Explaining the Subjunctive in factive contexts
Abstract
The occurrence of the Subjunctive mood in sentences describing facts is commonly seen as problematic, given the relation between Subjunctive and non-veridicality. One line that is explored in the literature to account for the Subjunctive in complement clauses of factive verbs is to link the occurrence of this mood in such contexts to gradability of the main clause’s predicate. However, such an account faces empirical problems, and is not extendable to other contexts where the Subjunctive occurs even if the sentence describes a fact of reality. This paper proposes an account for the occurrence of Subjunctive in different kinds of factive contexts, showing that in all such cases the reason for this mood to occur follows from the general condition that leads to the use of Subjunctive, though for different reasons. Gradability of the main predicate is, in fact, one of the factors that leads to the consideration of non-p worlds, and the Subjunctive, but not the only one. For other predicates, other semantic features lead to counterfactual reasoning. Concessive clauses are another factive context where Subjunctive occurs and allow a better understanding of what triggers the Subjunctive mood and what this formal sign indicates.
Keywords
mood, Subjunctive, non-veridicality, causality, factivityReferences
Baker, Carl Leroy. 1970. Double negatives. Linguistic Inquiry 1: 169–186.
Baunaz, Lena, & Genoveva Puskás. 2022. A Cross-linguistic Approach to the Syntax of Subjunctive Mood. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04540-0
Beaver, David. 2010. Have you noticed that your belly button lint colour is related to the colour of your clothing? In R. Bäuerle, U. Reyle & T. E. Zimmermann (eds), Pre-suppositions and discourse: Essays offered to Hans Kamp, 65–99. Bingley: Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004253162_004
Condoravdi, Cleo. 2002. Temporal interpretation of modals: Modals for the present and for the past. In D. Beaver, S. Kaufmann, B. Clark & L. Casillas (eds), The Con-struction of Meaning, 59–88. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Ducrot, Oswald: 1978. Deux mais. Cahiers de linguistique 8: 109–120.
Farkas, Donka. 1992. On the semantics of subjunctive complements. In P. Hirschbühler & K. Koerner (eds), Romance Languages and Modern Linguistic Theo-ry, 71–104. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.91.07far
von Fintel, Kai, & Anthony Gillies. 2007. An opinionated guide to epistemic modali-ty. In T. Szaebo (ed.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology, Vol. 2, 32–62. Oxford: Ox-ford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199237067.003.0002
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 1994. The semantic licensing of NPIs and the Modern Greek subjunctive. In A. de Boer, H. de Hoop & H. de Swart (eds), Language and Cogni-tion (4), Yearbook of the Research Group for Theoretical and Experimental Linguis-tics, 55–68. Groningen: University of Groningen.
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2016. Evaluative Subjunctive and Nonveridicality. In J. Blaszczak, A. Giannakidou, D. Klimek-Jankowska & K. Migdalski (eds), Mood, As-pect and Modality Revisited: New Answers to Old Questions, 177–217. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Giannakidou, Anastasia, & Alda Mari. 2016. Emotive predicates and the subjunctive: A flexible mood OT account based on (non)veridicality. In N.Bade, P.Berezovskaya & A. Schöller (eds), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 20, 288–305.
Giannakidou, Anastasia, & Alda Mari. 2021. Truth and Veridicality in Grammar and Thought: Mood, Modality, and Propositional Attitudes. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Godard, Danièle. 2012. Indicative and subjunctive mood in complement clauses: from formal semantics to grammar writing. In C. Piñón (ed.), Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 9, 129–148. Paris: CSSP http://www.cssp.cnrs.fr/eiss9/index_en.html
Hacquard, Valentine. 2005. Aspects of Too and Enough Constructions. In E. Geor-gala & J. Howell (eds), Proceedings of SALT XV, 80–97. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univer-sity. https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v15i0.2919
Heim, Irene. 1992. Presupposition Projection and the Semantics of Attitude Verbs. Journal of Semantics 9(3): 183–221. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/9.3.183
Karttunen, Lauri. 1971. Implicative Verbs. Language 47(2): 340–358. https://doi.org/10.2307/412084
Karttunen, Lauri. 2016. Presupposition: What went wrong? In M. Moroney, C.R.- Little, J. Collard & D. Burgdorf (eds), Semantics and linguistic theory (SALT) 26, 705–731. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v26i0.3954
Kiparsky, Paul, & Kiparsky, Carol. 1970. Fact. In P. Kiparsky & C. Kiparsky, Pro-gress in Linguistics: A Collection of Papers, 143–173. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111350219.143
Lewis, David. 1973. Causation. The Journal of Philosophy 70(17): 556–567.
Mari, Alda. 2015. Modalités et Temps. Des modèles aux données. Bern: Peter Lang.
Mari, Alda. 2016. Actuality Entailments: When the Modality is in the Presupposition. In M. Amblard, P. de Groote, S. Pogodalla, C. Retoré (eds), Logical Aspects of Com-putational Linguistics. Celebrating 20 Years of LACL (1996–2016). vol 10054, 191–210. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53826-5_12
Portner, Paul. 2009. Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Quer, Josep. 1998. Mood at the Interface. Utrecht: University of Utrecht dissertation.
Salmon, Wesley C. 1998. Causality and Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thomas, Guillaume. 2014. Circumstantial modality and the diversity condition. In U. Etxeberria, A. Fălăus, A. Irurtzun & B. Leferman (eds), Proceedings of Sinn und Be-deutung 18, 433–450.
Villalta, Elisabeth. 2008. Mood and Gradability: An Investigation of the Subjunctive Mood in Spanish. Linguistics and Philosophy 31(4): 467–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-008-9046-x
Published
How to Cite
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2024 Rui Marques

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.