Documentation

Linglib.Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.GiorgoloAsudeh2012

Giorgolo & Asudeh 2012: Monads for Conventional Implicatures #

@cite{giorgolo-asudeh-2012}

Core Claim #

Conventional implicatures are modeled as Writer monad side-effects. CI-contributing expressions (appositives, expressives) log propositions to a side-issue dimension via write, while presupposition triggers log conditions via check. The monadic type structure enforces @cite{potts-2005}'s flow restriction by construction: bind's function argument receives only the at-issue value, never the CI log.

Two-Stage Architecture #

  1. Compositional phase: at-issue and CI dimensions are separated; Potts's flow restrictions hold (at-issue → CI is one-way).
  2. Post-compositional phase: anaphora resolution and presupposition checking can freely access both dimensions.

Two Channels via Monad Transformer (Appendix A) #

The analysis requires two Writer monads combined via a monad transformer:

write and check have the same definition λt.⟨⊥, {t}⟩ (eq. 21) but operate in different monad layers (fn. 4).

Worked Example (§5): "John, who likes cats, likes dogs also." #

The presupposition is satisfied by the CI content: john likes cats, and cats ≠ dogs. This satisfaction happens post-compositionally, after both Writer logs are exposed.

Relation to @cite{shan-2001} #

@cite{shan-2001} showed monads capture deep structure in NL semantics (focus, scope, questions, binding). @cite{giorgolo-asudeh-2012} apply the Writer monad specifically to CIs, arguing it is preferable to the continuation-based approach: each monad isolates one kind of side-effect, and monad transformers compose them modularly.

  • john : E
  • cats : E
  • dogs : E
Instances For
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      CI propositions: unevaluated semantic objects logged by write.

      Instances For
        Equations
        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
        Instances For
          Equations
          Instances For
            Equations
            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
            Instances For

              Presuppositional conditions: unevaluated conditions logged by check.

              • existsOtherLiked : EEPresupProp

                ∃z. like(subj, z) ∧ z ≠ obj — the presupposition of "also"

              Instances For
                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For
                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                  Instances For

                    Evaluate a presuppositional condition over the finite entity domain.

                    Equations
                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                    Instances For
                      structure Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.GiorgoloAsudeh2012.TwoChannel (CI : Type u_1) (Presup : Type u_2) (A : Type u_3) :
                      Type (max (max u_1 u_2) u_3)

                      Two-channel meaning: flattened Writer Presup (Writer CI A).

                      The outer Writer carries presuppositions; the inner carries conventional implicatures. Figure 1's result type is: ⟨⟨at-issue, {CI-props}⟩, {presup-conditions}⟩

                      • val : A
                      • ciLog : List CI
                      • presupLog : List Presup
                      Instances For
                        def Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.GiorgoloAsudeh2012.TwoChannel.pure {CI : Type u_1} {Presup : Type u_2} {A : Type u_3} (a : A) :
                        TwoChannel CI Presup A
                        Equations
                        Instances For
                          def Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.GiorgoloAsudeh2012.TwoChannel.bind {CI : Type u_1} {Presup : Type u_2} {A : Type u_3} {B : Type u_4} (m : TwoChannel CI Presup A) (f : ATwoChannel CI Presup B) :
                          TwoChannel CI Presup B
                          Equations
                          Instances For

                            write(t) = ⟨⊥, {t}⟩ (eq. 21): log a proposition to the CI channel.

                            Equations
                            Instances For

                              check(t) = lift(⟨⊥, {t}⟩) (eq. 21, fn. 4): log a condition to the presupposition channel. Same definition as write, different layer.

