* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *
LINGUIST List 18.990

Mon Apr 02 2007

Diss: Semantics: Oshima: Perspectives in Reported Discourse

Editor for this issue: Hunter Lockwood <hunterlinguistlist.org>


To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.
Directory
        1.    David Oshima, Perspectives in Reported Discourse


*******************************************************************************
Fund Drive FLASH: We still need $28,854 to end Fund Drive.
If you have not donated, please visit http://linguistlist.org/donate.html
*******************************************************************************
Current Top 5 Schools in LL Grad School Challenge:

1. University of Washington $1134
2. Stanford University $1110
3. University of California, Santa Barbara $726
4. University of Toronto $685
5. Michigan State University $560

To see the full list, go to: http://linguistlist.org/donation/fund-drive2007/allschools.cfm

*******************************************************************************

Message 1: Perspectives in Reported Discourse
Date: 31-Mar-2007
From: David Oshima <davidyogmail.com>
Subject: Perspectives in Reported Discourse


Institution: Stanford University
Program: Department of Linguistics
Dissertation Status: Completed
Degree Date: 2006

Author: David Yoshikazu Oshima

Dissertation Title: Perspectives in Reported Discourse

Dissertation URL: http://davidyo.net/publications.aspx

Linguistic Field(s): Semantics

Dissertation Director:
Ivan A Sag

Dissertation Abstract:

This thesis addresses issues regarding propositional attitudes, with an
overarching theme of how the speaker's choice of perspective (between his
own and the reported agent's) manifests itself in attitude reports. I take
up four dimensions of perspective: analytic, logophoric, deictic, and
empathic. The analytic perspective concerns the de re and de dicto modes of
attitude reports. I defend the 'sententialist' approach to the de re/de
dicto distinction over the 'scopal' approach, and argue that the de dicto
mode reflects the fact that the speaker chooses descriptive terms
(linguistic forms) from the reported agent's perspective.

The logophoric perspective concerns the de se/non-de se opposition, which
has recently attracted wide attention in the light of new cross-linguistic
data. Building on the widely accepted view that the object of a de se
report is a Kaplanian propositional character, I develop a solution to two
problems known in the literature: (i) how to capture the relation between
what the complement clause denotes and what the 'original'
utterance/belief represents in a generalized way, and (ii) how to properly
restrict occurrences and possible interpretations of indexical expressions.

The deictic and empathic perspectives concern the choice of the reference
point(s) for deictic predicates (e.g., go and come) and the determination
of empathy relations (a la Kuno). First, I observe that the pragmatic
meanings associated with deictic predicates/empathy-loaded expressions are
presuppositional, and further point out that their projection pattern with
respect to an attitude predicate has interesting correlations with the
choice of the speaker's perspective. Then, I propose to treat deictic
predicates/empathy-loaded expressions as indexicals, which refer to either
the external context of utterance or a secondary context (In this sense,
the deictic and empathic perspectives can be understood as subcomponents of
the logophoric perspective.)

Towards the end of the thesis, I discuss factors that affect the possible
or favored choice of perspective, including (i) the interaction among the
subtypes of perspective (e.g., the bias for the consistency of
perspective), and (ii) the implicational hierarchy of the semantic types of
attitude predicates.




This Year the LINGUIST List hopes to raise $55,000. This money will go to help keep the 
List running by supporting all of our Student Editors for the coming year.

See below for donation instructions, and don't forget to check out our Fund Drive 2007 
LINGUIST List Superhero Adventure for some Fund Drive fun!

http://linguistlist.org/donation/fund-drive2007/ 

There are many ways to donate to LINGUIST!

You can donate right now using our secure credit card form.

Alternatively you can also pledge right now and pay later.

For all information on donating and pledging, including information on how to donate by 
check, money order, or wire transfer, please visit:

http://linguistlist.org/donate.html

The LINGUIST List is under the umbrella of Eastern Michigan University and as such can 
receive donations through the EMU Foundation, which is a registered 501(c) Non Profit 
organization. Our Federal Tax number is 38-6005986. These donations can be offset against 
your federal and sometimes your state tax return (U.S. tax payers only). For more 
information visit the IRS Web-Site, or contact your financial advisor.

Many companies also offer a gift matching program, such that they will match any gift 
you make to a non-profit organization. Normally this entails your contacting your human 
resources department and sending us a form that the EMU Foundation fills in and returns 
to your employer. This is generally a simple administrative procedure that doubles the 
value of your gift to LINGUIST, without costing you an extra penny. Please take a moment 
to check if your company operates such a program.

Thank you very much for your support of LINGUIST!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue




Please report any bad links or misclassified data

LINGUIST Homepage | Read LINGUIST | Contact us

NSF Logo

While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.