Abstract
Noh (1998a, b) analyzes echo questions in terms of metarepresentation and pragmatic enrichment within the framework of Relevance Theory. This paper argues that while the basic idea of metarepresentational analysis seems correct, it is better implemented differently.
The alternative analysis proposed in this paper consists of three claims: first, echo questions are metarepresentational with rising intonation, with the rise alone conferring the question status; second, echoquestions question the pragmatically enriched attribution; third, the focus of metarepresentation is to be distinguished from the rest of the metarepresentation.
This version of metarepresentational analysis reveals why echo questions behave the way they do, both syntactically and semantically/pragmatically. At the same time, this analysis captures not only similarities but also differences between echo questions and interrogatives on a principled basis.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Adamson, S.: 1994, ‘Subjectivity in Narration: Empathy and Echo’, in M. Yaguello (ed.), Subjecthood and Subjectivity: The Status of the Subject in Linguistic Theory, pp. 193–208, Institut francais du Royaume-Uni, Ophrys.
Austin, J. L.: 1962, How to Do Things with Words, Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York.
Bach, K.: 1999, ‘The Myth of Conventional Implicature’, Linguistics and Philosophy 22, 327–366.
Bach, K. and R. M. Harnish: 1979, Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts, Cambridge University Press, Massachusetts.
Banfield, A.: 1982, Unspeakable Sentences: Narration and Representation in the Language of Fiction, Routledge & Kegan Paul, Boston.
Bartels, C.: 1999, The Intonation of English Statements and Questions: A Compositional Interpretation, Garland, New York & London.
Bell, M.: 1975, ‘Questioning’, The Philosophical Quarterly 25, 193–212.
Bellert, I.: 1977, ‘On Semantic and Distributional Properties of Sentential Adverbs’, Linguistic Inquiry 8, 337–351.
Belnap, N.: 1982, ‘Questions and Answers in Montague Grammar’, in S. Peters and E. Saarinen (eds.), Processes, Beliefs, and Questions, pp. 165–198, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Blakemore, D.: 1993, ‘The Relevance of Reformulations’, Language and Literature 2, 101–120.
Blakemore, D.: 1994a, ‘Relevance, Poetic Effects and Social Goals: A Reply to Culpeper’, Language and Literature 3, 49–59.
Blakemore, D.: 1994b, ‘Echo Questions: A Pragmatic Account’, Lingua 94,197–211.
Blakemore, D.: 1996, ‘Are Apposition Markers Discourse Markers?’, Journal of Linguistics 32, 325–347.
Boer, S.: 1978, ‘“Who” and “Whether”: Towards a Theory of Indirect Question Clauses’, Linguistics and Philosophy 2, 307–345.
Boer, S. E. and W. G. Lycan: 1980, ‘A Performadox in Truth Conditional Semantics,’ Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 71–100.
Bolinger, D.: 1957, Interrogative Structures of American English, University of Alabama Press, Alabama.
Bolinger, D.: 1978a, ‘Yes-No Questions Are Not Alternative Questions’, in H. Hiz (ed.), Questions, pp. 87–105, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Bolinger, D.: 1978b, ‘Asking More than One Thing at a Time’, in J. Hiz (ed.), Questions, pp. 107–150, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Bolinger, D.: 1987, ‘Echoes Reechoed’, American Speech 62, 262–279.
Breheny, R.: 1998, ‘Interface Economy and Focus’, in V. Rouchota and A. Jucker (eds.), Current Issues in Relevance Theory, pp. 105–139, John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
Burton-Roberts, N.: 1989a, ‘On Horn's Dilemma: Presupposition and Negation’, Journal of Linguistics 25, 95–125.
Burton-Roberts, N.: 1989b, The Limits to Debate, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Carlson, L.: 1983, Dialogue Games: An Approach to Discourse Analysis, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Carston, R.: 1988, ‘Implicature, Explicature, and Truth-Theoretic Semantics’, in R. Kempson (ed.), Mental Representations: The Interface between Language and Reality, pp. 155–181, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Carston, R.: 1995, ‘Quantity Maxims and Generalized Implicature’, Lingua 96, 213–244.
