She isn’t going out with John, as she promised [ [not] to]

[Uncanny]

Which is the correct interpretation?

1. She isn’t going out with John, as she promised. = She isn’t going out with John, as she promised to.
2. She isn’t going out with John, as she promised. = She isn’t going out with John, as she promised not to.

Does the meaning depend entirely on the context, as in these?

1. Jill can't keep her word. She isn’t going out with John, as she promised.
2. Jill keeps her word. She isn’t going out with John, as she promised.
   
   All the sentences are my creation.

 

[emsr2d2]

Coming up with your own sentences and then asking which is the right interpretation doesn't make sense. Tell us what you want it to mean and we'll tell you which one means it.

 

[Tarheel]

If you wrote those sentences then you surely know what you mean to say.

I might say: "Jill isn't going out with John even though she said she would."

 

[jutfrank]

I presume this is a purely academic question and that you're not concerned with good use of English, so I'll answer with that in mind.

The more likely interpretation is that she made a promise to go out with John and has since failed to fulfil that promise. However, if you remove the comma (a pause in speech) the interpretation that she has kept her promise becomes more likely.

Apart from context, other than the pause represented by the comma, I'd say any disambiguation would also come from subtle differences in how the auxiliary 'isn't', and the verb 'promised' are intoned.

 

[Uncanny]

Coming up with your own sentences and then asking which is the right interpretation doesn't make sense. Tell us what you want it to mean and we'll tell you which one means it.

In other words, the sentence is ambiguous.

 

[Uncanny]

how the auxiliary 'isn't', and the verb 'promised' are intoned.

That's something I didn't even think about! Can you explain it or perhaps refer me to the relevant audio examples? Or at least refer me to some general resources on prosody?

 

[Uncanny]

The more likely interpretation is that she made a promise to go out with John and has since failed to fulfil that promise. However, if you remove the comma (a pause in speech) the interpretation that she has kept her promise becomes more likely.

That's the opposite of what I expected.

 

[Tarheel]

In other words, the sentence is ambiguous.

Are you saying that is on purpose? Surely the writer of the sentence knows what the intended meaning is.

 

[Tarheel]

What do you mean to say?

If somebody said she was going to do something, but she didn't do it there is a straightforward way of saying that.

 

[jutfrank]

That's something I didn't even think about! Can you explain it or perhaps refer me to the relevant audio examples?

The only way I could imagine doing that properly is by recording my voice, so you can hear the difference, but I don't really want to do that. Sorry. Obviously, there are no audio examples of a human uttering this sentence, though you may be able to get an AI tool to do it for you if you know how.

The very general principle regarding the auxiliary is that there would be contrastive emphasis in the case that she broke her promise. The same goes for the word 'promised'—more primary stress (on the first syllable) in the case where she broke her promise. That's about as much as I can say, I'm afraid, and I don't think it's very useful anyway.

Or at least refer me to some general resources on prosody?

You mean academic articles or stuff specifically for language learners? If you mean the latter, I don't think I can point you to anything relevant, no. It's too specific.

 

[jutfrank]

That's the opposite of what I expected.

Here's an idea you could follow: Do a test. Give the written sentence to a range of different AI tools, both with and without the comma, and see what they interpret. I just did this with ChatGPT version 3 and it agrees with me. If you try it with other programs, I'd be interested in the results you get. Since the written sentence has no prosodic cues other than the comma, it should be a decent test.

 

[Uncanny]

Here's an idea you could follow: Do a test. Give the written sentence to a range of different AI tools, both with and without the comma, and see what they interpret. I just did this with ChatGPT version 3 and it agrees with me. If you try it with other programs, I'd be interested in the results you get. Since the written sentence has no prosodic cues other than the comma, it should be a decent test.

 

[jutfrank]

 

[SoothingDave]

To me, the written statement by itself is ambiguous. Commas or not.

Spoken, the intent would be clearer.

 

[jutfrank]

To me, the written statement by itself is ambiguous. Commas or not.

Oh, sure, to me too. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. I thought the question was about which way you'd lean, given no verbal cues.

 

[Uncanny]

Spoken, the intent would be clearer.

How?

 

[Tarheel]

How?

In speech the intent is generally to be clear about what we are saying. Also, speech has things written communication lacks-- things like intonation and body language.

 

[emsr2d2]

I find the original ambiguous too, for what it's worth. There would need to be a change of wording in order for me to be sure of the intended meaning.

1. She isn't going out with John, even though she said she would. (She said A and did B.)
2. She isn't going out with John, just as she predicted/and she'd already said she wouldn't. (She said A and did A.)