当前位置: X-MOL 学术The Linguistic Review › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
There be- and have-sentences: Different semantics, different definiteness effects
The Linguistic Review ( IF 0.581 ) Pub Date : 2020-05-26 , DOI: 10.1515/tlr-2019-2041
Toni Bassaganyas-Bars 1 , Louise McNally 2
Affiliation  

Abstract Edward Keenan coined the term “existential-have” for have-sentences containing a relational noun in object position that present a definiteness effect (DE) similar to the one in there be-sentences. We begin this paper by showing in detail that the DE in these sentences is in fact different from the one found with there be-sentences. We then explain how these contrasts reflect differences in the semantics of the two sorts of sentences that we have independently argued for in previous work. We will specifically challenge two assumptions that are frequently made about the definiteness effect in have-sentences: (1) that it is related to any version of the so-called “weak”/“strong” distinction that has been used to characterize the effect in there be-sentences; and (2) that it is limited to relational nouns like handle and follows from treating such nouns as two-place predicates. Finally, we show how our account is superior to other accounts that have been offered of the definiteness effect in have-sentences.

中文翻译:

有和有句子:不同的语义,不同的确定性效果

摘要爱德华·基南(Edward Keenan)创造了“有存在”一词,用于在宾语中包含关系名词的有句,表现出与有句相似的确定性效应(DE)。我们通过详细显示本文开头的DE实际上不同于存在句子的DE来开始本文。然后,我们将解释这些对比如何反映我们在先前工作中独立主张的两种句子的语义差异。我们将特别质疑在有句中关于定性效应经常做出的两个假设:(1)它与用来表征效应的所谓“弱” /“强”区分的任何版本有关有句子 (2)它仅限于诸如handle的关系名词,并且源于将此类名词视为两处谓词。最后,我们说明了我们的帐户如何优于具有句子中确定性作用的其他帐户。
更新日期:2020-05-26
down
wechat
bug