Modelling the question-statement opposition in Slavic languages (QueSlav)

极性疑问句及其亲属--不同类型的偏见疑问句和修辞疑问句--近年来在理论和实验语义学和语用学中得到了广泛的讨论。QueSlav项目希望通过研究斯拉夫语言提供的复杂的经验景观来促进这一辩论。用于区分陈述句和极性疑问句的编码策略来自各种语法领域--从句法和词法，到话语和语气词，再到韵律和语调。这些不同的策略在语言内部和语言之间的使用方式存在着相当大的差异，无论它们是强制性的还是可选的，以及它们产生了什么样的意义。由于存在一些边缘性的情况，如陈述性问题（具有陈述形式的问题）、修辞性问题（具有疑问形式的陈述）和偏见性问题（表达说话者的回答期望），这一问题变得更加复杂。该项目的重点是语言，尽管他们的谱系接近，利用一系列的问题编码策略，包括动词/助词的位置（捷克语），粒子的使用（波兰语，俄语），动词的韵律突出位置（俄语），以及边界音调的使用（所有语言）。此外，所调查的语言有丰富的剧目的话语粒子，极性项目，和问题的标签，往往是敏感的声明-问题（或声明-疑问）的区别，以及不同的偏见推断，并可用于诊断的相关属性的调查话语/句子类型。我们的主要研究问题是，表达极性或偏见意义的形式类型是否会影响所传达的语义和语用。根据原假设，问句语义具有普遍性。我们提出的竞争假设是，形式的类型与不同的语义相关。句法策略--这是由假设更根深蒂固的语法系统--导致更具体的语义比韵律策略，这反过来又表现出更强的依赖于语用和语境线索。因此，极性问题被用来作为一个窗口，进入语义-语用划分的一般问题。我们解决这个理论问题的方法显然是经验主义的。我们计划进行一系列的实验研究，研究极性问题的可接受性、离线和在线管理、它们的答案以及它们的上下文偏见。除了通知当前的理论，我们希望达到更好地理解极性问题的形成和偏见的问题在斯拉夫语，促进实验语义/语用方法一般和有助于更充分的跨语言类型学的极性问题。

The area of polar questions and their kin -- different types of bias and rhetorical questions -- has recently been intensively discussed in theoretical and experimental semantics and pragmatics. The QueSlav project hopes to contribute to this debate by looking at the complex empirical landscape offered by Slavic languages. The strategies used for encoding the distinction between statements and polar questions come from a variety of grammatical areas -- from syntax and morphology, through discourse and modal particles, to prosody and intonation. There is considerable intra- and cross-linguistic variation in how these different strategies are used, whether they are obligatory or optional, and what kinds of meanings they give rise to. The matter is further complicated by the existence of borderline cases such as declarative questions (questions with a declarative form), rhetorical questions (statements with an interrogative form), and bias questions (expressing speaker's answer expectations). The project focuses on languages which, despite their genealogical closeness, make use of a whole range of question-encoding strategies, including sentence-initial verb/auxiliary placement (Czech), use of particles (Polish, Russian), placement of prosodic prominence on the verb (Russian), and use of boundary tones (all languages). In addition, the languages under investigation have a rich repertoire of discourse particles, polarity items, and question tags which are often sensitive to the statement--question (or declarative--interrogative) distinction, as well as different bias inferences, and which can be exploited for diagnosing the relevant properties of the investigated utterance/sentence types. Our leading research question is whether the type of form used for the expression of polar or bias meanings influences the conveyed semantics and pragmatics. According to the null hypothesis, question semantics is universal. The competing hypothesis we put forth is that the type of form correlates with different semantics. Syntactic strategies -- which are by assumption more deeply entrenched in the grammatical system -- lead to more specified semantics than prosodic strategies, which in turn exhibit stronger reliance on pragmatic and contextual cues. Polar questions are thus used as a window into the general issue of the semantics--pragmatics divide. Our approach to addressing the theoretical question is distinctly empirical. We plan on a series of experimental studies of acceptability, offline and online management of polar questions, their answers, and their contextual bias. Besides informing current theories, we wish to attain a better understanding of polar question formation and bias in questions in Slavic, to foster experimental semantic/pragmatic methods in general and to contribute to a more adequate cross-linguistic typology of polar questions.