The Interpretation of the Logophoric Pronoun in Ewe Hazel Pearson. The distribution of the logophoric pronoun yè in Ewe is as follows:

Transcription

1 1. Introduction The Interpretation of the Logophoric Pronoun in Ewe Hazel Pearson The distribution of the logophoric pronoun yè in Ewe is as follows: (1) Kofi be yè dzo. Kofi say LOG leave Kofii say that hei/*j left. (2) *Yè dzo. LOG leave (i) MUST occur in the scope of an attitude predicate (ii) MUST have a de se reading The distributional properties raised a possibility that the lophoric pronoun might be an overt pronoun for PRO (3) John claimed [PRO to be clever]. (=(5)) Objectives of this paper are (i) to show that yè displays ambiguity between a de se and a de re reading, and (ii) to provide an analysis that can explain the ambiguity 2. Theoretical background (4) Scenario 1 Dave is running for office, and he is optimistic about his chances of winning. He often proudly says, I will win this election! (5) Scenario 2 Dave, who is running for office, is getting drunk at a bar. On the TV, they play one of his political ads, but he is so incredibly drunk that he doesn t recognize himself on the TV. But, he is impressed by the ad and says: See, that guy s gonna win this election! (6) a. Dave expects to win. b. Dave expects that he would win. 1

2 De se attitude An agent x bears a de se attitude to some content P only if: a. P is about x b. x figures into P in virtue of x thinking of themselves in a first personal way - Scenario 1 in (4) illustrates the de se attitude. - The sentence (6a), an attitude sentence with control infinitive, holds true only in (4). Analysis for the de se attitude LF structure of (6a): [Dave1 [expects [ 1 [PRO1 to win]]]] Lexical entry for [[expect de se ]] w : [[expect de se ]] w = λp<s,<et>>.λx. <y, w > Dox-Alt(x,w): P(w )(y) = T <y,w > Dox-Alt(Dave, w): y wins in w. De re attitude An agent x bears a de re attitude to some content P only if: a. P is about the thing z b. x would recognize the thing itself that the subordinate clause describes (but would NOT agree with the words chosen to describe that thing) - Scenario 2 in (5) illustrates the de re attitude. - The sentence (6b) can hold true in (5). Analysis for the de re attitude LF structure of (6b): [Dave [expects [λg1 [2 [λw3 [resp G1 he2] will win]]]]] Note that a concept generator variable G must be embedded in resp at LF Lexical entry for [[expect de re ]] w : [[expect de re ]] w = λφ<<e,<se>>,<e,<st>>>.λx. G. G is a concept generator for x & <y,w > Dox-Alt(x,w): Φ(G)(w )(y)=t G. G is a concept generator for Dave & <y,w > Dox-Alt(Dave, w ): G(Dave)(w ).will win in w 2

3 3. Introducing the Ewe data Basic distributions confirm observations that are reported in Clements (1975) (7) Kofi wɔ be e/*yè dzo. (=(44a,b)) Kofi do COMPL 3SG/LOG leave Kofi caused himself to leave. - Yè obligatorily occurs in the scope of attitude verbs cf. (1) (8) *Yè/e dzo. LOG/3SG leave He/she left. - Yè never occur in a matrix clause to refer to third person reference (9) Kofi koudrin be yè bidzi. Marie zu yè. (=(45)) Kofi dream COMPL LOG angry Mary insult LOG Kofii dreamed that hei was angry. Mary insulted himi. - Yè may occur in an unembedded sentence if the preceding sentence has an attitude predicate and it denotes the attitude holder associated with the predicate in the earlier sentence. (10) Kofi gblon na Marie be yè dzo. (=(46)) Kofi say PRP Mary COMPL LOG leave Kofi told Marie that he/*she left. - Yè must refer to the attitude holder (11) Marie be Kofi xɔse be yè na yè cadeau. (=(47)) Mary say Kofi believe COMPL LOG give LOG gift (i) Mary said that Kofi believed that she gave him a gift. (ii) Mary said that Kofi believed that he gave her a gift. - A possible antecedent is not limited to the most local one (12) M/O xɔse be m/o/(*ye) nyi sukuvi nyoe de. (=(48,49)) 1SG/2SG believe COMPL 1SG/2SG/LOG COP student good ART Intended: I believe that I am a good student. You believe that you are a good student. - Yè preferentially occurs with a third person antecedent rather than a first/second person antecedent (controversial) 3

4 4. The interpretation of yè Four of five consultant accept the de re reading of yè in mistaken identity scenarios. (13) Scenario: John has just found an old paper that he wrote, but he doesn t realize that he is the author of the paper. He reads it and is impressed by what a good paper it is. He says, Whoever wrote this paper is clever. John be yè le cleva. John say LOG COP clever John said that he was clever. (=(51)) Thus, there must be a proper LF construal for yè that allows the de re reading! 5. Reconciling the distribution of yè with its interpretation A resp in which yè is embedded introduces a concept generator G: G is a concept generator for x in w if a. G is of type <e, <s,e>> b. For all y, G(y) is a y-concept for x in w c. For all y, if there is w such that <y,w > Dox-Alt(x, w), than G(y) = G(x) According to the above assumptions, a LF structure of (51) would be as follows: [Λw1 [John [[say W1][ λg2 [1 [Λw3 [LOG1 G2] [is clever W2]]]]]] Then, predicted meaning for (51) would be as follows: [λw: G<e,<s, e>>. G is a concept generator for John in w & w Say(Kofi, w), G(y) is clever in w ] [λw: G<e,<s, e>>. G is a concept generator for John in w & w Say(Kofi, w), G(John) is clever in w ] (given the assumption (c)) 7. Consequence of the proposal 7.1. Interpretation of PRO According to the traditional assumptions, the de se reading of a pronoun is distinguished from the de re reading with respect to whether it is bound by an attitude predicate. 4

5 However, in the current system, the logophor yè is also bound by an attitude predicate although it allows the de re reading. Question: What distinguishes PRO, which only allows the de se reading, from the logophoric pronouns? The logophor can have a long-distance antecedent, while PRO cannot. (14) Marie be Kofi xɔse be yè na yè cadeau. (=(86)) Mary say Kofi believe COMPL LOG give LOG gift (i) Mary said that Kofi believed that she gave him a gift. (ii) Mary said that Kofi believed that he gave her a gift. (15) Kofii believed that Maryj claimed [PRO*i/j to have given himi/*herj a gift]. (=(87)) In order to have the de re reading, a pronoun must be embedded in a resp to be mediated by a concept generator. LF structure of (14): Kofi s attitude: de re [CP1 Mary said [CP2 λg1 1 λw1 [Kofi believed [CP3 λg2 2 λw2 [resp G2 LOG1 W2] ]]]] Mary s attitude: de se G. G is a concept generator for Mary & <y,w > SAY(Mary, w): G. G is a concept generator for Kofi & <z,w > BELIEFS (Kofi, w ): G(z) gave.. in w. Answer: The logophor can be embedded in a resp, but PRO cannot. Since having resp at LF is an additional step in a derivation, a grammar takes this option as a last-resort when a pronoun has an ability to take a long-distance antecedent Interpretation of logophoric pronoun in other languages If the ability of yè to take a long-distance antecedent causes the possibility of embedding of the pronoun in resp, an obligatory de se reading for logophoric pronouns in Yoruba and Tangale must be explained. In addition, the crosslinguistic variation in whether logophoric pronouns admit de re readings raises an acquisition problem: should this be assumed as a parametric variation? 5