Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures
This paper discusses the notion of grammatical well-formedness in the light of certain optimality approaches to syntactic phenomena (e.g.,Pesetsky 1998; Grimshaw 1997; Grimshaw & Samek-Lodovici 1995; Costa 1998). Such approaches adhere to assumptions that lead to the following theor...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
2008-04-01
|
Series: | Ilha do Desterro |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/desterro/article/view/7381 |
id |
doaj-2a75cda3a3f640e0baeac15a7f1f7bf6 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-2a75cda3a3f640e0baeac15a7f1f7bf62020-11-24T22:45:10ZengUniversidade Federal de Santa CatarinaIlha do Desterro 0101-48462175-80262008-04-01047129168Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicaturesSergio de Moura MenuzziThis paper discusses the notion of grammatical well-formedness in the light of certain optimality approaches to syntactic phenomena (e.g.,Pesetsky 1998; Grimshaw 1997; Grimshaw & Samek-Lodovici 1995; Costa 1998). Such approaches adhere to assumptions that lead to the following theorem: a linguistic representation may violate a rammatical constraint and still be well-formed if and only if all other alternative candidates also violate some grammatical constraint. The point the paper makes is: if well-formedness is the theoretical correlate of full acceptability, this theorem is in trouble. The arguments come from the analysis of two marked constructions of English: logophoric reflexives (Reinhart & Reuland, 1993) and peculiar passives (Davison, 1980). The paper argues that these phenomena arise as a result of a Gricean implicature triggered by violations of grammatical constraints, and that conversational implicatures cannot be characterized as the result of competition among grammatical constraints. This paper discusses the notion of grammatical well-formedness in the light of certain optimality approaches to syntactic phenomena (e.g.,Pesetsky 1998; Grimshaw 1997; Grimshaw & Samek-Lodovici 1995; Costa 1998). Such approaches adhere to assumptions that lead to the following theorem: a linguistic representation may violate a rammatical constraint and still be well-formed if and only if all other alternative candidates also violate some grammatical constraint. The point the paper makes is: if well-formedness is the theoretical correlate of full acceptability, this theorem is in trouble. The arguments come from the analysis of two marked constructions of English: logophoric reflexives (Reinhart & Reuland, 1993) and peculiar passives (Davison, 1980). The paper argues that these phenomena arise as a result of a Gricean implicature triggered by violations of grammatical constraints, and that conversational implicatures cannot be characterized as the result of competition among grammatical constraints. http://www.periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/desterro/article/view/7381English LanguageEnglish |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Sergio de Moura Menuzzi |
spellingShingle |
Sergio de Moura Menuzzi Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures Ilha do Desterro English Language English |
author_facet |
Sergio de Moura Menuzzi |
author_sort |
Sergio de Moura Menuzzi |
title |
Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures |
title_short |
Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures |
title_full |
Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures |
title_fullStr |
Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures |
title_full_unstemmed |
Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures Non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? Logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures |
title_sort |
non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures non-conflicting violations of grammatical constraints? logophoric reflexives, peculiar passives, and gricean implicatures |
publisher |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina |
series |
Ilha do Desterro |
issn |
0101-4846 2175-8026 |
publishDate |
2008-04-01 |
description |
This paper discusses the notion of grammatical well-formedness in the light of certain optimality approaches to syntactic phenomena (e.g.,Pesetsky 1998; Grimshaw 1997; Grimshaw & Samek-Lodovici 1995; Costa 1998). Such approaches adhere to assumptions that lead to the following theorem: a linguistic representation may violate a rammatical constraint and still be well-formed if and only if all other alternative candidates also violate some grammatical constraint. The point the paper makes is: if well-formedness is the theoretical correlate of full acceptability, this theorem is in trouble. The arguments come from the analysis of two marked constructions of English: logophoric reflexives (Reinhart & Reuland, 1993) and peculiar passives (Davison, 1980). The paper argues that these phenomena arise as a result of a Gricean implicature triggered by violations of grammatical constraints, and that conversational implicatures cannot be characterized as the result of competition among grammatical constraints. This paper discusses the notion of grammatical well-formedness in the light of certain optimality approaches to syntactic phenomena (e.g.,Pesetsky 1998; Grimshaw 1997; Grimshaw & Samek-Lodovici 1995; Costa 1998). Such approaches adhere to assumptions that lead to the following theorem: a linguistic representation may violate a rammatical constraint and still be well-formed if and only if all other alternative candidates also violate some grammatical constraint. The point the paper makes is: if well-formedness is the theoretical correlate of full acceptability, this theorem is in trouble. The arguments come from the analysis of two marked constructions of English: logophoric reflexives (Reinhart & Reuland, 1993) and peculiar passives (Davison, 1980). The paper argues that these phenomena arise as a result of a Gricean implicature triggered by violations of grammatical constraints, and that conversational implicatures cannot be characterized as the result of competition among grammatical constraints. |
topic |
English Language English |
url |
http://www.periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/desterro/article/view/7381 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT sergiodemouramenuzzi nonconflictingviolationsofgrammaticalconstraintslogophoricreflexivespeculiarpassivesandgriceanimplicaturesnonconflictingviolationsofgrammaticalconstraintslogophoricreflexivespeculiarpassivesandgriceanimplicatures |
_version_ |
1725689834033381376 |