Givenness

Last updated

In linguistics, givenness is a phenomenon in which a speaker assumes that contextual information of a topic of discourse is already known to the listener. The speaker thus considers it unnecessary to supply further contextual information through an expression's linguistic properties, its syntactic form or position, or its patterns of stress and intonation. [1] Givenness involves contextual information in a discourse that is given, or assumed to be known, by the addressee in the moment of utterance. Therefore, a given expression must be known from prior discourse. [2]

Contents

Givenness is marked by the absence of emphasis or detailed explanations. For example, when informing a close friend of having taken a long-considered action, an English speaker might simply say, "I did it!" The givenness of the action which "it" refers to results from previously discussing the action. In that utterance, the stress would not fall on "it," but on "did." This example may be contrasted when the nature of the action is new information, such as "I did a cartwheel!" In this case, the object of did— the noun cartwheel— will receive the emphasis.

Definitions

In literature, Prince (1981) distinguishes between three different kinds of Givenness: [3]

  1. "The speaker assumes the hearer can predict or could have predicted a particular linguistic item will or would occur in a particular position within a sentence.
  2. "The speaker assumes the hearer has or could appropriately have some particular thing/entity/... in his/her CONSCIOUSNESS at the time of hearing the utterance.
  3. "The speaker assumes the hearer "knows," assumes, or can infer in a particular thing (but is not necessarily thinking about it)."

Definition by Krifka (2008): [4]

A feature X of an expression α is a Givenness feature if X indicates whether the denotation of α is present in the CG [(Common Ground)] (see below) or not, and/or indicates the degree to which it is present in the immediate CG [(Common Ground)].

Definition by Kratzer and Selkirk (2018): [2]

An expression α is Given in a context C if there is a discourse referent (individual, property, proposition) in C that entails [[α]] O, C.


Entailment

Entailment describes the relation between expression α and expression β when one of the following conditions applies: [2]

Co-reference is one of the two semantic relations that express Givenness. [1] Formally, references α and β both refer to the same entity (the referent): α,β ∈ De, α = β. [2] A pronoun (α) usually identifies a noun phrase that has been mentioned (β) in a prior context and (α). Examples of: [2]

  1. On my way home, a dog barked at me. I was really frightened by [the fierce German shepherd]Given.
  2. Did you see Dr. Cramer to get your root canal? - Don't remind me. I'd like to strangle [the butcher]Given.
  3. My neighbor is a funny character. Still, I really like [John]Given. [1]

Alternatively, for non-referential α and β (e.g. predicates, quantifiers), α is given if the meaning of α and β are extensionally identical or α is a hypernym of β. Formally, α,β ∈ Dt, and α=0 or β=1. [2]

Extensional Identity occurs when an expression α is identical with a prior mentioned expression β, which makes α given.

  1. They brought some beer (β), but they didn't drink [thebeer]Given(α) because it was warm. [1]

A hypernym α of another item β is when the meaning of α includes β as a subcategory, making item α given:

X: I brought carrots (β) to the picnic.

Y: But I don't like [vegetables]Given(α).

However, if instead β includes α, there is hyponymy, and the hyponym (α) is considered to be not given:

X: I put some vegetables (β) in the soup.

Y: Oh I hate carrots (α). I hope you didn't put any inside.

Propositional Identity occurs when the proposition (α) is given because it is identical with the proposition (β) and proposition (β) is true.

a. Did you hear that Otto went to Russia (β)?

b. I can't believe that [he went to Russia]Given(α).

Asymmetric Entailment occurs when the proposition (α) is given because the proposition (α) is always true when the proposition (β) is true.

a. Did you hear that Otto went to Russia?

b. I can't believe [that he left]Given(α).

Expressing givenness

Givenness can be expressed by anaphoric expressions, deletion, or word order. [4]

Anaphoric expressions

Anaphoric expressions indicate the status of their denotations. [4] Anaphoric expressions include personal pronouns, clitics and person inflections, demonstratives, and definite articles as well as indefinite articles that indicate a non-given referent. [4]

a. The crowd approached the gate. The guards were AFRAID of [the women]Given. [1]

b. The children were up late. I'm reluctant to WAKE [the boys]Given. [1]

c. John ate garlic bread. Then [he]Given kissed Mary.

Decantation

Decantation is a form of prosodic reduction.

a. Ten years after John inherited an old farm, he SOLD [the shed]Given [4]

Here the shed is decanted because it is referring to the prior mentioned farm. Decantation is conditioned by Common Ground Management and can be seen as presuppositional because it expresses a presupposition of a situationally salient antecedent of a particular sort. [1]

Decantation can also occur in indefinite noun phrases:

a. If John paints a hot dog, Sam will eat [a hot dog]Given.

Decantation can occur on a focused constituent that is given at the same time, where it does not bear the pitch accent but functions as a focus with only : [1]

a. X: Everyone already knew that Mary only eats VEGETABLES.