Carston, R.: 1996, ‘Metalinguistic Negation and Echoic Use’, Journal of Pragmatics 25, 309–330.
Carston, R.: 1998, ‘Informativeness, Relevance and Scalar Implicature’, in R. Carston and S. Uchida (eds.), Relevance Theory: Applications and Implications, pp. 179–236, John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
Carston, R.: 1999, ‘Negation, “Presupposition” and Metarepresentation: A Response to Noel Burton-Roberts’, Journal of Linguistics 35, 365–389.
Carston, R. and E.-J. Noh: 1995, ‘A Truth-Functional Account of Metalinguistic Negation, with Evidence from Korean’, UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 7, 1–26.
Chafe, W.: 1970, Meaning and the Structure of Language, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Chapman, S.: 1993, ‘Metalinguistic Negation, Sentences and Utterances’, Newcastle and Durham Working Papers in Linguistics 1, 74–94.
Chapman, S.: 1996, ‘Some Observations on Metalinguistic Negation’, Journal of Linguistics 32, 387–402.
Clark, W.: 1991, Relevance Theory and the Semantics of Non-Declaratives, Ph.D. thesis, University College of London.
Clark, W.: 1993, ‘Relevance and “Pseudo-Imperatives”’, Linguistics and Philosophy 16, 79–121.
Clark, W. and G. Lindsey: 1990, ‘Intonation, Grammar and Utterance-Interpretation: Evidence from English Exclamatory-Inversions’, UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2, 32–51.
Collins Cobuild: 1990, English Grammar, Harper Collins, London.
Comorovski, I.: 1996, Interrogative Phrases and the Syntax-Semantics Interface, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Cooper, R.: 1983, Quantification and Syntactic Theory, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Cruttenden, A.: 1997, Intonation, 2nd edn, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Davison, A.: 1975, ‘Indirect Speech Acts and What to Do with Them’, in P. Cole, P. and J. L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol.3: Speech Acts, pp. 143–185, Academic Press, New York.
Davison, A.: 1983, ‘Linguistic or Pragmatic Description in the Context of the Performadox’, Linguistics and Philosophy 6, 499–526.
Ernst, T.: 1984, Towards an Integrated Theory of Adverb Position in English, Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington.
Escandell-Vidal, V.: 1998, ‘Intonation and Procedural Encoding: The Case of Spanish Interrogatives’, in V. Rouchota and Jucker, A. (eds.), Current Issues in Relevance Theory, pp. 169–203, John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
Espinal, M. T.: 1991, ‘The Representation of Disjunct Constituents’, Language 67, 726–762.
Fillmore, C. and P. Kay: 1999, ‘Grammatical Constructions and Linguistic Generalizations: The What's X Doing? Construction’, Language 75, 1–33.
Fludernik, M.: 1993, The Fictions of Language and the Languages of Fiction, Routledge, London & New York.
Fretheim, T.: 1998, ‘Intonation and the Procedural Encoding of Attributed Thoughts: The Case of Norwegian Negative Interrogatives’, in V. Rouchota and A. Jucker (eds.), Current Issues in Relevance Theory, pp. 205–236, John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
Geluykens, R.: 1987, ‘Intonation and Speech Act Type: An Experimental Approach to Rising Intonation in Queclaratives’, Journal of Pragmatics 11, 483–494.
Geluykens, R.: 1988, ‘On the Myth of Rising Intonation in Polar Questions’, Journal of Pragmatics 12, 467–485.
Geurts, B.: 1998, ‘The Mechanisms of Denial’, Language 74, 274–307.
Ginzburg, J.: 1995, ‘Resolving Question, I’, Linguistics and Philosophy 18, 459–527.
