Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

'Grammatical' vs. 'Lexical' Meaning Constructors for Glue Semantics

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Andrews, Avery

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Australian Linguistics Society

Abstract

Current theories of formal semantics allow arguments of predicates to be of non-basic types, such as e→p (e for ‘entity’, p for ‘proposition’, with no commitment to any particular treatment of propositions). ‘Modal adjectives’ such as alleged are for example standardly analysed as being of type (e→p)→(e→p). But such analyses allow certain kinds of modal adjectives that don’t seem to exist, such as a hypothetical alleger, such that an alleger murderer would be somebody who has made allegations that somebody (else) is a murderer. Here I make a proposal using LFG ‘glue semantics’ that permits it to avoid allowing this kind of adjectival meaning, by dividing the basic compositional units of meaning into an open class of ‘lexical meanings’, of strongly restricted form, and a finite class fixed by UG of ‘grammatical meanings’, which don’t obey these restrictions.

Description

Keywords

Citation

Source

Selected Papers from the 2009 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

DOI

Restricted until