The thesis presents a way to apply process algebra to computational linguistics. We are interested in how contexts can affect or contribute to language understanding and model the phenomena as a system of communicating processes to study the interaction between them in detail. For this purpose, we turn to the pie-calculus and investigate how communicating processes may be defined. While investigating the computational grounds of communication and concurrency,we devise a graphical representation for processes to capture the structure of interaction between them. Then, we develop a logic, combinatory intuitionistic linear logic with equality relation, to specify communicating processes logically. The development enables us to study Situation Semantics with process algebra. We construct semantic objects employed in Situation Semantics in the pi-calculus and then represent them in the logic. Through the construction,we also relate Situation Semantics with the research on the information flow, Channel Theory, by conceiving of linear logic as a theory of the information flow. To show how sentences can be parsed as the result of interactions between processes, we present a concurrent chart parser encoded in the pi-calculus. We also explain how a semantic representation can be generated as a process by the parser. We conclude the thesis by comparing the framework with other approaches.

This dissertation explores the semantics and syntax of switch-reference (SR). It makes novel generalizations about the phenomenon based on two empirical sources: A broad, cross-linguistic survey of descriptive reports, and semantic fieldwork that narrowly targets the Kiowa language of Oklahoma. It shows that previous attempts at formalizing switch-reference cannot work, and offers a new theory of switch-reference that derives the facts through effects that emerge from the interaction between the syntax and the semantics. The empirical investigation results in four major findings: First, SR is introduced by its own head, instead of being parasitic to T or C. Second, switch-reference can track Austinian topic situations. Third, it must track topic situations when it is found with coordination, and it cannot do so with intensional embedded clauses. Finally, generalizations or theories based solely on the syntax are not able to account for these facts. These findings are explained by analyzing switch-reference as a pronominal head in the extended verbal projection of the embedded clause. This head introduces a relation of identity or non-identity between two arguments. One of these is in the dominant clause, the other is the highest indexed constituent in the sister of the SR head. The arguments are selected indirectly, through binding structures that are interpreted as lambda-abstraction. The clausemate argument is bound by the SR head; the properties of feature valuation derive the height constraint. The pronoun introduced by the SR head is bound by the connective. Binding by the connective results in the interpretation of the SR-marked clause as a property. This property is then ascribed to an argument in the dominant clause. This theory accounts for the generalizations, and makes fruitful predictions about other aspects of switch-reference, notably when it tracks non-referential subjects. This dissertation improves our understanding of switch-reference, of situation semantics, and of reference-tracking in general. It ties reference-tracking to contextual restriction by use of topic situations, which are anaphoric pronouns used to restrict sentential interpretation. It provides the first solid evidence of morphology sensitive to situations. In addition, the theory of switch-reference proposed here relies on independently-motivated mechanisms in the grammar. This reliance links switch-reference to other mechanisms of co-reference from inside an embedded clause, and finds a solid place for switch-reference in linguistic theory.

This thesis is an investigation of the structural and formal semantic properties of copy raising constructions in English, as well as their expletive counterparts. The first main claim is that contrary to what has been previously assumed, the perceiver of the event (i.e. the Pgoal in Asudeh & Toivonen's 2012 terms) is an obligatory syntactic and semantic argument of the matrix verb. I argue that the identification of the Pgoal is not left to pragmatics, but rather that is represented as a silent pronoun in the structure: one that picks up a logophoric antecedent. The result of this is that the material in the embedded clause is semantically interpreted with respect to the Pgoal's perspective. The second major claim of the thesis is that this perspective-sensitivity is most appropriately captured using a modal semantic framework (Kratzer, 1977, 1981 von Fintel & Heim, 2002). Specifically, I argue that each of the different copy raising verbs encodes a different accessibility relation between possible worlds or situations, while the Pgoal's information state provides the relevant domain of worlds. Using these insights, I propose truth conditions for these constructions, which ultimately are sensitive to a kind of stereotypical ordering, and account for inter-speaker variability. Finally, I discuss the anomalous class of copy raising constructions with non-thematic subjects, and argue that overlapping discourse functions may have resulted in a shift away from modal semantics in these cases. / Thesis / Master of Science (MSc) / This thesis investigates the linguistic meaning associated with the "copy raising" sentence construction, e.g. "Your cat looks like she wants to go outside." I argue that the interpretation of these sentences is dependent on establishing the individual whose perspective is conveyed in the sentence, which does not need to be the speaker. After examining the range of contexts in which various different copy raising constructions can be used, I propose an analysis of their core meaning that draws on the philosophical idea of possible worlds, and the psychological notion of stereotypicality. I also address the question of whether these constructions are related to the phenomenon of evidentiality, a property of certain languages which allows the speaker to linguistically mark the source of evidence for their claim.

