31.2094, Review: Computational Linguistics; Pragmatics; Psycholinguistics; Semantics: Portner (2018)
The LINGUIST List
linguist at listserv.linguistlist.org
Fri Jun 26 02:38:37 UTC 2020
LINGUIST List: Vol-31-2094. Thu Jun 25 2020. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.
Subject: 31.2094, Review: Computational Linguistics; Pragmatics; Psycholinguistics; Semantics: Portner (2018)
Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Lauren Perkins, Nils Hjortnaes, Yiwen Zhang, Joshua Sims
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
Editor for this issue: Jeremy Coburn <jecoburn at linguistlist.org>
================================================================
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 22:38:03
From: Kathryn Bove [kpbove at gmail.com]
Subject: Mood.
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36602397
Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/29/29-979.html
AUTHOR: Paul Portner
TITLE: Mood
SERIES TITLE: Oxford Surveys in Semantics and Pragmatics
PUBLISHER: Oxford University Press
YEAR: 2018
REVIEWER: Kathryn P Bove, New Mexico State University
SUMMARY
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Portner begins this book by stating that most accounts of mood treat verbal
mood (such as modal adjectives, modal nouns, and grammatical mood) and
sentential mood (which modify an entire proposition, such as the use of
auxiliaries of possibility) as two individual units, but he hints that they
may not be as different as linguists assume. He then shares his goals for the
book: to provide background on previous mood research for scholars and to
advance new ideas of semantics and pragmatics in mood. He provides essential
definitions for keys terms and several examples that demonstrate the basics
necessary for studying mood theory. Next, he reviews canonical classifications
of modality (i.e. epistemic, priority, and dynamic modality) and Kratzer’s
(1981, 1991) ordering semantics. Portner notes that he is unable to give a
complete overview of modality in this book and directs the reader to his
previous book on the topic (Portner 2009). He describes several key theories
in what he calls “the flow of information in discourse” including the dynamic
approach (Stalnaker (1970, 1974), File Change Semantics (Heim 1982, 1983,
1988), Discourse Representation Theory (Kamp 1981, Kamp and Reyle 1993),
Dynamic Logic (Groenendijk and Stokhof 1991, 1991), Speech Act Theory (Austin
1962), illocutionary force (Searle 1965, 1969) and update potential/
illocutionary force (Gadzar 1979, 1981). Filled with ample examples and clear
explanations, this section highlights significant contributions of each theory
to the field of modality. The section ends with a brief outline for the book.
CHAPTER 2: VERBAL MOOD
As Portner points out in the beginning of this section, subsentential modality
is key to understanding mood. Therefore, he starts with an overview of
sentential modal constructions. This section discusses modal strength,
important differences in predicates (such as desire and believe), and the
importance of de se and de re interpretations of modality. Additionally, there
is a discussion of recent theory of subsentential modality within formal
semantics. Strengths and weaknesses in each of these theories is discussed.
Next, Portner gives an exhaustive overview of research on
indicative/subjunctive moods based primarily on Romance languages. He divides
these theories into two groups: theories based on comparison (such as Anand
and Hacquard 2013) and theories based on truth in a designated world or set of
worlds (such as Farkas 1992). The discussion of each group includes reviews of
several recent theories on grammatical mood that Portner groups by similar
theoretical bases for which he gives examples (some original, some new) in
both natural and formal language. This section ends with a conversation of
mood that moves beyond subjunctive/indicative forms. Specifically, Portner
explores other mood-indicating forms (such as the infinitive and
mood-indicating modals).
CHAPTER 3: Sentence mood
This lengthy chapter starts with a description of sentence mood, clause type,
and sentential force. Throughout this chapter, the author provides ample
examples, primarily based on English and non-Romance languages. Portner offers
definitions of these terms relative to alternative terminology to ease the
reader into the extensive overviews of previous literature. The chapter
presents the distinction between clause types (as opposed to grammatical
categories), describes properties of clause type systems, and discusses the
grammatical features that “mark” clause type. Portner begins a discussion of
sentential force, which he continues in depth later in the chapter. With
regard to the syntax/semantics interface, this chapter reviews several
approaches that Portner categorizes as one of the following: the operator
approach, the construction-based approach, and the compositional approach. The
next section returns to the topic of speech act theory. Portner reviews
classic theories such as the Performative Hypothesis (Katz and Postal 1964)
and discusses adjustments made in more recent analyses using speech act theory
as a framework. The chapter continues by revisiting the dynamic approach, also
first presented in the introduction. Starting with classic theories such as
Hamblin’s (1971) commitment slate model, Stalnaker’s (1974) common ground
model, and Kamp’s (1981) discourse representation, Portner compares and
contrast each approach to dynamic theory and shares his own perspective
(Portner 2004). He also compares individual clause types (i.e. interrogatives,
imperatives). Lastly, he presents a short discussion of optatives and
exclamatives, which he calls “minor types”. In the conclusion for this
chapter, Portner concludes that there has been extensive work over decades on
sentence mood, but there is a notable lack of cross-linguistic data. He points
out that this is changing in the field of semantics, and he anticipates an
increase in this data in the future.
