Skip to main content
Log in

A unified analysis of conditionals as topics

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Linguistics and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We bring out syntactic and semantic similarities of two types of conditionals with fronted antecedents [normal indicative conditionals (NCs) and biscuit conditionals (BCs)] and two types of left dislocation constructions in German (German left dislocation and hanging topic left dislocation), which mark two types of topicality (aboutness topicality and relevance topicality). On the basis of these similarities we argue that (the antecedent if-clauses of) NCs and BCs are aboutness topics and relevance topics, respectively. Our analysis extends the approach to aboutness topicality of Endriss (Quantificational topics. A scopal treatment of exceptional wide scope phenomena, 2009) to relevance topics to derive the semantic and pragmatic contribution of left-dislocated DPs and applies it to an analysis of conditionals as (maximal) pluralities of possible worlds. We show how this uniform approach to the interpretation of topicality accounts for the nominal left dislocation constructions as well as for the semantic and pragmatic effects observed in connection with the two types of conditionals. We furthermore discuss the potential of our proposal to deal with subjunctive biscuit conditionals, if-clauses modifying speech acts different from assertions, conditionals with right-dislocated if-clauses, and nested conditionals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alonso-Ovalle L. (2009) Counterfactuals, correlatives, and disjunction. Linguistics and Philosophy 32: 207–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altmann, H. (1981). Formen der Herausstellung im Deutschen. Tubingen: Niemeyer.

  • Austin, J. L. (1961). Ifs and cans. In Philosophical papers (pp. 153–180). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Averintseva-Klisch, M. (2006). The ‘separate performative’ account of the German right dislocation. In C. Ebert & C. Endriss (Eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 10, Vol. 44 of ZASPiL (pp. 15–28). Berlin: ZAS.

  • Bennett, J. (2003). A philosophical guide to conditionals. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  • Bhatt, R., & Pancheva, R. (2006). Conditionals. In M. Everaert & H. van Riemsdijk (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax (Vol. I, pp. 638–687). Malden: Blackwell.

  • Bittner, M. (2001). Topical Referents for Individuals and Possibilities. In R. Hastings et al. (Ed.) Proceedings from SALT XI, pages 36–55

  • Comrie, B. (1986). Conditionals: A typology. In E. C. Traugott, A. ter Meulen, J. Snitzer Reilly, & Ch. A. Ferguson (Eds.), On conditionals (Chap. 4, pp. 77–102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Davison A. (1983) Linguistic or pragmatic description in the context of the performadox. Linguistics and Philosophy 6: 499–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Declerck, R., & Reed, S. (2001). Conditionals: A comprehensive empirical analysis. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.

  • DeRose K., Grandy R. E. (1999) Conditional assertions and ‘biscuit’ conditionals. Noûs 33(3): 405–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebert, Ch., & Ebert, C. (2010). On squeamishness of the royal kind. In T. Hanneforth & G. Fanselow (Eds.), Language and logos. Festschrift for Peter Staudacher on his 70th Birthday. Studia grammatica 72. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

  • Ebert, Ch., & Endriss, C. (2007). Functional topics. In E. Puig-Waldmüller (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sinn und Bedeutung XI (pp. 194–208). Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.

  • Ebert C., Hinterwimmer S. (2010) Quantificational variability effects with plural definites: Quantification over individuals or situations?. Journal of Semantics 27: 139–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endriss, C. (2009). Quantificational topics. A scopal treatment of exceptional wide scope phenomena. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy. Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Endriss, C., & Hinterwimmer, S. (2010). The interpretation of topical indefinites as direct and indirect aboutness topics. In C. Féry & M. Zimmermann (Eds.), Information structure (pp. 89–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • von Fintel, K. (1994). Restrictions on quantifier domains. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Franke, M. (2007). The pragmatics of biscuit conditionals. In M. Aloni, P. Dekker, & F. Roelofsen (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixteenth Amsterdam colloquium. Amsterdam: ILLC/Department of Philosophy University of Amsterdam.

  • Franke, M. (2009). Signal to act: Game theory in pragmatics. Ph.D. Thesis, Universiteit can Amsterdam.

  • Frey, W. (2004). Notes on the syntax and the pragmatics of German left dislocation. In H. Lohnstein & S. Trissler (Eds.), The syntax and semantics of the left periphery (pp. 203–233). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Frey, W. (2005). Pragmatic properties of certain German and English left peripheral constructions. Linguistics, 43, 89–129.

  • Gärtner H.-M. (2000) Are there V2 relative clauses in german?. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 3(2): 97–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillies A. S. (2010) Iffiness. Semantics and Pragmatics 3(4): 1–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1984). Studies on the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.

  • Haegeman L. (2003) Conditional clauses: External and internal syntax. Mind & Language 18(4): 317–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haiman J. (1978) Conditionals are topics. Language 54: 565–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hale, K. (1976). The adjoined relative clause in Australia. In R. Dixon (Ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages (pp. 78–105). Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.

