Words that signal future content
Using "subway" as name for London Underground?
PhD - Well known professor or well known school?
What is the giant octopus in the torture chamber for?
Should I give professor gift at the beginning of my PhD?
Find the Factorial From the Given Prime Relationship
"You've got another thing coming" - translation into French
Was the Tamarian language in "Darmok" inspired by Jack Vance's "The Asutra"?
Winning Strategy for the Magician and his Apprentice
Taxi Services at Didcot
Which comes first? Multiple Imputation, Splitting into train/test, or Standardization/Normalization
What makes Ada the language of choice for the ISS's safety-critical systems?
Are there downsides to using std::string as a buffer?
Why only the fundamental frequency component is said to give useful power?
Payment instructions allegedly from HomeAway look fishy to me
Is it a problem if <h4>, <h5> and <h6> are smaller than regular text?
Where does "0 packages can be updated." come from?
Can the poison from Kingsmen be concocted?
Should an arbiter claim draw at a K+R vs K+R endgame?
What can I, as a user, do about offensive reviews in App Store?
BGP multihome issue
Movie about a boy who was born old and grew young
Smooth switching between 12 V batteries, with a toggle switch
Words that signal future content
Does an ice chest packed full of frozen food need ice?
Words that signal future content
Some content words signal that future content will likely follow. The words seem to act as a typing system for instances of the content. For example:
"I have an idea." --> one expects the idea to soon follow
"I have an example." --> (what is the example?)
"There are two things I need to say." --> (what are the two things?)
Is there a name for these kinds of words?
terminology semantics discourse-analysis
asked 11 hours ago
jeff schneiderjeff schneider
474113
add a comment |
Some content words signal that future content will likely follow. The words seem to act as a typing system for instances of the content. For example:
"I have an idea." --> one expects the idea to soon follow
"I have an example." --> (what is the example?)
"There are two things I need to say." --> (what are the two things?)
Is there a name for these kinds of words?
terminology semantics discourse-analysis
asked 11 hours ago
jeff schneiderjeff schneider
474113
add a comment |
Some content words signal that future content will likely follow. The words seem to act as a typing system for instances of the content. For example:
"I have an idea." --> one expects the idea to soon follow
"I have an example." --> (what is the example?)
"There are two things I need to say." --> (what are the two things?)
Is there a name for these kinds of words?
terminology semantics discourse-analysis
asked 11 hours ago
jeff schneiderjeff schneider
474113
Some content words signal that future content will likely follow. The words seem to act as a typing system for instances of the content. For example:
"I have an idea." --> one expects the idea to soon follow
"I have an example." --> (what is the example?)
"There are two things I need to say." --> (what are the two things?)
Is there a name for these kinds of words?
terminology semantics discourse-analysis
terminology semantics discourse-analysis
asked 11 hours ago
jeff schneiderjeff schneider
474113
asked 11 hours ago
jeff schneiderjeff schneider
474113
asked 11 hours ago
jeff schneiderjeff schneider
474113
asked 11 hours ago
jeff schneiderjeff schneider
474113
asked 11 hours ago
jeff schneiderjeff schneider
474113
474113
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
User6726 is absolutely correct, but to expand a little bit:
The "more to follow" idea comes from Gricean implicature, not from the words themselves.
Grice's Maxims are four rules that people "expect" everyone in a conversation to follow. One is the maxim of relevance: if you're saying something, you're saying it for a reason, so it should be relevant to the context. Another is the maxim of quantity: you'll say as much as you need to get the point across.
"I have an idea" on its own generally seems to violate either relevance or quantity: in most contexts, that doesn't really add anything or give any useful information (bad relevance), and if the idea is relevant, you haven't said enough about it (bad quantity). But if you followed it up with "…we could foo the bar", that would fulfill both relevance and quantity. So people will be expecting that followup—it's the only way the first part makes pragmatic sense.
answered 9 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
15.1k12361
Thanks. I'd suggest that, [Words-of-Type-X mandate follow-up content or they violate a Gricean maxim]. Hence, there's a difference between the set of "Words-of-Type-X" and the policy (a Gricean maxim). So, I fully agree with you on the policy, but I'm hopeful that additional thought has gone into the categorization of words that could trigger the policy.
– jeff schneider
9 hours ago
1
@jeffschneider That's the thing, there's nothing special about those words that makes them act that way. "I disagree with Einstein's ideas" doesn't violate a maxim on its own, but "have you seen?" does, without any nouns at all.
– Draconis
8 hours ago
Thanks. I'd suggest that "have you seen" violates argument realization, and I'd classify as a different problem. "Einstein's ideas" could trigger a follow-up but won't because common sense knowledge overrides the Gricean event. The phenomenon seems to be triggered when the reader is: 1. left wondering "which one(s)" (we have a pretty good guess on which of Einstein's ideas). 2. left wondering about examples or instances. Perhaps, hyponyms of 'content', 'cognitive construct', ...
