The UCLA Linguistics Department proudly presents

Dave Schueler
University of California, Los Angeles

On implicit conditionals

11am-1pm Public Policy 2250
Reception to follow in Campbell 2122

This is a talk about conditional sentences. More specifically, it is about a particular class of conditional sentences, which presents a unique challenge to any semantic theory. I am speaking of sentences of the type exemplified in (1), which I refer to as "implicit conditionals" or ICs. ICs are characterized by a resemblance in morphology to the consequent clause of a subjunctive conditional sentence, in particular the occurrence of the modal would or another conditional modal. Semantically, ICs are conditional in meaning, despite the fact that they lack the clausal complexity of full conditionals; the latter are exemplified in (2).
 
                        (1))                        a).            John would hate Paris.
                                                    b).            John would feed a unicorn.
 
                        (2))                        If John lived in France, he would hate Paris.
 
So an implicit conditional resembles the consequent of a full conditional, but as such is missing its antecedent. However, since many ICs are quite grammatical and felicitous to native speakers, we must be finding some way to interpret them. The focus of this dissertation, then, is to determine by what process ICs are interpreted. We will see that this problem can be more specifically stated as the problem of how to "fill in" the antecedent when we are interpreting an IC, to come up with what I call the "understood antecedent".

Faculty Host: Daniel Buering
Student hosts: James Pannacciulli and Craig Sailor