Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Resolving questions, I

  • Published:
Linguistics and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper is in two parts. In Part I, a semantics for embedded and query uses of interrogatives is put forward, couched within a situation semantics framework. Unlike many previous analyses,questions are not reductively analysed in terms of their answers. This enables us to provide a notion of ananswer that resolves a question which varies across contexts relative to parameters such as goals and inferential capabilities. In Part II of the paper, extensive motivation is provided for an ontology that distinguishes propositions, questions, and facts, while at the same time the semantics provided captures an important commonality between questions and propositions: factsprove propositions andresolve questions. This commonality is exploited to provide an explanation for why predicates such as ‘know’ carry presuppositions such as factivity and for a novel account of the behaviour of adverbially modified predicates with interrogative, declarative and fact-nominal arguments.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  • Austin, J. L.: 1950, ‘Truth’, in Warnock et al. (eds.),Austin: Philosophical Papers, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. L.: 1954, ‘Unfair to Facts’, in Warnock et al. (eds.),Austin: Philosophical Papers, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aczel, P. and R. Lunnon: 1991, ‘Universes and Parameters’, in Barwise et al. (eds.),Situation Theory and its Applications, Vol. 2, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J.: 1981, ‘Scenes and Other Situations’, Reprinted inThe Situation in Logic, CSLI Lecture Notes, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J.: 1986, ‘Conditionals and Conditional Information’, reprinted inThe Situation in Logic, CSLI Lecture Notes, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J.: 1993, ‘Constraints, Channels and the Flow of Information’, in Aczel, Katagiri, Israel and Peters (eds.),Situation Theory and its Applications, Vol. 3, CSLI Lecture notes, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J. and R. Cooper: 1991, ‘Simple Situation Theory and its Graphical Representation’, in J. Seligman (ed.), DYANA Report R2.1.C.

  • Barwise, J. and J. Etchemendy: 1987,The Liar, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J. and J. Etchemendy: 1990, ‘Information, Infons and Inference’, in Cooper et al. (eds.),Situation Theory and its Applications, Vol. 1, CSLI Lecture notes 22, CSLI, Stanford, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J. and J. Perry: 1983,Situations and Attitudes, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bealer, G.: 1982,Concept and Object, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belnap, N.: 1982, ‘Questions and Answers in Montague Grammar’, in Peters and Saarinen (eds.),Processes, Beliefs and Questions, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J.: 1988,Events and their Names, Hackett, Indianapolis/Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J.: 1989,Linguistic Behaviour, Hackett, Indianapolis/Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, S.: 1990, ‘Towards the Semantics of Open Sentences: Wh-Phrases and Indefinites’, in M. Stokhof et al. (eds.),Proceedings of the 7th Amsterdam Colloquium, ILLC, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, S.: 1991,On the Semantics and Logical Form of wh-Clauses, PhD Thesis, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

  • Berman, S.: 1994,Wh-Clauses and Quantificational Variability: Two Analyses, IMS, Universität Stuttgart Ms.

  • Boër, S.: 1978, ‘Toward a Theory of Indirect Question Clauses’,Linguistics and Philosophy 2, 307–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boër, S. and W. Lycan: 1985,Knowing Who, MIT Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, L.: 1983,Dialogue Games, Dordrecht, Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, G. and R. Turner: 1988, ‘Semantics and Property Theory’,Linguistics and Philosophy,11, 261–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia G.: 1982, ‘Nominalisation and Montague Grammar’,Linguistics and Philosophy 5, 303–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, P. R. and H. J. Levesque: 1990, ‘Rational Interaction as the Basis for Communication’, in Cohen, P. R. et al. (eds.),Intentions in Communication, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R.: 1993. ‘Towards a General Semantic Framework’, in R. Cooper (ed.),Integrating Semantic Theories, DYANA-2 Deliverable R2.1.A.

  • Cooper, R. and J. Ginzburg: 1993, ‘Enriched Answerhood, Goals and Mental States’, Handout of talk presented at the 1993 LSA/ASL conference on Logic and Linguistics, Columbus, Ohio.