– jeff schneider
7 hours ago
3
Are you saying that I created an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough?
– user6726
4 hours ago
1
@user6726 Dammit, now I wish I'd made that joke in the answer itself…
– Draconis
4 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
These words are nouns. The effect you're referring to doesn't come from those words. For example "That's why I rejected that idea", "I accepted his example", "As you know, Dr. Seuss wrote about two things". You can create an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough.
answered 10 hours ago
user6726user6726
36.6k12471
There must be a word for this type of unresolved dependencies, in some grammar, whether noun, determiner or interjection. Oh oh! ...
– vectory
1 hour ago
My work is done here.
– user6726
14 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "312"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31664%2fwords-that-signal-future-content%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
User6726 is absolutely correct, but to expand a little bit:
The "more to follow" idea comes from Gricean implicature, not from the words themselves.
Grice's Maxims are four rules that people "expect" everyone in a conversation to follow. One is the maxim of relevance: if you're saying something, you're saying it for a reason, so it should be relevant to the context. Another is the maxim of quantity: you'll say as much as you need to get the point across.
"I have an idea" on its own generally seems to violate either relevance or quantity: in most contexts, that doesn't really add anything or give any useful information (bad relevance), and if the idea is relevant, you haven't said enough about it (bad quantity). But if you followed it up with "…we could foo the bar", that would fulfill both relevance and quantity. So people will be expecting that followup—it's the only way the first part makes pragmatic sense.
answered 9 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
15.1k12361
Thanks. I'd suggest that, [Words-of-Type-X mandate follow-up content or they violate a Gricean maxim]. Hence, there's a difference between the set of "Words-of-Type-X" and the policy (a Gricean maxim). So, I fully agree with you on the policy, but I'm hopeful that additional thought has gone into the categorization of words that could trigger the policy.
– jeff schneider
9 hours ago
1
@jeffschneider That's the thing, there's nothing special about those words that makes them act that way. "I disagree with Einstein's ideas" doesn't violate a maxim on its own, but "have you seen?" does, without any nouns at all.
– Draconis
8 hours ago
Thanks. I'd suggest that "have you seen" violates argument realization, and I'd classify as a different problem. "Einstein's ideas" could trigger a follow-up but won't because common sense knowledge overrides the Gricean event. The phenomenon seems to be triggered when the reader is: 1. left wondering "which one(s)" (we have a pretty good guess on which of Einstein's ideas). 2. left wondering about examples or instances. Perhaps, hyponyms of 'content', 'cognitive construct', ...
– jeff schneider
7 hours ago
3
Are you saying that I created an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough?
– user6726
4 hours ago
1
@user6726 Dammit, now I wish I'd made that joke in the answer itself…
– Draconis
4 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
User6726 is absolutely correct, but to expand a little bit:
The "more to follow" idea comes from Gricean implicature, not from the words themselves.
Grice's Maxims are four rules that people "expect" everyone in a conversation to follow. One is the maxim of relevance: if you're saying something, you're saying it for a reason, so it should be relevant to the context. Another is the maxim of quantity: you'll say as much as you need to get the point across.
"I have an idea" on its own generally seems to violate either relevance or quantity: in most contexts, that doesn't really add anything or give any useful information (bad relevance), and if the idea is relevant, you haven't said enough about it (bad quantity). But if you followed it up with "…we could foo the bar", that would fulfill both relevance and quantity. So people will be expecting that followup—it's the only way the first part makes pragmatic sense.
answered 9 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
15.1k12361
Thanks. I'd suggest that, [Words-of-Type-X mandate follow-up content or they violate a Gricean maxim]. Hence, there's a difference between the set of "Words-of-Type-X" and the policy (a Gricean maxim). So, I fully agree with you on the policy, but I'm hopeful that additional thought has gone into the categorization of words that could trigger the policy.
– jeff schneider
9 hours ago
1
@jeffschneider That's the thing, there's nothing special about those words that makes them act that way. "I disagree with Einstein's ideas" doesn't violate a maxim on its own, but "have you seen?" does, without any nouns at all.
– Draconis
8 hours ago
Thanks. I'd suggest that "have you seen" violates argument realization, and I'd classify as a different problem. "Einstein's ideas" could trigger a follow-up but won't because common sense knowledge overrides the Gricean event. The phenomenon seems to be triggered when the reader is: 1. left wondering "which one(s)" (we have a pretty good guess on which of Einstein's ideas). 2. left wondering about examples or instances. Perhaps, hyponyms of 'content', 'cognitive construct', ...
