Publikation: Conjectural questions : The case of German verb-final wohl questions
Dateien
Datum
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
URI (zitierfähiger Link)
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Link zur Lizenz
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
Zusammenfassung
The paper analyzes German verb-final questions with the particle wohl, which roughly translate as ‘Q, I wonder?’. It construes German as an instance of a general typological pattern: Conjectural questions (CQs) are marked by evidentials in many languages, and German wohl is an inferential evidential. The analysis proceeds in three steps. First, wohl is shown to pattern with inferential evidentials in other languages. Declarative wohl p asserts p and conveys ‘the speaker defeasibly infers p from secure knowledge’ as non-at-issue content. Second, the analysis is extended to standard wohl Q questions, accounting for the interrogative flip. Third, the analysis integrates conjectural verb-final wohl questions. I propose that CQs ask for answers that are defeasibly entailed by the pooled knowledge of speaker and addressee. Due to the logic of defeasible inference, the addressee is not in a position to answer the CQ unless both interlocutors have pooled their knowledge. In normal utterance contexts, these questions are thus un-answerable. We see two conventionalized reactions: the interlocutors engage in speculative discourse, or the CQ is understood as a statement of curiosity that doesn’t require a response.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
Zitieren
ISO 690
ECKARDT, Regine, 2020. Conjectural questions : The case of German verb-final wohl questions. In: Semantics and Pragmatics. Linguistic Society of America. 2020, 13, 9. eISSN 1937-8912. Available under: doi: 10.3765/sp.13.9BibTex
@article{Eckardt2020-08-27Conje-51399, year={2020}, doi={10.3765/sp.13.9}, title={Conjectural questions : The case of German verb-final wohl questions}, volume={13}, journal={Semantics and Pragmatics}, author={Eckardt, Regine}, note={Article Number: 9} }
RDF
<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/51399"> <dcterms:title>Conjectural questions : The case of German verb-final wohl questions</dcterms:title> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2020-10-19T07:11:39Z</dc:date> <dcterms:issued>2020-08-27</dcterms:issued> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">The paper analyzes German verb-final questions with the particle wohl, which roughly translate as ‘Q, I wonder?’. It construes German as an instance of a general typological pattern: Conjectural questions (CQs) are marked by evidentials in many languages, and German wohl is an inferential evidential. The analysis proceeds in three steps. First, wohl is shown to pattern with inferential evidentials in other languages. Declarative wohl p asserts p and conveys ‘the speaker defeasibly infers p from secure knowledge’ as non-at-issue content. Second, the analysis is extended to standard wohl Q questions, accounting for the interrogative flip. Third, the analysis integrates conjectural verb-final wohl questions. I propose that CQs ask for answers that are defeasibly entailed by the pooled knowledge of speaker and addressee. Due to the logic of defeasible inference, the addressee is not in a position to answer the CQ unless both interlocutors have pooled their knowledge. In normal utterance contexts, these questions are thus un-answerable. We see two conventionalized reactions: the interlocutors engage in speculative discourse, or the CQ is understood as a statement of curiosity that doesn’t require a response.</dcterms:abstract> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dc:rights>Attribution 3.0 Unported</dc:rights> <dc:creator>Eckardt, Regine</dc:creator> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/"/> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2020-10-19T07:11:39Z</dcterms:available> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/> <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/51399/1/Eckardt_2-1el9qmhxbto1l9.pdf"/> <dc:contributor>Eckardt, Regine</dc:contributor> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/51399"/> <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/51399/1/Eckardt_2-1el9qmhxbto1l9.pdf"/> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>