@cite{tonhauser-beaver-degen-2018}: How Projective Is Projective Content? #
@cite{tonhauser-beaver-degen-2018} @cite{potts-2005} @cite{tonhauser-beaver-roberts-simons-2013}Empirical data from "How projective is projective content? Gradience in projectivity and at-issueness." Journal of Semantics 35(3): 495–542.
Key Findings #
- Projectivity is gradient, not binary. Even "strong" projective triggers like NRRCs show mean projectivity ≈ .96, not 1.0.
- Not-at-issueness is gradient and positively correlated with projectivity: r = .85 across 9 expression types (Exp 1a), r = .99 across 12 predicates (Exp 1b).
- Appositives are not maximally projective, contra @cite{potts-2005}.
- Within-type variation: different lexical items of the same type yield different ratings.
Gradient Projection Principle (GPP) #
The paper's central theoretical contribution (p. 497, ex. 7):
"If content C is expressed by a constituent embedded under an entailment-canceling operator, then C projects to the extent that it is not at-issue."
This generalizes Simons et al.'s (2010) Pragmatic Account by replacing the binary at-issue/not-at-issue distinction with a gradient one.
Experiments #
- Exp 1a: 9 expression types — projectivity + not-at-issueness (asking whether diagnostic). 190 participants.
- Exp 1b: 12 clause-embedding predicates — same diagnostics. 235 participants (after exclusions).
- Exp 2a/2b: Replications with direct dissent diagnostic (not formalized here).
Data #
Values are approximate means read from Figures 3 and 6. The paper reports ranges in text (e.g., projectivity .76–.96 for Exp 1a) but does not provide a table of exact per-expression means. Textually confirmed values are annotated.
The scale is 0–1 (proportion of "yes" responses). The paper measures not-at-issueness via the "asking whether" diagnostic: higher values mean the content is MORE not-at-issue (more backgrounded).
The 9 expression types tested in Experiment 1a.
All are non-SCF (Strong Contextual Felicity = no), chosen to isolate projectivity and at-issueness variation (p. 504).
- Class B (SCF=no, OLE=no): NRRC, nominal appositive, possessive NP
- Class C (SCF=no, OLE=yes): discover, know, be annoyed, stop
- Focus-sensitive: only
- Evaluative adjective: be stupid to
- nrrc : ExpressionType
- nominalAppositive : ExpressionType
- possessiveNP : ExpressionType
- discover : ExpressionType
- know : ExpressionType
- annoyed : ExpressionType
- stop : ExpressionType
- only : ExpressionType
- stupid : ExpressionType
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Mean projectivity rating from Experiment 1a (0–1 scale).
Values approximate means from Figure 3. Text (p. 507) confirms:
- only = .76 (minimum)
- NRRC = .96 and be annoyed = .96 (maximum, "close to ceiling")
Equations
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.projectivityRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.nrrc = 96 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.projectivityRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.nominalAppositive = 94 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.projectivityRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.possessiveNP = 93 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.projectivityRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.discover = 88 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.projectivityRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.know = 91 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.projectivityRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.annoyed = 96 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.projectivityRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.stop = 88 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.projectivityRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.only = 76 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.projectivityRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.stupid = 86 / 100
Instances For
Mean not-at-issueness rating from Experiment 1a (0–1 scale). Measured via the "asking whether" diagnostic.
Higher = more not-at-issue (more backgrounded).
Values approximate means from Figure 3. Text (p. 508) confirms:
- only = .73 (minimum)
- NRRC = .96 (maximum)
Equations
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.notAtIssuenessRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.nrrc = 96 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.notAtIssuenessRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.nominalAppositive = 91 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.notAtIssuenessRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.possessiveNP = 93 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.notAtIssuenessRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.discover = 84 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.notAtIssuenessRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.know = 88 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.notAtIssuenessRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.annoyed = 94 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.notAtIssuenessRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.stop = 78 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.notAtIssuenessRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.only = 73 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.notAtIssuenessRating Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.ExpressionType.stupid = 82 / 100
Instances For
At-issueness = 1 − not-at-issueness. Higher = more at-issue. Derived from the paper's direct measurements.
Equations
Instances For
The 12 clause-embedding predicates from Experiment 1b (p. 511).
Semantic classes (per paper):
- Emotive: be amused, be annoyed
- Cognitive: be aware, discover, find out, learn, notice, realize, establish
- Sensory: see
- Communication: confess, reveal
- beAmused : Predicate
- beAnnoyed : Predicate
- beAware : Predicate
- confess : Predicate
- discover : Predicate
- establish : Predicate
- findOut : Predicate
- learn : Predicate
- notice : Predicate
- realize : Predicate
- reveal : Predicate
- see : Predicate
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
Instances For
Mean projectivity ratings for the 12 predicates from Exp 1b (0–1 scale). Values approximate means from Figure 6.
