On Common Ground, Context and Information Structure: The Case of Counter-Expectation in Thai

PACLIC 28 !595 On Common Ground, Context and Information Structure: The Case of Counter-Expectation in Thai Upsorn Tawilapakul Language Institute Thammasat University Bangkok, Thailand u.tawilapakul@gmail.com Abstract This paper addresses the influences of common ground, context and information structure on the linguistic production and interpretation processes with a special reference to counter-expectation in Thai. It presents, first of all, a fresh view on the operation of the particle lɛɛw45 as a marker of counter-expectation. It also indicates the association of the particle with focus and the influence of common ground and context, both of which control the use and interpretation of lɛɛw45 as well as the conversation flow. Moreover, the unaccounted additional impact of numeral scalarity on the production of a counter-expectation has been detected. The paper applies the Question Under Discussion (QUD) technique in order to account for these phenomena. 1 Introduction This introductory section addresses the re-appraisal of the role of the particle lɛɛw45. It also raises two problematic issues involving the impact of numeral scalarity and the association of lɛɛw45 with focus. 1.1 The re-appraisal of the role of lɛɛw45 Lɛɛw45 has been regarded as a post-serial particle which acts either as a perfective aspect marker or a past time marker (Kanchanawan, 1978; Boonyapatipark, 1983). Also, Scovel (1970) proposes that it marks the completion of the event. Following these claims which are based hugely on the assumption that lɛɛw45 plays its primary role in temporality, it can be concluded in (1) that the addition of lɛɛw45 to the sentence generates perfectiveness, thereby asserting that the event plaa33thɔɔŋ33 taay33 or die (the goldfish) happened before the time of utterance and satisfies the truth-condition ‘the sentence is true if and only if there was a goldfish and it died at time t’ where t refers to the reference time. (1) plaa33thɔɔŋ33 taay33 lɛɛw45 goldfish die LƐƐW45 ‘The goldfish died.’ Nonetheless, the perfectiveness as well as the completion of the above event can still be derived even when lɛɛw45 is omitted. Findings from the data suggest that lɛɛw45 actually implies an expectation about the issue under discussion based on the state of the issue prior to the reference time. It also suggests that the particle is used in order to denote a counter-expectation. This claim is supported by three pieces of evidence given in (2), (3) and (4) which present the co-occurrence of lɛɛw45 with an achievement, an ongoing predicate and a state, respectively. They all indicate that the presence of lɛɛw45 does not affect the derivation of the aspectual readings which are in fact derived through the aspectual nature of the predicates attached to lɛɛw45. (2) fay33faa42 dap22 lɛɛw45 power go out LƐƐW45 ‘The power went out.’ → Previously it was expected that the power would not go out. Copyright 2014 by Upsorn Tawilapakul 28th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation pages 595–604 PACLIC 28 !596 (3) maa45 kam33laŋ33 wiŋ42 lɛɛw45 horse PROG run LƐƐW45 ‘The horse is running now.’ → Previously it was expected that the horse …

Content truncated to 500 words