東海意味論研究会（3月31日名古屋学院大学白鳥キャンパス：澤田，川原，大島，今仁）のお知らせ

[koj...@gmail.com]

メーリングリストの皆様，

下記の通り，東海意味論研究会を実施予定です．ご興味・ご関心のある方はお越しください．

https://sites.google.com/site/semanticsworkshopintokai/home

2018年3月31日 (日) 13時00分  

名古屋学院大学白鳥学舎　曙館 607 地図

 輪読会 (Reading/Discussion)：13:00~13:50

マテリアル: Fox and Hackl (2006) The Universal Density of Measurement. Linguistics & Philosophy 29.
上記マテリアルを水谷謙太さん（大阪大学大学院）の進行・解説で進める予定です。

研究発表 (Lecture)：13:55~14:40

Osamu Sawada (Mie University) and Jun Sawada (Aoyama Gakuin University)

On the inferential use of the Japanese NP-no koto-da(-kara): The dependent relationship with a modal statement

Abstract: 

This talk investigates the dependent property of the inferential use of NP-no koto-da(-kara) ‘lit. NP-GEN fact-PRED (-because)’ in Japanese. The inferential use of NP-no koto-da(-kara) is different from the non-inferential nominalized NP-no koto (e.g., Takubo 2007) in that it not only invokes a property of NP, but also indicates that it serves as a cause (evidence) for inferring a proposition (see also Masuoka 2013; Yumoto 2015).
An interesting point of the inferential use of no koto-da is that the causal and inferential meaning arise even without the conjunctive particle kara. We argue that although both NP-no-koto-da with kara and NP-no-koto-da without kara conventionally implicate that “the contextually salient property of NP is a cause for inferring a proposition p”, the way the conventional implicature (CI) is derived is different. In the former case, the conjunctive particle kara ‘because’ triggers the inferential causal relationship as a CI, while in the latter case, no koto-da has been conventionalized as an independent evidence-indicating marker, which triggers the inferential causal relationship as a CI. The proposed analyses of no koto-da(-kara) will provide a natural explanation for why both must co-occur with the so-called result-inferential modals, such as daroo ‘will’ and kamoshirenai ‘may’ (but not with other kinds of modals).
This paper shows that although CIs (the meaning of the inferential no koto-da(-kara)) are logically independent of the at-issue content (the at-issue meaning of a modal), it can have a dependent relationship with the at-issue content at the level of use-condition.

研究発表 (Lecture)：14:45~15:30

Koji Kawahara (Nagoya University of Foreign Studies)

Adjectival Extremeness and Grammatical Integration

Abstract:

Extreme adjectives such as fantastic or wonderful are assumed to be a class of implicit superlatives, whereby they resist comparisons (Bolinger, 1967; Cruise, 1986).

(1) a. ? Godzilla is more gigantic than Mothra.

     b. ? Monkeys are less marvelous than ferrets.

     c. ? Everything is more scrumptious than natto.

Comparisons by extreme adjectives, however, can be found in corpus (Morzycki, 2012).

(2) a. Yes, Tudor darling, understand why this land is more wonderful than anywhere else in the world and why it           is yours, just as much as it is mine.

     b. Other times he will take you to visit places more wonderful than you could ever dream of Would you like 

         Swan to take you home now?

     c. Over the next days, the girls swam, took long walks, talked, and ate Cook's meals which seemed more 

         wonderful than ever after the school's frugal fare.

     d. As their lips met, she knew in a ash that this kiss of love was even more wonderful than the words that had             just thrilled her.

     e. Fuck, what could be more wonderful than that!

Native speakers of English have intuition that extreme adjectives are not available in comparisons out of blue but nevertheless some of them can think of grammatical context, in which extreme adjectives build comparisons. 