  • Cooper, R. and J. Ginzburg: 1994, ‘A Compositional Situation Semantics for Attitude Reports’, in J. Seligman (ed.),Language, Logic and Computation: The 1994 Moraga Proceedings, CSLI Lecture notes, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. and M. Poesio: 1994, ‘Situation Theory’, FRACAS Deliverable D8.

  • Crimmins, M.: 1993a,Talk about Beliefs, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crimmins, M.: 1993b, ‘States of Affairs without Parameters’, in Aczel, Katagiri, Israel and Peters (eds.),Situation Theory and its Applications, Vol. 3, CSLI Lecture notes, CSLI. Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernando, T.: 1991,Mathematical Foundations of Situation Theory, PhD Thesis, Stanford University.

  • Gawron, M. and S. Peters: 1990,Anaphora and Quantification in Situation Semantics, CSLI publications, CSLI, Stanford, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginzburg, J.: 1992,Questions, Queries and Facts: a Semantics and Pragmatics for Interrogatives, PhD Thesis, Stanford University.

  • Ginzburg, J.: 1993, ‘Propositional and Non-Propositional Attitudes’, in Aczel, Katagiri, Israel and Peters (eds.),Situation Theory and its Applications, Vol. 3, CSLI Lecture notes, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginzburg, J.: 1994a, ‘Dynamics and the Semantics of Dialogue’, in J. Seligman (ed.),Language, Logic and Computation: The 1994 Moraga Proceedings, CSLI Lecture notes, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginzburg, J.: 1994b, ‘An Update Semantics for Dialogue’, in H. Bunt, R. Muskens, G. Rentier (eds.),Proceedings of the International Workshop on Computational Semantics, ITK, Tilburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginzburg, J.: (In preparation), ‘A Local Situation Semantics for Modality’.

  • Groenendijk, J. and M. Stokhof: 1982, ‘Semantic Analysis of wh-Complements’,Linguistics and Philosophy 5, 175–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, J. and M. Stokhof: 1984a,Studies on the Semantics of Questions and the Pragmatics of Answers, PhD Thesis, University of Amsterdam.

  • Groenendijk, J. and M. Stokhof: 1984b, ‘On the Semantics of Questions and the Pragmatics of Answers’, in F. Landman and F. Veltman (eds.),Varieties of Formal Semantics, Foris, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, J. and M. Stokhof: 1989, ‘Type Shifting and the Semantics of Interrogatives’, in G. Chierchia et al. (eds.),Properties, Types, and Meaning, Vol. 2, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, J. and M. Stokhof: 1993, ‘Interrogatives and Adverbs of Quantification’, in K. Bimbo and A. Mate (eds.),Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Logic and Language, Budapest.

  • Gupta, A.: 1980,The Logic of Common Nouns: An Investigation in Quantified Modal Logic, Yale University Press, New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, C. L.: 1970,Fallacies, Methuen, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, C. L.: 1973, ‘Questions in Montague English’,Foundations of Language 10, 41–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, I.: 1982,The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases, PhD Thesis, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

  • Higginbotham, J. and R. May: 1981, ‘Questions, Quantifiers and Crossing’,The Linguistic Review 1, 41–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J.: 1962,Knowledge and Belief, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J.: 1975, ‘Answers to Questions’, in H. Hiz (ed.),Questions, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J.: 1983, ‘New Foundations for a Theory of Questions and Answers’, in F. Kiefer (ed.),Questions and Answers, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, H.: 1981, ‘A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation’, in J. Groenendijk et al. (eds.),Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Mathematical Center, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, H.: 1990, ‘Prologmena to a Structured Theory of Belief and Other Attitudes’, in C. Anderson and J. Owens (eds.),Propositional Attitudes, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karttunen, L.: 1977, ‘The Syntax and Semantics of Questions’,Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 1–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karttunen, L. and S. Peters: 1976, ‘What Indirect Questions Conventionally Implicate’, inCLS 12: Papers from the Twelfth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiparsky, C. and P. Kiparsky: 1971, ‘Fact’, in Steinberg and Jacobowits (eds.),Semantics: an Interdisciplinary Reader, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Kuppevelt, J.: (to appear) ‘Discourse Structure, Topicality and Questioning’, To appear inJournal of Linguistics.

