Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Hypothetical Ideals and Conditionality: An Analysis by Condoravdi and Lauer, Lecture notes of Philosophy

A research paper presented at the 7th Annual Meeting of the Deutsche Gesellschaft f¨ur Sprachwissenschaft (DGfS) in 2015. The authors, Cleo Condoravdi and Sven Lauer, discuss the interpretation of hypothetical ideals and hypothetical facts in the temporal dimension, focusing on the compositionality problems with hypothetical ideals and the interpretation of tenses in bare conditionals. They propose solutions using nested modality and action-relevant preferences.

What you will learn

  • What role do modal operators play in the analysis of hypothetical ideals and conditionality?
  • How do the authors explain the temporal interpretation of hypothetical conditionals and anankastics?
  • What are hypothetical ideals and how do they differ from hypothetical facts?
  • What is the interpretation of tenses in bare conditionals according to the authors?
  • How do the authors propose to solve the compositionality problems with hypothetical ideals?

Typology: Lecture notes

2021/2022

Uploaded on 09/12/2022

shanti_122
shanti_122 🇺🇸

3.9

(16)

231 documents

1 / 40

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Hypothetical facts and hypothetical ideals in the
temporal dimension
Cleo Condoravdi1Sven Lauer2
1Stanford University
2University of Konstanz
37th Annual Meeting of the Deutsche Gesellschaft f¨ur
Sprachwissenschaft
AG 14: Modelling conditionality
University of Leipzig March 4–6, 2015
Condoravdi & Lauer HICs and HFCs in the temporal dimension DGfS 2015 1 /37
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
pfe
pff
pf12
pf13
pf14
pf15
pf16
pf17
pf18
pf19
pf1a
pf1b
pf1c
pf1d
pf1e
pf1f
pf20
pf21
pf22
pf23
pf24
pf25
pf26
pf27
pf28

Partial preview of the text

Download Hypothetical Ideals and Conditionality: An Analysis by Condoravdi and Lauer and more Lecture notes Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity!

Hypothetical facts and hypothetical ideals in the

temporal dimension

Cleo Condoravdi^1 Sven Lauer^2 (^1) Stanford University (^2) University of Konstanz

37th Annual Meeting of the Deutsche Gesellschaft f ¨ur Sprachwissenschaft AG 14: Modelling conditionality University of Leipzig March 4–6, 2015

Outline

(^1) Two compositionality problems with hypothetical ideals

(^2) The interpretation of tenses in bare conditionals—a primer

(^3) Temporal interpretation of (priority) modals

(^4) Anankastics in the temporal dimension

The problem with HICs

(H) If you (ever) want to go to Harlem, you should take the A train. Sæbø (1985, 2001): Anankastic conditionals (ACs) like (H) pose challenges for compositional interpretation. Intuitively, the sentence conveys that taking the A train is necessary for going to Harlem.

Sæbø’s compositionality problem

How does (H) manage to express a relationship between a proper part of the antecedent and a proper part of the consequent?

The problem with HICs

Kratzer-style

(H) If you (ever) want to go to Harlem, you should take the A train. Sæbø (1985, 2001): In a Kratzerian analysis, the problem is: How do we get the antecedent to interact with the ordering source of the modal in the right way? Somehow, the inner antecedent you go to Harlem must end up in the ordering source. von Fintel and Iatridou (2005): Same problem for (3). (3) If jaywalking is illegal here, this guy has to pay a fine.

Sæbø’s compositionality problem

How do we get the antecedent to influence the ordering source of the modal in the right way?

Solution, part two: Action-relevant preferences

Condoravdi and Lauer (2014): A fully compositional analysis of ACs is possible with...

... a nested modal analysis. ... a suitable semantics for want. I (^) In ACs, want has a reading on which it refers to action-relevant preferences. I (^) Multiple action-relevant preferences can be taken into account. Bonus: Various kinds of ‘near’-anankastics also can be treated.

