May 31 st 2020 CLA Interacting with Vocatives! Elizabeth Ritter & Martina Wiltschko (UCalgary) (ICREA, UPF, UBC)
Two questions about vocatives Two types of vocatives DP’s can’t serve as vocatives 2
Question 1 (1) That’s my seat, Cody . (2) *That’s my seat, the kid. (3) That’s my seat, kid . DP DP D NP NP D NP Cody *the N N N Cody kid kid Longobardi 1994 What is the structure of a vocative nominal? 3
Question 2 Zwicky (1974) distinguishes 2 functions of vocatives (1) Grandma Myshkin! Tell me about Lublin. Call (2) I imagine, Lady Jane , that you will find the sherbet pleasant. Address Is there a structural difference between Calls and Addresses ? 4
The proposal in a nutshell Addresses Calls RespP Interactional structure GroundP GroundP DP DP Propositional structure Vocatives are ‘big nominals’. They have nominal interactional structure. 5
Roadmap • Background • The structure and function of the interactional layer • The syntax of vocative calls and addresses • Motivating two categories in the nominal interactional layer • The reference of vocatives • Why DPs cannot be vocatives, but names and bare nouns can be • Why terms of endearment are special • Conclusion 6
Roadmap • Background • The structure and function of the interactional layer • The syntax of vocative calls and addresses • Motivating two categories in the nominal interactional layer • The reference of vocatives • Why DPs cannot be vocatives, but names and bare nouns can be • Why terms of endearment are special • Conclusion 7
The universal spine How the deictic linking center relates to the discourse How the event anchoring relates to the deictic center Viewing the perspectivization event from a particular PoV classification What kind of event is it? Wiltschko 2014 8
The interactional spine Interactional structure is about mental worlds : responding Beliefs, attitudes, evaluations, discourse status,…) grounding Propositional structure is linking about the world : propositions, individuals, anchoring eventualities,… perspectivization classification
The interactional spine How the utterance RespP marks the responding relates to the edge of a turn interaction grounding How the GroundP is articulated: utterance relates to the common S- and Adr oriented linking ground anchoring perspectivization classification
Clausal interactional structure Engagement RespP Interactional with interlocutor “Speech Act” structure GroundP Commitment to propositional content CP Propositional structure Wiltschko 2017, to appear Wiltschko & Heim 2016 11
Nominal interactional structure RespP Interactional structure GroundP DP Propositional structure Ritter & Wiltschko 2018, 2019 12
Nominal interactional structure Engagement RespP with interlocutor Interactional “Vocative” structure Commitment GroundP to propositional content DP Propositional structure 13
Roadmap • Background • The structure and function of the interactional layer • The syntax of vocative calls and addresses • Motivating two categories in the nominal interactional layer • The reference of vocatives • Why DPs cannot be vocatives, but names and bare nouns can be • Why terms of endearment are special • Conclusion 14
Question 2 Zwicky (1974) distinguishes 2 functions of vocatives (1) Grandma Myshkin! Tell me about Lublin. Call (2) I imagine, Lady Jane , that you will find the sherbet pleasant. Address Is there a structural difference between Calls and Addresses ? 15
The syntax of calls and addresses Calls Addresses RespP Predictions : Calls and addresses have: GroundP GroundP • different distributions • different content • different interpretive functions DP DP 16
Different distributions Calls may ONLY occur in initial position … and constitute an independent utterance. Addresses may occur initially, medially or finally within the sentence. Slocum 2016 (1) (Hey) Grandma Myshkin ! Tell me about Lublin. (2) a. I imagine, Lady Jane , that you will find the sherbet pleasant. b. Lady Jane , I imagine that you will find the sherbet pleasant. c. I imagine that you will find the sherbet pleasant, Lady Jane . 17
Different content Calls may be preceded by hey … but Addresses cannot Calls have a distinctive prosodic contour (Göskel & Pöchtrager 2013) … but Addresses do not (1) Grandma Myshkin , tell me about Lublin. (2) Hey Grandma Myshkin , tell me about Lublin. (3) I imagine, Lady Jane , that you will find the sherbet pleasant. (4) * I imagine, hey Lady Jane , that you will find the sherbet pleasant. 18
