Home
Catalogue search
Refine your search:
Keyword
Creator / Publisher:
Alsop, Anna (3)
Grosu, Ioana (2)
Blix, Hagen (1)
Bordia, Shikha (1)
Bowman, Samuel R. (1)
Cao, Yu (1)
Champollion, Lucas (1)
Davidson, Kathryn (1)
Harvard College Research Program (1)
Htut, Phu Mon (1)
more
Year:
2019 (2)
2018 (1)
Medium
Type
BLLDB-Access
Search in the Catalogues and Directories
All fields
Title
Creator / Publisher
Keyword
Year
AND
OR
AND NOT
All fields
Title
Creator / Publisher
Keyword
Year
AND
OR
AND NOT
All fields
Title
Creator / Publisher
Keyword
Year
AND
OR
AND NOT
All fields
Title
Creator / Publisher
Keyword
Year
AND
OR
AND NOT
All fields
Title
Creator / Publisher
Keyword
Year
Sort by
creator [A → Z]
'
creator [Z → A]
'
publishing year ↑ (asc)
'
publishing year ↓ (desc)
'
title [A → Z]
'
title [Z → A]
'
Simple Search
Hits 1 – 3 of 3
1
Investigating BERT's Knowledge of Language: Five Analysis Methods with NPIs ...
Warstadt, Alex
;
Cao, Yu
;
Grosu, Ioana
. - : arXiv, 2019
BASE
Show details
2
Free choice disjunction as a rational speech act
Champollion, Lucas
;
Alsop, Anna
;
Grosu, Ioana
In: Semantics and Linguistic Theory; Proceedings of SALT 29; 238-257 ; 2163-5951 (2019)
Abstract:
The so-called free choice inference (from You may take an apple or a pear to You may take an apple) is mysterious because it does not follow from ordinary modal logic. We show that this inference arises in the Rational Speech Act framework (Frank & Goodman 2012). Our basic idea is inspired by exhaustification-based models of free choice (Fox 2007) and by game-theoretic accounts based on iterated best response (Franke 2011). We assume that when the speaker utters You may take an apple or a pear, the hearer reasons about why the speaker did not choose alternative utterances such as You may take an apple. A crucial ingredient in our explanation is the idea of semantic uncertainty (Bergen, Levy & Goodman 2016). Specifically, we assume that the speaker is uncertain whether or not the hearer will interpret You may take an apple as forbidding them from taking a pear. This uncertainty can be thought of as resulting from Fox’s (2007) optional covert exhaustification. Uttering the disjunction is a way for the speaker to prevent the hearer from concluding that any fruit is forbidden to take. Knowing this, the hearer concludes that they may choose either fruit.
URL:
http://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/SALT/article/view/29.238
https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v29i0.4608
BASE
Hide details
3
Testing contrastive inferences from suprasegmental features using offline measures
Alsop, Anna
;
Stranahan, Elaine
;
Davidson, Kathryn
In: Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America; Vol 3 (2018): Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America; 71:1–15 ; 2473-8689 (2018)
BASE
Show details
Mobile view
All
Catalogues
UB Frankfurt Linguistik
0
IDS Mannheim
0
OLC Linguistik
0
UB Frankfurt Retrokatalog
0
DNB Subject Category Language
0
Institut für Empirische Sprachwissenschaft
0
Leibniz-Centre General Linguistics (ZAS)
0
Bibliographies
BLLDB
0
BDSL
0
IDS Bibliografie zur deutschen Grammatik
0
IDS Bibliografie zur Gesprächsforschung
0
IDS Konnektoren im Deutschen
0
IDS Präpositionen im Deutschen
0
IDS OBELEX meta
0
MPI-SHH Linguistics Collection
0
MPI for Psycholinguistics
0
Linked Open Data catalogues
Annohub
0
Online resources
Link directory
0
Journal directory
0
Database directory
0
Dictionary directory
0
Open access documents
BASE
3
Linguistik-Repository
0
IDS Publikationsserver
0
Online dissertations
0
Language Description Heritage
0
© 2013 - 2024 Lin|gu|is|tik
|
Imprint
|
Privacy Policy
|
Datenschutzeinstellungen ändern