ProlegomenatoatheoryofX-marking

KaivonFintel andSabineIatridouMIT

1

Apair:

1a.IfMaryknowstheanswer,Johnknowstheanswerb.IfMaryknewtheanswer,Johnwouldknowtheanswer

Not“subjunctiveconditionals”:thesubjunctiveisneithernecessarynorsufficient.

Not“counterfactualconditionals”:FutureLessVividconditionals,alsocancellability asinAnderson1951.

2

O-marked

X-marked

“O-marking”:Open,Ordinary,..“X-marking”:eXtra

Thereisnodeepersignificanceinthechoiceofterms.

Theyarepickedmerelytoavoidwrongassociationslike“subjunctive”and“counterfactual”

3

WhatisthemeaningdifferencebetweenO- andX-marking?“semanticX-contribution”

WhatisthemorphologicaldifferencebetweenO- andX-marking?

4

TherearelanguagesthathaveveryspecializedX-morphology.

TherearelanguageswhereX-markingconsistsofmorphemesthathaveotherusesaswell.

5

• HungarianisalanguagewithspecializedX-morphology:Add-nA toanO-conditional

3. HaJános tudja aválaszt,Mari(is)tudja aválasztifJknowstheanswer-acc M(too)knowstheanswer-acc‘IfJohnknowstheanswer,Maryknowstheanswer’

4.HaJános tudná aválaszt,Mariistudná aválasztifJknow.NA theanswer-acc Maritooknow.NA theanswer-accIfJohnknewtheanswer,Marywouldknowtheanswer

(4)isPresentCounterfactual(PresCF):p,qdonotholdatUT.

6

PastCounterfactual,wherep,qdonotholdatatimepriortoUT: youaddpast+nA .

PresCF:5. HaJános tudná aválaszt,Mariistudná aválaszt

ifJknow.NA theanswer-accMaritooknow.NA theanswer-acc‘IfJohnknewtheanswer,Marywouldknowtheanswer’

PastCF:

6. HaJános tudta volna a választ,ifJ know.past.3sgbe-NA theanswer-acc

Mariis tudta volna aválasztM tooknow.past.3gbe-NA theanswer-acc‘IfJohnhadknowntheanswer,Marywouldhaveknowntheanswer too’

7

• FutureLessVivid(FLVs):

7a.haholnap el-indul, ajo:vo" h'etre oda-e’riftomorrowaway-leavethefollowingweek.onto there-reach‘Ifheleavestomorrow,hewillgettherenextweek’

b.haholnap el-indulna, ajo:vo" he'tre oda-e'rneiftomorrowaway-leave.NA thefollowingweek.onto there-reach.NA‘Ifhe lefttomorrow,hewouldgettherenextweek’

8

Next:

LanguageswhereX-markingplaysadifferentroleinotherenvironments.

SuchlanguagesvariablyusePastTense,Imperfective,FutureandsometimesSubjunctivetomarkthedifferencebetweenXandO-markedconditionals.

9

• ForexampleGreek,uses“FakePast”and“FakeImperfective”:

8.Anoarchigos pethene avrio,tha tonthavameekiIfthechiefdied.PST.IMP tomorrow,FUThimbury.PST.IMP there‘ifthechiefdiedtomorrow,wewouldburyhimthere’

Thehypotheticaleventsdescribedarenotinterpretedinthepastnorasbeinginprogress.

Yet,themorphologyisPastandImperfective.

10

English,amongmanyothers, isalsoafakepastlanguage(would=woll+PST):

9a.Ifhelefttomorrow,hewouldgettherenextweek(FLV)

b.IfIhadacarnow,Iwouldbehappy (PresCF)

c.Ifhehadbeendescended fromNapoleon, hewouldhavebeen shorter

(PastCF)

EnglishisinasmallminorityoflanguageswhereX-markingappearstoconsistonlyofPasttense.

11

TherehasbeenafairamountofliteratureontryingtoidentifyhowthedifferentmorphologicalingredientscontributetothemeaningofthedifferencebetweenXandOconditionals.

Thereareatleasttwowaysthisliteraturehasbeenonthewrongpath.

12

• ThefirstisthatmostproposalsconcentrateontheroleofPasttensealone.ignoringotherelementsinX-marking,likeImperfectiveAspectinGreek,Romanceetc).

