CHRONOS 7 University of Antwerp September 19, 2006 Fake Past and Covert Emotive Modality

1
CHRONOS 7University of AntwerpSeptember 19,
2006Fake Past and Covert Emotive Modality

• Sumiyo Nishiguchi
• Stony Brook University
• snishigu_at_ic.sunysb.edu
• http//homepage3.nifty.com/sumiyo_nishiguchi/

2
Abstract

• The past tense marker can be fake i.e., used
  without reference to past time in the context of
• expressing speakers surprise
• recalling something
• seeing the fulfillment of expectations.

3

• (1)a. Oh, it was here (all along).
• b. A, koko-ni at-ta/a-ru.
• Oh here-LOC be-PAST/be-PRES
• (Japanese)

4

• Attitude reports are monsters which shift
  reference of indexicals in the embedded clauses
  in some languages (Schlenker 1999, 2003 Anand
  and Nevins 2004).
• I argue that implicit speaker attitudes on
  factive propositions are monsters in the sense
  of Kaplan (1977), a context shifting operator
  which changes context parameters.

5

• I base my argument on the mono-clausal fake past
  construction
• N.B. The terminology fake' comes from Iatridou
  (2000).

6
What is a monster?

• Monster Def an operator on character which is a
  function from context to content/intension
• Kaplan (1977) There is no monster
• The indexicals, e.g., I, you, it that, this
  here, now and tomorrow, do not change the
  references
• Schlenker (1999,2003) All attitude predicates
  are monsters

7
Monster supporters

• Schlenker (1999,2003)
• Attitude verbs quantify over contexts of thought
  or of speech.
• Attitude predicates are monsters that shift the
  references of indexicals.
• As evidence, Amharic first person pronoun shifts
  its reference into third person under attitude
  verbs
• Anand and Nevins (2004)
• In Zazaki, the verb vano (say) shifts indexicals
  I, you, here and yesterday in its scope.

8
Strengthening limited evidence for monsters

• All supporting arguments for monsters have been
  based on the indexical shift in embedded context
  under attitude predicates.
• You need to have monsters in non-embedded
  contexts.

9
Mono-clausal factive sentences

• The fake past construction is factive simple
  sentences (not embedded under attitude
  predicates) and temporal and parameter shifts.
• I argue that speaker's emotion (surprise)
  -bouletic (in view of what I want) and epistemic
  speculative modality (in view of what I know,
  Kratzer 1991)- is a context shifting operator.

10

• Slave embedded clauses
• (2) say you
• I
• Fake past simple sentences
• (3) COVERT MODAL PAST
• PRES

11

• Surprise affects temporal interpretations
• (4) MODAL(fltlttc, wc, acgt, ltti, wigtgt)
• (fltltti, wc, acgt, ltti, wcgtgt
• (t time, w world, a speaker, c context, i
  index)

12
Generalized quantifier

• Covert modal is grammatically represented by a
  determiner-like element which takes negative
  presupposition in the restrictor and overt
  predicate in the nuclear scope (Kratzer 1991
  Berman 1991 von Fintel 1994 Ippolito 2003).

13

• Fake Past

14

• The past tense marker can receive non-past
  interpretation when associated with discovery,
  fulfillment of expectation, recalling of a plan
  (Teramura 1984, among others) often as
  exclamatives.

15
Surprise

• (5)a. Oh, it was here (all along).
• b. A, koko-ni at-ta/a-ru?
• Oh here-LOC be-PAST/be-PRES
• (Japanese)

16
Cross-linguistic phenomena

• (6)a. Oh, the book was here (all along).
• b. Chek-i yogi iss-ot-ne. (Korean)
• book-NOM here be-PAST-EXC
• c. Waragat all-a gaa ide. (Dasenach)
• book place at sit-PAST
• The book was sitting at this place

17
Recalling the future schedule

• (7) I had a meeting next Monday.
• (8) Mintian you-le wanyan.
• tomorrow have-PERF party
• I had a party tomorrow
• (Mandarin)

18
Mismatched temporal adverbials

• (9) There was a party tomorrow.
• (10) Mintian you-le wanyan. (Mandarin)
• tomorrow have-PERF party
• I had a party tomorrow
• (11) Asu-wa Maria-no tanjobi-dat-ta.(Japanese)
• tomorrow-TOP Maria-GEN birthday-be-PAST
• Tomorrow is Maria's birthday
• Antecedent of counterfactuals can (Ippolito 2003)
• (12) If it rained tomorrow, I would go shopping.