Y: If even PAUL knew that Mary only eats [vegetables]Given, then he should have suggested a different RESTAURANT.

Deletion

Deletion is an extreme form of reduction. [4]

a. Bill went to Greenland, and Mary did _ too. [4]

In this example, one can find the deletion of the VP went to Greenland.

Word Order

In the double object construction, given constituents precede new constituents: [4]

a. Bill showed the boy a girl.

*Bill showed a boy the girl.

*Bill showed the girl a boy. [4]

Common Ground

Common Ground (CG) in linguistics is the shared knowledge between participants in discourse. It is a set of propositions and entities that are known to both speakers, and is updated during the discourse. [1] Common Ground can further be divided into

Exceptions

Two individuals who spend a lot of time together or have many shared experiences can more easily latch onto each other's givenness in their discourse. However, when that phenomenon is relied upon in future or ongoing conversations, deficits in information can begin to develop, and as a result, it becomes difficult to assess givenness in the context of new conversations.

See also

Related Research Articles

In linguistics and related fields, pragmatics is the study of how context contributes to meaning. The field of study evaluates how human language is utilized in social interactions, as well as the relationship between the interpreter and the interpreted. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are called pragmaticians. The field has been represented since 1986 by the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deixis</span> Words requiring context to understand their meaning

In linguistics, deixis is the use of words or phrases to refer to a particular time, place, or person relative to the context of the utterance. Deixis exists in all known natural languages and is closely related to anaphora, with a sometimes unclear distinction between the two. In linguistic anthropology, deixis is seen as the same as, or a subclass of, indexicality.

An interjection is a word or expression that occurs as an utterance on its own and expresses a spontaneous feeling or reaction. It is a diverse category, encompassing many different parts of speech, such as exclamations (ouch!, wow!), curses (damn!), greetings, response particles, hesitation markers, and other words. Due to its diverse nature, the category of interjections partly overlaps with a few other categories like profanities, discourse markers, and fillers. The use and linguistic discussion of interjections can be traced historically through the Greek and Latin Modistae over many centuries.

In pragmatics, a subdiscipline of linguistics, an implicature is something the speaker suggests or implies with an utterance, even though it is not literally expressed. Implicatures can aid in communicating more efficiently than by explicitly saying everything we want to communicate. The philosopher H. P. Grice coined the term in 1975. Grice distinguished conversational implicatures, which arise because speakers are expected to respect general rules of conversation, and conventional ones, which are tied to certain words such as "but" or "therefore". Take for example the following exchange:

Universal pragmatics (UP), more recently placed under the heading of formal pragmatics, is the philosophical study of the necessary conditions for reaching an understanding through communication. The philosopher Jürgen Habermas coined the term in his essay "What is Universal Pragmatics?" where he suggests that human competition, conflict, and strategic action are attempts to achieve understanding that have failed because of modal confusions. The implication is that coming to terms with how people understand or misunderstand one another could lead to a reduction of social conflict.

The concept of illocutionary acts was introduced into linguistics by the philosopher J. L. Austin in his investigation of the various aspects of speech acts. In his framework, locution is what was said and meant, illocution is what was done, and perlocution is what happened as a result.

In linguistics, anaphora is the use of an expression whose interpretation depends upon another expression in context. In a narrower sense, anaphora is the use of an expression that depends specifically upon an antecedent expression and thus is contrasted with cataphora, which is the use of an expression that depends upon a postcedent expression. The anaphoric (referring) term is called an anaphor. For example, in the sentence Sally arrived, but nobody saw her, the pronoun her is an anaphor, referring back to the antecedent Sally. In the sentence Before her arrival, nobody saw Sally, the pronoun her refers forward to the postcedent Sally, so her is now a cataphor. Usually, an anaphoric expression is a pro-form or some other kind of deictic expression. Both anaphora and cataphora are species of endophora, referring to something mentioned elsewhere in a dialog or text.

In linguistics, focus is a grammatical category that conveys which part of the sentence contributes new, non-derivable, or contrastive information. In the English sentence "Mary only insulted BILL", focus is expressed prosodically by a pitch accent on "Bill" which identifies him as the only person whom Mary insulted. By contrast, in the sentence "Mary only INSULTED Bill", the verb "insult" is focused and thus expresses that Mary performed no other actions towards Bill. Focus is a cross-linguistic phenomenon and a major topic in linguistics. Research on focus spans numerous subfields including phonetics, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and sociolinguistics.

David Benjamin Kaplan is an American philosopher. He is the Hans Reichenbach Professor of Scientific Philosophy at the UCLA Department of Philosophy. His philosophical work focuses on the philosophy of language, logic, metaphysics, epistemology and the philosophy of Frege and Russell. He is best known for his work on demonstratives, propositions, and reference in intensional contexts. He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences in 1983 and a Corresponding Fellow of the British Academy in 2007.

