Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Analisis Thesis
Analisis Thesis
1 Existential presupposition
The existential presuppositions is not only assumed to be present in possessive
constructions (for example, 'your car' `you have a car'), but more generally in any definite
noun phrase. By using any of the expressions in below, the speaker is assumed to be
committed to the existence of the entities named.
[15]The King of Sweden, the cat, the girl next door, the Counting Crows.
Possessive case (existential)
John's children are very noisy.
John has children.
occurs in a structure, 'Everybody knows that q', with q as the presupposition. The
presupposed information following a verb like 'know' can be treated as a fact, and is
described as a factive presupposition. A number of other verbs, such as 'realize' in [17a.] and
'regret' in [17b.], as well as phrases involving 'be' with 'aware' [17c.], 'odd' [17d], and 'glad'
[17e.] have factive presuppositions.
[17]
( He was ill)
( We told him)
( He left early)
( Its over)
Factive verbs
Martha regrets drinking John's home brew.
Presupposition: Martha did in fact drink John's home brew.
Frankenstein was aware that Dracula was there.
Presupposition: Dracula was in fact there.
John realized that he was in debt.
Presupposition: John was in fact in debt.
It was odd how proud he was.
Presupposition: He was in fact proud.
Some further factive predicates: know; be sorry that; be proud that; be indifferent that; be
glad that; be sad that, significant, odd, tragic, exciting, relevant, matter, count, make sense,
suffice, amuse, bother. regret, be aware (of), grasp, comprehend, take into consideration, take
into account, bear in mind, ignore, make clear, mind, forget (about), deplore, resent, care
(about).
Temporal clauses (factive)
Before Strawson was even born, Frege noticed presuppositions.
Strawson was born.
While Chomsky was revolutionizing linguistics, the rest of social science was asleep.
Chomsky was revolutionizing linguistics.
Since Churchill died, we've lacked a leader.
Churchill died.
Further temporal clause constructors: after; during; whenever; as (as in As John was getting
up, he slipped).
[17]
a. He stopped smoking.
( He used to smoke)
Iteratives (lexical)
The flying saucer came again.
The flying saucer came before.
You can't get gobstoppers anymore.
You once could get gobstoppers.
Carter returned to power.
Carter held power before.
Further iteratives: another time; to come back; restore; repeat; for the nth time.
( He left)
The type of presupposition illustrated in [18] can lead listeners to believe that the
information presented is necessarily true, rather than just the presupposition of the person
asking the question.
Questions (structural)
Presuppose a seeking for what is sought.
c. He pretends to be ill.
( He is not ill)
Nonfactive predicates: likely, sure, possible, true, false, seem, appear, happen, chance, turn
out. suppose, assert, allege, assume, claim, charge, maintain, believe, conclude, conjecture,
intimate, deem, fancy, figure.
Counterfactual conditionals
If the notice had only said 'mine-field' in Welsh as well as in English, we would never have
lost poor Llewellyn.
The notice didn't say 'mine-field' in Welsh.
2.4.1 Sequentiality
In this relation, there are two types of sequentiality. First, the time of the protasis
precedes the time of the apodosis, as shown in the following example:
[24]
2.4.2 Causality
Dancygier (1998) agrees that the context or the knowledge of the hearer may play an
important role in the causal interpretation of conditional sentences in some cases, but not
always. For example, the knowledge of the hearer may motivate the causal relation between
the two clauses in an example such as [26a] which is quoted from Dancygier (1998, 9),
however, they cannot make a conditional sentence, such as the one in [26b] (which is quoted
from Dancygier (1998, 14)) causal.
[26]
a. `If you add whipped cream, the fruit salad will taste better'.
b. `If you are interested, he is my husband'.
Thus, Dancygier (1998, 84) argues that the causal relation depends on the type of
conditional, whereby `predictive conditionals, which mark a content connection between their
clauses, will be most likely to receive causal or enablement interpretation'. On the contrary,
non-predictive conditionals are open to different kinds of relations between the two clauses.
Meanwhile Sweetser (1990) argues that causal relation in conditional sentences is
understood in the content domain when the two clauses in a conditional sentence refer to the
real world. This domain in the classification of Sweetser (1990) includes all conditional
sentences that have a causal relation between their two clauses.
a. `If John went to the party, (then) he was trying to infuriate Miriam'.
b. `If Mary is late, she went to the dentist'.
The causal relation between the clauses in the two examples is in the reverse
direction. That is to say, the fulfillment of the apodosis causes the fulfillment of the protasis.
For example, Mary is late (the protasis) in the last example because she went to the dentist
(the apodosis) (See Dancygier (1990, 1993, 1998) and Dancygier and Sweetser (2005)).
Sweetser (1990), however, disagrees with the above statement and argues that there is
a causal relation between the clauses in epistemic conditional, whereby the knowledge in the
protasis causes the conclusion in the apodosis.
In addition, Dancygier (1998, 88) suggests two tests for distinguishing epistemic
conditional from other conditionals. Test (1) refers to the use of the epistemic modal must,
whereas test (2) involves using the expression it means that, as shown below respectively:
[28]
protasis enables or causes the speech act in the apodosis. Sweetser (1990, 118) suggests the
following example as an example of speech act conditionals:
[29]
`If I have not already asked you to do so, please sign the guest book before you go'.
This example can be paraphrased as If I have not already asked you to do so consider
that I ask you to sign the guest book before you go.
of asserting that there are biscuits on the sideboard, but gives a justification for offering
biscuits to the hearer.