Asking and answering questions is a staple of human communication. In order to answer a question effectively, a hearer must interpret the speaker's intention given the specific question asked. Wh-questions like Where can I get coffee? are underspecified for (non-)exhaustivity, i.e., how many answers the must be provided to resolve the speaker's goal. Intuitions from the semantic literature report that questions are generally exhaustive, and non-exhaustive only in the context of specific linguistic factors (e.g., the modal can, certain wh-words). To test these assumptions, we collected question paraphrase ratings for naturally occuring root questions in variable linguistic contexts. In contrast to previous claims, we find that questions are not biased for exhaustivity. However, other prior observations are supported by the data. We argue that a full account of the observed distribution of meanings must integrate discourse factors like the hearer's estimate of the speaker's goal, alongside (or subsuming the effect of) linguistic cues.

No abstract

Pinning down the semantics of questions poses a challenge for the study of meaning. Unlike most declarative statements, questions cannot be assigned a truth value. They do not assert information about the world that can be easily verified as true or false, or accepted or rejected. Instead, their function as a speech act is to interrogate, to seek information about the world. Thus a truth-conditional approach to the semantics of questions runs into a dead end. We must therefore evaluate the semantics of questions in terms of the propositions that serve as their answers.But here, a number of questions arise that shape our investigation. What counts as a suitable answer, in general or in a given discourse context? How does the variability of question types within and across the world's languages influence our theory of a unified semantics of questions? When questions are embedded under a matrix verb like "know," which takes the question as a sentential complement, how does the semantics of questions feed into the assessment of the proposition expressed by this declarative utterance? What must the subject of the sentence know? Should they be required to know or list an exhaustive list of true answers or one true answer, should they know of the false answers that they are false? What answers are licensed? How can questions reflect a bias on the part of the speaker?These issues lie at the heart of an investigation of the semantics of questions.

Asking questions is a fundamental aspect of human nature. Languages all around the world encode interrogative constructions. It is therefore incumbent upon semanticists to capture the meaning of questions. However, achieving this goal faces a challenge under a truth conditional approach to meaning, since questions cannot easily be assigned a truth value. Moreover, it is not sufficient to focus only on the questions themselves; one must also determine what counts as a felicitous and informative answer, and how this relates to a speaker's intention in posing a question in a discourse context. How then do semanticists approach an investigation of questions? In this article, we present the core issues inherent to question-answer dynamics, review the main approaches to question-answer meaning, highlight how questions are situated in a discourse context, and explore extensions of questions that highlight the connection between semantics, pragmatics, and human reasoning.