CHAPTER 4: Core mood, reality status, and evidentiality
Portner has two goals for this chapter: (1) Present his theory, which he
proposes can capture both verbal and sentential mood and (2) Explore realis
and evidentiality. Portner proposes his own novel explanation, “The Partially
Ordered Set of Worlds (POSW) Framework”, which uses the idea of a preference
relation of a < ordering source given an individual’s cognitive model. Portner
provides ample formalizations for models and applies it to both verbal and
sentential mood. He also includes suggestions for the elaboration of this
framework. In the second section of this chapter, Portner briefly explores
realis and evidentiality, of he claims are is little discussion in semantics
and pragmatics. Portner refers to verbal and sentential mood as “core mood”,
and he suggests that realis and evidentiality may be part of core mood or they
may be “peripheral types of mood”. First, Portner provides a very brief
overview of the (ir)realis debate. He provides examples of the Papual language
Amele from Roberts (1991) and introduces the reader to the discussion of the
value of the realis system (Elliot 2000) or the lack thereof (de Haan 2012).
He notes that this presentation of information is “incomplete and sketchy”,
but he concludes that it is unclear if this is core mood due to the fact that
the term (ir)realis has been used variety of ways. In his discussion of
evidentiality, Portner presents an equally brief overview of two perspectives:
Faller’s (2002) analysis based on speech act theory and Murray’s (2014, 2016)
analysis based on dynamic theory. He concludes this chapter (and in fact the
book) by reiterating the importance of the relationship between mood and
modality and the need for theories that can correctly account for both mood
phenomena and modal semantics.
EVALUATION
Overall, like his previous books, this book was a pleasure to read. Portner
has a knack for presenting clear examples that are explained in a direct and
tangible way. For example, when reviewing several approaches to analyzing
modality in the introduction, he uses the same natural language example in his
explanation of each theory. This allows the reader to clearly see the
differences in the theories. When he adopts new terminology (as seen in
Chapter 2’s “clause type”), his consistently use of the terminology
throughout, even to describe previous work, helps the reader adapt to the
proposed terminology. While the writing is very accessible, Porter does not
overly simplify the material that he presents.
The first goal of this book was to provide an overview to the topic of mood in
formal semantics. Portner has done this very successfully. The section on
verbal mood provides an extensive overview that covers the canonical work in
mood, especially in Romance languages. Most impressively, he allows the
previous research to interact with each other, and as he points out weaknesses
of one approach, he suggests how others have filled that gap. Chapter 3
(sentential mood) also provided extensive background on sentence mood. While
the information was very important and examples were helpful, the organization
of the chapter was a bit confusing at times. There were several jumps back and
forth between concepts in this chapter in particular. For example, sentence
mood, clause type and sentential force are presented in 3.1. Next is speech
act theory (3.2) and dynamic theory (3.3). Section 3.2 reviewed previous
theories separated by author and includes a subsection on dynamic theory.
Section 3.3 was organized by clause types. In the last section, we return to
the first subsection to talk about theories of clause type systems and
sentence mood (3.4). However, this is only a minor issue. The last chapter in
the book briefly presented background on irrealis and evidentiality. As the
author noted, this section was incomplete. While Portner does include a great
summary of the theories that he presents, I would direct the reader to other
sources on both of these topics. Nevertheless, the book does an exceptional
job at presenting important research on both verbal and sentential mood.
The second goal of this book was to posit new ideas of semantics and
pragmatics in mood. In Chapter 4, Portner presents his Partially Ordered Set
of Worlds (POSW) Framework, which is used to explain both verbal and
sentential mood. He often refers to this framework “sketch of analyses”, and I
would argue that this is an accurate description of his proposal. In this
theory, he provides formalizations but this section only includes one example
of natural language. This framework appears to have promise, but it lacks
development. Based on the fact that the author includes suggestions for the
elaboration of this framework, I believe that Portner’s intention for
presenting this framework is to open the idea up for future research.
