Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Wiley-Blackwell Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

Language Planning as a Sociolinguistic Experiment

By: Ernst Jahr

Provides richly detailed insight into the uniqueness of the Norwegian language development. Marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of the Norwegian nation following centuries of Danish rule


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

Acquiring Phonology: A Cross-Generational Case-Study

By Neil Smith

The study also highlights the constructs of current linguistic theory, arguing for distinctive features and the notion 'onset' and against some of the claims of Optimality Theory and Usage-based accounts.


New from Brill!

ad

Language Production and Interpretation: Linguistics meets Cognition

By Henk Zeevat

The importance of Henk Zeevat's new monograph cannot be overstated. [...] I recommend it to anyone who combines interests in language, logic, and computation [...]. David Beaver, University of Texas at Austin


Academic Paper


Title: 'Between being wise and acting wise: A hidden conditional in some constructions with propensity adjectives'
Author: DavidYoshikazuOshima
Email: click here to access email
Homepage: 'http://www.gsid.nagoya-u.ac.jp/oshima'
Institution: 'Nagoya University'
Linguistic Field: 'Semantics'
Abstract: This paper develops a semantic analysis of three constructions: (i) the subject-oriented adverb construction (Wisely, John left early), (ii) the ‘Adj+to Inf’ construction (John was wise to leave early), and (iii) the ‘Adj+of NP’ construction (It was wise of John to leave early), which all involve three semantic components: (i) an individual a (John), (ii) a property P that describes a mental/behavioral propensity (wise), and (iii) another property P which typically describes an action (leave early). I argue that the three constructions share a meaning along the lines of ‘P(a), and from this it is possible to infer that P(a)’, where P is forced to receive the transitory interpretation, but they differ as to which component they assert/presuppose. I further demonstrate that this analysis allows us to solve two well-known semantic puzzles concerning these constructions (the ‘entailment puzzle’ and the ‘embeddability puzzle’). The three constructions are highly amenable to the Construction Grammar approach, because their meaning cannot be derived from the intuitive meanings of their constituents and regular semantic rules only. I provide formal analyses of the three constructions in the framework of Sign-Based Construction Grammar (SBCG).

CUP at LINGUIST

This article appears in Journal of Linguistics Vol. 45, Issue 2, which you can read on Cambridge's site or on LINGUIST .



Back
Add a new paper
Return to Academic Papers main page
Return to Directory of Linguists main page