Imperatives and modals

Natural Language Semantics

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 351-383

  Portner, Paul ^a  

^a GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Imperatives; Modality

Indexed keywords

EID: 36649011218     PISSN: 0925854X     EISSN: 1572865X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11050-007-9022-y     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Bennett J. (2003). Philosophical guide to conditionals. Oxford, Oxford University Press
2. Bhatt R. (1998). Obligation and possession. In Harley H. (ed). Papers from the UPenn/MIT roundtable on argument structure and aspect. Cambridge, MA, MITWPL.
3. Brennan V. (1993). Root and epistemic modal auxiliary verbs. Amherst, GLSA
4. Davies E. (1986). The English imperative. London, Croom Helm
5. Drubig, H. (2001). On the syntactic form of epistemic modality. Ms. University of Tübingen.
6. Feldman F. (1986). Doing the best we can. Dortrecht, Reidel
7. Ginzburg J. (1995a). Resolving questions, part I. Linguistics and Philosophy 18(5): 459-527
8. Ginzburg J. (1995b). Resolving questions, part II. Linguistics and Philosophy 18(6): 567-609
9. Hacquard, V. (2006). Aspects of modality. Ph.D. Thesis, MIT.
10. Halliday M. (1970). Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English. Foundations of Language 6, 322-361
11. Han, C.-H. (1998). The structure and interpretation of imperatives: Mood and force in Universal Grammar. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
12. Han C.-H. (1999). Deontic modality, lexical aspect and the semantics of imperatives. In Linguistics in the morning calm 4. Seoul, Hanshin Publications
13. Jackendoff R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press
14. Kaplan D. (1989). Demonstratives: An essay on the semantics, logic, metaphysics, and epistemology of demonstratives and other indexicals. In: Almog J., Perry J., Wettstein H. (eds). Themes from Kaplan. New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 481-563
15. Kratzer A. (1977). What "must" and "can" must and can mean. Linguistics and Philosophy 1(1): 337-355
16. Kratzer A. (1981). The notional category of modality. In: Eikmeyer H.-J., Rieser H. (eds). Words, worlds, and contexts. Berlin, de Gruyter, pp. 38-74
17. Lascarides, A., & Asher, N. (2003). Imperatives in dialogue. In P. Kuehnlein, H. Rieser, & H. Zeevat (Eds.), The semanatics and pragmatics of dialogue for the new millenium. Philadelphia: Benjamins.
18. Lewis D.K. (1979). A problem about permission. In: Saarinen E., Hilpinen R., Niiniluoto I., Hintikka M.P. (eds). Essays in honour of Jaakko Hintikka. Dordrecht, Reidel, pp. 163-175
19. Lyons J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
20. Ninan D. (2005). Two puzzles about deontic necessity. In: Gajewski J., Hacquard V., Nickel B., Yalcin S. (eds). New work on modality, Vol. 51 of MIT Working Papers in Linguistics. Cambridge, MA, MITWPL, pp. 149-178
21. Pak, M. (2004). Sentence types in Korean. Ms., Georgetown University. May be downloaded at http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/portnerp/nsfsite/ nsfframeset.htm
22. Pak, M., Portner, P., & Zanuttini, R. (2004). Deriving Clause Types: Focusing on Korean. In Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of Korea 2004, Yonsei Institute of Language and Information Studies (pp. 359-368). Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company.
23. Pak, M., Portner, P., & Zanuttini, R. (2006). What Korean promissives tell us about jussive clause types. Ms., Georgetown University. May be downloaded at http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/portnerp/nsfsite/nsfframeset.htm
24. Palmer F. (2001). Mood and modality (2nd ed.). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
25. Papafragou A. (2006). Epistemic modality and truth conditions. Lingua 116, 1688-1702
26. Platzack C., Rosengren I. (1994). On the subject of imperatives. A minimalist account of the imperative pronoun and negated imperatives. Sprache und Pragmatik 34, 26-67
27. Poletto, C., & Zanuttini, R. (2003). Making imperatives: Evidence from Central Rhaetoromance. In C. Tortora (Ed.), The syntax of Italian dialects (pp. 175-206). Oxford University Press.
28. Portner P. (2003). The temporal semantics and modal pragmatics of the perfect. Linguistics and Philosophy 26, 459-510
29. Portner, P. (2004). The semantics of imperatives within a theory of clause types. In K. Watanabe & R. B. Young (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 14. Cornell University Linguistics Department: CLC Publications.
30. Portner, P. (2007). Beyond the common ground: The semantics and pragmatics of epistemic modals. In K.-A. Kim & J.-Y. Yoon (Eds.), The perspectives of linguistics in the 21st century.
31. Portner, P. (to appear). Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. Potsdam, E. (1996). Syntactic issues in English imperatives. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California at Santa Cruz.
33. Potts, C. (2003). Keeping world and will apart: A discourse-based semantics for imperatives. Talk delivered at the NYU Syntax/Semantics Lecture Series, October 17, 2003.
34. Roberts, C. (1996). Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. In J.-H. Toon & A. Kathol (Eds.), Papers in semantics, OSU Working Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 49. Columbus: The Ohio State University.
35. Roberts, C. (2004). Context in dynamic interpretation. In Handbook of pragmatics. Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell.
36. Ross, J. R. (1969). Auxiliaries as main verbs. In W. Todd (Ed.), Studies in philosophical linguistics (series 1). Evanston, IL: Great Expectations Press.
37. Schlenker P. (2003). A plea for monsters. Linguistics and Philosophy 26, 29-120
38. Schmerling S. (1975). Imperative subject deletion and some related matters. Linguistic Inquiry 6(3): 501-511
39. Schwager, M. (2005). Permitting permissions. In J. Gervain (Ed.), Proceedings of the Tenth ESSLLI Student Session.
40. Schwager, M. (2007). Conditionalized imperatives. In C. Tancredi, M. Kanazawa, I. Imani, & K. Kusumoto (Eds.), Proceedings of SALT 16. Cornell University Linguistics Department: CLC Publications. http://research.nii.ac.jp/ salt16/proceedings.html
41. Segerberg K. (1990). Validity and satisfaction in imperative logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 31(2): 203-221
42. Shim, J., Lee, K., & Lee, C. (1977). Introduction to semantics. Chipmun-dang.
43. Stalnaker R. (1974). Pragmatic presupposition. In: Munitz M., Unger P. (eds). Semantics and philosophy. New York, New York University Press, pp. 197-213
44. Stalnaker R. (1978). Assertion. In: Cole P. (ed). Syntax and semantics 9: Pragmatics. New York, Academic Press, pp. 315-332
45. Swanson, E. (2006). Something "might" might mean. Ms., University of Michigan.
46. von Fintel, K. (2003). Epistemic modals and conditionals revisited. Handout of a talk presented at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Dec. 12, 2003. http://web.mit.edu/fintel/www/umass-handout.pdf
47. Wilson D., Sperber D. (1988). Mood and the analysis of non-declarative sentences. In: Dancy J., Moravcsik J., Taylor C. (eds). Human agency: Language, duty and value. Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press, pp. 77-101
48. Wurmbrand S. (1999). Modal verbs must be raising verbs. In: Bird S., Carnie A., Haugen J., Norquest P. (eds). The Proceedings of WCCFL 18. Somerville, MA, Cascadilla, pp. 599-612
49. Zanuttini, R. (2004). Understanding the restrictions on imperative subjects. Paper presented at the X Giornata di Dialettologia, University of Padua, June 24, 2004. http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/portnerp/nsfsite/ nsfframeset.htm Imperatives and modals