Esta tese tem por objetivo discutir algumas das questões semântico- pragmáticas relacionadas com as descrições demonstrativas, especificamente aquelas ligadas aos usos dêiticos dessas expressões, os quais englobam, ao nosso ver, os usos dêiticos canônicos, os uso descritivos e os usos com referência deferida (NUNBERG, 1993, 2004; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008). Para realizar nossas análises, utilizamos a semântica de situações (KRATZER, 1989) e as noções de situação default e situa_c~ao não-default (WOLTER, 2006). Para iniciar a investigação, no Capítulo 1, retomamos conceitos da abordagem de Kaplan (1989), uma das pioneiras em relação ao es- tudo dos demonstrativos. Além disso, também expomos os principais aspectos da teoria de Wolter (2006) { uma abordagem semântico- pragmática elegante que tenta explicar diferentes usos das descrições demonstrativas através da semântica de situações. Utilizamos a teoria de Wolter (2006) como parâmetro de comparação pela sua importância e simplicidade em relação as outras abordagens. Por isso, a partir da abordagem da autora levantamos algumas questões no primeiro capítulo, as quais nortearam nossa investigação ao longo da tese. No Capítulo 2, detemo-nos no papel da demonstração nos usos dêiticos das descrições demonstrativas. Nossa investigação procurava entender se apontamentos (gestos físicos que acompanham e são importantes para a determinação do valor semântico das expressões dêiticas) são elemento\essenciais", no sentido de serem convencionalmente ligados às descrições demonstrativas. Concluímos que demonstrações e saliência são fatores ”não-essenciais" da semântica das descrições demonstrativas, porque eles podem ser substituídos por outros elementos dado um contexto adequado, ponto de vista que se aproxima da abordagem de Wolter (2006). No Capítulo 3, buscamos elucidar a influência e/ou a função semântica do conteúdo descritivo adicional na interpretação das descrições demonstrativas dêiticas. Tendo como pano de fundo a abordagem de Wolter (2006), suas noções de situação default e de situação não- default e suas análises dos \usos descritivos W" ou NDNS (KING, 2001), verificamos que a ideia da autora de que o material adicional introduz uma variável de situação extra na forma lógica _e uma assunção desnecessária. Afirmamos isso, com base na constatação de que o conteúdo descritivo adicional é o ultimo e o mais poderoso meio de restrição do domínio de referentes das descrições demonstrativas, i.e., ele é o elemento que assegura a unicidade quando outros elementos { apontamento, saliência, informação espacial do determinante não são suficientes. No Capítulo 4, analisamos os usos descritivos e os usos com referência deferida das descrições demonstrativas. Buscamos verificar a natureza e a importância do componente relacional, proposto por Nunberg (1993) e formalizado por Elbourne (2005), na semântica/pragmática dessas expressões. Concluímos, após análises empíricas, que o componente relacional é resultado de muitos processos pragmáticos, o que torna sua representação demasiadamente complexa e, muitas vezes, não completamente fiel aos processos envolvidos. Os usos descritivos e com referência deferida também serviram para elucidarmos o nível de semelhança/diferença semântico-pragmática das descrições demonstrativas e das descrições definidas. Chegamos à conclusão que devido às diferenças nos processos de interpretação desses dois grupos de expressões, aspecto evidenciado pelos usos descritivos e com referência deferida, elas não devem ser consideradas expressões similares do ponto de vista semântico-pragmático, apesar de alguns autores afirmarem o contrário (WOLTER, 2006; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008, entre outros). / This dissertation aims to discuss some of the main points about seman- tics and pragmatics of demonstratives descriptions, speci cally those related to deictic uses of these expressions, which in our point of view include canonical deictic uses, descriptive uses and, uses with deferred reference (NUNBERG, 1993, 2004; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008). We use the situations semantics (KRATZER, 1989) and conceptions of default situation and non-default situation (WOLTER, 2006) to work in our analyzes. To begin the investigation, in Chapter 1, we recall concepts from Kaplan's approach (1989), one of the pioneers in relation to the study of demonstratives. In addition, we also discuss the main aspects of Wolter's theory (2006); an elegant semantic-pragmatic approach that tries to explain different uses of demonstrative descriptions through situation semantics. Wolter (2006) is our parameter of comparison for its importance and simplicity. Because of this, in this chapter we also