Interacting with Vocatives! Elizabeth Ritter & Martina Wiltschko - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Interacting with Vocatives!

Elizabeth Ritter & Martina Wiltschko (UCalgary) (ICREA, UPF, UBC)

May 31st 2020 CLA

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.

3

What is the structure of a vocative nominal?

Longobardi 1994

DP NP D Cody N Cody DP NP D *the N kid

NP N kid

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

4

Is there a structural difference between Calls and Addresses?

The proposal in a nutshell

5

Addresses Calls

GroundP RespP DP

GroundP DP

Propositional structure Interactional structure Vocatives are ‘big nominals’. They have nominal interactional structure.

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

8

The universal spine

How the event relates to the deictic center Viewing the event from a particular PoV What kind of event is it?

linking anchoring perspectivization classification

How the deictic center relates to the discourse Wiltschko 2014

The interactional spine

linking anchoring perspectivization classification responding grounding

Propositional structure is about the world: propositions, individuals, eventualities,… Interactional structure is about mental worlds: Beliefs, attitudes, evaluations, discourse status,…)

The interactional spine

linking anchoring perspectivization classification responding grounding

How the utterance relates to the interaction How the utterance relates to the common ground

RespP marks the edge of a turn GroundP is articulated: S- and Adr oriented

Clausal interactional structure

“Speech Act”

11

Wiltschko 2017, to appear Wiltschko & Heim 2016

Interactional structure Propositional structure

GroundP RespP CP

Engagement with interlocutor Commitment to propositional content

GroundP RespP DP

Nominal interactional structure

12

Ritter & Wiltschko 2018, 2019

Interactional structure Propositional structure

Nominal interactional structure

13

Interactional structure Propositional structure

GroundP RespP DP

Engagement with interlocutor Commitment to propositional content “Vocative”

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

15

Is there a structural difference between Calls and Addresses?

The syntax of calls and addresses

16

Calls Addresses

GroundP RespP DP GroundP DP

Predictions: Calls and addresses have:

• different distributions
• different content
• different interpretive functions

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.

19

• The function of Calls is engagement with the interlocutor.
• The function of Addresses is commitment to the propositional content.

The interpretive function of Calls

20

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!

The interpretive function of Addresses

21

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.

The structure of Addresses

I imagine, Lady Jane, that you will find the sherbet pleasant.

22

• A and S have a relationship and thus share a

common Ground

• Addresses require commitment, and this is the

interpretive function of GroundP

The structure of Calls & Addresses

23

Addresses Calls

• RespP is not embeddable
• RespP has an extra layer of structure to

host intonation and hey

• RespP is locus of engagement
• GroundP is embeddable
• GroundP lacks positions for engagement

UoLs

• GroundP is locus of commitment

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.

25

GroundAdrP DP DP *[DP the Kid] DP Cody pro GroundAdrP Kid GroundAdrP GroundAdr GroundAdr GroundAdr pro pro

Why is [DP the N] excluded from GroundP?

Interactional arguments are never [DP the N]

26

• 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 (1) a. *Wos is mit Martina passiert? What is with Martina happened ‘What happened to Martina?’ b. Wos is mit da Martina passiert? Interactional argument (vocative) (2) a. Martina, wos is passiert? Martina, what is happened ‘Martina, what happened?’

• b. * Da Martina , wos ist passiert?

27

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)

GroundAdrP DP DP *[DP the Kid] DP Cody pro GroundAdrP Kid GroundAdrP GroundAdr GroundAdr GroundAdr pro pro

i ? ?

28

Why is [DP the N] excluded from GroundP?

GroundAdrP DP DP *[DP the Kid] DP Cody pro GroundAdrP Kid GroundAdrP GroundAdr GroundAdr GroundAdr pro pro

i ? ? How is reference established for interactional arguments?

29

The reference of names

Assumption: Individuals we know are represented with file-cards

(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)

27

Relation to me: son … First Name: Konrad Titles: Senpai Last Name: Burton Nick Name: K Middle Name: Strang

The set of file-cards comprises a Compendium

30

The reference of names

RespP GroundP DP

Lexicon

List of Units

• f Language

and their grammatical properties

World knowledge

Encyclopedia Compendium

List of individuals with their names and E-indices

Grammar

The reference of names

31

GroundAdrP DP DP *[DP the Kid] DP Konrad pro GroundAdrP Kid GroundAdrP GroundAdr GroundAdr GroundAdr pro pro

32

The reference of bare nouns as interactional arguments

i 27 ? How is reference established for bare nouns as vocatives?

33

The reference of bare nouns as interactional arguments

(1) That’s my seat, kid.

• Bare nouns are not DPs, hence they do not have a DR index.
• Bare nouns are not in the compendium, hence they do not have an E-index.

How do bare nouns uniquely identify the addressee?