In linguistics and philosophy, a presupposition is an implicit assumption about the world or background belief relating to an utterance whose truth is taken for granted in discourse. Examples of presuppositions include:

In linguistics and philosophy, modality refers to the ways language can express various relationships to reality or truth. For instance, a modal expression may convey that something is likely, desirable, or permissible. Quintessential modal expressions include modal auxiliaries such as "could", "should", or "must"; modal adverbs such as "possibly" or "necessarily"; and modal adjectives such as "conceivable" or "probable". However, modal components have been identified in the meanings of countless natural language expressions, including counterfactuals, propositional attitudes, evidentials, habituals, and generics.

In formal linguistics, discourse representation theory (DRT) is a framework for exploring meaning under a formal semantics approach. One of the main differences between DRT-style approaches and traditional Montagovian approaches is that DRT includes a level of abstract mental representations within its formalism, which gives it an intrinsic ability to handle meaning across sentence boundaries. DRT was created by Hans Kamp in 1981. A very similar theory was developed independently by Irene Heim in 1982, under the name of File Change Semantics (FCS). Discourse representation theories have been used to implement semantic parsers and natural language understanding systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Relevance theory</span> Theory of cognitive linguistics

Relevance theory is a framework for understanding the interpretation of utterances. It was first proposed by Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson, and is used within cognitive linguistics and pragmatics. The theory was originally inspired by the work of Paul Grice and developed out of his ideas, but has since become a pragmatic framework in its own right. The seminal book, Relevance, was first published in 1986 and revised in 1995.

In semantics, a donkey sentence is a sentence containing a pronoun which is semantically bound but syntactically free. They are a classic puzzle in formal semantics and philosophy of language because they are fully grammatical and yet defy straightforward attempts to generate their formal language equivalents. In order to explain how speakers are able to understand them, semanticists have proposed a variety of formalisms including systems of dynamic semantics such as Discourse representation theory. Their name comes from the example sentence "Every farmer who owns a donkey beats it", in which the donkey pronoun acts as a donkey pronoun because it is semantically but not syntactically bound by the indefinite noun phrase "a donkey". The phenomenon is known as donkey anaphora.

In linguistics, a referring expression (RE) is any noun phrase, or surrogate for a noun phrase, whose function in discourse is to identify some individual object. The technical terminology for identify differs a great deal from one school of linguistics to another. The most widespread term is probably refer, and a thing identified is a referent, as for example in the work of John Lyons. In linguistics, the study of reference relations belongs to pragmatics, the study of language use, though it is also a matter of great interest to philosophers, especially those wishing to understand the nature of knowledge, perception and cognition more generally.

In linguistics, information structure, also called information packaging, describes the way in which information is formally packaged within a sentence. This generally includes only those aspects of information that "respond to the temporary state of the addressee's mind", and excludes other aspects of linguistic information such as references to background (encyclopedic/common) knowledge, choice of style, politeness, and so forth. For example, the difference between an active clause and a corresponding passive is a syntactic difference, but one motivated by information structuring considerations. Other structures motivated by information structure include preposing and inversion.

In linguistics and philosophy of language, an utterance is felicitous if it is pragmatically well-formed. An utterance can be infelicitous because it is self-contradictory, trivial, irrelevant, or because it is somehow inappropriate for the context of utterance. Researchers in semantics and pragmatics use felicity judgments much as syntacticians use grammaticality judgments. An infelicitous sentence is marked with the pound sign.

Explicature is a technical term in pragmatics, the branch of linguistics that concerns the meaning given to an utterance by its context. The explicatures of a sentence are what is explicitly said, often supplemented with contextual information. They contrast with implicatures, the information that the speaker conveys without actually stating it.

Papuan Malay or Irian Malay is a Malay-based creole language spoken in the Indonesian part of New Guinea. It emerged as a contact language among tribes in Indonesian New Guinea for trading and daily communication. Nowadays, it has a growing number of native speakers. More recently, the vernacular of Indonesian Papuans has been influenced by Standard Indonesian, the national standard dialect. It is spoken in Indonesian New Guinea alongside 274 other languages and functions as a lingua franca.

In linguistics and philosophy of language, the conversational scoreboard is a tuple which represents the discourse context at a given point in a conversation. The scoreboard is updated by each speech act performed by one of the interlocutors.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Rochemont, Michael (2016). "Givenness". In Féry, Caroline (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Information Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 41–63. ISBN   9780199642670.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Kratzer, Angelica & Selkirk, Elizabeth (2018). Deconstructing Information Structure. Manuscript, University of Massachusetts, at Amherst and University College London (UCL). https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/004201
  3. ↑ Prince, Ellen (1981). "Toward a taxonomy of given-new information". In Cole, Peter (ed.). Radical Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. pp. 91–136. ISBN   0121796604.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Krifka, Manfred (2008). "Basic Notions of Information Structure" (PDF). Acta Linguistica Hungarica. 55 (3–4): 243–276. doi:10.1556/ALing.55.2008.3-4.2.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.