ESD Test Suite Examples

  Chase Browne!
  Don't you chase Browne!
  Let's chase Browne!

Linguistic Characterization

Imperatives form a syntactically distinct type of clause, leaving the subject unexpressed, that are characteristically used to issue commands or requests, i.e. have a directive interpretation (which arguably is

ERS Fingerprints

The eventuality introduced by the imperative verb has a marked sentence force and is further constrained to the present tense.

  pron[ARG0 x {PERS 2}]
  [ARG0 e {SF comm, TENSE pres}, ARG1 x]

Unless the syntactic subject is overtly expressed, the ERG will insert a second-person ‘zero’ pronoun (marked as [PRONTYPE zero_pron]). If we were to include this variable property in the fingerprint of imperatives, we would have to distinguish two sub-phenomena: imperatives with or without an overt subject.

Interactions

Reflections

  • Be registered before the deadline!
  • Shave yourself!
  • You mind your own business!
  • Nobody move!
  • Kim, you be umpire please!

The 1212 ERG has no directive analysis for imperatives with overt subjects. While these may at times look like vocatives, H&P suggest the examples above as clear instances of imperative subjects and further argue that there are intonation contrasts (corresponding to the use of a comma, following a vocative) that distinguish the two interpretations of e.g.

  • Someone in the back row(,) please turn on the fan!

Open Questions

There are a few minor questions related to the analysis of imperatives, as well as one question that is of a more principled nature. First, which of the variable properties of the event except SF should be considered part of the analysis of imperatives? Are they actually tensed (although syntactically always constructed using base-form verbs), and if so, on what basis do we mark imperatives as present tense? By and large, we reserve short, unintrusive names for variable properties and values, so that PRONTYPE and zero_pron stand out a little; seeing there is ‘refl’ already, should we shorten the other two to ‘std’ and ‘zero’? Finally, H&P argue that ‘directive’ (rather than ‘command’) is a better, more encompassing name for the broad range of illocutionary forces associated with imperatives.

More fundamentally, what is the benefit of ‘hallucinating’ a zero pronoun subject? Unless we can give an argument for making explicit the understood addressee, a principle of parsimony would speak in favor of leaving the unexpressed argument genuinely unbound.

Grammar Version

  • The above fingerprint is against 1212, but the analysis of imperatives has been stable for many years.

More Information

Last update: 2015-06-04 by EmilyBender [edit]