The temporal interpretation of HFCs and ACs

Sæbø observed that there is an intuitive difference in the relative temporal location of the eventualities of ACs and HFCs. (4) If you (ever) go to Harlem, you should see the Apollo theater. ↪→ you go to Harlemyou see the Apollo theater (5) If you (ever) want to go to Harlem, you should take the A train. ↪→ you go to Harlemyou take the A train

Compositionality problem in the temporal dimension?

The HFC-constraint relates the time of the full antecedent and the time of the consequent: (6) If you go to Harlem, you should see the Apollo theater. end( you go to Harlem ) ≤ end( you see the Apollo theater ) The AC-constraint, by contrast, relates the time of inner antecedent and the consequent (prejacent of the modal). (7) If you want to go to Harlem, you should take the A train. start( you go to Harlem ) ≥ start( you take the A train )

Temporal compositionality problem

According to Sæbø’s conjecture, ACs impose a constraint on the temporal relationship between a proper part of the antecedent and the prejacent of the modal in the consequent.

Plot

Nec( you want to go to Harlem )(Should( you take the A train ))

Determine what the predictions of the nested-modal analysis are. I (^) Plausible assumptions about the temporal interpretation of bare conditionals. I (^) Plausible assumptions about the temporal interpretation of priority modals like should. I (^) Putting the two together. Evaluate the resulting predictions for HICs, and ACs in particular.

Outline

(^1) Two compositionality problems with hypothetical ideals

(^2) The interpretation of tenses in bare conditionals—a primer

(^3) Temporal interpretation of (priority) modals

(^4) Anankastics in the temporal dimension

Bare conditionals

Bare conditionals (BCs): Indicative conditionals without any modal operator are Nec-conditionals: Nec(Antecedent)(Consequent)

Their temporal interpretation is intricate, but surprisingly little work on this. We will draw here mostly on Crouch (1993), Kaufmann (2005), Schulz (2007, 2008) and Grønn and von Stechow (2011). Set aside: I (^) ‘Generic’ readings of conditionals, those might well contain another operator. I (^) ‘Scheduling’ readings of the present tense. I (^) will -conditionals, which might be modal.

Present tense antecedent: More interesting

Present tense antecedents can be about the utterance time, or any future time: (10) If he arrives tomorrow,...

Usual restrictions do not apply: Eventuality can be located anywhere in the interval [now, ∞). Eventive predicates: Mandatory forward-shift. Stative predicates: Optional forward-shift, strong tendency towards now-interpretation. I (^) But shiftable by overt adverbs or contextual clues.

(11) If he is in Utrecht,... (12) If he is in Utrecht tomorrow,...

Present tense antecedent: More interesting

Present-Past

Present in the antecedent, past in the consequent: Past tense in the consequent can get a ‘shifted’ past-in-the-future reading (Crouch 1993).

(13) If John comes out smiling, the interview went well.

Assumptions about the tenses

Simple(-minded?) analysis of the tenses: (17) ~Presi^ = λP.λw.Inst(P, i, w) (18) ~Pasti^ = λP.λw.Inst(P, (−∞, i), w) i = now in unembedded uses, can be shifted by embedding environment.

(19) Inst(P, i, w) =

∃e : P(e, w) & τ(e, w) ⊆ i if P eventive P(i, w) if P temporal

τ(e, w): The ‘run-time’ of e at w. Assumption: Statives denote temporal predicates that are true of an interval iff the state overlaps with it.

Recipe for present tense antecedents

Shifted consequent reading

Nec has now as its temporal perspective. its modal base is restricted to worlds that make the antecedent true at some subinterval tA of [now, ∞). at each world, it sets the earliest such interval as the interval of evaluation for the consequent.

i=now ︷ ︸︸ ︷ Nec[Pres(A) ︸ ︷︷ ︸ i=[now,∞)

][ Tns(C) ︸ ︷︷ ︸ i=earliest(TA)

]

(See Kaufmann (2005),Schulz (2007),Grønn and von Stechow (2011) for steps towards a compositional implementation of this—though only Schulz enforces the ‘earliest’ part.)