– jeff schneider
7 hours ago
3
Are you saying that I created an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough?
– user6726
4 hours ago
1
@user6726 Dammit, now I wish I'd made that joke in the answer itself…
– Draconis
4 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
User6726 is absolutely correct, but to expand a little bit:
The "more to follow" idea comes from Gricean implicature, not from the words themselves.
Grice's Maxims are four rules that people "expect" everyone in a conversation to follow. One is the maxim of relevance: if you're saying something, you're saying it for a reason, so it should be relevant to the context. Another is the maxim of quantity: you'll say as much as you need to get the point across.
"I have an idea" on its own generally seems to violate either relevance or quantity: in most contexts, that doesn't really add anything or give any useful information (bad relevance), and if the idea is relevant, you haven't said enough about it (bad quantity). But if you followed it up with "…we could foo the bar", that would fulfill both relevance and quantity. So people will be expecting that followup—it's the only way the first part makes pragmatic sense.
answered 9 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
15.1k12361
User6726 is absolutely correct, but to expand a little bit:
The "more to follow" idea comes from Gricean implicature, not from the words themselves.
Grice's Maxims are four rules that people "expect" everyone in a conversation to follow. One is the maxim of relevance: if you're saying something, you're saying it for a reason, so it should be relevant to the context. Another is the maxim of quantity: you'll say as much as you need to get the point across.
"I have an idea" on its own generally seems to violate either relevance or quantity: in most contexts, that doesn't really add anything or give any useful information (bad relevance), and if the idea is relevant, you haven't said enough about it (bad quantity). But if you followed it up with "…we could foo the bar", that would fulfill both relevance and quantity. So people will be expecting that followup—it's the only way the first part makes pragmatic sense.
answered 9 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
15.1k12361
answered 9 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
15.1k12361
answered 9 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
15.1k12361
answered 9 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
15.1k12361
15.1k12361
Thanks. I'd suggest that, [Words-of-Type-X mandate follow-up content or they violate a Gricean maxim]. Hence, there's a difference between the set of "Words-of-Type-X" and the policy (a Gricean maxim). So, I fully agree with you on the policy, but I'm hopeful that additional thought has gone into the categorization of words that could trigger the policy.
– jeff schneider
9 hours ago
1
@jeffschneider That's the thing, there's nothing special about those words that makes them act that way. "I disagree with Einstein's ideas" doesn't violate a maxim on its own, but "have you seen?" does, without any nouns at all.
– Draconis
8 hours ago
Thanks. I'd suggest that "have you seen" violates argument realization, and I'd classify as a different problem. "Einstein's ideas" could trigger a follow-up but won't because common sense knowledge overrides the Gricean event. The phenomenon seems to be triggered when the reader is: 1. left wondering "which one(s)" (we have a pretty good guess on which of Einstein's ideas). 2. left wondering about examples or instances. Perhaps, hyponyms of 'content', 'cognitive construct', ...
– jeff schneider
7 hours ago
3
Are you saying that I created an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough?
– user6726
4 hours ago
1
@user6726 Dammit, now I wish I'd made that joke in the answer itself…
– Draconis
4 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Thanks. I'd suggest that, [Words-of-Type-X mandate follow-up content or they violate a Gricean maxim]. Hence, there's a difference between the set of "Words-of-Type-X" and the policy (a Gricean maxim). So, I fully agree with you on the policy, but I'm hopeful that additional thought has gone into the categorization of words that could trigger the policy.
– jeff schneider
9 hours ago
1
@jeffschneider That's the thing, there's nothing special about those words that makes them act that way. "I disagree with Einstein's ideas" doesn't violate a maxim on its own, but "have you seen?" does, without any nouns at all.
– Draconis
8 hours ago
Thanks. I'd suggest that "have you seen" violates argument realization, and I'd classify as a different problem. "Einstein's ideas" could trigger a follow-up but won't because common sense knowledge overrides the Gricean event. The phenomenon seems to be triggered when the reader is: 1. left wondering "which one(s)" (we have a pretty good guess on which of Einstein's ideas). 2. left wondering about examples or instances. Perhaps, hyponyms of 'content', 'cognitive construct', ...
– jeff schneider
7 hours ago
3
Are you saying that I created an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough?
– user6726
4 hours ago
1
@user6726 Dammit, now I wish I'd made that joke in the answer itself…
– Draconis
4 hours ago
Thanks. I'd suggest that, [Words-of-Type-X mandate follow-up content or they violate a Gricean maxim]. Hence, there's a difference between the set of "Words-of-Type-X" and the policy (a Gricean maxim). So, I fully agree with you on the policy, but I'm hopeful that additional thought has gone into the categorization of words that could trigger the policy.