Ginzburg, J.: 1996, ‘Interrogatives: Questions, Facts and Dialogue’, in S. Lappin (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, pp. 385–422, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Ginzburg, J. and I. Sag: 2001, Interrogative Investigations: The Form, Meaning, and Use of English Interrogatives, CSLI Publications, Stanford.
Goldberg, A.: 1995, Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Goossens, L.: 1982, ‘Say: Focus on the Message’, in R. Dirven, L. Goossens, Y. Putseys, and E. Vorlat (eds.), The Scene of Linguistic Action and Its Perspectivization by Speak, Talk, Say, and Tell, pp. 85–132, John Benjamins, Amsterdam & Philadelphia.
Greenbaum, S.: 1969, Studies in English Adverbial Usage, Longman, London.
Grice, P.: 1989, Studies in the Way of Words, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Groefsema, M.: 1995, ‘Can, May, Must and Should: A Relevance-Theoretic Approach’, Journal of Linguistics 31, 53–79.
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, pp. 21–68, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Haegeman, L.: 1991, Introduction to Government & Binding Theory, Blackwell, Oxford, UK and Cambridge, US.
Hajicova, E., B. H. Partee and P. Sgall: 1998, Topic-Focus Articulation, Tripartite Structures, and Semantic Content, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Hamblin, C.: 1973, ‘Questions in Montague English’, Foundations of Language 10, 41–53. Reprinted in B. H. Partee (ed.), Montague Grammar, pp. 247–259, Academic Press, New York.
Hare, R. M.: 1971, Practical Inferences, London, Macmillan.
Higginbotham, J.: 1996, ‘The Semantics of Questions’, in S. Lappin (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, pp. 361–384, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Hintikka, J.: 1975, ‘Answers to Questions’, in H. Hiz (ed.), Questions, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Horn, L.: 1985, ‘Metalinguistic Negation and Pragmatic Ambiguity’, Language 61, 121–174.
Horn, L.: 1989, A Natural History of Negation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Horn, L.: 1992, ‘The Said and the Unsaid’, Ohio State Working Papers in Linguistics (SALT II Proceedings), Vol. 40, pp. 163–192, Ohio State University.
Horn, L.: 2001, A Natural History of Negation, CSLI Publications, Stanford.
Huddleston, R.: 1993, ‘On Exclamatory-Inversion Sentences in English’, Lingua 90, 259–269.
Huddleston, R.: 1994, ‘The Contrast between Interrogatives and Questions’, Journal of Linguistics 30, 411–439.
Ifantidou, E.: 1993, ‘Parentheticals and Relevance’, Lingua 90, 69–90.
Iwata, S.: 1998, ‘Some Extensions of the Echoic Analysis of Metalinguistic Negation’, Lingua 105, 49–65.
Jackendoff, R.: 1972, Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Janda, R.: 1985, ‘Echo-Questions are Evidence for What?’, CLS 21, 171–188.
Jesperson, O.: 1924, The Philosophy of Grammar (1922 edition), University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Karttunen, L.: 1977, ‘The Syntax and Semantics of Questions’, Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 3–44. Reprinted in H. Hiz. (ed.), Questions, pp. 165–210, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Kim, J.-B.: 1998, The Grammar of Negation: A Constraint-Based Approach, CSLI Publications, Stanford.
Klinge, A.: 1993, ‘The English Modal Auxiliaries: From Lexical Semantics to Utterance Interpretation’, Journal of Linguistics 29, 315–357.
Ladusaw, W.: 1996, ‘Negation and Polarity Items’, in S. Lappin (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, pp. 321–341, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Lambrecht, K.: 1994, Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Lappin, S.: 1982, ‘On the Pragmatics of Mood’, Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 559–578.
Lyons, J.: 1977, Semantics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
McCawley, J.: 1987, ‘The Syntax of English Echoes’, CLS 23, 246–258.