raise some questions related to Wolter's theory which guide our investigation throughout the thesis. The purpose of Chapter 2 is analyzing the role of demonstration in deictic uses of demonstrative descriptions. Our investigation tryes to explain whether pointings (physical gestures associated to deictic ex- pressions and important to semantic value determination) are \essential elements" in the sense of being conventionally related to demonstrative descriptions. We conclude that demonstrations and salience are \non- essential" elements to the semantics of the demonstrative descriptions, mainly because they can be replaced by other elements given a suitable context. In Chapter 3, our focus is to elucidate the semantic in uence and/or the semantic function of additional descriptive content in the interpretation of deictic demonstrative descriptions. Our investigation is based on Wolter's approach (2006), her concepts of default and non-default situations and her analysis of \W descriptive uses" or NDNS's uses (KING, 2001) { these uses are distintc from deictic uses, but they also have additional descriptive content associated with demonstrative descriptions. We conclude that Wolter's conception, in which the additional material introduces an extra situation variable in logical form, is an unnecessary assumption. We affirm this, based on examples where the additional descriptive content is the last resource and the most powerful means of restricting the domain of reference of demons- trative descriptions, i.e., it is the element that ensures the uniqueness when other elements, such as pointing, contextual salience and, spatial information of the determiner, are not enough to do this. In Chapter 4, we analyze descriptive uses and uses with deferred reference of demonstrative descriptions. We verify the nature and the importance of the relational component, proposed by Nunberg (1993) and formalized by Elbourne (2005), in the semantics / pragmatics of these expressions. We conclude, after empirical analysis, that the relational component is the result of many pragmatic processes. This complexity makes its formal representation too complicated and often not completely faithful to all the processes involved in interpretation. The descriptive uses and uses with deferred reference also contributed to elucidate the semantics / pragmatics level of similarity / difference between demonstrative descriptions and de nite descriptions. We conclude that the distinct processes of interpretation of these two groups of expressions are relevant, so they should not be considered similar expressions from the semantic-pragmatic point of view, although some authors affirm the opposite (WOLTER, 2006; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008, among others).

Donkey pronouns seem to defy the conventional categories of referential and anaphoric pronouns and hence cannot be analyzed as variables. An orthodox treatment is that donkey pronouns are semantically equivalent to definite descriptions. I argue on the contrary that donkey pronouns can be analyzed as bound variables given a distinct notion of binding. I provide a systematic comparison between the static, description-theoretic approach and Discourse Representation Theory (DRT), a representative of dynamic semantics. By exposing the inadequacy of various descriptivist theories, I motivate and argue that DRT is the better alternative. DRT is superior for being a coherent and flexible analysis of donkey pronouns, a unified analysis of pronouns in general, and an intuitively appealing model of meaning. In addition, I uncover the similarities between the situational descriptivist account and DRT. I show that when fully elaborated, the former turns out to be a notational variant of the latter. I then trace their common problems to the Lewisian assumptions of quantification and conditionals; my proposed solutions suggest non-trivial modifications to and clarifications of the underlying Lewisian framework. / text

Esta tese tem por objetivo discutir algumas das questões semântico- pragmáticas relacionadas com as descrições demonstrativas, especificamente aquelas ligadas aos usos dêiticos dessas expressões, os quais englobam, ao nosso ver, os usos dêiticos canônicos, os uso descritivos e os usos com referência deferida (NUNBERG, 1993, 2004; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008). Para realizar nossas análises, utilizamos a semântica de situações (KRATZER, 1989) e as noções de situação default e situa_c~ao não-default (WOLTER, 2006). Para iniciar a investigação, no Capítulo 1, retomamos conceitos da abordagem de Kaplan (1989), uma das pioneiras em relação ao es- tudo dos demonstrativos. Além disso, também expomos os principais aspectos da teoria de