Yasutada Sudo

Presupposition Reading Group 2026

Schedule

Meeting 1: Introduction to presupposition

  • Tuesday 14 April 2026
  • 17:30– at NINJAL
  • Reading
    • Beaver & Geurts (2024) Presupposition. In Zalta & Nodelman (eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    • Romoli & Sauerland (2017) Presupposition and Acoommodation. In Barron (ed.), The Routleddge Handbook of Pragmatics, pp. 257–276.
  • We use the handout from 2018 available here

Meeting 2: Bidimensional Theory and Satisfaction Theory

  • Friday 24 April 2026
  • 15:00– at Room 1113, Bldg. 18, Komaba campus, University of Tokyo
  • Reading:
    • Schlenker (2011) Presupposition projection: Two theories of local contexts (Part I). Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(12): 848–857. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2011.00299.x
    • Heim (1983) On the projection problem for presuppositions. In Proceedings of WCCFL 2, pp. 114–125.
  • handout

Meeting 3: Quantified sentences in Satisfaction Theory

  • Thursday 30 April 2026
  • 15:00– at NINJAL
  • Reading
    • Beaver (1994) When variables don’t vary enough. In Proceedings of SALT 4, pp. 35–60. 10.3765/salt.v4i0.2467
    • Chemla (2009) Presuppositions of quantified sentences: experimental data. Natural Language Semantics, 17(4): 299–340. 10.1007/s11050-009-9043-9
  • handout

Meeting 4: Trivalent theories I

  • Thursday 21 May 2026
  • 13:00–, Shinjuku
  • Reading
    • Beaver & Kramer (2001) A partial account of presupposition projection. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 10: 147–182.
  • Other relevant papers
    • Peters (1979) A truth-conditional formulation of Karttunen’s account of presupposition. Synthese, 40: 301–316. doi: 10.1007/BF00485682
  • handout

Meeting 5: Trivalent theories II

  • Wednesday 3 June 2026
  • 13:00–, Shinjuku
  • Reading
    • Fox (2012) Presupposition projection from quantificational sentences: trivalence, local accommodation, and presupposiiton strengthening. In Caponigro & Cecchetto (eds.), From grammar to meaning: the spontaneous logicality of language, pp. 201–232. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139519328.011
    • George (2008) A new predictive theory of presupposition projection. In Proceedings of SALT 18, pp. 358–375. doi: 10.3765/salt.v18i0.2472
  • same handout as last time

Meeting 6: The Proviso Problem

  • Wednesday 8 July 2026
  • Reading
    • Mandlkern (2016) A note on the architecture of presupposition. Semantics & Pragmatics, 9(13): 1–24. doi: 10.3765/sp.9.13
    • Mandelkern (2016) Dissatisfaction Theory. In Proceedings of SALT 26, pp. 391–416. doi: 10.3765/salt.v26i0.3804
  • Other relevant papers
    • Singh (2007) Formal alternatives as a solution to the proviso problem. In Proceedings of SALT 17, pp. 264–281. doi: 10.3765/salt.v17i0.2960
    • Schlenker (2011) The proviso problem: a note. Natural Language Semantics, 19: 395–422. doi: 10.1007/s11050-011-9072-z
  • handout

Meeting 7: Presuppositions in attitude reports

  • Thursday 8 October 2026
  • Reading
    • Heim (1992) Presupposition projection and the semantics of attitude verbs. Journal of Semantics, 9(3): 183–221. doi: 10.1093/jos/9.3.183
    • Sudo (2014) Presupposition satisfaction in attitude contexts. In Crnič & Sauerland (eds.), The Art and Craft of Semantics, pp. 175–199. link
    • Mandelkern (2016) Dissatisfaction Theory. In Proceedings of SALT 26, pp. 391–416. doi: 10.3765/salt.v26i0.3804
  • handout

Meeting 8: Explanatory theories of presupposition projection I: Trivalent and Transparency Theories

  • Reading
    • Schlenker (2008) Be Articulate! A pragmatic theory of presupposition projection. Theoretical Linguistics, 34(3): 157–212. doi: 0.1515/THLI.2008.013
  • handout

Meeting 9: Explanatory theories of presupposition projection II: Deriving local contexts

  • Reading
    • Schlenker (2009) Local contexts. Semantics and Pragmatics, 2(3): 1–78. doi: 10.3765/sp.2.3
  • handout

Meeting 10: Explanatory theories of presupposition projection III: Symmetric dynamic semantics

  • Reading
    • Rothschild (2011) Explaining presupposition projection with dynamic semantics. Semantics and Pragmatics, 4(3): 1–43. doi: 10.3765/sp.4.3
  • handout

Meeting 11: Symmetric and asymmetric connectives

  • Reading
    • Chemla & Schlenker (2012) Incremental vs. symmetric accounts of presupposition projection: an experimental approach. Natural Language Semantics, 20(2): 177–226. doi: 10.1007/s11050-012-9080-7
    • Mandelkern, Zehr, Romoli & Schwarz (2020) We’ve discovered that projection across conjunction si asymmetric (and it is!). Linguistics and Philosophy, 43: 473–514. doi: 10.1007/s10988-019-09276-5
    • Kalomoiros & Schwarz (2024) Presupposition projection from ‘and’ vs. ‘or’: Experimental data and theoretical implications. Journal of Semantics, 41(3–4): 331–372. 10.1093/jos/ffae011
  • handout

Meeting 12: Presupposition Triggering

  • Reading
    • Abrusán (2011a) Predicting the presuppositions of soft triggers. Linguistics and Philosophy, 34: 491–535. doi: 10.1007/s10988-012-9108-y
    • Abrusán (2011b)
    • Abrusán (2016)
    • Schlenker (2021) Triggering presuppositions. Glossa