Florian Haas | Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena (original) (raw)

Papers by Florian Haas

Journal of Pragmatics, Oct 1, 2015

Pronominal and verbal forms of the second person singular are canonically used with personal refe... more Pronominal and verbal forms of the second person singular are canonically used with personal reference, i.e., as referring (exclusively) to the addressee. In what is often called 'impersonal' uses, the range of reference is broadened from the addressee to a more comprehensive set of referents, and sometimes the relevant sentences are not literally speaking true, as properties are attributed to the addressee which (s)he does not actually have. The question arises whether impersonally used forms of the second person singular constitute a grammatical category of their own, or whether they exhibit the same (underlying) semantics as canonical uses of the second person. On the basis of a dynamic-inferential view of communication, we argue for a unified analysis of personal and impersonal second person forms. Effects of generalization are claimed to emerge in sentences which are generalizing independently of the occurrence of a second person form. Uses of the second person that lead to truth-conditionally false sentences are claimed to involve (an invitation to) simulation and the creation of empathy. According to this analysis, impersonal uses of the second person establish a direct referential link to the addressee, just like personal uses, and their status as 'impersonal' is a function of sentential contexts and conversational conditions.

Studies in Language Companion Series, 2011

The present study deals with the distribution of subject properties in 'formulaic' presentational... more The present study deals with the distribution of subject properties in 'formulaic' presentational constructions such as Engl. there is NP, Fr. il y'a NP and Span. hay NP, approaching the problem from a diachronic-typological perspective. Nine major types of presentational constructions are distinguished by cross-classifying the three-valued parameters 'type of existential predicate' and 'type of expletive'. Moreover, a language-level parameter is introduced which distinguishes languages allowing verb-initial order in thetic sentences ('thetic-V1 languages') from languages disallowing such an order ('thetic-XV languages'). It is shown that thetic-XV languages tend to use expletives in their existential formulas, which attract subject properties and qualify as impersonal. By contrast, thetic-V1 languages often do not use expletives at all, and if they do, these do not attract subject properties. The corresponding constructions are consequently not impersonal. Accordingly, a correlation can be established between the parameters 'thetic-XV' vs. 'thetic-V1', on the one hand, and 'impersonal presentational' vs. 'personal presentational', on the other.

Symmetry as a logical notion (e.g. Partee et al. 1993: 40-41) (1) "If (aRb) then (bRa)" (2) Given... more Symmetry as a logical notion (e.g. Partee et al. 1993: 40-41) (1) "If (aRb) then (bRa)" (2) Given a set A and a binary relation R in A, R is SYMMETRIC if and only if for every ordered pair <x,y> in R, the pair <y,x> is also in R. 2. Classifying verbs as 'symmetric' The definition in (1) has been taken over to the classification of verbs, taking the interchangeability of arguments in the transitive realization of meet, for instance, as criterial (cf. e.g. Dimitriadis 2008): (3) a. John and Mary met. b. John met Mary. c. Mary met John. (4) a. "There can be no event of John meeting Mary without Mary meeting John at the same time." (Dimitriadis 2008: 329) b. "A predicate is […] symmetric if (a) it expresses a binary relationship, but (b) its two arguments have necessarily identical participation in any event described by the predicate."

Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 2018

http://linguistlist.org/issues/23/23-1215.html

http://journals.linguisticsociety.org/booknotices/?p=1098

Journal of Pragmatics, 2015

ABSTRACT Pronominal and verbal forms of the second person singular are canonically used with pers... more ABSTRACT Pronominal and verbal forms of the second person singular are canonically used with personal reference, i.e., as referring (exclusively) to the addressee. In what is often called ‘impersonal’ uses, the range of reference is broadened from the addressee to a more comprehensive set of referents, and sometimes the relevant sentences are not literally speaking true, as properties are attributed to the addressee which (s)he does not actually have. The question arises whether impersonally used forms of the second person singular constitute a grammatical category of their own, or whether they exhibit the same (underlying) semantics as canonical uses of the second person. On the basis of a dynamic-inferential view of communication, we argue for a unified analysis of personal and impersonal second person forms. Effects of generalization are claimed to emerge in sentences which are generalizing independently of the occurrence of a second person form. Uses of the second person that lead to truth-conditionally false sentences are claimed to involve (an invitation to) simulation and the creation of empathy. According to this analysis, impersonal uses of the second person establish a direct referential link to the addressee, just like personal uses, and their status as ‘impersonal’ is a function of sentential contexts and conversational conditions.

Languages in Contrast

German has a set of nouns which are derived from a combination of a preposition and the reciproca... more German has a set of nouns which are derived from a combination of a preposition and the reciprocal pronoun einander ‘one another’. Compounds of this type are strikingly absent from English, although all the components that enter the German formations are available in English, as well. This paper takes a closer look at the relevant word-formation patterns, focusing on compounding and different types of conversion, also taking into account the diachrony of reciprocal pronouns (einander in German and each other/one another in English) and the role of morphological schemas. It will be argued that for explaining the lack of English nouns corresponding to the German nouns under discussion contrasts in the history and the grammar of reciprocals are less relevant than (i) the availability of well-entrenched word-formation patterns, and (ii) the more significant role of ‘syntactic conversion’ in German.

