[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Bidirektionale Optimalitätstheorie

Bidirectional Optimality Theory

  • Published:
Kognitionswissenschaft

Abstract

Optimality Theory as developed by Prince, Smolensky and others has been fruitfully applied to phonology, morphology, and syntax. The attempt to apply the ideas developed in these fields to the semantics/pragmatics interface necessitates the conception of a bidirectional OT. The main reason for assuming the idea of bidirectionality (combining expressive and interpretive optimization) derives from a number of phenomena which, on the one hand, demand the treatment of preferred interpretations, and, on the other hand, suggest to take into account the existence of blocking effects. In this article, some general motivation for the idea of bidirectionality is presented, the importance of this idea for the field of pragmatics (conversational implicature) is investigated, and some potential applications of bidirectional OT are outlined.

Zusammenfassung

Die von Prince, Smolensky und anderen entwickelte Optimalitätstheorie (OT) hat ihre Fruchtbarkeit in den Bereichen Phonologie, Morphologie und Syntax zulänglich bewiesen. Der Versuch, die auf diesen Gebieten erarbeiteten Grundideen auf die Semantik/Pragmatik-Schnittstelle anzuwenden, führt zwingend auf das Konzept einer bidirektionalen OT. Der Hauptgrund für die Annahme von Bidirektionalität (Kombination von interpretativer und expressiver Optimierung) ergibt sich vor allem daraus, dass im genannten Bereich eine Reihe von Phänomenen existieren, die einerseits die Behandlung von vorgezogenen Interpretationen verlangen und andererseits zur Berücksichtigung von Blockierungseffekten auffordern. Die vorliegende Arbeit gibt eine allgemeine Motivation für Bidirektionalität, untersucht die Wirkungsweise von Bidirektionalität im Bereich der Pragmatik (konversationelle Implikaturen) und gibt eine Übersicht über potenzielle Anwendungen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Literatur

  • Antilla, A. (1995) Deriving Variation from Grammar: A Study of Finnish Genitives. Manuscript. Stanford University. [ROA-63]

  • Atlas, J. D. & Levinson, S. C. (1981) It-clefts, informativeness and logical form. In: P. Cole (ed.), Radical Pragmatics (pp. 1–61). New York: Academic Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbosa, P., Fox, D., Hagstrom, P., McGinnis, M. & Pesetsky, D. (eds.) (1998) Is the Best Good Enough? Optimality and Competition in Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, D. (2000) Centering and the Optimization of Discourse. Manuscript, Stanford University

  • Bierwisch, M. (1987) Semantik der Graduierung. In: M. Bierwisch & E. Lang (Hrsg.), Grammatische und konzeptuelle Aspekte von Dimensionsadjektiven. Berlin: Akademie Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  • Blutner, R. (1998) Lexical Pragmatics. Journal of Semantics 15, 115–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blutner, R. (2000) Some Aspects of Optimality in Natural Language Interpretation. Journal of Semantics 17, 189–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boersma, P. (1998) Functional Phonology. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics

    Google Scholar 

  • Boersma, P. (1998) & Hayes, B. (1999) Empirical Tests of the Gradual Learning Algorithm. Manuscript, University of Amsterdam & UCLA. ROA-Archiv.

  • Bresnan, J. (1998) Optimal Syntax. Manuscript, Stanford University.

  • Bresnan, J. (im Druck) Explaining morphosyntactic competition. In: M. Baltin & C. Collins (eds.) Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell

  • Burzio, L. (1989) On the Non-Existence of Disjoint Reference Principles. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 14, 3–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Burzio, L. (1998) Anaphora and soft constraints. In: P. Barbosa, D. Fox, P. Hagstrom, M. McGinnis & D. Pesetsky (eds.), Optimality and Competition in Syntax (pp. 93–113). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Carston, R. (1998) Informativeness, relevance and scalar implicature. In: R. Carston & S. Uchida (eds.), Relevance Theory: Applications and Implications. Amsterdam: John Benjamins

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, Hye-Won (1996) Optimizing Structure in Context. PhD Dissertation. Stanford University.

