< previous page page_247 next page >

Page 247
seems to contradict the description above. However, such a sentence, uttered out of context, would have an odd flavor, since it seems impossible to assert that one does not remember what one is saying. Once again, as stressed in the discussion on challenging presuppositions, one seldom utters a sentence of this kind in natural language without answering or challenging a previous sentence uttered by somebody else. Sentence (20) could plausibly occur after a sentence such as (21):
(21) Don't you remember that we have met before?
In such a context, the S who utters (20) takes for granted the presupposition carried by the S who utters (21), and asserts that he is not aware of it. The S of (20) quotes the presupposition posited as an unquestionable piece of information in the framework of the discourse by the S of (21). Without a previous utterance like (21), no one would utter (20). One would rather say something like (22) or (23):
(22) I don't think we have met before.
(23) Did we meet before? I don't remember. . . .
2.3.4. Implicative Verbs
Consider the following sentences:
(24) John kissed Mary.
(25) John managed to kiss Mary.
Sentence (25) asserts the same content as sentence (24) but presupposes two things besides: first, that John tried to kiss Mary; second, that it was difficult (or unlikely). When we use the verb manage as in (25) we "make the hearer understand" something more than sentence (24). The description of manage will be
manage: [Sw0t-1 TRY (Sw0t-1 CAUSE (Owjtj BECOME Ow0t0))DIFFICULT (Owjtj BECOME Ow0t0)]Sw0t0 CAUSE (Owjtj BECOM Ow0t0)
The presupposition is that the Subject, in the actual world and at time t-1, tries to change an Object from a possible world (of his desires or duties) into the actual world and that his change is difficult. The asserted content is that the Subject accomplished this change.
With the verb dare the embedded clause is not implicated, but ex-

 
< previous page page_247 next page >