Jennifer Rau

[...]

In this paper, I compare finite and infinite complements embedded under predict ate of a class I call influence predicates, for instance befehlen (order), erlauben (allow), zwingen (force), ermöglichen (enable). They share the property that under some conditions, modal verbs in the complements are semantically redundant. I assume that their core meaning provides a causal operator and a modal operator modifying the embedded proposition. Empirical studies show that with regard to the redundancy of point at a fundamental difference between finite and infinite complements. Though both are propositional, only infinite complements are modally dependent from their matrix predicate while finite clauses are optionally semantically independent.

This paper investigates the lexical distinctness of factive vs. non-factive predicates. It is shown that besides semi-factives, all factive classes have a non-factive reading which arises for pragmatic reasons when the factive reading is excluded due to a presupposition failure. A study which tested the acceptability of test samples containing presupposition failure under factives provides evidence that there is a lexical re-interpretation available for all factives which puts them close to attitude predicates. Using a satisfaction approach for the interpretation of factives as in Heim (1992), which examines the definedness conditions for presuppositions at local contexts, it is shown that this lexical re-interpretation changes the context necessary to satisfy the presupposition from a local context to the set of a holder's beliefs.