---
title: "Triggering Presuppositions — paper by Schlenker (2021)"
description: "The proposed rule is that an entailment p of a content pp' counts as presupposed if, when people… 40 references, cited by 1 paper here."
authors: ["Philippe Schlenker"]
year: 2021
venue: "Glossa: a journal of general linguistics"
source: "https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/id/5415/"
doi: "10.5334/gjgl.1352"
licence: "CC BY 4.0"
licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/schlenker-2021-triggering-presuppositions/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/schlenker-2021-triggering-presuppositions/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/) / [2021](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2021/page/6/) / Triggering Presuppositions

# Triggering Presuppositions

**Authors:** [Philippe Schlenker](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/philippe-schlenker/) · **Year:** 2021 · **Venue:** [Glossa: a journal of general linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/glossa-a-journal-of-general-linguistics/) ([Glossa a journal of general linguistics 2021](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/glossa-a-journal-of-general-linguistics/2021/)) · **Publisher:** [Ubiquity Press](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/publishers/ubiquity-press/) · **Licence:** [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1352) · [PDF](https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/5415/galley/11089/download) · [DOI 10.5334/gjgl.1352](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1352) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W4213158982)

**Citations:** 17 citations (OpenAlex, 2026-10-14) · [1](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/schlenker-2021-triggering-presuppositions/cited-by/) in our library, of the 141,840 papers whose bibliographies we read

## Summary
Most presupposition research asks how presuppositions of complex sentences follow from those of their parts (the Projection Problem). Schlenker addresses a different question, the Triggering Problem. Given an expression's "bivalent content" (true vs. non-true), which entailments become presuppositions and which stay at-issue? He argues against treating this as a purely lexical fact, for two reasons. First, iconic gestures nobody has seen before still produce presuppositions; replacing a verb with an "unscrew from the ceiling" gesture presupposes the bulb is on the ceiling. Second, ordinary phrases can presuppose things they do not entail. "Pull the trigger" said of a hunter presupposes the rifle is loaded, but only because world knowledge supplies that inference. The proposed rule is that an entailment p of a content pp' counts as presupposed if, when people typically learn pp', they already knew p beforehand. The rule rests on how facts are discovered, not on discourse strategy. It links triggering to projection, since presuppositions must be trivial in their local context. The account is a sketch, limited to propositional cases.

## Key points
- The formal setting is a trivalent semantics after Heim 1983, where presupposition failure yields a third value #. Triggering is framed as dividing the "non-true" region into false vs. #.
- The proposed rule is probabilistic: P(believe at t-1 that p | believed context C at t-1 and acquired pp' at t) ≥ a threshold *a*.
- Evidence includes pro-speech gestures, ASL classifier predicates (consultant Jonathan Lamberton) and contextual or complex triggers. One gestural minimal pair compares PICK-UP-GUN-SHOOT, where the gun is visible on the table and is presupposed, with PULL-GUN-SHOOT, where the gun is hidden in a jacket and is likely not presupposed.
- Projection is the main diagnostic for presupposition:
  - inferences survive questions, negation, *if* and *might*;
  - under *none* they yield universal inferences;
  - this separates them from scalar implicatures, which yield existential ones (Chemla 2009).
- Scope and open issues:
  - Definites, pronouns, *too*, *only*/*even* and clefts are excluded.
  - The probabilities and threshold still need experimental measurement.
  - The rule must be extended to predicate-type triggers.
  - Its excessive context-sensitivity needs fixing.
  - Funding: ERC grant 788,077 (Orisem).

## Interesting ideas
- Treat presupposition as the output of a rule applied to an expression's full truth-conditional content, rather than a property listed per word; this generalizes to novel or rare expressions.
- A presupposition can come from the expression plus context, not from the words alone: hunter + pull the trigger brings in "rifle loaded" via common sense.
- The "epistemic precondition" test asks whether p is usually known before learning the whole event; this gives a principled way to split old from new information.
- A projection battery (negation, question, conditional, *might*, *none*-quantifier) cleanly separates presuppositions from at-issue content and scalar implicatures.
- The author warns that deriving triggering from communicative usage risks circularity, since usage data may simply reflect expressions that already carry lexical presuppositions.