The reference of bare nouns as interactional arguments

34

GroundP DP KidAdr … pro Ground

Grammar

Hypothesis: In the absence of E-index, Addressee Role serves to identify the interactional argument

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 can be
• Why terms of endearment are special
• Conclusion

35

Terms of endearment

…can be used as vocative nominals (1) a. Are you ready to order, Hon? b. It’s your turn, Kiddo. c. I love you, Honey-bunny. …cannot be used as arguments (2) a. *Is (the) Hon ready to order? b. *It’s (the) Kiddo’s turn. c. *I love (the) Honey-bunny.

36

• How are ToEs licensed as interactional arguments?
• Why are ToEs not licensed as propositional arguments?

Terms of endearment

Proposal: These terms of endearment are composed of nouns and vocativizers (1) a. Are you ready to order, Honey? à vocative clipping b. It’s your turn, Kidd-o. à vocative suffixation c. I love you, Honey-bunny. à vocative reduplication

37

The modern use of suffix –o which forms many vocative diminutives, or terms which are more nearly pure vocatives than the words or names which are modified in this way. ‘Boyo’, for example, is used vocatively, whereas ‘boy’ is more frequently used in 3rd person reference […] ’Kiddo’ is a vocative form of ’kid’ […]

Dunkling 1990: entry for “O”

Terms of endearment

Proposal: These terms of endearment are composed of nouns and vocativizers (1) a. Are you ready to order, Honey? à vocative clipping b. It’s your turn, Kidd-o. à vocative suffixation c. I love you, Honey-bunny. à vocative reduplication This is a form of vocative case, as in Latin (2) Fer, serv-e, aquam bring slave-VOC water-ACC Slave, bring water.

38

Terms of endearment

39

GroundP DP N+Voc Honey Honey-bunny Kiddo pro Ground

Grammar

Another type of term of endearment

Can be used as interactional argument (vocative): (1) a. Are you at home, Sweetheart? Can be used as propositional argument if possessed DP: (2)

• a. * Is the sweetheart at home?

b. Is my/your/her sweetheart at home?

40

• How are these ToEs licensed as interactional arguments?
• Why are these ToEs only licensed as propositional arguments if they are possessed?

Type 2 Terms of endearment

41

Type 2 Terms of endearment

42 GroundP DP pro Ground

Grammar

SweetheartAdr <R, Spkr>

Type 2 ToEs are relational nouns

• As p-arguments they relate to the
• vert possessor
• As i-arguments they relate to S
• Like bare nouns they are licensed

by the Adr role

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 can be
• Why terms of endearment are special
• Conclusion

43

The syntax of vocatives

44

Addresses Calls

GroundP RespP DP

GroundP DP

Propositional structure Interactional structure Vocatives are ‘big nominals’. They are in the nominal interactional structure.

The reference of vocatives

45

Propositional arguments…

• are restricted to individuals we talk about
• their referent is represented as a DR-index

Interactional arguments …

• are restricted to individuals we talk to
• lack a DR-index and hence have their referent established by other means

The reference of vocatives

46

What we do with nominals

Dedicated forms Example Track Pronouns they Describe Full DPs the kids Name Proper Names Konrad

47

Ritter & Wiltschko 2018, 2019

What we do with nominals

Dedicated forms Example Track Pronouns they Describe Full DPs the kids Name Proper Names Konrad Address Terms of endearment Honey-Bunny, Sweetheart Terms of derogation Jerkface, Stupid

48

Vocatives are part of grammar:

• Their distribution, content, and function are regulated by interactional structure.
• Some UoLs are dedicated to interactional language. (ToEs, vocativizers, hey…)

THANK YOU, AUDIENCE!

49

Appendix 1

Are there restrictions on bare nouns used as vocatives?

50

51

Bare nouns

Schegloff 1968 claims that not all nouns can be used as vocative nominals (cf. also Zwicky 1974) (1) Tell me, doctor, why do my armpits itch? (2) *Tell me, pediatrician/surgeon/physician why do my armpits itch. Adapted from Zwicky 1974: 790 (30)

But

• In the right context, any noun that denotes a person can serve as a vocative:

(1) In a play about a hospital, the director can say: “Pediatrician, I need you to enter stage left.” (2) On a child’s 13th birthday, a parent may greet their child as follows: “Good morning, teenager!”

52

Appendix 2

Hey is a head.

53

Is hey an adjunct?

• Adjuncts have to be adjoined to a host.…but hey can appear as a call without a host:

(1) Hey! Do you need a hand? à hey is not an adjunct

54

Is hey a head?

• The interpretation of a head is determined by its lexical content AND spinal function
• Multi-functionality arises when the content (UoL) associates with different head

positions within the spine

• Hey is multifunctional due to association with different head positions:

(1) Hey as a call: Hey (Betsy) ! Do you need a hand? (2) Hey as a greeting: Upon running into a friend: Hey (Betsy). (3) Hey as a confirmational: That was really weird, hey? à hey is a head

55