The purpose of this talk is to show that emphasized extreme adjectives hold dual meanings, whereby a CI meaning is added to a literal or at-issue meaning (Potts, 2005; McCready, 2010; Sawada, 2018). Comparisons by extreme adjectives are calculated at CI-dimensions and thus a comparative constituent will not be redundant. A consequence of the present analysis is that expressiveness does not resist grammatical integration (Dingemanse and Akita, 2017) but it contributes to a CI-meaning.

研究発表 (Lecture)：15:40~16:25

David Oshima (Nagoya University) 

On the mirative use of the noda construction in Japanese

Abstract:

 

It has been widely acknowledged that the noda construction in Japanese has a wide range of interpretations. This works aims to provide an adequate semantic description of one of the major uses of noda, which has been labeled as the “discovery”, “grasping”, or “apprehension” use by Japanese grammarians (as in, A, koko ni ita n da‘Oh, there you are’), in light of the recent discussion of the notion of mirativity (“linguistic marking of an utterance as conveying information which is new or unexpected to the speaker” DeLancey 2001) in the typological literature. We argue that noda in its “discovery” use, can sensibly be regarded as a mirativity maker, and further discuss some subtle aspects of its meaning/felicity conditions that do not automatically follow from its being a mirativity marker.

研究発表 (Lecture)：16:35~17:15

Ikumi Imani　(Nagoya Gakuin University)

Scope and Negation - reconsiderion on Kuno's hypothesis

Abstract:

This talk is to reconsider Kuno’s hypothesis that the scope of negation was very narrow in Japanese (Kuno 1980, 1983). This somewhat unintuitive hypothesis has been challenged by Takubo (1985), Koganemaru (1990), Masuoka (1991), Yatabe (2002) and Shibata (2015) among others. In this talk, we will first review Kuno’s

approach, and then show that if we take into account how alternatives of a focused phrase are semantically computed, his hypothesis turns out to be replaceable by a simpler and more unified one. 

One of the sentences that plays a crucial role in Kuno’s analysis is (1). According to Kuno, (1B) is unnatural as a reply to (1A).

(1) A: Kimi-wa kono-tokei-wo pari-de kat-ta-no-ka? 

     B: *Iya, pari-de(-wa) kaw-anak-atta. Kuno (1983: 126)

To explain why (1B) is infelicitous as the reply to (1A), he hypothesizes about the width the scope of negation has in Japanese, as shown in (2). 

(2) Kuno’s hypothesis: 

    The scope of the negative morpheme nai does not extend over verbs/adjectives that immediately precede it or       “nouns/quasi-adjectives + a copula (da).” (Kuno 1983)

What (2) says is that the scope of negation does not extend over the verb kaw in (1B). However, there are exceptions to (2), and thus Kuno ends up with assuming the existence of two types of information structures in Japanese, a-fill-in-a-hole information structure and multiple-choice information structure. Kuno states:

(3) a. When a sentence has a fill-in-a-hole information structure, (i) it expresses a single event, and (ii) the scope               of negation does not　extend over a verb or adjectives that immediately precede it, or “nouns/quasi-                       adjectives + a copula (da).”

                b. When a sentence has a multiple-choice information structure, (i) it expresses repeatable events, and (ii) the 

         scope of negation becomes wider so that the phrase under focus is in its scope.

The problem of (3) is twofold. One problem is that it is not clear on what ground we can assume that there are two kinds of information structures. The other is that the existence of exceptions such as sentences having multiple-choice information structure inevitably weakens his proposal that the scope of negation be very narrow in Japanese.

To solve these problems, we will propose another approach, more significantly based on the system of focus calculation.

• 懇親会 (Party)：TBD

       （気軽にご参加ください．なお，予約がありますので事前連絡をいただけますと大変助かります）

       

      概要：

• 東海意味論研究会は有志で行っているインフォーマルな研究会です。会員費等は必要ありません。
• 参加は自由ですので，どなたでもいつでも気軽におこしください．学生の皆さんの参加も歓迎します。

     連絡先

       川原功司 kkoji at nufs.ac.jp