Once again, I canvas the native speakers among you (and non-native speakers with near-native fluency) for your linguistic judgments. (Though I do ask you to tell me if you're non-native with near-native fluency just in case this ends up marking a difference in judgment.)
Also: If you have had serious logic/semantics background, could you also let me know? (I suspect this might have more influence than the native/non-native difference.)
I thank you all in advance, and give you heaps of academic love.
Scenario
Jack travels to the Land of Far, Far Away, and sees the Firebird, the Griffin, and the Unicorn.
Lily is talking with Hoggle, a dwarf of dubious reliability.
Lily: "What did Jack see in the Land of Far, Far Away?"
Hoggle: "Jack saw the Firebird and the Griffin."
Question 1: Was Hoggle telling the truth?
Higgle, another dwarf of dubious reliability, turns to Sarah and says, "Hoggle told Lily what Jack saw in the Land of Far, Far Away."
Question 2: Was Higgle telling the truth?
Haggle, a third dwarf of dubious reliability, runs up to Sarah and says, "Hoggle didn't tell Lily what Jack saw in the Land of Far, Far Away."
Question 3: Was Haggle telling the truth?
Also: If you have had serious logic/semantics background, could you also let me know? (I suspect this might have more influence than the native/non-native difference.)
I thank you all in advance, and give you heaps of academic love.
Scenario
Jack travels to the Land of Far, Far Away, and sees the Firebird, the Griffin, and the Unicorn.
Lily is talking with Hoggle, a dwarf of dubious reliability.
Lily: "What did Jack see in the Land of Far, Far Away?"
Hoggle: "Jack saw the Firebird and the Griffin."
Question 1: Was Hoggle telling the truth?
Higgle, another dwarf of dubious reliability, turns to Sarah and says, "Hoggle told Lily what Jack saw in the Land of Far, Far Away."
Question 2: Was Higgle telling the truth?
Haggle, a third dwarf of dubious reliability, runs up to Sarah and says, "Hoggle didn't tell Lily what Jack saw in the Land of Far, Far Away."
Question 3: Was Haggle telling the truth?
Profile
jalenstrix- Jalen Strix
Page Summary
- y2kdragon : (no subject) [+3]
- (Anonymous) : (no subject) [+1]
- radhardened : (no subject) [+0]
- insheepsclothng : (no subject) [+0]
- silmaril : (no subject) [+0]
- underwatercolor : (no subject) [+0]
- thewronghands : (no subject) [+0]
- capfox : (no subject) [+0]
- stillvisions : (no subject) [+0]
- (Anonymous) : What do you presuppose these dwarves are talking about? [+1]
- (Anonymous) : What do you presuppose these dwarves are talking about? [+1]
- serkalove : (no subject) [+0]
Comments
2. No, since in this case, the first dwarf did not tell everything that Jack saw.
3. Yes, but again, only in part, since Hoggle forgot about the Unicorn.
I was a scholar of classical languages at a good university for the subject (Oxford), so I feel I have a claim to know roughly what I'm talking about, even though I'm not strictly an expert on logic/semantics ;)
My high school English teacher would be proud of me.
*grin*
Q1: Yes, most of the truth.
Q2: Yes, most again.
Q3: No, clearly untrue.
Non-native with near-native fluency; I don't know if having studied Boolean logic and designed digital circuits counts as a "serious logic background" but I have a feeling it doesn't.
1. I'd say yes (even if it's partial, he's not leaving anything out).
2. I'd say yes here, too.
3. Partial truths don't buy you a yes; this one's a no.
There is an implicature attached to that statement saying, "I've told you all the relevant things Jack saw." Take that as you will in regard to truth.
As for
There is an implicature attached to that statement saying, "I've told you all the relevant things Jack saw." Take that as you will in regard to truth.
As for question 2, same deal.
Question 3 is more interesting, and I'm not sure. My feeling is that if you read it with metalinguistic negation, you get a true statement.
RB
But good - I'm glad question 3 is different than the previous 2, even to someone well-versed in semantics.
However, I think I need to have some way to gauge truthfulness, since these aren't very easy to classify as true or false as such. I feel the beginnings of a truth scale coming on....
;)