Some New Observations on ‘because (of)’

Abstract

Because (of) is ambiguous between a reason and a plain cause interpretation. Presenting a semantic analysis framed in Discourse Representation Theory, I argue that the two variants can be represented by an underspecified semantic representation involving a causal relation. After showing how the two interpretations are dependent on the ontological nature of the arguments of this causal relation, I point to a difference between sentential-complement because and nominal-complement because of with regard to their interaction with modals. Whereas both because and because of may outscope e.g. deontic necessity modals, only because may outscope epistemic modal operators.