Wolter (2006) { uma abordagem semântico- pragmática elegante que tenta explicar diferentes usos das descrições demonstrativas através da semântica de situações. Utilizamos a teoria de Wolter (2006) como parâmetro de comparação pela sua importância e simplicidade em relação as outras abordagens. Por isso, a partir da abordagem da autora levantamos algumas questões no primeiro capítulo, as quais nortearam nossa investigação ao longo da tese. No Capítulo 2, detemo-nos no papel da demonstração nos usos dêiticos das descrições demonstrativas. Nossa investigação procurava entender se apontamentos (gestos físicos que acompanham e são importantes para a determinação do valor semântico das expressões dêiticas) são elemento\essenciais", no sentido de serem convencionalmente ligados às descrições demonstrativas. Concluímos que demonstrações e saliência são fatores ”não-essenciais" da semântica das descrições demonstrativas, porque eles podem ser substituídos por outros elementos dado um contexto adequado, ponto de vista que se aproxima da abordagem de Wolter (2006). No Capítulo 3, buscamos elucidar a influência e/ou a função semântica do conteúdo descritivo adicional na interpretação das descrições demonstrativas dêiticas. Tendo como pano de fundo a abordagem de Wolter (2006), suas noções de situação default e de situação não- default e suas análises dos \usos descritivos W" ou NDNS (KING, 2001), verificamos que a ideia da autora de que o material adicional introduz uma variável de situação extra na forma lógica _e uma assunção desnecessária. Afirmamos isso, com base na constatação de que o conteúdo descritivo adicional é o ultimo e o mais poderoso meio de restrição do domínio de referentes das descrições demonstrativas, i.e., ele é o elemento que assegura a unicidade quando outros elementos { apontamento, saliência, informação espacial do determinante não são suficientes. No Capítulo 4, analisamos os usos descritivos e os usos com referência deferida das descrições demonstrativas. Buscamos verificar a natureza e a importância do componente relacional, proposto por Nunberg (1993) e formalizado por Elbourne (2005), na semântica/pragmática dessas expressões. Concluímos, após análises empíricas, que o componente relacional é resultado de muitos processos pragmáticos, o que torna sua representação demasiadamente complexa e, muitas vezes, não completamente fiel aos processos envolvidos. Os usos descritivos e com referência deferida também serviram para elucidarmos o nível de semelhança/diferença semântico-pragmática das descrições demonstrativas e das descrições definidas. Chegamos à conclusão que devido às diferenças nos processos de interpretação desses dois grupos de expressões, aspecto evidenciado pelos usos descritivos e com referência deferida, elas não devem ser consideradas expressões similares do ponto de vista semântico-pragmático, apesar de alguns autores afirmarem o contrário (WOLTER, 2006; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008, entre outros). / This dissertation aims to discuss some of the main points about seman- tics and pragmatics of demonstratives descriptions, speci cally those related to deictic uses of these expressions, which in our point of view include canonical deictic uses, descriptive uses and, uses with deferred reference (NUNBERG, 1993, 2004; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008). We use the situations semantics (KRATZER, 1989) and conceptions of default situation and non-default situation (WOLTER, 2006) to work in our analyzes. To begin the investigation, in Chapter 1, we recall concepts from Kaplan's approach (1989), one of the pioneers in relation to the study of demonstratives. In addition, we also discuss the main aspects of Wolter's theory (2006); an elegant semantic-pragmatic approach that tries to explain different uses of demonstrative descriptions through situation semantics. Wolter (2006) is our parameter of comparison for its importance and simplicity. Because of this, in this chapter we also raise some questions related to Wolter's theory which guide our investigation throughout the thesis. The purpose of Chapter 2 is analyzing the role of demonstration in deictic uses of demonstrative descriptions. Our investigation tryes to explain whether pointings (physical gestures associated to deictic ex- pressions and important to semantic value determination) are \essential elements" in the sense of being conventionally related to demonstrative descriptions. We conclude that demonstrations and salience are \non- essential" elements to the semantics of the demonstrative descriptions, mainly because they can be replaced by other elements given a suitable context. In Chapter 3, our focus is to elucidate the semantic in uence and/or the semantic function