| 81 |
Obligatory reconstruction and the meaning of traces
|
|
|
|
In: http://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/2E5MDU5Y/motrSingle.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 82 |
On Quantifier Raising in German
|
|
|
|
In: http://edocs.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2009/12804/pdf/SAUERLAND_On_Quantifier_Raising_in_German.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 83 |
Decomposing Questions Acts
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.zas.gwz-berlin.de/fileadmin/material/40-60-puzzles-for-krifka/pdf/sauerland.pdf
|
|
Abstract:
German wieder (‘again’) has several uses that have not been discussed in much detail as Klein (2001) points out. One puzzling use that I have not seen discussed even by Klein is that of wieder in questions (as far as I can tell, nochmal displays the same range of uses). Consider example (1): (1) Wie war wieder ihr Name? How was again your name It seems that wieder in (1) has a reading, that is absent from the corresponding declarative in (2). (2) has two interpretations: One interpretation requires a namechange: my name used to be Uli at some point in the past, then I had a different name for a while, but now I went back to Uli. Secondly, (2) has an interpretation, where it states that somebody earlier in some salient sequence (not necessarily temporal), also had the name Uli. Focus disambiguates between these two interpretations. While the former requires focus on ‘Uli’, the latter requires focus on ‘mein’. (2) Mein Name ist wieder Uli. my name is again Uli The question in (1) allows an interpretation that corresponds to neither of these interpretations of (2): (1) does not presuppose that the person addressed has changed his name or that there is another person with the same name. I suspect that this interpretation involves an interpretation of wieder at the speech act level. One initial indication of this speech-act nature comes from its cooccurrence with denn. Krifka (2001) discusses the German particle denn as a speech act particle. Denn naturally co-occurs with wieder as in
|
|
URL: http://www.zas.gwz-berlin.de/fileadmin/material/40-60-puzzles-for-krifka/pdf/sauerland.pdf
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.607.9751
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 84 |
1.1 Necessary Condition for the Licensing of Focus
|
|
|
|
In: http://edocs.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2009/12813/pdf/SAUERLAND_The_Content_of_Pronouns_Evidence_from_Focus.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 85 |
A Contrast to a Trace
|
|
|
|
In: http://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/TY3MTljM/wccfl01.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 86 |
No ‘No’: On the Crosslinguistic Absence of a Determiner ‘No’∗
|
|
|
|
In: http://edocs.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2009/12806/pdf/SAUERLAND_On_the_Crosslinguistic_Absence.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 87 |
Hardts Surprising Sloppy Readings: A Flat Binding Account ∗
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.hf.uio.no/ilos/forskning/aktuelt/arrangementer/konferanser/2007/SuB12/proceedings/sauerland_523-536.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 88 |
Hardts Surprising Sloppy Readings: A Flat Binding Account ∗
|
|
|
|
In: http://edocs.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2009/12748/pdf/SAUERLAND_Hardts_Surprising_Sloppy_Readings.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 89 |
Focus and the Semantic Typology of Reciprocals
|
|
|
|
In: http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/burs/RCL07/pages/handouts/sauerland.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
