The projection problem

 Is the meaning of some presupposition ( as ‘parts’) doesn’t survive to become the

meaning of some complex sentences ( as ‘wholes’ )
 The meaning of the whole sentence is a combination of the meaning of its parts.
 We expect the presupposition of a simple sentence will continue to be true when that
simple sentence becomes part of a more complex sentence cause the meaning of the
whole sentence is a combination of the meaning of its parts.
 It doesn't happen!
 Ex :
a) George regrets getting Marry pregnant.(=p)
b) George got Marry Pregnant.(=q)
c) p>>q
d) He doesn't get her pregnant. (=r)
e) George regrets getting Marry pregnant, (=p & r) but he doesn't get her pregnant.
f) p & r >> NOT q
The projection Problem, cont.
 Presupposition don't 'project' is that they are destroyed by entailments.
 When we combine two utterance (types presupposition), it can't survive to become the
meaning of some complex sentences. It is known as projection problem
 Remember that entailment is something that necessarily follows from what is asserted
 Entailment is something that necessarily follows from what is asserted. The entailment is
simply more powerful than the presupposition.
 ‘potential presupposition’ which only become actual presupposition is not being
presented to be recognized as such within utterances .
 Speaker can indeed that the potential presupposition is not being presented as a strong
assumption.
 Ex :
a) Nobody realized that Kelly was ill.(=p)
b) Kelly was ill. (=q)
c) p>>q
d) I imagined that Kelly was ill. (=r)
e) Kelly was not ill. (=NOT q)
f) r >> NOT q
g) I imagined that Kelly was ill and nobody realized that she was ill.(=r & p)
h) r & p >> NOT q
You have a presupposition “q”and an entailment not “q >”