| 1 |
The Role of Discourse Prominence in the Resolution of Referential Ambiguities: Evidence from co-reference in Italian
|
|
|
|
In: University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Making Worlds Accessible. Essays in Honor of Angelika Kratzer
|
|
|
|
In: Angelika Kratzer Festschrift (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
Copular Questions and Concealed Questions
|
|
|
|
In: Sinn und Bedeutung; Bd. 14 (2010): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 14; 134-150 ; Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung; Vol 14 (2010): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 14; 134-150 ; 2629-6055 (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
Italian ‘mica’ in assertions and questions
|
|
|
|
In: Sinn und Bedeutung; Bd. 20 (2016): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 20; 234-251 ; Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung; Vol 20 (2016): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 20; 234-251 ; 2629-6055 (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Evidence and Bias: The Case of the Evidential Future in Italian
|
|
|
|
In: Semantics and Linguistic Theory; Proceedings of SALT 29; 727-747 ; 2163-5951 (2019)
|
|
Abstract:
Evidential markers encode the source of information that an individual (the evidential Origo) has for a proposition. In root declaratives, the Origo is always the speaker (see Korotkova 2016 and references therein). Instead, questions often display interrogative flip: the Origo shifts to the hearer (Garrett 2001; Speas & Tenny 2003, a.o.). While interrogative flip is widely attested across languages, some evidentials have been reported not to flip in questions (see, e.g., San Roque, Floyd & Norcliffe 2017; Bhadra 2017). What determines whether evidentials flip or not? Recent work (Korotkova 2016; Bhadra 2017) has proposed that there is a correlation between lack of flip and bias in questions. This paper contributes to our understanding of the interaction of evidentials and bias by investigating the behaviour of questions with the Italian non-predictive future. We characterize the non-predictive future as an inferential evidential marker (see also Mari 2009; Eckardt & Beltrama forthcoming), and show that lack of flip for the future correlates only with a particular type of bias: a reversal of the default bias associated with negative polar questions (Frana & Rawlins forthcoming). We trace back this pattern to an interaction between the evidential component of the future and the operator that triggers bias reversal.
|
|
URL: https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v29i0.4629
http://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/SALT/article/view/29.727
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 9 |
Unconditional concealed questions and Heim's ambiguity
|
|
|
|
In: Semantics and Linguistic Theory; Proceedings of SALT 21; 495-514 ; 2163-5951 (2011)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 10 |
Concealed questions. In search of answers
|
|
|
|
In: Doctoral Dissertations Available from Proquest (2010)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 11 |
Concealed Questions. In Search Of Answers
|
|
|
|
In: Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 (2010)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 12 |
The de re Analysis of Concealed Questions: A Unified Approach to Definite and Indefinite Concealed Questions
|
|
|
|
In: Semantics and Linguistic Theory; Proceedings of SALT 16; 17-34 ; 2163-5951 (2006)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
