Intensionality, grammar, and the sententialist hypothesis
-
Wolfram Hinzen
Abstract
Intensionality, the apparent failure of a normal referential interpretation of nominals in embedded positions, is a phenomenon that is pervasive in human language. It has been a foundational problem for semantics, defining a significant part of its agenda. Here we address the explanatory question of why it exists. Distinguishing lexical aspects of meaning from those that depend on grammatical patterning, we argue that intensionality is mainly grammatical in nature and origin: intensionality is an architectural consequence of the design of human grammar, although, in language use, lexical and pragmatic factors also play a role in the genesis of intuitions of non-substitutability salva veritate. Over the course of this paper, we offer a sequence of ten empirical arguments for this conclusion. A particular account of recursive structure-building in grammar is also offered, which predicts intensionality effects from constraints that govern how nominals of different grammatical types are embedded as arguments in larger units. Crucially, our account requires no appeal to a traditionally postulated semantic ontology of ‘senses’ or ‘thoughts’ as entities ‘denoted’ by embedded clauses, which, we argue, are explanatorily inert. It also covers intensionality characteristics in apparently non-sentential complements of verbs, which we further argue, against the claims of the recent ‘Sententialist Hypothesis’, not to be sentential complements in disguise.
Abstract
Intensionality, the apparent failure of a normal referential interpretation of nominals in embedded positions, is a phenomenon that is pervasive in human language. It has been a foundational problem for semantics, defining a significant part of its agenda. Here we address the explanatory question of why it exists. Distinguishing lexical aspects of meaning from those that depend on grammatical patterning, we argue that intensionality is mainly grammatical in nature and origin: intensionality is an architectural consequence of the design of human grammar, although, in language use, lexical and pragmatic factors also play a role in the genesis of intuitions of non-substitutability salva veritate. Over the course of this paper, we offer a sequence of ten empirical arguments for this conclusion. A particular account of recursive structure-building in grammar is also offered, which predicts intensionality effects from constraints that govern how nominals of different grammatical types are embedded as arguments in larger units. Crucially, our account requires no appeal to a traditionally postulated semantic ontology of ‘senses’ or ‘thoughts’ as entities ‘denoted’ by embedded clauses, which, we argue, are explanatorily inert. It also covers intensionality characteristics in apparently non-sentential complements of verbs, which we further argue, against the claims of the recent ‘Sententialist Hypothesis’, not to be sentential complements in disguise.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Preface 1
- List of contributors 5
-
I. Minimalism: Quo Vadis?
- A program for the Minimalist Program 9
-
II. Exploring features in syntax
- On feature interpretability and inheritance 37
- On the need for formal features in the narrow syntax 56
- Adjunct Control and edge features 79
- On the uninterpretability of interpretable features 109
- The Merge Condition 130
-
III. Radicalizing the interfaces
- Chains in Minimalism 169
- Multiattachment syntax, “Movement” effects, and Spell-Out 195
- Flavors of movement 236
- Minimalism and I-Morphology 267
- A minimalist approach to roots 287
- Computations at the interfaces in child grammar 304
- Intensionality, grammar, and the sententialist hypothesis 315
- What is and what is not problematic about the T-model 350
- Regarding the Third Factor 363
- The role of arbitrariness from a minimalist point of view 392
- Index 417
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- Preface 1
- List of contributors 5
-
I. Minimalism: Quo Vadis?
- A program for the Minimalist Program 9
-
II. Exploring features in syntax
- On feature interpretability and inheritance 37
- On the need for formal features in the narrow syntax 56
- Adjunct Control and edge features 79
- On the uninterpretability of interpretable features 109
- The Merge Condition 130
-
III. Radicalizing the interfaces
- Chains in Minimalism 169
- Multiattachment syntax, “Movement” effects, and Spell-Out 195
- Flavors of movement 236
- Minimalism and I-Morphology 267
- A minimalist approach to roots 287
- Computations at the interfaces in child grammar 304
- Intensionality, grammar, and the sententialist hypothesis 315
- What is and what is not problematic about the T-model 350
- Regarding the Third Factor 363
- The role of arbitrariness from a minimalist point of view 392
- Index 417