  • Copstake, A. & Briscoe, T. (1995) Semi-Productive Polysemy and Sense Extension. Journal of Semantics 12, 15–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Hoop, H. (2000) Optimal scrambling and interpretation. In: H. Bennis, M. Everaert & E. Reuland (eds.), Interface Strategies (pp. 153–168). Amsterdam: KNAW

    Google Scholar 

  • de Hoop, H. & de Swart, H. (1999) Temporal adjunct clauses in optimality theory. In: H. Bennis & M. Everaert (eds.), Interface Strategies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekker, P. & van Rooy, R. (2000) Optimality Theory and Game Theory: Some Parallels. Journal of Semantics 17, 217–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fanselow, G., Schlesewsky, M., Cavar, D. & Kliegl, R. (1999) Optimal Parsing. Manuscript, University of Potsdam.

  • Geurts, B. (1995) Presupposing. PhD Dissertation. Universität zu Osnabr ück.

  • Geurts, B. (1999), Presuppositions and Pronouns. Oxford: Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  • Geurts, B. (2000) Buoyancy and Strength. Journal of Semantics (3).

  • Gibson, E. & Broihier, K. (1998) Optimality theory and human sentence processing. In: P. Barbosa, D. Fox, P. Hagstrom, M. McGinnis & D. Pesetsky (eds.), Optimality and Competition in Syntax (pp. 157–191). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, P. (1957) Meaning. The Philosophical Review 64, 377–388. Nachgedruckt in Grice (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grice, P. (1967) Logic and conversation. Manuskript. Nachgedruckt in Grice (1989)

  • Grice, P. (1989) Studies in the Way of Words. Harvard University Press

  • Grimshaw, J. (1997) Projection, Heads and Optimality. Linguistic Inquiry 28, 373–422

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, J. & Stokhof. M. (1991) Dynamic Predicate Logic. Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 39–100

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Haspelmath, M. (1999) Optimality and Diachronic adaptation. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 18, 180–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, I. (1982) The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. PhD thesis. University of Massachusetts. Amherst

  • Hendriks, P. & de Hoop, H. (2001) Optimality Theoretic Semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 24, 1–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, L. R. (1984) Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Qbased and R-based implicatures. In: D. Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning, Form, and Use in Context (pp. 11–42). Washington: Georgetown University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, L. R. (1989) A Natural History of Negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Itô, J., Mester, A. & Padgett, L. (1995) Underspecification in Optimality Theory. Linguistic Inquiry 26, 571–613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jäger, G. (2000) Some Notes on the Formal Properties of Bidirectional Optimality theory. In: R. Blutner & G. Jäger (eds.), Studies in Optimality Theory (pp. 41–63). Linguistics in Potsdam, Potsdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Jäger, G. & Blutner, R. (2000) Against lexical decomposition in syntax. Proceedings of IATL 15. University of Haifa.

  • Kager, R. (1999) Optimality Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  • Kamp, H. (1981) A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In: J. Groenendijk et al. (eds.), Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum. Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, H. & Reyle, U. (1993) From Discourse to Logic: Introduction to Modeltheoretic Semantics of Natural Language, Formal Logic and Discourse Representation Theory. Kluwer Academic Publishers

  • Kiparsky, P. (1998) Paradigm Effects and Opacity. Manuscript, Stanford University.

  • Krifka, M. (2000) Precise and vague interpretation of measurement terms. Vortrag auf der internationalen Tagung über Sinn und Bedeutung (Amsterdam).

  • Kuhn, J. (2000) Generation and parsing in optimality theoretic syntax!issues in the formalization of OT-LFG. In: P. Sells (ed.), Formal and Empirical Issues in Optimality-theoretic Syntax. Stanford: CSLI Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H. (2000) Markedness and word order freezing. In: P. Sells (ed.), Formal and Empirical Issues in Optimality-theoretic Syntax. Stanford: CSLI Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, Stephen C. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, England.

