Volume 16, Issue 2-3
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238


(NTSs), like the one in the title, have been little studied. This paper, based on a corpus of authentic instances of the form, provides the first thorough examination of the interpretations assigned to NTSs in context and an account for those interpretations. The brief version of the account is that the NTS structure encodes procedural instructions to the effect that NTSs are to be interpreted as the rejection of conclusions derived from contextual assumptions.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Austen, Jane
    (1964 [1816]) Emma. New York: Signet Classics.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. (1972 [1818]) Northanger Abbey. New York: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bar-Lev, Zev , and A. Palacas
    (1980) Semantic command over pragmatic priority. Lingua51: 137-46. doi: 10.1016/0024‑3841(80)90004‑2
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(80)90004-2 [Google Scholar]
  4. Birner, Betty , and Gregory Ward
    (1998) Information status and non-canonical word order in English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/slcs.40
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.40 [Google Scholar]
  5. Blakemore, Diane
    (1987) Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (1988) So as a constraint on relevance. In R. Kempson , Mental representations: The interface between language and reality. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 183-196.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. (1996) Are apposition markers discourse markers?Journal of Linguistics32: 325-347. doi: 10.1017/S0022226700015917
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700015917 [Google Scholar]
  8. (1997a) Restatement and exemplification. Pragmatics and Cognition 5.1: 1-19. doi: 10.1075/pc.5.1.04bla
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pc.5.1.04bla [Google Scholar]
  9. (1997b) On non-truth conditional meaning. Linguistische Berichte: Special Issue on Pragmatics8: 92-102.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. (2001) Discourse and relevance theory. In D. Schiffrin , D. Tannen , and H.E. Hamilton (eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (2002) Relevance and linguistic meaning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486456
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486456 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2004) Discourse markers. In L. Horn and G. Card (eds.), The handbook of pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Blass, Regina
    (1990) Relevance relations in discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511586293
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511586293 [Google Scholar]
  14. Brill’s ContentMarch (2001).
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Carson, Paul
    (1998) Scalpel. London: Arrow Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Carston, Robyn
    (2002) Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470754603
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470754603 [Google Scholar]
  17. Carter, Ronald
    (1990) Language and literature. InN.E. Collinge An encyclopaedia of language. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Cross, Donna Woolfolk
    (1996) Pope Joan: A novel. New York: Ballantine Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Culicover, Peter W. , and Ray Jackendoff
    (2005) Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199271092.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199271092.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Dalby, Liza
    (2001) The tale of Murasaki. New York: First Anchor Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. De Bhaldraithe, Tomás
    (1959) English-Irish dictionary. Baile Átha Cliath: Oifig an tSoláthair.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Delahunty, Gerald
    (2001) Discourse functions of inferential sentences. Linguistics 39.3: 517-545. doi: 10.1515/ling.2001.022
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ling.2001.022 [Google Scholar]
  23. Delahunty, Gerald , and Maura Velazquez-Castillo
    (2002) The X is that: A lexico-grammatical device for local discourse management. In James F. Lee , Kimberly L. Geeslin , and J. Clancy Clements (eds.), Structure, meaning, and acquisition in Spanish: Papers from the 4th Hispanic linguistics symposium. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 46-64.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Grice, H. Paul
    (1968) Logic and conversation. In Steven Davis (ed.) (1991) Pragmatics: A reader. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 305-315.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Hillerman, Tony
    (1989) Talking god. New York: Harper.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. (1990) Coyote waits. New York: Harper.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Hirschberg, Julia
    (1991) A theory of scalar implicature. New York: Garland.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Hobbs, Jerry
    (1979) Coherence and co-reference. Cognitive Sciences3: 67-90. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0301_4
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0301_4 [Google Scholar]
  29. Horn, Laurence R
    (1989) A natural history of negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Hovy, Eduard H. , and Elizabeth Maier
    (1995) Parsimonious or profligate: How many and which discourse structure relations? Unpublished ms.
  31. Huddleston, Rodney , and Geoffrey Pullum
    (eds.) (2002) Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Irish Emigrant (2000) May 22.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Irving, John
    (1973) The 158 pound marriage. New York: Pocket Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Lambrecht, Knut
    (2001) The analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics 39.3: 463-516. doi: 10.1515/ling.2001.021
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2001.021 [Google Scholar]
  35. Le Carré, John
    (1962) A murder of quality. New York: Bantam Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. (1995) Our game. New York: Ballantine.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. (1999) Single and Single. New York: Pocket Star Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Levinson, Stephen
    (2000) Presumptive meanings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Littwin, Mike
    (2005) Wrong as it sounds, Owens is right on TABOR. Rocky Mountain News. March 19.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Lively, Penelope
    (1987) Moon tiger. London: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. London Times (1988) August 30. Obituary for H. Paul Grice.
  42. McCabe, Patrick
    (1995) The dead school. New York: Dell.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. McCall, Andrew
    (1979) The medieval underworld. New York: Barnes and Noble.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. McLaverty, Bernard
    (2002) The anatomy school. London: Vintage.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Millet, Larry
    (1998) Sherlock Holmes and the Ice Palace murders. New York: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Newsweek (2000) July 31.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. O’Brien, Kate
    (1987 [1931]) Without my cloak. New York: Virago.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. (1988 [1934]) The ante-room. New York: Virago
    [Google Scholar]
  49. (1988 [1942]) The land of spices. New York: Virago.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Osaragi, Jiro
    (2000) The journey. Boston: Tuttle.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Perret, Geoffrey
    (1999) Eisenhower. Holbrook, MA: Adams Media Corp.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Prince, Ellen
    (1978) A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in disourse. Language54: 883-906. doi: 10.2307/413238
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/413238 [Google Scholar]
  53. (1985) Fancy syntax and ‘shared knowledge‘. Journal of Pragmatics9: 65-81. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(85)90048‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(85)90048-7 [Google Scholar]
  54. Reilly, Rick
    (2003) Where have all the young men gone?Time, February17.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Ross, John R
    (1969) ‘Guess who.’In R.I. Binnick , A. Davison , G.M. Green , and J.L. Morgan (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th annual meeting of CLS, pp. 252-286.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Saint Paul
    Epistle to the Philippians3: 8-14.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Sanders, Ted , Wilbert Spooren , and Leonard M. Noordman
    (1993) Towards a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes15.1: 1-36.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Shakespeare, William
    Julius Caesar.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Othello.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Sinclair, John
    (ed.) (1990) Collins CoBuild English grammar. London: HarperCollins.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Somerville, Edith , and Martin Ross
    (1977 [1894]) The real Charlotte. London: Quartet.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Sperber, Dan , and Deirdre Wilson
    (1995 [1986]) Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Tottie, Gunnel
    (1991) Negation in English speech and writing. San Diego: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Ward, Gregory , and Betty Birner
    (2004) Information structure and non-canonical syntax. In L. Horn and G. Ward (eds.), The handbook of pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, pp. 153-174.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Wilson, Deirdre
    (1998) Discourse, coherence, and relevance: A reply to Rachel Giora. Journal of Pragmatics29: 57-74. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)00012‑X
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00012-X [Google Scholar]
  66. Wilson, Deirdre , and Dan Sperber
    (2004) Relevance theory. In L. Horn and G. Ward (eds.), The handbook of pragmatics. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 607-632.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Zanuttini, Rafaella , and Paul Portner
    (2003) Exclamative clauses: At the syntax-semantics interface. Language79: 39-81. doi: 10.1353/lan.2003.0105
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2003.0105 [Google Scholar]
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error