A projeção de pressuposições: comparando teorias

Roberta Pires de Oliveira

doi:10.20396/cel.v51i2.8637214

v. 51 n. 2 (2009), Artigos

v. 51 n. 2 (2009)

A projeção de pressuposições: comparando teorias

Artigos

https://doi.org/10.20396/cel.v51i2.8637214

Publicado 2011-07-14

Roberta Pires de Oliveira⁺⁻

Roberta Pires de Oliveira

Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina

PDF

Palavras-chave

Linguística

Como Citar

OLIVEIRA, Roberta Pires de. A projeção de pressuposições: comparando teorias. Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos, Campinas, SP, v. 51, n. 2, p. 235–252, 2011. DOI: 10.20396/cel.v51i2.8637214. Disponível em: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/cel/article/view/8637214. Acesso em: 24 abr. 2024.

Resumo

The paper compares two solutions to the presupposition projection problem: the File Change Semantics, as proposed by Heim (1982, 1983), and the proposal raised by Geurts (1999) within the framework of Discourse Representation Theory, elaborated by Kamp & Reyle (1993). In Heim, presupposition projection is explained via satisfaction theory, whereas Geurts understands it as a case of anaphora. The aim is to show that the two analyses of presupposition projection are not equivalent, against the literature (Chierchia (1995) and Kadmon (2001), among others) which claims that FCS and DRT are not formal variants, and that the binding theory is a better explanation for presupposition.

https://doi.org/10.20396/cel.v51i2.8637214

PDF

Referências

BEAVER, David I. (2001). Presupposition and Assertion in Dynamic Semantics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

CHIERCHIA, Gennaro. (1995). Dynamics of Meaning. Anaphora, Presupposition, and the Theory of Grammar. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

CHIERCHIA, Gennaro & SALLY McCornell. (1990). Meaning and Grammar: an Introduction to Semantics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

DUCROT, Oswald. (1972). Dire et ne pas dire. Paris : Hermann.

FREGE, Gottlob. (1978). Sobre sentido e a referência. In: Lógica e Filosofia da Linguagem. São Paulo: Cultrix/USP. 59-86.

GEURTS, Bart. (1999). Presuppositions and Pronouns. Elsevier.

GROENENDIJK, Jeroen e MARTIN Stokhof. (1989). Dynamic Montague Grammar. In: L. Kalman e L.Polos (eds.), Papers from the second symposium on logic and language. Budapest: Akadémiai Kaidó.

HEIM, Irene. (1982). The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

HEIM, Irene. (1983). On the projection problem for presuppositions. In M. Barlow, D. Flickinger, M. Wescoat (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL2, Stanford University. 114-25.

KAMP, Hans e UWE, Reyle. (1993). From Discourse to Logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

KADMON, Nirit. (2001). Formal Pragmatics. Semantics, Pragmatics, Presupposition, and Focus. London: Blackwell.

KARTTUNEN, Lauri. (1973). Presuppositions of compound sentences. Linguistic Inquiry 4.2, 169-93.

LEWIS, David. (1975). Adverbs of Quantification. In: Keenan, E. (ed), Formal Semantics of Natural Language. Cambridge: Cambridge Univerisity Press. 3-15.

LEWIS, David. (1979). Scorekeeping in a language game. In: Bäuerle, U. Egli and A von Stechow (eds.), Semantics from Different Points of View. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 172-187.

STALNAKER, Robert. (1974). Pragmatic presuppositions. In M.K.Munits and D.K. Unger (eds), Semantics and Philosophy. New York: New York University Press, 197-213.

O periódico Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos utiliza a licença do Creative Commons (CC), preservando assim, a integridade dos artigos em ambiente de acesso aberto.