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


Summary Details


Query:   A summary of
Author:  Eung-Cheon Hah
Submitter Email:  click here to access email
Linguistic LingField(s):   Pragmatics
Semantics
Syntax

Summary:   Dear linguists,

Around seven weeks ago, I asked your judgements on the scopal facts of
the following sentences. I thank the following people for their
immediate response to the test.

Linda Merlo <lmerlo@oclc.k12.ca.us>
Deborah Milam Berkley <dberkley@babel.ling.nwu.edu>
David Parkinson <dpll@cornell.edu>
Michael Israel <israel@ling.ucsd.edu>
anonymous <htaber@email.gc.cuny.edu>
Robert Orr <roborr@uottawa.ca>

Of these linguists, Robert Orr replied: "With regard to your recent
posting, I am a native speaker of English (British(Scottish with a
Canadian overlay), and, for what it's worth, my first reaction is that I
can't imagine these sentences pronounced without some sort of tonal
accentuation (possibly accompanied by a change in facial expression!)."


A summary of the responses is given below the original query.

> I'm currently investigaing scope phenomena in English. Your intuitive
> judgement on the followin sentences would be gratly appreciated. If the
> sentence is ambiguous, marginally ambiguous, or unambiguous between the
> relevant scope-bearing elements given in the parenthesis, please mark it
> with (+A), (mA), or (-A), respectively. I assume that all the
> scope-bearing elements receive neutral stress.
>
> *********************************************************************
> 1. Someone doesn't love everyone. (between 'someone' and 'everyone')
> 2. Someone doesn't love John. (between 'someone' and 'not')
> 3. I expected someone not to have arrived. (between 'someone' and 'not')
> 4. I expected everyone not to have arrived.(between 'everyone' and 'not)
> 5. I expected someone not to like everyone.
> (between 'someone' and 'everyone')
> 6. I expected someone to like everyone.
> (between 'someone' and 'everyone')
> *********************************************************

1. (+A: 2, mA: 1, -A: 2)
2. (+A: 0, mA: 0, -A: 5)
3. (+A: 0, mA: 1, -A: 4)
4. (+A: 2, mA: 1, -A: 2)
5. (+A: 2, mA: 1, -A: 2)
6. (+A: 3, mA: 2, -A: 0)


Thanks again.

Best,
Eung-Cheon Hah

LL Issue: 9.909
Date Posted: 19-Jun-1998
Original Query: Read original query


Back

Sums main page