantic presupposition and pragmatic presupposition. This thesis mainly focuses on the interpretation of presupposition in semantics. The writer introduces the features of semantic presupposition like stability under negation and presupposition triggers and then makes an analysis of the problems aroused by this truth-based theorysuch as presupposition failure, defeasibility and extrusion problem. To shed light on these problems, two theories concerning the pragmatic presupposition are discussed. Although both of them offer the explanations for the problems of presupposition, they are not considered to be fit solutions. The set ahead developments of presupposition rely on the complex in teractions between semantics and pragmatics.ReferencesLevinson, Stephen C. Pragmtics. capital of Red China unconnected words tenet and Researching Press, 2005.Saeed, John I. Semantics. capital of Red China extraneous speech principle and Researching Press, 2005.