Documentation

Linglib.Studies.Gutzmann2015

Gutzmann (2015): Sentence Mood as Use-Conditional Meaning #

[Gut15]

Use-Conditional Meaning: Studies in Multidimensional Semantics. Oxford University Press.

Key Claims #

  1. Sentence mood operators (deontic, epistemic) are UCIs, not presuppositions
  2. The epistemic interpretation of [±wh] does NOT pass standard presupposition tests (negation, disjunction)
  3. V2-interrogatives carry a HKNOW condition absent from VL-interrogatives
  4. Modal particles are functional expletive UCIs whose mood restrictions derive from interaction with sentence mood operators
  5. wohl is a UC-modifier (not a UCI), with selectional restriction

Clause Type Predictions #

Clause typet-contentu-content
dass-VLpDEONT(p)
V2-declarativepDEONT(EPIS(p))
VL-interrogativepDEONT(EPIS(p))
V2-interrogativepDEONT(EPIS(p)) ⊙ HKNOW(p)
ImperativepDEONT(p)
source
theorem Gutzmann2015.cuban_cigar :
German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType.v2Interrogative.moodStructure.hasHearerKnowledge = true ∧ German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType.vlInterrogative.moodStructure.hasHearerKnowledge = false

The Cuban cigar argument: V2- and VL-interrogatives differ ONLY in the hearer knowledge condition. This explains why VL-interrogatives are felicitous even when the hearer clearly does not know the answer (the Cuban cigar scenario), while V2-interrogatives are not.

source
theorem Gutzmann2015.imperative_matches_dassVL :
German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType.imperative.moodStructure = German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType.dassVL.moodStructure

Imperatives share dass-VL mood structure (deontic only): both lack [±wh] at LF, so neither triggers epistemic interpretation.

source
theorem Gutzmann2015.root_rule {f : Features.ClauseForm} (ct : German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType f) :
ct.moodStructure.hasDeontic = true

Every matrix clause has a deontic operator (the root rule).

source
theorem Gutzmann2015.dassVL_no_epis :
German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType.dassVL.moodStructure.hasEpistemic = false

dass-VL clauses have no epistemic component.

source
theorem Gutzmann2015.v2Decl_epis_no_hknow :
German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType.v2Declarative.moodStructure.hasEpistemic = true ∧ German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType.v2Declarative.moodStructure.hasHearerKnowledge = false

V2-declaratives have epistemic but not hearer knowledge.

source
theorem Gutzmann2015.epis_preserves_truth {W : Type u_1} (p : W → Bool) (w : W) :
Semantics.Mood.Gutzmann.epis p w = p w

Epistemic embedding preserves truth at the world level. The epistemic contribution is purely use-conditional, not truth-conditional.

source
theorem Gutzmann2015.v2_vs_vl_interrog {W : Type u_1} (p : W → Bool) (c : Semantics.Mood.Gutzmann.MoodContext W) :
German.ClauseTypes.v2InterrogMood p c = (German.ClauseTypes.vlInterrogMood p c && Semantics.Mood.Gutzmann.hknow p c)

V2-interrogatives differ from VL-interrogatives only in HKNOW. Derived from the theory of [±wh] feature visibility.

source
def Gutzmann2015.uciParticles :
List Particle

Gutzmann's L_TU classification (§6.5): ja/denn/halt/doch are functional-expletive UCIs of type ⟨⟨s,t⟩, u⟩, restricted via use-conditional conflict. (Formerly fragment fields; the typing is this book's analysis.)

Equations
Instances For
    source
    def Gutzmann2015.ucModifiers :
    List Particle

    wohl is Gutzmann's sole UC-modifier among the common MPs: type ⟨⟨⟨s,t⟩,u⟩, ⟨⟨s,t⟩,u⟩⟩, modifying EPIS, restricted selectionally.

    Equations
    Instances For
      source
      def Gutzmann2015.restrictionKind (p : Particle) :
      Semantics.UseConditional.RestrictionKind

      Restriction kind per Gutzmann: UCIs restrict via use-conditional conflict, UC-modifiers selectionally (imperatives lack EPIS — a type mismatch, not a pragmatic conflict).

      Equations
      Instances For
        source
        theorem Gutzmann2015.wohl_derived_from_epis {f : Features.ClauseForm} (ct : German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType f) :
        German.Particles.licensedInClause German.Particles.wohl ct = ct.moodStructure.hasEpistemic

        wohl's distribution is fully derived from EPIS presence: wohl is licensed in a clause type iff that clause type has an epistemic mood operator — the formal content of the selectional restriction analysis.

        source
        theorem Gutzmann2015.ja_declarative_restriction :
        German.Particles.ja.LicensedIn Clause.Context.declarative ∧ ¬German.Particles.ja.LicensedIn Clause.Context.polarInterrogative

        ja is restricted to declaratives, matching the clause type with deontic + epistemic mood but without the hearer knowledge condition.

        source
        theorem Gutzmann2015.denn_interrogative_restriction :
        ¬German.Particles.denn.LicensedIn Clause.Context.declarative ∧ German.Particles.denn.LicensedIn Clause.Context.polarInterrogative

        denn is the interrogative counterpart of ja.

        source
        theorem Gutzmann2015.ja_denn_partition {f : Features.ClauseForm} (ct : German.ClauseTypes.GermanClauseType f) :
        ¬(German.Particles.licensedInClause German.Particles.ja ct = true ∧ German.Particles.licensedInClause German.Particles.denn ct = true)

        ja and denn partition clause types: they are never both licensed in the same clause type.