ButifX-markingconsistsofPastandImperfectiveinGreek andjustPastinEnglish,onewouldhavetocometoeitheroneoftwoconclusions:

- [Past]Greek =/=[Past]EnglishAfterall[Past]Greek needsimperfectiveforX-marking;[Past]Englishdoesnot.or-[Past]Greek =[Past]EnglishAndtheobligatoryimperfectiveinGreekX-markingmakesnocontribution

13

Eitherconclusionhasgoneunder-appreciatedbyworkthatfocusesonlyontheroleofPastinX-marking.

Butwearenotheretodaytotrytorectifythistendency.Fortoday’spurposes,wedonotcarewhatXconsistsofmorphologically.

Thatis,Hungarian,EnglishandGreekareonapartoday.

14

ThesecondwayinwhichtheliteratureonX-markinghasbeenonthewrongpathisthatithasbeentryingtogleanthecontributionofX-markingbyjustlookingatconditionals.

Thatis,theprevalentpracticehasbeentotrytounderstandthecontributionofX- markingbylookingonly atthedifferencebetweenXandO-markedconditionals.

However,X-markingappearsinotherpartsofthegrammaraswell.

Defaultassumption:thecontributionofX-markingremainsthesame,regardlessofwhetheritappearsinconditionalsorelsewhere.

15

Sowhatwewouldliketodotodayistolookatthesenon-conditionalenvironmentsthatcontainXandseewhatwecanlearnfromthem…

…andfindoutifweneedtoamendourviewofX-markinginconditionals,inordertomaintainaconsistentinterpretationforXacrossallenvironmentswhereitappears.

Themethod:wewillstartwithameaningforXfromconditionalsandtakeittothenon-conditionalenvironmentsandseehowitfares.

16

Butfirst,wewillneedtoconvinceyouthatthereareindeednon-conditionalenvironmentsthatcontainX-marking.

Thereareatleasttwo:

-aphenomenonwewillcall“transparentwishes”or“X-markeddesires”

and

-aphenomenonwewillcall“transparentought”or“X-markednecessity”

17

Let’sstartwithwhatareoftencalled“Counterfactualwishes”:

10.IwishIhadabrotheràIdonothaveabrother

ThecomplementofWISHis(presupposedtobe)false/contrary-to-fact.

Buttheterm“counterfactualwish”isamisnomer:Thedesireisintheactualworld.Thiswillbeimportantlateron.

Wewillshortlydispensewiththeterm“counterfactualwish”.

18

19

Inmanylanguages,thereisamorphologicalcommonalitybetweenX-markedconditionalsandCFwishes(Iatridou 2000).

Inthefullversionofthegeneralization,themorphologyontheX-conditionalconsequentappearsontheembeddingverbwant andthemorphologyontheX-conditionalantecedentappearsonitscomplement:

11.X-markedconditional:ifpm1,qm2

12.CFwish:Iwantm2 thatpm1

WecallthistheConditional/Desire(C/D)generalization.

Theconditional/desiregeneralizationholdsinmanylanguages:

11.X-markedconditional:ifpm1,qm212.CFwish:Iwantm2 thatpm1

Notethatwearedealingwithtwo“types”ofX-marking:-Xontheconditionalconsequentanddesire-verb-Xontheconditionalantecedentandcomplementofthedesireverb

Themorphologicaldifferencebetweenantecedent andconsequentX-markingisnotalwaysvisiblebecauseinsomelanguages,“antecedent”and“consequent”X-markingarethesame(eg Hungarian,German).

20

Hungarian:

13.HaJános tudná aválaszt,Mariistudná aválasztifJknow.NA theanswer-accMaritooknow.NA theanswer-accIfJohnknewtheanswer,Marywouldknowtheanswer

14.Szeret-né-mhamagasabb len-nelike-NA-1sgiftallerbe-NE`Iwishshewastaller’

21

Inothers(eg Greek,Spanish)youcanseethedifference:

15.Sifuera más alto sería unjugadordebaloncesto.Ifbe.3.sg.PAST.SUBJ moretallbe.3.sg.COND aplayerofbasketball‘Ifs/hewastaller,s/hewouldbeabastketball player’

SpanishX-desire:

16.Querría que fuera más altodeloque es.Want.3.sg.COND thats/hebe.3.sg.PAST.SUBJ moretallthanits/heis‘Iwishs/hewastallerthans/heis

22

“Transparentwishes”:onepartoftheC/Dgeneralization:want+X-marking

Spanish,Greek,Frenchandothersare“transparentwish”languages.