of additional descriptive content in the interpretation of deictic demonstrative descriptions. Our investigation is based on Wolter's approach (2006), her concepts of default and non-default situations and her analysis of \W descriptive uses" or NDNS's uses (KING, 2001) { these uses are distintc from deictic uses, but they also have additional descriptive content associated with demonstrative descriptions. We conclude that Wolter's conception, in which the additional material introduces an extra situation variable in logical form, is an unnecessary assumption. We affirm this, based on examples where the additional descriptive content is the last resource and the most powerful means of restricting the domain of reference of demons- trative descriptions, i.e., it is the element that ensures the uniqueness when other elements, such as pointing, contextual salience and, spatial information of the determiner, are not enough to do this. In Chapter 4, we analyze descriptive uses and uses with deferred reference of demonstrative descriptions. We verify the nature and the importance of the relational component, proposed by Nunberg (1993) and formalized by Elbourne (2005), in the semantics / pragmatics of these expressions. We conclude, after empirical analysis, that the relational component is the result of many pragmatic processes. This complexity makes its formal representation too complicated and often not completely faithful to all the processes involved in interpretation. The descriptive uses and uses with deferred reference also contributed to elucidate the semantics / pragmatics level of similarity / difference between demonstrative descriptions and de nite descriptions. We conclude that the distinct processes of interpretation of these two groups of expressions are relevant, so they should not be considered similar expressions from the semantic-pragmatic point of view, although some authors affirm the opposite (WOLTER, 2006; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008, among others).

Esta tese tem por objetivo discutir algumas das questões semântico- pragmáticas relacionadas com as descrições demonstrativas, especificamente aquelas ligadas aos usos dêiticos dessas expressões, os quais englobam, ao nosso ver, os usos dêiticos canônicos, os uso descritivos e os usos com referência deferida (NUNBERG, 1993, 2004; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008). Para realizar nossas análises, utilizamos a semântica de situações (KRATZER, 1989) e as noções de situação default e situa_c~ao não-default (WOLTER, 2006). Para iniciar a investigação, no Capítulo 1, retomamos conceitos da abordagem de Kaplan (1989), uma das pioneiras em relação ao es- tudo dos demonstrativos. Além disso, também expomos os principais aspectos da teoria de Wolter (2006) { uma abordagem semântico- pragmática elegante que tenta explicar diferentes usos das descrições demonstrativas através da semântica de situações. Utilizamos a teoria de Wolter (2006) como parâmetro de comparação pela sua importância e simplicidade em relação as outras abordagens. Por isso, a partir da abordagem da autora levantamos algumas questões no primeiro capítulo, as quais nortearam nossa investigação ao longo da tese. No Capítulo 2, detemo-nos no papel da demonstração nos usos dêiticos das descrições demonstrativas. Nossa investigação procurava entender se apontamentos (gestos físicos que acompanham e são importantes para a determinação do valor semântico das expressões dêiticas) são elemento\essenciais", no sentido de serem convencionalmente ligados às descrições demonstrativas. Concluímos que demonstrações e saliência são fatores ”não-essenciais" da semântica das descrições demonstrativas, porque eles podem ser substituídos por outros elementos dado um contexto adequado, ponto de vista que se aproxima da abordagem de Wolter (2006). No Capítulo 3, buscamos elucidar a influência e/ou a função semântica do conteúdo descritivo adicional na interpretação das descrições demonstrativas dêiticas. Tendo como pano de fundo a abordagem de Wolter (2006), suas noções de situação default e de situação não- default e suas análises dos \usos descritivos W" ou NDNS (KING, 2001), verificamos que a ideia da autora de que o material adicional introduz uma variável de situação extra na forma lógica _e uma assunção desnecessária. Afirmamos isso, com base na constatação de que o conteúdo descritivo adicional é o ultimo e o mais poderoso meio de restrição do domínio de referentes das descrições demonstrativas, i.e., ele é o elemento que assegura a unicidade quando outros elementos { apontamento, saliência, informação espacial do determinante não são suficientes. No Capítulo 4, analisamos os usos descritivos e os usos com referência deferida das descrições