Resumen de What 'but'-sentences argue for: an argumentative analysis of 'but'
This paper discusses the semantics of the connective 'but'. Two trends of analyses are compared: ones based on a notion of 'formal contrast' and others that are 'inferential'. First, the formal contrast approaches are evaluated with respect to a certain number of roblematic examples. I argue that they encounter insurmountable issues, and that an inferential account is needed. However, the way the inference required in those latter accounts is drawn needs to be defined in a restricted way. I propose to use the probabilistic interpretation of the notion of 'argumentation' to carry this out. It is argued that to be interpreted, 'but' needs an argumentative goal that is debated by its conjuncts. In the absence of an explicit goal or one that can be deduced by world-knowledge, the goal must be abduced from he content of the 'but' conjuncts alone by taking their information structure into account. My proposal for 'but' is then shown to interact with that of other particles: 'too', 'only' and 'yet' .
