The Connection Between Antecedent and Consequent in Tagalog Conditionals

Author: 
Hidalgo, Araceli C.
Year: 
1978

     We describe . . . the various types of lung-sentences in Tagalog and make an initial identification of those we consider as conditional sentences, using as a criterion a particular context of use. It is also in this chapter that we examine the conventional content of the word kung. There are a number of problems raised against the semantic analysis provided by classical logic for conditional sentences. Some of these are presented . . . along with an examination of H.P. Grice's (1968) innovative attempt to explain away one that has been persistently raised since the time of the Stoics: the connection between antecedent and consequent of the conditional sentence. This is one of the problems that this dissertation is particularly concerned with. The other problem is the contention that counterfactuals differ in semantic properties from indicative conditionals."
     In addition, "the differences between the subjunctive conditional and the indicative conditional in Tagalog are examined. In particular, the restrictions on the form of the conditionals in terms of tense-aspect sequences in the antecedent and the consequent are presented. It is proposed that the differences in form between subjunctive conditionals and indicative conditionals relate to a difference in transparency of the connection between antecedent and consequent." Then, "we examine the similarities between the subjunctive conditional and the indicative conditional. First, we argue that the subjunctive conditional, like the indicative conditional, does not presuppose falsity of the antecedent nor of the consequent. Second, we specify and characterize informally the notion of connection contained in both subjunctive conditionals and indicative conditionals and demonstrate that for comparable subjunctives and indicatives (i.e., those that have identical predicate forms) the connection between antecedent and consequent could be identical in content. We further argue that for the subjunctive conditionals, the connection is a part of its conventional content." The next chapter "is a further examination of the similarities between the subjunctive conditional and the indicative conditional. We argue that subjunctives and indicatives behave alike with respect to certain semantic properties and demonstrate that the variation with respect to these semantic properties relates either to the type of connection between antecedent and consequent or to the direction of inference in the conditional sentence. Furthermore, we show that even for some indicative conditionals, the connection between antecedent and consequent cannot be dismissed as a conversational implicature. The last chapter presents the conclusions of the study.