demonstrativas. Buscamos verificar a natureza e a importância do componente relacional, proposto por Nunberg (1993) e formalizado por Elbourne (2005), na semântica/pragmática dessas expressões. Concluímos, após análises empíricas, que o componente relacional é resultado de muitos processos pragmáticos, o que torna sua representação demasiadamente complexa e, muitas vezes, não completamente fiel aos processos envolvidos. Os usos descritivos e com referência deferida também serviram para elucidarmos o nível de semelhança/diferença semântico-pragmática das descrições demonstrativas e das descrições definidas. Chegamos à conclusão que devido às diferenças nos processos de interpretação desses dois grupos de expressões, aspecto evidenciado pelos usos descritivos e com referência deferida, elas não devem ser consideradas expressões similares do ponto de vista semântico-pragmático, apesar de alguns autores afirmarem o contrário (WOLTER, 2006; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008, entre outros). / This dissertation aims to discuss some of the main points about seman- tics and pragmatics of demonstratives descriptions, speci cally those related to deictic uses of these expressions, which in our point of view include canonical deictic uses, descriptive uses and, uses with deferred reference (NUNBERG, 1993, 2004; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008). We use the situations semantics (KRATZER, 1989) and conceptions of default situation and non-default situation (WOLTER, 2006) to work in our analyzes. To begin the investigation, in Chapter 1, we recall concepts from Kaplan's approach (1989), one of the pioneers in relation to the study of demonstratives. In addition, we also discuss the main aspects of Wolter's theory (2006); an elegant semantic-pragmatic approach that tries to explain different uses of demonstrative descriptions through situation semantics. Wolter (2006) is our parameter of comparison for its importance and simplicity. Because of this, in this chapter we also raise some questions related to Wolter's theory which guide our investigation throughout the thesis. The purpose of Chapter 2 is analyzing the role of demonstration in deictic uses of demonstrative descriptions. Our investigation tryes to explain whether pointings (physical gestures associated to deictic ex- pressions and important to semantic value determination) are \essential elements" in the sense of being conventionally related to demonstrative descriptions. We conclude that demonstrations and salience are \non- essential" elements to the semantics of the demonstrative descriptions, mainly because they can be replaced by other elements given a suitable context. In Chapter 3, our focus is to elucidate the semantic in uence and/or the semantic function of additional descriptive content in the interpretation of deictic demonstrative descriptions. Our investigation is based on Wolter's approach (2006), her concepts of default and non-default situations and her analysis of \W descriptive uses" or NDNS's uses (KING, 2001) { these uses are distintc from deictic uses, but they also have additional descriptive content associated with demonstrative descriptions. We conclude that Wolter's conception, in which the additional material introduces an extra situation variable in logical form, is an unnecessary assumption. We affirm this, based on examples where the additional descriptive content is the last resource and the most powerful means of restricting the domain of reference of demons- trative descriptions, i.e., it is the element that ensures the uniqueness when other elements, such as pointing, contextual salience and, spatial information of the determiner, are not enough to do this. In Chapter 4, we analyze descriptive uses and uses with deferred reference of demonstrative descriptions. We verify the nature and the importance of the relational component, proposed by Nunberg (1993) and formalized by Elbourne (2005), in the semantics / pragmatics of these expressions. We conclude, after empirical analysis, that the relational component is the result of many pragmatic processes. This complexity makes its formal representation too complicated and often not completely faithful to all the processes involved in interpretation. The descriptive uses and uses with deferred reference also contributed to elucidate the semantics / pragmatics level of similarity / difference between demonstrative descriptions and de nite descriptions. We conclude that the distinct processes of interpretation of these two groups of expressions are relevant, so they should not be considered similar expressions from the semantic-pragmatic point of view, although some authors affirm the opposite (WOLTER, 2006; ELBOURNE, 2005, 2008, among others).