## For Mova

How these ideas could serve Mova, our small open language model — its files, stages and tests:

- **I1** (frames): crate prag could derive presuppositions from a frame's precondition slots (e.g., VerbNet pre-states) instead of a hand-maintained trigger list, keeping each derivation explainable.
- **I2** (world): when building the text world, add background states that compiled knowledge guarantees for a given event-in-context, and mark them as presupposed rather than asserted.
- **I3** (world): use it to place pre-event states (stopped smoking → previously smoked) earlier on the event timeline as already-established facts.
- **I4** (learn): auto-generate embedded variants of test sentences as negative controls, checking that presupposed facts persist in the world model while at-issue ones correctly drop out.
- **I5** (learn): when LLM teacher tiers label presuppositions, validate on nonce or paraphrased items so that the labels are not just echoes of familiar trigger words.

*Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.*

## Institutions

- [New York University](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/new-york-university/) — University, New York, United States · 136 works · 86,390 citations
- [Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/labs/centre-national-de-la-recherche-scientifique/) — Research institute, Paris, France · 104 works · 60,877 citations
- [École Normale Supérieure - PSL](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/labs/ecole-normale-superieure-psl/) — Research institute, Paris, France · 12 works · 3,399 citations
- [Université Paris Sciences et Lettres](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/universite-paris-sciences-et-lettres/) — University, Paris, France · 9 works · 2,361 citations
- [École des hautes études en sciences sociales](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/labs/ecole-des-hautes-etudes-en-sciences-sociales/) — Research institute, Paris, France · 8 works · 2,159 citations
- [Institut Jean Nicod](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/labs/institut-jean-nicod/) — Research institute, Paris, France · 6 works · 1,359 citations

📚 Shelves (5): [🖥️ Computer Science](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/) · 9,086 works · [🤖 Artificial Intelligence](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/artificial-intelligence/) · 8,889 works · [🎭 Arts and Humanities](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/) · 9,296 works · [🗣️ Language and Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/language-and-linguistics/) · 9,206 works · [🤔 Philosophy](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/philosophy/) · 211 works

🧭 Topics (1): [😉 Implicature](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/topics/implicature/) · 72 works

