Abstract

This paper is devoted to an exploration of the implications for the theory of pre-lexical syntax as developed by McCawley, and for syntactic theories in general, of an analysis of English emphatic conjunctions along the lines of Green . Among the conclusions are: The underlying representation of sentences must be much more abstract than has even been imagined previously, referring, in some as yet undiscovered way, to assumptions of the speaker about the real world, in order to account for the grammatical occurrence of both terms of suppletive lexical items in otherwise identical surface strings with corresponding differences in meaning. A grammatical theory which purports to be capable of relating the sentences of a language to what they mean in a systematic way must be capable of referring directly to relevant assumptions made by the speaker of any given utterance at the time of utterance. So-called 'contrastive stress' is only one of the phenomena whose ultimate explanation depends on direct reference to such assumptions. Transformational grammars, which explicitly claim to be capable of relating in a systematic way the sentences of a language and what they mean, must be capable of referring to the sub-lexical, semantic structure of sentences, and furthermore, must be capable of doing so at an indefinite number of points in their derivation. This means that the semantic representation of a sentence must be available for reference at every stage in the derivation of the sentence