Presuppositions as anaphors: Towards a full understanding of partial matches

Van der Sandt’s theory of presuppositions-as-anaphors is widely considered to be the empirically most adequate theory of presupposition projection on the market. One of the main differences between Van der Sandt’s approach and its main competitor, the ‘contextual satisfaction’ approach, lies in the treatment of the so-called partial match phenomenon. In this paper, we take a closer look at partial matches. We show that the distinction between partial and full matches should be a central element of any theory of presupposition projection. However, we also argue that Van der Sandt’s own formal theory, as it stands, does not offer an adequate treatment of partial matches. We then propose a number of modifications of his formal theory and apply the modified algorithm to definite (and other) NPs. The resulting modified version of the presuppositions-as-anaphors theory is argued to be more general, formally more precise, and empirically more adequate than its predecessor.