19
The forgotten information

• (13) a. What was your name? (Teramura 1982)
• b Onamae-wa nan-deshi-ta-ka.
• Name-TOP what-HON-PAST-Q
• (14) a. Where did you live?
• b. Osumai-wa dochira-deshi-ta-ka-ne.
• residence-TOP where-HON-PAST-Q-PAR

20
The past tense refers to present, not simple
past, with surprise

• (15) Oh, the book was here. But it is not here
  anymore.
• (16) A, shinbun-ga koko-ni at-ta.
• Oh newspaper-NOM here-LOC be-PAST
• Demo ima-wa mo nai.
• but now-TOP already NEG
• Oh, the newspaper was here. But it's not here
  anymore'

21
Fake Past and Aktionsarten

• English
• Stative predicates
• (17) Oh, it was here (all along).
• Eventive predicates
• (18) Oh, the bus came/is coming.

22
Stative predicates

• Japanese/Korean
• (19) A, koko-ni at-ta/a-ru. (Japanese)
• Oh here-LOC be-PAST/be-PRES
• Oh, it was here
• (20) Chek-i yogi iss-ot-ne. (Korean)
• book-NOM here be-PAST-EXC
• Oh, the was here'

23
Eventive predicates

• (21) Basu-ga ki-ta. (Japanese)
• bus-NOM come-PAST
• The bus is coming

24

• (22) a. Avtobus prisho-l. (Russian)
• bus come-PAST
• The bus is coming
• b. Avtobus prihodit.
• bus come-PRES
• The bus comes

25

• (23) Ya ush-la. (Russian)
• I go-PAST
• I am leaving

26
Inchoative

• Japanese inchoative verbs that bring change of
  states
• (24) A, warat-ta.
• oh smile-PAST
• Oh, (the baby) is smiling (started to
  smile)
• (25) A, hikoki-ga ton-da. (Japanese)
• Oh airplane-NOM fly-PAST
• Oh, the airplane is flying

27

• (26) Shimat-ta.
• close-PAST
• Oh, no

28
Adjectives (individual level)

• (27) Yo-kat-ta. (Japanese)
• good-be-PAST
• Thank goodness (when a lost wallet was
  returned with money)
• (28) (Ao-to omot-tei-tara) kuro-dat-ta blue-COMP
  think-PROG-then black-be-PAST
• (I thought it was blue but) it was black

29
Achievement verbs

• Achievement verbs (Vendler 1967) e.g., come,
  arrive at, get wet give non-past interpretations

30
Accomplishment verbs

• Accomplishment verbs, e.g., build a house, and
  draw a circle are unnatural with the non-past
  reading
• (29) a. A, Taro-ga ie-o tate-ta.
• oh Taro-NOM house-ACC build-PAST
• Oh, Taro is building a house
• b. A, Taro-ga jukkiro hashit-ta.
• oh Taro-NOM 10 km run-PAST
• Oh, Taro is running 10km

31
Typical fake past predicates

• Copular stage level predicates

32
Pragmatic explanation on aktionsarten

• Stative/eventive
• -It is more surprising to find existence of
  something than perceiving events.

33

• Achievement/accomplishment
• -Normally, surprise is caused by perceiving the
  momentous events or change of states. Long-term
  processes would not surprise us instantly.
  Achievement verbs such as come or become wet
  surprise us while gradual accomplishment, e.g.,
  build a house and running ten miles, are not so
  astonishing naturally.

34
Unaccusativity and surprise

• Fake past predicates are mostly limited to
  unaccusative verbs such as be, exist, and come
  (cf. Kusumoto 2001 Ogihara 2004 for relative
  clauses).

35
Unaccusativity test

• VP internal numerals associate with the surface
  subject (mutual c-command in base position)
  (Miyagawa and Babyonyshev 2004)
• Transitive verb
• (30) Gakusei-ga VP hon-o san-nin kat-ta.
• Students-NOM book-ACC 3-CL buy-PAST
• Three students bought a book

36

• (31)Honi-ga VPtsukue-no ue-ni ti ni-satsu
  at-ta.
• book-NOM desk-GEN up-LOC 2-CL
  be-PAST
• There were two books on the desk
• (32)Basu-ga VP ekimae-ni ti ni-dai ki-ta.
• bus-NOM station-front-LOC 2-CL come-PAST
• Two buses came in front of the station