I would highly recommend this book to a scholar wanting to learn more about a
semantic approach to mood. A familiarity with formal semantics would assist
the reader in understanding the plentiful formalizations presented, but even
those unfamiliar with this theoretical approach will benefit from reading this
book. If you are planning on starting a research project on mood (or even if
you have already started), this book will be a strong asset.
REFERENCES
Anand, P. and Hacquard, V. (2013) Epistemics and attitudes. Semantics and
Pragmatics, 6(8):1-59
Austin, J. (1962). How to do Things with Words. Oxford University Press, New
York.
de Haan, F. (2012). Irrealis: fact or fiction? Language Sciences, 34(2):
107-130
Elliot, J. (2000). Realis and irrealis: forms and concepts of the
grammaticalization of reality. Linguistic Typology, 4:55-90
Faller, M. (2002). Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quechua.
PhD thesis, Stanford University.
Farkas, D. (1992). On the semantics of subjunctive complements. In
Hirschbuiler, P. and Koerner, K., eds, Romance Languages and Modern Linguistic
Theory, p. 69-104. Benjamins, Amberdam and Philadelphia.
Gadzar, G. (1979). Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form.
Academic Press, London
------------ (1981). Speech act assignment. In Joshi, A., Weber, B.H., and
Sag.I.A., eds, Elements of Discourse Understanding, p 64-83. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Groenendijk and Stokhof (1990). Dynamic Montague grammar. In Kálman, L. and
Pólos, L., eds, Papers from the Symposium on Logic and Language, p. 3-48.
Adakémiai Kiadó, Budapest.
------------ (1991). Dynamic predicate logic. Linguistics and Philosophy, 14:
39-100.
Hamblin, C. L. (1971). Mathematical models of dialogue. Theoria, 37(2):
130-155.
Heim, I. (1982). The semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrase. PhD
thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
------------ (1983). File Change Semantics and the familiarity theory of
definiteness. In Bauerle, R., Schwarze, C., and von Stechow, A., eds, Meaning,
Use, and Interpretation of Language, p. 164-189. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
Reprinted in Portner, P. and Partee, B.H., eds (2002). Formal Semantics: The
Essential Readings. Blackwell, Oxford.
------------ (1988). On the projection problem for presuppositions. In Barlow,
M., Flickinger, D., and Wiegand, N., eds, Proceedings of WCCFL 2, p 114-125.
Standford University. Reprinted in Portner, P. and Partee, B.H., eds (2002).
Formal Semantics: The Essential Readings. Blackwell, Oxford.
Kamp, H. (1981). A theory of truth and semantic representation. In
Groenendijk, J., Janssen, T., and Stokhof, M., eds, Formal Methods in the
Study of Language, p 277-322. Mathematical Centre, Amsterdam.
Kamp, H. and Reyle, U. (1993). From Discourse to Logic: Introduction to
Model-theoretic Semantics of Natural Language, Formal Logic and Discourse
Representation Theory. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Kratzer, A. (1981). The notional category of modality. In Eikmeyer, H. J. and
Rieser, H., eds, Words, Worlds, and Contexts, p 38-74. De Gruyter, Berlin.
------------ (1991). Modality. In von Stechow, A. and Wunderlich, D., eds,
Semantik/Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, p
639-350.de Gruyter, Berlin.
Murray, S. E. (2014). Varieties of update. Semantics and Pragmatics,
7(2):1-53.
------------ (2016). Evidentials and illocutionary mood in Cheyenne.
International Journal of American Linguistics, 82(4): 487-517.
Portner, P. (2004). The semantics of imperatives within a theory of clause
types. In Watanabe, K. and Young, R. B., eds Proceedings of Semantics and
Linguistic Theory 14, p. 235-252. CLC Publications, Cornell University
Linguistics Department.
------------. (2009). Modality. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Roberts, J.R. (1991). Modality in Amele and other Papuan languages. Journal of
Linguistics, 26(2): 363-401.
Searle, J. R. (1965). What is a speech act? In Black, M., ed., Philosophy in
America p. 221-239. Unwin Hyman, London.
------------ (1969). Speech Acts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Stalnaker, R. (1970). Pragmatics. Synthese, 22: 272-289
------------ (1974). Pragmatic presuppositions. In Munitz, M. and Unger, P.,
eds, Semantics and Philosophy, p. 197-213. New York University Press, New
York.
ABOUT THE REVIEWER
Kathryn Bove is an assistant professor at New Mexico State University. Her
primary areas of research are semantics, language contact, and mood/modality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*************************** LINGUIST List Support ***************************
The 2019 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
https://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list-2019
Let's make this a short fund drive!
Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-31-2094
----------------------------------------------------------
More information about the LINGUIST
mailing list