<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C86-1042">
  <Title>LINKING PROPOSrFIONS</Title>
  <Section position="2" start_page="0" end_page="178" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
ANS (Geerts et al., 1984}.
2. Inferential linkage
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> An inference relationship exists between two propositions when the truth value of one can be deduced from the other. The grounds for the deduction are left open. They may be based on some causal model of reality: If metal is heated it expands.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> But they can also be purely definitional: If two angles of a triangle are equal, their opposite sides are equal.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> The types of inferential linkage depend in the first instance on tile truth statas of the main proposition. This may be either true, probably true but with the possibility of an escape, hypothetically true or counterfactual. A false main proposition is not indicated by an SC but by the use of the past tense and/or a modal auxiliary verb.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> True. If the main proposition is true, then the inference relation from the sub proposition may be used, denied or deemed h'relewmt.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> The tm-e of the inference is indicated in Dutch by the SC aangezien (since): De rector had besloten de school te sluiten aangezien her verbod was overtreden. (ANS, p.655) (The principal decided to close the school sinc.e the ban had been contravened.) It has been, and still is, customary to classify aangezien as a causal SC (ANS, p.655). This is incorrect. Causal SCs can be topicalized, inferential SCs cannot. The reason for this distinction is that causal SCs say something about reality, whereas inferential SCs are used to make an inference. This making cannot be topicalized. Aangezlen, however, like non-temporal since, cannot be topicalized, so it is not causal: *llet is aangezien het verbod was overtreden, dat de rector besloot de school te sluiten.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> An inference relationship \]nay be denied using the SC hoewel {although). Then the normal inference is from the sub proposition to the falsity of tile main proposition: Hoewel her verbod was overtreden, besloot de rector de school niet te sluiten.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> (Although the ban had been contravened, the principal decided not to close the school.) The irrelevance of any inference relationship is indicated by ongeacht (whether ... or not}: Ongeacht of het verbod was overtreden, zou de rector hebben besloten de school te sluiten.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> (Whether the ban had been contravened or not, the principal would have decided to close the school.)  Escape linkages. If the speaker wishes to indicate that the main proposition is not certainly, hut only probably, true, then an SC can be used to indicate the circumstances under which the main proposition may indeed by false. Such SCs provide an ESCAPE from the speech act being made in the main clause. This speech act may be an assertion, in which case the escape is from the truth of the main proposition; but any other type of speech act, such as a promise, may also be escaped from. The escape may be either when the sub proposition is true, with tenzlj (unless), or when it is false, using mtts (provided that): De oecumene zal niet slagen tenzij het gesprek met Israel ... wordt gevoerd. (2.3040) (Ecumenism will not succeed unless there is a dialogue with Israel ...) Jongeren kennen een normale behoefte aan gezag en normen, mits zij er de zin van weten te ontdekken. (5.3341) (Youngsters have a normal need for authority and norms, provided they can discover their sense.) Hypothetical linkage. If the truths of the main and sub propositions are unknown, an inference relationship from the sub to the main proposition can be shown by using either als or lndlen (if). Of these two SCs, als is the more common, but it is ambiguous between several uses (see below); indlen is more formal and emphatic: Als/Indien het verbod is overtreden, zal de rector de school slutten.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="8"> (If the ban has been contravened, the principal will close the school.)  Truth of the Main Proposition I 1 probably I true unkown or false true l Escape frdegm Sub P', fits Use degf the inference I or opposite, ,,, to the Main Proposition Sub P. opposite HYPOTHETICAL ESCAPE - ESCAPE + DENIED IRRELEVANT USED m/ts tenz/j a/s/)nd/en hoewe/ oncjeacht aangez/bn  provided unless if though whether or not since Counterfactuals. Just as with the true inferential linkages, the counterfactual inference may be simply used or denied. The inference, in this false world, may be used to infer a main proposition which is true in this false world but false in the actual world: If Eve hadn't given Adam the apple, he wouldn't have eaten it.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="9"> The inference may also be denied to give a main proposition which is true in both worlds: Even if Eve hadntt given Adam the apple, he still would have eaten it.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="10"> This is a semifactual. The same SC, als (if), is used both for hypotheticals and counter/semi-factuals. This is not the case in all languages, e.g. Polish, Japanese. In order to indicate that the sub clause does not correspond with the truth status of the sub preposition, the tense of sub clause verb is placed one step further into the past than would normally be the case. That is to say: if the tense would normally be past, past-perfect or present-perfect then it is set to past-perfect; otherwise it is set to past, With the true counterfactuals (as opposed to the semifactuals) the fact that the main  clause also does not correspond with the truth status of the main proposition is indicated by using the pastfuture, i.e. using the past form of the verb zullen as the auxiliary finite verb form: Als Ik geld had, zou lk op rels gaan.