Studies in Language Companion Series, 2015

DESCRIPTION Invited talk at workshop "Interdisciplinary perspectives on populist discourse i... more DESCRIPTION Invited talk at workshop "Interdisciplinary perspectives on populist discourse in Germany and Poland", August 20-21, 2015

Typological Studies in Language, 2009

Language Typology and Universals, 2008

Sorlin, S. & L. Gardelle (eds.): The Pragmatics of Personal Pronouns, 311-334. Amsterdam: Benjamins. , 2015

Second person forms of pronouns (e.g. Engl. 'you', Germ. 'du') or verbs (e.g. Russian 'pišeš' 'yo... more Second person forms of pronouns (e.g. Engl. 'you', Germ. 'du') or verbs (e.g. Russian 'pišeš' 'you write') have a basically deictic function and refer to the addressee. In uses that have been called " impersonal " or " non-canonical " , the second person forms are used in a generalizing way (e.g. 'You only live once'), often in combination with predicates that are not literally true of the addressee (e.g. As the Pope you have to be righteous, said by the Pope to a reporter). In this contribution we pursue two main goals. First, we propose a taxonomy of non-canonical uses of the second person as a frame of reference for future, especially quantitative, studies. Our second goal is to determine the pragmatic (non-truth-conditional) interpretive effects of impersonal uses of the second person. We argue that all instances of such forms imply, at an interactional level, the establishment of solidarity between the interlocutors, and at an expressive level, the presence of empathy with the members of the category over which a generalization is made. Accordingly, we propose the term " generalized empathy " as the main function of the relevant uses of the second person.

Pronominal and verbal forms of the second person singular are canonically used with personal refe... more Pronominal and verbal forms of the second person singular are canonically used with personal reference, i.e., as referring deictically to the addressee. In what is often called 'impersonal' uses of the second person singular, the range of reference is broadened from the addressee to a more comprehensive set of referents, and sometimes the relevant sentences are not literally speaking true, as properties are attributed to the addressee which (s)he does not actually have. The question arises whether impersonally used forms of the second person constitute a grammatical category of its own, or whether they exhibit the same (underlying) semantics as canonical uses of the second person. On the basis of a dynamic-inferential view of communication, we argue for a unified analysis of personal and impersonal second person forms. Effects of generalization are claimed to emerge in sentences which are generalizing independently of the occurrence of a second person form. Uses of the second person that lead to truth-conditionally false sentences are claimed to involve (an invitation to) simulation and the creation of empathy. According to this analysis, impersonal uses of the second person establish a direct referential link to the addressee, just like personal uses, and their status as 'impersonal' is a function of sentential contexts and conversational conditions.

Journal of Pragmatics, Oct 1, 2015

Studies in Language Companion Series, 2011

Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 2018

http://linguistlist.org/issues/23/23-1215.html

http://journals.linguisticsociety.org/booknotices/?p=1098

Journal of Pragmatics, 2015

Languages in Contrast

Studies in Language Companion Series, 2015

Typological Studies in Language, 2009

Language Typology and Universals, 2008

Sorlin, S. & L. Gardelle (eds.): The Pragmatics of Personal Pronouns, 311-334. Amsterdam: Benjamins. , 2015

Pronominal and verbal forms of the second person singular are canonically used with personal refe... more Pronominal and verbal forms of the second person singular are canonically used with personal reference, i.e., as referring deictically to the addressee. In what is often called 'impersonal' uses of the second person singular, the range of reference is broadened from the addressee to a more comprehensive set of referents, and sometimes the relevant sentences are not literally speaking true, as properties are attributed to the addressee which (s)he does not actually have. The question arises whether impersonally used forms of the second person constitute a grammatical category of its own, or whether they exhibit the same (underlying) semantics as canonical uses of the second person. On the basis of a dynamic-inferential view of communication, we argue for a unified analysis of personal and impersonal second person forms. Effects of generalization are claimed to emerge in sentences which are generalizing independently of the occurrence of a second person form. Uses of the second person that lead to truth-conditionally false sentences are claimed to involve (an invitation to) simulation and the creation of empathy. According to this analysis, impersonal uses of the second person establish a direct referential link to the addressee, just like personal uses, and their status as 'impersonal' is a function of sentential contexts and conversational conditions.

English had an impersonal pronoun man/men/me, later men/me (not a PL of man, Rissanen 1997: 517-5... more English had an impersonal pronoun man/men/me, later men/me (not a PL of man, Rissanen 1997: 517-521). In OE and ME, it was the most frequent impersonal strategy.

1. Symmetry as a logical notion (e.g. Partee et al. 1993: 40-41) (1) "If (aRb) then (bRa)"

While there is ample evidence showing that the impersonal use of second-person singular pronouns ... more While there is ample evidence showing that the impersonal use of second-person singular pronouns has increased in several languages, the recent history of impersonal you in English has not yet received much attention in the literature. The present investigation presents corpus evidence from Modern English indicating that this strategy has indeed gained in frequency, independently of changes in the general frequency of second-person pronouns and the evolution of genres. Tracing specific functions of impersonal you diachronically reveals that you simulating the hearer's membership in the set generalized over and encoding hidden self-reference are relatively new uses, supporting the view that this impersonal strategy has undergone semantic extensions comparable to developments found in other languages.