|
 |
|
 |
|
|
uninterpreted in the framework of the present analysis, for the sake of economy.) actual world. |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
W0 = actual world. |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
Wj = any possible world (where j = 1, 2, 3, . . . n). |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
t0 = speech time (expressed by the verbal tense). |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
tj = temporal states preceding or following the speech time (where j = -2, -1, +l, +2, . . . ). |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
O = the object of the action performed by the primitive predicate, that is, what the subject is supposed to do, to want, to be aware of, and so on; in the text the object can be represented by an embedded clause. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following description is applied to verbs of judgment, verbs of transition, factive verbs and implicative verbs, and we are indebted to all the preceding analyses of these p-terms. The application of the model to other p-terms remains a matter for further tests. For the sake of brevity, here we will discuss only some cases for each group. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
According to Fillmore's analysis (1971), our description of accuse will be |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[BAD (Ow0)]S1w0t0 SAY S2 (S3w0t-1 CAUSE (Ow0t-1)) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The presupposition is that the Object is bad in the actual world (the judgment of negativity is not limited to a specific action at a specific time). What is explicitly said is that S1, in the actual world and at the speech time, says to S2 that S3, at the time t-1, preceding the speech time, caused the given O. The presence of three Subjects (which are empty actantial roles) distinguishes between verbs of saying and others. Verbs of saying, such as accuse, require three Subjects even if, generally, only two of them are actualized, since the actor plays more than one role. But in a semantic description of the action we should distinguish the Addressee of the act of saying from the Addressee of the act of accusing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The description of criticize will be |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[S3w0t-1 CAUSE (Ow0t-1)]S1w0t0 SAY S2 (BAD Ow0) |
|
|
|
|
|