TRA CỨU
Tác giả CN Fuentes, Pablo
Nhan đề Future obligations / Pablo Fuentes
Thông tin xuất bản United States : Cambridge University Press, 2020
Mô tả vật lý p. 601 - 628
Tóm tắt This article reflects on a double interpretation of English constructions containing the combined expression will have to. As I will show, illocutions involving sentences of the type ‘NP will have to VP’ can be interpreted as either (i) predicting future enforcing circumstances that trigger a future obligation or (ii) reporting such circumstances as currently in force at speech time. Once I sketch the different semantic elements at play in a Kratzerian framework, I cast doubt on some current views on the so-called modal–tense interaction. As I will show, one way to fully account for the availability of both readings is by assuming a semantic temporal underspecification as to when the triggering circumstances in the conversational background are initially in force. This raises important theoretical caveats for semantic analyses in the field, particularly for those that equate the semantics of the future with prediction. As the article shows, such a widespread assumption can be contended by a dynamic account of obligational ascriptions, according to which their different illocutionary forces can be derived from the contextual change potential of its primitive (and admittedly underspecified) future semantics. Ultimately, the paper voices support for the view that future semantics must not be equated with prediction.
Đề mục chủ đề English--English constructions--Tense
Đề mục chủ đề Tiếng Anh--Cấu trúc--Thì
Thuật ngữ không kiểm soát Cấu trúc
Thuật ngữ không kiểm soát Tiếng Anh
Thuật ngữ không kiểm soát Thì
Nguồn trích Journal of Linguistics- Volume 56 , Issue 3, 01 August 2020
Tệp tin điện tử https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-linguistics/article/abs/future-obligations/14C474BFFB849AA3D6D40143A87D6184
000 00000nab#a2200000ui#4500
00159956
0022
004BE0D0833-7AC9-4F30-974C-AB5F3CB8A8DC
005202105061526
008081223s2020 vm| vie
0091 0
022 |a00222267
039|a20210506152609|btult|y20201207145719|zhuongnt
0410 |aeng
044 |aenk
1001 |aFuentes, Pablo
24510|aFuture obligations / |cPablo Fuentes
260 |aUnited States : |bCambridge University Press, |c2020
300 |ap. 601 - 628
520 |aThis article reflects on a double interpretation of English constructions containing the combined expression will have to. As I will show, illocutions involving sentences of the type ‘NP will have to VP’ can be interpreted as either (i) predicting future enforcing circumstances that trigger a future obligation or (ii) reporting such circumstances as currently in force at speech time. Once I sketch the different semantic elements at play in a Kratzerian framework, I cast doubt on some current views on the so-called modal–tense interaction. As I will show, one way to fully account for the availability of both readings is by assuming a semantic temporal underspecification as to when the triggering circumstances in the conversational background are initially in force. This raises important theoretical caveats for semantic analyses in the field, particularly for those that equate the semantics of the future with prediction. As the article shows, such a widespread assumption can be contended by a dynamic account of obligational ascriptions, according to which their different illocutionary forces can be derived from the contextual change potential of its primitive (and admittedly underspecified) future semantics. Ultimately, the paper voices support for the view that future semantics must not be equated with prediction.
65010|aEnglish|xEnglish constructions|xTense
65010|aTiếng Anh|xCấu trúc|xThì
6530 |aCấu trúc
6530 |aTiếng Anh
6530 |aThì
773 |tJournal of Linguistics|gVolume 56 , Issue 3, 01 August 2020
856 |uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-linguistics/article/abs/future-obligations/14C474BFFB849AA3D6D40143A87D6184
890|a0|b0|c0|d0

Không có liên kết tài liệu số nào