Englishisnot.Ithasalexicalizeditemwish andobeysonlyonepartoftheC/Dgeneralization,namely“antecedent”X-markingonthecomplementofthedesireverb:

16a.IfIhad acar,Iwouldbehappy

b.IwishthatIhad acarnow

23

IfEnglishhadbeenatransparentwishlanguage,itwouldhavehadwouldonwant,and (18b)wouldhavemeant(18c),whichitdoesnot:

18a.IfIhadacar,Iwouldbehappyb.Iwould wantthatIhad acarnow(Iwould wanttohaveacarnow)

=/=c.IwishthatIhadacarnow

ButeventhoughEnglishisnotatransparentwishlanguage,itdoesobeyonepartoftheC/Dgeneralization,namelythesamemorphologyappearsontheconditionalantecedentandonthecomplementofthedesirepredicate.

24

IfEnglishhadbeenatransparentwishlanguage,itwouldhavehadwouldonwant,and (18b)wouldhavemeant(18c),whichitdoesnot:

18a.IfIhad acar,Iwouldbehappyb.Iwould wantthatIhad acarnow(Iwould wanttohaveacarnow)

=/=c.IwishthatIhad acarnow

ButeventhoughEnglishisnotatransparentwishlanguage,itdoesobeyonepartoftheC/Dgeneralization,namelythesamemorphologyappearsontheconditionalantecedentandonthecomplementofthedesirepredicate.

25

TurkishisanotherlanguagelikeEnglish,whichhasaspecializedmorphemefor“CF”wishes.LikeEnglish,itobeystheC/Dgeneralizationonlyinthecomplement.

X-markinginTurkish:TurkishhasfakePast.

X-markingontheconsequent:aorist+pastX-markingontheantecedent:SA+past (past-SAinepistemicconds.)

19.Johnönümüzdeki salı gel-se-ydi,annesi çokmutlu ol-ur-duJohn next Tue come-SA-PST his.mom veryhappybe(come)-AOR-PST‘IfJohnarrivednextTuesday,hismomwouldbeveryhappy’

26

Turkishhasundeclinable (non-verbal)keşke toconveyWISH:

20.Keşke önümüzdeki salı gel-se-ydiKeşke nexttuesday come-SA-PST‘IwishhewouldcomenextTuesday’

Andin(20)thespeakerbelievesthatherwishwillnotcometrue.(Hindikaash behavesthesame)

SotheC/Dgeneralizationisreal,eveniftherearelanguages,likeEnglishandTurkish,whichobeyonlyoneofitstwoparts.

27

Remember:“counterfactual”wishesaresocalled,notbecausethedesireisinacounterfactualworld(thedesireisintheactualworld)butbecausethecomplementistakentobefalse.

Thesameholdsfortransparentwishes/i.e.X-markeddesirepredicates.

TakeFrench.Thedifferencebetweenaninfinitiveorasubjunctivecomplementisafunctionofthe(contra)indexingofthesubjects:

21a.Jeveux aller à Paris.Iwantgo.inf toParis

b.Jeveux que tu ailles à Paris.Iwantthatyougo.subj toParis

28

Whentheembeddedeventisnotattainableanymore,plainwant isout:

22a.*Jeveux être arrivé mardi passé.IwantbearrivedTuesdaypassedintended:‘IwanttohavearrivedlastTuesday’

b.*Jeveux qu’il soit arrivé mardi passé.Iwantthathebe.subj arrivedTuesdaypassedintended:‘IwantyoutohavearrivedlastTuesday’

29

Instead,X-markingonwantmustbeused.French(consequent)X-markingiscalledthe“conditionel”,whichisnotamoodbutafuture+past+imperfective combination(Iatridou 2000).

23a.Jevoudrais être arrivé mardi passé.Iwant+X bearrivedTuesdaypassed‘IwishIhadarrivedlastTuesday’

b.Jevoudrais qu’il soit arrivé mardi passé.Iwant+X thathebe.subj arrivedTuesdaypassed‘IwishhehadarrivedlastTuesday’

30

SothefirstenvironmentwhereweseeX-markingappearoutsideconditionalsisX-markeddesiresforunattainablesituations.

31

ThesecondenvironmentisX-markednecessity.

TaketheEnglishmodalought,whichweidentifybythetestin(24a):

24a.Yououghttodothedishesbutyoudonothavetob.#Youmustdothedishesbutyoudonothaveto

Wewillrefertomodalsthatbehavelikeought inthistestas“weaknecessitymodals”.