– jeff schneider
9 hours ago
Thanks. I'd suggest that, [Words-of-Type-X mandate follow-up content or they violate a Gricean maxim]. Hence, there's a difference between the set of "Words-of-Type-X" and the policy (a Gricean maxim). So, I fully agree with you on the policy, but I'm hopeful that additional thought has gone into the categorization of words that could trigger the policy.
– jeff schneider
9 hours ago
1
1
@jeffschneider That's the thing, there's nothing special about those words that makes them act that way. "I disagree with Einstein's ideas" doesn't violate a maxim on its own, but "have you seen?" does, without any nouns at all.
– Draconis
8 hours ago
@jeffschneider That's the thing, there's nothing special about those words that makes them act that way. "I disagree with Einstein's ideas" doesn't violate a maxim on its own, but "have you seen?" does, without any nouns at all.
– Draconis
8 hours ago
Thanks. I'd suggest that "have you seen" violates argument realization, and I'd classify as a different problem. "Einstein's ideas" could trigger a follow-up but won't because common sense knowledge overrides the Gricean event. The phenomenon seems to be triggered when the reader is: 1. left wondering "which one(s)" (we have a pretty good guess on which of Einstein's ideas). 2. left wondering about examples or instances. Perhaps, hyponyms of 'content', 'cognitive construct', ...
– jeff schneider
7 hours ago
Thanks. I'd suggest that "have you seen" violates argument realization, and I'd classify as a different problem. "Einstein's ideas" could trigger a follow-up but won't because common sense knowledge overrides the Gricean event. The phenomenon seems to be triggered when the reader is: 1. left wondering "which one(s)" (we have a pretty good guess on which of Einstein's ideas). 2. left wondering about examples or instances. Perhaps, hyponyms of 'content', 'cognitive construct', ...
– jeff schneider
7 hours ago
3
3
Are you saying that I created an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough?
– user6726
4 hours ago
Are you saying that I created an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough?
– user6726
4 hours ago
1
1
@user6726 Dammit, now I wish I'd made that joke in the answer itself…
– Draconis
4 hours ago
@user6726 Dammit, now I wish I'd made that joke in the answer itself…
– Draconis
4 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
These words are nouns. The effect you're referring to doesn't come from those words. For example "That's why I rejected that idea", "I accepted his example", "As you know, Dr. Seuss wrote about two things". You can create an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough.
answered 10 hours ago
user6726user6726
36.6k12471
There must be a word for this type of unresolved dependencies, in some grammar, whether noun, determiner or interjection. Oh oh! ...
– vectory
1 hour ago
My work is done here.
– user6726
14 mins ago
add a comment |
These words are nouns. The effect you're referring to doesn't come from those words. For example "That's why I rejected that idea", "I accepted his example", "As you know, Dr. Seuss wrote about two things". You can create an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough.
answered 10 hours ago
user6726user6726
36.6k12471
There must be a word for this type of unresolved dependencies, in some grammar, whether noun, determiner or interjection. Oh oh! ...
– vectory
1 hour ago
My work is done here.
– user6726
14 mins ago
add a comment |
These words are nouns. The effect you're referring to doesn't come from those words. For example "That's why I rejected that idea", "I accepted his example", "As you know, Dr. Seuss wrote about two things". You can create an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough.
answered 10 hours ago
user6726user6726
36.6k12471
These words are nouns. The effect you're referring to doesn't come from those words. For example "That's why I rejected that idea", "I accepted his example", "As you know, Dr. Seuss wrote about two things". You can create an expectation of "more to come" by not saying enough.
answered 10 hours ago
user6726user6726
36.6k12471
answered 10 hours ago
user6726user6726
36.6k12471
answered 10 hours ago
user6726user6726
36.6k12471
answered 10 hours ago
user6726user6726
36.6k12471
36.6k12471
There must be a word for this type of unresolved dependencies, in some grammar, whether noun, determiner or interjection. Oh oh! ...
– vectory
1 hour ago
My work is done here.
– user6726
14 mins ago
add a comment |
There must be a word for this type of unresolved dependencies, in some grammar, whether noun, determiner or interjection. Oh oh! ...
– vectory
1 hour ago
My work is done here.
– user6726
14 mins ago
There must be a word for this type of unresolved dependencies, in some grammar, whether noun, determiner or interjection. Oh oh! ...
– vectory
1 hour ago
There must be a word for this type of unresolved dependencies, in some grammar, whether noun, determiner or interjection. Oh oh! ...
– vectory
1 hour ago
My work is done here.
– user6726
14 mins ago
My work is done here.
– user6726
14 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Linguistics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31664%2fwords-that-signal-future-content%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