  • Levinson, S. C. (1987) Pragmatics and the Grammar of Anaphora. Journal of Linguistics 23, 379–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S. C. (1989) A Review of Relevance. Journal of Linguistics 25, 455–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, Stephen C. (1991) Pragmatic Reduction of the Binding Conditions Revisited. Journal of Linguistics 27: 107–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S. C. (2000) Presumptive Meanings. Cambridge & London: The MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattausch, J. (2000) On Optimization in Discourse Generation. Master thesis. Ms., University of Amsterdam.

  • McCarthy, J. & Prince, A. (1995) Prosodic Morphology. In: J. Goldsmith (ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory (pp. 318–366). Oxford: Blackwell

    Google Scholar 

  • McCawley, J. D. (1978) Conversational implicature and the lexicon. In: P. Cole (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics (pp. 245–259). Academic Press. New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Merin, A. (1999) Information, relevance, and social decision making: some principles and results of decision-theoretic semantics. In: L.S. Moss, J. Ginzburg, and M. de Rijke (eds.), Logic, Language, and Computation Vol 2 (pp. 179–221). Stanford CA: CSLI Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunberg, G. & Zaenen, A. (1992) Systematic polysemy in lexicology and lexicography. In: K. Varantola, H. Tommola, T. Salmi-Tolonen & J. Schopp (eds.), Euralex II, Tampere, Finland

  • Prince, A. & Smolensky, P. (1993) Optimality Theory. Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Book manuscript Rudgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. and University of Colorado, Boulder. (To appear, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.)

  • Schwarzschild, R. (1999) GIVENness, AvoidF and Other Constraints of the Placement of Accent, Natural Language Semantics 13, 87–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolensky, P. (1986) Information processing in dynamical systems: foundation of harmony theory. In: D. E. Rumelhart & J. L McClelland (eds.), Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition (pp. 194–281). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1976) Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesar, B. & Smolensky, P. (2000) Learnability in Optimality Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • van Deemter, K. & Peters, S. (eds.) (1996) Semantic Ambiguity and Underspecification Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Sandt, R. A. (1992) Presupposition Projection as Anaphora Resolution Journal of Semantics 9, 333–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Rooy, R. (2000) Comparing Questions and Answers: A Bit of Logic, a Bit of Language and Some Bits of Information. Manuscript, University of Amsterdam.

  • Williams, E. (1997) Blocking and Anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 28, 577–628

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, C. (1998) Bidirectional optimization and the theory of anaphora. Manuscript Johns Hopkin University. In: J. Grimshaw, G. Legendre & S. Vikner (eds.), Optimality Theoretic Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Wunderlich, D. (2000) How gaps and substitutions can become optimal: the pronominal affix paradigms of Yimas. In: J. P. Blevins (ed.), Transactions of the Philological Society, special issue on lexical paradigms

    Google Scholar 

  • Wurzel, W. U. (1998) On Markedness. Theoretical Linguistics 24, 53–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeevat, H. (1999) Explaining Presupposition Triggers. Manuscript AC99. University of Amsterdam. Herunterzuladen von http://www.hum.uva.nl/computerlinguistiek/henk/

  • Zeevat, H. (2000) Semantics in Optimality Theory. Journal of Semantics 17 (3)

  • Zipf, G. K. (1949) Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. Cambridge: Addison-Wesley

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für deutsche Sprache und Linguistik, Humboldt-Universität Berlin, Prenzlauer Promenade 149-152, D-13189, Berlin, Deutschland

    Reinhard Blutner

Authors
  1. Reinhard Blutner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Blutner, R. Bidirektionale Optimalitätstheorie. Kognit. Wiss. 9, 158–168 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03354949

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03354949

Search

Navigation