Do modals take propositions or sets of propositions? Evidence from Japanese darou

Wataru Uegaki, Floris Roelofsen


The Japanese modal particle darou can take either a declarative or an interrogative prejacent (Hara 2006; Hara & Davis 2013). We point out, however, that its interrogative-embedding use cannot be reduced to its declarative-embedding use. This is problematic under the standard assumption that modal operators always apply to propositions, but not under more recent proposals which take modal op- erators to apply to sets of propositions. We develop a detailed account of darou, capturing its non-reductive nature as well as its puzzling interaction with intonation (Hara 2015).

Full Text:



Blutner, Reinhard. 2000. Some aspects of optimality in natural language interpretation. Journal of Semantics 17(3). 189–216.

Ciardelli, Ivano. 2016. Questions in logic: Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam dissertation.

Ciardelli, Ivano & Floris Roelofsen. 2015. Inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic. Synthese 192(6). 1643–1687.

Ciardelli, Ivano & Floris Roelofsen. 2018. An inquisitive perspective on modals and quantifiers. Annual Review of Linguistics 4. 129–149. doi:10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011817-045626.

Dayal, Veneeta. 1996. Locality in wh-quantification: questions and relative clauses in Hindi. Kluwer Academic Publishers. doi:10.1007/978-94-011-4808-5.

Elliott, Patrick D., Nathan Klinedinst, Yasutada Sudo & Wataru Uegaki. 2017. Predicates of relevance and theories of question embedding. Journal of Semantics 34(3). 547–554. doi:10.1093/jos/ffx008.

George, B.R. 2011. Question embedding and the semantics of answers: University of California, Los Angeles dissertation.

George, B.R. 2013. Knowing-wh, mention-some readings, and non-reducibility. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 2(2). 166–177.

Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2002. Intonation and interpretation: phonetics and phonology. In The 1st international conference on speech prosody, 47–57.

Hamblin, Charles L. 1973. Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Lan- guage 10(1). 41–53.

Hara, Yurie. 2006. Grammar of knowledge representation: Japanese discourse items at interfaces: University of Delaware dissertation.

Hara, Yurie. 2015. Darou ka: an interplay of bias, sentence types, and prosody. Ms., City University of Hong Kong, available online at Semantics Archive.

Hara, Yurie. 2018. Darou as an entertain modal: an inquisitive approach. To appear in the Proceedings of the 25th Japanese/Korean linguistics conference.

Hara, Yurie & Chris Davis. 2013. Darou as a deictic context shifter. In Kazuko Yatsushiro & Uli Sauerland (eds.), Formal Approaches to Japanese Linguistics

, 41–56. MITWPL.

Heim, Irene. 1994. Interrogative semantics and Karttunen’s semantics for know. In R. Buchalla & A. Mittwoch (eds.), The proceedings of the ninth annual conference and the workshop on discourse of the Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics, Jerusalem: Academon.

Horn, Laurence R. 1984. Towards a new taxonomy of pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicatures. In D. Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning, form, and use in context, 11–42. Georgetown University Press.

Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1. 3–44. doi:10.1007/bf00351935.

Karttunen, Lauri & Stanley Peters. 1976. What indirect questions conventionally implicate. In Cls 12: Papers from the twelfth regional meeting, 351–368. Chicago Linguistic Society.

Karttunen, Lauri & Stanley Peters. 1979. Conventional implicature. Syntax and semantics 11. 1–56.

Katzir, Roni. 2007. Structurally-defined alternatives. Linguistics and Philosophy 30(6). 669–690. doi:10.1007/s10988-008-9029-y.

Kratzer, Angelika. 1981. The notional category of modality. In H.J. Eikmeyer & H. Rieser (eds.), Words, worlds, and contexts: New approaches in word semantics, 38–74. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Lahiri, Utpal. 2000. Lexical selection and quantificational variability in embedded interrogatives. Linguistics and Philosophy 23(4). 325–389.

Levinson, Stephen. 2000. Presumptive meanings. MIT press.

Morimoto, Junko. 1994. Hanashite no shukan o arawasu fukushi ni tsuite [On adverbs that represent the speaker’s subjectivity]. Tokyo: Kuroshio.

Roelofsen, Floris & Donka F. Farkas. 2015. Polarity particle responses as a window onto the interpretation of questions and assertions. Language 91(2). 359–414.

Spector, Benjamin & Paul Egré. 2015. A uniform semantics for embedded inter- rogatives: An answer, not necessarily the answer. Synthese 192(6). 1729–1784.

Sugimura, Yasushi. 2004. Gaizensei o arawasu fukushi to bunmatsu no modality keishiki [Adverbs of probability and sentence-final modality expressions]. Gengo Bunka Ronshuu 25(2). 90–111.

Takubo, Yukinori. 2001. Gendai nihongo ni okeru nishu no modal jodoshi ni tsuite [On two kinds of modal auxiliaries in Modern Japanese]. Kannichigo Bungaku Ronsou 1003–1025.

Theiler, Nadine, Floris Roelofsen & Maria Aloni. 2018. A uniform semantics for declarative and interrogative complements. Journal of Semantics 35(3). 409–


Uegaki, Wataru. 2015. Interpreting questions under attitudes: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation.

Westera, Matthijs. 2017. Exhaustivity and intonation: a unified theory: Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam dissertation.


Copyright (c) 2018 Wataru Uegaki, Floris Roelofsen