  • Lahiri, U.: 1991,Embedded Interrogatives and Predicates That Embed Them, PhD Thesis, MIT.

  • Lewis, D.: 1972, ‘General Semantics’, Reprinted in B. Partee (ed.),Montague Grammar, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.: 1975, ‘Adverbs of Quantification’, in E. Keenan (ed.),Formal Semantics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.: 1979, ‘Score Keeping in a Language Game’, in Bauerle et al. (eds.),Semantics from Different Points of View, Springer, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lunnon, R.: 1992, ‘Generalised Set Theory for Modelling Situation Theory’, Course notes for the 4th LLI Summer School, University of Essex, Colchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montague, R.: 1970, ‘The Proper Treatment of Quantification in English’, in R. Thomason (ed.),Formal Philosophy, Yale University Press, New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munsat, S.: 1986, ‘Wh-Complementizers’,Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 191–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, C. and I. A. Sag: 1994,Head Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pustejovsky, J.: 1993, ‘Linguistic Constraints on Type Coercion’, in J. Pustejovsky (ed.),Semantics and the Lexicon, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, F.: 1927, ‘Facts and Propositions’, in D. H. Mellor (ed.),F. P. Ramsey: Foundations, Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard, M.: 1990,Propositional Attitudes: An Essay on Thoughts and How We Ascribe Them, MIT Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B.: 1918, ‘The Philosophy of Logical Atomism’, in D. Pears (ed.),Russell's Logical Atomism, Fontana, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sag, I. A., G. Gazdar, T. Wasow, and S. Weisler: 1985, ‘Coordination and How to Distinguish Categories’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3, 117–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, S.: 1993, ‘Modal Situation Theory’, in Aczel, Katagiri, Israel and Peters (eds.),Situation Theory and its Applications, Vol. 3, CSLI Lecture notes, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J.: 1969.Speech Acts, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soames, S.: 1989, ‘Presupposition’, in D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.),Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 4, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastav, V.: 1991,Wh-dependencies in Hindi and the Theory of Grammar, PhD. Thesis, Cornell University.

  • Stalnaker, R.: 1974, ‘Pragmatic Presuppositions’, in Munitz and Unger (eds.),Semantics and Philosophy, NYU Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stalnaker, R.: 1978, ‘Assertion’, in P. Cole (ed.),Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 9, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veltman, F.: 1984, ‘Data Semantics’, in J. Groenendijk et al. (eds.),Truth, Interpretation and Information, Foris, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vendler, Z.: 1967, ‘Causal Relations’,Journal of Philosophy 64, 704–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vendler, Z.: 1972,Res Cogitans, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerstähl, D.: 1990, ‘Parametric Types and Propositions in First Order Situation Theory’, in Cooper et al. (eds.),Situation Theory and its Applications, Vol. 1, CSLI Lecture notes 22, CSLI, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Communication Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, 2, Buccleuch Place, EH8 9LW, Edinburgh, Scotland

    Jonathan Ginzburg

Authors
  1. Jonathan Ginzburg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This paper presents a substantially revised version of the theory developed in my thesis, Ginzburg (1992), and in Ginzburg (1993). All acknowledgements from those works carry over to the present one. In particular I would like to thank Stanley Peters for many useful suggestions and encouragement. Many thanks to Robin Cooper for various stimulating conversations. Many ideas in this current paper arose as a result of joint work, reported in Cooper and Ginzburg (1993). I would also like to thank Enric Vallduví, Jeroen Groenendijk, David Milward and Elisabet Engdahl for discussion and for comments on an earlier draft. I am also indebted to the many highly useful comments of two anonymous reviewers forLinguistics and Philosophy and also to Martin Stokhof for a variety of acute comments and helpful suggestions. Thanks also to the members of the MaC group in Edinburgh, and to audiences at the 1993 LSA summer institute, the LSA/ASL conference on Logic and Linguistics both at Columbus, Ohio, the 6th ESLLI in Copenhagen, and NELS 25 in Philadelphia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ginzburg, J. Resolving questions, I. Linguist Philos 18, 459–527 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00985365

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00985365

Keywords

Search

Navigation