Different interpretive functions “ Calls are designed to catch the addressee’s attention, addresses maintain or emphasize the contact between speaker and addressee.” (Zwicky 1974: 787) (1) Grandma Myshkin , tell me about Lublin. (2) I imagine, Lady Jane , that you will find the sherbet pleasant. • The function of Calls is engagement with the interlocutor. • The function of Addresses is commitment to the propositional content. 19
The interpretive function of Calls Calls signal that S wishes to initiate engagement with A … and can be used in isolation to attract attention Grandma Myshkin has her back towards her grandchild (1) (Hey) Grandma Myshkin ! 20
The interpretive function of Addresses Addresses (re-)establish relationship between S and A; encodes social information about A (Slocum 2016) …and that S knows that what they are saying is particularly relevant for A. (1) a. You shouldn’t text while driving personal or impersonal b. You shouldn’t text while driving, Konrad . personal only (2) a. * One shouldn’t text while driving, Konrad . b. EVERYONE knows that one shouldn’t text while driving, Konrad . 21
The structure of Addresses • A and S have a relationship and thus share a common Ground • Addresses require commitment, and this is the interpretive function of GroundP I imagine, Lady Jane , that you will find the sherbet pleasant. 22
The structure of Calls & Addresses Calls Addresses • RespP is not embeddable • GroundP is embeddable • RespP has an extra layer of structure to • GroundP lacks positions for engagement host intonation and hey UoLs • RespP is locus of engagement • GroundP is locus of commitment 23
Roadmap • Background • The structure and function of the interactional layer • The syntax of vocative calls and addresses • Motivating two categories in the nominal interactional layer • The reference of vocatives • Why DPs cannot be vocatives, but names and bare nouns can be • Why terms of endearment are special • Conclusion 24
Question 1 (revised) (1) That’s my seat, Cody . (2) *That’s my seat, the kid. (3) That’s my seat, kid . Ground Adr P Ground Adr P Ground Adr P Cody *[ DP the Kid] Kid Ground Adr DP Ground Adr Ground Adr DP DP pro pro pro Why is [ DP the N] excluded from GroundP? 25
Interactional arguments are never [ DP the N] • Names as interactional arguments can never be preceded by a determiner • even in languages where names are otherwise obligatorily preceded by a determiner (e.g., Upper Austrian German) Propositional arguments Interactional argument (vocative) (1) a. *Wos is mit Martina passiert? (2) a. Martina , wos is passiert? What is with Martina happened Martina, what is happened ‘What happened to Martina?’ ‘Martina, what happened?’ b. Wos is mit da Martina passiert? b. * Da Martina , wos ist passiert? 26
Why is [ DP the N] excluded from GroundP? Hypothesis 1: Interactional arguments differ from propositional arguments: • Propositional arguments require a DR index (= individuals we talk about ) • Interactional arguments cannot have a DR index (= individuals we talk to ) Ground Adr P Ground Adr P Ground Adr P Cody ? i *[ DP the Kid] Kid ? Ground Adr DP Ground Adr Ground Adr DP DP pro pro pro 27
Why is [ DP the N] excluded from GroundP? How is reference established for interactional arguments? Ground Adr P Ground Adr P Ground Adr P Cody ? i *[ DP the Kid] Kid ? Ground Adr DP Ground Adr Ground Adr DP DP pro pro pro 28
The reference of names 27 Relation to me: son First Name: Konrad Middle Name: Strang Assumption: Last Name: Burton Individuals we know are represented with file-cards Nick Name: K Titles: Senpai (Reinhart 1981, Erteshik-Shir 1997, 2007 ) … Proposal : Each file-card contains i) the name(s) of the individual ii) the individual’s relationship to the speaker iii) a unique identifier: an E(xtensional) index (27) The set of file-cards comprises a Compendium 29
The reference of names Grammar Encyclopedia Lexicon List of Units World of Language knowledge RespP and their grammatical GroundP properties DP Compendium List of individuals with their names and E-indices 30
The reference of names 31
The reference of bare nouns as interactional arguments How is reference established for bare nouns as vocatives? Ground Adr P Ground Adr P Ground Adr P Konrad *[ DP the Kid] Kid 27 i ? Ground Adr DP Ground Adr Ground Adr DP DP pro pro pro 32
Recommend
More recommend
