We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 January 2015
INTRODUCTION
There is a general notion of semantic argument. It says that A is a semantic argument of B when it instantiates a term (fills a slot) in a relation expressed by B. But under this rubric fall several more specific ideas, all commonly evoked, that need to be distinguished. In this chapter I will discuss four, which I call functional arguments (Section 4.2), content arguments (Section 4.3), entailed role arguments (Section 4.4) and participant arguments (Section 4.5). In Section 4.6, I will review common ideas on the correspondence of semantic and syntactic arguments.
The need for distinction reflects actual diversity in usage. The term “argument” is used with more variety in semantics than it is in syntax, and for a reason. In syntax it is clear what sort of fact the distinction between arguments and adjuncts is meant to account for: namely, different effects on distributional category. The string carry the chair slowly has nearly the same distribution as carry the chair, but these two strings both differ substantially in distribution from carry on its own. The claim that the chair but not slowly is an argument is meant to encode this. In semantics, however, the distinction between arguments and non-arguments finds no single agreed explanandum that is equally clear. Consider (1).
(1) Mo might cook sausage in the kitchen with our blowtorch.
Its meaning relates Mo, sausage, the kitchen and our blowtorch all to an event of cooking. If any single aspect of this fact demands a purely semantic distinction between arguments and adjuncts, it is not clear at first blush. Any distinction we might care to make will therefore be based on observations that are subtle or even tendentious – nothing so plain as a difference in string distributions. And with no single kind of fact to be accountable to, usage of “semantic argument” is correspondingly diverse. Linguists feel free to use it in any of several different ways. In the interests of clarifying conversation, I will now put labels to a few of these uses.
To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.