  • Hinterwimmer, S. (in print). A unified account of the properties of German demonstrative pronouns. In P. Grosz, P. Patel-Grosz & I. Yanovich (Eds.), The Proceedings of the Workshop on Pronominal Semantics at NELS 40, (pp. 61–107) GLSA Publications, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Iatridou, S. (1991). Topics in conditionals. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  • Iatridou S. (1994) On the contribution of conditional then. Natural Language Semantics 2: 171–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaacs J., Rawlins K. (2008) Conditional questions. Journal of Semantics 25: 269–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Izvorski, R. (1996). The syntax and semantic of correlative proforms. In K. Kusumo (Ed.), Proceedings of NELS 26 (pp. 133–147). Cambridge: Harvard University and MIT.

  • Jacobs J. (1984) Funktionale Satzperspektive und Illokutionssemantik. Linguistische Berichte 91: 25–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson P. (1999) Towards a variable-free semantics. Linguistics & Philosophy 22(2): 117–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, M. (1994). When-clauses, adverbs of quantification, and focus. In R. Aranovich, W. Byrne, S. Preuss, & M. Senturia (Eds.), WCCFL 13: The proceedings of the thirteenth West Coast conference on formal linguistics. Stanford, CA: Stanford Linguistics Association, CSLI, Stanford University.

  • Karttunen L (1977) Syntax and Semantics of Questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1: 3–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klinedinst, N. (2007). Plurality and possibility. Ph.D. Thesis, UCLA.

  • Kratzer A. (1986) Conditionals. Chicago Linguistics Society 22(2): 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, M. (1992). A compositional semantics for multiple focus constructions. In J. Jacobs (Ed.), Informationsstruktur und Grammatik, Linguistische Berichte. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

  • Krifka, M. (2014). Embedding illocutionary acts. In T. Roeper & M. Speas (Eds.), Recursion: Complexity in cognition (Vol. 43, pp. 59–87). Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics. Springer.

  • Kuroda S.-Y. (1972) The categorical and the thetic judgement: Evidence from Japanese syntax. Foundations of Language 9(2): 153–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

  • Landman F. (1989) Groups I. Linguistics and Philosophy 12(5): 559–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis D. (1973) Counterfactuals and comparative possibility. Journal of Philosophical Logic 2: 418–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D. (1975). Adverbs of quantification. In E. L. Keenan (Ed.), Formal semantics of natural language (pp. 3–15). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

  • Link, G. (1983). The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms. In C. Schwarze, R. Bäuerle, & A. von Stechow (Eds.), Meaning, use and interpretation of language (pp. 302–323). Berlin: De Gruyter.

  • Nolan D. (2003) Defending a possible-worlds account of indicative conditionals. Philosophical Studies 116: 215–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Predelli S. (2009) Towards a semantics for biscuit conditionals. Philosophical Studies 142: 293–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prince, E. F. (1998). On the limits of syntax, with reference to left-dislocation and topicalization. In P. W. Culicover & L. McNally (Eds.), The limits of syntax, Vol. 29 of Syntax and semantics (pp. 281–302). New York: Academic Press.

  • Rawlins K. (2013) (un)conditionals. Natural Language Semantics 21: 111–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart T. (1981) Pragmatics and linguistics. An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica 27: 53–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Repp, S. (2011). Relevance topics. In I. Reich et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Sinn & Bedeutung 15. Saarbrücken: Universaar - Saarland University.

  • Roberts, C. (2004). Pronouns as definites. In M. Reimer & A. Bezuidenhout (Eds.), Descriptions and beyond, papers in semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Roberts, C. (2012a) Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. Semantics and Pragmatics 5(6): 1–69

  • Roberts, C. (2012b). Topics. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Ross, J. R. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph.D. Thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA.

  • Schein, B. (2001). Adverbial, descriptive reciprocals. In R. Hastings, B. Jackson, & Z. Zvolenszky (Eds.), Proceedings of SALT XI (pp. 404–430). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CLC Publications.

  • Schlenker P. (2004) Conditionals as definite descriptions. Research in Language and Computation 2: 417–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwager, M. (2006). Conditionalized imperatives. In C. Tancredi, M. Kanazawa, I. Imani, & K. Kusumoto (Eds.), Proceedings of SALT XVI. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.

  • Searle, J. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press.

  • Siegel M. (2006) Biscuit conditionals. Quantification over Potential Literal Acts. Linguistics & Philosophy 29: 167–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stalnaker, R. (1980). A theory of conditionals. In Studies in logical theory, No. 2 in American Philosophical Quarterly Monograph Series. Oxford: Blackwell. (Reprinted from Ifs, by W. L. Harper, R. Stalnaker, & G. Pierce, Eds., 1968.)

  • von Stechow, A. (1989). Focusing and backgrounding operators. Konstanz: Arbeitspapier Nr. 6. Universität Konstanz, Fachgruppe Sprachwissenschaft.

  • Strawson, P. (1964). Identifying reference and truth values. Theoria, 30. (Reprinted from Semantics, by D. D. Steinberg & L.A. Jakobovits, Eds., 1971.)

  • Swanson E. (2013) Subjunctive biscuit and stand-off conditionals. Philosophical Studies 163(3): 637–648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, S. (1991). Verb second and illocutionary force. In K. Leffel & D. Bouchard (Eds.), Views on phrase structure (pp. 177–191). Dodrecht: Kluwer.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Ebert.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ebert, C., Ebert, C. & Hinterwimmer, S. A unified analysis of conditionals as topics. Linguist and Philos 37, 353–408 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-014-9158-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-014-9158-4

Keywords

Navigation