Publications

Abstract

This paper is an attempt to show that given the available observations on the behaviour of negation and presuppositions there is no simpler explanation than to assume that natural language has two distinct negation operators, the minimal negation which preserves presuppositions and the radical negation which does not. The three-valued logic emerging from this distinction, and especially its model-theory, are discussed in detail. It is, however, stressed that the logic itself is only epiphenomenal on the structures and processes involved in the interpretation of sentences. Horn (1985) brings new observations to bear, related with metalinguistic uses of negation, and proposes a “pragmatic” ambiguity in negation to the effect that in descriptive (or “straight”) use negation is the classical bivalent operator, whereas in metalinguistic use it is non-truthfunctional but only pragmatic. Van der Sandt (to appear) accepts Horn's observations but proposes a different solution: he proposes an ambiguity in the argument clause of the negation operator (which, for him, too, is classical and bivalent), according to whether the negation takes only the strictly asserted proposition or covers also the presuppositions, the (scalar) implicatures and other implications (in particular of style and register) of the sentence expressing that proposition. These theories are discussed at some length. The three-valued analysis is defended on the basis of partly new observations, which do not seem to fit either Horn's or Van der Sandt's solution. It is then placed in the context of incremental discourse semantics, where both negations are seen to do the job of keeping increments out of the discourse domain, though each does so in its own specific way. The metalinguistic character of the radical negation is accounted for in terms of the incremental apparatus. The metalinguistic use of negation in denials of implicatures or implications of style and register is regarded as a particular form of minimal negation, where the negation denies not the proposition itself but the appropriateness of the use of an expression in it. This appropriateness negation is truth-functional and not pragmatic, but it applies to a particular, independently motivated, analysis of the argument clause. The ambiguity of negation in natural language is different from the ordinary type of ambiguity found in the lexicon. Normally, lexical ambiguities are idiosyncratic, highly contingent, and unpredictable from language to language. In the case of negation, however, the two meanings are closely related, both truth-conditionally and incrementally. Moreover, the mechanism of discourse incrementation automatically selects the right meaning. These properties are taken to provide a sufficient basis for discarding the, otherwise valid, objection that negation is unlikely to be ambiguous because no known language makes a lexical distinction between the two readings.

Abstract

An introductory study of the perception of stochastically specified events is reported. The initial problem was to determine whether the perceiver can split visual input data of this kind into random and determined components. The inability of subjects to do so with the stimulus material used (a filmlike sequence of dot patterns), led to the more general question of how subjects code this kind of visual material. To meet the difficulty of defining the subjects' responses, two experiments were designed. In both, patterns were presented as a rapid sequence of dots on a screen. The patterns were more or less disturbed by “noise,” i.e. the dots did not appear exactly at their proper places. In the first experiment the response was a rating on a semantic scale, in the second an identification from among a set of alternative patterns. The results of these experiments give some insight in the coding systems adopted by the subjects. First, noise appears to be detrimental to pattern recognition, especially to patterns with little spread. Second, this shows connections with the factors obtained from analysis of the semantic ratings, e.g. easily disturbed patterns show a large drop in the semantic regularity factor, when only a little noise is added.

Abstract

A combination of Southern blot analysis on a panel of tumor-derived somatic cell hybrids and fluorescence in situ hybridization techniques was used to map YACs, cosmids and DNA markers from the Xp11.2 region relative to the X chromosome breakpoint of the renal cell carcinoma-associated t(X;1)(p11;q21). The position of the breakpoint could be determined as follows: Xcen-OATL2-DXS146-DXS255-SYP-t(X;1)-TFE 3-OATL1-Xpter. Fluorescence in situ hybridization experiments using TFE3-containing YACs and cosmids revealed split signals indicating that the corresponding DNA inserts span the breakpoint region. Subsequent Southern blot analysis showed that a 2.3-kb EcoRI fragment which is present in all TFE3 cosmids identified, hybridizes to aberrant restriction fragments in three independent t(X;1)-positive renal cell carcinoma DNAs. The breakpoints in these tumors are not the same, but map within a region of approximately 6.5 kb. Through preparative gel electrophoresis an (X;1) chimaeric 4.4-kb EcoRI fragment could be isolated which encompasses the breakpoint region present on der(X). Preliminary characterization of this fragment revealed the presence of a 150-bp region with a strong homology to the 5' end of the mouse TFE3 cDNA in the X-chromosome part, and a 48-bp segment in the chromosome 1-derived part identical to the 5' end of a known EST (accession number R93849). These observations suggest that a fusion gene is formed between the two corresponding genes in t(X;1)(p11;q21)-positive papillary renal cell carcinomas.