Given a syntagmatic combination of propositions p and q, a contrast obtains between them if p would make one expect ¬q or vice versa. The basis of such an expectancy may be diverse. In some cases, it is visible in the structure of the two propositions. Thus in , the two propositions have a parallel structure and differ essentially in the predicate adjective; moreover, the two adjectives are antonyms.

However, in many other cases, the contrast being conveyed is exclusively based on world knowledge. illustrates the unexpected incident subtype of the concessive contrastive relation. The use of the connective und nun makes the hearer infer that a contrast between the two propositions is intended, which he may construe on the basis of his world knowledge.

Oppositive relation

A simple opposition between two propositions takes the form ‘p but q’, as in .

There may be degrees of strength of the contrast, as they are conveyed by such conjunctions as but, yet, however, nevertheless in English. Ancient Greek men - de and Russian a code a weak opposition and might be used in translations of .

Adversative relation¹

In an adversative (or contrast) relation of the form ‘S↴ while ↴S’, ↴S provides a contrast to S↴. The clause representing ↴S is called adversative clause. is an example.

To the extent that the contrast is balanced, the relation between p and q is symmetric, and choice of the subordinate proposition is semantically arbitrary and only depends on the text flow (~ higher level information structure). The adversative relation is therefore hard to distinguish from other contrast relations on purely semantic grounds.

The adversative relation is sometimes confounded with the concessive relation. Both involve some kind of contrast. The difference is that a concessive relation presupposes some causal dependency between the two propositions so that one could be an obstacle to the other, which is not involved in adversative relations.

Unexpected incident

‘p, and now q’ means that from p one would infer ¬q; but surprisingly, q is, in fact, the case. Thus, q is counter to expectations. The interpropositional relation may also be called ‘frustrated expectancy’. It is a subtype of the factive concessive relation. It may be conveyed in German by und nun ‘and now (it turns out that)’, as in .

The semantic vicinity of the unexpected circumstance to a concession may be plausibilized by a translation ‘Although Linda has been short on money all the time, she now buys a Porsche’ or equivalently: ‘Linda has been short on money all the time; nevertheless she now buys a Porsche.’

Nànáfwê (Kwa, Ivory Coast) has a conjunction dedicated to coding a frustrated expectancy, illustrated by .

Among the language-specific variants of this relation is the frustrative of Kimaragang. A frustrative relation between propositions S↴ and ↴S is such that ↴S might be expected; however S↴. Thus, as a consequence of S↴, ↴S did not happen or fully realize. The particle dara Frustrative marks ↴S, as in .

Concessive relation

Treated on a separate page.

¹ It seems that the traditional term ‘adversative’ is restricted to use for subordinate clauses, a viewpoint that is irrelevant in a semantically-based classification.