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="11"> (If I money had, would I travelling go.) Moreover the simple (or perfect) past can also be used to indicate connterfactuality: Als lk geld had, glng tk op reis.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="12"> (If I had money, I went travelling.) Als lk geld gehad had, had ik meer gereisd.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="13"> (If I had had money, I had more travelled.) The ANS (p.468) provides no rule for choosing between using the simple (or perfect) past and using the modal auxiliary zullen. There are, however, systematic differences (Nteuwlnt, 1984). More problematic is that the simple past tense may indicate one of two things: the Time Of Reference (TOR) is in the past or we are dealing with a counterfactual. This ambiguity can be resolved by the context: if the TOR is already in the present, then the past tense indicates counterfactuality. Summarizing, we find four types of inferential linkage, depending on the truth value of the main proposition: true: the inference from a true sub proposition may be used, denied or deemed irrelevant; probably true: this truth can be escaped, either from the sub proposition or from its negation; hypothetical inference from a sub proposition whose truth is uncertain; counterfactuals: an inference from a sub proposition that is known to be false, to either a false or a true main proposition.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="3" start_page="178" end_page="178" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
3. Temporal linkage
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> The temporal SCs specify the time of the main predication in relation to the time of the event indicated in the sub clause. The system we have used to represent the different possible temporal linkages is based on two dimensions: the relative temporal order of the main and sub events, and the place of the main event within this restricted time range.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> Relative temporal order. A sub clause introduced by a temporal SC is used to restrict the time during which the main proposition is true: the time of the main event may be at a time that is either earlier than, or later than, the time of the sub event, or it may be coincidental with the time of the the sub event.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> The position within the range. The place of the main event within this restricted time range is the second  dimension. It may be either: at some time within the proximity of the sub eventl - either immediately adjoining the sub event; - or in the vicinity of the sub event time.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> at some time within an interval. The way the bounds  of this time interval are Indicated depends on the relationship between the TOR and the interval itself. If the TOR is to fall within the interval, then the duration of the sub event determines the interval. Otherwise the TOR marks one bound of the interval, the other bound being set by the time of the sub event. Again this category has two alternatives: either the main event occurs at some moment within the interval; or it occurs for the whole of the interval, in which case the event must be able to have a duration or be repeatable.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> These four different places within the time range, together with the three ways of specifying the range, give twelve different possibilities for indicating the time relationship between the main and sub events.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> It is not to be expected that any language will have SCs to distinguish between all these twelve possible temporal linkages. In Dutch three of the relationships cannot be expressed using an SC. Moreover, the sub-distinctions made in the second dimension are not always made.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6">  sub event. Next to Nearby Sometime Durative Earlier than: voor totdat</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="8"> Coincidental: wanneer/nu terwljl zolang (when) (while) (as long as) Later than: zodra nadat Ands sinds (as soon as) (after) (since) (since} The difference between the four SCs als, toen, wanneer and nu requires an explanation: teen is used to set the TOR to some point before the time of utterance, and so only occurs when the TOR is in the past (ef. the use of when as discussed by Kamp, 1981). The TOR Is set to the time of the sub event; nu is used when the TOR has already been fixed, and an event, the sub event, which happens to be coincidental with the TOR, is a cause or reason for the main event; als and wanneer are used: for a temporal coincidence after the TOR, without bringing the TOR forward; to indicate a repeated or repeatable temporal coincidence.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="9"> Wanneer (when), which hardly ever occurs in spoken Dutch except as an interrogative, is temporal. Als (if) is not confined to a temporal role, being used also for manner and inferential linkages. So its use puts the burden of interpretation onto the addressee.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="10"> We have seen that the temporal linkage is specified on two principle dimensions: the time range to which the main event is restricted may be before, after or coincidental with the time of the sub event; the time; of the main event may be related either directly to the time of the sub event, or it may fall within an interval. In the former case the proximity may be indicated. In the latter case the main event may be considered to occur once in the interval or during the whole of the interval. The interval itself is bound between the sub ewmt and the TOR, unless the TOR falls within the time period of the sub event, In which case the interval is equivalent to the duration of the sub event itself.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="4" start_page="178" end_page="179" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
4. Causal linkage
