Section 2: Semantics and Cognition
JOSÉ MARÍA GARCÍA NÚÑEZ1 Attitude Verbs and Nominalization 1. Introduction Attitude verbs have been shown to differ in a number of grammati- cally meaningful ways. The earliest distinction is between factive and non-factive attitude predicates (Kiparsky/Kiparsky 1970). As impor- tant as this is the classification of attitude verbs into assertive and non- assertive ones (Hooper 1975). Although these taxonomies are not altogether independent from each another, they can be shown to be semantically and syntactically discrete. In this chapter, I will focus on the assertive dimension of atti- tude predicates. Assertive verbs, or assertive readings thereof, can be distinguished from non assertive ones by at least the following gram- matical criteria: (a) they can be the main predicate in what Reinhart (1983: 175) calls speaker-oriented parentheticals, roughly, parentheticals convey- ing the speaker`s assessment of the sentential as something in- ferred from the subject’s beliefs rather than reported from her words (subject-oriented parentheticals); there are all kinds of grammatical differences between these parenthetical construc- tions (Reinhart 1983; Corver 1994; Collins/Branigan 1997), most prominent among which is the fact that, unlike subject-oriented parenheticals, speaker-oriented parentheticals cannot be analyzed as cases of slifting (Ross 1973) (movement of a sentential to the left periphery), given the binding pattern in (1)-(4); 1 . 108 José María García Núñez (1) Suei was ill, shei said/thought/believed/knew. (2) *Shei was ill, Suei said/thought/believed/knew (SP-oriented). (3) Shei was ill, Suei yelled/regretted/accepted. (4) *Suei was ill, shei yelled/regretted/accepted (SU-oriented). (b) they can have...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.