**2.6 Triggers**

54 Semantics – Advances in Theories and Mathematical Models

In 1985 Searle and Vanderveken publish *Foundations of Illocutionary Logic*. Questions are, once more, mentioned among speech acts considered as illocutionary acts. Therefore questions too consist of an illocutionary force F and a propositional content P. Illocutionary logic aims to formalize the logical properties of illocutionary forces. In the case of questions,

According to the meanings attributed to the occurring symbols8, definitions of 'request' and

A request is a directive illocution that allows for the possibility of refusal. A request can be granted or refused by the hearer. Thus ║request║ differs from ║direct ║only by the fact that mode (║request║) (*i*, P) = I iff *i* ∏�! *P* and the speaker in *i* allows the hearer the possibility of refusing to carry out the future course of action represented by *P*. "Request" is the paradigmatic directive verb, but since it is special in having a rather polite mode of

"Ask" has two quite distinct uses. One is in the notion of asking a question and the second is in the notion of asking someone to do something. Questions are always directives, for they are attempts to get the hearer to perform a speech act. In the simple directive sense, "ask" names the same illocutionary force as "request". In the sense of "ask a question" it means request that the hearer perform a speech act to the speaker, the form of which is already determined by the propositional content of the question. Thus if the question is a yes-no question requesting an assertive, the speaker expresses the propositional content of the answer in asking the question; and all that the hearer is asked to do is affirm or deny that propositional content. For example, to ask someone whether it is raining is to request him to perform a true assertion with the propositional content that it is or that it is not raining.

The illocutionary force of the illocutionary act that is requested to be performed in case of asking a question is not necessarily assertive. When the minister in the wedding chapel asks "Do you take this woman to be your lawful wedded wife?", he is asking for a response

<sup>8</sup> ║ ║ is the function that assigns to each illocutionary verb the force or type of speech act that it names;

∏� names a relation between contexts of utterance and propositions that determines the condition of

Prop ║ask║ (*i*) is the set of all propositions which respect the conditions imposed by the illocutionary

I names the integer one or the truth value: truth, or the success value : success;

*ai* is a variable for speakers; it names the speaker of context of utterance *i*;

force ║ask║on the propositional content P in a context *i*.

achievement of its illocutionary point, it cannot be taken as the primitive directive.

the authors consider requests and asks within the class of English directives.

'ask' are as follows:

"*request* (!)

*ask*.

*i* is a variable for possible contexts of utterance;

*P* is a variable for propositions;

∈ is the sign of membership;

*bi* is a variable for hearers;

commitment to illocutionary point ∏;

Prop names the set of all propositions; *A* is a variable for illocutionary acts;

*t* is a variable for moments of time; *l* is a variable for places of utterance; *w* is a variable for possible words

Sometimes old mythology helps to show simply and synthetically the deep roots – the foundations – of what technical treatments of ever-green topics just foreshadow.

If we read Plato's Symposion, we find the story told by Diotima to Socrates about the birth of Eros (love) from Poros (Πόρος, "resource" or "plenty") and Penia (Πενία, poverty).9 According to Plato, love "is also a philosopher: or lover of wisdom, and being a lover of wisdom is in a mean between the wise and the ignorant."

This tale can serve as a helpful hint to understand the formal affinity between indefinite and interrogative adjectives/pronouns: constantly related throughout typologically different languages10.

What does this structural similarity mean? It underlines the strong relationship between lack of determinacy (poverty) and the need to overcome it (in order to attain plentifulness). If somebody is not able to determine, to define something, s/he is in a position of having to ask somebody else to fill this gap. To be in this position does not necessarily imply acting upon it, adopting those decisions, using those devices where triggers such as *wh-*words are at work for retrieving missing information, for extracting knowledge, mining data or for receiving the cooperation requested.