                              Equations
                              Instances For
                                @[simp]
                                theorem Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.GiorgoloAsudeh2012.TwoChannel.pure_val {CI : Type u_1} {Presup : Type u_2} {A : Type u_3} (a : A) :
                                (pure a).val = a
                                @[simp]
                                @[simp]
                                theorem Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.GiorgoloAsudeh2012.TwoChannel.bind_val {CI : Type u_1} {Presup : Type u_2} {A : Type u_3} {B : Type u_4} (m : TwoChannel CI Presup A) (f : ATwoChannel CI Presup B) :
                                (m.bind f).val = (f m.val).val
                                @[simp]
                                theorem Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.GiorgoloAsudeh2012.TwoChannel.bind_ciLog {CI : Type u_1} {Presup : Type u_2} {A : Type u_3} {B : Type u_4} (m : TwoChannel CI Presup A) (f : ATwoChannel CI Presup B) :
                                (m.bind f).ciLog = m.ciLog ++ (f m.val).ciLog
                                @[simp]
                                theorem Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.GiorgoloAsudeh2012.TwoChannel.bind_presupLog {CI : Type u_1} {Presup : Type u_2} {A : Type u_3} {B : Type u_4} (m : TwoChannel CI Presup A) (f : ATwoChannel CI Presup B) :

                                All lexical items not introducing CIs or presuppositions are η-lifted: ⟦word⟧ = η(standard-meaning) (Table 1).

                                comma (Table 1): λj λl. j ⋆ λx. l ⋆ λf. write(f x) ⋆ λ_. η(x)

                                The prosodic comma introduces NRRC content as CI via write. Both arguments are monadic (⊸* in Glue), matching Table 1's type j ⊸* (j ⊸ l) ⊸* j.

                                Equations
                                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                Instances For

                                  also (Table 1): λv.λo.λs. s ⋆ λx. v ⋆ λf. o ⋆ λy. check(∃z. f z x ∧ z ≠ y) ⋆ λ_. η(f y x)

                                  Takes verb, object, subject (all monadic per ⊸*). Checks the presupposition that the subject verb-s something other than the object, then returns the at-issue content f y x.

                                  Equations
                                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                  Instances For

                                    "John, who likes cats" — comma writes like(john, cats) to CI.

                                    Equations
                                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                    Instances For

                                      Full sentence (example 20): also(likes)(dogs)(john_who_likes_cats)

                                      Equations
                                      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                      Instances For

                                        Figure 1's result: ⟨⟨like(j, dogs), {like(j, cats)}⟩, {∃z.like(j,z) ∧ z ≠ dogs}⟩

                                        Post-compositionally, both logs are exposed. CI content and presuppositional conditions are evaluated against the model.

                                        The CI log provides the witness for presupposition satisfaction.

                                        The NRRC logs like(john, cats). Since like(john, cats) = true and cats ≠ dogs, the presupposition ∃z. like(john, z) ∧ z ≠ dogs is witnessed. This is the paper's central empirical point: the presupposition of "also" is satisfied by CI content from the NRRC, but this satisfaction is only computable post-compositionally (the log produced by write cannot be examined before the monadic computation terminates).

                                        Why the Writer monad enforces dimensional separation #

                                        The function in bind has type A → TwoChannel CI Presup B, not TwoChannel CI Presup A → TwoChannel CI Presup B. It receives the value stripped of both logs. This means:

                                        This structural separation IS Potts's restriction, enforced by the type system rather than stipulated as a constraint on derivations.

                                        Changing the NRRC content does not affect the at-issue result: the main clause function sees only the value, never the CI log.

                                        Equations
                                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                        Instances For

                                          CI-contributing expressions modeled by the Writer monad — expressives, appositives, NRRCs — are exactly Class B in @cite{tonhauser-beaver-roberts-simons-2013}'s taxonomy: SCF=no (CI content can be informative), OLE=no (attributed to speaker, not attitude holder). The Writer's log threading captures this: content projects past all operators without requiring prior establishment in context.

                                          For intensional models where values and log entries are world-indexed propositions, the CI channel maps directly to @cite{potts-2005}'s TwoDimProp. The presupposition channel is orthogonal.

                                          Project the CI channel to a TwoDimProp. The at-issue value becomes atIssue; the conjoined CI log becomes ci. Presuppositional content is discarded (it lives in a separate dimension).

                                          Equations
                                          Instances For

                                            Structural correspondence to PostSupp #

                                            PostSupp S A (@cite{charlow-2021}) is structurally identical to a single Writer monad: a value paired with accumulated side-effect content, composed via pure/bind with log sequencing via dseq. The Writer monad for CIs and Charlow's PostSupp for modified numerals are the same pattern applied to different side-effects (CI propositions vs cardinality tests), confirming @cite{shan-2001}'s insight that monads capture recurring compositional structure in natural language.