Englishhasalexicalitemoughtbutotherlanguagesdonot.(vonFintel andIatridou 2008)

32

Otherlanguages:X-markingonastrongnecessitymodal.

InHungarianX-markingisjustnA.25.Péter-nek elkell-ene mosogat-ni-aaz edény-ek-et,

Peter-DATPRTmust-X wash-INF-3sgthedish-PL-ACC

de senki nem kényszer-ít rábutnoone notforce-3sg.SUBJ.3.OBJthat.SUBL

‘Peteroughttodothedishesbutnobodyrequireshimtodothat’

IntheabsenceofX-markingthesentenceisgrammaticalbutacontradiction.

33

Andwhenyoucantellthedifference,weseeitisspecifically“consequent”-X-marking. Spanish:

26a.Deberia limpiar losplatos,pero noestoy obligadoMust+COND cleanthedishesbutnotamobliged‘IoughttodothedishesbutIamnotobliged’

b.Tendria que limpiar losplatos,pero noestoy obligadoHave+COND COMPLcleanthedishesbutnotamobliged‘IoughttodothedishesbutIamnotobligedto’

c.#Tengo que limpiar losplatos pero noestoy obligadoHaveCOMPcleanthedishesbutnotamobliged

34

IfEnglishhadbeenatransparentoughtlanguage,itwouldhavehadwouldonhaveto,and (27b)wouldhavemeant(27c),whichitdoesnot:

27a.IfIhadacar,Iwouldbehappy

b.Youwould havetodothedishesbutyouarenotrequiredto=/=

c.Youought todothedishesbutyouarenotrequiredto

35

Sothewaythereisaconditional/desiregeneralization,morphologicallyspeaking,thereisalsoaconditional/necessitygeneralization,againmorphologicallyspeaking.(Andagain,therearelanguagesthatshowonlyonepartofeachgeneralization,inthiscaselanguageswherecomplementsofmodalsareinfinitivalandthusincapableofshowingX-marking)

Butit’sallaboutX-marking!Andontheassumptionthatthemodalofaconditionalissituatedintheconsequent,weunderstandwhat“consequent”-X-markingis:X-markingonamodal!-intheconditionalconsequent-onthedesirepredicate-onthenecessitymodal

36

HerewecanalreadydrawourfirstlessonaboutourtheoriesofX-markinginconditionals:

AnumberofproposalsaboutX-markinginconditionalsconsideronlyX-markingintheconsequenttobesemanticallyactive,andX-markingintheantecedentasortofagreementphenomenon(orSoT)totheX-markingintheconsequent.(ThoseproposalsmostlytalkaboutthePastinX).

ButsuchapproachesrunintoadifficultyinthefaceoftheC/Dgeneralization:antecedentX-markingisrequiredevenwhentheembedder isnotapast-markedelement,likeEnglishwish,theTurkishkeşke,Hindikaash,etc.

37

Asecondreasonwhy“antecedent”X-markingisnotjustagreement:Someoftheseparticles,likeTurkishkeşke,Greekmakari cantakeeitherO-markingorX-markingontheircomplement:28.Makari na ine eki tora O-marking

makari PRTistherenow(roughly):‘Iwanthim/hertobetherenow’

29.Makari na itan eki tora X-markingmakari PRTwastherenow‘Iwishs/hewastherenow’

ButwithX-markingitisnecessarilyconveyedthats/heisnottherenow.Soclearly“antecedentX-marking”isnotJUSTagreementorSoT.AntecedentX-markingmakesadifferenceinmeaning.

38

Sofarwehave:

X-markedconditionalsX-markeddesiresX-markednecessity

Wesawwhattheyhaveincommoninform.Nextweneedtoseewhattheyhaveincommoninmeaning.

WestartwithasimilaritythatX-markeddesiresandX-markednecessityshare:acertainambiguitywhichdoesnotappeartobepresentinX-markedconditionals.WewillstartbypresentingthissimilaritywithX-markeddesires.

39

X-markednecessityisambiguousbetween-Aweaknecessitymodalintheactualworld:

30.tha eprepe na pari aftin tinvarka

must+X takethistheboat‘heoughttotaketheboat’ß noteEnglishtranslation

-Astrongnecessitymodalina“counterfactual”world:

31.AnoFredithele na pai sto nisi,tha eprepe na pari aftin tinvarka

IftheFredwantedtogoto-theisland,must+X takethistheboat‘IfFredwantedtogototheisland,hewouldhavetousetheboat’ß noteEnglishtranslation

ThesetranslatedifferentlyintoEnglishbutin“transparent”languagestheybothareX-markingonanecessitymodal.

