Search

This work introduces a subset of informational features (termed core intentional features ), different from standard pragmatic features such as topic and focus. Adopting the basic tenets of the Minimalist program, core intentional features are defined as edge features which sit in the relevant phases and are subject to parametric variation. They are assumed to drive the derivation of the sentence so that it constitutes an intentionally-adequate object (i.e. a categorical or a thetic statement) even in the absence of a particular communicative situation. The paper specifically focuses on one of these features, [DI] ( discourse intention ), and on how it determines the eventual position of the subject in a discourse-prominent language such as Spanish. A preliminary distinction is made between sentences that inaugurate the discourse (d-sentences) and sentences which are integrated in a particular context (context-dependent sentences). It is argued that the SV/VS order in Spanish follows from the conditions of valuation of [DI] in each case; in particular, valuation of [DI] in d-sentences will be a matter of structural and semantic prominence whereas in context-dependent sentences it will depend on pragmatic conditions. The paper also addresses a number of significant contrasts in the much-debated issue of the placement of the subject in Spanish, which receive a principled explanation under the theory of core intentional features proposed here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• All uses of the Spanish future tense share a common feature: "echoing the ground". • Different uses of the Spanish future tense display different levels of subjectivity. • Evidentiality, tense and modality-related elements can be found in the future tense. The paper examines all uses of the Spanish future tense (the HABLARÉ paradigm) from a cognitive perspective and analyses in detail the level of subjectivity displayed and the relationship to the ground. It is claimed that these uses share a common feature: the echo of the ground (the speaker or the communication situation). The modal, evidential and temporal elements of the ground are presented in a new light, underlining their inherent interconnection. It is proposed that a unified account for all uses of what is traditionally called the "future tense" can be found only when all these elements are taken into account, thus arguing against approaches that associate this paradigm exclusively with temporality, modality or evidentiality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]