37

• (33) A, warat-ta.
• oh smile-Past
• Oh, (the baby) is smiling
• (33) A, gakuseii-ga butai-de ti san-nin
  warat-ta. oh student-NOM
  stage-LOC 3-CL smile-PAST
• Oh, the three students laughed on the stage

38

• (34) Shimat-t-a.
• close-PAST-be
• Oh, no
• (34) Gakuseii-ga mae-de ti san-nin shimat-ta.
  student-NOM front-LOC 3-CL close-PAST
• The three students made a mistake in front

39
Unaccusativity contributes to surprise

• Unaccusative verbs
• 1. Representational verbs
• be, exist, come
• 2. Verbs of posture
• sit
• The nature of unaccusative predicates contributes
  to surprise
• Finding existence and appearance is likely to
  cause more astonishment than finding transitive
  predicates

40
Puzzle

• Why is the past tense used for non-past?
• (1) Oh, it was here (all along).

41
Fake past as a counterfactual morpheme

• Counterfactual conditional
• (35) If it rained tomorrow, I would go to Florida
  (but it is not likely).
• Topic worlds and the actual world differ
• Simple fake past
• (36) There was a mistake (surprisingly).
• The actual world is counterfactual to the
  prospective actual world

42
Tense as a shifty indexical

• Tense is a shiftable indexical.
• What shifts tense?

43

• Tense resembles pronouns such as he, she, or it,
  due to its i) deictic (demonstrative) ii)
  anaphoric and, iii) bound variable-like natures
  (Partee 1973).
• i) Tense is deictic
• (37) I didn't turn off the stove
• (utterance on the way to work)
• The deictic past refers to a definite interval
  identified from the extra-linguistic content.

44
Shifty pronouns

• While English pronouns always take the speaker's
  perspective, Slave and Japanese pronouns take
  the matrix subject's viewpoint in indirect
  discourse.
• (38) a. John told me that I should go home.
• b. John ?aranila séhdi. (Slave)
• John 2SG.gohome 3SG.told.1SG
• John told me to go home'
• (Rice 198651)

45

• (39) Yoko-ni omae-ga warui-to iw-are-ta.
• (Japanese)
• Yoko-DAT you-NOM bad-COMP say-PASS-PAST
• Yoko told me that I was wrong (it was my
  fault)'

46

• In the embedded reports, pronouns are not
  directly referential in Japanese and Slave, as
  well as in Amharic, Aghem, Navajo, Zazaki,
  Russian and Navajo (Lewis 1980, Hyman 1979, Rice
  1986, Speas 2000, Schlenker 1999, 2003, Anand and
  Nevins 2004).

47

• Such pronominal indexicals have been used to
  argue against Kaplanian view that indexicals are
  rigidly specified before the context is derived
  (Kaplan 1977). Schlenker (1999) and others argue
  that such changes of references of indexicals are
  the evidence that indexicals are context
  dependent, and the attitude predicates are
  monsterous functions that manipulate the context
  parameters in embedded clauses.

48
Strengthening monster theory

• All the arguments of monster supporters have been
  based on the data on the embedded clauses.
• The data on mono-clausal fake past sentences
  present stronger support for the anti-Kaplanian
  view.

49
Fake past simple sentences give stronger support
for monsters

• Being simple sentences, context parameters are
  not maneuvered by attitude reports but by speaker
  attitude itself.
• Overtcovert attitude predicates switch tense.

50
Necessary condition surprise

• Surprise licenses non-past interpretations of the
  past tense (Teramura 1984)
• (40)a. At-ta. (without surprise, with fake past
  reading)
• exist-PAST
• It was here'
• b.At-ta. (without surprise, with real past
  reading)
• exist-PAST
• It was here'

51
Negative presuppositions

• (41) (Nai-to omotte-i-ta-ra,) at-ta.
• NEG-COMP think-be-PAST-then be-PAST
• It was here (surprisingly).'

52
Or, the speakers expectation is realized

• (42) (Kuru-to omotte-i-ta basu-ga yappari)
  ki-ta.
• come-COMP think be-PAST bus-NOM as I expected
  come-PAST
• The bus is coming (as expected)
• The speaker doubted or has not been sure if p.
• The common ground contains both p worlds and
  non-p worlds
• Fake past assertions disambiguate the actual
  world (cf. Stalnaker 2004)

53
Double index system

• In the framework of the double index system
  (Lewis 1980), the ordinary past tense morphology
  shifts the temporal index into the prior time
• present f lttc, wc, sc, hcgt, lttc,wcgt
• past flttc, wc, sc, hcgt, ltti,wigt
• past f1 iff there is time ti prior to the
  utterance time tc