McCawley, J.: 1988, Syntactic Phenomena in English, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
McHale, B.: 1978, ‘Free Indirect Discourse: A Survey of Recent Accounts’, PIL: A Journal of Descriptive Poetics and Theory of Literature 3, 249–287.
McHale, B.: 1983, ‘Unspeakable Sentences, Unnatural Acts: Linguistics and Poetics Revisited’, Poetics Today 4, 17–45.
Mittwoch, A.: 1977, ‘How to Refer to One's Own Words: Speech Act Modifying Adverbials and the Performative Analysis’, Journal of Linguistics 13, 177–189.
Nakau, M.: 1992, ‘Modality and Subjective Semantics’, Tsukuba English Studies 11, 1–48.
Nakau, M.: 1994, Ninchi-imiron-no Genri (Principles of Cognitive Semantics), Taishukan, Tokyo.
Noh, E.-J.: 1995, ‘A Pragmatic Approach to Echo Questions’, UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 7, 107–140.
Noh, E.-J.: 1998a, The Semantics and Pragmatics of Metarepresentation in English: A Relevance-Theoretic Approach, Ph.D, University of College London. Published as Metarepresentation: A Relevance Theory Approach, 2000, John Benjamins, Amsterdam & Philadelphia.
Noh, E.-J.: 1998b, ‘Echo Questions: Metarepresentation and Pragmatic Enrichment’, Linguistics and Philosophy 21, 603–628.
Noh, E.-J.: 1998c, ‘A Relevance-Theoretic Account of Metarepresentative Uses in Conditionals’, in V. Rouchota and A. Jucker (eds.), Current Issues in Relevance Theory, PP. 271–304, John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
Ohnuma, M.: 1970, ‘Echo Expressions’, Eigo Kenkyu 1970, 8, 40–41.
Papafragou, A.: 1998, ‘Inference and Word Meaning: The Case of Modal Auxiliaries’, Lingua 105, 1–47.
Papafragou, A.: 2000, Modality: Issues in the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface, Elsevier.
Parker, F. and J. Pickeral: 1985, ‘Echo Questions in English’, American Speech 60, 337–347.
Pierrehumbert, J.: 1980, The Phonology and Phonetics of English Intonation, Ph.D thesis, MIT Press.
Pierrehumbert, J. and J. Hirschberg: 1990, ‘The Meaning of Intonational Contours in the Interpretation of Discourse’, in P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, and M. E. Pollock (eds.), Intentions in Communication, pp. 271–311, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Pollard, C. and I. Sag: 1987, Information-Based Syntax and Semantics, Vol.1: Fundamentals, CSLI Publications, Stanford.
Pollard, C. and I. Sag: 1994, Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, University of Chicago Press & CSLI, Chicago and Stanford.
Pollard, C. and E. J. Yoon: 1998, ‘A Unified Theory of Scope for Quantifiers and Wh-Phrases’, Journal of Linguistics 34, 415–445.
Pope, E.: 1976, Questions and Answers in English, Mouton, The Hague.
Progovac, L.: 1994, Negative and Positive Polarity: A Binding Approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J: 1985, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, Longman, London.
Rando, E.: 1980, ‘Intonation in Discourse’, in L. Waugh and C. H. van Schoone (eds.), The Melody of Language: Intonation and Prosody, pp. 243–278, University Park Press, Baltimore.
Rooth, M.: 1996, ‘Focus’, in S. Lappin (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, pp. 271–298, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Ross, J.: 1969, ‘Guess Who’, CLS 5, pp. 252–286.
Sadock, J.: 1974, Toward a Linguistic Theory of Speech Acts, Academic Press, New York.
Sadock, J. and A. Zwicky: 1985, ‘Speech Act Distinctions in Syntax’, in T. Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. 1, pp. 155–196, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Sag, I. and T. Wasow: 1999, Syntactic Theory: A Formal Introduction, CSLI Publications, Stanford.
Schmidt-Radefelt, J: 1977, ‘On So-Called Rhetorical Questions’, Journal of Pragmatics 1, 375–392.