## Cite

Cite as: Philippe Schlenker. 2021. Triggering Presuppositions. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```bibtex
@article{schlenker2021triggering,
  title = {{Triggering Presuppositions}},
  author = {Philippe Schlenker},
  journal = {Glossa: a journal of general linguistics},
  year = {2021},
  doi = {10.5334/gjgl.1352},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1352}
}
```

- [← previous Stages rather than ages in the acquisition of movement structures: Data from sentence repetition and 27,696 spontaneous clauses](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/friedmann-2021-stages-rather-than-ages-acquisition/)
- [next → Coreference Resolution for the Biomedical Domain: A Survey](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/lu-2021-coreference-resolution-biomedical-domain-survey/)
- [↑ back to papers of 2021](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2021/page/6/)

## References

40 references, 2 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Abbott, Barbara. 2000. Presuppositions as Nonassertions. Journal of Pragmatics 32. 1419–1437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00108-3 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(99)00108-3)
2. Abrusán, Márta. 2011. Predicting the presuppositions of soft triggers. Linguistics and Philosophy 34(6). 491–535. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-012-9108-y Abrusán, Márta. To appear. The Spectrum of Perspective Shift: Free Indirect Discourse vs. Protagonist Projection. Linguistics & Philosophy. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-012-9108-y)
3. Abusch, Dorit. 2002. Lexical alternatives as a source of pragmatic presuppositions. In B. Jackson (ed.), Proceedings of SALT 12, 1–19. Cornell University, CLC Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3765/salt. v12i0.2867 Abusch, Dorit. 2010. Presupposition triggering from alternatives. Journal of Semantics 27(1). 37–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffp009 [↗](https://doi.org/10.3765/salt)
4. Anand, Pranav and Valentine Hacquard. 2014. Factivity, belief and discourse. In L. Crnic and U. Sauerland (eds.) The Art and Craft of Semantics: A Festschrift for Irene Heim. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL. 69–90. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Anand%2C+Pranav+and+Valentine+Hacquard%2E+2014%2E+Factivity%2C+belief+and+discourse%2E+In+L%2E+Crnic+and+U%2E+Sauerland+%28eds%2E%29+The+Art+and+Craft+of+Semantics%3A+A+Festschrift+for+Irene+Heim%2E+Cambridge%2C+MA%3A+MITWPL%2E+69)
5. Beaver, David. 2010. Have you Noticed that your Belly Button Lint Colour is Related to the Colour of your Clothing? In Reyle Bäuerle, Uwe Reyle & Thomas E. Zimmermann (eds.), Presuppositions and Discourse: Essays offered to Hans Kamp, 65–100. Oxford: Elsevier. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004253162_004 Beaver, David & Bart Geurts. 2011. Presupposition. In: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato. stanford.edu/entries/presupposition/. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-009-9043-9 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004253162_004)
6. Büring, Daniel. 2012. Focus and Intonation. In Gillian Russell and Delia Graff Fara (ed.), Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Language, 103–115. London: Routledge. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=B%C3%BCring%2C+Daniel%2E+2012%2E+Focus+and+Intonation%2E+In+Gillian+Russell+and+Delia+Graff+Fara+%28ed%2E%29%2C+Routledge+Companion+to+the+Philosophy+of+Language%2C+103%E2%80%93115%2E+London%3A+Routledge%2E)
7. Chemla, Emmanuel. 2006. Recent Views on Presupposition. Manuscript, LSCP, Paris. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Chemla%2C+Emmanuel%2E+2006%2E+Recent+Views+on+Presupposition%2E+Manuscript%2C+LSCP%2C+Paris%2E)
8. Chemla, Emmanuel. 2009. Presuppositions of quantified sentences: experimental data. Natural Language Semantics 17(4). 299–340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-009-9043-9 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-009-9043-9)
9. Chemla, Emmanuel. 2010. Similarity: towards a unified account of scalar implicatures, free choice permission and presupposition projection. Unpublished manuscript, LSCP, Paris. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Chemla%2C+Emmanuel%2E+2010%2E+Similarity%3A+towards+a+unified+account+of+scalar+implicatures%2C+free+choice+permission+and+presupposition+projection%2E+Unpublished+manuscript%2C+LSCP%2C+Paris%2E)
10. Esipova, Maria. 2016. Presuppositions under Contrastive Focus: Standard Triggers and Co-speech Gestures. Manuscript, New York University. [https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/003285](https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/003285) [↗](https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/003285)
11. Gettier, Edmund L. 1963. Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? Analysis 23(6). 121–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/23.6.121 Geurts, Bart. 1994. Presupposing. PhD dissertation, Universität Osnabrück. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/23.6.121)
