Conditional independence and biscuit conditional questions in Dynamic Semantics

Katsuhiko Sano, Yurie Hara


Biscuit conditionals such as ‘If you are thirsty, there’s beer in the fridge.’ are felt different from canonical conditionals ‘If it’s raining, the fireworks will be cancelled.’ in that the consequent seems to be entailed regardless of the truth/falsity of the antecedent. Franke (2009) argues that the “feeling of the consequent entailment” in biscuit conditionals is due to the conditional independence between the antecedent and consequent; thus a uniform semantics for canonical and biscuit conditionals can be maintained. A question arises as to whether it is possible to derive the same consequent entailment in the framework of dynamic semantics.
Furthermore, there are some instances of biscuit conditional questions such as ‘If I get thirsty, is there anything in the fridge?’ This paper provides a dynamic and non-symmetric version of the independence condition, a d-independence condition which correctly derives the consequent entailment in both declaratives and interrogatives.

Full Text:



Franke, Michael. 2007. The pragmatics of biscuit conditionals. In Maria Aloni,

Paul Dekker & Floris Roelofson (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th Amsterdam

Colloquium, 91–96.

Franke, Michael. 2009. Signal to Act: Game Theory in Pragmatics: Universiteit van

Amsterdam dissertation.

Groenendijk, Jeroen. 1999. The logic of interrogation. In Tanya Matthews &

Devon Strolovitch (eds.), Proceedings of SALT IX, 109–126. Ithaca, NY: Cornell


Groenendijk, Jeroen & Floris Roelofsen. 2009. Inquisitive semantics and pragmatics.

Presented at the Workshop on Language, Communication, and Rational Agency

at Stanford, May 2009.

Groenendijk, Jeroen & Floris Roelofsen. 2013. Suppositional inquisitive semantics.

Workshop on Inquisitive Logic and Dependence Logic, ILLC, Amsterdam, June

, 2013.

Hamblin, C.L. 1958. Questions. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 36. 159–168.

Heim, Irene. 1982. The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases: University

of Massachussets, Amherst dissertation. [Distributed by GLSA].

Iatridou, Sabine. 1991. Topics in Conditionals. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.

Isaacs, James & Kyle Rawlins. 2008. Conditional questions. Journal of Semantics


Karttunen, Lauri. 1974. Presupposition and linguistic context. Theoretical Linguistics

(1/2). 182–194.

Kaufmann, Stefan. 2000. Dynamic context management. In S. Kaufmann M. Faller

& M. Pauly (eds.), Formalizing the Dynamics of Information, Stanford, CA:


Kratzer, Angelika. 1981. The notional category of modality. In Hans-Jürgen

Eikmeyer & Hannes Rieser (eds.), Words, Worlds, and Contexts, 38–74. Berlin:

Walter de Gruyter.

Kratzer, Angelika. 1991. Modality. In A. von Stechow & D. Wunderlich (eds.), Semantics:

An iternational handbook of contemporary research, 639–650. Berlin:

de Gruyter.

Lewis, David. 1988. Relevant impliation. Theoria 54. 161–237.

Ramsey, F. P. 1931. General propositions and causality. In R. Braithwaite (ed.), The

Foundations of Mathematics: Collected Papers of Frank P. Ramsey, 237–255.

London: Routledge.

van Rooij, Robert. 2007. Strengthening conditional presuppositions. Journal of

Semantics 24. 289–304.

Siegel, Muffy. 2006. Biscuit conditionals: Quantification over potential literal acts.

Linguistics and Philosophy 29(2). 167 – 203.

Stalnaker, Robert. 1968. A theory of conditionals. In N. Resher (ed.), Studies in

Logical Theory, Oxford: Blackwell.

Velissaratou, Sophia. 2000. Conditional questions and which-interrogatives. University

of Amsterdam, ILLC Publications MA thesis.

Veltman, Frank. 1996. Defaults in update semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic

(3). 221–261.