Schreiber, P.: 1972, ‘Style Disjuncts and the Performative Analysis’, Linguistic Inquiry 3, 321–347.
Searle, J.: 1969, Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Selkirk, E.: 1984, Phonology and Syntax: The Relations between Sound and Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Sobin, N.: 1990, ‘On the Syntax of English Echo Questions’, Lingua 81, 141–167.
Sperber, D. and D. Wilson: 1981, ‘Irony and the Use-Mention Distinction’, in Cole (ed.), Radical Pragmatics, pp. 295–318, Academic Press, New York.
Sperber, D. and D. Wilson: 1986/1995, Relevance: Communication and Cognition, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Taglicht, J.: 1984, Message and Emphasis: On Focus and Scope in English, Longman, London.
Taylor, J.: 1989, ‘Intonation in Interaction’, in R. Dirven (ed.), A User's Grammar of English: Word, Sentence, Text, Interaction, pp. 841–872, Lang, Frankfurt am Main, Bern, New York.
Taylor, J.: 1998, ‘Syntactic Constructions as Prototype Categories’, in M. Tomasello (ed.), The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure, pp. 177–202, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey.
Ultan, R.: 1978, ‘Some General Characteristics of Interrogative Systems’, in J. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of Human Language, Vol. 4: Syntax, pp. 211–248, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Van der Auwera, J.: 1986, ‘Conditionals and Speech Acts’, in E. C. Traugott, A. ter Meulen, J. S. Reily and C. A. Ferguson (eds.), On Conditionals, pp. 197–214, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
van der Wouden, T.: 1997, Negative Contexts: Collocation, Polarity, and Multiple Negation Routledge, London.
Vendler, Z.: 1972, Res Cogitans: An Essay in Rational Psychology, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London.
von Klopp, A.: 1998, ‘An Alternative View of Polarity Items’, Linguistics and Philosophy 21, 393–432.
Wilson, D.: 1999, ‘Metarepresentation in Linguistic Communication,’ UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 11, 127–161.
Wilson, D. and D. Sperber: 1988a, ‘Representation and Relevance’, in R. Kempson (ed.), Mental Representations: The Interface between Language and Reality, pp. 133–153, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Wilson, D. and D. Sperber: 1988b, ‘Mood and the Analysis of Non-Declarative Sentences’, in J. Dancy, J. Moravczik and C. Taylor (eds.), Human Agency: Language, Duty and Value, pp. 77–101, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Wilson, D. and D. Sperber: 1992, ‘On Verbal Irony’, Lingua 87, 53–76.
Wilson, D. and D. Sperber: 1993, ‘Linguistic Form and Relevance’, Lingua 90, 1–25.
Yamaguchi, H.: 1989, ‘On “Unspeakable Sentences”: A Pragmatic Review’, Journal of Pragmatics 13, 577–596.
Yamaguchi, H.: 1992, ‘Kurikaesenai Kotoba: Kontekusuto-ga Inyo-ni Motarasu Eikyo (Unrepeatable Utterances: Contextual Influence on Quoting)’, in I. Yasui (ed.), Grammar, Text, Rhetoric, pp. 289–320, Kuroshio Publishers, Tokyo.
Yamaguchi, H.: 1993, ‘Echo Utterances’, in R. E. Asher (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, pp. 1084–1085, Pergamon Press.
Yamaguchi, H.: 1994, ‘Unspeakable Sentences: Contextual Influence on Speech and Thought Presentation’, in H. Parret (ed.), Pretending to Communicate, pp. 239–252, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin & New York.
Yoshimura, A.: 1999, Hitei-kyokusei-genshou (Negative Polarity Phenomena), Eihosha, Tokyo.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Iwata, S. Echo Questions are Interrogatives? Another Version of a Metarepresentational Analysis. Linguistics and Philosophy 26, 185–254 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022851819941
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022851819941