|
|
THE TWO MEANINGS OF 'DON'T WAIT'
Lauri Karttunen
Sponsored by the Stanford Humanities Center/Mellon Foundation
Graduate Research Program
Karttunen 1971 and Nairn et al. present a semantic classification of
verbs that take infinitival complements. Two-way implicative verbs
such as “manage” and “fail” yield entailments both in affirmative and
negative contexts: “Ed managed to solve the problem” and “Ed didn’t
fail to solve the problem” both entail that Ed solved the problem.
One-way implicatives such as “force” yield positive entailments in
positive contexts and no entailments in negative contexts,
possibility modals such as “be able” yield negative entailments in
negative contexts. There are a few verbs such as “hesitate” that
yield positive entailments in negative contexts. For example, “Ed
didn’t hesitate to voice his opinion” entails that Ed voiced his
opinion.
The verb “wait” is a curious case because it does not fall into any
of the previously identified semantic categories. Sentences such as
“Mr. Schiavo didn’t wait to call for help” can be understood in two
ways. If the next sentence is “He left the scene in a hurry”, it is
clear that Mr. Schiavo did not call for help. The other meaning can
be flushed out with the continuation “If he hadn’t dialed 911
immediately, Terry Schiavo would have died that day.” In general, the
construction NOT WAIT TO X is systematically ambiguous. It means
either NO X or X IMMEDIATELY.
It may be the case that the ambiguity is syntactic. Although I have
not found any examples in the wild, it is possible that syntactically
“wait” can take two optional infinitival complements, schematically,
“wait (to A) (to B)” where A temporally precedes B. For example,
“Neil didn’t wait to take off his coat to start playing with the
train.” On this account, the ambiguity of NOT WAIT TO X is due to
the fact that, without some external clue, we do not know whether X
is the A or the B clause. The NO X reading is the only available one
in cases such as “Neil didn’t wait to take off his coat before
playing with the train.” The X IMMEDIATELY reading wins in cases
such as “You should have, but you didn’t wait to open the package.”
If there is no convincing evidence for syntactic ambiguity, we need
to consider the NOT WAIT TO X construction as a purely semantic
ambiguity.
Most of the time there is no uncertainty about which of the two
alternative meanings is intended: “Don’t wait to suffer from hair
loss! Stop hair loss before it starts.” (NO X) “Don’t wait to take
advantage of Meriwest eStatements! Get these great saving benefits
today.” (X IMMEDIATELY)
The ambiguity of NOT WAIT TO X appears to be a peculiarity of
English. Native speakers of German, Dutch, French, and Finnish report
that they cannot translate the ambiguity into their languages.
References
Lauri Karttunen, The Logic of English Predicate Complement
Constructions. Indiana University Linguistics Club Publications. 1971.
Rowan Nairn, Cleo Condoravdi, and Lauri Karttunen, “Computing Local
Textual Inferences”, submission to ICoS-2006 (Inference in
Computational Semantics).
|
|