54
Implicit attitude is a monsterous function that
changes a context parameter

• (43) fake( past flttc, wc, ac, hcgt, ltti,wigt)
• past fltti, wc, sc, hcgt,ltti,wigt
• (ttime, wworld, aspeaker, hhearer,
  ccontext, iindex, ti lt tc, cltwc, tc, acgt,
  iltwi, tigt)

55
Type of the monster

• Fake tense operator
• (44) Where cltwc, tc, acgt, iltwi, tigt,
• ti is prior to tc, c DcDsDe, s DsDwDt
• Fake ((cs)?t) ?((cs)?t)
• Fake (fltc, igt)1 iff fltcti/tc, igt1

56
The data set is incomplete before the utterance
(Veltman 1981)

• The speaker does not know enough data but expects
  that the book is not here the bus is
  coming tomorrow is not Marys birthday
• The data set becomes complete by seeing the facts
  or remembering the facts

57

• Exp Expectation function based on the available
  data
• (45) Expa(wi)(ti)fwi,ti?Expa(wc)(tc)fwc,tc
  
• ?Knowa (wc)(tc)fwc,tc
• (46) Expa(wi)(ti)fwi,ti?Expa(wc)(tc)fwc,t
  c ?Knowa(wc)(tc)fwc,tc
• (tilttc, tc utterance time, wc actual world)

58
Schema of fake past sentences

• of surprise (negative presupposition) f
• While expecting f, a finds f and a is glad to
  find f
• of fulfillment of expectancy (positive
  presupposition) f
• While expecting f in contrast with f, a finds f
  and a is glad to find f

59
Conversational backgrounds

• 1. Speculative epistemic necessity/possibility
• must/probably/might f
• 2. Bouletic modality (in view of what I want)
  fworlds are ranked higher than f worlds

60
Conversational backgrounds

• Modal base f (in view of available evidence,
  speculative epistemic necessity/possibility)
• must/probably/might f (cs)?((cs)?t)?t)
• Ordering source g (in view of what I want,
  bouletic modality)
• f worlds are ranked higher than f worlds
  (cs)?((cs)?t) ?t)
• where DsDwDt, DcDsDe

61

• (47)
• f
• g ordering sourcebouletic
• MODALemo f modal basespeculative
  modal
• (cf. Kratzer 1991 von Fintel and Iatridou 2005)

62

• (48) fake (past) (wc)(f)(g)(f)
• 1 if wc ? f(wi) ? w? MAXg(wc) f(wc)1,
• past(wc)(f)(g)(f), otherwise.
• Where for a given strict partial order ltp on
  worlds, define the selection function maxp that
  selects the set of ltp -best worlds from any set X
  of worlds
• ? X? W maxp(X)w?X ? w'?X w'ltp w

63
Restrictive quantification

• Modal scopes over due to its quantificational
  force (Lewis 1968, 1973 Kripke 1972). Modal
  takes the presupposition as its restrictor, and
  the assertion in its nuclear scope (Berman 1991
  von Fintel 1994 Heim 1982 Diesing 1992).
• (49) MODALemo ?i. fi ?i.fi
• determiner restrictor nuclear
  scope
• surprisingly while expecting f f is
  true

64

• (50) TP
• MODAL P VP
• MODALspec,bouletic presupposition

65
Context change potential (CCP)

• Heim (1988, 1992) the meaning of a sentence is
  its context change potential (CCP).
• Prior to fake past assertions, speaker has not
  been sure if p was true, or has believed the
  contrary, not-p, to be possibly true.
• (51) past ?? f ? present ? f

66

• Fake past utterances
• change the context by eliminating not-p and adds
  p.
• disambiguate the actual world.
• (52) CCP of fake past sentences
• for any context c, LF f,
• c fake past f
• c - ? Believe(a, f) Believe(a, f)

67

• Or,
• extract disbelief on p and adds belief on p. If
  speaker has strongly believed the contrary,
  negation takes narrower scope than Believe.
• (53) c Believe (a, ?f) Believe (a, f)

68
Conclusion

• Surprise and implicit speaker attitudes affect
  temporal interpretations of factive,
  unaccusative, and typically stative predicates.
• The mono-clausal fake past sentences show that
  covert emotive modality interacting with bouletic
  and epistemic speculative modality is the
  monster.

69

• Modal functions as a determiner-like element
  taking presuppositions in the restrictor
• Fake past assertions update contexts