Squib: A note on the analysis of too as a discourse marker

Clicks: 298
ID: 91873
2015
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #1 of 2 articles by views in revista linguística

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Heim (1990) and Kripke (2009) argue that the adverb too is a trigger of presuppositions that cannot be accommodated, i.e. a hard trigger (Abusch 2002). Contrary to this view Zeevat (2003,b) proposed that too should rather be analyzed as a marker of additive discourse relations, which he argues explains its resistance to accommodation. In this squib, I show that presuppositional analyses of too are actually as explanatory as the discourse marker analysis in this respect, and that the latter faces serious issues with sentences with contrastive topics. I conclude that nothing is gained by reanalyzing hard presupposition triggers as discourse markers.
Keywords: presuppositions, discourse markers, too

Reference Key
thomas2015squibrevista Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors
Journal revista linguística
Year 2015
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.