12. Goodman, Noah D. & Michael C. Frank. 2016. Pragmatic language interpretation as probabilistic inference. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 20(11). 818–829. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.08.005 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.08.005)
13. Greenberg, Gabriel. 2013. Beyond Resemblance. Philosophical Review 122(2). 215–287. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/00318108-1963716 Grice, H. Paul. 1981. Presupposition and Conversational Implicature. In P. Cole (ed.), Radical Pragmatics, 183–198. New York: Academic Press. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1215/00318108-1963716)
14. Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Comrie, Bernard & Polinsky, Maria (eds.), Causatives and transitivity, 87–120. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.23.05has [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.23.05has)
15. Heim, Irene. 1983. On the projection problem for presuppositions. In Barlow, M. and Flickinger, D. and Westcoat, M. (eds.), Second Annual West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 114–126. Stanford University. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Heim%2C+Irene%2E+1983%2E+On+the+projection+problem+for+presuppositions%2E+In+Barlow%2C+M%2E+and+Flickinger%2C+D%2E+and+Westcoat%2C+M%2E+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Second+Annual+West+Coast+Conference+on+Formal+Linguistics%2C+114%E2%80%93126%2E+Stanford)
16. Hobbs, Jerry R., Mark E. Stickel, Douglas E. Appelt & Paul Martin. 1993. Interpretation as abduction. Artificial Intelligence 63(1–2). 69–142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(93)90015-4 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(93)90015-4)
17. Kadmon, Nirit. 2001. Formal Pragmatics: Semantics, Pragmatics, Presupposition and Focus. Blackwell. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Kadmon%2C+Nirit%2E+2001%2E+Formal+Pragmatics%3A+Semantics%2C+Pragmatics%2C+Presupposition+and+Focus%2E+Blackwell%2E)
18. Lassiter, Daniel. 2011. [Presuppositions, provisos, and probability](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/lassiter-2012-presuppositions-provisos-probability/). In Kierstead George (ed.), Proceedings of ESSLLI 2011: Workshop on Projective Content, 67–81. Retrieved online on August 17, 2019 at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.646.290&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Schlenker Glossa: a journal of general linguistics DOI: 10.5334/gjgl.1352 [↗](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1352)
19. Lassiter, Daniel. 2012. [Presuppositions, provisos, and probability](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/lassiter-2012-presuppositions-provisos-probability/). Semantics and Pragmatics 5(2). 1–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.5.2 [↗](https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.5.2)
20. Leblanc, Hugues. 1962. Statistical and Inductive Probabilities. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Leblanc%2C+Hugues%2E+1962%2E+Statistical+and+Inductive+Probabilities%2E+Englewood+Cliffs%2C+New+Jersey%3A+Prentice%2DHall+Inc%2E)
21. Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001 [↗](https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001)
22. Romoli, Jacopo. 2014. The presuppositions of soft triggers are obligatory scalar implicatures. Journal of semantics 1. 1–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/fft017 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/fft017)
23. Rothschild, Daniel. 2011. Explaining Presupposition Projection with Dynamic Semantics. Semantics and Pragmatics 4(3). 1–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.4.3 [↗](https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.4.3)
24. Sauerland, Uli. 2008. Implicated presuppositions. In A. Steube (ed.), Sentence and Context: Language, context, and cognition. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110209303.4.581 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110209303.4.581)
25. Schlenker, Philippe. 2008. Be Articulate: A Pragmatic Theory of Presupposition Projection. Theoretical Linguistics 34(3). 157–212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/THLI.2008.013 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/thli.2008.013)
26. Schlenker, Philippe. 2009. Local Contexts. Semantics & Pragmatics 2(3). 1–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3765/ sp.2.3 Schlenker, Philippe. 2010. Local Contexts and Local Meanings. Philosophical Studies 151(1). 115–142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-010-9586-0 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-010-9586-0)
27. Schlenker, Philippe. 2019. Gestural Semantics: Replicating the typology of linguistic inferences with pro- and post-speech gestures. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 37(2). 735–784. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-018-9414-3 Schlenker, Philippe. to appear. Iconic Presuppositions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-018-9414-3)
