13.864, Sum: Causal/Resultative Uses of "And"

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-13-864. Thu Mar 28 2002. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 13.864, Sum: Causal/Resultative Uses of "And"

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry, Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>
            Andrew Carnie, U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org):
	Simin Karimi, U. of Arizona
	Terence Langendoen, U. of Arizona

Editors (linguist at linguistlist.org):
	Karen Milligan, WSU 		Naomi Ogasawara, EMU
	James Yuells, EMU		Marie Klopfenstein, WSU
	Michael Appleby, EMU		Heather Taylor-Loring, EMU
	Ljuba Veselinova, Stockholm U.	Richard John Harvey, EMU
	Dina Kapetangianni, EMU		Renee Galvis, WSU
	Karolina Owczarzak, EMU

Software: John Remmers, E. Michigan U. <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
          Gayathri Sriram, E. Michigan U. <gayatri at linguistlist.org>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.



Editor for this issue: Marie Klopfenstein <marie at linguistlist.org>

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Wed, 27 Mar 2002 10:09:07 +0000
From:  Julian Bradfield <jcb at dcs.ed.ac.uk>
Subject:  resultative etc. uses of "and"

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Wed, 27 Mar 2002 10:09:07 +0000
From:  Julian Bradfield <jcb at dcs.ed.ac.uk>
Subject:  resultative etc. uses of "and"

In Linguist 13.423, I asked whether "there is any language in which the
word for "and" in its plain boolean sense, or in its plain temporal
sequencing sense, *cannot* be used in the causal sense?"

Many thanks for the following replies, which I have edited for
brevity. In brief, the answer is "yes: several East Asian languages,
for a start"! However, it appears from the replies that the uses of
the different conjunctive particles in Chinese are syntactically
determined rather than semantic in nature.

- -
From: J L Speranza <jls at netverk.com.ar>

My answer: Can't we always built up what Grice would call an
"idiosyncratic" procedure. E.g. To utter *"P & Q" (where * is a
mode-indicator) iff U (Utterer) wills A (Audience) judges U accepts P AND U
accepts Q (where AND is the Boolean operator). In fact that's what Grice
was proposing as from as early as 1952 (as cited by Strawson, _Introduction
to Logical Theory_) when defend Russell/Whitehead's truth-conditional
'sense' of "and" as the only _relevant_ one; the remaining bunch of
so-called 'senses' (plain temporal sequencing, causal/resultative) -- some
of them highly relevant -- being just 'uses' (as Bradfield hs it) or to
wit: evaporable conversational implicatures. If so, English is the language
you are looking for. Refs: H. P. Grice, _Studies in the Way of Words_ (on
'and' on p 22 f -- & further refs. for 'and' in index: 67-70, 201, 276;
p.124 f for 'idiolect' meaning; for _resultant procedures_ cf Grice in
_Aspects of Reason_, p. 54f.

- -
From: Lance Eccles <lance.eccles at mq.edu.au>

Mandarin Chinese "and" words such as "he" and "gen" (there are also
others, more or less interchangeable) cannot join clauses, only nouns
(pen and pencil, cat and dog).

I suspect that if you investigate other East Asian languages you'll
find similar cases.

- -
From: "Sang Hwan Seong" <sseong at uni-bonn.de>

Korean connective 'kuriko' (and) cannot be used in this case in its plain sense.
I don't think that German 'und' also works for this sense.

*Gib mir dein Geld und ich lasse dich gehen.
Gib mir dein Geld und dann lasse ich dich gehen.
German 'und' also has the meaning 'but'.

- -
From: "Tim Wharton" <tim at tcody.freeserve.co.uk>

Tim Wharton (UCL) here. More than one of my students has told me that
Chinese speakers (can't remember whether Cantonese or Mandarin)  don't use
plain 'and' to have resultative meaning (instead they use 'and' plus 'so' or
some such).

- -
From: Mikael Parkvall <parkvall at ling.su.se>

Sorry if I'm pointing out something that you're well aware of, but I kinda
sense between the lines that you assume that there is a word 'and' in all
languages. Clearly, a language without 'and' (and this is not too uncommon,
I believe) would fit your definition even if that's presumably not what
you're looking for. Also, quite a few languages that I've looked at have
more than one 'and, depending on whether you're joining NPs or VPs.

- -
From: "z.guan" <z.guan at world-net.co.nz>

In Chinese (Mandarin), "and" has only the former use.

- -
From: Dieter Wunderlich <wdl at phil-fak.uni-duesseldorf.de>

>In English, and all other languages known to the participants so far,
>the word "and" can have a causal or resultative meaning, as in
>  Give me the money and I'll let you go.

This sentence has a conditional reading but never a causal or resultative one!!

- -
From: Niina Zhang <zhang at zas.gwz-berlin.de>

Chinese conjuncts

Four most frequently used conjuncts in Chinese are: erqie, he, yiji, and
jian. None of them can be used in a causal sense.

/erqie/ 'and' coordinates APs and verbal phrases including clauses.

/he/ 'and' coordinates two nominals, regardless of whether the nominals are
individual-denoting. It can also coordinate two verbs or verb phrases if
there is a shared direct object.

(1)	a. 	Dahui      taolun  he  tongguo-le na   xiang jueyi.
		conference discuss and pass-PRF    that CL      decision
		'That decision was discussed and passed in the conference.'
	b.	Women fenxi   he   pipan-le        na   pian wenzhang.
		we    analyze and criticize-PRF that CL     article
		'We analyzed and criticized that article.'

/yiji/ 'and' coordinates nominals, PPs, and verbal phrases including
clauses (Lü et al. 1999: 615).

/Jian/ 'and' coordinates VP and NP predicates, but not AP, PP, and
individual-denoting nominals (DP).

Reference
Lü, S. et al. 1980 Xiandai Hanyu Babai Ci [800 Words in Chinese]. Shangwu
Press. (1999)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-13-864