March 15, 16-17:30, Erasmusbuilding 14.01
Rosja Mastop, Amsterdam
How past tense imperatives can be meaningfulAbstract:
Despite the 'dynamic turn' and the blurring of the
semantics-pragmatics divide, the ''proposition'' still has a central
place in semantics. In most semantic theories of imperatives those
sentences are attributed a propositional content, often without
motivation. In my thesis I argue against this form of reductionism.
For an adequate semantics of imperatives we need to adopt a
pluralistic view on semantic content. Imperative content differs from
declarative content in at least two respects. First, the imperative
subject is not the same as the declarative subject. It is used to
identify who of the addressees are being instructed to perform the
action. Second, imperatives are future oriented. Whereas
declaratives require a perspective on the event as complete or
ongoing, imperatives present the action as future or still to be
completed. One issue is particularly interesting in this respect:
Dutch appears to have past tense imperatives.
I will explain that these sentences should indeed be understood as
past tense imperatives. Thereby they constitute a clear argument for
why imperative meaning cannot simply be equated with directive force
over some moodless, truth conditional content. I will propose an
analysis of these sentences in a constructive update semantics,
drawing on the work of Cleo Condoravdi on modals for the past.