40

X-markeddesiresareequallyambiguous:

-Adesireintheactualworldtowardssomethingunattainable:

32.tha ithele na ixe makritero krevatiFUTwant+Past na hadlongerbed‘Hewishes hehadalongerbed’

-AdesireinaCFworld:

33.Anitan psiloteros tha ithele na ixe/exi makritero krevatiifwastallerFUTwant+Past na had/havelongerbed‘Ifhewastallerhewouldwanttohavealongerbed’

41

Again,notethedifferentEnglishtranslations

42

FromvonFintelandIatridou2008

Butnote:

Despitetheparallelsbetweentransparentought andwish,thereisonedifference:

• Necessity+X intheactualworld:aweakmodal(ought)Want+Xintheactualword:notaweakerdesire(butadesiretowardssomethingunattainable;hencethefrequentterm“CFwish”)

43

Sohereisourtask:understandwhatXdoesinthefollowingenvironments:

a. X-markedconditionalsb. X-markednecessitywhichyieldsaweaknecessityintheactualworldc. X-markednecessitywhichyieldsastrongnecessityinaCF-worldd. X-markeddesirewhichyieldsanunattainabledesireintheactualworlde. X-markeddesirewhichyieldsadesireinaCF-world

Wewillstartwithareductionthatshouldnotbecontroversial:(c)and(e)reduceto(a):

44

a. X-markedconditionalsb. X-markednecessitywhichyieldsaweaknecessityintheactualworldc. X-markednecessitywhichyieldsastrongnecessityinaCF-worldd. X-markeddesirewhichyieldsanunattainabledesireintheactualworlde. X-markeddesirewhichyieldsadesireinaCF-world

(c):strongnecessity inaX-marked consequent:if ...,Iwould have to...(d):adesireverbinaX-marked consequent:if ...,Iwould want to...

So(c,d)arecasesof(a).45

Sothequestionreducesto:WhatdoesXdointhefollowing?

a. X-markedconditionalsb. X-markednecessitywhichyieldsaweaknecessityintheactualworldd.X-markeddesirewhichyieldsanunattainabledesireintheactualworld

46

Atthispoint,wegetoursecondtake-homelessonaboutourtheoriesofX-markinginconditionals.

Schulzhascoinedtheterms“PastasModal”and“PastasPast”forthetwocampsofproposalsforwhat/howPastTense(partorwholeofX-marking)contributestotheinterpretationofX-markedconditionals.

47

PastasModal:

The“past”morphemehasanunderspecifiedmeaning:

temporalpast

μ

CFinference

Past-as-Modal:Iatridou,Schulz,Mackay,Bittner,andothers

times

worlds

PastasPast:X-markingisapastoperatorwithwidescopeovertheconditional,whichresultsinthe(mostlymetaphysicalmodal’s)modalbasebeingcalculatedinthepasttimeoftheutterancetime.

Past-as-Past:Ippolito,Arregui,Khoo,Romero,andothers

49

The“splittingpoint”

~p

~p

p

p

Roughly:thePasttakesusbacktoatimewherethe(non-Past)conditionalcouldstillhavebeentrue.

NobodythatweknowofhasattemptedaPast-as-PastaccountoftheX-markinginX-markeddesiresorX-markednecessity.

Back-shiftingthetimeofevaluationofthemodal,wouldnotyieldaweakmodalintheactualworld.

Thesameholdsfortransparentwish:Back-shiftingthetimeofevaluationofthemodal,wouldnotyieldtheconstellationofpropertiesofCFwishes.Afterall,whatwecallCFwishesareaboutcurrentdesiresintheactualworld.

50

SothePast- as-PastcampdoesnotfarewelloncewelookatX-markingoutsideconditionals.

WhataboutthePast-as-Modalcamp?

Mackay2015(seealsoLeahy2015)arguesthatcertainPast-as-Modalaccounts(morespecificallyIatridou2000andSchulz2014)sufferfromModusPonensproblems.TherehavebeenattemptstosavethePast-as-ModalapproachfromthisproblembySchulz,andinfact,byMackayhimself.

Wewillnotexpressanopiniononthisdebatetoday,butinsteadcontinueourdiscussionwitha“classic”accountofX-marking,theoneinStalnaker 1968,1975.

51