<sup>9 &</sup>quot;What then is Love?" I asked; "Is he mortal?" "No." "What then?" "As in the former instance, he is neither mortal nor immortal, but in a mean between the two." "What is he, Diotima?" "He is a great spirit (daimon), and like all spirits he is intermediate between the divine and the mortal." "And what," I said, "is his power?" "He interprets," she replied, "between gods and men, conveying and taking across to the gods the prayers and sacrifices of men, and to men the commands and replies of the gods; he is the mediator who spans the chasm which divides them, and therefore in him all is bound together, and through him the arts of the prophet and the priest, their sacrifices and mysteries and charms, and all, prophecy and incantation, find their way. For God mingles not with man; but through Love all the intercourse, and converse of god with man, whether awake or asleep, is carried on. The wisdom which understands this is spiritual; all other wisdom, such as that of arts and handicrafts, is mean and vulgar. Now these spirits or intermediate powers are many and diverse, and one of them is Love. "And who," I said, "was his father, and who his mother?" "The tale," she said, "will take time; nevertheless I will tell you…" The tale can be read in The Internet Classics Archive:

http://classics.mit.edu//Plato/symposium.html.

<sup>10</sup> http://wals.info/chapter/46

Queries and Predicate – Argument Relationship 57

else, as expressions of properties or relations belonging to one or more objects, or the result

Actually, in logical-grammatical training, we meet predicates first. Predication as such remains in the background. On the contrary, it is consistent with a pragmatic framework to

Our claim is that without predication we cannot ensure neither the right assessment of the interrogative items in questions (where *wh*-placeholders need to be substituted and their empty place filled), nor the nuclear structure upon which the illocutionary force of the

Moreover, we think that while underlining predication as a main device, at the same time we show answers as works in progress, towards the identification of definite references or events, or towards the definition of a yes- or no-answer. In fact, if we consider that, according to a certain semantic paradigm (the Fregean and the Neo-fregean one), truth values are the referents of assertions, we can say that predication allows answers to gain reference both locally and globally (at the level of single constituents and at the level of

Once the primacy of the act of predication upon predicates and consequently upon predication as a result is stated (words like predic-*ation* always work both as a *nomen actionis*

 eventually we will consider the whole structure it builds, from the point of view of the two main paradigms according to which such a structure has been conceived, the

Let us consider the etymology of 'predicate', in English a noun with exactly the same form as the verb (but in the infinitive, not participle mood). Why is this so? According to the reconstruction offered by the Oxford English Dictionary 'predicate' comes from "Middle French *predicat* (French *prédicat* ) that which is said of a subject (1370), quality (1466) and its etymon post-classical Latin *praedicatum*12 that which is said of a subject (6th cent. in Boethius; earlier in senses doctrine, precept (4th cent.), prediction (late 2nd or early 3rd cent.

Therefore, if somebody predicates something of something else or of somebody else, then we obtain predicates. We can sum up the whole scene as a predication. Why do I underline such an obvious remark? Because sometimes this "ontogenetic", dynamic reconstruction has been forgotten, leaving as a result the static relation between predicates and their correlates

12 Gr. *kategoroúmenon*, from *kategoréo*, a typical expression recalling the *agorà* in the *polis*, and its role of attracting citizens called to select (*katà*, in front of everybody, publicly) candidates submitted to public

in Tertullian), use as noun of neuter past participle of classical Latin *praedicāre*. ''.

of making concepts fall into one another.

put the act first and its result afterwards.

whole sentences, if assertive, as such).

then we will see its correlates and

as ready-made.

Aristotelian and the Fregean one.

**3.2 The basic syntagmatic act is predication** 

evaluation for the future governance of the *polis* itself.

and as a *nomen rei actae*), we can proceed as follows:

first we will treat predication as the basic syntagmatic act,

answers can be exerted.

We are all familiar with the expression "to break the ice". To ask proper questions at the right moment may be a good way to break the ice. But sometimes it is so difficult to detect the extension and the boundaries of what we ignore that no questions arise, whereas at some other times correct, precise, punctual questions addressed to the right addressee at the right moment can pave the way to quite important self-disclosures, intelligent and farseeing insights, real turning points. The quality of interviews and interrogatories depends on the skills of their authors and on the cooperation they are able to gain.

There are crucial structures which are capable of building answers, as well as questions and requests. These structures are the strategic means to order words syntactically and semantically, in a way which is suitable for "filling" the gaps (of knowledge/action) identified by questions/requests; strategic insofar as they themselves are non-saturated tools, unaccomplished structures, and yet still able to activate accomplishments, and form a bridge to the expected items.

Predication is such a structure, propositional functions are its developments on the way towards complete propositions.
