CAN LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS UNDERSTAND PRESUPPOSITION? A SEMANTIC–PRAGMATIC INTERFACE ANALYSIS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18822367Keywords:
presupposition, semantic–pragmatic interface, implicit meaning, large language models, pragmatics, linguistic understandingAbstract
Presupposition constitutes one of the most complex categories at the intersection of semantics and pragmatics, as it encodes implicit meaning that is linguistically triggered but contextually validated. With the increasing use of large language models (LLMs) in academic and communicative settings, questions concerning their capacity for linguistic understanding have intensified. This paper examines whether LLMs can be said to understand presupposition or whether they merely reproduce presuppositional patterns without access to the underlying semantic–pragmatic mechanisms. Adopting a semantic–pragmatic interface approach, the study analyzes presupposition as a linguistically encoded phenomenon whose interpretation depends on contextual assumptions, discourse continuity, and shared background knowledge. Drawing on theoretical linguistics and comparative insights from English and Uzbek, the analysis evaluates LLM-generated texts with respect to presupposition triggering, projection, accommodation, and failure. The findings indicate that while LLMs successfully generate structures containing presuppositional triggers, they systematically fail to manage presuppositions across contextual shifts and culturally embedded assumptions. This demonstrates that LLMs operate at the level of formal pattern simulation rather than genuine presuppositional understanding. The study contributes to AI linguistics by clarifying the limits of machine-generated meaning from a strictly linguistic perspective.
References
Briana, J. C. D. (2024). Is ChatGPT-Produced Text Authentic? // Journal of English and Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 38:54. https://doi.org/10.59588/2961-3094.1120.
Georgiou, G. P. (2024). Differentiating between Human-Written and AI-Generated Texts Using Linguistic Features. // Information, 16(11), 979. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16110979.
Oringalieva, N. (2025). O‘zbek tili sintaktik tizimi va uning xususiyatlari. // Global Trends in Education and Research Development, 1(1), pp. 206–210.
Rakhimova, D. et al. (2024). Development of a Children’s Educational Dictionary for a Low-Resource Language Using AI Tools. // Computers, 13(10), p. 253.
Rustamov, I. (2025). Sun’iy intellekt matnlarida stilistik yondashuv. // Global Trends in Education and Research Development, 1(1), pp. 1985–1990.
Shah, A. et al. (2023). Detecting and Unmasking AI-Generated Texts through Explainable Artificial Intelligence Using Stylistic Features. // International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 14(10).
To‘qboyeva, M. (2024). O‘zbek tili gap qurilmasida holatni ifodalovchi elementlarning sintaktik o‘rni. – In: Conference Proceedings: Fostering Your Research Spirit, pp. 1020–1022.
Tukbayeva, M. (2024). Linguistic Units Representing the Category of State in the Uzbek Language. // Journal of Language Pedagogy and Innovative Applied Linguistics, 2(1), pp. 75–79.
Ullah, A., Yameen, A. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Linguistic Features of Academic Text and AI-Generated Text. // Heritage: International Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 1(1), pp. 12–31.
Zindela, N. (2023). Comparing Measures of Syntactic and Lexical Complexity in Artificial Intelligence and L2 Human-Generated Argumentative Essays. // International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, 19(3), pp. 50–68.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.