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> A temporal linkage is not the only relationship that can be indicated in reality between the sub and main propositions. A causal linkage can also be made from the sub event or state, to the main event or state.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> There are two main types of causal linkage: teleological and ateleological.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> An ateleological cause Is a purely physical link, i.e. mechanistic, in the sense that no will is posited. The mechanism operates inevitably, e.g. gravitation that controls the motion of the planets. E.g.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> De peehdag voor de NS ward glsteren nog gecompleteerd, doordat op bet centraal station in Utrecht twee machinisten van aanslultende posttreinen biJ bet wlsselen van treln allebei precies in de verkeerde stapten. (1.5847) (The day of troubles on the railways yesterday was even more complete, because at the central station in Utrecht two drivers of connecting post trains, when changing trains, each stepped into the incorrect train.) An ateleologleal link may also be proportional: the more there is of some sub property the more there will be of the main property, as in: De dagen lengen naarmate de nachten korten.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> (The days lengthen as the nights shorten.) A teleological link, on the other hand requires that a will be present. They are volitional. The being that exerts tlds will has two components of interest: a perception of his own state and an awareness of his own goal. There are, correspondingly, two types of teleological cause: reason and motive. Reason is primarily state controlled, e.g.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> ttet kwam hem voor dat hij, jutst omdat hlj zo gewoon mogelijk wilde doen, zich zo ongewoon voelde. (4.1610) (He realized that he, just because he wanted to behave as normally as possible, felt himself to be so abnormal.) Motive is primarily goal controlled, e.g.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> De regering heeft hat bedrag van de steun verhoogd opdat de armsten geen honger zullen lijden.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> (Donaldson, 1984, p. 195) (The government has increased the amount of the support so that the poorest people will not suffer from hunger.) Note that the description of the goal state is not true, as it has yet to be achieved. The standard way of indicating this is to use the conditional auxiliary (zullen will) in the subordinate clause. As an illustration of the contrast: 'feeling ill' is a reason for going to bed, 'to get better' is a motiw. ~ for going to bed.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="8">  for an ateleological mechanistic link. As a result doordat is used to emphasize an ateleological cause. In, e.g. Because there were several new dancers in the troupe, the form of the ballet (was) changed.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="9"> because would be translated by doordat to indicate that the new dancers themselves caused the change; whereas omdat would indicate that the choreographer made the change to accommodate tile ballet to the new dancers.  We have found that there is a distinction between mechanistic and volitional causal linkages. Mechanistic links may also be proportional. Volitional, or teleological, links may be based either on reason or on motive.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="5" start_page="179" end_page="179" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
5. Manner linkage
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> The fourth and last type of linkage is the least specific.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> The sub proposition indicates something about the manner of the main proposition. A manner SC is used to add a descriptor, which includes the sub event or state, to the main proposition. The principle distinction to be made is whether this sub event/state actually exists or is (perhaps) imaginary, i.e. whether the sub proposition is true or of unknown truth value.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> True sub proposition. If the sub proposition is true, then either the manner of the main proposition is specified as being restricted to the same as the manner in the sub: Hij speelt viool zoals hi\] piano speelt.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> (He plays violin in the same way as he plays piano.) or the sub proposition is an addition to the main one: Hij speelt viool evenals zijn vader dat heeft gedaan.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> (He plays the violin, just as his father did.) Non true sub proposition. If the sub proposition is false or of unknown truth value then alsof is used: Hij speelt viool alsof hii piano speelt.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> (He plays the violin as if he plays the piano.) Whether the sub proposition is false or merely of unknown truth value must be determined using the context. The speaker can indicate a false value by using the past tense, just as with conditional counterfactuals: Hij speelt viool alsof hi\] piano speelde.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> (He plays the violin as though he played the piano.)  Restriction zoals (same way as) Addition evenals (just as) alsof (as though)</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="6" start_page="179" end_page="179" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
6. Conclusion.
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> In this analysis of the semantics of Dutch SCs, we have concentrated on the main aspects in order to distinguish the wood from the trees. We have ignored SCs that are archaic, dialectal or formal. We have also ignored secondary uses of certain SCs, e.g. that the temporal SC terwljl (while) can be used to highlight a contrast. We believe that this is not prejudicial to our case.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> Secondary uses are just that; they are not different meanings, as we have argued elsewhere for the non-standard uses of if (Br(e &amp; Smit, 1985).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> The definition of the meanings of the Dutch SCs is specific enough to be implemented in a sentence generation program. We have demonstrated this using</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>