Equations
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.establish = 43 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.confess = 65 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.reveal = 77 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.learn = 82 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.discover = 86 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.findOut = 90 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.see = 90 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.beAmused = 92 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.realize = 92 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.beAware = 93 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.notice = 94 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbProjectivity Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.beAnnoyed = 94 / 100
Instances For
Mean not-at-issueness ratings for the 12 predicates from Exp 1b (0–1 scale). Values approximate means from Figure 6.
Equations
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.establish = 47 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.confess = 56 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.reveal = 68 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.learn = 73 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.discover = 78 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.findOut = 82 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.see = 83 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.beAmused = 85 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.realize = 86 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.beAware = 87 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.notice = 88 / 100
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.verbNotAtIssueness Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.Predicate.beAnnoyed = 89 / 100
Instances For
At-issueness = 1 − not-at-issueness for predicates.
Equations
Instances For
Regression coefficient: not-at-issueness predicts projectivity. Exp 1a (p. 508–509): β = 0.37, SE = 0.10, t = 3.70, p < .003. Exp 1b (p. 514): β = 0.34, SE = 0.04, t = 9.31, p < .0001.
The effect is significant in both experiments.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.exp1aRegression = { beta := 37 / 100, se := 10 / 100 }
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.exp1bRegression = { beta := 34 / 100, se := 4 / 100 }
Instances For
Pearson r for not-at-issueness × projectivity (positive correlation). "Collapsing" = computed over expression-type/predicate means. "Not collapsing" = computed over individual items.
Exp 1a (p. 508): r = .85 (collapsing), r = .45 (not collapsing) Exp 1b (p. 514): r = .99 (collapsing), r = .44 (not collapsing)
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.exp1aCorrelation = { collapsing := 85 / 100, notCollapsing := 45 / 100 }
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Presupposition.Studies.TonhauserBeaverDegen2018.exp1bCorrelation = { collapsing := 99 / 100, notCollapsing := 44 / 100 }
Instances For
NRRC and be annoyed are tied for most projective (text: .96).
only is the least projective at .76 (text confirms).
NRRC has the highest not-at-issueness at .96 (text confirms).
only has the lowest not-at-issueness at .73 (text confirms).
Appositives are not maximally projective, contra @cite{potts-2005}. Potts predicted CI content (including appositives) should project obligatorily. The data shows 94/100 — high but not 1.0.
Within-type variation: factive predicates differ in projectivity. discover (.88) vs know (.91) — both traditionally "factive" but different ratings.
GPP supported for Exp 1a extremes: only has highest at-issueness and lowest projectivity; NRRC has lowest at-issueness and highest projectivity.
be annoyed has the highest projectivity among the 12 predicates. (Tied with notice at .94.)
establish has the lowest projectivity (.43) — notably below .50, suggesting it may not even be a projective trigger.
establish is the only predicate with projectivity below the midpoint .50, suggesting it may not be a projective trigger.
GPP supported for Exp 1b extremes: establish has highest at-issueness and lowest projectivity.
All predicates except establish have projectivity ≥ .65.
The top group of Exp 1a (Table 1): {NRRC, annoyed, NomApp, possNP, know} show no significant pairwise differences in projectivity. These form the "high projectivity" cluster (.91–.96).
only is significantly different from all other expression types (Table 1: all pairwise comparisons significant at p < .001).
The top group of Exp 1b (Table 3): {annoyed, notice, aware, realize, amused, findOut} show no significant pairwise differences. These form the "high projectivity" cluster (.90–.94).
establish is clearly separated from the top group (Table 3: all pairwise comparisons significant at p < .001).
Lift an expression type's projectivity rating to a bounded degree.
Equations
Instances For
Lift an expression type's at-issueness to a bounded degree.
Equations
Instances For
Lift a predicate's projectivity rating to a bounded degree.
Equations
Instances For
Lift a predicate's at-issueness to a bounded degree.
Equations
Instances For
Mean projectivity for Class B triggers (NRRC, appositive, possessive NP).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Mean projectivity for Class C triggers (discover, know, annoyed, stop).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Class B triggers have higher mean projectivity than Class C triggers.
Mean not-at-issueness for Class B triggers.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Mean not-at-issueness for Class C triggers.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Class B triggers are more not-at-issue than Class C triggers.
With the default threshold of 0.5, all 9 expression types are classified as not-at-issue.
For Exp 1b predicates, only establish is classified as at-issue with the default threshold.
All predicates except establish are classified as not-at-issue.
The GPP anti-monotonicity property holds for Exp 1b verb data.
Exp 1a is NOT fully anti-monotone: possNP and NomApp are non-monotone.