28. Simons, Mandy. 2001. On the conversational basis of some presuppositions. In Rachel Hastings, Brendan Jackson & Zsofia Zvolenszky (eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 11, 431–448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v11i0.3099 [↗](https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v11i0.3099)
29. Simons, Mandy, David Beaver, Craige Roberts & Judith Tonhauser. 2010. What projects and why. In N. Li & D. Lutz (Eds.), Proceedings of semantics and linguistic theory 20, 309–327. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v20i0.2584 [↗](https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v20i0.2584)
30. Stalnaker Robert C. 1968. A Theory of Conditionals. Studies in Logical Theory, American Philosophical Quaterly, Monograph: 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9117-0_2 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9117-0_2)
31. Stalnaker, Robert C. 1974. Pragmatic presuppositions. In M. Munitz & P. Unger (Eds.), Semantics and philosophy. New York: New York University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Stalnaker%2C+Robert+C%2E+1974%2E+Pragmatic+presuppositions%2E+In+M%2E+Munitz+%26+P%2E+Unger+%28Eds%2E%29%2C+Semantics+and+philosophy%2E+New+York%3A+New+York+University+Press%2E)
32. Stalnaker, Robert C. 1978. Assertion. In Peter Cole (ed.), Pragmatics, 315–322. Academic Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368873_013 Stalnaker, Robert C. 2002. Common ground. Linguistics and Philosophy 25(5–6). 701–721. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1023/A:1020867916902 Thomason, Richmond, Matthew Stone & David DeVault. 2006. Enlightened update: a computational architecture for presupposition and other pragmatic phenomena. In Donna Byron, Craige Roberts, and Scott Schwenter (eds.), Presupposition Accommodation. Prepublication version distributed by Ohio State Pragmatics Initiative, forthcoming (http://ling.osu.edu/pragwiki/ index.php). [↗](https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368873_013)
33. Tieu, Lyn, Philippe Schlenker & Emmanuel Chemla. 2019. Linguistic Inferences Without Words. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116(20). 9796–9801. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821018116 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821018116)
34. Tonhauser, Judith. 2017. How to cut the projective content pie. Slides of a talk given at University of California, San Diego, December 4, 2017. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Tonhauser%2C+Judith%2E+2017%2E+How+to+cut+the+projective+content+pie%2E+Slides+of+a+talk+given+at+University+of+California%2C+San+Diego%2C+December+4%2C+2017%2E)
35. Tonhauser, Judith, David Beaver, Craige Roberts & Mandy Simons. 2013. Toward a taxonomy of projective content. Language 89(1). 66–109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2013.0001 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2013.0001)
36. Tonhauser, Judith, David Beaver & Judith Degen. 2018. How projective is projective content? Gradiencein Projectivity and At-issueness. Journal of Semantics 35(3). 495–542. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ ffy007 Tonhauser, Judith & Judith Degen. 2019. Higher-probability content is more projective than lower-probability content. Abstract of a talk given at XPrag 2019, Edinburgh, June 19, 2019. von Fintel, Kai. 2008. What is presupposition accommodation, again? Philosophical Perspectives 22 (1). 137– 170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1520-8583.2008.00144.x [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/)
37. Wechsler, Stephen. 2015. Word Meaning and Syntax. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ acprof:oso/9780199279883.001.0001 Zehr, Jérémy & Florian Schwarz. 2016. Entailed vs. non-entailed presuppositions – An experimental assessment. Proceedings of NELS 46 3. 319–328. Schlenker Glossa: a journal of general linguistics DOI: 10.5334/gjgl.1352 [↗](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1352)
38. TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Schlenker, Philippe. 2021. Triggering Presuppositions. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6(1): 35. 1–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ gjgl.1352 [↗](https://doi.org/10.5334/)
39. Submitted: 18 June 2020 Accepted: 24 January 2021 Published: 05 April 2021 [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Submitted%3A+18+June+2020+Accepted%3A+24+January+2021+Published%3A+05+April+2021)
40. COPYRIGHT: © 2021 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See [http://creativecommons.org/](http://creativecommons.org/) licenses/by/4.0/. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics is a peer-reviewed open access journal published by Ubiquity Press. [↗](http://creativecommons.org/)

*Updated 24 October 2026*